Not trying to be offensive OP, but what did you say when 2E came out and there was no assassin class? There wasn't even internet then, so you couldn't find it online. In fact I'm pretty sure there was never any kind of assassin class for 2E except for I think a kit that came out in the rogue's handbook.
It's just that I had high hopes for this thread to bring forth a really interesting discussion on WoTCs new initiative. I really am hoping that it won't degenerate into a 3e/4e fight.Ditto. Maybe if I admit my language was incendiary and try to turn things around a bit:
For those of you who believe this decision is appropriate, and in keeping with D&D remaining a primarily pen & paper experience, what would be unreasonable for WoTC to publish exclusively online? Fighter? Sorceror? Or perhaps it isn't a class at all?
How much is "too much"?
Chief Creative Officer, Publisher
|
I think it finally showed up in the Scarlet Brotherhood book at the very end of the 2e era.
I don't know how (or whether) it contributes to this thread, but I was always disappointed in the removal of the class in 2e, and in the ghettoizing of it as a prestige class in 3.0 and 3.5 (and, for that matter, in PFRPG).
I think it finally showed up in the Scarlet Brotherhood book at the very end of the 2e era.
I don't know how (or whether) it contributes to this thread, but I was always disappointed in the removal of the class in 2e, and in the ghettoizing of it as a prestige class in 3.0 and 3.5 (and, for that matter, in PFRPG).
But they handled the removal of assassins so well, especially in the Forgotten Realms. That whole "they all die because the god of assassins died, so problem solved - no more assassins!" was just awesome. Thankfully it spared the assa- I mean, fighter/thieves like Artemis Entreri.
Yeah, even if I never cared for the assassin class, TSR sure handled their removal in a wonderful way.
Is Paizo planning a "Time of Troubles" for Golarion to explain the changes from 3.5 to PFRPG? I think that should be the model for all major rule changes.
Not! {/Borat voice}
|
I think it finally showed up in the Scarlet Brotherhood book at the very end of the 2e era.
I don't know how (or whether) it contributes to this thread, but I was always disappointed in the removal of the class in 2e, and in the ghettoizing of it as a prestige class in 3.0 and 3.5 (and, for that matter, in PFRPG).
But they handled the removal of assassins so well, especially in the Forgotten Realms. That whole "they all die because the god of assassins died, so problem solved - no more assassins!" was just awesome. Thankfully it spared the assa- I mean, fighter/thieves like Artemis Entreri.
Yeah, even if I never cared for the assassin class, TSR sure handled their removal in a wonderful way.
Is Paizo planning a "Time of Troubles" for Golarion to explain the changes from 3.5 to PFRPG? I think that should be the model for all major rule changes.
Not! {/Borat voice}
Kinda like what WotC did with FR in 4e?
"Gee, I thought I left Thay right here, wonder where it went?"
Yeah, 1e FR still kicks everything else's ass....
Just looking at my own book shelf, it is clear to me that even if everything went online tomorrow or if no new material for the game was ever published again, I'd still be running my weekly pen and paper game on Sundays for the foreseeable future. I mean how many books do people really want or need to play the game? Personally I think that once I add the primal and divine power books to my 4E collection, I'm going to have a really solid base for the 4E game that will give me and my group enough options to keep running it for years. Of course I'll likely buy more books beyond that, but do I really need any beyond the PHB, DMG and MM to play the game? NO.
Furthermore, with DDI I can pretty much get access to all the content in all the books, which I think is really cool because I can use all the material without having to actually buy books that take up my precious shelf space use up our trees.
My advice to the OP is to dust off your 1E books forget the internet and get back to it. I'm sure it would still be a blast.
|
|
Just looking at my own book shelf, it is clear to me that even if everything went online tomorrow or if no new material for the game was ever published again, I'd still be running my weekly pen and paper game on Sundays for the foreseeable future. I mean how many books do people really want or need to play the game. Personally I think that once I have the primal and divine power books, I'm going to have a really solid base for the 4E game that will give me and my group enough options to keep running it for years. Of course I'll likely buy more books beyond that, but do I really need any beyond the PHB, DMG and MM to play the game? NO.
Of course, with DDI I can pretty much get access to all the content in all the books, which I think is really cool because I can use all the material without having to actually buy books that take up my precious shelf space use up our trees.
My advice to the OP is to dust off your 1E books forget the internet and get back to it. I'm sure it would still be a blast.
Yeah, I still think they should put labels on everything after 1e:
"This game is loosely based on some really kick ass s$~~ Gygax wrote back in the day. We just call it 'D&D' because we can."
You know, truth in advertising and all...
Oh, and trees grow back. Leech mining metals to make Kindles and computers? Drilling oil to make plastics? Damn, that's some environmental impact...
;)
My tree comment was admittedly a little weak. Everything we do f+%~s up the planet, so there's really no winning there. We'll wipe ourselves out sooner or later.
In the mean time I'll just go into my happy little world of dnd and try to forget about all that nastiness, and when it all goes to hell I'll just go down gaming.
|
|
My tree comment was admittedly a little weak. Everything we do f&!%s up the planet, so there's really no winning there. We'll wipe ourselves out sooner or later.
Yeah, unless we go back to having a village skald or something to memorize the rules and hand them down verbally to apprentices, we're kinda screwed.
I bet everyone who's been posting on this thread has the rules close to memorized, so no worries there.
I started playing dnd right around when 2E came out, so I never had a chance to play 1e. However, I eventually grew tired of the 2e system and started playing other games. It was only the release of 3E that really pulled me back to the game, and I've been playing it pretty consistently ever since. Having seen so much else that is now out in the world of rpgs, I don't think 1E would really float my boat, which is probably why I don't play it.
Am I sad there is no "assassin" class in the 4E phb?- Nope
I think I stopped playing 2E well before the Skald class was released. Unless it was in the Viking Sourcebook, which I have on pdf somewhere.
Yeah, unless we go back to having a village skald or something to memorize the rules and hand them down verbally to apprentices, we're kinda screwed.Are you referring to the skald kit or core class?
Core class, I guess. I didn't really get into 2e much...
;)
(they have a skald core class???)
|
|
I think it finally showed up in the Scarlet Brotherhood book at the very end of the 2e era.
I don't know how (or whether) it contributes to this thread, but I was always disappointed in the removal of the class in 2e, and in the ghettoizing of it as a prestige class in 3.0 and 3.5 (and, for that matter, in PFRPG).
I kinda like the Green Ronin's assassin for 3e.
|
|
And I guess that is the crux of the matter: I am. But I could be wrong; it wouldn't be the first time.Pessimists are never disappointed, right?I'm sure I have no idea.
And, with that, this thread has officially jumped the shark. Good day.
Meh....don't take it all so hard, neophyte grognard.
Who's that Patron Saint of Lost Causes? I forget; he lost.Look at the bright side; it helps me.....and I'm a dyed-in-the-wool old dog pessimist; they're at Paizo talking about 4e; they're not at enWorld or WOTC trashing us all. Not that I care (bite me, hatas!) but if they're at Paizo, they might buy something. And THAT is what makes this country great: people buying your stuff. Well not my stuff; gimme a f&%+ing break I'm cold-medicated. Paizo's stuff.
You can't argue this stuff; it's like argling about religion. Soon as I realized that, I found comfort in my grognardy.
Is Paizo planning a "Time of Troubles" for Golarion to explain the changes from 3.5 to PFRPG? I think that should be the model for all major rule changes.
Not! {/Borat voice}
I remember reading that part of the novel and laughing out loud at the absurdity of it. I laughed just as loud at your reference to it. Jeez that was AWFUL. Nicely recalled. Now that we've all had a good laugh, let's try our best to forget the whole thing all over again.
|
|
And I guess that is the crux of the matter: I am. But I could be wrong; it wouldn't be the first time.Pessimists are never disappointed, right?I'm sure I have no idea.
And, with that, this thread has officially jumped the shark. Good day.
Meh....don't take it all so hard, neophyte grognard.
Who's that Patron Saint of Lost Causes? I forget; he lost.Look at the bright side; it helps me.....and I'm a dyed-in-the-wool old dog pessimist; they're at Paizo talking about 4e; they're not at enWorld or WOTC trashing us all. Not that I care (bite me, hatas!) but if they're at Paizo, they might buy something. And THAT is what makes this country great: people buying your stuff. Well not my stuff; gimme a f&!%ing break I'm cold-medicated. Paizo's stuff.
You can't argue this stuff; it's like argling about religion. Soon as I realized that, I found comfort in my grognardy.
Look at my middle name on Facebook. Put a St. in front of it. That is the saint's name.
;)
|
|
Simple, things haven't changed other than you now provide;
(1) Dice
(2) Pen
(3) Paper (in the form of your own paper from your printer)
(4) and miniatures or suitable place holders [Sprite caps make wonderful Beholders btw - sorry yesterdays game, found it hard getting all <scary> about the Sprite cap attacking...]
See still pen & paper game - primarily...
|
The amazing thing for me is that the more WotC does with DDI, the less interested I am in it. I'm not sure if it is cause they are doing everything but what they originally promised or my lack of faith in their online continuity. Probably the latter as they have a lot of history of fail when it comes to online.
As for the assassin class itself, I really hated that they did away with it during 2e till toward the end and have to agree with Erik that I hated the prestige class concept in 3.x. The best 3.x straight class concept presented was AEG's version for Warlords RPG. I liked a lot of the stuff they did for it.
Also, the assassin is only really iconic for those who remember 1e. That may be quite a few players but plenty of people only started playing D&D with 2e or 3e, so something that was in a book from maybe 1985 and not really repeated since then is not as iconic as, say, the druid (and even he wasn't in 2e, IIRC). Classes and icons seem to come and go.
Except the druid was in 2nd Ed as an example of a specialised priest. Although assassins were not in the 21nd Ed PHB they did at least appear in the Scarlet Brotherhood supplement. The assassin prestige class has been part of 3rd edition from the start. They are iconic.
Using the logic that due to under representation the assassin is not iconic and therefore does not need to be included in the pen and paper version of the game it is equally valid to state that classes that have never been included (such as those in PHB2) should never get published.
And yes - I remember AD&D fondly, I am that old :)
|
Also, the assassin is only really iconic for those who remember 1e. That may be quite a few players but plenty of people only started playing D&D with 2e or 3e, so something that was in a book from maybe 1985 and not really repeated since then is not as iconic as, say, the druid (and even he wasn't in 2e, IIRC). Classes and icons seem to come and go.
Except the druid was in 2nd Ed as an example of a specialised priest. Although assassins were not in the 21nd Ed PHB they did at least appear in the Scarlet Brotherhood supplement. The assassin prestige class has been part of 3rd edition from the start. They are iconic.
Using the logic that due to under representation the assassin is not iconic and therefore does not need to be included in the pen and paper version of the game it is equally valid to state that classes that have never been included (such as those in PHB2) should never get published.
And yes - I remember AD&D fondly, I am that old :)
Well, we can split hairs here - so why not?
The druid was a specialty priest, and as such a sub-class - 3e put him back in his (rightful, in my view) place as a class in his own right. Whether a sub-class is iconic or not is debatable - arguably, it is only really iconic because it was a class in 1e, and got demoted to sub-iconic in 2e.
On assassins, didn't know about the Scarlet Brotherhood supplment - which kind of means their bid for iconhood in 2e is a bit shaky. And the prestige class in 3e.... I can't really see a prestige class as being in the same league as a character class. It was an OK prestige class and obviously a nod to 1e, but it was also (by and large) a non-PC prestige class - the PCs faced assassins, they weren't assassins too often (though I expect that varies table by table).
On the stuff in the PHB2, I disagree intellectually (new classes are fine) but kind of agree emotionally. The warden in particular (where did he come from?) leaves me cold not because it is a bad class, but because it doesn't resonate with me (a guy creeps round the forest, Defending things) and has no real history or backstory in the game. Ideally, I wouldn't have minded the assassin getting in to the PHB2 instead of him.
I'm not really denying the iconic status of the assassin, just pointing out that unless you were around for 1e it isn't that big a deal. I was there too (illusionist as separate class and all) but the game is so different now. I haven't yet looked at the new version (cursed firewalls at work) - does he have a death attack?
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Assassin 1e PHB, 2e Complete Rogue (as a kit) or Scarlet Brotherhood (written by SKR) 3.0 DMG (Or Green Ronin's Master Class) 3.5 DMG (or d20 Freeport Companion)
Skald 1e n/a 2e Complete Bard 3.0 n/a 3.5 Unearthed Arcana (Savage Bard)
I don't remember either in BECMI. I do remember Paladin = Lawful Fighter 'prestige class' Avenger = chaotic fighter 'prestige class' druid = neutral cleric 'prestige class' and the mystic came later.
(prestige class in the sense you had to be x level to take it)
But they handled the removal of assassins so well, especially in the Forgotten Realms. That whole "they all die because the god of assassins died, so problem solved - no more assassins!" was just awesome. Thankfully it spared the assa- I mean, fighter/thieves like Artemis Entreri.
Just to split some more hairs, it was the other way round:
Not the god of assassins died wiping out his worshipers, but all assassins died first (since Bane needed their essence to fuel his avatar in the battle against Torm), weakening Baal immensely by loosing the bulk of his worshipers.
--
So, where did I put this blasted key?
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
I'm not really denying the iconic status of the assassin, just pointing out that unless you were around for 1e it isn't that big a deal. I was there too (illusionist as separate class and all) but the game is so different now. I haven't yet looked at the new version (cursed firewalls at work) - does he have a death attack?
Yes, he gets to roll vs Fortitude on rainbows, unicorns and bugglyman's dreams of what 4e is ;-)
Your definition of the Warden made me laugh. I now picture the Warden laying in wait, protecting pic-a-nic baskets from bears.
Your definition of the Warden made me laugh. I now picture the Warden laying in wait, protecting pic-a-nic baskets from bears.
Now that's iconic. :D
|
Greyhawk got hit by the edition change class assassination meme too in a half-awesome, half-s&@@e module called Fate of Istus. I wonder if the "kill off the classes" mandate came from management or something?
I was under the impression that it was Lorraine Williams that put the axe to the Assassin. I remember TSRs argument in 2e was that anyone could be an Assassin, after all killing was part of the description of all characters classes.
My beef was that I could understand why assassins had to be evil, unless you based them all on the Assassin's Guild from Gygax's Greyhawk books and in that case their all rotten bustards.
Your definition of the Warden made me laugh. I now picture the Warden laying in wait, protecting pic-a-nic baskets from bears.
He should probably protect the bears from the picnic baskets. I bet whats in those picnic baskets is highly processed and not healthy for bears.
He should probably protect the bears from the picnic baskets. I bet whats in those picnic baskets is highly processed and not healthy for bears.
Your definition of the Warden made me laugh. I now picture the Warden laying in wait, protecting pic-a-nic baskets from bears.
I think it finally showed up in the Scarlet Brotherhood book at the very end of the 2e era.
I don't know how (or whether) it contributes to this thread, but I was always disappointed in the removal of the class in 2e, and in the ghettoizing of it as a prestige class in 3.0 and 3.5 (and, for that matter, in PFRPG).
I'm offended.
I'm offended that you're offended.
On assassins, didn't know about the Scarlet Brotherhood supplment - which kind of means their bid for iconhood in 2e is a bit shaky. And the prestige class in 3e.... I can't really see a prestige class as being in the same league as a character class. It was an OK prestige class and obviously a nod to 1e, but it was also (by and large) a non-PC prestige class - the PCs faced assassins, they weren't assassins too often (though I expect that varies table by table).
My first AD&D character was an assassin (damn those slavelords for killing him)! I currently DM a character who is a (pathfinder Beta) Rog7/Assassin 10. Some of us do use assassins as PCs.
Perhaps I should change my argumant to: in my opinion assassins deserve to be iconic, the fact that they were demoted in 3rd Ed to a prestige class and only appeared as either a kit or a in a late Greyhawk supplement in 2E was unfair and should not be reason to continue with the demotion.
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.
You couldn't play an assassin out of the book in BECMI either. It was an iconic class in 1E. That's it.
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.
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.
I'm not sick of 4E at all; I love it as a system. I'm pretty sick of how WotC is handling it, though. Making the assassin a DDI-exclusive is just the latest in a series of bad management decisions.
Here is what would completely sell me on 4E (in addition to what they have gotten right; the Character Builder, for example):
- A core 3 (PHB/DMG/MM) that included content comparable the the core 3 in 3.5. Say, with stuff from PHB1, some of PHB2, AV, MM1, and a good chunk of MM2, a few dribs and drabs from the power series, and a much richer selection of rituals.
- Books published on decent paper, with a SEWN BINDING, printed using ink that doesn't smudge, Yes, these things would cost more. I would happily pay more for them.
- Inexpensive water-marked PDFs of any book I purchase.*
- A careful balance of DDI-exclusive material...to me, exclusive classes (like the forthcoming assassin) go too far. The game must be (and remain) an PnP game foremost.
- Increase in both the quality, quantity, and value of WotC adventures. There is no excuse for drek like "The Keep on the Shadowfell" making it out the door.
Give me those, and I'm a 4E customer again. Interestingly, Pathfinder gives me *all* of these things, so even though I prefer the mechanics of 4E, unless WotC starts listening to me as a customer they will not get my money. Further, if, upon reading the release version of the Pathfinder RPG, I find that it meets my needs, my gaming dollars will go to Paizo.
Edit: I was, just today, asked to DM a 4E group for some friends, several of whom have never played D&D(!). I agreed. I will continue to play and enjoy 4E with the material I own. Once again, I am not "sick of 4E"; I merely cannot stand how it is being handled.
* My previous 4E group included a handicapped individual who *needed* PDFs to fully participate. Sure, he could use the DDI for the crunch bits, but nearly all the flavor text of the books was completely denied him by WotC's withdrawal of the PDFs. So, as annoying as I find the PDF situation, it also directly affected my group in a very real way.
I'm ok with DDI subscribers getting exclusive content. I haven't read the whole thread, so I don't know if this has been said already, but didn't the print version of Dragon have new races or classes on occaision? And let's be honest, how long before WotC prints this exclusive material anyway? I own so many WotC books that just plain reprinted articles straight from Dragon, so I expect this material to show up somewhere down the line as well.
BTW, when did WotC say there wouldn't be exclusive content online? I know they said you wouldn't need an account to play D&D, but I don't remember anybody saying you wouldn't see a new class or race there only.
As they say around these parts 'Whoopie Dink'. D&D is just as pen and paper after this announcement as before, unless you chose to play it otherwise.
Seriously, sometimes I think gamers must be the most lucky, happy people in the world given how minor the things they complain about are.
As they say around these parts 'Whoopie Dink'. D&D is just as pen and paper after this announcement as before, unless you chose to play it otherwise.
Seriously, sometimes I think gamers must be the most lucky, happy people in the world given how minor the things they complain about are.
Almost like posting in a thread just to complain about how much other gamers complain...
;-)
arkady_v
Torrent sites are still killing them. The pulling of pdfs haven't stopped the release of Arcane Power or the Monster Manual 2, it did delay it a week or two but it didn't stop it. I doubt that many more people went out a bought the legal copies of the book just because they had to wait two weeks for the illegal copies. The pulling of the pdf was the dumbest knee-jerk reaction I have seen in years since the MPAA blamed illegal downloads for the fall in their revenue when in reality it was the competition in all of the major markets (Music, Movies, Video Games becoming mainstream). There is just to much to spread your money on and not enough people are focusing it on a single market. That is the breaks, they are getting use to it now but Wizards appears to be behind on the times.
Matthew Koelbl
You pretty much said what I was thinking. I hate the idea of an Assassin class because I have had alot of problems with "Assassin" classes in my role-playing career. I understand that this Assassin is probably just a westernized ninja without forcing a "Ninja" into the game. I can stomach it from the perceptive because I loved Assassin's Creed.
bugleyman
I can agree with you that WotC has made alot of management mistakes in handling 4E and are pretty much been trying to shoot themselves in the foot but I do not agree that a DDI-exclusive class is a poor decision. The Core 3 books HAD comparable content to the Core 3 of 3.5 but it wasn't the *same* content. You lost half-orcs and gnomes but gained tieflings, dragonborn, and eladrin so Core 4 had more races. There was alittle class lost because of the lost of Bard, Druid, Monk, and Sorcerer but gained Warlord and Warlock but then again there was the addition of paragon paths, epic destinies, and magical items to the PHB instead of the DMG.
The book quality could be better and the whole pdf thing was bogus. As for the careful balance of DDI-exclusive material while I can't agree with you there because I think that exclusive classes is a great idea especially if they are more mature oriented then the book classes. I also don't feel that 1 exclusive class against 18 book classes is going too far and that it does not in anyway effect the PnP nature of the game or even such that it will change it. The adventures are getting better and better every release as the developers are getting more and more comfortable with the rule system. There are people that worked on Pathfinder/Dungeon adventures that are working on the new 4E dungeon adventures as well.
I wanted to like Pathfinder and I was on for it before 4E even came out. I had the Alpha version but it was still to based in the broken 3.5 rules. I got the beta and it was still to based in the broken 3.5 rules and 4E had hooked me by then. Unfortunately the only way that I am likely to become a customer for Paizo again is if they ever do 4E stuff which they have already said they will not. I stay on the boards because for the most part I like the people and they have a powerful amount of creativity. Also I have a few pbp games that dragged me back here or I wouldn't be as active. So in this I am pretty much the exact opposite of you and I don't think Pathfinder gives me all the things that 4E does.
The book quality could be better and the whole pdf thing was bogus. As for the careful balance of DDI-exclusive material while I can't agree with you there because I think that exclusive classes is a great idea especially if they are more mature oriented then the book classes. I also don't feel that 1 exclusive class against 18 book classes is going too far and that it does not in anyway effect the PnP nature of the game or even such that it will change it.
Fair enough. To me, WotC just seems to be steadily edging away from traditional book publishing. As I said, it is quite possible I'm overreacting. I've certainly been wrong before.
The adventures are getting better and better every release as the developers are getting more and more comfortable with the rule system. There are people that worked on Pathfinder/Dungeon adventures that are working on the new 4E dungeon adventures as well.
The experience issue is a fair point, and one that I hadn't considered. I do think the WotC modules remain overpriced for what they are (by about $5; you could probably shave that by consolidating to a single book, even keeping the map), but I will allow that the content may be getting better (I stopped buyng them several mods ago). Thanks for bring that up.
I stay on the boards because for the most part I like the people and they have a powerful amount of creativity.
Hear, hear.
I have always felt the community is better off as a place where all gamers feel comfortable, whatever their system of choice (well, except for Rifts). ;-)
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
I have always felt the community is better of as a place where all gamers feel comfortable, whatever their system of choice (well, except for Rifts). ;-)
Hey now, that there's a straw man argument if ever there was one. No one chooses to play Rifts, you play Rifts because its got cool art and is stuffed so fall of awesome that it has an intoxicating effect which, along with actual chemical-based intoxicants, can allow you to overlook its system flaws.
Heroes players though, that's a whole other story. Those bastards should be persecuted and driven screaming from any website where they dare to show their poodle-like faces...