This thing is not that there will be multiple PHB's for us to buy to get new classes. Nor was it that the Swordmage and the Artificer were to be put into campaign specific player's guides. It wasn't even that WotC felt it nessessary to expand the number of PHB's that a power source's name saw on the cover of.
The problem here is this: The Arcane Power sourcebook does not even cover all the arcane classes! It puts in options for a swordmage, but leaves out the artificer! WHAT?! Is this to say that there will be an ARCANE POWER 2!!?!
I'm sorry WotC, but that is a bit much, and that is an understatement. I wish you guys would let something give somewhere; whether that be reprint the Swordmage in the PHB2 and reprint the Artificer in PHB3, or put them on DDI, or only make one Arcane Power book after ALL the arcane classes have been released. Something, please! I find it acceptable to buy 5 books to get all the arcane classes and options thereof, but making it 6+ is making me question all the times I have defended the WotC marketing strategy.
Thank you all for your time, and I hope that WotC does make a decision that both it and its new/old customer base can agree with.
The problem here is this: The Arcane Power sourcebook does not even cover all the arcane classes! It puts in options for a swordmage, but leaves out the artificer!
Judging by the release schedule, the artificer won't have been finished or published by the time Arcane Power comes out.
If you wish the arcane power book to not come out until all the arcane classes are released, then the book should be canceled. After all, in a year, a new arcane class could come out, rendering the book useless.
In the meantime, they could publish more modules and campaign settings than are currently scheduled.
This could work...
WHAT?! Is this to say that there will be an ARCANE POWER 2!!?!
Yeh! I mean, it's not like there were several arcane based supplements in 3.x!:D
It's also possible that swordmage specific powers won't be in Arcane Power and it will only cover the PHB classes.
Behold, knowledge:
http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?t=237234&page=4
Swordmage is included.
And I can't defend my opinion (to prove it right), I can only express it (to prove that it exists). Therefore, I will only clerify my thoughts, and not try to justify them.
Firstly, I think it is dumb that there are classes in Campaign Setting books, but they are still being considered "core" classes enough to put them into books like Arcane Power. If I (and other likeminded individuals) had my way, all non-PHB1 Arcane classes would come in Arcane Power, and subsequent sequels if necessary. However, not ONLY is the arcane power source being put into multiple "series" of books, the "Players Guide to __" and PHB lines, but the third line that it is being put into will likely have sequals!
This would not be a problem to me if I were truely interested in the D&D campaign settings, however, my group likes to use their own worlds, but use many many class and race options. In this way, my group would not mind PHBs with new races and new classes. However, we want to run our own campaign settings; purchasing a campaign setting's player's guide just for a class, then, is a large irritation to us.
In this respect, the Artificer becomes less of a problem (because it was a class unique to Eberron), and again raises the thorn of the swordmage. The Duskblade was a PHB2 class in 3.5, but now in 4e, its new incarnation is being drafted to Faerun!
In summation, I was initially irritated because classes that are considered part of the "core" experience are being deligated to setting specific Player's Guides. I was further irritated with the realization that PHB2 was to hold more of the same, that is, more arcane classes, because the XX Power book line was supposed to cover the PHB's butts when it came to space for customization. The straw that broke the cammals back for me is that this does not appear to be all that the problem is isolated to: More PHB's (with arcane classes), more ____ Player's Guides (with arcane classes), and more Arcane Power (with arcane options).
tl;dr: This is the "Complete blah" problem all over again, but multiplied by three, and that is my breaking point.
I'd rather the classes be entirely self-contained in the campaign setting books, and appear nowhere else. That way, if I want the class, I can buy it, and if I don't, I don't get a bunch of trash in my core books that I can't use.
And I really hope there isn't an Arcane Power II; I'd rather have to only lug around a PHB plus a sourcebook if I'm a player.
I am so confused right now because this makes no sense. They should have released Divine Power first and then done Arcane Power, including the Artificer if they were going to include campaign classes......with that said, I am now going to go out and party in celebration of being given more options for the Swordmage!On to the topic of Arcane Power II, I fully expect them to eventually release it eventually. However with this recent announcement, I'm sort of at a loss as to what is going on in their minds. I was previously expecting Arcane Power II to be released in a few years after they had started to cycle through the power sources again(after having released 4 classes of each power source). Now though, I can forsee it being released practically at any time. Then again we can hope that the Artificer will get a full power book treatment in its initial release.
not anymore than you need to worry about the sun exploding, or the mayan calendar.
i seriously doubt that a second version of the book has even crossed the minds of the developers, and i dont think we need be concerned anytime soon.
but for those of you who insist on worrying a good 3 to 4 years in advance.... all the power to you.
im just saying...
Oh, and the region stuff as well.
And probably some more divinity feats to round out a pantheon.
Did it occur to you that the Playtest Artificier is an Arcane Power Source, but in it's final version it will be a separate Power Source, merely saying Arcane for ease of integration in current games?
I don't recall reading that anywhere. Do you have a link for that or is that just a postulation that you've pulled out of your bum? :P
I don't see how a artificer can be anything other than arcane. If they start making up power sources for every little class, I'll be thoroughly disappointed.
Will this class be in PH2 or one of the Forgotten Realms books?
I one going to be Core FR and the other having options for other weapons?
Don't fret. Seems swordmage is also in PHB2.
No it isn't. That was a mistake on enworld's part. None of the released information points to the swordmage being included, and in fact points to it not being in there, unless they decide to put nine classes in there, which we have no indication of them doing at the moment.
Did it occur to you that the Playtest Artificier is an Arcane Power Source, but in it's final version it will be a separate Power Source, merely saying Arcane for ease of intgration in current games?
Not likely as it fits perfectly in the arcane power source, but doesn't fit into any of the others. Creating a power source for a single class seems to be an excercise in pointlessness since power sources serve primarily to unify classes.
Questions about Swordmage.
Will this class be in PH2 or one of the Forgotten Realms books?
I one going to be Core FR and the other having options for other weapons?
It will be in the FR Player's Guide with some expansion in Arcane Power.
-This is not a thread discussing the Artificer's power source
-That being said, Artificer fits perfectly in Arcane, IMHO
-The statement that the Swordmage will be in the PHB2 on the ENWorld newspage is inaccurate according to the pages the statement linked to (namely, the 2009 catalog).
- Anyone with a link to a reliable source stating that the swordmage will be in PHB2, please post it
-Did you guys know that this page went up by 500 views OVER NIGHT? :D
Let me clear some things up:
-This is not a thread discussing the Artificer's power source
-That being said, Artificer fits perfectly in Arcane, IMHO
-The statement that the Swordmage will be in the PHB2 on the ENWorld newspage is inaccurate according to the pages the statement linked to (namely, the 2009 catalog).
- Anyone with a link to a reliable source stating that the swordmage will be in PHB2, please post it
-Did you guys know that this page went up by 500 views OVER NIGHT? :D
Oh sure try to take away all of my fun by setting people straight. I see how it is.:P
Anyways on subject, I was reading the thread where the catalog was originally posted and there was some explanation from a WotC employee(forgot which) as to why the Artificer wasn't included.....it didn't address why they didn't switch the order of Arcane Power and Divine Power though(my guess would be arcane is more popular*shrugs*).
I've said it before, and I'll say it again: I want the Artificer supported in Arcane Power, and I don't even give a damn if that book gets released before the final version of the class does!
Maybe that sounds ridiculous, but I like Eberron, and I like Artificers. I want them to see the same love FR's Swordmage is getting.
I'm with you, Wizardmon. This "No Artificer in Arcane Power" development straight bums me out.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again: I want the Artificer supported in Arcane Power, and I don't even give a damn if that book gets released before the final version of the class does!
Maybe that sounds ridiculous, but I like Eberron, and I like Artificers. I want them to see the same love FR's Swordmage is getting.
Well that's easily fixed: Give them more than 2 builds in the Eberron book and put a couple paragon paths in for them as well. We'll have to see how much swordmage specific material is in the Arcane Power Book to figure out how much 'extra' needs to be put in the Eberron book to give Artificer's the same treatment.
Keep in mind that the Arcane Power book isn't JUST for the classes out at that point but some of the options will be fore other classes in that or other power sources. The new multiclassing feats will likely be for ALL classes not just martial/arcane. Some of the feats will likely not be class/power source restricted, and the same with PPs and EDs.
They should have released Divine Power first and then done Arcane Power, including the Artificer if they were going to include campaign classes......with that said, I am now going to go out and party in celebration of being given more options for the Swordmage!
That makes even less sense. People are complaining because Arcane Power may miss one of the Arcane classes. Can you imagine how people would react if Divine Power missed half of them? There would have to be a Divine Power II, because at present, the only divine classes are Cleric and Paladin. At least when Arcane Power comes out, nearly all the Arcane classes will be out (Swordmage, Bard, Wizard, Warlock, and Sorcerer).
Well that's easily fixed: Give them more than 2 builds in the Eberron book and put a couple paragon paths in for them as well. We'll have to see how much swordmage specific material is in the Arcane Power Book to figure out how much 'extra' needs to be put in the Eberron book to give Artificer's the same treatment.
Exactly. I think people are overreacting. If the Eberron Player's Guide provides an amount of options for the Artificer equal to what the other Arcane classes get from their book and Arcane Power combined, then who needs an Arcane Power II?
Exactly. I think people are overreacting. If the Eberron Player's Guide provides an amount of options for the Artificer equal to what the other Arcane classes get from their book and Arcane Power combined, then who needs an Arcane Power II?
...If EPG does provide the same amount of Artificer goodies as PH1/PH2/FRPG + Arcane Power does for each of the other Arcane classes, then dandy! That's two-thirds of my concern right there.
One-sixth of my remaining concern is that if all the Artificer stuff is in EPG, it may be too "Eberron-centric" (or considered thusly by some DMs) for easy use outside of Eberron, despite the intention to make setting-specific published material easily poachable for other campaigns.
My last concern is the precedent this sets; thus far, we've been under the impression that each "[Power] Source" book would be a capstone to published material for that power source. (Admittedly, I don't recall if anyone ever said that officially, but it's been the impression in the community so far.) Suffice to say, it does sort of leave a toe in the door for a potential "Arcane Power II".
...*sigh*
Maybe that doesn't really stand to logic. I guess I'm just still a little bummed about no Artificer in Arcane Power; I was really looking forward to it!That makes even less sense. People are complaining because Arcane Power may miss one of the Arcane classes. Can you imagine how people would react if Divine Power missed half of them? There would have to be a Divine Power II, because at present, the only divine classes are Cleric and Paladin. At least when Arcane Power comes out, nearly all the Arcane classes will be out (Swordmage, Bard, Wizard, Warlock, and Sorcerer).
Ummm PHBII will have Divine classes in it. In case you didn't notice Arcane Power has the Bard and Sorceror in it, both of which will be in PHBII(ok Bard isn't technically confirmed yet, but lets skip over that point for now). Therefore why would Divine Power have to miss half the classes if they had switched the schedule between the two?
Ummm PHBII will have Divine classes in it. In case you didn't notice Arcane Power has the Bard and Sorceror in it, both of which will be in PHBII(ok Bard isn't technically confirmed yet, but lets skip over that point for now). Therefore why would Divine Power have to miss half the classes if they had switched the schedule between the two?
Sure Bard is confirmed. It's confirmed as getting support in Arcane Power, which it wouldn't be getting if it wasn't going to be already published by the time Arcane Power comes out, (à la "Artificer-gate"). Since PH2 is the only place it could be, it is therefore confirmed, yeah?
Honestly, considering how awesome the SM looks I'd rather like it to be in PHBII, because I have no powerful desire to buy the FR Player's Guide.
Sure Bard is confirmed. It's confirmed as getting support in Arcane Power, which it wouldn't be getting if it wasn't going to be already published by the time Arcane Power comes out, (à la "Artificer-gate"). Since PH2 is the only place it could be, it is therefore confirmed, yeah?
It has been suggested that it could be D&DI content, so while all signs point to it being in the PHBII, I feel it is neccesary to include that .00001% that it isn't in there.
That said there is nothing that says you can't create your own Artificer abilities or even change some of the powers found in Arcane Power into Artificer powers.
I am a HUGE Psionics and Kalashtar fan. I have to wait at least 2 years for Psionics
I am hoping WOTC releases a preview of a telepath class like they did with the Artificer.
Remember the books are just guidelines. The class or power you might make might be better than what WOTC creates! :D
Remember the books are just guidelines. The class or power you might make might be better than what WOTC creates! :D
Not according to the guys that DM my games! Anything NOT produced in a D&D compatible supplement is usually not allowed because "homebrew classes, feats, items, and powers are usually not designed as well, and are typicly better-than-to-broken compared to 'official' material."
Unless some sort of guideline comes out that shows how to create balanced classes, powers, effects, etc., the D&D books will hold a LOT more than just guidelines in my group x.x
One-sixth of my remaining concern is that if all the Artificer stuff is in EPG, it may be too "Eberron-centric" (or considered thusly by some DMs) for easy use outside of Eberron, despite the intention to make setting-specific published material easily poachable for other campaigns.
That's largely a DM problem (IMO) and you need a DM that won't see that as a problem. Personally I'll be allowing the Luckbringer of Tymora Paragon Path from the Cormyr article in Dragon in my Eberron campaign. The only stipulation will of course be that the player works with me to make it more Eberron-centric (which could easily just be change a few names around).
Unless some sort of guideline comes out that shows how to create balanced classes, powers, effects, etc., the D&D books will hold a LOT more than just guidelines in my group x.x
I've got to agree with your DM. Now sure, homebrew stuff can be balanced, but its a heck of a lot harder to ensure it is balanced.
At this point in time, the only reason I would even buy the FRPG would be for the Swordmage. I could, with relative ease, create a Duskblade/Swordmage class of my own but for this notion of "official only" which is all too convenient for WotC. I understand the need to make a buck, but in the particular instance of the Swordmage I am a bit irritated. (I am also irritated about the Artificer, but less so. It was always an Eberron class, unlike the Duskblade/Swordmage, and can be replaced in the Power Source/Party Role matrix by the Bard. However, my irritation will hold if it does not see equal support of the Swordmage within a finite number of books.)
Not according to the guys that DM my games! Anything NOT produced in a D&D compatible supplement is usually not allowed because "homebrew classes, feats, items, and powers are usually not designed as well, and are typicly better-than-to-broken compared to 'official' material."
Unless some sort of guideline comes out that shows how to create balanced classes, powers, effects, etc., the D&D books will hold a LOT more than just guidelines in my group x.x
ugg sorry to hear that
....he does realize the books are created by players just like us. Even WOTC creates class/feats/powers that are unbalanced or broken at times. All the DMs I have played with have encouraged players to create/adapt classes/powers/feats on a trial basis. If they seem balanced as they are played then they will be allowed but if in play they are unbalanced/broken, then they get adjusted.
Did it occur to you that the Playtest Artificier is an Arcane Power Source, but in it's final version it will be a separate Power Source, merely saying Arcane for ease of intgration in current games?
Its arcane.
And I think its stupid that the SM is getting any support outside of FR at all; I'd like the class to be entirely self-contained, as I have no plans to purchase the FR books, Swordmage or no.
I understand that WotC is a for profit buisness, I really do. I understand them remaking a game to appeal to a wider audience; I support the sentiment. I understand making sourcebooks for each powersource, and think it is an excellent idea. However, recently something very, very NOT okay has come to my attention.
The problem here is this: The Arcane Power sourcebook does not even cover all the arcane classes! It puts in options for a swordmage, but leaves out the artificer! WHAT?! Is this to say that there will be an ARCANE POWER 2!!?!
I dont think there is alot of proof that the Swordmage in in the Arcane Power book, and in fact there is equal proof that the artificer will make the book if the swordmage does. In other words I think you are worrying about nothing.
-Tig
I dont think there is alot of proof that the Swordmage in in the Arcane Power book, and in fact there is equal proof that the artificer will make the book if the swordmage does. In other words I think you are worrying about nothing.
-Tig
Actually a WotC employee has confirmed that the Swordmage will be in Arcane Power and Artificer will not.
For your convenience: http://www.enworld.org/articles/Dungeons_and_Dragons_News/6928
(Be sure to scroll down and read, introductory summary is inaccurate based on information later in the page)
Tiger- Erm, did you check the Spring 2009 Catalog, or any website reposting it? It seems VERY clear to me, judging by the description of Arcane Power.
For your convenience: http://www.enworld.org/articles/Dungeons_and_Dragons_News/6928
(Be sure to scroll down and read, introductory summary is inaccurate based on information later in the page)
How many people on this very thread have claimed that the Swordmage is in Players Handbook 2, something at least Rich is on record as saying isnt happening? As others have also said, its quite possible the Artificer will have extra powers in the Eberron book, to make it equal in options to the other 5 Arcane classes (and 4 Martial Classes) that have had there power books put out. As for someones comment that a WOTC employee said no to Artificer and yes to Swordmage in Arcane power, do we have a real reference about that, or are we playing Chinese Whispers again, (a game thats at times is more popular on here then 4th Edition).
-Tig
How many people on this very thread have claimed that the Swordmage is in Players Handbook 2, something at least Rich is on record as saying isnt happening? As others have also said, its quite possible the Artificer will have extra powers in the Eberron book, to make it equal in options to the other 5 Arcane classes (and 4 Martial Classes) that have had there power books put out. As for someones comment that a WOTC employee said no to Artificer and yes to Swordmage in Arcane power, do we have a real reference about that, or are we playing Chinese Whispers again, (a game thats at times is more popular on here then 4th Edition).
-Tig
One person has made that claim and they were corrected fairly quickly.
*grumbles* And here is the comment from WotC_Logan I was talking about.
A few comments on Arcane Power:
The artificer won't be supported in that book, because the artificer won't be fully developed until the Eberron Player's Guide goes through dev. It just didn't make sense to support an unfinished class in a book that already had more classes covered than Martial Power needed to. We were already designing powers for PH2 classes that weren't finished!
Source: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?t=237234&page=5
The catalogue listing should be enough to confirm Swordmage being in Arcane Power, and if you insist on a link to that also just go back one page in that thread and it was posted by a very reputable poster at ENWorld.
The swordmage was invented in the midst of 4e and Forgotten Realms development. This gave it only enough time to have two of its builds tested before being included in the FR Player's Guide. By comparison, it was all but inevitable that the artificer would appear in the Eberron setting, and it will have a lot more time for development.
For the artificer to be included in AP, that book would need to be released after the Eberron setting. Otherwise, the full class would be in AP, which would run contrary to WotC's intentions not to do this in power sourcebooks. I think many players who want extra options for their arcane PCs would be angered if AP was delayed thanks to Eberron.
A fair chunk of people who'll buy AP don't play in Forgotten Realms or Eberron. Having one unusable part (the swordmage material) is forgivable but pushing it. Two unusable parts is a deal-breaker. Therefore, I think the artificer will be entirely contained within the Eberron setting, and there's a very good chance it will get four builds.
Here's my guesstimate on things.
The swordmage was invented in the midst of 4e and Forgotten Realms development. This gave it only enough time to have two of its builds tested before being included in the FR Player's Guide. By comparison, it was all but inevitable that the artificer would appear in the Eberron setting, and it will have a lot more time for development.
For the artificer to be included in AP, that book would need to be released after the Eberron setting. Otherwise, the full class would be in AP, which would run contrary to WotC's intentions not to do this in power sourcebooks. I think many players who want extra options for their arcane PCs would be angered if AP was delayed thanks to Eberron.
A fair chunk of people who'll buy AP don't play in Forgotten Realms or Eberron. Having one unusable part (the swordmage material) is forgivable but pushing it. Two unusable parts is a deal-breaker. Therefore, I think the artificer will be entirely contained within the Eberron setting, and there's a very good chance it will get four builds.
considering that Eberron fans that hate the realms would have to either buy a book for one class or do without the arcane defender in a world that's permeated with magic, I'm fine with no campaign setting people having to purchase a product that expands upon one class from a campaign setting and contains one class inspired by another
is it possible that DDi will "reprint" the swordmage
At this point, I doubt it. Swordmage is a big draw for non-FR players to buy'n'try the FR Player's Guide. (This book is designed and written to be Realms-specific but also potentially very useful to players in any setting, thanks to the number of new character options presented.) Reprinting it on DDI could spoil the sales of FRPG, and would therefore be a fairly dumb move.
However, it was already released in preview format for the LFR.
At this point, I doubt it. Swordmage is a big draw for non-FR players to buy'n'try the FR Player's Guide. (This book is designed and written to be Realms-specific but also potentially very useful to players in any setting, thanks to the number of new character options presented.) Reprinting it on DDI could spoil the sales of FRPG, and would therefore be a fairly dumb move.
However, it was already released in preview format for the LFR.
well, perhaps it could be re-printed on DDi in a few months, maybe around the time Arcane Power is released, but I understand what you are saying
At this point, I doubt it. Swordmage is a big draw for non-FR players to buy'n'try the FR Player's Guide. (This book is designed and written to be Realms-specific but also potentially very useful to players in any setting, thanks to the number of new character options presented.) Reprinting it on DDI could spoil the sales of FRPG, and would therefore be a fairly dumb move.
However, it was already released in preview format for the LFR.
It should however be in the Compendium
Its arcane.
And I think its stupid that the SM is getting any support outside of FR at all; I'd like the class to be entirely self-contained, as I have no plans to purchase the FR books, Swordmage or no.
+ lots.
Our group agrees, we don't want stuff from a setting we don't even play and we sure aren't buying the book just for the swordmage. That's space I'd rather was used on actual core stuff like say: bard, sorcerer, warlock and wizard goodies.
FR isn't core no matter how much they want it to be, stop pushing it down our throats.
Really, each time FR is mentioned, there is like an alergic reaction... dudes, it's a legitimate part of D&D's legacy like the others. It's also *not* core.
Eberron is as much 'forced', why the double standarts?
Anyway.
It wouldn't surprise me to see PDF packages for campaign-specific classes, that customers can purchase. Which is a good idea, because many people will balk at buying a 160 page book for the 15 pages they actually want. It's like the analogy of the cow and the milk, or the pig and the sausage.
Pick and choose.
I want to use the swordmage? I can buy the FR player's guide. It will also contain new races, new rituals, and presumably some new equipment, at least. I can leave the FR campaign guide on the shelf.
Same with anyone wanting to run an Artificer in a non-Eberron setting. Buy the player's guide and leave the campaign guide.
This is no different than D&D has done at any point in it's history. I mean, the AD&D PHB had multiple races and classes in it, not to mention all those spells and psionics. What if I only wanted to play non-psionic human fighters? Same with these player's guides. Look at the total package and decide if it is worth the money to have whatever you like from the book at your disposal.
Reprinting it on DDI could spoil the sales of FRPG, and would therefore be a fairly dumb move.
They'll be putting it in the Compendium. Already thanks to that we have all the details on Fighters, Clerics, etc. If it weren't for the character creation and combat rules people wouldn't need the PHB. However with PGtFR we don't need any such rules to play the Swordmage, Genasi and Drow.
I have to say that integrating the magazines was a smart move on their part. Now if a class comes out underpowered, they can actually fix it and have it count.