From EN World:
EN World member Wartorn has posted the table of contents from Wizards Presents: Worlds & Monsters:
D&D and the Birth of a New Edition (2 pages)
The Process of Re-Creation (4 pages) - reimagining monsters for 4e
The Setting of D&D (4 pages) - the Points of Light setting, and how it came about
The New Cosmology (2 pages) - an overview of the new cosmology and the end of the great wheel
The World (8 pages) - Includes sections Fallen Empires, Locations of Note, The End of Human Dominion
Dragons (6 pages)
Giants (2 pages)
The Underdark (4 pages)
The Feywild (8 pages)
The ShadowFell (8 pages)
Art Gallery (1 page)
The Elemental Chaos (12 pages) - Elementals, Locations of Note, and the Abyss
The Astral Sea (10 pages) - includes The Gods, Angels, Devils
The Far Realm (6 pages) - includes Aberrant Creatures and Mind Flayers
Staff Thoughts on 4th Edition (13 pages) - sections about... lots of things
The Next Word (1 page) - a few words about what's coming
He also mentions a little about the Far Realm:
Here's a rundown on the Far Realm (which I jumped to because I'd never heard of it)
In summary, based on the fluff, it is definitely Lovecraftian but more on the 'outside and bizarre reality' side than the 'outer space' side.
The Far Realm is formally acknowledged in the cosmology, and 'is responsible for monstrosities that haunt the universe'. Specifcally, all aberrations are linked to it.
A Far Realm specific reason is suggested as a source of the conflict between the illithid and aboleth.
Perhaps taking a cue from WFRP, the Far Realm is said to 'seep in' sometimes, overlaying the landscape with an unnerving sense of dread, even distorting it, and tainting the flora and fauna. Strange new creatures emerge from this 'polluted reality' and insane practitioners sometimes 'willfully merge the natural and the obscene'
Also mentioned is that aberration is not a type. Type is now distinct from Origin - so you have Humanoids (type) with an Origin of fey (eladrin) , aberration (mind flayer), elemental (archon) , natural (man)
Finally there's a page and a half or so on the mind flayer: in short: they are essentially the same as in the previous edition just with fewer powers (taken from the set of those that most define them) that are easier and clearer to run. There are a few mechanical tidbits about mind blast and dominate each being a 'renewable power - useable once per encounter', whereas tentacle lash and grab are basic attacks backed up by situational powers 'bore into brain', 'thrall' and 'interpose thrall'
So far the book seems to be pretty close to Races and Classes in terms of value - and for me it is having the same effect: reinforcing my faith in the designers, making some things clearer in a positive way, increasing my enthusiasm for 4e. If you enjoyed R&C I'd recommend it.
And yet more details! They just keep coming!
The Temple of Elemental Evil is mentioned as a Location of Note. This section is said to contain 'future adventuring locales'...
Dragons:
Bunches of stuff here, the highlights include:
The different colors of Dragon have different monster roles - in other words, some are artillery (blue), some are brutes (white), some are soldiers (red) and so on
Dragons are solo monsters who 'get to do more on their turn than most monsters do' and also 'get to do a lot when it's not their turn' (like the tail slap we already knew about, but also mentioned is the green dragon's ability to poison you if you get too close)
Dragons have fewer abilities, focused on the most iconic ones (continuing the theme). For example, the oldest black dragon is said to have only five possible standard actions, with unique magical abilities taking the place of spells simply taken from the wizard's lists.
Dragons aren't forced into specific 'alignments'. Their motives can vary from a baseline - chromatic are wild, metallic like to be in control but good and evil manifests in each.
There are two new flavours of metallic dragon which displace bronze and brass from the core group. The new metallics are Iron and Adamantine.
Chromatic dragons grow in raw elemental power as they age which manifests as unique new powers related to the appropriate element. An ancient red's breath weapon, for example, can 'scour the fire resistance right off you'
An all new look and set of powers for the green dragon; they are back to breathing poison!
Giants:
There are Huge versions of the standard giants called Titans - these are more closely tied to the elements and have greater power
Giants in general are more elemental in nature, and there is greater variety between the standard types
The Giant type is specifically for Giants. Trolls, ogres, ettins don't 'necessarily' have the Giant 'type'
Underdark:
Now considered easier to get to
Mentioned are Drow, Troglodytes, Mind Flayers, Kuo-Toas (aboleth servant/worshippers), aboleths, myconids
Vault of the Drow is mentioned as an Underdark Location of Note
Feywild:
Mentioned inhabitants include hags, yeth hounds, centaurs, eladrins, treants, fomorians, unicorns, elves, firbolgs, the Wild Hunt, red caps, quicklings, will-o'wisps, dark ones, pixies
There is a fey reflection of the underdark, ruled over by fomorians
The Isle of Dread is mentioned as a Location of Note
Gnomes are a possible fey-dwelling race
Pixies, well, don't want to ruin the surprise
Shadowfell:
Merges Negative Energy Plane and Plane of Shadow, removing the irritating bits that make these places a pain to visit
Shadow is a power source. Involved with stealth, illusion, dread, 'devastating enemies' and 'necrotic energy'
They've re-concepted the undead, adding the animus, providing 'vitality and mobility', as a companion to the soul and the body.
Very interesting descriptions of how different varieties of undead are now explained. Shadow are the animus freed of body and soul, for example.
Lots of details about how the new cosmology explains resurrection and reincarnation
Shadowfell is inhabited by ... the Shadar-kai.
I find it interesting and an improvement over last months "preview"
It feels like it might be worth buying even if its merely all fluff.
Anyone care to comment?
|
Dragons aren't forced into specific 'alignments'. Their motives can vary from a baseline - chromatic are wild, metallic like to be in control but good and evil manifests in each.
There are two new flavours of metallic dragon which displace bronze and brass from the core group. The new metallics are Iron and Adamantine.
One more thing to houserule.
Most of the rest I don't really mind, but why mess with something as basic to the game as dragons in this way? :(
One more thing to houserule.
Most of the rest I don't really mind, but why mess with something as basic to the game as dragons in this way? :(
It's a new setting.
Changing whether dragons are good or evil, or which colors are dominant is a 'homebrew' rather than a houserule. Having a rule that states "all blue dragons are evil" and assuming players know that rule will result in a campaign that reaks of metagaming, IMO.
|
|
So the book mentions the Temple of Elemental Evil and Vault of the Drow, huh? That worries me, and I'll tell you why.
The scenario I see is that the core world will be Greyhawk, but a Greyhawk that has seen the release and rampage of Tharizdun (as hinted at in the recent "Dungeon" adventure Essence of Evil), and is so devestated by that event as to be virtually unrecognizable as its former self and more akin to the "Points-of-light" world they keep talking about.
Either that, or this is another example of 4E killing Greyhawk and taking its stuff. Or......I'm delusional and paranoid.
Indeed, that sounds as a campaign setting.
|
|
One more thing to houserule.
Most of the rest I don't really mind, but why mess with something as basic to the game as dragons in this way? :(
It's a new setting.
Changing whether dragons are good or evil, or which colors are dominant is a 'homebrew' rather than a houserule. Having a rule that states "all blue dragons are evil" and assuming players know that rule will result in a campaign that reaks of metagaming, IMO.
Homebrew, house rule. Its still one more thing to change when (if) I switch.
And as far as all blue dragons being evil - almost all blue dragons are evil in almost every gameworld in D&D now. And almost every player in the game today knows that chromatic dragons are inherently evil and good dragons are good. I am sorry that you find the current situation so distasteful to your sensibilities.
|
Dragons aren't forced into specific 'alignments'. Their motives can vary from a baseline - chromatic are wild, metallic like to be in control but good and evil manifests in each.
There are two new flavours of metallic dragon which displace bronze and brass from the core group. The new metallics are Iron and Adamantine.
One more thing to houserule.
Most of the rest I don't really mind, but why mess with something as basic to the game as dragons in this way? :(
I don't really see the problem.
I won't miss bronze and brass dragons, if you are going to have metallic dragons they should be pure metals (bronze and brass are alloys made from copper and tin, and copper and zinc respectively), I can still remember a player making a joke about a tin dragon shagging a copper dragon.
And as for the alignment change, that won't really bother me much either, it essentially means to me that metallic dragons will see more use.
And almost every player in the game today knows that chromatic dragons are inherently evil and good dragons are good. I am sorry that you find the current situation so distasteful to your sensibilities.
Players may 'know' this, but character don't. If you're roleplaying character knowledge then it should make no difference if all blue dragons are evil or not.
And vice versa. If you find a player who has memorized the 4th edition monster manual, and he enters your world with a character and you're not using iron dragons or platinums, why would he really care in character?
D&D is a ruleset first and a setting afterwards. The most popular setting in D&D has always been homebrew.
I am astonished the brass and bronze are leaving. The whole pure metal vs allow doesn't hold much - since white and black aren't colors either. If they wanted "combat metals" they could have made a new branch of 5 neutrals that aren't gems and slid Bronze to go with Steel, Iron, Adamantine, Mithril, etc etc. Still wouldn't it have been easier to move the list to 7 dragons of each and add 2 more colors? There were like what, a few dozen dragons already as it was?
|
An all new look and set of powers for the green dragon; they are back to breathing poison!
Not to nitpick, but greens never used poison gas as a breath weapon. They use chlorine gas. Chlorine gas is nasty (ask a WWI vet) because, sparing the hows and whys, it's like breathing in hydrochloric acid. For simplicity's sake, I'd imagine (because "Acid" is a 3E energy type and chlorine isn't), green dragons in the latest incarnation of the game spew acid.
Yeah, I miss Green Dragons breathing out Chlorine Gas! It was a great attack because it was caustic, you could hold your breath and it wouldn't help. They switched to acid gas to make it easier for energy types and such, but I never liked how it "duplicated" the Black's energy type.
I have to clear something up - in Native American myth, the Thunderbirds were not dragons. The closest thing to a dragon were the Unktehila, the terrible lizards that lived in and around the lakes and rivers. They consumed and destroyed without end, until the Thunderbirds (which were based on eagles) were forced to destroy them. The snakes and lizards left in that region are all that remains of the Unktehila to this day.
- My best friend in Montana, who is Native American, would kill me if I didn't try to correct that. No offense intended.
EDIT: - so insert Unktehila in the Native American myths - The post is most valid. Dragons are in every mythology - some good, some evil, some are unable to be categorized in human alignments. Colors, metals, etc matter little - I for one don't want 3 or 4 dozen types of dragons though - and in my worlds, I haven't.
|
|
Players may 'know' this, but character don't. If you're roleplaying character knowledge then it should make no difference if all blue dragons are evil or not.
I don't know that I ever mentioned characters. I think I was talking about players.
But actually what I really meant was things I would have to change in order for it to feel like D&D to me.
D&D has always had as part of its world-view (aside from certain homebrews) good metallic and evil chromatic dragons. The whole visage of Tiamat is predicated on this fact (you notice there are no silver heads on her.)
Changing whether dragons are good or evil, or which colors are dominant is a 'homebrew' rather than a houserule. Having a rule that states "all blue dragons are evil" and assuming players know that rule will result in a campaign that reaks of metagaming, IMO.
Also, alignment is (as I understand it) being made optional -- thus alignment restrictions really won't make much sense any more.
For what it's worth.
|
|
Changing whether dragons are good or evil, or which colors are dominant is a 'homebrew' rather than a houserule. Having a rule that states "all blue dragons are evil" and assuming players know that rule will result in a campaign that reaks of metagaming, IMO.Also, alignment is (as I understand it) being made optional -- thus alignment restrictions really won't make much sense any more.
For what it's worth.
Yeah, except my 'homebrew/house-rules' is going to have alignments as well. Because, again, thats part of what makes it D&D to me. :/
|
|
Dragons aren't forced into specific 'alignments'. Their motives can vary from a baseline - chromatic are wild, metallic like to be in control but good and evil manifests in each.
There are two new flavours of metallic dragon which displace bronze and brass from the core group. The new metallics are Iron and Adamantine.
One more thing to houserule.
Most of the rest I don't really mind, but why mess with something as basic to the game as dragons in this way? :(
You could ask that same question about almost all of the changes they are making in 4E. The best answer is "Because the designers wanted it that way." It's very arbitrary and highly unsatisfying, but that's just the way it is. 4E is just an extremely heavily houseruled homebrew game.
|
Either that, or this is another example of 4E killing Greyhawk and taking its stuff. Or......I'm delusional and paranoid.
No. Your neither.
For the core books they wanted to come up with a generic lexicon of names and concepts that could be used or dumped as needed. The new core setting is actually just real loose fluff to give us a vocabulary if we do not want to use a specific campaign setting.
On the one hand I like the idea. On the other it will take some getting used to.
Besides, before Greyhawk was mugged it tried to kill Blackmoor and take its stuff.