4th edition - rumours and discussion and so on

Remove all ads!

yes but they added tieflings and a dragonborn race as base races. so now you can breath fire as a character & mages have per encounter powers so they never run out of magic. yeah thats smart(please note the sarcasm)

 

Sounds like world of warcraft hehe. (someone had to say it)

 

actually they have made it completely into the minatures rules. everything is based on 5' squares, movement, attacks, spells, etc & all attacks also seem to be standardised as in the minature rules ie. your fireball does 5pts damage to all enemies in the damage zone not 3d6 or your attack with a longsword does 4pts not 1d8+3 for str. sorry just way to dumbed down. simplification can be a good thing but it can also be taken too far.

 

Some of the races not in the PHB might be playable out of the Monster Manual, and that a second PHB is planned for next year with more classes.

But I'm not sure I like the sound of some of the things I'm hearing...

 

easier for newbies, a little... overdone

I'm playing with a group of people next year who have never played D&D before. From what I've heard, 4e rules sound like they're going to make the introduction smoother and more enjoyable for people who might not be that committed.

On the other hand, I don't like being able to play as more powerful races... If you start off with all these supercoolspecial powers, what's the point of being a level one and getting excited about killing a single orc or finishing your first big quest?

At least with p&p you can ignore all the rules you don't like...

 

You can ignore the rules up to a point, but after awhile, you start to notice the flaws and such. Especially if you are the DM.

And why the heck are people cheering for the fact that they have added the Tiefling to the player`s handbook 4ed? You could play a tiefling in 3.5ed as well. it not like that bit is a huge achievment.

 

There were rules in the third edition core books for numerous races as characters so that DM's could make villains from these races or officers, leaders and guards for the tribes. This also meant that players could playu these races too. I'm guessing that the rules are made clearer in Fourth...

 

The other classes will be in the PHB II and III and IV and V and...

Am I the only one seeing a trend here?

 

Nope. But the fun part will be all the guys cheering for phb 2-8. Extatic over having a couple of new races, and classes added to the game. All of wich, we allready have, in 2ed, and 3ed.... I was nosing about on the wizards-boards some time ago, and there were people there cheering for the fact that the Tiefling was in the phb and such.... Doesn`t take alot to make certain people happy. Wich is good for them, I suppose.

 

No alignment? Does this mean that if I say I'm CN I'm not making much or any sense and that I'm talking gibberish?

 

There will be alignment, but in a different form. I don't know much about it, since I tend to ignore it most of the time.


@Rawgrim: The most ridiculous thing about the multiple PHB's is the obvious money grab behind it. You absolutely have to buy at least the second PHB if you want to play a class that was a staple in 3e or in 2e.

Sure, it's more honest this time, but it also betrays the single biggest flaw of 4e and D&D in general: the existance of myriads of base classes. The same thing could easily be achieved through a modular class design.

 

I think they've scrapped the alignment system because it's been hard to work with. I used the alignment to work more with story lines rather than luring PC's into actions anyway. I don't see me missing the Alignment system very much...

 

Removing the aligments from the game is a good thing actually. They just sort of forces you to play your character in a certain kind of way, anyway. I think its only d&d that has actually had aligments in the game anyway. If the aligments are removed, and you play a paladin, for example, you still have to follow the code of conduct thingy anyway, so there is really no problem in removing it, I suppose.

 

Paladins still have to be LG. At least those following a LG ethos. You can play a paladin of an evil god, though.

 

Actually they took out the alignment restriction on paladins from what I heard. Now the idea of a paladin will be reconfigured to work for any ethical philosophy...

 

Stuff like this will mess up the campaign settings, I think. Same goes for what they did with the spellcasting system, and the removal of so many classes. Think of all the famous Bards, druids, barbarians, and such in the Forgotten Realms, for example. I suspect they have messed things up beyond repair with 4th ed.

 

I did hear a WotC big wig suggest that players play 3.5 ed while learning 4th edition. I'll order the books, but If I have a group before I'm ready to run it, the game will be in 3.5.

 

well most of the famous characters will be dead as the new setting takes place 100+ years ahead of where it is now in 3.5. That, plus everyone that dies in the spellplague(i think that is what they are caling it) will take care of most of the well known characters.

 

So they are more or less destroying the forgotten realms then. Too bad, I allways liked that setting. Its a shame it gets turned into Forgotten World of Warcraft Realms. The sheer lameness of 4th ed is getting on my nerves actually.

 

No gnomes? Well, gnomes were just comic relief really (Jan Jansen, Tiax, Quayle, Oswald Fiddlebender, Gromnarr, etc), but they could've...I dunno...made them more interesting?

And the new dragonborn base race just sounds lame. I mean...seriously. It's lame. Lame.

Setting-wise, sounds like they're doing a reset. To be honest? I never liked Mystra anyway. Cyric was much more interesting.