Post/Author/DateTime	Post
18DELTA 12-18-07, 01:55 PM	http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4pr/20071218a Starting in January 2008, Dragon #362 will take a look at the following: Forgotten Realms: Using the Spellplague in your 3E campaign Races: Elves and Eladrin Classes: Warlord Monsters: Minions Adventure Design: Fantastic Terrain Magic Items: Artifacts D&D World: The Feywild Subsystem: Death, Dying, and Negative HP
Lord Karsus 12-18-07, 03:39 PM	-I was reading that PDF on Clerics, there...The first thing that popped into my mind, literally, when I finished, was Lucy from I Love Lucy. "Eeehhhhhh..." -I don't like the reasons they listen why they changed around the "Core Pantheon", even though that, of course, has no bearing on the Realms. It echoes eerily of what they're doing in the Realms, though: "We wanted, fewer, 'better' deities", "We wanted deities to represent the new game and...world", "We want Epic Characters to be capable of challenging, and even becomming gods". -I don't like how they are seperating healing spells, prayers, battle spells (explody things), and so on, either. Maybe it'll make more sense in the Rule books. I especially don't like how, "Most short-term buffs lasts until the end of the encounter. That’s it. It’s simple, it’s clear, and the effects are more powerful since the duration’s shorter". -Lastly, I don't like the ending to that article. "So you might miss the 3E cleric if you just have to be a bit overpowered or were such an altruistic soul that you liked healing somebody every round, but we think most players will prefer the new cleric over the old." Like so many other things, it's as if they are being condescending towards anyone who does like the concept of the 2e/3e Cleric. -I won't go much into the article on Dwarves, but I am saddened to see that Dwarven women don't have beards. Again, it sounds like they're being condescending again...:rolleyes:
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 12-18-07, 04:02 PM	- -Lastly, I don't like the ending to that article. "So you might miss the 3E cleric if you just have to be a bit overpowered or were such an altruistic soul that you liked healing somebody every round, but we think most players will prefer the new cleric over the old." Like so many other things, it's as if they are being condescending towards anyone who does like the concept of the 2e/3e Cleric. I agree.:(
Rauric 12-18-07, 04:39 PM	I liked it. I was "stuck" being a cleric for so long, but learned how good they were right away. I like the new concept because havingto heal every round was annoying after a while.
johnkretzer 12-18-07, 04:45 PM	I liked it. I was "stuck" being a cleric for so long, but learned how good they were right away. I like the new concept because havingto heal every round was annoying after a while. Never had that problem playing a cleric. Sure I healed during combat but usualy it wasn't every round...and as you gain levels it becomes less round consuming...now...wow cleric just got broken....I mean how much more powerful is Divine power and Rightous Might going to get? And now you can free as free actions.... LK I am curious where they PDF on clerics is?
Sir_Shadow 12-18-07, 05:08 PM	They dont like the idea of gods as being omniprescent and omnipotent? SO the gods are just high level NPC's now. Lovely. Won't even get into the dwarf thing. Especially when coupled with the fact that the dwarves are apparently going to be former slaves of the giants and thats why they hate them so much. Couldn't possibly be because they live in the same damn areas and fight over territory, no it has to be because they were slaves to the giants. Why are they wholesale trying to reinvent all the races.
Lord Karsus 12-18-07, 05:30 PM	I liked it. I was "stuck" being a cleric for so long, but learned how good they were right away. I like the new concept because havingto heal every round was annoying after a while. -Heal every round? I've been a Cleric, and in the campaign I am currently playing in, I am a Cleric (Cleric of Lathander 5 / Morninglord 4). I am LG, but I don't go running around healing everyone every second, while in combat. My character is scrappy, and is in the fight with everyone else. We try to keep "combat healing" to a minimum, so when someone needs healing, they back off and call for me only if they need it. That allows my scrappy Cleric to be right in all the action. LK I am curious where they PDF on clerics is? -Just follow the link in DELTA's post. Won't even get into the dwarf thing. Especially when coupled with the fact that the dwarves are apparently going to be former slaves of the giants and thats why they hate them so much. Couldn't possibly be because they live in the same damn areas and fight over territory, no it has to be because they were slaves to the giants. -I wonder if, and how they'll incorporate this into the Realms.
johnkretzer 12-18-07, 05:46 PM	You know the whole idea that gods of agiculture and doorways don't make 'good adventuring' deities ao we are cutting them out...means two things... 1) It is all going to be about the PCs. To the point where a farmer NPC is going to have no god to follow because a very rare percentage of the popuylation isn't going to need it. 2) Chauntea is going to take a big hit in the New FR. I just don't get them. I mean they are only a little bit older then me...how the hell did we ever play the same game?
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 12-18-07, 06:07 PM	Also, since when have D&D deities been all-powerful or all-knowing? In my experience, that's never been the case (except maybe in the case of AO?).
Lord Karsus 12-18-07, 09:39 PM	2) Chauntea is going to take a big hit in the New FR. -Why do you think that? Also, since when have D&D deities been all-powerful or all-knowing? In my experience, that's never been the case (except maybe in the case of AO?). -The only cases that can be made would be Ao, of Realmspace, and The High Deity, of Krynnspace. And, arguments for and against their omniscience and omnipotence can be made.
MerrikCale 12-18-07, 09:54 PM	Also, since when have D&D deities been all-powerful or all-knowing? In my experience, that's never been the case (except maybe in the case of AO?). I agree with you. To this point, I haven't really had a problem with the rules changes just the Realms fluff stuff. But now even that is starting to bug me a little. As Bugs used to say "what a bunch of maroons"
Rauric 12-18-07, 11:10 PM	To LK and John, I was in a few games with a very lethal Dm. It took all I had to keep up my guys. I think he did that to keep me out of the picture. I was a changling cleric that wanted to get into warshaper at one point. I could have been out meleeing melee if I ever got the chance, which was never.
johnkretzer 12-18-07, 11:42 PM	To LK and John, I was in a few games with a very lethal Dm. It took all I had to keep up my guys. I think he did that to keep me out of the picture. I was a changling cleric that wanted to get into warshaper at one point. I could have been out meleeing melee if I ever got the chance, which was never. 1) That is not true...in the end a cleric at best equals a real meleeist and spends alot doing so(even with warshaper). 2) Also this has always confused me why out melee the meleeist? I mean isn't that person sitting next to you a friend? Why show him/her up like that? I don't I play in a pretty leathal game myself...and my cleric do thing other then healing(heck the one I am playing now is melleist though there is another weaker healer in the group.) and I do lots of other things besides healing. Though I can see things like size of the group, level, and just the skills of the other players also being a factor...
johnkretzer 12-18-07, 11:58 PM	-Why do you think that? The fact that they pretty much outright said a agicultural god has no place in a D&D world...and the fact that they insist that the FR WILL BE A D&D WORLD.
Lord Karsus 12-19-07, 12:07 AM	The fact that they pretty much outright said a agicultural god has no place in a D&D world...and the fact that they insist that the FR WILL BE A D&D WORLD. -You know, I missed that part. In their defense, though, that might have just come out a little awkward, that's all. I hope. -As a side note, the more I read that article (specifically about Clerics being overpowered and whatnot), I can't help but think that so much of 4e was made with the munchkinizing, power-gamer in mind (either, to limit them, or to enable them).
Mr_Miscellany 12-19-07, 12:19 AM	They want Epic Characters to be able to challenge the gods or maybe even become gods...wowzers! Sounds interesting to me. I've go the vomit bucket out for the rest of you, should you need it. :P ::::: I'm liking the ideas behind the Cleric as well. Clerics in my twenty some odd years of experience gaming in the Realms have always been the best (and easiest) way for a player to blend their own roleplaying style with the flavor of the setting. Obviously we don't know for sure how much the Realms will change, but it looks like we'll have a great opportunity with 4E to tie in more cool magical abilities/spells with divine themes and roleplaying. Looking forward to it. :::::::: Ooh! An arcticle for using the spellplague in a 3E campaign. Perfect! ::::::::: From Bill Slavicsek’s “Orcus Design Tenets” 8. Make the Game Easy to Design for, Develop and Edit. ....If we can spend less time on the details and more time on the cool factor for future designs, we’ll all be better off. Hah! Cool was preordained into the system. Long live the word ‘cool’!
Fingoldfin 12-19-07, 12:42 AM	It looks to me like the designers decided that the next generation of role-players are all shallow, egotistical, and selfish. It looks like they decided that altruistic themes in D&D couldn't possibly appeal to young people in our society today. Just think for a little while about all the changes. None of the changes encourage people to work together. The changes all encourage players to be selfish and egotistical. Paladins can be evil. The gods are just another creature to kill. No none adventurer gods exist. Clerics become blasters instead of healers. All the talking points are about players being the center of the universe. High level NPCs must die because they make players feel insecure. The dryad needed to get turned into combat fodder for PCs. The speed of level advancement is greatly increased. Every new level has a new class ability or spell level. Every change strokes the ego of players and makes them feel special. Either the designers have a very condescending view of young gamers or they have market research that tells them young gamers are selfish and egotistical. All of this is my opinion not fact. Every new change I've heard about seems to point in this direction.
Lord Karsus 12-19-07, 12:43 AM	They want Epic Characters to be able to challenge the gods or maybe even become gods...wowzers! Sounds interesting to me. -Which deempasizes the mysticism quality of a deity. Why bother worshipping one, when someone can theoretically come along anytime and slay them? -While this does happen from time to time, it is almost always during special circumstances- the Time of Troubles, the casting of a 12th level spell, killing a deity on his/her/its home plance, with the backing of another divine entity. The taste that little sidebar left in my mouth was basically: Bob (Wizard 20/Archmage 5/Netherese Arcanist 5): "Hey, Ralph." Ralph (Fighter 20/Barbarian 20): "Yeah, Bob?" Ralph: "I'm bored." Bob: "Me too..." Ralph: "Wanna try to slay Finder Wyvernspur (assuming Finder Wyvernspur is still around)? I hear he's not that tough of a guy. Bob: "Sure, why not? It's not like we're doing anything".
Lord Karsus 12-19-07, 12:45 AM	Every change strokes the ego of players and makes them feel special. -Well, if the players aren't feeling special in the campaign they are in, either the DM isn't doing something right, or they just haven't found their niche, yet. While the PCs shouldn't be the main characters of the setting itself, they should be the main characters of the campaign.
Mr_Miscellany 12-19-07, 12:48 AM	Wow, you guys are good at finding/making up the negative for everything. Gods forbid the game should be fun, because all that means is D&D players are shallow, egotistical and selfish. ...not that this isn't a fair description of your average 12 year old boy, mind. But I'll not be thinking any less of myself when I go buy these books with the intent of having fun...that's the point, as Selunatic reminded me not to long ago.
Lord Karsus 12-19-07, 12:49 AM	Wow, you guys are good at finding/making up the negative for everything. Gods forbid the game should be fun, because all that means is D&D players are shallow, egotistical and selfish. ...not that this isn't a fair description of your average 12 year old boy, mind. But I'll not be thinking any less of myself when I go buy these books with the intent of having fun...that's the point, as Selunatic reminded me not to long ago. -Way to go, answering valid points.
Mr_Miscellany 12-19-07, 12:51 AM	-Which deempasizes the mysticism quality of a deity. Why bother worshipping one, when someone can theoretically come along anytime and slay them? -While this does happen from time to time, it is almost always during special circumstances- ...and what, pray tell, are you basing your assumption on that such special circumstances won't form the basis for such a special, nay EPIC event in the life of a player character? Can you see your way past the negative-nelly blindfolds you're wearing long enough to glimpse the possiblity that WotC is setting the game up for DMs to allow events to occur in their campaigns right in line with what you've written in your list? I think you can.
Lord Karsus 12-19-07, 12:57 AM	...and what, pray tell, are you basing your assumption on that such special circumstances won't form the basis for such a special, nay EPIC event in the life of a player character? Can you see your way past the negative-nelly blindfolds you're wearing long enough to glimpse the possiblity that WotC is setting the game up for DMs to allow events to occur in their campaigns right in line with what you've written in your list? I think you can -All of those concepts are already included in the setting. The article, to paraphrase, says, "Deities are just big, tough NPCs. Get enough levels, by killing things, and you can kill them too." It makes no mention of things that, on either the generic level, or the FR level. Even though deities are powerful entities, there is more to them than just "killing them", as Fingoldfin alludes to. -I've agreed with some 4e points that have been mentioned. I disagree with many more, however. I don't kowtow because I see one or two points will improve things here and there, or make the setting better. Thus far, the bad outweighs the good.
Fingoldfin 12-19-07, 12:58 AM	[QUOTE=Mr_Miscellany;14619736]They want Epic Characters to be able to challenge the gods or maybe even become gods...wowzers! Sounds interesting to me. I've go the vomit bucket out for the rest of you, should you need it. :P :yuck: :yuck: :yuck: Thanks for getting the bucket for me Mr. Miscellany. :P
18DELTA 12-19-07, 01:05 AM	Wow!:D So... are some people happy that in Jan. a spellplague article is coming out. ;) I kinda like whats happening to the Cleric. So my 30th level follower of Tempus ascends into Tempus Pantheon.:cool:
Lord Karsus 12-19-07, 01:06 AM	Wow!:D So... are some people happy that in Jan. a spellplague article is coming out. ;) -If it explains what it is, and what it'll be doing, sure.
Fingoldfin 12-19-07, 01:11 AM	Wow, you guys are good at finding/making up the negative for everything. Gods forbid the game should be fun, because all that means is D&D players are shallow, egotistical and selfish. ...not that this isn't a fair description of your average 12 year old boy, mind. But I'll not be thinking any less of myself when I go buy these books with the intent of having fun...that's the point, as Selunatic reminded me not to long ago. I'm not saying that the players are shallow or selfish. I'm saying that it looks like the changes are meant to appeal to egotistical people. It looks like they are trying to appeal to a stereotype of insecure 12 year old boys that just want to kill things. Read the designers blogs and their interviews. They just keep endlessly repeating that the players will always be the stars, will gain more power quicker, and will have more cool stuff to do. You can even kill the gods now. The attempts to stroke the ego are blatant in their talking points. Just read their words and think about the changes to the Realms and mechanics before you dismiss this idea out of hand Mr. Miscellany.
18DELTA 12-19-07, 01:18 AM	-If it explains what it is, and what it'll be doing, sure. Watch it be vague and lacking in substance... God I hope not.
Lord Karsus 12-19-07, 01:20 AM	Watch it be vague and lacking in substance... God I hope not. -Probably. I figure they aren't going to "say" much about the Spellplague until the 4e FRCS.
Fingoldfin 12-19-07, 01:24 AM	Watch it be vague and lacking in substance... God I hope not. My guess is that it will be very vague. I don't think they ironed the system out yet and I think they just want to put out an article to keep people interested.
Stigger 12-19-07, 02:18 AM	To be honest, I'm actually pretty stoked about some of the class stuff I've read about for 4e, as a lot of it sounds pretty interesting to me as a concept, particularly the stuff on Wizards that was in Shelly's last article. But I'm pretty sure its something I'm going to be doing a lot of tinkering with to get into a useable state for my games needs, and I'm almost positive the flavor stuff is going to be nearly unrecognizable once I'm done with it. In the end, I think I'm probably just going to invest in the core books and whatever else looks useable, and just ignore the setting specific stuff unless its got interesting crunch I can mess around with.
Uzzy 12-19-07, 07:41 AM	I will use my magical powers of prediction to predict that the word 'Cool' is used in the 'Using the Spellplague in 3rd Edition Realms' article. I know, it's a long shot.
Stigger 12-19-07, 08:26 AM	I, for one, will be amazed if your prediction comes true. ;)
To11 12-19-07, 10:05 AM	A friend of mine picked up Races & Classes last night, and I read big chunks of it. One thing I did notice (besides the amazing artwork) was that each class description emphasized the way the various classes worked together. There was a strong emphasis on team work and party support. They may have taken healing out of the hands of a few classes, but they spread it around to all of them. The talk about making gods that work for adventurers is a valid point - where does Chauntea fit into this? But in the core setting it sounds like Pelor is going to be an agricultural god (in addition to the god of the sun and healers). Obad-Hai is in as well. Chauntea has, for years, had adventuring clerics and it has been made explicit why they adventure - I don't see that changing now Though it's not a huge deal (just concept art really), the new look of the dwarven women is actually pretty good. They still look dwarven (big noses, broad features, stocky, dour expressions, etc.), but they also look feminine. That's a feat in and of itself.
Zanan 12-19-07, 10:19 AM	"Orcus Design Tenets" ... man, they must oh so love the goathead! Where has it all gone wrong? :nonono: - We don’t want deities to be thought of as omniscient and all-powerful. Omniscience and omnipotence makes it difficult to use gods in adventure plots or have them interact with characters. - We want epic characters to be capable of challenging gods and even of becoming gods. Cleric's PDF We would have wanted a vote in here, for the above, quite honestly, beggars belief. On one side you kill off all the high levels super-NPC, on the other you make gods kill-able NPCs? Why do we have gods in the first place? I might have expected somesuch in a 3E d20-third party product, like those on the Norse gods. If that comes to pass in 4E FR, it essentially ridicules all that went before it.
18DELTA 12-19-07, 10:47 AM	"The Bloated Goathead" for the win!;) :P
Rauric 12-19-07, 11:12 AM	1) That is not true...in the end a cleric at best equals a real meleeist and spends alot doing so(even with warshaper). 2) Also this has always confused me why out melee the meleeist? I mean isn't that person sitting next to you a friend? Why show him/her up like that? I don't I play in a pretty leathal game myself...and my cleric do thing other then healing(heck the one I am playing now is melleist though there is another weaker healer in the group.) and I do lots of other things besides healing. Though I can see things like size of the group, level, and just the skills of the other players also being a factor... When I say outmelee it is just a statement. It just means to me that I can serve a dual role if possible. Hitting people in the face is jsut more rewarding sometimes then keeping people up. I like saving people so it is ok with me. I like the options of the new cleric though. I have a question though John, you play in MS game right? He always says he runs very lethal games so I am curious about your one statement. I am pretty sure my DM was afraid of me even though I tried to be more RP oriented then breaking his game oriented. I played a cleric of the Traveler which in EB was a god of change and trickery. My guy wasn't "Ubered" out, he had a 10 str and cha a decent dex, wis and xon thoough. He also only used a scimitar and shield and only wore light armor. I still think he was afraid that I would really bust things up if I was wasn't healing people. With my melee through buffing myself, debuff spells, combat spells, ability to wear armor AND heal I was the most versatile and powerful class in the game. So he made sure every encounter was life and death. Anyway this made me want the changes for the cleric class. I like the idea of doing some melee and heling slightly at the same time.
Rauric 12-19-07, 11:17 AM	It looks to me like the designers decided that the next generation of role-players are all shallow, egotistical, and selfish. It looks like they decided that altruistic themes in D&D couldn't possibly appeal to young people in our society today. Just think for a little while about all the changes. None of the changes encourage people to work together. The changes all encourage players to be selfish and egotistical. Paladins can be evil. The gods are just another creature to kill. No none adventurer gods exist. Clerics become blasters instead of healers. All the talking points are about players being the center of the universe. High level NPCs must die because they make players feel insecure. The dryad needed to get turned into combat fodder for PCs. The speed of level advancement is greatly increased. Every new level has a new class ability or spell level. Every change strokes the ego of players and makes them feel special. Either the designers have a very condescending view of young gamers or they have market research that tells them young gamers are selfish and egotistical. All of this is my opinion not fact. Every new change I've heard about seems to point in this direction. WOW. Uh, I always try to make my players feel special. They decide to spend 5 hours a week with me and are nice enough to let me run a game for them. I want tthem to feel like they are in LOTR or some other novel or movie. I want them to have fun. I restrict some things here and there and bend the rules otherwise. All of the player are over 25. They are excited about the new rules, what little we know of them. No player of mine is under 21. Could these new rules be about player enjoyment? Fun? Nah, it is probably about ego like you said. That makes more sense.
Zanan 12-19-07, 11:38 AM	Rauric WOW. As in World of Warcraft, or as in "Wow!" I'd assume the former.
MerrikCale 12-19-07, 01:04 PM	Watch it be vague and lacking in substance... God I hope not. it would just follow along with everything else
18DELTA 12-19-07, 02:48 PM	it would just follow along with everything else I think they(WotC) enjoy watching us go crazy, due to a lack of info and rampant speculation.:rolleyes: Then again it could kick :censored: :waits: ;)
johnkretzer 12-19-07, 03:38 PM	When I say outmelee it is just a statement. It just means to me that I can serve a dual role if possible. Hitting people in the face is jsut more rewarding sometimes then keeping people up. I like saving people so it is ok with me. I like the options of the new cleric though. Ok I understand you point... I have a question though John, you play in MS game right? He always says he runs very lethal games so I am curious about your one statement. Sorry I haven't been sleeping well lately...I meant 'I do play in a leathal game myself.' I probably started that sentence one way...changed it mid course and never corrected it. I am pretty sure my DM was afraid of me even though I tried to be more RP oriented then breaking his game oriented. I played a cleric of the Traveler which in EB was a god of change and trickery. My guy wasn't "Ubered" out, he had a 10 str and cha a decent dex, wis and xon thoough. He also only used a scimitar and shield and only wore light armor. I still think he was afraid that I would really bust things up if I was wasn't healing people. With my melee through buffing myself, debuff spells, combat spells, ability to wear armor AND heal I was the most versatile and powerful class in the game. So he made sure every encounter was life and death. Anyway this made me want the changes for the cleric class. I like the idea of doing some melee and heling slightly at the same time. You had a Str of 10...and expected to even come close to a well built mellee fighter?...yeah I guess you can come close if you have about 5 rounds of prep. time. Anyway it sounds like you had a bad DM...new rules won't make it better. He'll will still be afraid of certain classes...heck that DM will be more afraid of clerics now. Also I don't like making healing that easy because it takes out the thrill and challenge of combat. I mean if you are always getting heal by this and that free actions then what the point in actualy fighting you will win though attrition. Healing is a very powerful ability in the game it should cost you your action. It actually means you have to think a little bit on if I do this and not heal Bob Bob might die. It is taking a aspect of the game away.
Rauric 12-19-07, 03:42 PM	Rauric As in World of Warcraft, or as in "Wow!" I'd assume the former. More like "Wow at how ignorant most of that post was." People have been homeruling evil pallys for years. People have been killing gods and high level npcs for decades since the games been around. There are spells named after players in Gygaxs first group. How "Center of the universe" is that? Basically all of his "New Insights" are not really new. Level increase has been high since 3E. Egotisical players are something new? Really? C'mon now, you sound like chicken little. I am 32 and like the changes. I like roleplaying and a great story. I like action and beating my enemies and having fun. 4E sounds like it will have everything I need in it so I can have fun. That's a real shame isn't it? ;)
Alediran 12-19-07, 04:00 PM	I am 32 and like the changes. I like roleplaying and a great story. I like action and beating my enemies and having fun. 4E sounds like it will have everything I need in it so I can have fun. That's a real shame isn't it? ;) And 3ed already gives us that.
Lord Karsus 12-19-07, 04:10 PM	-Hell, to have fun, you don't even need rules.
johnkretzer 12-19-07, 04:15 PM	The talk about making gods that work for adventurers is a valid point - where does Chauntea fit into this? But in the core setting it sounds like Pelor is going to be an agricultural god (in addition to the god of the sun and healers). Obad-Hai is in as well. Chauntea has, for years, had adventuring clerics and it has been made explicit why they adventure - I don't see that changing now. Yes Chauntea has had adventuring cleric in game supported by lore for a long time now. And Helm has been a very practicle god for very long time also...so why is he accepting a challenge to a duel? That has nothing to do with being praticle. The game designers probaly think it is silly the Chauntea has adventuring clerics and the lore that supports it is just as silly...so they are going either give a highly reduced status...or give her some 'cool' new domains to support her adventuring clerics. Though it's not a huge deal (just concept art really), the new look of the dwarven women is actually pretty good. They still look dwarven (big noses, broad features, stocky, dour expressions, etc.), but they also look feminine. That's a feat in and of itself. Um...well in my game dwarven women will still have beards. If they want they can shave...I don't get the big deal anyway...
Stigger 12-19-07, 07:18 PM	I have to admit, the more I see of the 4e class mechanics, the happier I get, while when I read about the fluff it just gets downright depressing. I have a feeling I'm investing in the the PHB and DMG and just skimming them for stuff I can rework into 3.5 stuff.
Mr_Miscellany 12-19-07, 08:04 PM	And 3ed already gives us that. And 4E will probably do a better job of it. Really, people. The threadcrapping has got to stop.
MerrikCale 12-19-07, 08:31 PM	I have to admit, the more I see of the 4e class mechanics, the happier I get, while when I read about the fluff it just gets downright depressing. I have a feeling I'm investing in the the PHB and DMG and just skimming them for stuff I can rework into 3.5 stuff. Thats basically how I feel. The 4e mechanics seem pretty good so far with a few exceptions. But the FR fluff seems god-awful so far.
Fingoldfin 12-19-07, 09:18 PM	More like "Wow at how ignorant most of that post was." People have been homeruling evil pallys for years. People have been killing gods and high level npcs for decades since the games been around. There are spells named after players in Gygaxs first group. How "Center of the universe" is that? Basically all of his "New Insights" are not really new. Level increase has been high since 3E. Egotisical players are something new? Really? C'mon now, you sound like chicken little. I am 32 and like the changes. I like roleplaying and a great story. I like action and beating my enemies and having fun. 4E sounds like it will have everything I need in it so I can have fun. That's a real shame isn't it? ;) How about Wow, you really missed my point and didn't even bother to think about what I was getting at. You like the changes. Ok good for you. That must be why you completely ignored what I said. Yes, people have home ruled evil paladins. Yes, many home games kill gods and high powered NPCs. Yes, all the players should feel important. I don't have a problem with that. Plenty of BBGs die in my games and sometimes I run evil games for a change of pace. (no evil pallys, but PrCs fill that roll) Yes, the game should be about having fun. I don't just see the changes as a something out of the blue. I've looked at 3e and I see a steady erosion in the gaming books from role-playing information to roll-playing information. Take a look at your 2e books and your 3e books. The first thing you should notice is that half of the 3e books are splat books with all combat information or new classes. So half of source books in 3e were totally devoted to helping players uber-class their PCs. Now look at the 2e MM and 3e MM. The 2e MM has some lore about ecology and society. Very useful role-playing information, but it's not very useful if you just want the creatures as canon fodder for super-PCs. The 3e MM is almost all stat blocks. There is an undeniable creep from lore to stat blocks. It's blatant whenever you put any 3e book side by side with the 2e version. What I already know about 4e tells me this will only get worse. So just think about what I posted for a little while before you respond with yet another, "you're just being negative post."
Fingoldfin 12-19-07, 09:25 PM	I have to admit, the more I see of the 4e class mechanics, the happier I get, while when I read about the fluff it just gets downright depressing. I have a feeling I'm investing in the the PHB and DMG and just skimming them for stuff I can rework into 3.5 stuff. The 4e mechanics look pretty good. I don't see anything that'll get me to switch editions, but I may house rule some of it. Almost all the lore changes I hate. The only lore change I think I'll use is the Feywild stuff.
Vulpes 12-19-07, 11:46 PM	Also, since when have D&D deities been all-powerful or all-knowing? In my experience, that's never been the case (except maybe in the case of AO?). Yeah, I don't get that either. The deities have NEVER been portrayed as omnipotent or omniscient. Frankly, omnipotence and omniscience are pretty much impossible in a polytheistic theology. And haven't players always been able to kill deities and/or become gods? It's really, really hard, as it should be, but I've never thought it was impossible.
Rauric 12-19-07, 11:58 PM	How about Wow, you really missed my point and didn't even bother to think about what I was getting at. You like the changes. Ok good for you. That must be why you completely ignored what I said. Yes, people have home ruled evil paladins. Yes, many home games kill gods and high powered NPCs. Yes, all the players should feel important. I don't have a problem with that. Plenty of BBGs die in my games and sometimes I run evil games for a change of pace. (no evil pallys, but PrCs fill that roll) Yes, the game should be about having fun. I don't just see the changes as a something out of the blue. I've looked at 3e and I see a steady erosion in the gaming books from role-playing information to roll-playing information. Take a look at your 2e books and your 3e books. The first thing you should notice is that half of the 3e books are splat books with all combat information or new classes. So half of source books in 3e were totally devoted to helping players uber-class their PCs. Now look at the 2e MM and 3e MM. The 2e MM has some lore about ecology and society. Very useful role-playing information, but it's not very useful if you just want the creatures as canon fodder for super-PCs. The 3e MM is almost all stat blocks. There is an undeniable creep from lore to stat blocks. It's blatant whenever you put any 3e book side by side with the 2e version. What I already know about 4e tells me this will only get worse. So just think about what I posted for a little while before you respond with yet another, "you're just being negative post." Heh, this post made sense. I hope they put more fluff in their 4E MM. I liked the new dragon template in the last MM. I used it for a campaign I am running. On another note I am not saying you are ignorant, just some of the stuff you were proclaiming to be new ideas were coming from a place of...ignorance or some crap like that. Maybe not ignorance at all, but those things you mentioned were all there from the beginning of the game. I want fluff and fun and crunch and people to paly with. I am hoping 4E can do this. 3E has but that ship is sailing. Plus rules don't dictate a good or bad game. I am hoping they bring in ALL types of gamers. Then I can try to play with them and maybe get them to change their attitudes if they are selfish SOBs. I need them to play first before I can mold em all though. On another note most of you anti FR4E guys are really negative with some pretty silly complaints. Most of the problems can be fixed with your imagiations and houseruling. This is a tried and true method in RPG games. I believe you all know this but just love to complain. I am not that smart but even I can see multiple solutions to most of your problems. If I can come up with somethign then you guys can too most likely. ;)
Rauric 12-20-07, 12:01 AM	"Um...well in my game dwarven women will still have beards. If they want they can shave...I don't get the big deal anyway..." Totally agree with you here. It is no big deal and I like the idea of females wirh beards. Just liek I like halfings to have furry feet still.
Lord Karsus 12-20-07, 12:34 AM	"The Bloated Goathead" for the win!;) :P -Is the next inn/tavern/bar my PCs find. Thanks! Now look at the 2e MM and 3e MM. The 2e MM has some lore about ecology and society. Very useful role-playing information, but it's not very useful if you just want the creatures as canon fodder for super-PCs. The 3e MM is almost all stat blocks. There is an undeniable creep from lore to stat blocks. It's blatant whenever you put any 3e book side by side with the 2e version. -I don't have it, but Paizo put together a compilation of all of their Monsterous Ecology articles, which are basically 2e entries on steroids, in 3e format. It's not that high on my priorities list, but if I saw it at a store, and it wasn't too expensive, I'd buy it. And 4E will probably do a better job of it. Really, people. The threadcrapping has got to stop. -So sayth you. Others disagree.
Dark Wizard 12-20-07, 12:38 AM	On another note most of you anti FR4E guys are really negative with some pretty silly complaints. Most of the problems can be fixed with your imagiations and houseruling. This is a tried and true method in RPG games. I believe you all know this but just love to complain. I am not that smart but even I can see multiple solutions to most of your problems. If I can come up with somethign then you guys can too most likely. ;) The anti-4e-FR people could definitely change things to fit our games just fine, the main problem is that they have to do so (and seemingly more and more with each tidbit of 4E Realms hinted or released). If they need to change so much of the new Realms back, then the 4E FR books really have a diminished use to that group. That group now has a major block to entering the 4E FR setting. In some ways it seems as much a new setting for the old players as it is for the new player, perhaps not a bad thing, but it's being marketed as FR which brings all sorts of "baggage" for old FR fans. The problem lies in that most anti-FR-4E people want to support the Realms in 4E but are often finding grating elements that keep them from enjoying the new take on the setting. Another problem is when different Realms era players enter into a game. They may likely conflict about or get confused over the old vs. new Realms, or someone is going to have to give way. A new player will probably be just as if not more lost in 4E if he enters a game using the old Realms than if he was a new player entering 3e FR. So FR 4E games are the only FR games for him. An old Realms player who dislikes the new Realms will have to seriously think twice before joining the local FR group running 4E FR. This problem extends to their new D&DI online games, with the link between D&D 4E rules and FR 4E, most games online will probably be 4E Realms based, so a portion of the FR D&D fanbase may be disinclined to participate. A good launch goes a long way to secure a place for the new initiative. It didn't have to be such a rough transition. A bit of this problem stems from WotC considering the old FR players an expendable group. That may be necessary since WotC is looking towards the future as they should. I just feel if they look too far into the future they might not noticed the cliff ahead of them, or at least the rocks waiting to give them a stubbed toe. I think WotC could have easily had their cake and eat it too with a more moderate approach. They only needed one big publicity event to get the point across that the Realms have changed (probably the death of one, maybe two, deites, at least one of the major Chosen and a few minor characters with a reduction in power for the other NPCs using a setting wide NPC stat retcon via new edition caveat).
Fingoldfin 12-20-07, 12:58 AM	Heh, this post made sense. I hope they put more fluff in their 4E MM. I liked the new dragon template in the last MM. I used it for a campaign I am running. On another note I am not saying you are ignorant, just some of the stuff you were proclaiming to be new ideas were coming from a place of...ignorance or some crap like that. Maybe not ignorance at all, but those things you mentioned were all there from the beginning of the game. I want fluff and fun and crunch and people to paly with. I am hoping 4E can do this. 3E has but that ship is sailing. Plus rules don't dictate a good or bad game. I am hoping they bring in ALL types of gamers. Then I can try to play with them and maybe get them to change their attitudes if they are selfish SOBs. I need them to play first before I can mold em all though. On another note most of you anti FR4E guys are really negative with some pretty silly complaints. Most of the problems can be fixed with your imagiations and houseruling. This is a tried and true method in RPG games. I believe you all know this but just love to complain. I am not that smart but even I can see multiple solutions to most of your problems. If I can come up with somethign then you guys can too most likely. ;) Hi Rauric, I read my earlier post and I don't think I did a good job explaining my point. I don't think that many gamers are selfish. It just looked to me like most of the changes (even the changes I like) are designed to attract powergamers. As far as the changes go... I hate that there are no specialist wizards. I thought that changing pscionics was a good idea. It makes sense that the mind-mages get most of the mind altering effects. I don't like the wand, staff, orb thing. I hate the changes to Tannar'ri and Baaetzu. They had to make that change when they threw away the alignment system. Thats why I don't think Yugoloths will exist. If there are no Yugoloths then they will have to retcon the fall of Myth Drannor. I think they could have just softened the alignment system a little and kept law and chaos in place. The one thing that I am enthusiastic about are the Fey. I really like that the Fey will play a much bigger role. I still have to say that I don't think I'll buy any of the 4e line. I could ramble on all night so I'll stop now. Have fun gaming. :)
Fingoldfin 12-20-07, 01:03 AM	Yes to everything Darkwizard just posted. :)
Fingoldfin 12-20-07, 01:14 AM	Hi Lord Karsus Thanks for that bit about the Monsterous Ecology articles. That reminded me that about a month ago I stumbled into Eric Mona's blog and he said that if 4e did poorly than Piazo would think about putting out a 3.75e system for their Pathfinder world. Does any one know anything about that? Is it even legal?
Lord Karsus 12-20-07, 01:25 AM	That reminded me that about a month ago I stumbled into Eric Mona's blog and he said that if 4e did poorly than Piazo would think about putting out a 3.75e system for their Pathfinder world. Does any one know anything about that? Is it even legal? -Sure. If the d20 system is subject to all of that Open Game License stuff, then building upon it, evolving it, and "keeping it alive" is fair. I just don't think they'd legally be able to call it 3.75e. They'd have to keep with the 'd20' theme. 'Evolved d20', maybe? 'd20 Advanced'?
18DELTA 12-20-07, 01:26 AM	-Is the next inn/tavern/bar my PCs find. Thanks! :tiphat: :pint: :D
Straploknight 12-20-07, 01:57 AM	They dont like the idea of gods as being omniprescent and omnipotent? SO the gods are just high level NPC's now. Lovely. Won't even get into the dwarf thing. Especially when coupled with the fact that the dwarves are apparently going to be former slaves of the giants and thats why they hate them so much. Couldn't possibly be because they live in the same damn areas and fight over territory, no it has to be because they were slaves to the giants. Why are they wholesale trying to reinvent all the races. Ebberon becomes core by proxy? :rolleye2: Sounds like the drow Xendrik
Green Elven Vampire 12-20-07, 02:30 AM	Once again, 4ED just made me vomit in my mouth!! At least 4ED is good for a sad, ludicrous laugh!
Storm_Silverhand 12-20-07, 07:37 AM	Heya, On another note most of you anti FR4E guys are really negative with some pretty silly complaints. Most of the problems can be fixed with your imagiations and houseruling. This is a tried and true method in RPG games. I believe you all know this but just love to complain. I am not that smart but even I can see multiple solutions to most of your problems. If I can come up with somethign then you guys can too most likely. ;) I haven't read all the way to the end of the thread, but I wanted to address this point. Yes. We can buy the core books for 4e (which is what I'm planning to do)... But if we're going to be mucking around with lore and trying to adapt 3e Realms to the 4e game system - What possible reason would we have for buying the 4e FR products? That's the important point. Wizards are trying to bring new players in... The reason they're trying to bring new players in is to make MONEY. That is the purpose of any business - they have to answer to shareholders, since Hasbro is a public company, and shareholders want to see a PROFIT. The problem is that Wizards are alienating a portion of their current player base with the changes they're implementing... Some of us are not even going to go on to buy 4e - I've heard people discussing what other systems they can use, and some saying they're sticking with the (going out of print and therefore only limited money left in the system) 3rd Edition. If we're not BUYING their new product, and they FAIL in their gamble to draw in enough new players, then FR will stop making a PROFIT and WILL FAIL. By the way, it is my considered opinion as an avid MMORPG player (WoW, EQ2, SWG, and PotBS (beta) at the moment), that Wizards are wasting their time trying to draw in the MMORPG audience. Most MMORPG players aren't interested in playing an RPG, they're interested in playing a social computer game. There is a vast difference between a social computer game and an actual RPG. Those MMORPG players who are interested in the RPing aspects of the game are already playing pencil and paper table top RPGs. RPers in MMORPGs are a distinct minority. As a general rule we get fewer servers than just your average non-RP players, and mostly they're labeled "RP preferred" and RP is not enforced on those servers - Antonia Bayle, for example, is one of the highest populated server for EQ2, but that's not because it's labeled RP Preferred. Antonia Bayle was one of the first servers released and because the servers are listed in alphabetical order, and because it was the only server starting with A, it was at the top of the list... At release everyone piled onto it, many without even realizing that it was the only RP Preferred server at the time (Lucan D'Lere was a little while off still at that point). Today, AB has far more non-RPers than RPers. I haven't seen much RPing going on there since I returned to the game a couple of months ago.
Rauric 12-20-07, 08:44 AM	Yes to everything Darkwizard just posted. :) I understand DW. You, Karsus and Stigger are some of the Anti-4E guys that I don't mind about. You state some good points and I don't get headaches when I read your stuff. Fing, I understand your potential concern even though I don't agree with it. Younger gamers are usually Egotistical and hack and slash at first IMO. Not always, but usually. They tends to change a bit if they hang with a slightly older crowd. Not always though. Plus I undestand how people can post with passion at 1st then rethink what they just did and go "Oh for the love of Pete!" I am a master of it. Storm, If all the online, anti-4E people NEVER pick up the new FR supplements maybe they will be in trouble. Add the people who don't know these boards exist, then sure it could be bad for sales. The thing is gamers are collectors and pick up books even when they will potentially hate it. Not all of them but enough I figure to make the 1st few years profitable. People willl pick it up out of curiosities sake. I don't even care if people are anti-4E, it is how people post about it in a totally tired way that bothers me now. People have different tastes which is ok in the end. There is griping and then their is whining. I will always rage on against the whiners and respect the gripers. It is just my way. I hope people keep playing 3.5, so I can sell my books when 4E comes out. ;)
Alediran 12-20-07, 08:49 AM	I hope people keep playing 3.5, so I can sell my books when 4E comes out. ;) Don't sell them until you're sure that 4th edition is for you, I have read more than one person regretting the moment they sold their 2nd edition books.
MarkusTay63 12-20-07, 09:45 AM	I'm tired of all the arguing. :( The new cleric sounds 'interesting', and will probably appeal to more players now. From personal experience, my older son 'got stuck' (as he put it) being the cleric, since the other three players chose fighter, Wizard, and thief. Don't get me wrong - he enjoys his Dwarven Cleric VERY much now, but it is not a choice he would have made willingly if someone else would have been the Healer for the group. I'm sure he will be happy when I convert him to 4e rules. Some of the other stuff I like, some I dislike, but its all just opinion now and not worth discussing until we see the 'big picture'. I do like the idea that they are including an article for people who want to play their 3e campaigns into the Spellplague - thats something I don't think they were intending to do, so perhaps some of our complaining has had paid off there as well. Kudos to WotC for at least not lot leaving the curremt FR fanbase "in the lurch". Maybe we will see further 3e FR love in the form of future articles; especially if a very large portion of the fans decide not to move their campaigns forward to the new campaign date. I'm still 'concerned' about 4e FR, but I'm not going to let a game chew me up inside.
Stigger 12-20-07, 09:55 AM	I haven't yet begun to argue! Or complain for that matter! Mostly because I'm not seeing a lot to disagree with at this precise moment.' I might later. Sleep might be wise, hope that's sensical...
Lord Karsus 12-20-07, 03:11 PM	I understand DW. You, Karsus and Stigger are some of the Anti-4E guys that I don't mind about. You state some good points and I don't get headaches when I read your stuff. -Because we're not anti-4e to the point of unreasonableness. We're anti-4e when something that we don't like rears its ugly head, and neutral when something that we like appears. And, when things that we do not like rear their ungly heads, we argue from with logic, not unabashed craziness and senselessness, like some others.
MerrikCale 12-20-07, 06:27 PM	I understand DW. You, Karsus and Stigger are some of the Anti-4E guys that I don't mind about. You state some good points and I don't get headaches when I read your stuff. howzabout me? I'm fairly anti-4e
Stigger 12-20-07, 06:29 PM	I'm thinking about joining the unreasonable side of things... holiday stress release and all that...
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 12-20-07, 08:06 PM	To be honest, I'm actually pretty stoked about some of the class stuff I've read about for 4e, as a lot of it sounds pretty interesting to me as a concept, particularly the stuff on Wizards that was in Shelly's last article. But I'm pretty sure its something I'm going to be doing a lot of tinkering with to get into a useable state for my games needs, and I'm almost positive the flavor stuff is going to be nearly unrecognizable once I'm done with it. In the end, I think I'm probably just going to invest in the core books and whatever else looks useable, and just ignore the setting specific stuff unless its got interesting crunch I can mess around with. I agree that I actually like a lot of the basic, "core" concepts that are being kicked around. But that doesn't mean I would be willing to use them in the FR setting. I'd actually be a lot more willing to play a 4E "core" game than a 4E FR game. Really.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 12-20-07, 08:14 PM	And 4E will probably do a better job of it. Really, people. The threadcrapping has got to stop. I agree. Let's get into the Christmas spirit. You and Lord Karsus will sing "The Christmas Shoes". It's up to you both decide who plays the narrator (the man who "wasn't really in the Christmas mood") and who plays the poor, innocent little boy who just wants to buy his sick mama a pair of shoes in case she "meets Jesus tonight". If you can't decide, I'll decide for you. :cool:
Lord Karsus 12-20-07, 09:13 PM	I agree. Let's get into the Christmas spirit. You and Lord Karsus will sing "The Christmas Shoes". It's up to you both decide who plays the narrator (the man who "wasn't really in the Christmas mood") and who plays the poor, innocent little boy who just wants to buy his sick mama a pair of shoes in case she "meets Jesus tonight". If you can't decide, I'll decide for you. :cool: -I'll be the narrator, 'cause I'm not in really in the Christmas mood.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 12-20-07, 09:28 PM	-I'll be the narrator, 'cause I'm not in really in the Christmas mood. Wonderful! Mr. Miscellany will be singing all the "little boy" parts, then--in a little boy's voice, of course. Here are the lyrics, guys! Now sing...:) It was almost Christmas time, there I stood in another line Tryin' to buy that last gift or two, not really in the Christmas mood Standing right in front of me was a little boy waiting anxiously Pacing 'round like little boys do And in his hands he held a pair of shoes His clothes were worn and old, he was dirty from head to toe And when it came his time to pay I couldn't believe what I heard him say Chorus: Sir, I want to buy these shoes for my Mama, please It's Christmas Eve and these shoes are just her size Could you hurry, sir, Daddy says there's not much time You see she's been sick for quite a while And I know these shoes would make her smile And I want her to look beautiful if Mama meets Jesus tonight He counted pennies for what seemed like years Then the cashier said, "Son, there's not enough here" He searched his pockets frantically Then he turned and he looked at me He said Mama made Christmas good at our house Though most years she just did without Tell me Sir, what am I going to do, Somehow I've got to buy her these Christmas shoes So I laid the money down, I just had to help him out I'll never forget the look on his face when he said Mama's gonna look so great Sir, I want to buy these shoes for my Mama, please It's Christmas Eve and these shoes are just her size Could you hurry, sir, Daddy says there's not much time You see she's been sick for quite a while And I know these shoes would make her smile And I want her to look beautiful if Mama meets Jesus tonight Bridge: I knew I'd caught a glimpse of heaven's love As he thanked me and ran out I knew that God had sent that little boy To remind me just what Christmas is all about Repeat Chorus
Lord Karsus 12-20-07, 09:52 PM	Now sing...:) -Which are my lines?
Rauric 12-20-07, 10:03 PM	-Because we're not anti-4e to the point of unreasonableness. We're anti-4e when something that we don't like rears its ugly head, and neutral when something that we like appears. And, when things that we do not like rear their ungly heads, we argue from with logic, not unabashed craziness and senselessness, like some others. I know. When you state a dislike for the upcoming changes it is not in an irritating or repetitive manner. I like that. I may not agree with some of your points but that's no problem. You guys come off as classy anti-4E peoples.;) People that gripe a bit but don't whine. I am sure I would get along with the whiners if we were talkign about other things. Actually I am sure I have agreed with some of the whiners about other subjects at some point. Meh who cares what I think anyway.:P
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 12-20-07, 10:10 PM	-Which are my lines? Everything except for the repeating chorus at the end.:) Unless you and Misc want to get experimental and try something else!
Lord Karsus 12-20-07, 10:19 PM	Meh who cares what I think anyway.:P -Exactly. You don't matter. :D Unless you and Misc want to get experimental and try something else! -I am of the singing school of Robert Plant. -On topic, with all this talk of singing, I wonder how Bards will be effected.
Stigger 12-21-07, 12:46 AM	I'd like to see them buffed up a bit... was always a bit underwhelmed with them. Personally, I'd like to see them as a very, very powerful class, but I doubt the whole balance thing is going to do that. Nothing a bit of houseruling can't do though. :D
Fingoldfin 12-21-07, 01:21 AM	I know. When you state a dislike for the upcoming changes it is not in an irritating or repetitive manner. I like that. I may not agree with some of your points but that's no problem. You guys come off as classy anti-4E peoples.;) People that gripe a bit but don't whine. I am sure I would get along with the whiners if we were talkign about other things. Actually I am sure I have agreed with some of the whiners about other subjects at some point. Meh who cares what I think anyway.:P I think I still do my fair share of whining, but I also try to make a logical argument. ;)
Lord Karsus 12-21-07, 01:28 AM	I'd like to see them buffed up a bit... was always a bit underwhelmed with them. Personally, I'd like to see them as a very, very powerful class, but I doubt the whole balance thing is going to do that. Nothing a bit of houseruling can't do though. :D -I'd like that too. In my mind, Bards should get the Sneak Attack ability. One of my players (my sister), plays a Bard in my campaign, a very rougish-Bard. With the way she plays, I've always found it unfortunate that Bards don't have Sneak Attack capabilities.
johnkretzer 12-21-07, 01:41 AM	I know. When you state a dislike for the upcoming changes it is not in an irritating or repetitive manner. I like that. I may not agree with some of your points but that's no problem. You guys come off as classy anti-4E peoples.;) People that gripe a bit but don't whine. I am sure I would get along with the whiners if we were talkign about other things. Actually I am sure I have agreed with some of the whiners about other subjects at some point. Meh who cares what I think anyway.:P mmmm....so am I a 'whiner' or a 'griper'? My prediction is you'll see me as borderline... I care what most people think by the way(rather I agree w/ them or not is a different story).
Stigger 12-21-07, 03:14 AM	I usually let anyone sneak attack to some degree in my games, I just allow for rogues being a lot better at it, so long as they make the move silently and/or hide checks successfully. Makes a lot more sense to me that way... I'm certainly no rogue and I've pulled it off a few times here and there, so I don't see why a trained fighter couldn't do it. I think what I would prefer would be making sneak attack a skill or feat, and giving rogues and improved version or bonus or something to it.
Lord Karsus 12-21-07, 03:31 AM	I think what I would prefer would be making sneak attack a skill or feat, and giving rogues and improved version or bonus or something to it. -Yeah, I was actually mulling the idea of making some feats that allow anyone to use the special abilities of different classes- a 'Rage' feat, a 'Sneak Attack' feat, and so on.
Stigger 12-21-07, 03:35 AM	Hadn't really considered rage, but that's not a bad idea either really.
Lord Karsus 12-21-07, 03:47 AM	Hadn't really considered rage, but that's not a bad idea either really. -Hey, there's no real reason, say, a Fighter can't work himself into a frenzy, if showed how.
Reneshat 12-21-07, 03:59 AM	-Yeah, I was actually mulling the idea of making some feats that allow anyone to use the special abilities of different classes- a 'Rage' feat, a 'Sneak Attack' feat, and so on. Complete speculation here, but I thought that the class feats for 4ed were going to go this way. Barbarian Training, the feat, would give your fighter a simple rage ability, just as Wizard Training, gives him some minor spellcasting. I could have the names wrong, as I don't have the previous reference here in front of me, and my speculation on their effects could be entirely wrong. Still, it's how I read it.
Lord Karsus 12-21-07, 04:04 AM	Complete speculation here, but I thought that the class feats for 4ed were going to go this way. Barbarian Training, the feat, would give your fighter a simple rage ability, just as Wizard Training, gives him some minor spellcasting. I could have the names wrong, as I don't have the previous reference here in front of me, and my speculation on their effects could be entirely wrong. Still, it's how I read it. -Not sure. Though, if they are giving everyone healing abilities, why not let them dabble in the abilities of other classes as well? On one hand, I like it, but on the other, I don't- which is why I haven't made up the feats yet. It increases the versatility of the character that takes it, but I feel that it also cheapens the individual classes as well. I think I'll start another thread in the Generic D&D boards, to get more opinions.
Stigger 12-21-07, 04:46 AM	Depends on how they do it as to whether it cheapens the other classes. It very well could though, but I'm hoping it doesn't.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 12-21-07, 11:06 AM	Umm. I love the bard class.:) I'm curious to see what will be done with them, although I'm not sure if they'll even be in the PHB this time around.
MerrikCale 12-21-07, 09:37 PM	Umm. I love the bard class.:) I'm curious to see what will be done with them, although I'm not sure if they'll even be in the PHB this time around. They have pretty much said they will not. Although they have also said there will be a new PHB every year or so
18DELTA 12-22-07, 12:03 AM	Umm. I love the bard class.:) I'm curious to see what will be done with them, although I'm not sure if they'll even be in the PHB this time around. Well in Races and Classes(PAGE82), they said that Bards will be Leaders and gain their powers from otherworldly sources that admire the Bard's work. Probably in PHB2.:D
Green Elven Vampire 12-22-07, 12:25 AM	They have pretty much said they will not. Although they have also said there will be a new PHB every year or so A new PHB every year? What a joke.
Lord Karsus 12-22-07, 01:26 AM	Well in Races and Classes(PAGE82), they said that Bards will be Leaders and gain their powers from otherworldly sources that admire the Bard's work. Probably in PHB2.:D -So, I guess they aren't going to be arcane spell casters...?
GreenKnight 12-22-07, 03:30 AM	-So, I guess they aren't going to be arcane spell casters...? They'll probably be arcane the way Warlocks are arcane. A new PHB every year? What a joke. How different is it from WOTC releasing books like the Complete Warrior, Complete Arcane, Complete Divine, etc?
Lord Karsus 12-22-07, 03:35 AM	They'll probably be arcane the way Warlocks are arcane. -Which will make Bards pseudo-Clerics in a sense, as they are granted their abilities by some foreign power. Tell me, can Warlocks have their powers taken away, if they fail to live up to their side of the bargain they make with the Fey, Demons, and whomever else? -This is giving me quite a few new ideas on Bardic Colleges, some of which I might even implement in my own campaign. Interesting... How different is it from WOTC releasing books like the Complete Warrior, Complete Arcane, Complete Divine, etc? -That's pretty much what I was envisioning, except these books will be those books in multiple volumes, with the obvious rule changes.
GreenKnight 12-22-07, 03:44 AM	-Which will make Bards pseudo-Clerics in a sense, as they are granted their abilities by some foreign power. Tell me, can Warlocks have their powers taken away, if they fail to live up to their side of the bargain they make with the Fey, Demons, and whomever else? I imagine that the deal is that once they give you the power, they can't take it away. That doesn't make their magic divine anymore then Wizards in the Realms are wielding divine magic, just because Mystra can cut them off from the Weave and leave them powerless. -That's pretty much what I was envisioning, except these books will be those books in multiple volumes, with the obvious rule changes. Well, I haven't heard anything about the subsequent PHB's having any rules changes. The idea behind them is that they'll be like all those Complete books, the Psionics Handbook, and all the rest. They'll present new Classes, Feats, weapons, etc.
johnkretzer 12-22-07, 03:45 AM	How different is it from WOTC releasing books like the Complete Warrior, Complete Arcane, Complete Divine, etc? True, but who says they will stop with the complete books also...as a matter of fact they is probably going to be those as well as(if not more) because everything is going to work differently. Instead needing say a book that can cover fighters and other martial characters you are going to need one for fighter, one for paladin, etc. The new PhBs are just going to cover new rules on things...not be much support for the things covered in previous PhBs.
GreenKnight 12-22-07, 03:50 AM	True, but who says they will stop with the complete books also...as a matter of fact they is probably going to be those as well as(if not more) because everything is going to work differently. Instead needing say a book that can cover fighters and other martial characters you are going to need one for fighter, one for paladin, etc. The new PhBs are just going to cover new rules on things...not be much support for the things covered in previous PhBs. http://forums.gleemax.com/showpost.php?p=13484347&postcount=9 They also told us that 1 year after the Core 3 are released there will be a Players Handbook 2, DMG 2, and Monster Manual 2 and a new one every year after that. In this they told us each will have a new set of races and classes. The More dificault Classes and Races to balance will be released in the later PHBs. And while I can't find it, I'm pretty certain they've said that there won't be any "Complete" books, as that stuff will be appearing in future PHB's.
johnkretzer 12-22-07, 04:18 AM	http://forums.gleemax.com/showpost.php?p=13484347&postcount=9 And while I can't find it, I'm pretty certain they've said that there won't be any "Complete" books, as that stuff will be appearing in future PHB's. They have also said that 4th edition would be coming out at about 2010....I am not saying they won't be calling them Complete books but splat books will still be coming out. Or do you really think that they will make their money off modules? Do remember they want to world specfic books only sell to a part of their fan base...generic stuff sells to everyone.
GreenKnight 12-22-07, 04:29 AM	...And that generic stuff will be put into future PHB's and DMG's. The idea is to let people know that any supplements that come out with new races/classes/feats/etc are core. That's the whole point behind making more PHB's. Making some other kind of splatbook defeats that purpose.
johnkretzer 12-22-07, 04:51 AM	...And that generic stuff will be put into future PHB's and DMG's. The idea is to let people know that any supplements that come out with new races/classes/feats/etc are core. That's the whole point behind making more PHB's. Making some other kind of splatbook defeats that purpose. We will see...personaly I think they are going to support existing classes and races though splat books and introduce new classes and races though the PhBs. In a year from now we will see who is right. (Also I think they want to throw the idea of core far away as possible...I mean they perfer to sell more than three books to potential customers anyway.)
Fingoldfin 12-22-07, 01:02 PM	...And that generic stuff will be put into future PHB's and DMG's. The idea is to let people know that any supplements that come out with new races/classes/feats/etc are core. That's the whole point behind making more PHB's. Making some other kind of splatbook defeats that purpose. I agree with John on this one. I think WotC will continue to produce splat books. Most players like splat books and powergamers love splat books. I said before that I think many of the changes are meant to appeal to powergamers. I don't see any reason why wizards won't make a new splat book every few months. I think DMs will have more work to do in 4e. A PHB and DMG every year means new rules every year. All the new classes look complicated. Every class gets a new ability at every level. That makes NPCs a little more time consuming to produce. I think that DMs will also need to spend more time planning out combat encounters. The likely result is less role-playing.
msatran 12-22-07, 01:22 PM	Yeah, I've got to admit that's what worries me, too. I try to make sure that there's dialogue in every combat round, but you know, it's a little difficult to have that sort of flavor if people are too busy worried about the Monkeyspit smite or the Torgon The Eviscerator's **** Probe.
msatran 12-22-07, 01:26 PM	Clearly, 4th Edition D+D needs to be reviewed by this being. http://torgon.blogspot.com/2005/12/after-several-decades-of-subjugating.html
18DELTA 12-22-07, 02:23 PM	Yeah, I've got to admit that's what worries me, too. I try to make sure that there's dialogue in every combat round, but you know, it's a little difficult to have that sort of flavor if people are too busy worried about the Monkeyspit smite or the Torgon The Eviscerator's **** Probe. :OMG! :heehee :rofl: :lightbulb :plotting: ;) :P
Lord Karsus 12-22-07, 02:48 PM	The likely result is less role-playing. -In general, maybe. It just means that there's more rules and whatever. Rules don't necessarily eliminate roleplaying. And, you can always ignore the rules that do hamper it.
Mr_Miscellany 12-22-07, 05:09 PM	I think DMs will have more work to do in 4e. A PHB and DMG every year means new rules every year. All the new classes look complicated. Every class gets a new ability at every level. That makes NPCs a little more time consuming to produce. I think that DMs will also need to spend more time planning out combat encounters. The likely result is less role-playing. I haven't seen a downturn in roleplaying or in my ability to plan with each new book's release in 3E. I don't see that happening in 4E, either. 3E is already pretty complicated. If WotC follows through on their promise to make the game less of a bear to deal with, then I don't think DMs will have a harder time of it in 4E. Obviously WotC needs to **sell** books...it's how they make money, after all. But, just like in 3E, DMs don't have to run the other books, even if they're core.
Rauric 12-22-07, 06:36 PM	I haven't seen a downturn in roleplaying or in my ability to plan with each new book's release in 3E. I don't see that happening in 4E, either. 3E is already pretty complicated. If WotC follows through on their promise to make the game less of a bear to deal with, then I don't think DMs will have a harder time of it in 4E. Obviously WotC needs to **sell** books...it's how they make money, after all. But, just like in 3E, DMs don't have to run the other books, even if they're core. True. I ran a core game for a while even after several complete books came out. Then I decided to go crazy and make it an almost everything goes campaign. I will never be a rules over fun DM though. I can understand why the fear is there though.
GothicDan 12-22-07, 07:40 PM	Yeah. In the most recent 3E game I played in, the fairly new DM felt pretty much constantly swamped with the glut of books. Luckily I was there to help and tell him, "Ignore whatever you don't want to deal with."
Mr_Miscellany 12-22-07, 07:43 PM	I should be careful with what I'm saying.....I have a good idea what WotC's goals are, and they seem to have realized what's good and what needs improvement in the game as a whole....but still Fin could be right. WotC could screw it up royally. Just have to wait half a year or so. (Which makes me realize yet again: GenCon ought to be a fun one next year)
Rauric 12-22-07, 07:50 PM	That's true too, ya never know what will happen. I sometime feel swamped with all those books. My wife looks at me crosseyed when I bring the crate of books to my car when I go to run my game. "You need all of those books?" she asks.
Mr_Miscellany 12-22-07, 07:55 PM	Heh...I roll mine around in a carry-on type suitcase. Got a new one from Miss Miscellany last Christmas and I already busted the handle on it. Books are heavy....
GothicDan 12-22-07, 07:56 PM	Jansports for the win!
Alediran 12-22-07, 09:06 PM	I got all my books digitalized in pdf and carriable in a laptop (technology FTW)
Lord Karsus 12-23-07, 12:44 AM	(Which makes me realize yet again: GenCon ought to be a fun one next year) -And, remember everyone: My offer for $20 remains. First one to film themselves shouting "Rich Baker must be stopped!" at a Rich Baker seminar gets the money. Jansports for the win! -Yep.
johnkretzer 12-23-07, 04:56 AM	I got all my books digitalized in pdf and carriable in a laptop (technology FTW) Cheater... Come on people carrieing those rule books are the only way that some of you get excerise.:) I spent alot of money and have a away copy and a home copy of all the rules books(I leave a set in my trunk). I usualy just bring in what I need..if a player needs a book I tell him to get it from my trunk.
msatran 12-23-07, 08:58 AM	Yeah, I was told to take it out of my signature, but other people are still doing it. And no, I will not embarrass myself by shouting that in front of a room full of people. I'm 38 years old. I can't do that kind of stuff. If I was 20, and full of beer, I might, but with age comes the certainty that real life has nothing to do with the internet.
Lord Karsus 12-23-07, 10:45 AM	I spent alot of money and have a away copy and a home copy of all the rules books(I leave a set in my trunk). I usualy just bring in what I need..if a player needs a book I tell him to get it from my trunk. -That's hardcore! Yeah, I was told to take it out of my signature, but other people are still doing it. And no, I will not embarrass myself by shouting that in front of a room full of people. -Pssh, for $20, I'd do almost anything. :cool:
GothicDan 12-23-07, 10:52 AM	Me and LK should shout it. We're about that age, and while I'm not a fan of beer, I wouldn't mind hitting a few car bombs.
Fingoldfin 12-23-07, 11:01 AM	[QUOTE=johnkretzer;14652073] Come on people carrieing those rule books are the only way that some of you get excerise.:) Some of us also get exercise carrying around thousands of Magic Cards. :P
Fingoldfin 12-23-07, 11:14 AM	-Pssh, for $20, I'd do almost anything. :cool: How about an eggnog power-hour? It's an annual New Year's Eve event now among my friends. Here's how the competition works. All contestants take a double-shot of eggnog every minute for an hour or until they vomit or crap. The last person to vomit or crap wins. Don't forget to spike the eggnog. So far no one has ever lasted longer than 20 minutes. :P
GothicDan 12-23-07, 11:16 AM	That sounds.. Disgusting.
Lord Karsus 12-23-07, 11:26 AM	Me and LK should shout it. We're about that age, and while I'm not a fan of beer, I wouldn't mind hitting a few car bombs. -I'd do it. A lot of people who go to Gencon are participants on the boards- some of them from the FR boards, even. I think a lot of people, including Rich, who does seem to have a sense of humor, would find it funny for the...five, six seconds it lasts. :) How about an eggnog power-hour? It's an annual New Year's Eve event now among my friends. Here's how the competition works. All contestants take a double-shot of eggnog every minute for an hour or until they vomit or crap. The last person to vomit or crap wins. Don't forget to spike the eggnog. So far no one has ever lasted longer than 20 minutes. :P -I don't drink to excess, but if there's money involved, I'm there.
GothicDan 12-23-07, 11:29 AM	-I'd do it. A lot of people who go to Gencon are participants on the boards- some of them from the FR boards, even. I think a lot of people, including Rich, who does seem to have a sense of humor, would find it funny for the...five, six seconds it lasts. While I rarely agree with Rich's design decisions, he seems like a good guy. And he doesn't run around throwing terms like 'sick' and 'sweet' all over the place like they actually meant something to us. :)
Fingoldfin 12-23-07, 11:33 AM	While I rarely agree with Rich's design decisions, he seems like a good guy. And he doesn't run around throwing terms like 'sick' and 'sweet' all over the place like they actually meant something to us. :) Once or twice would be funny. Just don't do it 20 times.
GothicDan 12-23-07, 11:34 AM	3.14159.
Fingoldfin 12-23-07, 11:35 AM	That sounds.. Disgusting. Yup. Sorry if anyone got grossed out.
GothicDan 12-23-07, 11:36 AM	I only was a bit. I've heard far worse.
Lord Karsus 12-23-07, 11:44 AM	Once or twice would be funny. Just don't do it 20 times. -I'd just do it once. It's meant to be a joke, not an annoyance/disruption.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 12-23-07, 05:41 PM	Well in Races and Classes(PAGE82), they said that Bards will be Leaders and gain their powers from otherworldly sources that admire the Bard's work. Probably in PHB2.:D I love the idea of the bard as a Leader.:)
MarkusTay63 12-23-07, 10:59 PM	I get the feeling that the Gnome is moving closer to the 'Fey' interpretation from folklore, rather then then the 'Tinker Gnome' of Dragonlance and Warcraft fame. It almost appears as if they intend to roll them into a sub-group of diminutive Fey, along with the Leprecauns we never got in 3e. In fact, the term 'Gnome' may now be an "umbrelaa-group" for a whole plethora of smallish Fey who lair in out-of-the-way places (under hills, deep in Sylvan forests, etc...), with each sub-group having its own local name (Brownie, Leprecaun, Redcap, etc...). It just seems that with 4e we are getting a MUCH greater connection to folklore, and are finally going to get sunstantial Fey lore. It sort of makes sense, giving the new Gnomes appearance and attitude, that he would get caught-up in all that. WotC could screw it up royally. Just have to wait half a year or so. It's nice to see that both sides have sort of become one, and we are ALL fans and are all a wee bit worried. ;) The rules I really don't worry about as much, because I've always bent 'em to suit my needs anyway. The rules only effect our individual campaigns, and in that arena, we DMs have always had the final say, whatever they do. The setting though, transcends the game, and is part of the novels and computer games. It becomes much harder to 'hand-tailor' to our needs, because of the established lore. I'm still greatly interested in seeing just what they plan to do in order to 'erase' people's perception of the Realms as a place loaded down with history.
18DELTA 12-24-07, 12:19 AM	I love the idea of the bard as a Leader.:) I do too. With every class getting their own power source in 4E, I wonder what kinda abilities they are going to get.:thinks: I really like that there will no longer be any spell or power overlap. Wizard powers are Wizard powers, Sorcerer powers will be Sorcerer powers, Cleric powers will be Cleric powers. Not the same old rehash with EVERY class!:D
Dark Wizard 12-24-07, 03:00 AM	I get the feeling that the Gnome is moving closer to the 'Fey' interpretation from folklore, rather then then the 'Tinker Gnome' of Dragonlance and Warcraft fame. It almost appears as if they intend to roll them into a sub-group of diminutive Fey, along with the Leprecauns we never got in 3e. In fact, the term 'Gnome' may now be an "umbrelaa-group" for a whole plethora of smallish Fey who lair in out-of-the-way places (under hills, deep in Sylvan forests, etc...), with each sub-group having its own local name (Brownie, Leprecaun, Redcap, etc...). It just seems that with 4e we are getting a MUCH greater connection to folklore, and are finally going to get sunstantial Fey lore. It sort of makes sense, giving the new Gnomes appearance and attitude, that he would get caught-up in all that. Sounds like what the guys at Paizo hinted their gnomes in the Pathfinder setting would be like, more fey-ish. Their elves also have fully colored eyes (no eye whites). That was the first thing the gnome in the flash reminded me of. http://paizo.com/image/content/RiseOfTheRunelords/Pathfinder3_Rogue.jpg
msatran 12-24-07, 09:59 AM	That's odd, Delta. That's the thing I hate most. The fact that everything was internally consistent was what made D+D 3.5 so good, and now, nothing is internally consistent, and I'm not happy with it. 4 E is going to suck, because of no Druid. They pretty much have almost lost me as a result of the preview book, I can't work this into the backstory of my game without DESTROYING CONTINUITY. But see, Wizards doesn't care about people like me, because they want D+D to be about cardboard straw men who the PC's knock down.
Rauric 12-24-07, 10:32 AM	Druids will be in 4E. I am not sure if it will be in the core book though. I did not pick up the "preview" because it seemed like a waste of money, even though I am pro-4E. I do belive at some point Druids will be in 4E.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 12-24-07, 10:55 AM	Yeah, I don't think Druids will be gone for good.:) I like them too, I wouldn't want them to be ditched permanently.
MerrikCale 12-24-07, 10:56 AM	Druids will be in 4E. I am not sure if it will be in the core book though. I did not pick up the "preview" because it seemed like a waste of money, even though I am pro-4E. I do belive at some point Druids will be in 4E. Like Bards, I would guess in the PHB2
johnkretzer 12-24-07, 01:05 PM	Druids will be in 4E. I am not sure if it will be in the core book though. I did not pick up the "preview" because it seemed like a waste of money, even though I am pro-4E. I do belive at some point Druids will be in 4E. Well yeah Druids will be in 4th...by the way the preview book is good(still not worth it) as it gives a very good look at the New D&D. Rather you like it or not...it ****** me off more than anything else so the PhB has better be great if there is any chance of me converting.
GreenKnight 12-24-07, 04:12 PM	4 E is going to suck, because of no Druid. From ENWorld (http://www.enworld.org/index.php?page=4e). Druid mentioned in D&D's seminar's summary. - From Wizards Presents: Races & Classes: Their spellcasting takes second seat. The primary ability is wildshape, which they can do a lot more often, but only shapes they have picked (like spells). They have some nature related spells to cast when in humanoid form. - The 4E Druid will heavily emphasize sharp-changing abilities, and will possess a spell list with ranged firepower and utility effects.
18DELTA 12-24-07, 07:41 PM	Like Bards, I would guess in the PHB2 Right, because they have to create the power source for those classes. With each class having their own power source, it makes them unique in play to fufill their intended roles in the game. The classes probably wont be rehashes of each other anymore. I can get with that. :twocents:
johnkretzer 12-24-07, 07:56 PM	Right, because they have to create the power source for those classes. With each class having their own power source, it makes them unique in play to fufill their intended roles in the game. The classes probably wont be rehashes of each other anymore. I can get with that. :twocents: Except it is not really simpler anymore...before bringing certain books were optional...now it won't be. I think 4th edition is going be a really ugly mess in about a year.
MerrikCale 12-24-07, 11:12 PM	Right, because they have to create the power source for those classes. With each class having their own power source, it makes them unique in play to fufill their intended roles in the game. The classes probably wont be rehashes of each other anymore. I can get with that. :twocents: I agree. Its just too bad that they feel they have to destroy the Realms for it
Dark Wizard 12-24-07, 11:27 PM	I agree. Its just too bad that they feel they have to destroy the Realms for it Seconded. They really could have had both the old and the new fanbase with a good, a more subtle setup that didn't rub the old fans the wrong way but still with enough change to get the new players into the setting (which the old fans could live with or probably even understand). It's not that hard I don't think, things are often not so absolute and extreme. Don't underestimate both sides of the fanbase, each side is capable of compromise.
GothicDan 12-25-07, 12:28 AM	Druid mentioned in D&D's seminar's summary. - From Wizards Presents: Races & Classes: Their spellcasting takes second seat. The primary ability is wildshape, which they can do a lot more often, but only shapes they have picked (like spells). They have some nature related spells to cast when in humanoid form. - The 4E Druid will heavily emphasize sharp-changing abilities, and will possess a spell list with ranged firepower and utility effects. Considering I was already upset at 3E's emphasis of Wild Shaping for Druids, and the de-emphasis on their connection to the Inner Planes, this is even more of an upset for me...
Lord Karsus 12-25-07, 01:38 AM	-Maybe I'm in the minority, but I never really liked Druids too much. I always thought they were a little of redundant, especially with Clerics of Nature deities running around. I think Druid should be a PrC, or Feat-chain, or something like that.
Fingoldfin 12-25-07, 01:58 AM	Except it is not really simpler anymore...before bringing certain books were optional...now it won't be. I think 4th edition is going be a really ugly mess in about a year. This is one of the things I don't like. All those splat books made a mess in 3e and now 4e is going to emphasize them more by making them almost mandatory. A PHB and DMG every year? Why? Each one will have a small amount of necessary information like the Druid class. Then the rest of the book will be half-hearted filler like some of the crap PrCs we saw in 3e splat books. Some of the optional rules in 3e splat books looked like they were just their to fill out page counts.
Lord Karsus 12-25-07, 04:14 AM	This is one of the things I don't like. All those splat books made a mess in 3e and now 4e is going to emphasize them more by making them almost mandatory. A PHB and DMG every year? Why? Each one will have a small amount of necessary information like the Druid class. Then the rest of the book will be half-hearted filler like some of the crap PrCs we saw in 3e splat books. Some of the optional rules in 3e splat books looked like they were just their to fill out page counts. -That's the kind of thing that everyone complained about concerning the timeline of the Realms: That everything was spread out over a bunch of different sourcebooks.
Rauric 12-25-07, 07:26 AM	I will be careful in what non-campaign sourcebooks I pick up. MM and certain supplements is one thing the complete/races stuff is another. The good thing is you could run a Core only game and have fun with it. I opened a can of worms when I allowed all the other books. I had fun with it all and it gave me some new ideas, but it did cost me alot more money. It was my decision to do it though. My players played a core only game and were fine with it for the most part. Still the PRCs and lore in some of those books were bad times. I did like the TOB though (not the lore) and things like Warlock and Scout. All of these were thought to be overpowered but I have proved that they are not in my campaign. We have also allowed gestalts to happen (it was a storyline soulbinding thing) and that worked well. I was the DM so they really could not break my game too much. I am in control in the end. I ended up liking the adventures in 3E more because I could steal ideas and plots from those products and use them in my campaign. Re Hand of Doom and Ravenloft are being picked apart by me at the moment. The group (gestalt) in my Eberron game are encountering a 28 days later storyline in the city of Sharn and dealing with the Cults of Tiamat somewhere down the road. So I am pretty happy with the adventures even if I never really use them to full effect. I disliked the FR adventures though. EB ones had more setting flavor for me.
GreenKnight 12-25-07, 07:46 AM	This is one of the things I don't like. All those splat books made a mess in 3e and now 4e is going to emphasize them more by making them almost mandatory. I don't know if there'll still be an OGL, but if there is, then that's a good thing for 3rd party publishers, as they'll be able to dip into that stuff, too. Besides, if it's just a PHB and DMG every year, then that's still miles better then the stream of splatbooks released during 3E. I bet if you were to count up all those various books that were released during the life of 3.5, the number would vastly eclipse the number of PHB's and DMG's produced in an equal amount of years.
Dark Wizard 12-25-07, 02:29 PM	WotC never said their releases would consists of just a PHB/DMG/MM every year. They will release other books.
Priamon 01-11-08, 07:48 AM	They want Epic Characters to be able to challenge the gods or maybe even become gods...wowzers! Sounds interesting to me. I've go the vomit bucket out for the rest of you, should you need it. :P ::::: I'm liking the ideas behind the Cleric as well. Clerics in my twenty some odd years of experience gaming in the Realms have always been the best (and easiest) way for a player to blend their own roleplaying style with the flavor of the setting. Obviously we don't know for sure how much the Realms will change, but it looks like we'll have a great opportunity with 4E to tie in more cool magical abilities/spells with divine themes and roleplaying. Looking forward to it. :::::::: Ooh! An arcticle for using the spellplague in a 3E campaign. Perfect! ::::::::: From Bill Slavicsek’s “Orcus Design Tenets” 8. Make the Game Easy to Design for, Develop and Edit. ....If we can spend less time on the details and more time on the cool factor for future designs, we’ll all be better off. Hah! Cool was preordained into the system. Long live the word ‘cool’! Quote for Truth.
18DELTA 01-11-08, 10:59 AM	WotC never said their releases would consists of just a PHB/DMG/MM every year. They will release other books. - A cash cow it is $E!!!;) :P :D LORD DELTA
Lord Karsus 01-11-08, 08:04 PM	I don't know if there'll still be an OGL, but if there is, then that's a good thing for 3rd party publishers, as they'll be able to dip into that stuff, too. -The Open-Game License should still be in effect though, shouldn't it? Meaning, companies should be able to continue to develop 3e stuff if they wanted to...
18DELTA 02-10-08, 12:36 AM	-Wow January came and went and none of these articles have been released yet other than Death and Dying, and Elves!!!:rolleyes: http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=967504 Starting in January 2008, Dragon #362 will take a look at the following: Forgotten Realms: Using the Spellplague in your 3E campaign Races: Elves and Eladrin Classes: Warlord Monsters: Minions Adventure Design: Fantastic Terrain Magic Items: Artifacts D&D World: The Feywild Subsystem: Death, Dying, and Negative HP :uh-huh: :nonono: :bored: -Is there anything else that has been released yet?:confused: 18DELTA:thumbsdow
MarkusTay63 02-10-08, 01:11 AM	Death and Dying (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/drdd/20080201a) is out, as are a slew of others. (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4arch/main) ;) Edit: I missed that you already mentioned the death one - anyway, the Feywild was partly covered in two other articles.
Lord Karsus 02-10-08, 01:41 AM	Death and Dying (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/drdd/20080201a) is out, -I like that idea, with -10 or 1/4 HP total under 0. Thats cool. I don't agree with a few of the points made in the article, though. Mainly, this: "Ask any high-level fighter whether he’d prefer the second-to-last attack from a monster to leave him at 1 hp or -1 hp; I’d put odds on unconsciousness, and how lame is that?" and this: "Among other problems, this also meant that characters effectively had no way to “lose” a combat except by being killed. This removes a lot of dramatic possibilities for the story—for instance, the classic scene of the characters being captured and thrown in a cell from which they have to escape using only their wits and a pack of chewing gum (or whatever)."
MarkusTay63 02-10-08, 12:03 PM	I would agree that it always struck me strange that combat was "all or nothing", and the subdual damage rules were just too strange. I think there needs to be some sort of system in place where people can be 'beaten into submission', rather then killed outright, but I don't see how their 'new' (?) system will help that in any way. Its like they set out to fix the problem, gave people more 'unconscious' hit points, and never even addressed the problem they set out to correct. :confused: I think there needs to be a sliding scale, based of a percentage of a character's HP, where a person must make SRs to stay conscious. We don't need negative HP - its just stupid - just add those HP to the positive side and make savings throws!
Jarred_Garrison 02-10-08, 02:33 PM	Ya know... I don´t spend much time around here anymore (the fluff changes to FR having driven me away almost completely, due to lack of interest), but when I read this bit on the summary for the articles in January´s Dragon: "Starting in January 2008, Dragon #362 will take a look at the following: Forgotten Realms: Using the Spellplague in your 3E campaign" I thought I´d rather see "Forgotten Realms: Not using the Spellplague in your 4E campaign". Ah well... *sighs*.
Lord Karsus 02-10-08, 04:24 PM	I would agree that it always struck me strange that combat was "all or nothing", and the subdual damage rules were just too strange. -How was combat always 'all or nothing'? What happened to the options of 'surrender', which either I or a player I've gamed with have done, 'playing dead', which either I or a player I've gamed with have done, and so on... We don't need negative HP - its just stupid - just add those HP to the positive side and make savings throws! -Having more "negative HP" makes sense to me. It took, say 100 HP worth of damage to literally beat you into unconsciousness. It is a little silly, I guess, to say that it only takes another 10 to outright kill you. There is a video game I like, Saga Frontier, that has a system like that, but after you are knocked unconscious, the maximum amount of damage you can take it from an enemy is '1'. Were this substituted into D&D, I think it would work well as well. I thought I´d rather see "Forgotten Realms: Not using the Spellplague in your 4E campaign". Ah well... *sighs*. -Yeah, well...Get used to it.