arkady_v's page

A character becomes likable, Martin kills them.

This is a gross exaggeration. Yes, characters die, but not all of them. My favorite characters are all still alive and kicking.

I seriously doubt that Seattle uses a definition of summer that lasts all the way to September 21st.

Actually, here in the Pacific Northwest, "summer" (characterized by warm, sunny, dry weather) versus the perpetual rain of winter and spring) usually starts after the summer solstice (typically July 4th) and lasts about up to the autumnul equinox. Fall is short, between mid-September and through October, sometimes reaching into November. Then, the rains come and it's winter again.

The last fighter I played, everyone in the group thought he was overpowered compared to the rest of the party (up through about level 12). He was somewhat min-maxed, but not too bad. Some of the rest of the party was max-minned (did I coin a new term), but not too bad. They included a battle oracle, a rogue, a bard, and a witch.

To me, the major failure of 4E was in the fluff. Both 4E and Pathfinder have major flaws (my opinion) in game play.

Where Paizo and WotC are different are that WotC failed to produce any decent modules or a cool world (or, at least, in the first 2 years, after that I gave up because my gamer friends gave up). In fact, they seemingly intentionally AVOIDED producing cool settings and adventures.

Paizo has an awesome world with tons of amazing adventures.

It shouldn't be a mystery as to why Pathfinder is succeeding and 4E is dying.

This is really cool. Thanks for writing this up.

I agree. And, I think it's relevant considering that there is a base class (alchemist) that "gets" poison use as a class skill. It really is pretty much worthless at the costs in the book. Magic is far less expensive, making the poison use class ability almost useless.

I think that the whole poison list needs major re-working.

Am I missing something or does this system completely nerf illusions. The 3rd level word Glimmering creates a visual illusion...? That is equivalent to the first level spell minor image. Whoopdidoo. The 3rd level wizard spell Major Image has visual, audible, olfactory, and thermal components. The word of power pretty much sucks.

arkady_v wrote:

Anything for alchemists? I'm looking for an alternative to a fire bombing alchemist for an upcoming Serpent's Skull adventure path character. I want to play more of an herbalist focusing on mutagens, extracts, infusions, and poisons, and it'd be nice to have an alternative to the fire bomb.

Oh yeah... alchemists have some really fun and disturbing new discoveries. Having a Tumor as a familiar that can detach and wander around, or vestigial conjoined twins, extra limbs\tentacles. Bottled oozes, alchemical zombies, simulacrua, tanglefoot bombs, self-mumification, and more!

... and 30 new spells.

Wow, that all sounds really... weird, LOL.

Anything for alchemists? I'm looking for an alternative to a fire bombing alchemist for an upcoming Serpent's Skull adventure path character. I want to play more of an herbalist focusing on mutagens, extracts, infusions, and poisons, and it'd be nice to have an alternative to the fire bomb.

Edit: I was just reading through the Wayfinder #4 archetype for "herbalist", and it's pretty cool, but I'd still like to know if there's anything in Ultimate Magic for alchemists, since I'll probably use the herbalist archetype if my DM goes for it.

I like the idea of giving a stat boost to two stats every even level (on the opposite level characters get feats). Then you don't have to put in limits, which would be necessary to prevent players from having a 35 in an ability score by Level 20. Unless, that's what you want... I guess it's not all that crazy to think a 35 would be possible for a 20th level character, who, really, is pretty much a demi-god by that point.

It might be quite possible to have sold himself into slavery, depending on background, also in different times it wasnt perceived as bad per se, often there was hardly a difference between the life of a slave and a peasant, in fact I dare say slaves were often treated much better.

If you've watched Spartacus Blood and Sand, you've seen a story of a man who sold himself into slavery to pay off gambling debts.

It'd be a great show for you to watch, Robodruida, to help spur ideas for your character.

I never meant to give you the impression that I like 4e. I'd rather claw my eyes out with a rusty garden fork.

Then why are you on a 4E forum? Can't help yourself?

Matthew Koelbl wrote:

These are all new options that the 4E gaming base is almost universally excited about.

And why are they excited about the new rules? Looks to me that the reason is that they are no longer content with the old rules and the reason is that they are starting to see the flaws in the old rules.

Are you excited about the Advanced Player's Guide for Pathfinder? If so, does that mean that you don't like Pathfinder any more?

That having been said, I'd sincerely like to know how often people post Pathfinder news at the WotC 4e message boards. Does that kind of thing tend to happen only in one direction? I mean, if I wanted to know what is going on with 4e, I'd go to that message board (or to Eric Noah's).

People peddling that crap here shouldn't be surprised many of us don't like 4e. If we liked 4e, Pathfinder probably wouldn't be able to stay in business.

If you don't like people discussing 4E on this messageboard:

(a) don't click on the 4E forum (wow, is that hard to figure out)

(b) convince Paizo to take this forum off their board

Seriously, you're post makes no sense at all.

Awesome!

It's interesting to see all of the disappointment that it's a 4E game here in the 4E forum.

My disappointment is that Golarion and the Adventure Paths are NOT 4E.

I love the 4E system, I'm just disappointed that WoTC hasn't produced rich and flavorful adventures for it.

I think 4e makes it harder on the DM actually. 4e is in my opinion designed so for players to know very little about the game and make the DM know more about the game.

Yes so of the rules are easier.. but that's because there's also fewer (because it's a newer game), but you need to know more of them then the players do.

I disagree that it's harder. In my opinion, it is way easier for the reasons in the second post in this thread.

Foci I hope to see:

Dreaming, Stars, Fate, Sun, Luck, Foresight

It was great to see the Paizo staff at the show. I only got to meet Eric, and I missed the Lucky Labrador because I came home and fell asleep, but, I have to say, I really, really was impressed with the show.

I am Steve, the camera man and co-videographer. So, I went to all foiur performances of Burnt Offerings. I enjoyed it more each time. I am not a theater guy, so it was really interesting to see the evolution of the play over four showings... it got better and better each time, and last night was just fantastic. The acting was a notch better and everything was just amazing.

I have no idea what's going to happen with the video... I am a novice at editing video, but when this is over, I certainly won't be any more.

I will talk to Fat Jozka about thoughts on posting some of the photographs.

I have to say, I got choked up several times during the play. Having known and gamed with Fat Jozka for about 9 or 10 years now (can it be that long), it is really exciting to see this project of his come to fruiting. I am amazed at how incredible of a production this was, particularly knowing it was done on a public school budget with the help of a bunch of really talented parents and friends. It was amazing.

We are videotaping the play. I'm not sure what we're going to be doing with it, though. There are probably a few issues to work out on that (rights, releases, etc.). But first, a lot of editing to be done.

I've been DMing my group through CotCT 4E for many months now and we're having an absolute blast. They're currently assaulting Scarwall, but I remember Edge of Anarchy quite fondly. One of my favorite things about 4E is the competence and resilience of 1st level characters. An example:

A human rogue and an elven ranger were the first on the adventure path. They stealthily investigated the buildings around the Old Fishery, and managed to quietly flee from a jigsaw shark and hurl themselves silently away from a hold full of spiders. They eventually decide to raid the Fishery, but managed to snipe enemies from the shadows until Gaedren showed himself, when the ranger dropped him with one arrow (critical hit, quarry, encounter exploit).

Though I was tempted to make Gaedren an elite or solo monster, the truth is that he's just an old man who terrorized children. He had terrible combat stats in 3E, and it didn't make sense to make him incredibly competent in 4E. This change (or lack therefore) made the players feel special and important, and I'd like to think this feeling still remains.

I hope this helps you as you prepare your conversions. I've found 4E to be absolutely wonderful in telling a Paizo storyline while making my prepwork a breeze.

Alex, I'm in the midst of History of Ashes, and if you have any electronic notes on what you've done to convert History and Scarwall to 4E, I'd love to see them. My email address is stevenankeny@yahoo.com. Thanks in advance if you happen to have something you can pass along.

Yeah... small favor Jozka? Is there a way to purchase tickets online/over the phone? And if so, could you hook me up with the method? I live up here in Pierce County Washington State, so driving down just to buy tickets before they get bought out isn't exactly appealing lol.

It looks like you can buy them by mail, although I'm not positive.

Wow, this thread really devolved.

Scott, any questions about 4E Crimson Throne, please email me at stevenankeny@yahoo.com.

Zombie guy... you remind me of the guy I have gamed with that just cannot let the game come to him, if his initial first impression does not immediately make sense to him, he cannot, for the life of him, suspend his disbelief and find another way around the situation, obstacle, whatever. He's a great guy and a long time friend, but I find myself in intractable arguments with him all the time because he just cannot let things lie and, when something doesn't seem "right", he just cannot be convinced to find alternative explanations for why things may happen. It always MUST be the way he originally perceived it, and there is no changing that perception.

As someone who has recently worked in the film/video equipment rental field, I would suggest going with something other than the RED ONE. You'll end up with video of too high a resolution to be workable and unless you're specifically lighting for the camera (which I imagine you're not on stage) it will come across as very, very flat. For a lower price point, you may look into a multi-camera Sony EX3 package. It'll give you incredible quality and should come in around the same price or less than a RED ONE with all the necessary accessories.

Thanks! I was just going with the "cool" product right now. I'll look into the Sony package.

I mean, worse comes to worse, I have a hand held Canon HD camcorder. I need to attend some of the rehearsals, Fat Jozka, so that I know what and when to shoot.

Bear in mind that this is a relative take on WotC's published adventures. Modules like Keep on the Shadowfell were never intended to serve as intense character interaction experiences. They were designed to provide DMs with the things DMs need most, and that are toughest for DMs new to the system to put together: encounters. Taken as a series of encounters strung together with hooks, the published H-P-E adventures are fantastic tools. The philosophy at WotC behind adventure design is that no one but the DM is really familiar with the roleplaying dynamic at your table. They are making adventures that can be used by just about anyone, so the assumption is that you, the DM, will provide a roleplaying experience...

I'm kind of surprised to hear this, coming from the guy that is using a Paizo product for the story line and then converting it to 4E. :-)

I disagree that the things DM need most are encounters... What I need (and what I get from Paizo) are interesting story lines. I can make up encounters on the fly, ESPECIALLY in 4E. But an engaging story line with good plot hooks, I don't have the time to put that together. Which is why I'm running Crimson Throne in 4E.

No it did not change!

The groupe i'm running (some of them playing with me for the last 18 years!)with gave a fair try at 4ED but we did not even finish the first adventure!

Rule wise its solid and sharp but its not just D&D anymore. Everything is based on combat prowess and martial skills. For us who love roleplay and interaction, its sound more like a couple of D&D mini game connected together by some "random" roleplay instead of being the other way around.... lots of role play and intrigue spiced up with some well placed and exiting combat situations!

So no our gaming experience or playstyle had not changed because we simply went back to 3.5 and more recently to Pathfinder.

I know that some devs here simply turn allergic when they ear bad comment about 4ED but its our opinions and for me and my group 4ED was the worst thing that could have happend to D&D.

The last two game sessions in my current 4E game contained NO COMBAT. It was all roleplaying. Two 3 to 4 hour sessions. So, if you found 4E to be all combat, well, I hate to be blunt, but it was no fault of the system, that's for sure.

It could very well be the fault of the lame WotC adventures... Lame really doesn't do them justice. Terrible may be a better description.

I'm another of Fat Jozka's gaming buddies and an amateur professional photographer... I'll be heading over to the school this afternoon to get some shots of the actors in costume. I'm pretty excited! This is pretty fun.

I'm going to be trying to figure out how to get this videotaped (and videotaped well). Anyone have a RED ONE camera they want to loan out? (Ha ha, I wish.) It costs like $600 to rent for a single day. Ugh.

I like the idea of two hit minions, with the first making them bloodied. Great idea!

In the last combat in which I had minions, I had included an elite of 2 levels higher than the party and then 4 minions 2 levels higher than the party... but to just let the minions die on one hit was too boring, so I gave them about 1/3 normal hit points, which translated to about 2 to 4 hits to kill them, depending on who was doing the hitting.

Because it was only 5 monsters total, it wasn't an accounting problem and it worked really well at giving the party some danger but keeping the combat short.

I have always hated gnomes... until I read the way Pathfinder handles gnomes. I like the combination of Pathfinder gnome fluff and 4E gnome abilities. A lot.

Warforged are not robots... "refluffing them as constructs" is not necessary... they are constructs. That said, they don't fit in a non-Eberron campaign very well.

Dragonborn... I like the race, but not for my 4E Curse of the Crimson Throne campaign. Just too exotic.

I never got excited about Shifters. They seemed "extra" and just not necessary.

Finally... elves. It's not the elves I hate, it's the players that want to play elves. Invariably, they are either way too "hippy" or way too much of a min-maxer. Rarely does someone play an elf without falling into one of the two categories. Oh, that and the "secret door radar" thing from previous editions. Ugh.

My PCs approached the meeting with the Arkonas in a pretty unique way, I think.

Knowing the Arkonas are underworld criminals and the palace was at the top of a cliff, they just assumed that there would be a smuggler's entrance, so they found it, went in, and killed the Reefclaw (I'm running this as 4E, so I made it an Elite Chuul with extra poisoning abilities.)

Then, they went and met the Rakshasa with the cobras, with whom they parleyed. The dumb dwarf spilled his guts... that they were there to find Neolandus. The sneaky rogue just about blew a gasket, getting pissed at the dwarf for spilling his guts... but it worked out perfectly. The Rakshasa suggested they talk to Glorio. So they did, and he sent them down into the Labyrinth. (We have a new player who is a bit of an archeaologist... and so I had it that he had been petitioning to visit the Labyrinth to find some ancient item of power that was rumored to be there, worked great, another person to help the party kill Vimanda.)

So, the rakshasha snake master dude (can't remember his name) took them back down and sent them into the labyrinth.

Where the rogue promptly walked into the first rotating room and pulled the level and rotated away. Then, she went into the next room and pulled that lever and rotated away. Then, the rest of the party went into the "Good" pool room and got rotated away...

To avoid the complications, I let them keep rotating to eventually get back together again, probably 12 to 15 rotations. I probably should have started throwing stuff at them... but it was just going to be too big of a pain in the butt.

So, then, while fighting the blood cobra, I had Vimanda come up behind the party dressed as Vencarlo. They pretty much were suspicious immediately. And they kept asking questions that she had no way of answering. Like, "Hey, Blackjack, we found your rapier... where'd we find it... if you're really Vencarlo, you'll know." I had her just say, "Well, obviously, you're testing me, we all know I'm not Blackjack." I thought that was good. But, eventually, they just got so suspicious, I had one of them notice the fingers. So, then I had her turn back to Meliya and try to get them to join her against Bahor. They would have none of it. So, finally, battle ensued. I had given her some armor that lets her go insubstantial once a day, so I had her run when she was down to about 15% of her hit points. She'll be back, though, and will try to kill them off.

I made Vimanda a Level 14 Elite Skirmisher (the party is Level 9). I had to reduce her defenses a little, though, otherwise she would probably have wiped up the party. As it was, it was a pretty knockdown dragout fight. I gave her the powers of a 9th level monk and 6th level wizard (all thunder and lightning powers), with the wizard powers all useable as minor actions. She is pretty nasty. If there hadn't been 5 party members, she might have killed them. As it was, they got her down from 288 to about 32 hit points and she fled.

All in all, a pretty fun battle. Although the battlefield was a little small for her to really use all of her movement and push and pull powers to full effect.

If you have questions, ask them and I will try to answer them :)

Well, tell me as much about the Avenger as possible. What's the new build? Oath Power? Any decent damage powers?

It would seem the answer is a DM should basically ignore monster hp's and have them die when dramatically appropriate OR when players start looking like they are about to have a nap.

This is exactly what I tend to do, about 30 to 40% of the time and particularly with key enemies. Sometimes, I actually have to keep them alive another round or so to make them seem like a real threat.

I definitely wouldn't do this all the time, otherwise I'd probably be inserting a bias towards things ending the same way all of the time. But, I will do it pretty often.

But, I am also interested in the idea you guys used Stefan. So, tell me if I get this right. When the attack roll is not a critical, you remove damage from regular hit points, but when the attack roll is a critical, you remove the base weapon damage from constitution? The "actual" constitution value (i.e. does the character's Fort defense go down?). Or from a Wounds value equal to his constitution.

So, for a creature that does, say, 3d8+9 damage on a hit, would you remove 3d8 points from the Wounds value? 3d8+9?

And a creature dies when it's wounds are 0 or negative? And what about a character? They're just dying as usual?

I really do like this idea, but I'm worried that when monster base damages get high, there could be a lot of one-shotting of characters.

I want to see lots of new traps and skill challenges and ideas for how to combine the two and combine them with encounters. Puzzles and hazards would be cool, too. Basically, I want to see a bunch of stuff that will help in building encounters.

just lacking a lot of the spice that made the older edition's things more interesting. By about round 5 everyone is usually out of the powers you'll be willing to expend against not the big bad guy monsters so you've got a lot of at-wills being tossed about.

I just don't get this train of thought. At all. People complain that once you have no more encounter and daily powers, all you can do is use at wills... well, in 3.5, all that the non-spellcasting characters HAD were at-wills.

Fighter - I swing my weapon. (4E has feats, too, so you can't say that well, there were a ton of feats you could use.) Whereas, in 4E, you can mark an opponent, preventing them from moving AND you have 2 at will powers in addition to a basic melee attack.

Rogue - I sneak attack. (You can sneak attack in 4E, too. AND, you can do your other at-will attacks.)

Etc.

Sure, wizards, clerics, etc. have far fewer spells to choose from, but the other classes have far more things to choose from. I like how it balances out the game.

Plus, with all of the movement based mechanics and cooperation based mechanics thrown in, 4E combats seem much more interesting and challenging to me. I just do NOT get the "there's nothing to do in 4E combats compared to 3.5 combats" argument at all.

Jeremy, that is freaking sweet!

What I have done for printing off maps is:

- Copy the image out of the pdf of the module (click on it and select copy)

- Paste it into an image editing program such as Photoshop or Photoshop Elements.

- Look at the ruler and figure out how many squares there are per inch.

- Go to image size and resize the image so that it is scaled to 1 inch = 1 square. (Note, the image will be at a resolution of 72 dots per inch, I leave that the same, although you could bump it up to 150 dpi if you wanted). Use the bicubic interpolation for resizing. Photoshop will actually add pixels to make the image bigger.

- The resized image is going to be somewhat blurry, so I go into Filters/Sharpen and use either Smart Sharpen or Unsharp Mask and sharpen the image up. Play with the settings until it looks good. You can really get it to look pretty good this way, despite having scaled the image up dramatically.

- So, now I have an image that is pretty huge, depending on the map, and something like 40 by 50 inches. I have access to a color printer at work that will print 11 by 17 pages, so, I make a new file that is 10.5 inches by 16.5 inches and then I drag the big map around on it, printing off individual sections.

- I have taped individual sections together at times, or, I have also just described the dungeon as they go through it and then pulled out individual maps for areas when an encounter happens.

For Scarwall, I'll probably describe it all verbally... it is a big place and I want the players to get the feeling that mapping it all out could be difficult. Then, when an encounter occurs, I'll pull out the appropriate printed map and run it on that.

So, does this make sense?

- You can only teleport a creature horizontally

- You can teleport them off a cliff, so DMs, don't design encounters with bottomless pits or enormously tall cliffs

- If you're flying on a flying mount, you probably can't be teleported off of it IF one considers teleport to be "forced movement" and I would consider it to be, in the sense that anything that moves your location on the battlefield forcibly is forced movement by definition.

Yeah, double up the XP value of the monsters, but don't double up the actual number of monsters. Although, if you want to have a bunch of enemies to make the feel really epic, make most of the numbers minions.

For 10 characters, in an epic battle, I'd probably include as opponents (assuming all foes are the same level as the party):

1 solo OR 2 elite and a regular monster
1 elite
3 regular monsters (1 lurker, 2 soldiers or maybe some artillery)
16 minions

I don't know if it is specifically stated in the rules, but, as others have said, from what I understand, the common interpretation of teleport is that the destination must be a solid surface. No teleporting something up into thin air, teleporting people onto water (or magma), or teleporting people over a cliff.

At least, that's how I'd rule it.

I don't think it's viable.

Has anyone run through Edge of Anarchy and Seven Days to the Grave in 4E? Do you have notes?

I have converted my game (currently in the midst of Escape from Old Korvosa) to 4E, and I will be converting the rest of the adventure path. I was thinking of posting a simple blog with the material, and it would be nice to have the first and second adventures converted, too. Anyone want to collaborate? Or just send me your notes and I'll credit you for helping?

stevenankeny@yahoo.com

OK, I re-read the Vivified Labyrinth last night, and I guess there *is* a heck of a lot going on in it, just mostly a LOT of traps. I'm going to really have to pull out the stops in converting this. But, it should be fun.

My PCs negotiated with him. Let him go. Regretted it afterwards... not because of anything he did, but just on general principal.

Edited to remove my post... why did this ancient thread get resurrected?

I am switching my campaign over to 4E, and the party is going to be heading in to visit the Arkonas tomorrow.

Some thoughts I have:

- This adventure seems like it could be really short. There is a ton of space in the book devoted to the Arkona Palace, but, if the adventure plays out as written, the party will never fight Bahor or the other 4 rakshasa's up in the palace, and probably not the one down below hanging out with his snakes.

- I see the only encounters being the fungus janni soldier thingies, Vimanda, the Beatific One, and Sivis... not much for a 4E style adventure. I need to do some thinking on how to beef this up some.

- I'd really like to send the 4 rakshasas after the party, but I don't want them to make enemies with Bahor yet... but if they're just "cousins" from Vudra, maybe Bahor wouldn't mind if a few of them died in a battle with the PCs...

- Maybe the party can come back to visit the Arkonas sometime later. I think I'll do as Turin has and make them a pretty high level and have them run into the Arkonas later in the adventure path, possibly after dealing with Ileosa.

When I first saw this post, I thought, oh no, here comes the whining... but, after reading through everything, I guess I have to begin to agree that these feats are a bit of a mess. It *is* bad when a feat is so good that it overshadows nearly every other feat available to that character. Dwarven weapon proficiency is another one: +2 to damage and proficiency in all superior axes and hammers... uh, that's a no brainer if you're a melee dwarf.

Normally, I'd say, well, characters don't HAVE to take them, they provide a nice way to get another +1 by taking a feat and then reducing your main stat by 2 or 4 so you can bump up your other stats...

But, the game I'm playing in, we have four 2nd level characters, and the DM is running us through a published adventure that includes a Level 4 Solo Young Black Dragon that can cloak itself in darkness AND sit in the middle of a pool of water (which we have no idea how deep it is). So, it sits there in the dark, blasting us, and we can't hit it. If we run into the water, who knows what's going to happen to us, and, if we run into the darkness to attack it, it gets total concealment for another +5 to it's already very difficult to hit AC of 22. With an AC of 27, a second level character is going to need some damn good rolls to hit the dang thing, unless just completely optimized. I'm not even sure you can get combat advantage to it if you can't even see it. So, if they are going to be publishing foes that are that freaking tough, well, then they are encouraging optimization, which sucks.

If I were DMing it, I'd have toned down the power of the dragon, but the guy DMing the game doesn't have a lot of experience, so he's playing it as written. (Meaning, a foe for 5 characters, not 4, which is a whole other story... the stubborn guy in our gaming group refused to consider having an NPC come along with us and then attacked the NPC the DM put in the dungeon for us to meet... "I'm a dwarf and she's a half-orc, so I hate her, and she's got magic armor, so I'm going to strip it off her before she even wakes up, never mind that she probably has good intelligence for us.... oh, and that I'm 'good'". Yeah, what a jackass.)

An optimized 2nd level character lucky enough to have already found a magic weapon, with expertise, would have a +10 attack. But, that's totally optimized, putting an 18 into the main stat, getting a racial bonus, nerfing every other stat, taking a feat for expertise, and using a +3 proficiency weapon that has a +1 enchantment. And, that character still needs to roll a 17 to hit this young dragon when it is in the darkness. Insane. Even with the +3 we could get from our warlord if he hadn't wasted that power on an imp (an imp!), that's still a 14 to hit the dang thing, by a fully optimized character. Crazy.

So, as a party, we ran to go kill other things. We might come back to fight another day if we can come up with a way to daze or stun the dang dragon so that it drops its globe of darkness, but I'm not sure any of our characters will be able to do that. I'm suggesting that we go hire another swordarm (we don't have a defender... we have a wizard, cleric, warlord, and avenger) and then come back later to kill the thing, and I think the stubborn guy is going to finally come to his senses and see that we need another member of the party, even if it has to be an NPC.

Sorry to totally go off topic there. Rant over.

Blazej wrote:

arkady_v wrote:

Obviously, you've just gotten sick of 4E and can't help yourself but get upset at anything WOTC does with it. I'm sorry to hear that because, you yourself said you like 4E.

And obviously you unconditionally love everything about 4E and can't help but defend WotC no matter what they do.

Or it could be that people are more complicated that being just for or against and that pointing at someone and declaring that they can't have opinions that make them like somethings and dislike other things without being forced into a "completely for" or "completely against" category.

I wish I could disbelieve the response this thread had produced.

I really, really, really hate to respond to a response about a response, but...

I read that quote in a slightly different context, which was not an attempt to paint Bugleyman as an irrational hater, but rather to express some empathy with him. Maybe I'm just reading it wrong, but that's how it struck me. I don't think it was intended as flame-bait - I'm pretty good at sniffing that stuff out and responding appropriately (or, actually, inappropriately).

Thanks... I totally mistyped when I said Buglyman obviously hated 4E... I meant to say he obviously is very disappointed with WotC, which, he basically admitted a few times in this thread.

And, then I said how much *I* was disappointed in WotC for how lame the adventures they've published have been... so, I'm not sure why the guy thinks I LOVE everything about 4E... I absolutely hate how they came out with horrible adventures (Keep on the Shadowfell was terrible, I mean, terrible), and I hate that it took basically a year for them to get a complete game (I will call it complete when Divine Power comes out).

But, I love the mechanic and I enjoy it a LOT, which is why I said it was a shame that Buglyman was so down on it. I really don't think that WotC is going to move away from this being a book based, pen and paper game. The money is in the selling of the books, after all. They do get a nice little extra revenue stream from DDI, but I doubt it is on par with the books. So, I think we can safely assume we'll have a book based game for a long time to come.

If I can't pick up the PHB (be it 1, 2, or N) and play an assassin, a class that has been around since 1st edition, how is that in keeping with D&D being a pen and paper game?

You couldn't pick up the PHB and play an assassin in 3.0, either.

Obviously, you've just gotten sick of 4E and can't help yourself but get upset at anything WOTC does with it. I'm sorry to hear that because, you yourself said you like 4E.

Personally, I love the 4E game. I'm not thrilled with the quality of published adventures, and that's what upsets me the most about it, which is why I'm converting my Curse of the Crimson Throne campaign to 4E. But, I don't mind some online content. In fact, I think it's fine.

And, um, Character Builder! It's worth a subscription right there.

And, you're upset they stopped issuing pdfs? The torrent sites were probably killing them. They didn't want to, but they pretty much had to.

I can't believe this thread. Thanks for saying all of the things I want to say, Scott Betts.

I'm thinking about starting an online 4e game with the pathfinder setting. I'd prefer to do one of the pathfinder APs, but I am unsure which one would work best, both in terms of ease of conversion and for running in an online setting.

Any suggestions?

- Ashavan

Someone (name escapes me at the moment) is doing a 4E conversion of Rise of the Runelords and even has a blog page for it. There should be a thread in this forum about it.

The other part of Butcher's work that just feels like it found its way into fourth edition is the way Dresden uses a staff and a wand and a blasting rod. And the way he does rituals. The magic system just really seems very very similar to the Dresden Files magic system. The swordmage is very similar to a Warden, too.

The Dresden Files felt like they started off slowly, but, damn, the last few books have been great, great reads. Really good stuff.

this is supposed to be about Player's Handbook 3 rather than random thought that pops into my mind.

On that note, so, the PH3 has Minotaurs and Gith (zerai or yanki or both?) in it. And it has psionic, divine, and primal classes. Any predictions (and yes, I know that there are several threads on WOTC's boards on the subject).

I honestly have no ideas for additional divine and primal classes. For Psionic, I want to see the monk (skriker), soulblade (striker), psion (controller), ardent (leader), and [psychic warrior... but hopefully a new name] (defender). That would result in a 5 psionic classes and 1 divine and 2 primal or 2 divine and 1 primal.

Deva can actually also take Remembered Wizardry, which does basically the same thing as Expanded Spellbook... meaning they can take both to have all the spells they can dream of! ;)

Wow, now that would be crazy. Almost makes me want to see Arcane Power 2 just to see all the spells that character could take!

I did notice Expanded Spellbook, and so my character idea has changed a bit. I'm really enjoying reading the Dresden Files books, and I love Butcher's depiction of the Never Never (equivalent to Feywild... I think 4E may have been influenced as much by Butcher as by WOW...).

So, my character idea that I just need a game to play in is a wizard that is beholden to the fey, that is being fought over by the forces of Summer and Winter, and that exhibits aspects of both. One day she is the Summer wizard, all happiness, light, and fire. The next, she's the Winter Wizard, all cold, calculating, and frosty. With a hefty dose of illusion magic across both personalities. She has the multiclass warlock feat and a Feypact.

Man, I love this character concept, but between DMing one game and playing an Avenger in another, I'm not sure when I'm going to get to play it.

In the very first D&D game I played in as an "adult" (in 1992) after an about 8 year break from the game during high school and college, I was in a party with a lizard man and a minotaur. So, yeah, the minotaur is obviously all about WOW. :-/

That aside, I have to agree with the note that there are WOW-ish elements to D&D 4E. But... the game is a whole lot of fun to play, so who cares.