Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Kolsus_Hayl 04-11-07, 11:06 PM	My premise for this thread...3.5 works. It is a very solid system with an immense amount of support, both published and online. There are problems, but they don't overwhelm a small amount of house-ruling (including outlawing certain books, depending on the campaign). Of course, what I'm looking for here are articulate people who have serious issues with the system. I feel no need for a 4th edition. Who does?
DungeonMaster 04-11-07, 11:15 PM	I see a myriad of problems with 3.5 and 3rd edition. We're ripe for a new system. I personally can't wait for 3.5 to die it's natural death but I'm quite worried that the next edition will borrow to much of 3.5 and not enough from the original 3rd edition (which I think is clearly superior but still flawed). We'll just have to see, I have no faith in the current crop of game "designers" since 3.5 came out as such a tour-de-failure and so no faith in 4th edition being a marked improvement. What you're going to get in terms of replies for serious issues with the system will cover the entire range of the PhB, DMG and MM. There are so many to list it's not the work of one thread to do the job.
Solaris 04-11-07, 11:15 PM	[deleted]
bobothechimp 04-11-07, 11:39 PM	I, personally, wouldn't mind a change. Not necessarily a drastic one, just balancing things out better. The way it is now is pretty ridiculous.
a_psh 04-11-07, 11:51 PM	I personally can't wait for 3.5 to die it's natural death but I'm quite worried that the next edition will borrow to much of 3.5 and not enough from the original 3rd edition (which I think is clearly superior but still flawed).They're practically the same. A system that truly "borrows" a lot from either will basically be just another incremental change, a "3.75 edition" rather than an actual new thing. We'll just have to see, I have no faith in the current crop of game "designers" since 3.5 came out as such a tour-de-failure and so no faith in 4th edition being a marked improvement.WotC's staff has shifted around considerably between the release of 3.5 and right now. You should be looking at newer books like ToB if you want to judge what the current designers are capable of producing.
Krusk 04-11-07, 11:54 PM	ill pobably ignore the newest edition. My group will almost definatly do so. Who wants to learn a new set of rules when the existing ones work fine? Plus ive spent a good ammount of money on books, and id like to keep using them. Unless of course the newest system is simply amazing.
bobothechimp 04-11-07, 11:56 PM	You really should look into a system before you condemn it. Just because it's new does not mean it's bad.
YellowKnight 04-11-07, 11:59 PM	I think that when they do come out with 4th edition, they should make it about as similar to 3.5 as 3.0 was to 2e. That way maybe they can release an errata-type thing on the website that has general guidelines for people to convert stuff from old editions if they should want to. That being said, I think 3.5 is a good system, albeit lacking in support for some classes, still presenting problems in a few races, etc.
Imatash 04-12-07, 01:35 AM	Any more editions would be a complete disaster not to mention a huge money grab.....if you don't like something don't use it change it or modify it. Speaking from someone who skipped 2nd and 3rd edition since I had about as much as anyone could want from 1st edition. My friends finally after much gnawing of teeth convinced me to give 3.5 a chance. It is neat. However, just like anything else every new release and new discovery always runs the risk of unbalancing the game. So take what you like (especially as the DM) and ditch what you don't. Like the free space in Monopoly have some house rules. 1. We use LOTR elves...at least for High and Gray. 2. We allow characters to use their Con bonus when going to negatives 3. We allow characters to add their Con bonus to the toughness feat. 4. We believe all 'extra' feats must be learned from specialists. That way the DM can read up on it and see if he approves. DnD shouldn't turn into microsoft. Imatash
DragonBringerX 04-12-07, 03:17 AM	Any more editions would be a complete disaster not to mention a huge money grab.....if you don't like something don't use it change it or modify it. Speaking from someone who skipped 2nd and 3rd edition since I had about as much as anyone could want from 1st edition. My friends finally after much gnawing of teeth convinced me to give 3.5 a chance. It is neat. However, just like anything else every new release and new discovery always runs the risk of unbalancing the game. So take what you like (especially as the DM) and ditch what you don't. Like the free space in Monopoly have some house rules. 1. We use LOTR elves...at least for High and Gray. 2. We allow characters to use their Con bonus when going to negatives 3. We allow characters to add their Con bonus to the toughness feat. 4. We believe all 'extra' feats must be learned from specialists. That way the DM can read up on it and see if he approves. DnD shouldn't turn into microsoft. Imatash :clap: well said ( I don't agree with your house rules, but thats just mpo)
darrylhaines 04-12-07, 03:27 AM	I hope they dont release a v4.0 as I've just spent a shed load on most of the books. I.e Players handbook Players handbook 2 Dungeon Masters Guide Monster Manaul Complete Adventurer Complete Arcane Complete Divine Complete Mage Comeplete Warrior Complete Scoundrel Races of destiny Book Of Exalted Deeds and 1 or 2 others that I can't remember.
Dougan Axehammer 04-12-07, 03:36 AM	IMHO, if WOTC were to do a 4th Edition to the game, they should keep it d20 and do it this way: Create a core player's rulebook (with character creation, leveling, magic-using, a list of typical gear, etc.) using a generic human race and basic classes (maybe even go as far as the generic classes from the Unearthed Arcana) as the only examples; give suggestions on how characters of the various alignments would act and provide a guideline on character background. Create a storyteller/world-builder's rulebook that includes rules for environmental and conditional effects, guidelines for creating a believable world that incorporates magic, rules and guidelines for both combat and non-combat situations (such as fending of an orc, or building a farm), and rules for item creation (a sample list should only include some common potions and special substances) Create an arms and equipment rulebook that also describes some of the fundamentals of common economics as it applies to the game such as crafting skills and trade (expand the equipment list to include special items such as rare materials, trade goods, land use, etc.) Create a compendium of creatures (heroic and villainous) providing guidelines for using them as encounters (including knowledge checks, generic societies, encounter levels, tactics etc.) and rules for using them as playable characters (with level adjustments, racial attributes etc.) Create a series of guidebooks for each of the creatures that expand on the information described in the compeniums; include racial history, typical behavior (such as reactions, interracial relations, etc.), and certain features (such as items, feats and classes) that might be race specific. Create a series of guidebooks that highlight various human cultures and societies; include information similar to that provided in the creatures series. Create a compendium of magic that expands on the rules for magic-users and item creation; include magic philosophies, magical societies, an equipment list of commonly sold spell components, and information on artificing and sample artifacts. Create a tome of warfare that expands the rules on combat; include styles of combat, tactical situations (both land and naval), military practices, mercenaries, and guidelines for incorporating war into a campaign. Create a book about deities and religion; include religious organizations, rules on rituals and religious services, and guidelines on incorporating religion in the campaign. Publish campaign settings in a guidebook format which should contain a short atlas, an almanac, campaign specific creatures, any and all varient rules that only apply to the campaign, and a sample adventure to begin a campaign. Campaign supplements should be no bigger than a large adventure module; regional campaign supplements should also contain a small adventure set in the region. Adventures should be published at least once every two months for each campaign setting updating the timeline and include a newsletter with the current events as they relate to the adventure. Generic adventures should be published at least once each month and could also include a newsletter with fan fiction and art, various house rules, and stories from the table.This list resolves most of the issues associated with the current rules. However, it also happens to be a big undertaking, and would probably not be very popular with many people. As a result, a new edition would be an unwise and potentially disastrous endeavor.
a_psh 04-12-07, 04:25 AM	IMHO, if WOTC were to do a 4th Edition to the game, they should keep it d20 and do it this way: <SNIP /> This list resolves most of the issues associated with the current rules. However, it also happens to be a big undertaking, and would probably not be very popular with many people. As a result, a new edition would be an unwise and potentially disastrous endeavor.Or they could figure out how to actually make a fully-functional game in one book, which countless others have done already. (Of course, I don't expect them to, since one book = less revenue.) Also, you threw in a metaplot, which is a big no-no.
a_psh 04-12-07, 04:28 AM	I hope they dont release a v4.0 as I've just spent a shed load on most of the books.But if they don't release a new edition, how do they keep getting you to pay for books? Other than printing a Complete Sorcerer to give you even more of the same stuff you already got in Complete Arcane and Complete Mage, that is...
j_gunder 04-12-07, 04:37 AM	My premise for this thread...2nd edition: Adnd worked. It is a very solid system with an immense amount of support, both published and online. There are problems, but they don't overwhelm a small amount of house-ruling (including outlawing certain books, depending on the campaign). Of course, what I'm looking for here are articulate people who have serious issues with the system. I feel there was no need for a 3rd edition. Who does? Sorry for messing with your words, OP. :) Eh. I really hope they don't come out with a new edition. I play 3.5, but I wish I still had a group interested in playing 2e Adnd or Adnd. 3.5 is too hinged on the whole "balance" factor. It bugs me. Inherent imbalance is a good thing, IMO...it defines character roles. Fighters sucked up damage, mages blasted thing, clerics were stuck blowing all their spells healing the fighter. Monsters with 1,433 hit points bother me, as do armor classes over 10. Call me a grognard, but that's how I feel. At the time that 3.0 came out, I felt like a change...I had been playing the same system for 7 or 8 years, after all, 3.0 was fresh. It was good. It had its flaws, to be certain, but nothing a house-rule or two couldn't tweak. 3.5, however, has become a monster--too many specifics are drowning out creativity, IMO. What is a swashbuckler, but a fighter with a high dex, light armor and a rapier? Why do we need a separate "core" class for them? The same goes for just about every other core class. Most PrCs, as well, are easy enough to build with PHB material...same as kits were in 2e. I've spent well over $1000 building up my 3.5 collection. At $30-$40 a book, I'm not interested in buying anything else. In fact, every book I buy that re-introduces and updates material already printed makes me wish I could find players interested in going back to 2e. What is 4th edition going to offer, really, except a few minor tweaks on classes, spells, items et cetera that has already been released multiple times? If you've been gaming since "editions" went by "red" and "blue" as opposed to numbers, than you can probably see a trend. Editions have a shelf-life of about ten years, after which new shiny books with minor tweaks come out. They start out with the best of intentions, re-organizing and updating for the most-needed changes...and then eventually drown in a host of supplements after which they bring out a new edition, starting the cycle all over again. I'm done with that, though. I've got bills to pay, you know?
Steely_Dan 04-12-07, 06:18 AM	I feel no need for a 4th edition. Who does? Me, I would like to see: -The game being designed/balanced per encounter, instead of this assumed 4 encounters a day malarkey -No dead levels -A complete Skill system revamp (Rank nightmares etc) -Talent trees -No multi-classing restrictions (monks/paladins etc) XP penalties or favoured classes -No death from massive damage -Fewer absolutes – no save or die spells or total immunities etc -More hp at first level to avoid going down to a carrot thrown at you by a gnome -Skill folding (Listen + Spot = Perception etc) -No random ability score generation methods (maybe as optional variants) -Fixed hp for levelling (ala Living Greyhawk)
Steely_Dan 04-12-07, 06:21 AM	I hope they dont release a v4.0 as I've just spent a shed load on most of the books. I.e Players handbook Players handbook 2 Dungeon Masters Guide Monster Manaul Complete Adventurer Complete Arcane Complete Divine Complete Mage Comeplete Warrior Complete Scoundrel Races of destiny Book Of Exalted Deeds and 1 or 2 others that I can't remember. As far as hobbies goes that is a pittance (collection-wise and monetary value).
OravennasBrother 04-12-07, 09:14 AM	My premise for this thread...3.5 works. It is a very solid system Actually there are several problems 1) Massive Damage becomes unbalancing at high levels where almost every attack form inflicts over 50 HP Damage. 2) Multiclassing and PrC's have gotten to be extremely problematic in the hands of skilled "powergamers" 3) The CR system is balanced to characters with SO many magic items that the character is lost without them (VOP as the obvious exception) and begins to seem a collection of Gear more than a Skilled Combatant (Wizard, etc.) 4) The rate of advancement should be SLOW with the option of speeding it, just like 2nd and earlier editions, rather than FAST with the option of slowing it. The semantic change empowers DM's against whiney "I want more XP" players. 5) Characters ALWAYS feel like they are missing something critical - the Feat system insures that even Fighters are left in the lurch. I can recall earlier editions where a Fighter of 7th level seemed "Powerful" against anything except enemies immune to normal weapons.
WayneTheGame 04-12-07, 09:55 AM	Quite frankly, and I mean this as nice as I can: It doesn't matter if you think 3.5 is fine and there's no need for a 4th edition. It will happen at some point. It's probably at least two years off, but it is coming and posting a thread saying why 3.5 is fine (which is flawed anyways) won't change it. I applaud your effort, but the effort is wasted.
Escef 04-12-07, 09:55 AM	Or they could figure out how to actually make a fully-functional game in one book, which countless others have done already. Reasons not to make a codified D&D Guide: 1. Do you honestly expect said book to be less than 700 pages? The Monster Manual contains 281 pages of monsters, that does not count descriptions of special abilities, monstrous feats, monster type definitions, monster advancement material, table of contents, indexes, etc. 2. If you think DMs complain about players knowing monster and magic item stats now, imagine what it will be like with everything in one book. (I can just hear the accusations of player entitlement now. "My players think they can play anything in the book just because it's in there!") 3. Every system I've seen that has attempted to present a game in one book contains very sketchy game mechanics and/or few monsters/enemies. There is quite simply too much in D&D to do this (see 1, above). 4. Sacred Cow. This is one of the Sacred Cows of D&D that, believe it or not, some of us like. It just wouldn't feel like D&D to me without the triumverate of core rulebooks. 5. Most will not enjoy lugging around a 700+ page rulebook, in addition to whatever splatbooks they will have for their class/race. If I'm just playing, all I need to bring with me (bookwise) is a PHB and maybe a splatbook. Why should I lug around an extra 2 books worth of material that I won't be using? Could a D&D core rulebook be made with all 3 books worth of material in it? Of course it could. But in order to keep it down to a less intimidating size the fluff, examples, charts, illustrations, and other helpful (but non-mechanical) material will have to be cut back or excised completely.
Stormonu 04-12-07, 11:25 AM	Each iteration of the game builds upon the past, improving it in many areas while opening holes in others. Overall, I've enjoyed the derth of options available for D&D, but it is getting a bit tedious to wade through the depth of material available. I wouldn't mind a 4th edition if it came along, but I've learned my lesson from 3E and will probably just stick to a core set of rules. I'd also like to see the game get away from the gear making the character - the characters ought to be able to function just dandy with few magic items instead of being christmas trees (go Iron Heroes!). on a side note, the idea of "Dead levels" seems like a silly concept to me. For example, the fighter, wizard, sorcerer, cleric, bard and druid, in my mind, doesn't have one dead level at all.
Steely_Dan 04-12-07, 11:34 AM	1.) I'd also like to see the game get away from the gear making the character - the characters ought to be able to function just dandy with few magic items instead of being christmas trees (go Iron Heroes!). 2.) For example, the fighter, in my mind, doesn't have one dead level at all. 1.) I agree 2.) What do you call levels 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15, 17, and 19?
Leo 04-12-07, 01:32 PM	1.) I agree 2.) What do you call levels 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15, 17, and 19? Mighty toughness X! You become harder to kill! Combat mastery X:You are even better at hitting things! Jack of all trades X! Choose between upgrading your old skills or gaining new ones!
polt 04-12-07, 01:49 PM	I dislike a lot of the stuff in 3.5. I think HPs are kinda stupid, but I can live with it. I think the skill system should change. It's really annoying how little you're able to do when you're a fighter for example, how little versatility in the current skill system. I want to be able to do more things, I want it to be easier to do cinematic stuff. As unrealistic a system D&D is, it's really weird something like Attacks of Oppourtinity exists, cause that really is a killer for cinematic actions. I REALLY utterly hate the spell system. It's so lame that if a wizard comes in a fight in the morning, he'll be almost useless for the rest of the day. I'm so tired of that "Well, I know it's only 4 pm, but how about we rest here for the rest of the day? Because otherwise, it'll really suck to be the wizard." THere are some other excellent spellsystems out there, USE THEM! There's no shame in stealing a better system. I hate the multiclass xp penalty, which of course is easy not to use. But that thing is only there to stop powergamers, it's not doing anything good for roleplayers. Like I said, HP is stupid. It kills drama and tension. There's no danger in a guy pointing an arrow at you, or points a spear at you, you always know that you can just take the hit and charge him with the 95 points of HP you have left. There are so many stupid stuff in D&D right now that doesn't make sense. The weapons? How the hell do you justify that it takes a feat to throw a shurikin, but not a knife? It is SO much harder to throw a knife than it is throw a shurikin. The exotic weapon thing has nothing to do with how hard it is to use a weapon, or even how powerful the weapons are, it's like the developers just said "Well okay, these weapon are going to demand a feat, I have no idea why, but that's it." STUPID!. The spell system should be more versatile, I'll say it again. Make the spells more costumizable. Don't make a flame spear, flame sword, produce fire, firewall and firball spell. Make one that's called firecontrol, and when you grow in power you'll be able to do more and more powerful stuff. It strengthens creativity, and even though it demands a little more from the DM, it's much much cooler. Just my 2 cents. EDIT: Oh yeah, the books should be settingless.
a_psh 04-12-07, 02:08 PM	1. Do you honestly expect said book to be less than 700 pages? The Monster Manual contains 281 pages of monsters, that does not count descriptions of special abilities, monstrous feats, monster type definitions, monster advancement material, table of contents, indexes, etc.Does anyone in the world actually need a Digester or a Mordenkainen's Magnificent Mansion in the main book? 2. If you think DMs complain about players knowing monster and magic item stats now, imagine what it will be like with everything in one book. (I can just hear the accusations of player entitlement now. "My players think they can play anything in the book just because it's in there!")People have been looking at the DM book for ages. Heck, you can't even make a character without using the DM book these days, so it's pretty moot. The whole information-hiding thing has been a total failure from the start. 3. Every system I've seen that has attempted to present a game in one book contains very sketchy game mechanics and/or few monsters/enemies. There is quite simply too much in D&D to do this (see 1, above).Even with their current bulky wargaminess, the combat rules take up like 30 pages. Most D&D spells and monsters don't get used -- I know every damn thing in D&D is a sacred cow, but most of these really don't need to be in a book anyone can buy. 4. Sacred Cow. This is one of the Sacred Cows of D&D that, believe it or not, some of us like. It just wouldn't feel like D&D to me without the triumverate of core rulebooks.I know it'll never happen because three core books = more revenue than one core book. But, jeez, I really wish designers learned to cut bloat instead of learning to make more and more of it (*cough* every splat ever *cough*). 5. Most will not enjoy lugging around a 700+ page rulebook, in addition to whatever splatbooks they will have for their class/race. If I'm just playing, all I need to bring with me (bookwise) is a PHB and maybe a splatbook. Why should I lug around an extra 2 books worth of material that I won't be using?How about a hundred? You can make a fully functional D&D-like RPG in a hundred pages. You can make a fully functional non-D&D-like RPG in less than twenty. Half the PHB is spells. I bet you at least half of them are pretty much useless. 90% of that splat you bought is useless, too. And it's not examples and "flavor text" that are filling up the books. They'll never print a single core book when they can print three. I know that. But, honestly, it would be easy as hell to do so if they wanted to.
a_psh 04-12-07, 02:10 PM	I don't mean this as an insult, FYI... I dislike a lot of the stuff in 3.5. <SNIP list of stuff, including HP, magic, skills, and weapons />What's left? Pretty much the letters "D&D" on the cover? ;)
polt 04-12-07, 02:30 PM	I don't mean this as an insult, FYI... What's left? Pretty much the letters "D&D" on the cover? ;) None taken, actually that was pretty funny :D However, there's still the whole combat system and the classes, a lot of the rules. Actually most of the rules :)
Escef 04-12-07, 03:13 PM	Does anyone in the world actually need a Digester or a Mordenkainen's Magnificent Mansion in the main book? <snip> Most D&D spells and monsters don't get used -- I know every damn thing in D&D is a sacred cow, but most of these really don't need to be in a book anyone can buy. <snip> But, jeez, I really wish designers learned to cut bloat instead of learning to make more and more of it (*cough* every splat ever *cough*). <snip> You can make a fully functional D&D-like RPG in a hundred pages. <snip> Half the PHB is spells. I bet you at least half of them are pretty much useless. 90% of that splat you bought is useless, too. And you have now removed a huge amount of material that creates benchmark guides for people creating their own material for the game. Some people need these benchmarks, especially those new to the game, others don't. Remember, D&D isn't just for you. It's for the entire community and everyone who ends up joining it. Just because you'd like to see it, and it would make it convenient for you, does not mean it is good for the game as a whole.
a_psh 04-12-07, 04:28 PM	And you have now removed a huge amount of material that creates benchmark guides for people creating their own material for the game. Some people need these benchmarks, especially those new to the game, others don't. Remember, D&D isn't just for you. It's for the entire community and everyone who ends up joining it. Just because you'd like to see it, and it would make it convenient for you, does not mean it is good for the game as a whole.You know what's better than a benchmark? An actual system. ;) Then your 100 pages of stuff can take up, say, 3 pages of rules and 10 of examples.
Escef 04-12-07, 04:42 PM	You know what's better than a benchmark? An actual system. ;) That's crazy talk. ;) Honestly, spells and monsters are more an art than a science. Weapon balance is a science, we have some very good, well balanced and thought out charts. The things magic can do are so diverse that you do indeed need oodles upon oodles of examples. Hence, a couple hundred pages of spells. Same goes for monsters with their vast arrays of abilities, HD, sizes, etc.
Imatash 04-12-07, 04:51 PM	Well I played first edition from 78-2003 gasp....yeah I know old....I dont' know what the heck happened either..... So if 4.0 comes along we will be fine with 3.5 until 2003-2028.....and that just might be long enough for this DM :D seriously, I still convert the classics and the ICE MERP modules to play now. Imatash
Nobby_Nobbs 04-12-07, 05:25 PM	That's crazy talk. ;) Honestly, spells and monsters are more an art than a science. Weapon balance is a science, we have some very good, well balanced and thought out charts. The things magic can do are so diverse that you do indeed need oodles upon oodles of examples. Hence, a couple hundred pages of spells. Same goes for monsters with their vast arrays of abilities, HD, sizes, etc. You really don't need alot of spell examples. You just need all the first level spells to scale, possibly with some elemental modifiers for attacks. Just take how damage spells increase the number of dice you get per caster level and apply it for every spell. And then just have one paragraph explaining the effect of adding an element to a spell. For example: At first level you have magic misile and an elemental trapping of your choice, like acid. This means when you cast magic missile you can choose to have it be an Acid missle, it's exactically the same, but it's now acidic. To balance this you could have the damage be reduced a little bit for it to gain the acid element.
a_psh 04-12-07, 05:28 PM	You really don't need alot of spell examples. You just need all the first level spells to scale, possibly with some elemental modifiers for attacks.Think of it as a lot of metamagic but actually balanced and well-thought-out.
Shadowhowler 04-12-07, 06:51 PM	ill pobably ignore the newest edition. My group will almost definatly do so. Who wants to learn a new set of rules when the existing ones work fine? Plus ive spent a good ammount of money on books, and id like to keep using them. Unless of course the newest system is simply amazing. This was the exact philosophy that kept me from touching 3.0 and 3.5 till just a few months ago... my group and I had no problems and no need for a new system, and the new one was not good enough to merit buying a whole new library of books.
Shadowhowler 04-12-07, 06:56 PM	Sorry for messing with your words, OP. :) Eh. I really hope they don't come out with a new edition. I play 3.5, but I wish I still had a group interested in playing 2e Adnd or Adnd. I would be... doubt we live anywhere near one another tho... I miss my game-friends badly... :(
Dougan Axehammer 04-13-07, 02:00 AM	Or they could figure out how to actually make a fully-functional game in one book, which countless others have done already. (Of course, I don't expect them to, since one book = less revenue.) Also, you threw in a metaplot, which is a big no-no. But there is a problem with putting everything in one book: the amount of information. If you make the book too small, then you'll lose alot of rules that would be necessary to minimize confusion and disagreements during play. If you make the book too big, then you get a book with alot of unnecessary information that will likely not be used during play. Spreading the information across several books allows both player and storyteller/DM to streamline options for play. If they want to limit or even eliminate some aspect from the game, then they simply ignore the information from an entire book without disrupting the core rules. As for metaplot, if they want to keep the campaign setting flowing in a certain direction, then they need to keep the setting regularly updated if the campaign progresses, whether through storyline (novels) or gameplay. The adventures don't need to be based on primary events; unrelated events will be just fine. But the primary concern for some campaign settings is keeping up with the storyline to produce adventures related to the events in the setting. This doesn't mean that player's and GM's must conform to the storyline, it will simply allow them to if they so choose. (Though I do understand the concern for railroading and Deus Ex, this will not be stymied by eliminating metaplot.)
Krusk 04-13-07, 11:41 AM	plenty of other RPGs have one core book, or maybe two. It can be done, it just means lots less stuff.
Kursk 04-13-07, 11:51 AM	I see a myriad of problems with 3.5 and 3rd edition. We're ripe for a new system. Really? What's so bad that new system is needed immediately?
Kursk 04-13-07, 11:59 AM	But if they don't release a new edition, how do they keep getting you to pay for books? Other than printing a Complete Sorcerer to give you even more of the same stuff you already got in Complete Arcane and Complete Mage, that is... Your assuming a static player base. What they need to do is marketing to obtain new players. Also, publishing worlds and modules.
Kursk 04-13-07, 12:02 PM	People have been looking at the DM book for ages. Heck, you can't even make a character without using the DM book these days, so it's pretty moot. The whole information-hiding thing has been a total failure from the start. What are you talking about. My players make all their characters w/o looking through the DMG. I don't use when I make characters.
a_psh 04-13-07, 12:29 PM	What are you talking about. My players make all their characters w/o looking through the DMG. I don't use when I make characters.Magical gear? You'll end up checking this a lot if you have a character die and need to make another one. Or if you start crafting items, for that matter. Prestige classes? Ditto. Not something you'll use at first level, but something you will need to read. How to generate ability scores? Only in the DMG. Information about leveling up? DMG.
High Octane 04-13-07, 12:30 PM	Who does? THERE. ARE. NO. PLANS. FOR. A. 4th. EDITION. AT. THIS. TIME.
Kursk 04-13-07, 12:41 PM	Magical gear? You'll end up checking this a lot if you have a character die and need to make another one. Or if you start crafting items, for that matter. Yes, see your point if not creating beginning characters, however, if my players are doing that they ask me what items I will give them. They don't pick. Prestige classes? Ditto. Not something you'll use at first level, but something you will need to read. Hardly a bid deal. The DM tells you what's available and hands you the book for 10 minutes. How to generate ability scores? Only in the DMG. Information about leveling up? DMG. ??? Players don't decide what method is used to generate ability scores. Leveling is covered in the PHB
a_psh 04-13-07, 12:44 PM	Your assuming a static player base. What they need to do is marketing to obtain new players. Also, publishing worlds and modules.Worlds and modules don't sell as well as splats. With settings, in particular, there's a "diminishing returns" phenomenon with each one published actually devaluing the next one you're going to put out. Having a big product line that exists for years also diminishes your ability to grab new players, because the barrier for entry appears steeper and steeper as the years wear on. "What, I need to buy fifty books here? Yeah, screw that." Moreover, you can't change around your image to appeal to a new customer base without an edition reboot. In addition to the complete system rewrite, 3e also got rid of a lot of the implicit misogyny of earlier editions (e.g. no cheesecake). Really, RPG publishing is pretty hopelessly messed up. But, yes, there will be a new edition. Any RPG product that is part of a big ol' product line will inevitably require a new edition to keep the money train going (although, being RPG publishing, it's more of a money cart).
Kursk 04-13-07, 12:49 PM	Worlds and modules don't sell as well as splats. With settings, in particular, there's a "diminishing returns" phenomenon with each one published actually devaluing the next one you're going to put out. Having a big product line that exists for years also diminishes your ability to grab new players, because the barrier for entry appears steeper and steeper as the years wear on. "What, I need to buy fifty books here? Yeah, screw that." Moreover, you can't change around your image to appeal to a new customer base without an edition reboot. In addition to the complete system rewrite, 3e also got rid of a lot of the implicit misogyny of earlier editions (e.g. no cheesecake). Really, RPG publishing is pretty hopelessly messed up. But, yes, there will be a new edition. Any RPG product that is part of a big ol' product line will inevitably require a new edition to keep the money train going (although, being RPG publishing, it's more of a money cart). Yes, part of the problem with getting new players is too many books. A bigger part is that they don't know how to market to new players. In almost any business that is critical. That's the biggest hole I've seen with RPG Publishers.
Neuneck 04-13-07, 01:32 PM	I got several things to say: 1) Somene mentioned he dislikes the hp-system since at higher levels it's not of interest if someone aims an arrow at you... WRONG: "Remeber, although a character may have lots of hitpoints a dagger in the eye is still a dagger in the eye" (Quoted from the DMG) 2) If you dislike the spell system, just have a look at www.d20srd.org. It's free material and offers many variant rules. If you dislike the propositions there, just come up with something better. It's easy to critizise a construction but building a better one is what you've gotta do. 3) When you don't want to be a "cristmas tree" (I like the expression :D) play a low-magic campaign. Here also, house-ruling can open completely new paths. You don't need too much magic items if everyone agrees on low magic (including the DM who then shouldn't show up with uber-killer monsters), everyone will have to scale down challenges a bit, yet it's a possibility. 4) I know a power gamer (and a slightly power-and-metagaming friend of mine is part of my gaming group). The first thing he asks is "What's my benefit of this?". Two ways of dealing with him: 1) Just tell him that it's roleplaying not rollplaying, possibly he's gonna understand 2) Forbid combinations that could make him the masterkiller-of-all-time (there's a reason for cross-classing between monk and paladin being forbidden, y'know) (See "save my game" article series for further advice) 5) As in 1) 2) and3) i want to point out that it doesn't matter how much books and feats and so on are accessible but your choice does matter. WotC is simply providing a large scale of possibilities that you can use or can't. Some prestige classes' most difficult prerequisite is finding a DM who allows his players to take levels in it. I personally percieve the PrCs as examples. Whenever I think a character needs to have more style than can be provided by "fluff" I try to come up with a PrC of my own, or a feat or so. In the core rulebooks there is always a section helping you in creating you own stuff (in the monster manual it's even spread over two chapters). The classes/PrCs/monsters detailed out in the core rules are a fine choice for beginners though, because you have to know the system very well to create something balances on your own. 6) Look at the rules before trying to mash them down, an example: There are so many stupid stuff in D&D right now that doesn't make sense. The weapons? How the hell do you justify that it takes a feat to throw a shurikin, but not a knife? It is SO much harder to throw a knife than it is throw a shurikin. The exotic weapon thing has nothing to do with how hard it is to use a weapon, or even how powerful the weapons are, it's like the developers just said "Well okay, these weapon are going to demand a feat, I have no idea why, but that's it." STUPID!. Examples: Shuriken: Shuriken are, albeit being thrown weapons, treated like ammunition, so you can enchant a bunch of them for the price of enchanting one knife. In addition they are monk's weapons, so he can use his furry of blows with it. Another reason is that they are "exotic" in the western middle-age style the game is in. Hand crossbow: You may wield one in each hand, although they are ranged weapons, if the enemy draws close, drop them and draw your swords. Big advantage, at the cost of a feat. Most double weapons: You have a primary and secondary weapon at the price of one weapon. The second end counts as a light weapon, so minimum drawback. Nevertheless they can be wielded just as normal weapons. Racial weapons: aren't exotic for the culture that brought them forth. Bolas: Trip with range. I think I read of a feat chain that made such thing possible with arrows as well, taking 2 or 3 feats. I don't need to talk about monk's weapons (taking no feat for a monk) or repeating crossbows, the benefit is just too obvious. 7) ALL you need to provide several years of interesting gaming and fun is the core rulebooks. In addition to them I only possess the Faerun campaign setting and it's Faiths and Pantheons addon. Everything going beyond the core rulebooks (heck, even a complete game setting is offered) is additional material to feed your interests. If you're the melee masher go buy the complete warrior. If you love icy plains etc. go buy Frostburn. If you just want to play the game, buy the core rulebooks, take a week of reading and have fun playing. The problem really IS winning new players for the game, because both roleplaying is chichιd and roleplaying is rather unknown. There is no anime series or so thematizising roleplaying. There is fantasy literature but nowhere (exept in direct roleplaying relied works as Drizzd's story for example) there is a link drawn to roleplaying. I have never seen a TV spot on RPG (dunno if there are some but here in germany there aren't). Pen and Paper RPG is spread by mouth-to-mouth propaganda only. Nevertheless there are LOTS of different systems and settings. Publicity is what's missing, not additional material. I hope I didn't step on your feet too hard, elsewise I'm sorry! :) Neuneck
a_psh 04-13-07, 02:34 PM	A bigger part is that they don't know how to market to new players.This is where I think the name "D&D" is really bringing everyone down. It's bringing itself down because "D&D" means killing things in dungeons and taking their stuff, so that's what the game has to be about, and it's brining everything else anyone tries to publish down because "D&D" is synonymous with "tabletop RPG" to most people, so they think of all tabletop RPGs become games about killing things in dungeons and taking their stuff. I think the next really big "roleplaying game" won't have those words anywhere on the box.
polt 04-13-07, 02:50 PM	This is where I think the name "D&D" is really bringing everyone down. It's bringing itself down because "D&D" means killing things in dungeons and taking their stuff, so that's what the game has to be about, and it's brining everything else anyone tries to publish down because "D&D" is synonymous with "tabletop RPG" to most people, so they think of all tabletop RPGs become games about killing things in dungeons and taking their stuff. I think the next really big "roleplaying game" won't have those words anywhere on the box. I really doubt there will be a "next big roleplaying game".
a_psh 04-13-07, 03:04 PM	Well, we'll never recognize it as a "roleplaying game," will we?
polt 04-13-07, 03:05 PM	Well, we'll never recognize it as a "roleplaying game," will we? Yeah, we will.
Escef 04-13-07, 03:21 PM	Yeah, we will. No, we won't.
The Hive Custodian 04-13-07, 03:27 PM	How can we recognize it if it will never exist? Not that I don't think it will.
Nobby_Nobbs 04-13-07, 04:38 PM	Think of it as a lot of metamagic but actually balanced and well-thought-out. That's just what I meant, but worded better!
polt 04-13-07, 04:41 PM	No, we won't. Why not?
ENHenry 04-13-07, 04:48 PM	Guess what, Original Poster? You're in luck, because according to WotC representatives at the D&D experience, you won't see fourth edition until at least late 2008, and more likely it'll be 2009 or after that! I'll be honest, if my 3.5 can hold out for six years, I'd be happy with it. The changes to Star Wars Saga Edition seem to be some really exciting changes, and if many of those make it into a 4th edition down the pike, I wouldn't be upset.
polt 04-13-07, 04:49 PM	Guess what, Original Poster? You're in luck, because according to WotC representatives at the D&D experience, you won't see fourth edition until at least late 2008, and more likely it'll be 2009 or after that! I'll be honest, if my 3.5 can hold out for six years, I'd be happy with it. The changes to Star Wars Saga Edition seem to be some really exciting changes, and if many of those make it into a 4th edition down the pike, I wouldn't be upset. What are those changes you speak of?
Kursk 04-13-07, 04:59 PM	Guess what, Original Poster? You're in luck, because according to WotC representatives at the D&D experience, you won't see fourth edition until at least late 2008, and more likely it'll be 2009 They're hosed.
Stormonu 04-13-07, 05:40 PM	This is probably an impossiblity considering the glut of stuff out these days (and the demand for more), but I think WotC, whenever it goes to 4th edition, should seriously cut down on the books, perhaps limiting the line to PHB, DMG, an MM and a single "options" book, like a conglomoration of the the Completes & PHB II. And let that be it - beyond regular adventures. Let Dragon magazine once again become the host of "new" stuff, if any. I mean, look at the 40K game - they produce a rulebook and a codex for each army; that's about it. Many other non-RPG products don't have an ever-expanding base; usually you just have the core rulebook and maybe one or two expansions - at most. We, as customers, have gotten spoiled on a plethora of books and such that gets put out since at least the days of 2nd edition (if not earlier). I don't know if its a reversible trend, but the game should really stop bloating itself with supplement this or that. Look at both 1E and the basic game. In 1E, the DMG, PHB and MM were the only rulebook for a while; it was 2 years before the FF came out, then another 2 years for Dieties & Demigods, and yet another two before Unearthed Arcana - everything else was just adventures. The old basic/expert/companion/master set were the only rules/supplements for the D&D game, and everything else was just adventures.
Nobby_Nobbs 04-14-07, 04:31 AM	This is probably an impossiblity considering the glut of stuff out these days (and the demand for more), but I think WotC, whenever it goes to 4th edition, should seriously cut down on the books, perhaps limiting the line to PHB, DMG, an MM and a single "options" book, like a conglomoration of the the Completes & PHB II. And let that be it - beyond regular adventures. Let Dragon magazine once again become the host of "new" stuff, if any. I mean, look at the 40K game - they produce a rulebook and a codex for each army; that's about it. Many other non-RPG products don't have an ever-expanding base; usually you just have the core rulebook and maybe one or two expansions - at most. We, as customers, have gotten spoiled on a plethora of books and such that gets put out since at least the days of 2nd edition (if not earlier). I don't know if its a reversible trend, but the game should really stop bloating itself with supplement this or that. Look at both 1E and the basic game. In 1E, the DMG, PHB and MM were the only rulebook for a while; it was 2 years before the FF came out, then another 2 years for Dieties & Demigods, and yet another two before Unearthed Arcana - everything else was just adventures. The old basic/expert/companion/master set were the only rules/supplements for the D&D game, and everything else was just adventures. LOL! Yes, Wizards will cut a major line of income! They really doesn't care about making money at all! The reason Warhammer works that way is because it sells a crapload of overpriced miniatures in addition to the books. To be fair though, I'd love to see less books too. I'd love it to be just the core and periodically released limited settings. It's just that there's no freaking way Wizards would ever go that route.
polt 04-14-07, 06:19 AM	If you don't want a lot of books. Don't buy 'em. I think most of the WizO books are really bad, but I don't care how many books the publish. I just don't buy them :D
navar100 04-14-07, 06:31 AM	Me, I would like to see: -The game being designed/balanced per encounter, instead of this assumed 4 encounters a day malarkey -No dead levels -A complete Skill system revamp (Rank nightmares etc) -Talent trees -No multi-classing restrictions (monks/paladins etc) XP penalties or favoured classes -No death from massive damage -Fewer absolutes – no save or die spells or total immunities etc -More hp at first level to avoid going down to a carrot thrown at you by a gnome -Skill folding (Listen + Spot = Perception etc) -No random ability score generation methods (maybe as optional variants) -Fixed hp for levelling (ala Living Greyhawk) I agree with everything except no random ability score generation and fixed hit points for levelling. Any point buy system, so far, forces you to have a low score, usually two, if you dare to want to a high score, and I don't like that. A character does not have to have a negative modifier in order to have a "weakness" or make him "well rounded". If I roll an 8, fine, I deal with it. If I'm forced to have an 8, I'm irked. As for fixed hit points, it will really depend upon how it's done, and the Living Greyhawk way is not the answer. Damage output overwhelmes average hit points as the levels increase. Having the average become the minimum might work: i.e. fighters get 4 + 1d6 hit points, rogues 3 + 1d3.
navar100 04-14-07, 06:33 AM	4) The rate of advancement should be SLOW with the option of speeding it, just like 2nd and earlier editions, rather than FAST with the option of slowing it. The semantic change empowers DM's against whiney "I want more XP" players. . Or maybe that's just a DM with delusions of grandeur who can't stand player characters being competent, even at 1st level. All a matter of perspective.
navar100 04-14-07, 06:38 AM	Like I said, HP is stupid. It kills drama and tension. There's no danger in a guy pointing an arrow at you, or points a spear at you, you always know that you can just take the hit and charge him with the 95 points of HP you have left. . It's also no fun if I have to worry that any hit from an arrow and a spear will kill my character outright. I should not have to choose attack or run away for every single swing.
navar100 04-14-07, 06:41 AM	Well I played first edition from 78-2003 gasp....yeah I know old....I dont' know what the heck happened either..... So if 4.0 comes along we will be fine with 3.5 until 2003-2028.....and that just might be long enough for this DM :D seriously, I still convert the classics and the ICE MERP modules to play now. Imatash On a morbid note: 1E players won't be around forever. Many hypothetical 4E buyers won't even know about 2E.
polt 04-14-07, 06:41 AM	It's also no fun if I have to worry that any hit from an arrow and a spear will kill my character outright. I should not have to choose attack or run away for every single swing. Of course not, but there's plenty of systems out there where it works better than with HP. I'm not saying every hit should kill you, but it should be dangerous. I mean, in D&D a hit either does nothing, or it kills you. It never just hurts you. Not according to the rules. And even though you can go "Yeah, I'm pretty hurt." There's no real life countepart, there's nothing that really changes. There's no difference between not having been hit by a sword and have 90 points of HP, and being hit a billion times and having 1 point of HP. Except that NOW the fight is actually dangerous.
Archangel62 04-14-07, 06:43 AM	I think one of the big things is thematics too. I know some guys who love rolemaster, I personally despise it because of "We slew the dragon and lost none, decimated the undead hordes of the lich kings and lost none, Battled the Demon Lords of Kal-Dayr and lost none, and then we crossed a river with a waterfall and all died" GURPS can work but the power level system can get spotty and while it is truly universal some things can interact oddly and it can take a very long time to make working characters. Tri-Stat is both the most and least balanced system in existence because of what it allows for and what it can do on accident. Call of C'Thulhu tends to be vicious, Zombies is similar, in the end there are dozens of systems and dozens of styles out there. For high fantasy I like D&D, maybe it's just because I'm familiar with it but I also know that as much as some aspects of the system frustrate me it's fairly good at internal consistency and can handle multiple new rules without suffering major breakdowns.
navar100 04-14-07, 07:17 PM	Of course not, but there's plenty of systems out there where it works better than with HP. I'm not saying every hit should kill you, but it should be dangerous. I mean, in D&D a hit either does nothing, or it kills you. It never just hurts you. Not according to the rules. And even though you can go "Yeah, I'm pretty hurt." There's no real life countepart, there's nothing that really changes. There's no difference between not having been hit by a sword and have 90 points of HP, and being hit a billion times and having 1 point of HP. Except that NOW the fight is actually dangerous. So the more I get hit, the more penalties you would put against me making it even harder for me to defend myelf thus I become even easier o hit. Right, either fight or run away.
polt 04-14-07, 07:19 PM	So the more I get hit, the more penalties you would put against me making it even harder for me to defend myelf thus I become even easier o hit. Right, either fight or run away. Hey man, it gives the game a lot more credibilety, because guess what, that how it works in the real world. And even though I know realism doesn't mean better. It gives the game a certain feel when the system makes sense, and when it doesn't.
Shadowhowler 04-15-07, 12:20 AM	Hey man, it gives the game a lot more credibilety, because guess what, that how it works in the real world. And even though I know realism doesn't mean better. It gives the game a certain feel when the system makes sense, and when it doesn't. I, for one, agree with you. The other games I like to play, mainly WoD and Cyberpunk, don't use Hit Points, and every injury you suffer has an impact on you, making it easier to care about your characters health. Of course, even tho D&D does not have a system to deal with injury beyond alive/dead... I *STILL* play my D&D characters with cuation, as people that actaully care about their own lives and dont just always move forward, fight till someone dies. Sometimes... if my character gets smacked up... I'll have him limp out of the fight a moment... maybe draw a ranged weapon and use it. Other players in my curent group get annoyed and go 'We need that flanking bounes, you are not as effective with the bow, why did you do that?' as tho all that matters is the ability to do damage and kill whatever, and the threat to my characters life or the blood dripping out of his gapping belly wound should not concern me at all. I HATE that kinda game. Ugh.
polt 04-15-07, 08:50 AM	Yeah, that's nothing worse than people going "BUT THAT WAS STUPID", and you're like "dude, I'm roleplaying, get off my back. This isn't a game, it's ROLEPLAYING game." No being is completely rational, sometimes you do stuff that's true to your character, but might not be the smartest thing to do at the moment.
Archangel62 04-15-07, 10:20 AM	Yeah, that's nothing worse than people going "BUT THAT WAS STUPID", and you're like "dude, I'm roleplaying, get off my back. This isn't a game, it's ROLEPLAYING game." No being is completely rational, sometimes you do stuff that's true to your character, but might not be the smartest thing to do at the moment. Yes, and many people see 'But I'm Roleplaying' as an excuse to be a complete and utter asshat. While you can make odd or maybe even poor decisions based on RP it doesn't mean that the person gets to do crap that makes the game frustrating or unfun for other people. Many of you who advocate Roleplay tend to be very much 'It's all about me.' I've seen solipsist roleplaying ruin too many games, don't let it happen to you.
polt 04-15-07, 10:24 AM	Yeah of COURSE. A lot of roleplayers are all like "No, I'm the main character of this." All the players should try and contribute. But I mean, I once played a very naive sort of child like halfling, and he ended up in an arena with a dog. And he wouldn't kill it, he didn't believe in killing. And the wizard in the party was amongst the audience, and he dazed it. What I did, is I tried to crawled up the walls and flee, get away from the fight. And one of the other players was like "YOU IDIOT, WHY DIDN'T YOU KILL IT?". And that sucks, because my character wasn't about killing. Of course I'll contribute to an important fight, but this really wasn't important. I was caught stealing, I was thrown into the arena, it didn't matter if I killed it or not. Only thing was we wouldn't have gotten the XP if I didn't kill it.
Shadowhowler 04-16-07, 08:54 AM	Yeah, that's nothing worse than people going "BUT THAT WAS STUPID", and you're like "dude, I'm roleplaying, get off my back. This isn't a game, it's ROLEPLAYING game." No being is completely rational, sometimes you do stuff that's true to your character, but might not be the smartest thing to do at the moment. Exactly. With some of the new generation of gamers, I don't know exactly why they bother plyaing D&D. Seems they would be better served playing MMO's like Warcraft or EQ... since thats where most of the new gamers got their start anyway. All about numbers, and very little roleplay. Bleh. I feel old.
polt 04-16-07, 09:14 AM	Dude, don't feel old because you want a cool roleplaying experience. That's nothing wrong with that. I'm 19, so it should make you feel young (unless of course, you are younger than me. THe it should make you feel old.)
daggeroflath 04-16-07, 09:18 AM	I'm actually happy with 3.5 and I'm going to keep working with it for a while. Still, when one day they bring out 4th edition, I would like... To not have to play a class with sneak-attack to get more skill points. For fighters to have some extra options available to them. For monks to "ninja-vanish" from the books (personal taste). For two otherwise-identical multi-class characters to be the same, no matter which class you took at first level. The "ecology" section to be returned to the MM. Better movement rules. ... but since that's all I really want, they can hold off 4th edition for a while. I'll just be houseruling 3.5.
Shadowhowler 04-16-07, 08:33 PM	Dude, don't feel old because you want a cool roleplaying experience. That's nothing wrong with that. I'm 19, so it should make you feel young (unless of course, you are younger than me. THe it should make you feel old.) Right on. You give me hope for the new generation. The thing for me is... the group I have gamed with for years, eevryone is about my age, and it has been all about the roleplaying from day one. Recently, I have been gaming with new people (becuase I moved cross country) and all of them are younger then me, by about 5-6 years, sometimes more. They, and a lot of people I see on the forums these days, seem to be a lot less about the role playing and more about the Optimization (which in my day we called min-maxing, and it was frowned upon, now it seems to be cool with it's new PC term) and the rules laywering and what have you. This has led me to feel old, alone... and to feel there is a real gaming generation gap. You give me hope, young man. Gezz, that sounded condecnding... I don't mena it that way, honest. :)
Sphyre 04-16-07, 09:06 PM	Me, I would like to see: -The game being designed/balanced per encounter, instead of this assumed 4 encounters a day malarkey -No dead levels -A complete Skill system revamp (Rank nightmares etc) -Talent trees -No multi-classing restrictions (monks/paladins etc) XP penalties or favoured classes -No death from massive damage -Fewer absolutes – no save or die spells or total immunities etc -More hp at first level to avoid going down to a carrot thrown at you by a gnome -Skill folding (Listen + Spot = Perception etc) -No random ability score generation methods (maybe as optional variants) -Fixed hp for levelling (ala Living Greyhawk) Those are all things that can be fixed by simple enough houserules. For example the dead levels can be fixed by implementing this article (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/cwc/20061013a). The restrictions on multiclassing for monks and paladins simply can be scrapped. I, in fact, do houserule that there's no death by massive damage. What I think that needs to be looked at as a new core mechanic in 4th edition, something that isn't as easy as just a quick fix is a whole new racial/leveling system. Something where your total character truely indicates how powerful you are, and level adjustments that don't favor melee over casting... things like that. Level adjustments are my biggest beef with the 3.5 system, and a few years ago I started a project to try to create a nice workable houserule system for level adjustments, but it failed due to a large incompatibility. I currently use a "quick-fix" houserule that you get something similar to a d4 hitdie per level adjustment... but it doesn't satisfy as much as a true system with built in effects for racial progression along with class level could work. Whatever, whenever, 4th comes out as, I hope it has some truely great ideas, and is not a bunch of houserules applied to the 3.5 system.
daggeroflath 04-16-07, 09:06 PM	This has led me to feel old, alone... and to feel there is a real gaming generation gap. I'm 23 and I started playing with the original edition of D&D when I was 9. I feel weird when I game with people my age to whom 2nd edition is that old system that only old fogies still play. I'm straddling the gaming generation gap and it's starting to hurt my legs!
Cincinnati 04-16-07, 09:57 PM	I hope they dont release a v4.0 as I've just spent a shed load on most of the books. I.e Players handbook Players handbook 2 Dungeon Masters Guide Monster Manaul Complete Adventurer Complete Arcane Complete Divine Complete Mage Comeplete Warrior Complete Scoundrel Races of destiny Book Of Exalted Deeds and 1 or 2 others that I can't remember. I own every single 3.0 and 3.5 book ever made. I think you can cope.
Biomage 04-16-07, 10:11 PM	Thanks to OGC, WOTC has become their biggest competition. When 4th edition is released, it will have to compete with all of the 3rd party products that will continue to support the current system.
Imatash 04-16-07, 10:49 PM	On a morbid note: 1E players won't be around forever. Many hypothetical 4E buyers won't even know about 2E. :rofl: :bow: :bounce: still laughing Thanks Imatash But in our case we started the next generation on 1E, and skipped 2E :D
RedUncle 04-17-07, 03:48 AM	4th Ed? ... bring back thac0!! haha :P
polt 04-17-07, 04:11 AM	Gezz, that sounded condecnding... I don't mena it that way, honest. :) No problem man :D
Daydreamer 04-17-07, 04:14 AM	epic levels... diety rules spellcasters.... certain spells...polymorph and other things like GET RID OF THE COSMOLOGY, THERE SHOULD BE NO ZUES IN D&D. seriously dont ever bother from 'real world' mythology in such a direct way, no elysium as an outer plane. etc What eberron did with the cosmology is a good example of what i mean. Each 'campaign setting' should have it own cosmology and not connect to other material planes. All the realms shoudl be completley metaphysicaly detached from each other no going from Fr to Greyhawk etc!
Steely_Dan 04-17-07, 06:53 AM	What are those changes you speak of? Here's a preview of a statistics block that was constructed using the Saga Edition rules. Chalkazza, Wookiee Bounty Hunter CL 1 Medium Wookiee scout 1 Force 5; Dark Side 0 Init +0; Senses Perception +6 Languages Basic (cannot speak), Shryiiwook Defenses Ref 13 (flat-footed 13), Fort 14, Will 12 hp 26; Threshold 14 Speed 6 squares Melee vibroblade +3 (2d6+3) Ranged bowcaster +0 (3d10) Base Atk +0; Grp +3 Abilities Str 16, Dex 10, Con 15, Int 8, Wis 13, Cha 8 SQ extraordinary recuperation, Wookiee rage Talents Acute Senses Feats Shake It Off, Weapon Proficiency (advanced melee weapons, pistols, rifles, simple weapons) Skills Climb +3 (may take 10 even when distracted), Endurance +7, Perception +6, Persuasion –1 (may reroll checks to intimidate), Pilot +5, Stealth +5 Possessions bowcaster, vibroblade, binders (2), comlink, macrobinoculars Welcome to the 101st installment of "Jedi Counseling," our regular column in which we answer your rules questions about the Star Wars Miniatures Game and the Star Wars Roleplaying Game. If you have a question, send it in through the link at the end of this column, and check back here for the official answer. Star Wars Roleplaying Game Saga Edition In the last column, we walked through a preview of the new Saga Edition core rulebook that will relaunch the Star Wars Roleplaying Game line in May. Over the next few installments of "Jedi Counseling," we'll go through some of the major topics in the new rules to give you a better idea of what to expect from the system. Today, let's look at hit points and the condition track. What's Wrong With Vitality Points and Wound Points? The vitality points and wound points of the Revised Core Rulebook have one primary problem: They're a little too lethal in the long run. Consider that a player character is meant to survive literally hundreds of encounters over the course of his or her career. In contrast, an opponent is usually meant to survive just a few rounds. Any mechanic that is meant to force an opponent to meet with a sudden demise in just a few rounds of combat (such as a critical hit that kills him instantly, or nearly so) will almost certainly come back to haunt the PCs, too. That might not be a problem in Dungeons & Dragons, but death is a lot more permanent in Star Wars. For example, consider a scoundrel who has a Constitution score of 12. The character doesn't wear armor, and over the course of his career, he's hit by an average of one shot from a blaster rifle per encounter. (Some encounters, particularly at higher levels, might involve more hits, and others might involve less; this is just an average.) Let's take three important factors into account. 1. Assuming that an attacker can hit the scoundrel on a roll of 19, there's a 10% chance that any hit from a blaster rifle is a critical hit. 2. There's about a 2% chance that any critical hit from a blaster rifle kills the scoundrel instantly (that is, a roll of 22 or higher reduces his wound points to –10). 3. The scoundrel faces an average of 13.333 challenging encounters per level. Therefore, the character has a 39.1% chance of being killed by sheer dumb luck at some point before attaining 20th level. In fact, in a party of four heroes like this, the chance that all of them will reach 20th level without being killed in this manner is less than 14 percent. Worse, if a character has a lower Constitution score, or if he takes more than one hit from a blaster rifle in an average encounter, his chance of instant death can be substantially higher. Consult the table below. ODDS OF INSTANT DEATH DURING A CHARACTER'S CAREER Wound Points + Damage Reduction ----------- Hits/Encounter* ----------- Life Expectancy** One Two Three 15+ n/a n/a n/a n/a 14 4.80% 9.40% 13.80% 3,549 hits 13 18.00% 32.70% 44.80% 887 hits 12 39.10% 62.90% 77.40% 355 hits 11 63.00% 86.30% 94.90% 178 hits 10 82.50% 96.90% 99.50% 102 hits 9 93.90% 99.60% 99.98% 64 hits 8 98.50% 99.98% 100.00% 42 hits * Assumes an average of one, two, or three hits from a blaster rifle over the course of an average of 13.333 challenging encounters per level. The percentage shown is the likelihood of being killed by a single critical hit at some point prior to attaining 20th level. ** After this many independent hits from a blaster rifle, half of all characters will have been killed by a single critical hit. Keep in mind that the table includes only the likelihood of being killed outright by an opponent's lucky roll. Sure, losing your hero to sheer dumb luck when you made all the "right" decisions isn't much fun. But the table doesn't include the chance of being reduced to negative wound points and failing to stabilize, being slowly worn down by repeated hits, taking two critical hits in one fight, or any other source of danger. In other words, this estimate of mortality doesn't include any of the other challenges that we expect heroes to face. When you take those other dangers into account, too, the chance for death rises even more. Our Alternative: Hit Points Given all this, we decided to use hit points in Saga Edition. It avoids the "incredibly unlucky instant death" problem described above, it has the advantage of using a single measure for all damage, and it's a simple, familiar standard that is common to many games (including Dungeons & Dragons and Star Wars Miniatures). What do hit points represent? Here's a quote from Saga Edition: Hit points (sometimes abbreviated "hp") represent two things in the game world: the ability to take physical punishment and keep going, and the ability to turn a serious blow into a graze or near miss. As you become more experienced, you become more adept at parrying strikes, dodging attacks, and rolling with blows such that you minimize or avoid significant physical trauma, but all this effort slowly wears you down. Rather than trying to keep track of the difference between attacks and how much physical injury you take, hit points are an abstract measure of your total ability to survive damage. Hit points are not a universal gauge of concrete, physical toughness. If a soldier and a small tank both have 100 hit points, that doesn't mean the soldier is physically as tough as the tank! Hit points are deliberately abstract so that the same measure of damage can be applied to an inanimate object (such as a wall), an animate object (such as a tank), a massive creature (such as a Krayt dragon), or a high-level character. Consider what hit points mean to each of them: · The high-level character's durability comes mostly from avoiding attacks, rolling with blows, and so forth. Only a fraction of his survival is based on his physical ability to absorb damage. · The Krayt dragon's hit points include skill and speed, but a much greater portion comes from its sheer size and bulk. In other words, it's hard to hit something that big in a way that will cause critically injuries. · The tank's hit points are completely physical in nature, but they aren't determined only by its size and mass. They also account for qualities such as the resiliency of the tank's systems, the volatility of its fuel and payload, the number of redundant and backup systems, and so on. · The wall's hit points are completely physical and almost entirely determined by simple physical characteristics such as the type of material used to build the wall, the thickness of the wall, and so on. Over the years, some players have developed a terrible misconception that a character with 100 hit points can be shot almost a dozen times in the chest. Not true! Both a high-level soldier with 100 hit points and a stormtrooper with 10 hit points will be grievously injured and possibly killed by a single blaster wound to the chest. However, the high-level soldier will dodge the first nine shots, and the stormtrooper won't. (If it helps, imagine that a high-level hero has a reserve of "virtual hit points" to offset attacks that would otherwise be lethal. Once he has exhausted his reserve, the blow that finally reduces him to 0 hit points will solidly connect and cause serious physical trauma.) Damage Threshold and Condition Track There was one particularly nice thing about the vitality point/wound point system: It allowed for a character to be injured in a way that impaired his abilities but didn't render him unconscious. In fact, a common criticism of any hit point system is that characters are 100% healthy until they fall over from their injuries. Still, even the vitality point/wound point system didn't capitalize on this strength as well as it could have. By the time a character took wound damage, he was usually very close to being out of the fight. In Saga Edition rules, we tried to keep this strength and expand on it. Thus, the performance of a character, droid, vehicle, or object will degrade over time if it takes sufficiently large amounts of damage. Every target has what's called a damage threshold. If the target takes damage equal to or greater than the threshold, it moves a step down the condition track. The condition track is a unified system to cover all conditions that degrade a target's capabilities, including poison, stun blasts, fatigue, serious injury, morale effects, and anything else you can imagine. Each step that a character moves down the track imposes an increasing penalty on his actions and defenses, from –1 to –2 to –5 to –10. In addition, because the character is barely staying conscious, he's limited in what actions he can take. When a character moves five steps down the condition track, he falls unconscious (or becomes disabled, for nonliving targets). In most cases, characters can "catch their breath" to move back up the condition track, and they can do so more quickly if they break away from combat for a round or two. Thus, the damage threshold measures how much damage is required to move a target down the condition track. In addition, the threshold determines how much damage is needed to seriously injure or kill the target. · If a target is reduced to 0 hit points but takes less damage than its threshold, the target is merely unconscious (or disabled). · If the target falls to 0 hit points and takes more damage than its threshold, the target might be killed (or destroyed). A character's damage threshold increases as he becomes more experienced. At low levels, a relatively weak weapon (such as an ordinary blaster pistol) is still a fairly serious threat, so 1st-level heroes have reason to fear a group of stormtroopers. At high levels, characters are more adept at avoiding damage, so they can dodge, parry, or block attacks that would be devastating or even lethal to lower-level characters. Thus, a Jedi Master and a Sith Lord can tear into each another for an extended period without slowing down too much. After extensive playtesting of this new mechanic, we've concluded that it produces an appropriately cinematic game experience. Characters can still be heroic -- chasing a squad of stormtroopers down a hallway, for example -- without being immune to serious injury or death, especially when facing a powerful villain in a climactic encounter. When you try out the new game system, we hope you'll agree. Saga Edition Preview 1Classes and Character CreationBy Rodney Thompson The Star Wars Roleplaying Game: Saga Edition rulebook comes out in May. Are you ready for the new core rules? Maybe you've already planned your first character. (I know I have -- Chalkazza, a Wookiee bounty hunter). Or maybe you're outlining your first campaign, cooking up villains and nemeses to throw at an unsuspecting band of heroes. Of course, before you can start blasting stormtroopers and locking lightsabers, you've got to be able to create those wonderful characters.Fortunately, Saga Editionhas you covered. One of the primary goals of the new edition was to make character creation more flexible. At the same time, we wanted to streamline the process so that new players could jump right in, and we tried to give experienced players a wealth of options when crafting their characters.As some ravenous readers might know, we've reduced the number of classes to five: Jedi, noble, scoundrel, scout, and soldier. We bid the fringer farewell and send the tech specialist back to the assembly line, granting their heroic abilities to other classes. We also distilled the Jedi guardian and Jedi consular classes into a single Jedi class, which is more in line with what we see in the movies. The Force adept has become a prestige class, but we reinvented the process of creating a non-Jedi Force user. It now involves a new set of mechanics that finally lets players create Force users of their own traditions without being locked into class features that didn't necessarily fit the character's back story.At the same time, we worked to infuse the remaining classes with excitement and a lot of abilities. If you want to play a "fringer," you're likely to use the scout or scoundrel class, and a "tech specialist" will use the scoundrel class as well. The merging of these classes allows you to create heroic characters that might fit a certain theme while still being able to do exciting things. Star Wars is all about excitement, intrigue, and depth, and your character's abilities should convey that.Talent TreesWhen it came time to redesign the classes, we took a hard look at what works for the d20 system and what could be improved. We asked questions such as, "Why do all Force adepts learn to use the Force to understand other languages?" and "Why do all nobles get resource access, regardless of their history?" Sure, certain iconic archetypes stand out in the Star Wars universe, but do all iconic roles demand the same class features?Saga Editionfeatures a system of talents and feats similar to that which was used in the d20 Modern game system. At odd-numbered levels, you select a talent, which lets you do something unique in much the same way that class features did under the old rules. These talents are broken down into subgroups called trees that arrange the talents by function or theme. Some talents can't be selected unless you've already taken another talent from the same tree (much like a feat prerequisite), and thus you build a set of class features that play off of one another.The changes to the system allow you to build a character to your liking, selecting very specific features rather than being saddled with the same features as every other member of your class. Moreover, the flexible new rules let you choose the order in which you gain abilities, so you can prioritize which talents are most important to you and which ones you'll pick up at a later level. So if you envision your Rodian smuggler as a "run and gun" type, you can build his class features to suit those needs. By the same token, if you want him to be a fast-talking swindler and con artist, he's just as easy to create. If each class represents a classic Star Wars archetype, your selection of talents lets you tailor that archetype to your personality and game play style.You can even create two members of the same class that share almost no talents, and with the addition of prestige classes, you might have absolutely no overlap with other similar characters. This not only allows multiple heroes of the same class to fulfill unique roles, but with larger groups, it ensures that each PC contributes something unique to the game.In addition, talent trees expand the amount of information we can include in future Saga Edition releases. Rather than worrying about alternative or replacement class features, upcoming products will include new talent trees for existing classes, as well as new talents for existing trees.Talent trees will also keep prestige classes from becoming overly specialized. No longer will the naval officer and the officer need to be two different prestige classes, and the Jedi Knight prestige class can encompass Jedi healers, Jedi investigators, Jedi battlemasters, and so on. The individual requirements for specialization will be carried in the talents themselves, not in totally separate classes.More Character OptionsIn addition to providing heroes with access to talent trees, we tried to make individual characters more capable overall. Saga Edition uses a hit point system to track damage, with a "condition track" that slides up and down over the course of the battle, imposing and removing penalties. See Jedi Counseling 101 for more on the condition track.Also, heroes get triple their Hit Die at first level, so they're better able to survive a few blaster shots without going down for the count. We wanted a group of 1st-level heroes to be able to fight stormtroopers in the first game session, if the GM so wished. Star Wars characters fight bad guys, and lots of them, and the Saga Edition rules let the heroes jump right into light combat. Stormtroopers are still pretty threatening at 1st level, but now heroes have enough resources and abilities that deciding whether to fight or flee is actually a tough decision.The Force Is With YouWe've revamped Jedi and other Force-users to make them more flexible. The single Jedi class contains talent trees for the Jedi consular, the Jedi guardian, and the Jedi sentinel, as well as a talent tree for lightsaber combat. In the Star Wars movies, we see that Yoda is part Jedi consular and part Jedi guardian, and now players can create characters that are similar hybrids. Similarly, you can create a Jedi who behaves more like Yoda from the classic trilogy -- focusing more on the Force than the lightsaber -- and you can do it with a great diversity of character options.Moreover, in Saga Edition, you can build a Force adept character using a combination of Force abilities and the talents, feats, and skills of other classes. For example, let's say you want to create an urban Force-user who grew up on the streets of Chandrila and who focuses more on city survival than on "primitive" Force traditions. You could start with a scoundrel as your heroic class and add talents and feats that let her wield the Force while dodging speeders and firing blasters. The new edition of the rules greatly expands the possibilities for Force-users, allowing for a wider array of character options.Sample Talent Tree: Jedi SentinelAs an example of what a talent tree might look like, let's walk through the tree for the Jedi sentinel. The Jedi that follow this path are the true enemies of the dark side, hunting down evil wherever they go. Masters of subtlety, Jedi sentinels manage to withstand the lure of the dark side, even when confronted almost constantly with its power.Clear Mind: You may reroll any opposed Use the Force check made to avoid being detected by other Force-users. You must take the result of the reroll, even if it is worse.Dark Side Sense: Jedi sentinels are exceptionally talented at rooting out evil. You may reroll any Use the Force check made to sense the presence and relative location of creatures with a Dark Side Score of 1 or higher. You must take the result of the reroll, even if it is worse.Dark Side Scourge: Against creatures with a Dark Side Score of 1 or higher, you deal extra damage on melee attacks. The number of points of extra damage is equal to your Charisma bonus (minimum +1).Prerequisite: Dark Side Sense.Force Haze:You can spend a Force Point as a standard action to create a "haze" that hides you and your allies from the perceptions of others. You can hide a number of creatures in line of sight equal to your class level. Make a Use the Force check and compare the result to the Will Defense of any opponent that moves into line of sight of any creature hidden by your Force haze. If your check result beats the opponent's Will Defense, all hidden creatures are treated as if they had total concealment against that opponent. The Force haze lasts up to 1 minute but is dismissed instantly if anyone hidden by the Force haze makes an attack.Prerequisite: Clear Mind.Resist the Dark Side: You gain a Force bonus of +5 to all Defense scores against Force powers that have the "dark side" descriptor. You gain the same bonus against Force powers that originate from any dark Force-user (that is, any Force-user whose Dark Side Score equals his Wisdom score).Prerequisite: Dark Side Sense.Sample Stat BlockHere's a preview of a statistics block that was constructed using the Saga Edition rules.Chalkazza, Wookiee Bounty Hunter CL 1Medium Wookiee scout 1Force 5; Dark Side 0Init +0; Senses Perception +6Languages Basic (cannot speak), Shryiiwook Defenses Ref 13 (flat-footed 13), Fort 14, Will 12hp 26; Threshold 14 Speed 6 squaresMelee vibroblade +3 (2d6+3)Ranged bowcaster +0 (3d10)Base Atk +0; Grp +3 Abilities Str 16, Dex 10, Con 15, Int 8, Wis 13, Cha 8SQ extraordinary recuperation, Wookiee rageTalents Acute SensesFeats Shake It Off, Weapon Proficiency (advanced melee weapons, pistols, rifles, simple weapons)Skills Climb +3 (may take 10 even when distracted), Endurance +7, Perception +6, Persuasion –1 (may reroll checks to intimidate), Pilot +5, Stealth +5Possessions bowcaster, vibroblade, binders (2), comlink, macrobinoculars Improvements All AroundHigh-level play is much more streamlined and efficient in Saga Edition, and combat runs just as smoothly at 20th level as it does at 1st level. Furthermore, the new character creation rules let you build a high-level NPC in 5 to 10 minutes instead of an hour. Because generating enemies and allies on the fly is fast and simple, it's easier for Gamemasters to improvise when players diverge from the planned session.All in all, the changes to classes, skills, and other systems make the process of generating characters quick and flexible.In future previews of Saga Edition, we'll take a closer look at individual aspects of character creation, such as the skills system and building Force adepts. We'll also examine other aspects of the new rules, such as the revamped combat system, the way droids are handled, and the unified vehicle/starship combat system. Stay tuned to this web site! Saga Edition Preview 3Use the Force, Luke!By Rodney Thompson Saga Edition ArchiveGeneral FAQsProduct pagePreview 1: Classes and character creationPreview 2: Skill system One of the most important aspects of the Star Wars setting is the omnipresence of the Force. Without the Force, Star Wars would be little more than another example of space opera. The Force distinguishes the setting and is a key part of the Star Wars Roleplaying Game. For Saga Edition, the Force revamp represented one of the most daunting challenges of the entire design process. Getting it right certainly took a lot of work, a lot of tweaking, and a lot of time during the design process.In Saga Edition, the Force has been distilled into a more straightforward mechanic, relying on a single skill and the activation of powers and special abilities rather than on multiple skills and feats. The old system overtaxed the resources of Force-users too often. Rather than consuming permanent resources, such as skill points and feat slots, Saga Edition uses the mechanics of the individual powers with limited uses to balance out Force use. The Force has become a system unto itself, rather than a part of other subsystems.New Skill: Use the ForceUnder the old system, it was difficult for a Force-user to be skilled at anything other than the Force. One of the first changes made for Saga Edition was the creation of a new skill called Use the Force. This skill allows a character to do basic things with the Force without consuming many resources. These actions won't have a huge impact on any given encounter, but they still allow the use of the Force with a simple skill check. A character must have the Force Sensitivity feat to use the Use the Force skill untrained, and only someone trained in Use the Force can activate Force powers (explained below).Below is the text from Saga Edition that explains the Use the Force skill. USE THE FORCE (CHA)Requires the Force Sensitivity featYou draw upon the Force to help you recover from injuries, gain special insights, or perform other remarkable acts. You must have the Force Sensitivity feat to be trained in this skill.Activate Force Power (Trained Only): You make a Use the Force check to use a Force power. This use of the skill requires no action.Force Trance (Trained Only): As a full-round action, you can enter a Force trance with a DC 10 Use the Force check. In this state, you remain fully aware of your surroundings. Each hour you remain in the trance, you regain a number of hit points equal to your character level. You can emerge from the trance as a swift action. If you remain in a Force trance for 4 consecutive hours, you emerge from the trance fully rested (as though you'd rested for 8 hours). While you're in a Force trance, you can go ten times as long as normal without food or water (see the Endurance skill).Move Light Object (Trained Only): As a move action, you can use the Force to telekinetically lift and move a relatively light object within your line of sight. A successful DC 10 Use the Force check allows you to move an object weighing up to 5 kg a distance of 6 squares in any direction. As a standard action, you can use the object as a projectile weapon, but the DC increases to 15. If your Use the Force check beats the target's Reflex Defense, the object hits and deals 1d6 points of bludgeoning damage.Search Your Feelings: As a full-round action, you can make a DC 15 Use the Force check to determine whether a particular action will yield favorable or unfavorable results to you in the immediate future (10 minutes or less). For example, you can make the check to determine whether destroying a dark side artifact will have immediate unforeseen repercussions. The answer does not take into account the long-term consequences of a contemplated action. Using the above example, a successful check would not portend a future encounter with vengeful darksiders angered by the destruction of the dark side artifact. (The GM must assess the immediate consequences of the action, based on what he knows about the circumstances.)Sense Force (Trained Only): You automatically sense disturbances in the Force. A location that is strong in the dark side of the Force can be sensed out to a range of 1 kilometer. A relative, companion, or close friend in mortal danger or great pain can be sensed out to a range of 10,000 light years. A great disturbance, such as the destruction of an entire populated planet or the distress of a whole order of allies, can be sensed anywhere in the same galaxy. As a full-round action, you can make a DC 15 Use the Force check to determine the distance and general direction to the location of the disturbance.As a full-round action, you can use this ability to actively sense other Force-users out to a range of 100 kilometers. If you succeed on a DC 15 Use the Force check, you know how many Force-users are within range, their approximate distance and direction from you, and whether you've met them before or not. Another Force-user within range can try to conceal her presence from you by making an opposed Use the Force check. If she equals or exceeds your Use the Force check, you don't sense her presence at all.Sense Surroundings: As a swift action, you can make a DC 15 Use the Force check to ignore the effects of cover and concealment when making Perception checks to detect or observe targets. Increase the DC by 5 if this ability is used against targets with total cover.Telepathy: As a standard action, you can establish a telepathic link with a distant creature. Through the link, you can exchange emotions or a single thought, such as "Go!", "Help!", or "Danger!" The target must have an Intelligence of 2 or higher, and the distance between you and the target determines the DC (see below). Against an unwilling target, you must make a Use the Force check against the target's Will Defense; if the check fails, you cannot establish a telepathic link or attempt to telepathically contact the target for 24 hours unless the target becomes a willing one.Telepathy Distance DC Same planet 15 Same system 20 Same region/quadrant of the galaxy 25 Different region/quadrant of the galaxy 30 Special: You can't make Use the Force checks unless you have the Force Sensitivity feat. Use the Force is a class skill for any character with the Force Sensitivity feat.You can take 10 on a Use the Force check, but you can't take 20. Unlimited Power(s)!Now that you've seen the Use the Force skill, you should have a good idea of how it works at its most basic level. None of its uses can radically alter the flow of combat. To do that, a character must be trained in the skill and have access to Force powers. Force-users gain access to a feat called Force Training that gives them a pool of powers to draw upon. Each power represents a single use of the Force that helps make up a character's "suite."When a character uses a Force power, he removes it from his suite of powers, makes a Use the Force check, and follows the explanation of the effect. That power is now considered spent and can't be used again. Force-users regain their Force powers by resting for one minute outside of combat, activating special talents, spending Force points, and a variety of other means. Additionally, if you roll a natural 20 on your Use the Force check to activate a Force power, you regain all of your spent powers -- the Force is with you!The new system allows Force-users to do incredible things without completely overshadowing the other heroes. Force powers take up your actions and have a finite amount of uses; to regain them, you must spend time, resources, or effort. Thus, well-trained Force-users will be able to use the Force well and often, pausing occasionally to regain their powers.The system works very well for Jedi in particular, who now face a tactical choice between using their Force powers and wading into combat with a lightsaber. For example, a Jedi must decide whether to:· open combat with his Force powers, then enter battle to continue the fight; · hold his powers in reserve, engaging the enemy with a lightsaber and activating his Force powers only when needed; · disengage from combat to recover a spent power; or · charge back in with Force powers at the ready. The combination of Force powers and lightsaber combat in Saga Edition is not only more engaging for players, but it also encourages more diversity in combat and simulates what is seen in the movies.The sample Force power rebuke, below, illustrates how the new Force system works.REBUKEYou harmlessly absorb or deflect one Force power used against you, perhaps even turning it against its creator. Time: Reaction. Target: One Force power directed at you.Make a Use the Force check. If your result equals or exceeds the check result of the power directed at you, you harmlessly redirect it and suffer no ill effects. If you result exceeds the check result of the power directed at you by 5 or more, you may choose to turn the Force power against its creator, who suffers the effect.Special: If you successfully reflect a Force power back at its originator, the originator may attempt to rebuke the power as well. If he reflects it back again, both you and the originator are affected by the Force power. You can spend a Force Point as a reaction to suffer no ill effects from a Force power that has been rebuked twice -- once by you and once by the power's originator.Rebuke is one of the new powers added to Saga Edition that helps the game more closely model events seen in Episodes II and III. The power covers the duel between Yoda and Dooku duel at the end of Attack of the Clones. It also helps to illustrate how Anakin and Obi-Wan were able to lock themselves into a Force duel in Revenge of the Sith, sending them hurling to either side of the control room on Mustafar.Force TalentsForce-users also have access to a selection of special talents that enhance their Force-using ability. Any character who takes the Force Sensitivity feat gains access to several Force talent trees (Alter, Control, Dark Side, and Sense), which add special abilities to her powers or grant her special actions regarding the Force. Some Force talents require the character to expend a Force point to activate them, while other talents alter the way a character uses the Force in a typical situation.Any character with the Force Sensitivity feat can always select a Force talent whenever she would gain a new talent from a standard class or a prestige class. Thus, Force-sensitive characters can mix and match talents from their classes with Force talents, giving them greater diversity in how they're built. Jedi, who gain Force Sensitivity as a bonus feat, can also select from these talent trees. However, the class-specific talents for Jedi help cater toward her unique talents and make choosing a generic Force talent a tough decision.Alternate Force TraditionsAll of the elements described above come together to create our new system for creating non-Jedi Force-users. In the old system, it was the domain of the Force adept class. In Saga Edition, creating a Force-user from an alternate tradition is a simple matter of taking the Force Sensitivity feat and choosing Force powers and talents that suit the tradition. For example, a player who wants to create an urban Force-user might select the scoundrel class, choose a few scoundrel talents, dip into the Alter talent tree for a few more talents, take the Force Training feat a few times to learn Force powers, and mix and match the use of the Force with the features of the scoundrel class.Moreover, some specific Force traditions have their own unique talent trees that represent abilities inherent to that particular tradition. They're considered Force talent trees, but only characters who belong to that tradition can choose from that tree. The Saga Edition core book presents two alternate Force traditions: the Jensaarai and the Witches of Dathomir. Each tradition has its own talent tree, which provides Force-users with unique abilities that complement their other talents and feats.Let's close this Saga Edition preview with a sample statistics block for a Jensaarai Defender, which makes use of the new system.Jensaarai Defender CL 9 Medium human Jedi 5/soldier 3Force 5; Dark Side 1Init +11; Senses Perception +5Languages Basic Defenses Ref 25 (flat-footed 23), Fort 22, Will 20hp 85; Threshold 22 Speed 4 squaresMelee lightsaber +13 (2d8+6) orlightsaber +13 (3d8+6) with Mighty Swing Base Atk +8; Grp +11Atk Options Mighty SwingForce Powers Known (Use the Force +15): battle strike (2), Force slam, surge Abilities Str 16, Dex 14, Con 14, Int 8, Wis 12, Cha 12Talents Armored Defense, Attune Armor, Block, Deflect, Improved Armored DefenseFeats Armor Proficiency (light, medium), Force Sensitivity, Force Training (x2), Mighty Swing, Skill Focus (Use the Force), Weapon Focus (lightsaber), Weapon Proficiency (simple, lightsabers)Skills Initiative +11, Use the Force +15Possessions ceremonial armor (+7 armor), lightsaber, comlink, 100 credits
Kadasbrass 04-17-07, 08:45 AM	As long as DnD exist there will always be a new edition. Each generation that grows up with the game will grow up experiencing the problem of the game that resulted from the solution of the last generation. So each new generation will try and come up with a solution for the problems they encountered, which in turn will create new problems for the next generation of gamers. In addition to this as the game continues to grow there comes a critical point where there is just too much stuff. You can only continue to add so much before everything just needs to be torn down. Even seedlings won't grow in a forest where no sunlight reaches the ground. So there comes a point where the best thing for the game is to start over, and this is where the new generation comes in and trys to "solve" the problems, unwittly creating new problems along the way. I never played 1st or 2nd edition, and more then likely won't be playing 4th either. I have taken 3rd and altered it to the point where it is the final version I need.
Archangel62 04-17-07, 11:04 AM	Thanks to OGC, WOTC has become their biggest competition. When 4th edition is released, it will have to compete with all of the 3rd party products that will continue to support the current system. Unlikely, Monte Cooke himself said that no company really competes with WotC, they compete with other companies over the leavings.
Kensan_Oni 04-17-07, 11:28 AM	Hey man, it gives the game a lot more credibilety, because guess what, that how it works in the real world. And even though I know realism doesn't mean better. It gives the game a certain feel when the system makes sense, and when it doesn't. Why on earth do you want to give a game about fantasy heroics even MORE realism? I mean, don't you have GURPS for that? Conan, standing there dripping in his own blood, never staggers and falls over. He keeps fighting. Spartans running into the streets, ignoring their own wounds in their shining breastplates and spears, don't fall over when they get a devistating attack. They keep going till they are dead, dead, dead! Fi on your wanting reallism in a Fantasy game.
aotrscommander 04-17-07, 11:32 AM	I personally, think that as a system 3.5 is the best mechanically adept system I have seen. This is not to say that it could not be improved (what was posted about SW Saga sound pretty cool, actually!) However, I think D&D is at the stage where in order to facilitate some of the changes I would personally like to see, the system would have to be re-thought out from the ground level up. Saga Edition may well be a perfect testing zone, however, since it is allowing WotC to field-test radical changes to the system. I think what I have noticed over the period of 3.0-3.5 is that the game design theory has improved drastically. Most of the design articles I have read recently that have explained chnges as "does this rule make the game more fun?" Which is a damn good starting point. (For example, I would be astonished to see death from massive damage in 4th Ed whenever it eventually emerges in the distant future, especially considering what was said about Saga hp! I for one never have used in in any edition.)
Shadowhowler 04-17-07, 03:48 PM	Unlikely, Monte Cooke himself said that no company really competes with WotC, they compete with other companies over the leavings. Wow... That may well be true, I'm out of touch with the curent gamer trends, but it just sounds so... arrogent. It puts me off in a bad way.
Kensan_Oni 04-17-07, 05:51 PM	Wow... That may well be true, I'm out of touch with the curent gamer trends, but it just sounds so... arrogent. It puts me off in a bad way. Well... no... really, until burning wheel came out (And I am not sure if I even *LIKE* the idea of the game, from what I've heard of the fans), no one really has seriously tried competing in the Fantasy RPG's. There has been a couple of releases of Runequest, and White Wolf released Exalted, which sells based on the pure power of the White Wolf name. While many people have tipped into the d20 pie, very few have tried to compete with it. They've just saddle up beside it and tried to take part of the frenzy a few years ago. Some people still make a good living off of the d20 system, and have survived to this stage, but very few people try to compete to be the next D&D. They look for other nitches to fill. Monte Cook's statement, to this time, is mostly still correct. Times are changing, though, and I feel new games that I've heard about in the pipe from some independents might give it a run for a few years. Time will see.
aotrscommander 04-17-07, 06:32 PM	Rolemaster competed for a while a few years back, but they a) lost the Lord of the Rings license and b) went bust. (Iron Crown and Rolemaster is now not the same company as it was originally; as i understand it, it was bought up by one of the fans in which current form in resides.) Interestingly, some of the original authors of Rolemaster went on to write 3.x!
Steelwill 04-17-07, 10:17 PM	I tend to fully agree that 3.5 is the best incarnation, at least as far as the core rule books go, of D&D that has ever been. However I am sure many people prior to 3.5 thought 2nd Ed was the best, so I cannot honestly say I wouldn't be interested in seeing a 4th Edition, and maybe being pleasantly surprised that WoTC managed to improve on near perfection. I can say though that at this time I can only imagine a 4th edition that is predominantly a refinement of minor hiccups in 3.5, not the massive overhaul that 3.5 was from 2nd Ed. If I was to offer recommendations, it would be the following: -Sorcerer - Needs to use spell like abilities instead of spells, and become more its own class, not a mere offshoot of the Wizard -Metamagic - Needs to have a more user friendly system, that is significantly less difficult to utilize, and more worthwhile for casters. I adopted in my own games a house rule that implemented a times per day usage, much like metamagic rods, when a player took the feats. It was more popular this way, and actually made Metamagic Feats much more competitive options for my players as choices when picking a new feat than they previously had been. Dual Wielding/2Handed Weapon/Sword and Board - The classic melee fighting style options in D&D for a long time, and always competing for the top slot of "best" by the numbers. I feel in 2nd Edition Dual Wield was broken because it was ALWAYS the optimized choice, in 3.5 I feel the rebound made Dual Wielding too weak and 2-Handed Weapon styles too strong. Sword and Board has never been on top either. Striking a more technical rule based performance balance between these styles so that they can be choices made for style instead of optimal performance would be a nice improvement to see in a new edition of D&D. As well, Dual Wield needs a less cumbersome governing rule set, there are just too many variables involved, especially with more advanced characters, for it not to become a mathematic juggernaught whenever a full attack becomes available to a dual wielding character. Maybe much fewer governing feats and augmentations to "to hit". That's all I have for recommended changes in 3.5 atm, my 2 cents, hope it helps.
Illithid_Tentacles 04-17-07, 10:30 PM	I feel no need for a 4th edition. Who does? WotC does. I guarentee there will be a 4th edition of D&D, proabably sometime in the next 15 years. As I've said elsewhere, WotC is a business, and D&D is profitable for them, so they will continue to churn out D&D material until people stop buying it. Then they'll make 4e, and the cycle will go on. It doesn't matter how much you like 3.5e or how well supported it is, there WILL be a 4th edition.
Shadowhowler 04-17-07, 11:01 PM	Monte Cook's statement, to this time, is mostly still correct. Times are changing, though, and I feel new games that I've heard about in the pipe from some independents might give it a run for a few years. Time will see. My problem was not that it's not true or acurite, as I said, I'm out of touch enough to not know... my problem is that the statment is very arrogant, on its face, and I'm not a big fan of arrogance, wether it be founded or not.
Shadowhowler 04-17-07, 11:05 PM	I can say though that at this time I can only imagine a 4th edition that is predominantly a refinement of minor hiccups in 3.5, not the massive overhaul that 3.5 was from 2nd Ed. Did you ever see the 2.5 D&D stuff? It was a very intresting bridge between 2nd edd and 3.0. The changes of 2nd and 3rd eddition seem a lot less 'Holy crap' if you've played 2.5.
Escef 04-18-07, 10:51 AM	Wow... That may well be true, I'm out of touch with the curent gamer trends, but it just sounds so... arrogent. It puts me off in a bad way. WotC reps have come right out and said, "We are the industry." Apparently WotC makes up about 90% of the P&P RPG sales in the US (and probably Europe as well).
The Hive Custodian 04-18-07, 05:16 PM	"We are the industry." "I am the senate!" Seriously, though, over the past few years I've become disenchanted with D&D. I'm probably never going to ever buy another D&D book unless 4th Edition is absolutely brilliant in my eyes. If it is, I have no doubt many of out there with differing tastes will be angered. I don't think you'll have much to worry about though as far as that goes, though. But I will say this: If I were to keep with D&D, I would like to see more than minor tweaks to the system for 4ed. A few such things: 1. Get rid of the class/cross-class skill distinction. Either make all the skills equal in power, or weight their costs. The current skill system makes some skills not worth taking, complicates the creation of multiclass characters, and contributes to the unnecessary proliferation of classes. 2. "Memoryless" character creation. By this I mean that, given a level, you can create a character of that level without having to build that character at every previous level. This would involve reducing the role of the prerequisite mechanic. 3. More modularity. Judging from the hundreds of prestige classes out there, it seems the current mentality is to create a new prestige class for every concept. These prestige classes tend to be a very strict bundle of components. Would it not be more efficient to make a few more flexible classes than make a separate prestige class for every combination of components? 4. Less examples, more reasoning and ease of creation. There are a lot of books out there, but very few of them give advice on how to build new material, and often the advice isn't very good even when it does exist. Usually we're told to go look at examples, but examples alone are a rather inefficient way of learning how to do something. Imagine if you had a textbook in school and it had only examples in it. I would also like to see a system designed so that it is easier to design new material that fits well with it (i.e., isn't broken). Although this probably isn't good business practice, since if people can easily make their own material, they won't have to buy every bit of material that they want from a company.
Sykopup 04-21-07, 11:50 AM	Thanks to OGC, WOTC has become their biggest competition. When 4th edition is released, it will have to compete with all of the 3rd party products that will continue to support the current system. Not sure where he heard it, but at last week's game, one of the guys said he had heard a rumor that the whole Open Gaming concept was going to be phased out. If that happens, then a lot of 3rd parties are going to be looking for work. Personally, if this rumor is true, I think WotC should reconsider their position on the matter and allow the 3rd parties to continue supporting the 3 and 3.5 editions. If anyone can prove or disprove this rumor, I would be greatly appreciative.
Escef 04-21-07, 01:56 PM	Not sure where he heard it, but at last week's game, one of the guys said he had heard a rumor that the whole Open Gaming concept was going to be phased out... If anyone can prove or disprove this rumor, I would be greatly appreciative. Back at GenCon '04 someone told me he had a buddy working on a D&D game for the Xbox that was going to use 4th edition rules, which were due out the next year. Obviously, whatever he had heard was wrong. Rumors like this do not need to be disproved. Raher they need to be proven. And no one is going to have any proof; if this rumor were true, someone would have to have broken a Non-Disclosure Agreement to blab about it.
Biomage 04-21-07, 02:17 PM	I guarentee there will be a 4th edition of D&D, proabably sometime in the next 15 years.:uh-huh: :looloo: There will be a 4th ed announced within the next 2 years. WOTC isn't making enough on existing products. As you develop a game, the market gets diluted. Consumers are less likely to by supplements.
Escef 04-21-07, 02:19 PM	There will be a 4th ed announced within the next 2 years. Hold on, you're saying the next two years will not fall within the next fifteen? :thinks:
Cromag 04-21-07, 02:22 PM	I for one am going to be looking at WOTC's new star wars game. I'm willing to bet if they get half decent sales that it will be the new D&D system in the next couple of years.
Biomage 04-21-07, 02:25 PM	Hold on, you're saying the next two years will not fall within the next fifteen? :thinks: Yes, that is exactly what I am saying. Thank you for making it clear.:ahem:
Biomage 04-21-07, 02:29 PM	I for one am going to be looking at WOTC's new star wars game. I'm willing to bet if they get half decent sales that it will be the new D&D system in the next couple of years. You are absolutely correct. The changes that they are making in SW Saga are to test the waters for 4th edition. Personally, I don't like much of what I have seen from Saga and don't think that I would be interested in 4th edition if they kept some of the changes. I mean, only 1 attack per round...ever?
Kuronue 04-21-07, 05:28 PM	The main problem I have with DnD as it is (3.0/3.5) is that whenever things don't make logical sense because they have to adapt to the mechanics, I lose a little bit of my connection to the game world. For instance: Why can't a tiefling be bitten by a werewolf? They're at least 3/4 human,they appear humanoid, but they're magically immune. Or, why does dying matter if you can get ressurected? How about, if vampires are supposedly so persuasive, why is their dominate DC so low? Not to mention, what justifies magically knowing brand new class features mid-dungeon because, *pop* I levelled up!
Shadowhowler 04-21-07, 06:15 PM	The main problem I have with DnD as it is (3.0/3.5) is that whenever things don't make logical sense because they have to adapt to the mechanics, I lose a little bit of my connection to the game world. For instance: Why can't a tiefling be bitten by a werewolf? They're at least 3/4 human,they appear humanoid, but they're magically immune. Or, why does dying matter if you can get ressurected? How about, if vampires are supposedly so persuasive, why is their dominate DC so low? Not to mention, what justifies magically knowing brand new class features mid-dungeon because, *pop* I levelled up! I dunno about most of that... but the dieing and the level 'pop'ing can often be handled in differant ways by differant DM's. The games I'm used too... dieing matters and resurection is not quite so avalble/common. Also, if you level up and improve existing class features, thats one thing... but you can't just decide 'Oh, I'm a fighter 6, I want to take a level of rogue now' without some training/exposure to those skills.
Damior 04-21-07, 07:09 PM	right, It even says in the books (forget whether its DMG or PHB, or both) that leveling up isnt an autiomatic mid-dungeon thing, its after the adventure is over that you gain the xp (That I know is PHB) and level up if thats the case, assuming a few weeks training when you level up. Some DMs ignore this rule to speed up their games, but its there. Also, Vampires have a CHA bonus, so that means higher social skill modifiers, hence more persuasive. And finally, the outsider blood of the tiefling overpowers whatever magic causes the lycanthropy. Though that last one I disagree with partially, I wish monstrous humanoids could have the template, but its probably there for game balance reasons.
JustinA 04-21-07, 08:44 PM	We'll just have to see, I have no faith in the current crop of game "designers" since 3.5 came out as such a tour-de-failure and so no faith in 4th edition being a marked improvement. Bill Slavicsek is in charge of D&D R&D now. Bill Slavicsek's first effort in developing the D20 System gave us the original edition of D20 Star Wars. I have absolutely zero confidence in the direction 4th Edition would go with the current design team. I have a generally higher opinion of the quality of material WotC has been putting out than some people, but there are some core assumptions about what works and what doesn't work in 3rd Edition by the current design team that I simply don't agree with. Not sure where he heard it, but at last week's game, one of the guys said he had heard a rumor that the whole Open Gaming concept was going to be phased out. If that happens, then a lot of 3rd parties are going to be looking for work. Personally, if this rumor is true, I think WotC should reconsider their position on the matter and allow the 3rd parties to continue supporting the 3 and 3.5 editions. If anyone can prove or disprove this rumor, I would be greatly appreciative. Proving or disproving a rumor is, well, impossible. That's the insidious nature of a rumor. However, this has been a rumor which has been around since roughly August 2000, so without something more credible than "I heard it from a guy who heard it from a guy who heard it from a guy", there's really no reason to believe it. One last point: There is absolutely nothing WotC can do to prevent third party developers from continuing to support 3.0 and 3.5. The OGL is a Pandora's Box: There is no provision for WotC to close material once they've opened it. Now, what WotC can do is yank the D20 Trademark License. All that being said, three points: 1. It is certainly true that WotC has reversed its previous business model in the past two months. They have yanked licenses from both PCGen and Paizo, suggesting that their previous business model of allowing third party developers to provide support material they previously didn't want to be bothered with is coming to an end. This may or may not have an impact on their support of the OGL and D20 Trademark License with a new edition of the game. 2. Even if WotC can't yank the ability for people to use the SRD with the OGL, that doesn't mean that there will actually still be a meaningful market for 3rd Edition material. At the very least, the market for 3rd Edition material will contract drastically, and there's really no guarantee that it will survive. 3. (And this is the most important point.) There's really no reason to suspect that WotC is even meaningfully considering a 4th Edition at this point. One of the reasons why WotC is likely to avoid a new edition at this point is that they have no desire to even risk dividing their market. This was a major concern for the company when they switched from 2nd Edition to 3rd Edition: They were aware that the switch from 1st Edition to 2nd Edition had divided the market, and a lot of the gamers they lost during that transition never came back. With 3rd Edition they had a huge success: Not only was their retention rate for 2nd Edition gamers apparently huge, but they also won back into the fold a lot of older gamers who had abandoned the system while simultaneously rejuvenating the game for newer players. It was a perfect storm. There is no reason to think that, at this point a 4th Edition, could enjoy similar success. There is no strong indication, even from the hardcore fans, that there is a fundamental dissatisfaction with the system. (The best I've seen is people saying, "Well, there are certainly some areas where I could see improvement being made.") Without a radical redirection there's no way to win back any fans they have lost; and such a redirection is probably more likely to alienate the largely satisfied fans they do have than to win back the fans they've lost. Meanwhile, the OGL and SRD present a hurdle they didn't have when transitioning from 2nd Edition to 3rd Edition: They can't "force" a switch by simply stopping production on 3rd Edition supplements, because there are plenty of people who can keep on supplying those supplements. This will actually create a dynamic similar to what happened in the transition from 1st Edition to 2nd Edition: TSR kept printing 1st Edition books for, in some cases, years after 2nd Edition came out. This almost certainly contributed to the division of the fanbase during that transition. And the dynamic will be even worse in a 3rd Edition to 4th Edition transition: Not only will old material continue to be available, but new material will continue to be produced. The only way WotC could hope to mitigate this corrosive dynamic? By releasing a 4th Edition SRD under the OGL and allowing third-party developers to continue supporting the game. Why? Because the third-party developers will follow the money to 4th Edition and will stop supporting the old game. (That's what they did when 3.5 came out.) Now, playing Machiavelli, how would I go about killing third-party developers if that was my goal? Continue to support "open gaming" with the 4th Edition, but fail to release the 4th Edition SRD under the extant OGL. Release it only under a license similar to the D20 Trademark License -- one which can have its terms changed or revoked at any time. Even if the developers see it coming, this produces a coup de grace: There will be an inevitable market pressure to follow 4th Edition and some developers will. Without any clear industry solidarity in continuing to support the old edition, such support efforts will largely be disjointed and ineffective. Then, after a year or two (when the 3rd Edition support market has completely disintegrated), you yank your "open" license for 4th Edition. (And if you think the industry will see it coming and stand firm against it, you're kidding yourself. Way back in September 2000 when I was working as a freelancer in the industry I tried to convince the handful of companies developing under the OGL and D20 Trademark License that it would be better to collectively create a an openly licensed trademark that could identify D20-compatible material without being dependent on the D20 Trademark License. Strike early and build market recognition for it so that, if WotC ever decided to pull the trademark license, we wouldn't be left high-and-dry. Most companies couldn't even recognize the potential threat.) Justin Alexander http://www.thealexandrian.net