RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I’ve just finished up my part of adventure H2: Thunderspire Labyrinth. I’m pretty happy with the way it turned out. I think we’ve managed to capture a striking mood with the setting for the adventure (a great subterranean minotaur city, now in ruins), and I’m pretty proud of the map I put together for one of the adventure sections. My part of the adventure features a duergar stronghold. We decided to do something a little more ambitious than making them “the drow of the dwarves,” so we took the half-fiend durzagon and made our 4e duergar more like that. Duergar are a race of corrupt, devil-tainted dwarves. Some can turn invisible, some can enlarge, and others command nasty infernal powers.
I liked the Durzagon, but my lovely psionic, enslaved by <Wizards IP> fought their way free, abandoned by their 'good' kin duergar are gone, like the old fashioned tieflings.
*sob*
And they're not 'the drow of the dwarves' they're cooler.
Yes, I've said before I'm not buying 4.x, still hurts to see more history tossed.
(Edit, forgot to mention I read it on EnWorld)
|
Once again, another "fluff + related crunch" change in 4e that I don't like.
I'm not saying it's intrinsecally wrong: simply, it's not my taste, and I feel sad that to change some fluff about a race they also rework much of the crunch related to it, disregarding established lore.
A good number of homebrews will have to do their homework to set things straight.
IIRC, remember that one of the design goals of 4E is to make monster encounters fresh so that players will not be "ho-hum - another monster I've fought for 30 years".
And Mike Mearls loves to tinker....
A good number of homebrews will have to do their homework to set things straight.
I hat 4E just for the fact that so many homebrews are going to have to make the exact same changes to bring 4E around to their world.
4e adventures are $24.95 now
4e adventures are $24.95 now
Heh. Figures. Well, you know what they say: less is more.
Why does every homebrew have to change? Will Wizards swoop into your house and beat you up otherwise?
And Mike Mearls loves to tinker....
Wait until you see his Bearowl and Bearbugs they are always elite!Warebe!
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
I liked the Durzagon, but my lovely psionic, enslaved by <Wizards IP> fought their way free, abandoned by their 'good' kin duergar are gone, like the old fashioned tieflings.
Wait...what are the Derro then? I've never been able to keep the two straight. I've always seen them as the drow of dwarves. Except I think Derro are crazier. Is that the difference?
|
I liked the Durzagon, but my lovely psionic, enslaved by <Wizards IP> fought their way free, abandoned by their 'good' kin duergar are gone, like the old fashioned tieflings.Wait...what are the Derro then? I've never been able to keep the two straight. I've always seen them as the drow of dwarves. Except I think Derro are crazier. Is that the difference?
There's been some (I think) official sources that say Derro are human / dwarf cross-breeds. And yeah, they're mega-crazy.
Why does every homebrew have to change? Will Wizards swoop into your house and beat you up otherwise?
If they want to do 4e they have to change their duergar or make their own version in the new rules. Which they can do, but its work to get back to normal which is odd.
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
There's been some (I think) official sources that say Derro are human / dwarf cross-breeds. And yeah, they're mega-crazy.
That sounds right. The one thing I liked about dueregar were their arachknights. Those were pretty cool. Even though they were spider oriented. There was a 2e ecology about them that was nifty.
|
|
Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I certainly haven't been sold on a lot of the 4E "flavour" changes I've heard about - but this one doesn't bother me much for some reason. It actually kinda works, IMO ... but maybe that's because I was never that into Duergar. I can see how it would bother people who are.
|
|
That sounds right. The one thing I liked about dueregar were their arachknights. Those were pretty cool. Even though they were spider oriented. There was a 2e ecology about them that was nifty.
There's been some (I think) official sources that say Derro are human / dwarf cross-breeds. And yeah, they're mega-crazy.
Yeah, and they had cool saddles that allowed them to ride upside down and stuff. That was pretty cool. Although having the spider association didn't help that whole "drow of the dwarves" image.
|
Why does every homebrew have to change? Will Wizards swoop into your house and beat you up otherwise?If they want to do 4e they have to change their duergar or make their own version in the new rules. Which they can do, but its work to get back to normal which is odd.
I know I'm going to eventually end up with 4e products. Its crazy the number of house rules I'm going to have to have though. I've never had a lot of house rules before and already I realize that I'm going to have to make things up for alignment, the planes, illusionists, evil dwarves, and tieflings just to enjoy myself.
I actually kinda like the change to the duergar. Maybe it helps that I wasn't that crazy about em before. They seem a little less run of the mill now. So, I consider this to be a good change in a sea of bad changes.
I think this could be a good thing. The "enslaved and altered by mind flayers" (right?) origin is pretty well used by the githyanki and githzerai, so the fiendish ancestry might be a good thing. Of course, now instead of "the drow of the dwarves" they may just be the "tieflings of the dwarves". Huge change. They still go invisible and gigantic, though, so it seems mostly like a fluff change.
Yeah, and they had cool saddles that allowed them to ride upside down and stuff. That was pretty cool. Although having the spider association didn't help that whole "drow of the dwarves" image.
In one of the Class Acts in a (fairly) recent Dragon, there were various weird Underdark animals, and one was this cool black cave lizard. I think it was also good at climbing, so if you wanted to use that aspect, instant solution, right there. (Sorry that I forgot issue number. I'll turn it up later, I'm sure...)
Duergar rule. Long live the Duergar.
Not only do I not care, but I feel the need to share my indifference with anyone who will listen, wasting another 3 seconds of someone's life. I would like to thank the OP for the chance to NOT contribute to this thread.
IIRC, remember that one of the design goals of 4E is to make monster encounters fresh so that players will not be "ho-hum - another monster I've fought for 30 years".
What, they couldn't make new monsters? You know, I'm tired of dragons. I think dragons would be much cooler if they were more like wyverns, so from now on all dragons have stingers and no forelimbs. Nope, can't just add in new wyvern-like creatures, gotta replace all dragons with wyverns. Its fresh!
Of course, now I miss the wyverns, but I've already got two-legged flying stinging lizards, so I'll have to come up with something new for those. I know! I'll just make Pseudodragons bigger, yeah, then wyverns still have a sting but now they're fresh! And so on, until every monster's name is shifted down the ranks, leaving the poor gnomes, who, having no monsters left to be shifted too, are tossed away into the wind.
So now a fire giant is a hill giant that plays with fire
|
|
I certainly haven't been sold on a lot of the 4E "flavour" changes I've heard about - but this one doesn't bother me much for some reason. It actually kinda works, IMO ... but maybe that's because I was never that into Duergar. I can see how it would bother people who are.Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Yeah. Actually, one of my favorite characters was a duergar paladin amongst the dwarves of Felbarr. He was constantly pushing the gauntlet on defending the Citadel against the evils of the region ... sort of a deathwish if you will.
I'll probably house rule my own duergar. I agree with the OP, this is another flavorful piece of crap.
I'll probably house rule my own duergar. I agree with the OP, this is another flavorful piece of crap.
D&D has a flavor.
|
|
There's been some (I think) official sources that say Derro are human / dwarf cross-breeds. And yeah, they're mega-crazy.
When introduced in Greyhawk, the Derro were presented as a human/dwarf crossbreed created by the Suel imperium as a more tractable replacement for dwarf slave miners. The insanity part came later and had to do with the death/imprisonment of one of their two racial demigods.
as for Baker's latest "Wunderidea", I find his idea of fluff to be decidedly unpalatable. Ever since Wotc selected him as the winner of the "fan campaign world contest" when he was already a published freelance designer for them, I've monitored the type of work he produced. I did not like Eberon, and of the many 4ed ideas he has generated or lauded, I have yet to see one fluff change I can stomach.
I know the Paizo folks asked us to play nice, so please do not construe this as a personal attack on Mr. Baker. It is more akin to a complete rejection of his design sensibilities. <the rest of this post SELF-CENSORED FOR ACUTE SALTINESS>
Ever since Wotc selected him as the winner of the "fan campaign world contest" when he was already a published freelance designer for them
Wizards campaign open call was never intended to be amateur only. IIRC, there were several entries from inside the company.
|
|
There's been some (I think) official sources that say Derro are human / dwarf cross-breeds. And yeah, they're mega-crazy.When introduced in Greyhawk, the Derro were presented as a human/dwarf crossbreed created by the Suel imperium as a more tractable replacement for dwarf slave miners. The insanity part came later and had to do with the death/imprisonment of one of their two racial demigods.
as for Baker's latest "Wunderidea", I find his idea of fluff to be decidedly unpalatable. Ever since Wotc selected him as the winner of the "fan campaign world contest" when he was already a published freelance designer for them, I've monitored the type of work he produced. I did not like Eberon, and of the many 4ed ideas he has generated or lauded, I have yet to see one fluff change I can stomach.
I know the Paizo folks asked us to play nice, so please do not construe this as a personal attack on Mr. Baker. It is more akin to a complete rejection of his design sensibilities. <the rest of this post SELF-CENSORED FOR ACUTE SALTINESS>
Thanks for the info on Derro underling - I think that's what I was thinking of, only the details were hazy.
As for the rest ... erm, I'm not sure, but I think the original discussion was about Richard Baker, while you seem to be referring to Keith Baker. Unless you know something I don't, I think they're different people.
|
|
Ever since Wotc selected him as the winner of the "fan campaign world contest" when he was already a published freelance designer for themWizards campaign open call was never intended to be amateur only. IIRC, there were several entries from inside the company.
David! Nice contributer tag ... but what did you do with Hill Giant? ;-)
Hopefully this will lead to the drow becoming something more than "the drow of the elves". I'm thinking black dragon-blooded elves that spew acid. Hey, they can team up with those orc shamans I've been hearing about! Thats what I'm talking about, guys, monsters designed to work together! Throw in some dire fiendish giraffes, you've got yourself an encounter!
A dwarf that turns into a giant! D&D never had THAT before! Guys? Guys? .
.
.
.
.What?
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
as for Baker's latest "Wunderidea", I find his idea of fluff to be decidedly unpalatable. Ever since Wotc selected him as the winner of the "fan campaign world contest" when he was already a published freelance designer for them, I've monitored the type of work he produced. I did not like Eberon, and of the many 4ed ideas he has generated or lauded, I have yet to see one fluff change I can stomach.
You have your Bakers confused.
Keith created Eberron and changelings.
Rich killed my Duergar.
While I'm not a big fan of this idea, I do feel that I need to point something out. Rich Baker is on the Story Team, but not its lead. He is taking a lot of flack for making decisions that I don't think he is making himself. In fact, Rich has been posting in a very professional manner and presenting actual facts about 4th edition, while other members of the design team have been saying things like, "We're doing something with duergar, and it will be awesomely massively cool. You be sad you ever read your 3.5 books."
So its kind of ironic that the guy that has been the most informative and professional in all of this is getting the most slack. I'm not saying that some of these ideas aren't his, but a lot of them aren't. Seriously, I wish more of the designers had Rich's straight forward ability to just present information rather than telling us how cool and awesome 4th edition will be.
That having been said, not of fan of this news.
|
|
You have your Bakers confused.
Keith created Eberron and changelings.
Rich killed my Duergar.
I know what that's like. People confuse me with Ian Abercrombie all the time.
I know what that's like. People confuse me with Ian Abercrombie all the time.
Well, yeah, the resemblance is... wait, what?
Not only do I not care, but I feel the need to share my indifference with anyone who will listen, wasting another 3 seconds of someone's life. I would like to thank the OP for the chance to NOT contribute to this thread.
If any post was worth commenting on, it wasn't this one.
-The Gneech
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
As for the rest ... erm, I'm not sure, but I think the original discussion was about Richard Baker, while you seem to be referring to Keith Baker. Unless you know something I don't, I think they're different people.
Rich Burlew --> Rich Baker --> Keith Baker!
I'll let Razz fill in the rest of the conspriacy theories.
While I'm not a big fan of this idea, I do feel that I need to point something out. Rich Baker is on the Story Team, but not its lead. He is taking a lot of flack for making decisions that I don't think he is making himself. In fact, Rich has been posting in a very professional manner and presenting actual facts about 4th edition, while other members of the design team have been saying things like, "We're doing something with duergar, and it will be awesomely massively cool. You be sad you ever read your 3.5 books."
Regardless of who's making the decisions over there, I'll just never understand their incessant need to mess with things that don't need to be changed. They recently gave some examples of how a Bulette could be played better, but they didn't give it devil traits. The point being: I don't think they have to change the nature of creatures by tacking on superfluous powers in order to make them more interesting.
|
|
>>We decided to do something a little more ambitious than making them “the drow of the dwarves...
Awesome! Now my buddy's dream of releasing his short story on "Fizzit Do-Gooder the dark deep dwarf" with his twin warhammer style and Rothe companion "Brew-ha-ha" can come true and finally see print!
Oh, in the immortal words of Charlie Brown "can't you tell sarcasm when you hear it?" :-)
Yet another stupid change that guarantees all the cool leftover income I'll have in 2008 thanks to WotC...thanks, chumps!
-DM Jeff
They recently gave some examples of how a Bulette could be played better, but they didn't give it devil traits.
You mean, "didn't give it devil traits yet". They still have plenty of time to decide that yes, Bulettes would be MUCH cooler if they were red, covered in tiny horns, and shouted mean-spirited battle cries in Infernal while blasting hellfire from their twenty mouths. I think this version might perhaps be the most controversial version for the "D&D is the devil!" groups yet, as you've now got a devil-tainted core race, a core class that draws power from pacts formed with evil entities, and now devil dwarves (I think I'm missing one more devil-related detail, but maybe I'm just devil-happy). Perhaps they should replace the "Dragons" with "Devils", as it seems to be where its all going, at least at this hazy, mystery-shrouded stage of the game.
Originally they were going to change the name of Infernal to Devilish, since too many people had to look that word up (poor Todd Stroger), but then the decided that since skills were too complicated, so were languages, plus, it left too many options to slow down play in social combat situations . . .
"Hm . . . If I use elvish I'd be better at dazzling him with superfluous vocabulary, but if I want to go for the stun attack, dwarven is better for insults."
Have to streamline play, you know.
Have to streamline play, you know.
Ah yes, we'll be down to Common, Subcommon, and Supercommon, or in layman's terms, Roleplaying, Rollplaying, and Spelling Bee.
"Wait, I want to talk to the troll instead of stabbing him!"
"I'm sorry, but you only have Subcommon, so violence is the only language you know."
"Babau. B A B A U. Babau. Now can I charge?"
"Sorry, no, but your next word is Svirfneblin."
|
|
as for Baker's latest "Wunderidea", I find his idea of fluff to be decidedly unpalatable. Ever since Wotc selected him as the winner of the "fan campaign world contest" when he was already a published freelance designer for them, I've monitored the type of work he produced. I did not like Eberon, and of the many 4ed ideas he has generated or lauded, I have yet to see one fluff change I can stomach.
You have your Bakers confused.
Keith created Eberron and changelings.
Rich killed my Duergar.
my bad. I apologize for lumping Keith and rich together. However, since I have never been a fan of Eberon, the criticism of design sensibilities can be applied equally to both Bakers.
As to Rich's forthcoming nature in his blog, I can only say this. I dislike the changes that are being put forward for 4ed. Regardless of how personable and detailed MR. Baker is, he is still supporting changes that I strongly dislike. SO whether or not his comments are well thought out or more akin to "4ed will r0x0r your s0x0rs", I still blame him for being party to this abortion of an edition. 30 years of gaming should not easily be cast aside.
Of course. Makes perfect sense. Why leave the duergar alone? Their back story was cool. Can't have that. Plus, some people apparently called them "drow of the dwarves", even though they have few in common beyond the evil part and the underground part. What else? Ah yes: Nothing.
At least they have another excuse to do a Realms Shattering Event with accompanying trilogy. How one night, the hells ripped open because the all the planes got messed up because mystra croaked, and they took a night out and first killed all male duergar, than raped all female duergar, just to show everyone how nasty and badass they were. And all because Asmodeus gave them a list of three things they had to do so he could become a god - and they got drunk and messed it all up. After they were done with the duergar, they were asking him: "Done the first two, now where are those drow chicks so we can cut off their beards?"
Now we only need to know how they'll kill off the whole gnomish race in the 4e Realms, and the mess is perfect.
I'm probably banned already on all Wizards boards (EN World, Gleemax, whatever), so could someone please go there and tell them that I'm convinced now that I won't buy anything from them ever again? Apparently they thought there was still doubt in my heart, so they have to keep screwing it all up until I swear that I won't buy it. ;-)
