Each of the camaign settings has had a new class (sword mage and artificer) and with the recent news that there will not be a new class in DS, this frees up a lot of page space for current class conversion material. Eberron had 16 pages devoted to the artificer (including the 2 pps), that is room for a good deal of crunch (such as the already suggested mechanical changes to fighter, for example ) alongside the fluff. What do people thing this means for classes in DS?
When did they say there wouldn't be new classes in DS? If thats true, then it kinda sucks.
Now, if they put a DS spin on current classes, that will be great and what I'm looking for.
Can anyone provide a link to this info about DS not having new classes? Going to look for myself right now, but it'd be nice incase I can't find it. Thanks.
newbiedm.com/2009/09/14/1d12-questions-w...
Thanks so much! I'd of never found that. lol. Now I'll get back to your OP.
Each of the camaign settings has had a new class (sword mage and artificer) and with the recent news that there will not be a new class in DS, this frees up a lot of page space for current class conversion material. Eberron had 16 pages devoted to the artificer (including the 2 pps), that is room for a good deal of crunch (such as the already suggested mechanical changes to fighter, for example ) alongside the fluff. What do people thing this means for classes in DS?
Well, I'm very interested to know what new mechanic they will release in DS and how they will change the current classes to better fit athas. My knee jerk reaction, is new builds.
I'm not sure how they are going to deal with power sources and relating classes in DS. The cleric for instance. We might get a taste of the elemental power source in DS, but I'm not going to hold my breath.
If I had to guess at what the new mechanic will be like. I'd have to say, augmentation through life energy of the world. So every class has the potential to be a preserver or defiler. I find it a stretch and hope if that is it, Its done right.
I must admit to being a bit bummed about not having a new DS class, but I am hopeful for gladiator and templar builds for many if not each existing class. I mean, after all, anyone can serve a sorcerer king and anyone can be thrown into the arena.
I'm definitely excited about next year.
Also, since they are going against the norm for classes with DS by not including any, maybe they will also go against the norm for races, and include more than we've seen in other campaigns, so far.
Aww man that sucks! There better be something amazing in there to make me shell out money for a player's guide without a new class!
Plus now all those Dragonlance fanboys will go "SEE! You don't need a new class for a Player's Guide, you probably don't need new races and can just get by with variations, so its obviously Dragonlance in 2011!"
and we'll never hear the end of the 'Its gonna be DL!''No it won't!''Yes it will!''DL sucks!''No it doesn't!' until they announce the 2011. (Then the DL fanboys will be dissapointed when their run the mill setting doesn't get picked and start it ALL. OVER. AGAIN. for 2012!).
Just another book I am going to wait to be added to the CB.
My guess is either wild talents- minor effects everyone can have access to, that emphasizes the psionic primacy of the setting- OR Preserver/Defiler mechanics- we don't get a new class, but we get a mechanic that splits an existing class (Arcane, but you can presumably apply it to any class in theory) into two competing ideoligies.
*imagines a world where the martial powersource uses Defiler mechanics and shudders*
I hate dragonlance!
Fixed your post for you.
I hate dragonlance!
Fixed your post for you.
To be honest I don't know much about Dragonlance beside what was said here. When we were discussing the 2010 setting I asked Dragonlance fans to convince me I should care about a setting I percieved as not bringing anything new to the table (literally and figuratively speaking) and no one managed to do so.It sound like fine books to read but nothing special as a game setting.
What annoys me more is that the designers basically said they don't want to do something that's too similar to Forgotten Realms and clearly mentionned there was no plans for Greyhawk, Dragonlance or Mystara yet you just know the Dragonlance fanboys (and fangirls) are still gonna cling to the chance that 2011 will be Dragonlance and keep shoving their so call 'clues' in our face all year long.
What *I* want for 2011 setting is something BRAND NEW. Something with no fanboys and no baggage attached to it.
I would guess we'll get a handful of new races. Thri-kreen, Muls, runner-Elves...
There are a number of races in Dark Sun that just don't fit in most settings.
There better be something amazing in there to make me shell out money for a player's guide without a new class!
There will be. Its called Dark Sun ;)
Plus now all those Dragonlance fanboys will go "SEE! You don't need a new class for a Player's Guide, you probably don't need new races and can just get by with variations, so its obviously Dragonlance in 2011!"
There are actually quite a few races for Dragonlance that could be created for 4th ed.
and we'll never hear the end of the 'Its gonna be DL!''No it won't!''Yes it will!''DL sucks!''No it doesn't!' until they announce the 2011. (Then the DL fanboys will be dissapointed when their run the mill setting doesn't get picked and start it ALL. OVER. AGAIN. for 2012!).
If you don't want to hear arguments about Dragonlance, you should probably avoid making such provocative posts. IMO there's a good chance we'll see Dragonlance in 2011. We've had FR (run of the mill fantasy), Eberron (seen as a steampunk setting by many) and then Dark Sun (post-apocalyptic). I think there's a good chance for a run of the mill fantasy setting come 2011.
What *I* want for 2011 setting is something BRAND NEW. Something with no fanboys and no baggage attached to it.
You admit you know nothing about Dragonlance. For you, Dragonlance is BRAND NEW. If you don't want to listen to fans of a setting talk about the setting, put them on ignore.
What *I* want for 2011 setting is something BRAND NEW. Something with no fanboys and no baggage attached to it.
You admit you know nothing about Dragonlance. For you, Dragonlance is BRAND NEW. If you don't want to listen to fans of a setting talk about the setting, put them on ignore.
Yeah but its not "my" setting and its not a setting that was design especially for 4e. A lot of things in Dragonlance when ported over to 4e would feel like forcing a square peg in a round hole (Alignement based magic guilds for exemple?) and vice versa for 4e core elements (Dragonborn, Half-Orcs, etc).
Beside, new to me or not, I'm not interested in regular fantasy setting, I can homebrew that stuff with my eyes closed.
I'm not gonna ignore fans of Dragonlance just because they think their favorite setting will show up in 4e (when the designers denied it!), and I'm not going to ignore 2011 setting discussions because I *LIKE* to hear the ideas people have about brand new settings.
If you don't want to hear arguments about Dragonlance, you should probably avoid making such provocative posts. IMO there's a good chance we'll see Dragonlance in 2011. We've had FR (run of the mill fantasy), Eberron (seen as a steampunk setting by many) and then Dark Sun (post-apocalyptic). I think there's a good chance for a run of the mill fantasy setting come 2011.
This.
It's important for WotC to push the boundaries of the fantasy genre with odd-ball settings like Eberron and Dark Sun. I love Eberron for what it brings to D&D, and I'm excited to finally get a chance to get to know the Dark Sun setting (I was mostly non-involved in table top RPGs during 2e). However, it's also important for WotC of the cost to keep in touch with so called generic fantasy. Like it or not, generic fantasy is what most new players expect out of D&D. If too many settings fail to live up to that expectation then new players may be turned off before they ever get the chance to get involved.
Also, it's important for WotC to update old setting for retention purposes. Brand new never before seen setting might be exciting, but they are also untested. Older settings might be more generic, but they also bring with them an already established fan-base.
Also, it's important for WotC to update old setting for retention purposes. Brand new never before seen setting might be exciting, but they are also untested. Older settings might be more generic, but they also bring with them an already established fan-base.
Not to mention that if they are trying to attract new players, it simply doesnt matter if a setting is new or not because it will be new to potential players that have never picked up the game before. Re-doing old setting attracts old fans back in (ive seen tons of posts saying DS is doing this) but is brand spankin new to the noobs as well.
I like how the comment betting that there would be a Dragonlance discussion turned this into a Dragonlance discussion. XD
Personally, I'm hoping that Dark Sun brings more rules to enhance grit.
Things like wear and tear, environmental problems like dehydration, or other messes that hit the PCs with long term damage, things not healed after a simple extended rest. That and perhaps more weaponry materials, including things far more crude than steel.
Personally, I'm hoping that Dark Sun brings more rules to enhance grit.Things like wear and tear, environmental problems like dehydration, or other messes that hit the PCs with long term damage, things not healed after a simple extended rest. That and perhaps more weaponry materials, including things far more crude than steel.
Isnt dehydration already in the DMG? I bet we might see some guidelines in the DSCG on running survival skill challenges in the desert but i seriously doubt we will see any new rules, per se. Skill Challenges with loss of Healing Surges seems to cover this pretty well and i think this kind of thing can easily be handled within the existing framework with only a little advice needed.
As for breakable weapons or special rules for inferior materials: i can't imagine they would ever bother adding this level of "fiddliness" to the equipement rules since it seems like the kind of thing 4E doesn't deal with. If they include rules for inferior weapons or breakable weapons, i will eat my hat.
I hate dragonlance!
Fixed your post for you.
To be honest I don't know much about Dragonlance beside what was said here. When we were discussing the 2010 setting I asked Dragonlance fans to convince me I should care about a setting I percieved as not bringing anything new to the table (literally and figuratively speaking) and no one managed to do so.It sound like fine books to read but nothing special as a game setting.
What annoys me more is that the designers basically said they don't want to do something that's too similar to Forgotten Realms and clearly mentionned there was no plans for Greyhawk, Dragonlance or Mystara yet you just know the Dragonlance fanboys (and fangirls) are still gonna cling to the chance that 2011 will be Dragonlance and keep shoving their so call 'clues' in our face all year long.
What *I* want for 2011 setting is something BRAND NEW. Something with no fanboys and no baggage attached to it.
1. If you don't know much about dragonlance, then your opinion isn't based on much, so it doesn't mean much. Basing your opinion on what others say, and not first hand experience with the setting is silly. Not everyone understands a settings concept completely and too each individual, a setting is about different things. So you will never learn about the setting, only about the individuals vision of the setting.
2. Forgotten realms and Dragonlance are VERY different. But there is no point in trying to convince someone who is against it from the start. You don't like dragonlance based on what little you know, and thats not gonna change due to the actions or words of someone else.
3. You're basically saying, anyone who wants dragonlance as a published 4e setting is a fanboy, since fanboy is an insulting term, you are being insulting and probably trying to bait DL fans into a flamewar. You're equally a fanboy of 4e, or 3e, or whatever you like, since you like it, by your logic. That means your a "new setting fanboy".
4. I hope we get more than one new setting and I hope we get more classic settings, including dragonlance. If that makes me a fanboy in the eyes of the ignorant. No big deal.
PS: DL has enough fans to not need someone like you to love or want the setting. Wotc will still make money off a dragonlance 4e setting. So no worries, its not important that you like or accept it.
What *I* want for 2011 setting is something BRAND NEW. Something with no fanboys and no baggage attached to it.
You admit you know nothing about Dragonlance. For you, Dragonlance is BRAND NEW. If you don't want to listen to fans of a setting talk about the setting, put them on ignore.Yeah but its not "my" setting and its not a setting that was design especially for 4e. A lot of things in Dragonlance when ported over to 4e would feel like forcing a square peg in a round hole (Alignement based magic guilds for exemple?) and vice versa for 4e core elements (Dragonborn, Half-Orcs, etc).
Beside, new to me or not, I'm not interested in regular fantasy setting, I can homebrew that stuff with my eyes closed.
I'm not gonna ignore fans of Dragonlance just because they think their favorite setting will show up in 4e (when the designers denied it!), and I'm not going to ignore 2011 setting discussions because I *LIKE* to hear the ideas people have about brand new settings.
1. You already said you don't know much about dragonlance, which means you don't know what you're talking about in your first paragraph. YOu don't know what would feel forced, since you don't know about DL. Dragonborn can fit DL easily. Halforcs could be offspring of ogres. Again, stick to what you know, which clearly isn't dragonlance.
2. If you're not interested in "regular fantasy" then DL, FR, BR and much more isn't for you. There are other fans who are interested in those things, and they are the ones who take priority since they are the ones who would spend money. You are the minority in that respect. Concentrate on what you like and stop trying to prevent others from getting what they like. Don't be childish.
3. Try being a bit more adult in your discussion, this would reduce conflict. Although I think you enjoy it, which is sad. DL is a popular setting that will make wotc money. Wotc will release a DL setting eventually. People can say no, it won't, all they want. But those people don't know dragonlance fans and obviously don't understand wotc is in this for making money and dragonlance, both gaming and novels, sell and sell well.
Okay so we'll probably get Dragonlance at SOME POINT. We might get it in 2011, we might get it in 2012 or 2013. We might also never get it. If we get it I simply won't buy it (might read it off a friend) and that'll be the end of it.
I'll be honest and say I'll be annoyed if we don't get a setting especially designed for 4e later than sooner but that'll be the extend of it and I won't blame Dragonlance for it.
Truth is WE DON'T KNOW. We don't know when we'll get Dragonlance and the designers show no intend on working on it for now.
We spent I don't know how many monthes not going anywhere in 2010 setting discussion while Dark Sun and Dragonlance fans squared off against one another. I'd just like to see that situation avoided.
Now as for the topic here... why would there need to be different rules for weapons in different material?! What would the mechanical different between an iron Longsword and an Obsidion Longsword be?! Wouldn't both be +3 d8 versatile weapons?
We might get new Masterwork Armors though. Probably a LOT of boons too.
I'd just like to see that situation avoided.
Maybe in the future you should like, maybe, not bring it up, or something? Could that be a good idea? I dunno, maybe I'm just crazy.
I'd just like to see that situation avoided.
Maybe in the future you should like, maybe, not bring it up, or something? Could that be a good idea? I dunno, maybe I'm just crazy.
In retrospect...yeah good idea. -.-
Now as for the topic here... why would there need to be different rules for weapons in different material?! What would the mechanical different between an iron Longsword and an Obsidion Longsword be?! Wouldn't both be +3 d8 versatile weapons?
We might get new Masterwork Armors though. Probably a LOT of boons too.
My guess is that obsidian not being a metal makes it heavier and less hardy Longsword, sharper though... Much sharper... Sharp Heavy Stone Armour....
As for the Defiler/Preserver concept, I'm guessing its going to be an extra choice for Arcane classes, choosing between the two. I'm guessing that magic will have some cost restrictions (eg Surges for every daily and daily utility) considering that the unique nature of magic in DS is why its such horribly doomed existence. I suppose Warforged, if played in DS, would have to worry about sand in their....moving parts.
As for the above DL debate, please start another thread. I'm not a fan of DL, I've read some of it, I don't like the tone of the setting but I don't go around provoking people. Hell I'll probably end up buying it for the extras and not the setting itself.
Edit: I suppose new shifter variants would be cool for DS... Also I believe that they said no new classes, that doesn't mean we won't get new paragon paths or Epic Destinies. If you want to read it literally we might get new class builds instead.
DEfiler: When you cast a Ritual, you may spend half the needed value of components. If you do, all Survival checks take a -2 penalty for the next day.
Preserver: When you cast a Ritual, you may spend half the needed value of components. If you do, spend a healing surge for every 100 GP of components skipped.
the only thing you might see classwise in the DSPG will be class builds if anything
Dark Sun doesn't NEED new classes, far as I can see (PHB3 will have psionic classes)
DS needs Rules for mechnaics of how things are dfferent, including
defiling. preserving doesn't need rules, it's just "Normal" arcane" casting);
more environmental effects rules. Yes they are int he DMG folsk, go look! IIRC DC 26 Endurance or lose 1 healign surge/8 hours, for Stiffling heat. very good rules. I wish 2nd and 3rd ed could have had, healing hit points is too easy, healing lost healign surges is not!
More poisons and potions, poison use is a BIG thing in Athas, so are potions.
System ala DMG2, to replace items so instead of getting say +2 items, you get +2 defences, attacks and damage
Simple rules for poor quality materials, I do NOT want another 3rd ed over complexity just to chip a sword, lol. Roll a 1, a non-magic item breaks, I can live with that 
Rules that realize "gladiator" and "templar" are just PROFESSIONS, doesn't matter a damn about how you do it,. a non combat templar architect or taxman is perfecllty sensible. Gladiators cna be anything that can fight well in an arena.
However, gladiator and templar paragon paths, and typicla build suggestions would be good.. The Demagogue kit from DMG 1 with controller powers would be excellent for many templars. Templars of Hammanu though tend ot be far more fierce and military, so warlords and clerics with battle builds would make sense.
Races. Races make Athas different, not classes (bar commonality of Psions).
Equipment. Unusual weapons, and things like nets and bolas, which iirc were in Adventurer's Vault, are much more commonly used. Swords should exist, but be like "machituchals" (spelling?) edged with obsidian chips etc.
Dark Sun doesn't NEED new classes, far as I can see (PHB3 will have psionic classes)
DS needs Rules for mechnaics of how things are dfferent, includingdefiling. preserving doesn't need rules, it's just "Normal" arcane" casting);
"Normal"?
The whole point of DS being so horribly, horribly screwed is because there is no normal magic, only magic that destroys everything around it.
Dark Sun doesn't NEED new classes, far as I can see (PHB3 will have psionic classes)
DS needs Rules for mechnaics of how things are dfferent, including defiling. (Preserving doesn't need rules, it's just "Normal" arcane" casting);
"Normal"?
The whole point of DS being so horribly, horribly screwed is because there is no normal magic, only magic that destroys everything around it.
Re-read it without the syntax error Eyclonus, I almost jumped on him for the same thing. Silverblade is suggesting that Defilers need mechanics but Preserving should use the default mechanics. I disagree slightly, I'd prefer to see Preservers get some sort of mechanics like a Fatigue system for the more powerful spells to represent the choice between drawing energy from the life force around you and drawing upon your own life force to power the spells. Like perhaps Perserver's Daily powers don't function at full effectiveness unless they spend a healing surge. Now granted I don't expect that. What I do expect is that Arcane casters will be Defilers by default and have to make a sacrifice to become Preservers. I just hope it's not something pointless like a feat. It would just be a let down and feel like a feat tax if you simply have to take one feat to switch from Defiler to Preserver.
Personally, I prefer for the Preserver/Defiler mechanics to focus on Rituals- particularly higher level rituals, where you're doing thins like teleporting across creation or moving Earthmotes around. Even Daily powers are just a flash in the pan compared to that sort of spell.
What I do expect is that Arcane casters will be Defilers by default and have to make a sacrifice to become Preservers. I just hope it's not something pointless like a feat. It would just be a let down and feel like a feat tax if you simply have to take one feat to switch from Defiler to Preserver.
I disagree. D&D is a game of heroes, and defilers are the bad guys, as such PCs should be preservers by default. If defiling is even to be an option for PCs then it should be an option that bolsters arcane power, rather than making preserver magic weaker or more costly than default D&D.
I disagree. D&D is a game of heroes, and defilers are the bad guys, as such PCs should be preservers by default. If defiling is even to be an option for PCs then it should be an option that bolsters arcane power, rather than making preserver magic weaker or more costly than default D&D.
This.
Not sure what kind of class they would put in the Player's guide of this, but I hope it's Psionic, if only to help level out the amount of classes in each Power source; heck a Martial class might be nice too.
Not sure what kind of class they would put in the Player's guide of this, but I hope it's Psionic, if only to help level out the amount of classes in each Power source; heck a Martial class might be nice too.
Uh ..... you have read the thread, right? There isn't going to be a new class in the DSPG, period.
Not sure what kind of class they would put in the Player's guide of this, but I hope it's Psionic, if only to help level out the amount of classes in each Power source; heck a Martial class might be nice too.
Uh ..... you have read the thread, right? There isn't going to be a new class in the DSPG, period.
A) No I was lazy.
B) Where was this information obtained?
B) Where was this information obtained?
It was an interview with one of the Devs. i think it was the 1d12 questions with... I forget who article.
B) Where was this information obtained?It was an interview with one of the Devs. i think it was the 1d12 questions with... I forget who article.
Was this a DDi thing? That would explain how I hadn't seen it.
Here's a link, Kalnaur: 1d12 Questions With James Wyatt.
I disagree. D&D is a game of heroes, and defilers are the bad guys, as such PCs should be preservers by default. If defiling is even to be an option for PCs then it should be an option that bolsters arcane power, rather than making preserver magic weaker or more costly than default D&D.
Upon reconsideration, I have to agree that your expectations are more likely in the current D&D enviroment. Personally, I think doing so would be at the detriment to the setting, but the current design base is to assume that the PCs are superior in every way and disadvantages are taboo. I dislike the accompanying vision of a Living DS campaign with thousands of Preservers paying no heed to the concept that arcane spells suck the very life force from the enviroment around them. IMO, that concept is so core to the DS setting that it needs to be reinforced with a clear mechanical difference between Defilers and Preservers rather than simply being flavored to taste by the DM and player.
Upon reconsideration, I have to agree that your expectations are more likely in the current D&D enviroment. Personally, I think doing so would be at the detriment to the setting, but the current design base is to assume that the PCs are superior in every way and disadvantages are taboo. I dislike the accompanying vision of a Living DS campaign with thousands of Preservers paying no heed to the concept that arcane spells suck the very life force from the enviroment around them. IMO, that concept is so core to the DS setting that it needs to be reinforced with a clear mechanical difference between Defilers and Preservers rather than simply being flavored to taste by the DM and player.
I agree that there should be clear mechanical difference between defilers and preservers, I only disagree on what should be the PC default. Preserver magic should be the same as the standard arcane powers available to PCs in any setting, while defiler magic should be more potent at the cost of the environment and mostly relegated to NPC villains.
I don't think this is in any way to the detriment to the setting. You still have the subtle and sustainable magic of preservers vs. the overblown gas-guzzling magic of the defilers.
As to the RPGA, it's important to remember that while there may be thousands of players in our world that doen't mean that there are thousands of preservers in Athas. The RPGA is not an MMO, where all those thousands of players interact simultaniously. So far as most RPGA adventures are concerend the active players at any given table are the only heroes in the world. There are some events that might draw on the colletive expolits of the larger comunity, but those are to my knowledge the excpeption rather than the rule.
Aww man that sucks! There better be something amazing in there to make me shell out money for a player's guide without a new class!
Plus now all those Dragonlance fanboys will go "SEE! You don't need a new class for a Player's Guide, you probably don't need new races and can just get by with variations, so its obviously Dragonlance in 2011!"
and we'll never hear the end of the 'Its gonna be DL!''No it won't!''Yes it will!''DL sucks!''No it doesn't!' until they announce the 2011. (Then the DL fanboys will be dissapointed when their run the mill setting doesn't get picked and start it ALL. OVER. AGAIN. for 2012!).
Did it feel good to finally get a format to express your feelings about DL?
I understand the desire to get the "feel" of old magic with 4e DS, but from what I'm reading about the defiling and such, I really hope that's not what Wizards does. I'm really curious about this "new mechanic" and it is the only reason I'd spend money on a DS player's guide. If it's something like sucking life force from your surroundings, then I have no desire for it.
I bought the Eberron books because I saw stuff I could mine for my own campaigns, even though I dislike Eberron, and I'd be willing to do so with the DS player guide, but not if it's going to be something that sucks life force.