I read something today that just totally sold me over. I've really been kind of skiddish about the whole 4th edition thing. I can really see the need for a change. Then again, there's a lot of stuff they're talking about doing that really rubs me the wrong way. But then I read something that just floored me, and got me absolutely behind the new edition.
Get this:
Each year, Wizards is talking about releasing an entire line of core books (PHB, MM, DMG) unique to each campaign setting. Gone is the whole ambiguous setting garbage. Apparently gone also is all the carefully setting neutral stuff too. You buy a setting right along with your main books, and if all turns out well the books will drip with distinctive flavor.
The idea of a three book (possibly more) spread on my favorite settings has me drooling. Certainly if it's successful enough we might see the ressurection of some near and dear settings, modernized and rendered in lavish awesome detail. Hopefully there might even be some new ones too.
Honestly I gotta' tell you, I don't know that I wouldn't buy every single one. It's a great idea. It's the first thing I've heard about 4th edition that's gotten me genuinely butterfly stomached in anticipation of it.
This is really suprisingly cool.
I'm semi against the idea, mostly because:
1. It will limit the OGL material (monster X? Sorry, Monster X's not in the SRD, it's REALMS!).
2. A freaking crap ton of books to add to the pile next to my bed.
3. Popular but less selling campaign settings (Dark Sun, probably Dragonlance) will die ignoble deaths.
I'm semi against the idea, mostly because:
1. It will limit the OGL material (monster X? Sorry, Monster X's not in the SRD, it's REALMS!).
2. A freaking crap ton of books to add to the pile next to my bed.
3. Popular but less selling campaign settings (Dark Sun, probably Dragonlance) will die ignoble deaths.
Interesting point about the OGL. I thought there was also a non setting specific MM slatted to launch next year? Has this been scrapped? Plus I heard in the Interview with Eric and Lisa that they thought the OGL might be broader with 4ED.
Elcian
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
Got a site Grim?
I suppose my level of enthusiasm depends on how much duplication is in each such book. A substantial portion of the 3.5 PHB is combat rules and spells. I don't see much point in having another book with all that material reprinted. If that information was replaced with setting specific spells and world information though, it would be very useful.
Still, the campaign settings as they stand now are weird hybrid of DM/Player info. It's hard to parse out what players should read without giving away secrets and it's hard to communicate necessary secrets to the DM. Breaking these into two books makes a lot of sense from that perspective.
I could dig it. It's all in the execution. I'd be particularly happy if these new core books were part of their plan to republish retired settings on a regular basis. It'd also be interesting if they did something like the three core books for, say, Ravenloft, and then let third party publishers fill in the rest.
I can dream...
I'm just thrilled that someone said "Best Idea Ever!" in the 4th edition section without being sarcastic. Thank you, Grimcleaver.
I thought there was also a non setting specific MM slatted to launch next year? Elcian
There will be, but my supposition is that it will have a very few core/races/classes/monsters, followed up by all the stuff you remember tied to a specific campaign world and no longer freely useable. Want 4E statted gnomes? Must buy campaign set x, and pay to license them for an adventure. Dark Elves? Campaign set B... Vanilla is SRD though! Woooooo...
If it does bring back the more off the beaten path worlds though, I have to say it would definitely brighten my 4E outlook.
Actually, this is part of the reason I'm very much against 4E.
"Core a year" means that if you want to buy the "core books" you don't buy three any more - you buy nine, or twelve, or something.
No, thank you.
WotC can grab it's money from someone other than me.
I'm far too lazy to regoogle for them, but I tracked down two posts on the WoTC site about it, and two more on EnWorld. Gist of it is semi-confirmed, but likely.
Hmm...interesting news. If someone can get a link going I'll go check it out. I'm really not all that interested in digging through the WotC website.
I agree with Sebastian, if there is a whole bunch of reprinted materials in each 'core' set, then I would find this to be a poorly thought out idea by WotC.
Got a site Grim?
I suppose my level of enthusiasm depends on how much duplication is in each such book. A substantial portion of the 3.5 PHB is combat rules and spells. I don't see much point in having another book with all that material reprinted. If that information was replaced with setting specific spells and world information though, it would be very useful.
Still, the campaign settings as they stand now are weird hybrid of DM/Player info. It's hard to parse out what players should read without giving away secrets and it's hard to communicate necessary secrets to the DM. Breaking these into two books makes a lot of sense from that perspective.
I could dig it. It's all in the execution. I'd be particularly happy if these new core books were part of their plan to republish retired settings on a regular basis. It'd also be interesting if they did something like the three core books for, say, Ravenloft, and then let third party publishers fill in the rest.
I can dream...
I agree, that would be my biggest attraction to such a series. It'd be nice to split the information into player/DM specific knowledge.
If these end up being hardbound $30-a-piece books, I would have to be much more choosey and would be less enthused. But if they were cheaper softcover books, I think I would definitely be into it.
Not likely to happen that way, but a boy can dream.
If these end up being hardbound $30-a-piece books, I would have to be much more choosey and would be less enthused. But if they were cheaper softcover books, I think I would definitely be into it.
Not likely to happen that way, but a boy can dream.
Get real, of course they're going to be hardcover. And probably $35 - $40. I wish wizards would figure out that I'm not an ATM for their company to withdraw money from... I'm a secretary, and they are pricing me out of the hobby. If they're pricing me out, they are DEFINITELY pricing out the kids they are hoping to attract.
- Ashavan
I'm having trouble envisioning what this would look like. I can see setting specific Monster Manuals, they've done those before for Realms in 3e and multiple settings in 2e with the Monstrous Compendium bundles. But setting specific DMG? Using Eberron as an example, I think they would either have to reprint from the setting neutral edition, or republish material from all the 3.5 Eberron expansion books. I suppose the other possibility for Eberron would be folding the development of psionics into it instead of a seperate line. But I would be surprised if the contents were "new".
My suspicion is that it will be structurally similar to campaign setting info as published in the past except instead of combined in one hardbound book, it will be split into player's guide, dm's guide, and monsters for both. Hardcover vs. softcover? Hard to say, depends who they're marketing to; the settings established fans, or newbies.
Contributor
|
I expect that one of the 'benefits' of this plan is that WotC can make updayes with each new release of the core books without calling it a new edition. They can deliver 4.5 as '4E Greyhawk' or whatever. They can shake up a lot of material, and probably get fewer complaints, because at least they will be giving you value for your money in the next setting rules. I can see all kinds of other advantages for WotC in this. The theoretical benefit for players is that you only need to buy the core books for your preferred setting and all the rules are integrated with the setting material. Nice thing to have, to be honest (I still recomend Paizo make one for Pathfinder), but obviously no Eberron player that wants to switch to 4E is going to wait to buy the core rules. I'll bet that whichever setting core books are released in 2011 will probably be the best version of 4E though.
|
|
I'd like to see a link, too.
Especially because this contradicts some of the previous information on 4e. According to older sources there are supposed to be 3 core books and the FR 4e campaign setting is to immediately follow.
In general I am against this concept. There are already too many 3.5e campaign setting by 3rd parties who basically paraphrase by and large just another variation of the core rules. The new setting content just consists of less than one half of the book.
I love the concept of SRD that you purchase the setting content only and have the core rules for the rest... Do you really need the same spells with different setting specific names each? Sounds to me like an excuse to sell more pages and spend less effort on setting specific content - it's got so far that I only assume the worst when it comes to 4e... :p
But maybe they just want to extend their Star Wars approach (d20 rules heavily modified) to all their SF / Fantasy settings and would like to give each setting its own "rules touch"?
Looking back to Paizo this would open up completely new opportunities: If 4e already offered so many variations on the "core core" rules...?
Greetings,
Günther
Sorry guys. No link per se. It's like when I heard about the end of the magazines, or that there was gonna' be a fourth edition, or that succubi had changed alignment. It was one of those weird things I read about (this time on my first foray over to Gleemax) where people were posting back and forth as though "everybody knew this". I gotta' figure it's at least somewhat on the money. Everyone was talking about it like they knew. How did they know? Well my guess is they bought some premium content to read some article I usually only get when someone reposts it here.
What will this look like? Will it have a lot of reprinted information each time? Not a clue. Honestly the people over there were too busy griping about it.
I can say this. It's on a post over there labeled "A PHB each year? Really?" under 4E Concerns and Critism.
|
"A PHB each year? Really?"
I remember reading something in one of the blog's about this. IIRC, it was stated that there would be multiple core books with expanded material. IE, PHBI covers classes ABC and races 123, whereas PHBII covers classes DEF and Races 456.
That understanding seemed to be reinforced by the developers when they justify not covering a certain class or race in the intial core books by revealing they will be covered in a later [core] books.
So maybe PHBII, III, IV = splatbooks...
Then again, I could be wrong.
~sighs~ So this is just one more reason to hold off for a few years before buying any 4.x ed books. All I can say is from this point on, my credit card bills get the money before WotC. Oh well. Thanks WotC. You have just helped me pay off my debt that much quicker.
P.S. - Paizo will still get my buisness no matter what. WotC is just on hold.
If they really are planning on 'staggering' what we have all come to consider 'Core' content....? Then I agree whole-heartedly with Sharoth.
I'm not too keen on 4th edition, but I am willing to give the whole thing a fair shot. If they are intentionally withholding some of the core content, just to get us to buy more books then I cry foul.
If instead they are expanding on a base core book, that is something else. But then again, that is about the same business model used for 3.5
From what we've seen thus far, it seems like WotC and Hasbro has something entirely new in mind for their marketing/sales strategy this time around. We'll just have to see.
|
|
Just waded through the above mentioned forum and a lot of it seems to be conjecture (and personal attacks). The only "confirmed" things I could find was that at GenCon they mentioned additional "core books" and in the podcasts they have stated there will be multiple MM's.
While the idea of having a PHB, DMG, and MM for each setting would make it easier to keep a few DMing trump cards, I'm not sure this is their actual plan. Instead, I get the impression that they'll be covering other "core topics." Things like new "power sources" (nature, psionics, music, etc) and new monsters. I have no clue what they would put in a DMG III or higher other than new magic items...
other than new magic items...
Please god no.... *whimper*
The last thing D&D needs is more magic items.
Personally I think the campaign specific DMGs would have locations, NPCs, and factions. Of course, there would e some magic items.
|
|
The last thing D&D needs is more magic items.
You may be in luck then. One of the blogs mentions that there will be fewer magic items in general in 4th ed. I think headbands of intellect and rings of protection were specifically mentioned as being out (and I assume so would related items).
Supposedly, a 4th edition character is more like a than "christmas shrub" or "charlie brown chirstmas tree" than a [3rd edition} "christmas tree."
Each year, Wizards is talking about releasing an entire line of core books (PHB, MM, DMG) unique to each campaign setting. Gone is the whole ambiguous setting garbage.
If this turns out to be true, the likelihood that I will play 4th edition is (as we used to say in the good ol' 1e days) nil.
Worst. Idea. Ever.
|
I suppose my level of enthusiasm depends on how much duplication is in each such book. A substantial portion of the 3.5 PHB is combat rules and spells. I don't see much point in having another book with all that material reprinted. If that information was replaced with setting specific spells and world information though, it would be very useful.
I think having all the rules you need to play contained in PHB2 is a great idea.
We know that PHB classes now use "power sorces", such as martial, divine and arcane. PHB2 might contain, for example, nature, ki and psionics power sources to support the Druid, Monk, and Psion characters (among others). Then PHB2 wouldn't contain a reprint of PHB1 spells, it would contain all new spells and powers relevant to the new classes. It wouldn't contain a reprint of PHB1 Feats and Talent Trees, but all new ones for the new Races and Classes in PHB2.
Reprinting skills and combat chapters is a GOOD option. If you were only interested in playing a Psion, Monk or Druid character for example, you wouldn't have to purchase PHB1 at all! I think this is a great way to get new players into the hobby - they can purchase any PHB and they have everything they need to play using those new Races and Classes - ignoring elves, half-elves, drow and eladrin altogether!
Consider that HALF the 3.5 PHB was given to spell descriptions, if you only every played Fighter, Rogue or Barbarian, then half the PHB was useless to you. This way you can purchase whichever PHB contains the character concept and options you want to play.
This is the BEST idea for introducing new players into the game - less initial outlay for them to play the cool character options previously found in the splat books.
I kind of like the idea, except how long do I have to wait for a Greyhawk set?
|
|
In fact, for all of those people mourning the loss of their favourite race/class, they could continue playing 3.5 through next year, and pick up the game the following year when such race/class might appear in PHB2, skipping PHB1 entirely.
The thing is, the 3.5 PHB was a required purchase to play the game before purchasing any other material. However, the 4Ed PHB1 might not be.
*shakes head*
the way Im reading this, it seems like it's one more thing wotc would be taking from the old wod bag of tricks. First they want to add in excessive metaplots and now multiple rule books for every setting. Things that WW left behind because it wasn't the right way to do things. So before when I had to buy 20 books to get all the things I need, I now have 50 books to buy most likely. Ever notice also how the prices stay the same or even go up but the page count gets lower and lower? Soon we will be paying $34.95 for a 50 page booklet.
I was hoping that the rules compendium was a hint at a good trend from them. I just bought that book Saturday but already love it. It's nice to have clear concise rules that are easy to find. Though from what I hear it could have been longer. Too bad they didnt keep it that way.
The way I've read it is that the idea will be very much like PHB II and DMG II. In other words, they won't reprint the skills system with each PHB; it'll contain classes and races. I think that basically, the 'PHB-a-Year' will replace the 'splat books'; there won't be a 'Complete' series for each class type and race type. It'll have races, classes, whatever prestige class-like thing there is, feats, talents, spells, etc.
The DMG II will contain new rules; probably 'power sources' rules to go with the stuff in the PHB II, magic items, optional rules, new ways of using skills and such, etc. The stuff that was in the Environment books would probably be in the various DMG's.
The MM will be just like the MM's we've been used to.
So it sounds like there will be actually fewer books.
The newly released fluff will obviously be off limits, the thing I take umbrage with is that the newer crunch will most certainly be as well. If they update the SRD at the same pace as the new set of three books, well that would be something entirely different.
other than new magic items...Please god no.... *whimper*
The last thing D&D needs is more magic items.
Personally I think the campaign specific DMGs would have locations, NPCs, and factions. Of course, there would e some magic items.
That's what great about the game if you want to use the same old standard magic items over and over you can.
Personally, I am of the opinion that most magic items should be unique that each creator of such things would add his personal flare to each and that (given the size investment they are) each should be tailored to a specific use or user.
|
|
While I strongly support the idea of fluff-heavy Player's Guide or specific crunch filled DM's Handbooks (with secrets, stats and metaplot ideas only in the latter) tied to a single setting, having "default" PHB or DMG crafted with a specific setting in mind is something I also dislike very much.
Taking away the possibility of homebrew granted by a neutral, basic handbook is... just too bad to consider. Anyhow, the yearly release plan doesn't hook me in the least, even without the setting flavor.
|
|
It does seem like an interesting idea, but the real proof will come with the quality of the books. Like others said, it really boils down to making you buy more books, especially DMs. Also, I have no reason to buy the Forgotten Realms DMG and PHB, because I already know that they are scrapping the whole setting and replacing it with something that only has the Forgotten Realms name slapped on it. It's not too far of a stretch to see them doing this same thing to any other old setting they may bring back in this format. If it's not "points of light" it doesn't belong in 4th edition because you have to have plenty of monsters to kill and dungeons to clear between town A and town B. That's my two coppers.
I kind of like the idea, except how long do I have to wait for a Greyhawk set?
*snort* Good one.
Oh, you were serious... sorry.
Something I didn't see mentioned is that if they do adopt the setting-a-year strategy, every year's books will have minor changes and updates to the ruleset. So, if you want to have, in print, the most recent version of the rules, you'll need to buy new core books every year.
Plus, these books are all going to be written by different people, with different agendas... there's the chance that a set of rules on, say, ship-to-ship combat or city adventures or underdark stuff will only be printed, or decently written, in a given setting--say, the Drow/Underdark stuff gets the best coverage in the FR books, but the City info is best in Eberron, while wilderness adventures get the best coverage in Mario's World...
So, if you want to run a whole-shootin'-match kind of campaign, you'll need to collect the entire set.
Each year, Wizards is talking about releasing an entire line of core books (PHB, MM, DMG) unique to each campaign setting. Gone is the whole ambiguous setting garbage.If this turns out to be true, the likelihood that I will play 4th edition is (as we used to say in the good ol' 1e days) nil.
Worst. Idea. Ever.
I agree.
Aye the buzz over at the Enworld boards is that each year they will be releasaing 3 new core books (ie. PHB2 DMG2 and MM2, etc) as well as world specific books, such as forgottean realms and Ebberon.
I actually like the idea of a PHB2, 3, 4 etc instead of the "complete XXX" series. I mean the book would be nice and well rounded, and if its modeled after Players handbook 1, were talking like 8 new classes and races across a wide spectrum of power sources. PHB2 might give us monks and samurai's with Ki abilities, Druids and barbarians with some type of nature tie in, bards, etc. WE could also get gnomes, half orcs and other intresting races. Basically you get a balanced product hitting all the power sources, instead of a book chalked full of one type.
I like this idea instead of getting some thing like "Complete mage" which gives me 1 or 2 decent classes/prestige classes and 15 more really lousy ones all of the same type.
Having a new monster manual every year is pretty standard and I'e always liked that. Gave me something to look forward to each summer, something I knew as a DM I'd enjoy.
Having a DMG2, DMG3, DMG 4 though..well i'm not sold on. In all honesy, as an experienced DM, I really only open the book for calculating XP, looking up magic items, and peeking at a few Pclasses. BUT i guess if your a new DM, all the world building information is a boon. But how many ways can you go abouot telling people how to make thier world? I have a feeling that the DMG X series will be the weakest of the 3 books each year, because they will probably stick to the same formula (IE. some new terrain rules, a new example town or dungeon, some P-classes, and some magic items.) I just don't think It will have enough of a drive from year to year, unless they rework what the purpose of a DMG is. If it becomes the source for prestige classes and magic items each year, then players will buy it too. But marketing a book to 1/6th of thier market base (DM's) most of whom already have enough experience under thier belts to not really need most of the tools in the book seems like product suicide.
Anyhow, we will have to wait and see.
PHB 2, 3, 4, etc ---Thumbs up
MM 2, 3, 4 etc---- Thumbs up
DMG 2, 3, 4 etc----Thumbs down
This is consistant with what WotC had originally stated. I'm okay with this format (PHB2, PHB3, etc.) as opposed to campaign setting-based PHBs.
Still, I'm only interested in one book: the first PHB.
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
I actually like the idea of a PHB2, 3, 4 etc instead of the "complete XXX" series. I mean the book would be nice and well rounded, and if its modeled after Players handbook 1, were talking like 8 new classes and races across a wide spectrum of power sources. PHB2 might give us monks and samurai's with Ki abilities, Druids and barbarians with some type of nature tie in, bards, etc. WE could also get gnomes, half orcs and other intresting races. Basically you get a balanced product hitting all the power sources, instead of a book chalked full of one type.
Huh. That does sound pretty cool - somewhat like Arcana Unearthed, but hopefully with better names and fewer furries.
This expanded core thing is probably worthy of its own thread given that everyone is circling around the concept. Partly, I think it's because many of us have memories of the bad old days of 2e, when books had so many cross references that it felt like you needed every product produced by TSR to play.
On the one hand, the 3e philosophy of "there are only 3 core books" was nice because it limited the universe of material. On the other hand, it sucked because it limited the universe of material. All the supplemental material ended up in a strange vacuum caused by the lack of cross references to other supplemental material (and the lack of cross references to supplemental material in the core books). A damned good example is swift actions, which I think are described in every single book published by WotC in the past 3 years.
Hopefully though, even if there is new "core" material, the products will still include sufficient stats to use the material without requiring all the "core" expansions (the way Dungeon was and Pathfinder is). The movement to the electronic system will also be helpful in this regard because WotC will have the capability to update older material to reflect new races/classes. So, if the PHBI has a spell that effects dogs, grizzlies, and elves and the PHBII introduces the dog-elf, the PHBI electronic supplement can be revised to update the spell to effect dog-elfs.
It's a new direction, and one not entirely without merit.
(Assuming, of course, that the execution is done properly).
|
|
Sebastian raises a good point regarding cross-referencing between books. If everything is now "core", then you can expect to see adventures and other products draw from all available PHBs, MMs etc.
So, how would you run an adventure featuring a Tiefling Warlock (PHB1), Lizardman Shaman (PHB3) and a Frost Giant (MM2) if you only own PHB2 and MM1?
Solution: substitute creatures, races, classes of appropriate level that occupy the same role - Striker, Leader, Controller, etc.
Tiefling Warlock (PHB1) becomes a Gnome Sorceror (PHB2), Lizard Shaman (PHB4) becomes a Half-Orc Druid (PHB2), Frost Giant (MM2) becomes a Cyclops (MM1).
This sounds like a good application of the concept of characer/monster "roles".
|
In a way, this modular fashion is the one thing that has made me set against 4E.
After PHB 15, and DMG 9, and all of the MM series 1-89 it will be a pain in the backside.
Besides, if they do make "core" setting books (PHB FR, DMG Greyhawk, MM Eberon etc) it is almost a repeat of the problems that led to 2E's collapse and the sale of TSR to WOTC in the first place.
One of the fundamental problems that was found was TSR had so many setting it was supporting that none made a great deal of money.
If WOTC is planning on supporting at least 3 settings in this way, they are traveling down the same path. Let's face it, they added Eberon for 3E, so I must assume they are going to eventually add another setting for 4E.
They need one core setting and kill the rest. Let 3rd party companies or fandom keep them alive. I know all the FR, Grehawk and Eberon fans will start crying. But I am a fan of Mystara, which was killed and never even saw a 3E incarnation from a 3rd party (unlike Dragonlance and Ravenloft). Most games are homebrews and these settings mean nothing to most fans. Sure keep the novels going, but why support them with source books?
I mean first of all what is going to change substantially about a setting from 3E to 4E? Does that mean that the history of Greyhawk gets a whole new rewrite? Nope. So, ummmm what does 4E support do for you?
I mean really , I use a 1E setting and have no problem what-so-ever running games. Does it mean I can never use Bargle because I don't have current stat blocks for him? Of course not, I wouldn't use him right out of the book anyway. I restat him as much as needed for my game.
Nope. Kill the redundant settings and stick to just one.
I loved all the old settings, but this idea reeks of a Marketing Department discovering a new set of teats on the cashcow.
Don't think for a moment that they will limit themselves to the world books- there'll be monster manuals, profession books and other fluff garbage- it sounds like they're just shifting the emphisis so they can get into your wallet easier and without the kind of negative response they got when 4th Ed was announced: "What!?! But my new shiny addendums will be obselete- NOOOOOO!!!!"
I'm an upbeat kinda guy, but being treated to this kind of flim flam is just getting me down.