|
There are obviously plenty of rumors and speculation about what the new edition will actually have and/or not have. I've heard the magic system might no longer use the vancian (sp?) system, skills will be altered or simplified etc. I even just read on another thread that there is a rumor Gnomes might not make the cut!
So, I figured maybe we might need a place to try to separate the rumors from the 'facts' (I know, there are few actual facts since the new edition is far away - I mean facts in the sense that we have read from an actual designer that something most likely will or will not be a part of 4E)
For instance:
Fact (more or less)
There will be some sort of Racial level concept in addition to class level
The game will be 30 level instead of 20
So ... what else do we 'know'
There will be strong online support, and an online play platform hosted by WotC.
The next living campaign will be Forgotten Realms.
Listed as Settings are FR and Eberron presently on the homepage.
...
Oh, you meant rules-wise? Ahhh... You pretty much summed it up, AFAICT.
Stefan
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
Vancian spellcasting is demphasized.
Fighters gain abilities relating to their weapon of choice.
Rogues gain abilities relating to skills.
Classes are broken into three groups (martial, divine, arcane).
At least one race is out of the PHB (signs point to gnome).
Tiefling will be a core race as will Changelings (Eberron peeps - are they the furries or the dopplegangers?).
At least one current core class will not be in the PHB.
The number of core classes has not been revealed (at one point, someone said less than the current 11, but the last info I saw said between 3 and 14).
Greyhawk is not the core setting, but many elements of Greyhawk will be present in the core.
FR and Eberron will continue to be supported settings.
It's being produced by Wizards of the Coast
There will be an OGL, though the details are yet to be released
Psionics are being either folded into or closely modeled after arcane magic (From the preview stating that the psionicist was "a wizard with the serial numbers filed off")
And, the changeling is the shapeshifter (a la DS9)
It's being produced by Wizards of the Coast
There will be an OGL, though the details are yet to be releasedPsionics are being either folded into or closely modeled after arcane magic (From the preview stating that the psionicist was "a wizard with the serial numbers filed off")
And, the changeling is the shapeshifter (a la DS9)
They clarified the psion bit . . . Bruce Cordell was playing a psion in 3.5, they continued using the same characters more or less, so until there were psionic rules, he created a wizard to "act like" a psion. Psionics will be tackled, but not this year. Bruce's character wasn't a "real" psion.
Various special abilities allow more than one standard action in a round and more than one free action, etc. in addition to your move action. Immediate actions still seem to be limited to 1/round, however.
|
Damn. I hate the furies less.
Dopplegangers. The fuzzies are shifters.
I actually like the Changelings. I can understand why some folks wouldn't - their racial abilities are significant - but something about shapeshifters has always interested me.
I also happily admit I find the use that Nick Logue puts them to in his adventures endlessly entertaining.
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
I actually like the Changelings. I can understand why some folks wouldn't - their racial abilities are significant - but something about shapeshifters has always interested me.
I don't generally like creatures that can change shape. There are just so many of them and it can be such a cheap way to hide the villian in a mystery.
That being said, I have not looked very closely at the race. What is the extent of their abilities?
|
|
I don't generally like creatures that can change shape. There are just so many of them and it can be such a cheap way to hide the villian in a mystery.That being said, I have not looked very closely at the race. What is the extent of their abilities?
I don't have my book with me, so I'm not entirely sure. It's largely limited to the shapeshifting effect, although I think it's one of the lower level effects - either alter self, or change self. I believe they also get darkvision. That's about it otherwise.
Funny thing is? I actually just like how they look when not disguised.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32
|
Tiefling will be a core race as will Changelings
I'm not sure why this had to happen. If they were gonna put Tieflings in as a Core Race then they should have made the other new Race Aasimar to balance it out. I realy don't see Changelings being a "Core" Race, whereas I could at least see both Tieflings and Aasimar as Core. If they wanted a Core Race available that was Iconic to Eberron then I definately would have gone with the Warforged. Nothing says Iconic Eberron like a Warforged. That way they also could have made the Artificer a Core Class as well (which I think would have also been a reasonably good idea as I quite like the Artificer as a Class).
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
I'm not sure why this had to happen. If they were gonna put Tieflings in as a Core Race then they should have made the other new Race Aasimar to balance it out. I realy don't see Changelings being a "Core" Race, whereas I could at least see both Tieflings and Aasimar as Core. If they wanted a Core Race available that was Iconic to Eberron then I definately would have gone with the Warforged. Nothing says Iconic Eberron like a Warforged. That way they also could have made the Artificer a Core Class as well (which I think would have also been a reasonably good idea as I quite like the Artificer as a Class).
I would've expected the shifter over the changeling given that they are emphasizing racial traits/abilities, and the shifters have all those racial feats.
I've loved tieflings from the days of Planescape. Aasimar have always seemed like their lesser cousins, so I won't be too bummed if they are not included.
8 classes in PHB, fighter, rogue, wizard and cleric for certain (confirmed by Logan Bonner on ENWorld) - More in 4E, but just 8 in PHB
PHB II, DMG II, MM II a year after 4E releases, new ones every year after that (GenCon WotC seminar)
Wizards can cast 25th level spells (Rodney Thompson's blog on WotC site)
Lots of stuff in this thread - http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=204119
Have we heard anything about the price?
Do we know of any other 4e products slated for 2008 beside the core 3?
I want to keep an open mind.
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
How many want to wager that the sorcerer is getting the axe in favor of improving the way the wizard works?8 classes in PHB, fighter, rogue, wizard and cleric for certain (confirmed by Logan Bonner on ENWorld) - More in 4E, but just 8 in PHB
Probably, and good riddance, I say.
Originally Posted by WotC_Logan
All the classes in the 3.5 PH will appear at some point in the game's lifespan, but the only ones you can call "confirmed" in the PH1 are fighter, rogue, cleric, and wizard.
Monk is in.
DR is out. (both confirmed by WotC_Logan)
Originally Posted by James Wyatt's blog:
So finally today I had time to really dig in to the Demons entry of the MM. Ah, tasty, tasty.
What can I say about demons? As with so many other things, the entry is a mix of old, familiar faces (writing the vrock now), some more recent additions to the D&D world (there's a demon from MM5 in here), and one or two brand-new demons to round out the batch. Not every demon from 3e appears here, of course. But we'll have a number of MMs through the life of 4e that will cover the familiar bases as well as explore a lot of new ground. That's the fine line we're walking these days.
A very enjoyable part of this work is designing sample encounters for the monsters. We talked just today about whether that would be better on D&D Insider, but we agreed that it's important to reinforce the message that an interesting encounter consists of multiple, different monsters grouped in interesting ways.
What 4 e seems to be about is giving all the player's something "cool".
what do I mean?
complete scoundrel- skill tricks. (*make +12 skill ranks cool)
tome of battle: book of nine swords (*plus other weapons and fighting styles)
these two books appear to be transformed into the "new core" material.
why? magic.
no not the card game, well not the card game directly...
Magic spells are absolute, they do what they say and say what they do.
period. when a wizard/sorcerer/arcane-double-dipper-not-unbalanced Prc reaches level twenty and casts spells as a 15th level sorcerer, and a 15th level WwizZAdDDD Does the fighter/weaponmaster of the adamantine falchion still mater? even if his weapon some how deals 4d4+ Strength bonus, Plus class and feat bonuses, (*plus magic- because without enchanted items all non casting classes are monster food that got lucky so far) even if he gets criticals all day long...
Is the fighter worth it? are you playing the henchman role of "stuff carrier"...
if the rogue was anything other than a handy doorman? could it be more fun?
really, you reach 10th level and monsters start doing things like breath weapons and magic at will...
meanwhile your guy with a "deadly poke" is still doing 1d6...
So now we look at this tome of battle, I love the book. I really missed manuevers, passes, and fighting styles- I was searching for that 2e issue for the longest time to add some juice to non magic classes.
***MEANWHILE*** more and more classes and prestige classes began to appear allowing players to cast spells in armor or vainly attempting to replace the rogue. hehe hehe.
that's what fourth ed is all about from my reading:
Not giving everyone magic, no. It's giving everyone something cool that only they can do. and when they do it. it is done. period.
Who wants to bet that the new knight class will have crazy shield options or martial manuevers with shields- I hope so!
As much as I want the game to improve and grow...
I do have to say this sucks. I have close to 10K wrapped up in my collection of D&D stuff since 2000. I am not going to buy anything else.
It is over for me... for now.
they killed dungeon, they killed dragon, and they *EXPECT* everyone to have a $3,000 dollar book collection and a $3300 dollar laptop with internet... I do not know if the D20/ogl will still exist next year.
You know whaT I say?
they are killing the game with a hostile corprate money making scheme.
Wizards can cast 25th level spells (Rodney Thompson's blog on WotC site)
I hope to God this is is wrong, or I'm reading it wrong. 9 levels of spells (10 with 0-level) is quite enough, thanks. There is NO WAY I'm going to keep track of 25 levels of spells ("Hmmm... should I cast a 16th level spell? Or Maximize spell and use a 19th level slot?"). Up until I see it with my own eyes, I'll still be kinda interested, but if this tidbit is correct, it's a deal-breaker for me.
|
|
Wizards can cast 25th level spells (Rodney Thompson's blog on WotC site)I hope to God this is is wrong, or I'm reading it wrong. 9 levels of spells (10 with 0-level) is quite enough, thanks. There is NO WAY I'm going to keep track of 25 levels of spells ("Hmmm... should I cast a 16th level spell? Or Maximize spell and use a 19th level slot?"). Up until I see it with my own eyes, I'll still be kinda interested, but if this tidbit is correct, it's a deal-breaker for me.
Well, if you remember they're cutting Vancian casting. If the "level" of a spell is tied to how much 'mana' (or whatever game mechanic they go for) is pumped into it, this becomes a less frightening prospect.
I am going to go digging for the details on this one, though.
Well, if you remember they're cutting Vancian casting.
Is that also for sure? (sniffle) I LIKE Vancian casting!
sorry for the crazy rant.
what I mean is: that every character race, and every character class will have "scaling features" from what I have read.
a level 1 dwarf has a +x bonus verus blah, and this is going to change as the dwarf advances- as an example.
if the martial stuff from ToB-9s crosses over, you'll be looking at 15th level fighters doing things like 15d8 with a "queen's longsword bondock saint deadly thrust ki sandwich slice of dispairing doom and devastation because the designer thought it would be cool to have an attack named after this thing he saw in a movie-video game"....
Not all bad. I mean, doesn't anyone see a problem with a shrunk fighter doing 1d4 damage with his greatsword, but rogues still deal +Xd6 sneak attack no matter their size, or that magic spells do not scale (range, area, dice size) with size?
I hope some of these inconsistencies get fixed.
there will be 30 levels, not 36... heh.
You know what, I've been playing with gnomes and Vancian casting (and 9 levels of spells) for over 25 years now. Some things in D&D are just sacred cows. Yes, the bishops of the church can always go cow tipping, but they run the risk of their followers deserting them. I hope there's room for these things in 4e; even if they're not "core," I'd best be able to insert them fairly easily. I'm too old to completely abandon the game I grew up with in favor of this other one you're all describing. 3e had different mechanics from 1e, but it was still recognizeable as D&D. This thing we seem to be discussing here isn't, unless most of the rumors here are false. Why call it 4e, if it's not D&D at all?
|
|
Well, if you remember they're cutting Vancian casting.Is that also for sure? (sniffle) I LIKE Vancian casting!
Vancian casting is out (or at least mostly out). That is exactly the way Wotc has answered it, including the parenthetical note. The 25th level spell thing is mentioned as a teaser. It was the "secret" Wizards staffer (Rodney) was able to say if you asked about 4ed. Its not explained, not in context, and essentially is intended to get a rise out of us. My advice is that while it sounds bad, leave it be until they deign to give us some concrete info.
What, no Druids? ~scratches my head~ Damn, but I like Druids!!!
Glad to see so many folks sharing the FACTS known so far about 4E, but I'd like to request that we shift the focus of this thread so we can get back to listing known facts, instead of riffing on personal observations or opinions.
Ach, mein Herr, but alas, they have given us no FACTS, only hints and taglines. The best we can do is to speculate at this point.
|
|
Glad to see so many folks sharing the FACTS known so far about 4E, but I'd like to request that we shift the focus of this thread so we can get back to listing known facts, instead of riffing on personal observations or opinions.Ach, mein Herr, but alas, they have given us no FACTS, only hints and taglines. The best we can do is to speculate at this point.
Hey guys - as the humble originator of this thread, I must agree here. There are plenty of other threads to rant, vent, speculate and discuss 4E in general (perhaps too many threads, although given the importance of 4E, it's certainly to be expected).
I really was hoping to keep all ranting, venting, speculating and general discussion OUT of this thread and stick to facts - and yes, I know, we have few actual facts. As I said in the opening post, we are slowly getting some quasi 'facts' from the designers and that's what we need to compile here.
Thanks!
8 classes in PHB, fighter, rogue, wizard and cleric for certain (confirmed by Logan Bonner on ENWorld) - More in 4E, but just 8 in PHB
PHB II, DMG II, MM II a year after 4E releases, new ones every year after that (GenCon WotC seminar)
Wizards can cast 25th level spells (Rodney Thompson's blog on WotC site)
Lots of stuff in this thread - http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=204119
If this is correct then I don't think anyone has to worry about Gnomes and Druids. This is just WOTC's way of saying "after you've purchased the Core 4th edition books you have to spring more money for the Player's Handbook II for races and clasess that you thought would be there." Have no fear WOTC will take care of you. If you start a write in campaign now, the Aasimar may make it into the PHB III. Check out the thread. It seems that WOTC has planned the release of each race, class, weapon, spell, and monster into future releases of the Player's Handbook and Monster Manual. No more complete books, just more PHB's and MM's.
Enjoy
|
|
Disclaimer: This is my theory. I’m putting it up here because I think its pretty sound. Assume that Star Wars Saga Edition was a play-test (at least partially) for 4e. Therefore:
Reading the "sample dragon combat" on the WotC site, there will not be derivative attacks. The secondary attacks look like they are gone, or in some cases, will come in other forms. In the case of the dragon it could tail slap or breath as a free action. I assume many of these could have some limitation such as 1/combat, or perhaps not (but that’s speculation).
This could then be applied to fighters. A halberd fighter, for example, may attack with his halberd as a standard action. Then, as a free action use the back end to hit someone behind him. (This was vaguely described in one of the WotC columns)
|
|
Hey guys - as the humble originator of this thread, I must agree here. There are plenty of other threads to rant, vent, speculate and discuss 4E in general (perhaps too many threads, although given the importance of 4E, it's certainly to be expected).I really was hoping to keep all ranting, venting, speculating and general discussion OUT of this thread and stick to facts - and yes, I know, we have few actual facts. As I said in the opening post, we are slowly getting some quasi 'facts' from the designers and that's what we need to compile here.
Thanks!
Hey folks, I have to agree on this one. I'm not a fan of Wotc recent moves, but lets try to respect the OPs wishes.
As for other comments, the 4ed OGL is confirmed by Wizards. The details have not yet been released, but there will be an OGL license.
Lets all try to stick to the facts in this thread.
The 'Ling
sorry for the crazy rant.
what I mean is: that every character race, and every character class will have "scaling features" from what I have read.
a level 1 dwarf has a +x bonus verus blah, and this is going to change as the dwarf advances- as an example.if the martial stuff from ToB-9s crosses over, you'll be looking at 15th level fighters doing things like 15d8 with a "queen's longsword bondock saint deadly thrust ki sandwich slice of dispairing doom and devastation because the designer thought it would be cool to have an attack named after this thing he saw in a movie-video game"....
Not all bad. I mean, doesn't anyone see a problem with a shrunk fighter doing 1d4 damage with his greatsword, but rogues still deal +Xd6 sneak attack no matter their size, or that magic spells do not scale (range, area, dice size) with size?
I hope some of these inconsistencies get fixed.
there will be 30 levels, not 36... heh.
I hope this isn't exactly true, because a monster designed for a 15th level group would need a billion hit points (or whatever they are going to be called) to survive a couple of rounds of combat. It will become a game of math skills and make higher levels even less appealing to me.
If you're really looking at buying a computer just for 4e, you don't need the ultra-high speed, top end powerhouse. The 4e DI is a set of web apps, not the newest, bleeding edge, first person shooter.
Just some speculative notes:
1) Higher end laptops might be needed. I don't mean the $5000+ desktop replacements, but the online tabletop will need some decent graphical power. Plan on upgrading RAM at least.
2) IF WoTC doesn't set out with multi platform compatibility in mind, they might build their apps around DirectX 10. Currently, DirectX 10 is only mentioned as being usable in Vista. (If anyone knows where I can see the system specs, I'd appreciate a link.) That might require an OS upgrade. (And that would be one more reason I won't sign up for the DI.)
Again, I want to make it clear that this is my own personal speculation based of of the demo folded into the attitude about not looking into multi platform support at first. With a dash of cynicism drawn from other WoTC blunders.
|
|
Found the following list compiled on Enworld.org
Races:
Mentioned some race disappearing from core (bets go for the Gnome), possibly to be included in an early supplement.
Tiefling included, and they look much more demonic than now (almost half-demon).
Changeling from Eberron may be included.
"Dwarven resilience, elven evasion, a half-elf’s inspiring presence" mentioned as racial traits.
Classes can be improved by racial feats, in a similar way to how current racial substitution levels work.
All classes have at will, per encounter and per day abilities.
Classes:
Levels go up to 30, instead of 20;
Level division:
1-10 Heroic - foes are orcs and ogres, some giants, small dragons. Adventures tend to be local.
11-20 Paragon - on par with the current low to mid teens right now. Bigger threats are faced that might threaten a kingdom.
21-30 Epic- World or Planar threats.
The goal is to have the levels play in a similar manner - they don't want a 25th character overwhelmed with 80 abilities. The main differences should be in the story, not how they play.
From GamerZer0's interview with James Wyatt: There are four "roles".
Defender: fighter & paladin classes
Leader: cleric & warlord classes
Controller: wizard class
Striker: rogue & ranger classes
Although two PCs may serve the same role, they may do it in different ways. (Like fighters with different styles.) The roles are geared towards combat; a PC's non-combat aspects can differentiate him further. He also said that they are still considering the possibility of there being a class or two that doesn't quite fit the four "roles"
Fighter, Cleric, Rogue and Wizard definitely stay (multiple mentions and examples). Also mentioned Barbarian, Paladin and Ranger. Mentioned that wizard and sorcerer won't merge. Sorcerer will be different from wizards in more ways than just resource management.
Mentioned that paladins can be of other alignments other than lawful good.
Mentioned a warlord class
Druid mentioned in D&D's seminar's summary
Backstab mentioned.
Fighter's "powers" depend highly on the weapon they chose as primary - spears have different "powers" available than axes; swords and greatswords are very flexible in terms of said "powers"
Wisdom helps with power selection.
Mentioned a "rain of blows" power or maneuver for swords; mentioned making a choice between taking the abilities "Supreme Cleave" or "Massive Strike".
More on martial abilities: "A skilled halberdier can hack a foe with his weapon’s blade and spin around to smash a second foe with the haft. A fighter with a longsword disarms her foe with a flick of her wrist, while a battle hungry axeman cleaves through shields, armor, and bone." "Rogues have a similar relationship with skills. A nimble rogue dives through the air to tumble past an ogre, while a charismatic one tricks an enemy into looking away just before she delivers a killing blow with her dagger. Just as fighters do more with weapons than any other character, rogues push skills beyond the limits that constrain other PCs."
Cleric mentioned creating a "surge of healing power" alongside a critical hit. This hints (yet unconfirmed) to mechanics similar to some Crusader maneuvers, from Tome of Battle.
Some current base classes disappear; classes yet to be mentioned and therefore good candidates are Monk and Bard. Classes that don't appear in the PHB will appear in future products
Psionics not to be included in core, though they'll have support.
Prestige classes stay.
Feats and skills:
Move silently and hide rolled into one ("Stealth?")
Some of the more obscure or less used skills disappear (mentioned tailor and rope use)
Mentioned that Sage should be "considered a preview [of the skill system]"
Feats won't form long chains.
There will be rules akin to the retraining rules in PHBII - they don't like the idea of people planning their careers from level 1 to 30.
Combat and encounters:
Rules for non-combat encounters. The example given was social interaction. Unlike 3E, where negotiation amounts to a single Diplomacy check, it's treated almost like a combat in 4E. I make a skill check, but I also tell the DM what/how I'm doing. The opponent responds with behavior (and a check) of his own. I counter with a new check, and new words. And so forth.
Saves mentioned
AC mentioned, apparently with the same function as it has today.
Free, immediate, move and standard actions mentioned. (it stands to reason Swift actions will be present too).
Critical hits mentioned.
Attacks of opportunity gone or greatly changed/simplified: a fighter charges a dragon and no AoO is mentioned.
Grapple greatly simplified.
Confirmation rolls for critical hits possibly go away.
Combat still uses a square grid
Spells and magic:
Vancian system survives, but it's ony a "fraction" of the magic (or magic options) available to characters: "a wizard who casts all his memorized per day spells should be at about 80% of power."
"Wizards will be able to cast 25th-level spells."
Fireballs don't deal 1d6/level damage any more. Also, game breaking spells (spells that fundamentally change the gaming scenario, like etherealness, scrying, and save or die effects) "have been addressed as well".
Mentioned a "ray of freezing cold".
Magic items
Magic item creation doesn't use XP or require a feat.
Monsters:
The monsters will have their own roles and their own abilities- the orc will have orc abilities, not fighter or barbarian abilites
Monsters no longer drain XP (implied no draining of levels?)
Vulnerability to energy likely to work differently in 4e, with additional effects (like slowing in the case of cold) instead of (or in addition to?) extra damage.
"The ettin, for instance, has the whole two-heads thing, so it can go twice in one round, and take unrelated actions."
Ancient (red?) dragons apparently now can do a lot of things:
An inferno aura, useable as a free action.
A tail slap attack with an added pushback effect, useable as a free action.
Two claw attacks, useable as a standard action.
A fireball spit that sticks to the target dealing extra damage, useable as a standard action.
A breath weapon, but we don't get to see what kind of action it normally takes - a free one like the inferno aura, as different uses of the same ability?
A special action granting an extra standard action.
They may take an immediate action to use their breath weapon when reduced blow half damage.
They may take an immediate action to use their tail slap when about to be flanked.
Said dragon would have around 1000 hit points.
Again, I want to make it clear that this is my own personal speculation ...Isn't it in the wrong place then? Wasn't the point of this thread "What do we actually KNOW so far?"
It is just as fitting as the speculation I was responding to...
Not to mention how well your post fits in with the topic.
Rules for non-combat encounters. The example given was social interaction. Unlike 3E, where negotiation amounts to a single Diplomacy check, it's treated almost like a combat in 4E. I make a skill check, but I also tell the DM what/how I'm doing. The opponent responds with behavior (and a check) of his own. I counter with a new check, and new words. And so forth.
Interesting. Spycraft II anyone?
|
|
Rules for non-combat encounters. The example given was social interaction. Unlike 3E, where negotiation amounts to a single Diplomacy check, it's treated almost like a combat in 4E. I make a skill check, but I also tell the DM what/how I'm doing. The opponent responds with behavior (and a check) of his own. I counter with a new check, and new words. And so forth.Interesting. Spycraft II anyone?
thats what I was thinking too!
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
I think the most important thing that can be said on topic is to go to ENWorld and read the front page regularly for information. They were the source for 3e and 3.5 information, and, given that Morrus had a one on one meeting with the WotC brass at Gen Con, I assume it will also be the source for 4e info.