The fact that you said this:
[quote=]
While I didn't look at the combat or other mechanics, I looked over the races and classes.
This is just SO not ROLE(!)-playing anymore. I did not want to believe it at first, but this IS some friggin MMORPG (those actually don't even worth be called RPGs - they are ALL nothing but Third Person Action Adventure)!
Shows that you didn't even read the damn books. I aint got a problem with people not liking 4E or anything but at least actually know what your talking about.
I'm thinking people need to chill a bit here.
Go ahead, have a smoke, a shot, and a bottle of beer. Everything will be, once again, right with the world.
|
Well from what ive seen so far I get the impression that damage and amount of Hp dont scale up that well (Hp seem to shoot through the roof whilst damage dosent really seem to go up all that much) So as I said before I see high lvl combat being a very slow slugfest.
Definetly Inching from on the fence to not interested
Yeah, ok. But than say something like: "How can you judge without actually reading the mechanics?" instead of: "Oh oh oh, your such a big flamer! You should be banned for this!"
Honestly, I scanned over the monster manual, and it just reads as a compilation for a MMORPG. All this "Troglodyt Mauler, Troglodyt Curse Chanter, Troglodyte Honkiponk" (I hope you know what I mean).
I might have overlooked it, but all there was about discribring the different "types" of one monster, was how they act in combat, and that is just sad for a real RPG.
I can see that the new Edition will prove maybe even VERY GOOD for all those groups out there which enjoy the old "find the dungeon, break the door, kill the monster, get the loot" style.
I will not say that this is no real roleplaying, but it's just not MY style (comunication/skill intense, with occasional combat as "thriller").
One can argue that D&D itself is then not the right RPG for ME, but I played this game for almost 10 years now, and it worked so far (and my heart belongs to it).
So to get back to the OP, the accidental release has changed my mind in NOT buying 4th Edition. The changes I have seen are just too much in the wrong direction for my personal gaming style.
But I will take a closer look on some mechanics, and see if I can adapt those for my personal D&D house-rules.
To be honest, Pathfinder TOO is too much into combat for me. What I found pitty in the change to 3rd Ed. and now to PF is that most class abilities are solely tied to combat.
And (as I said about 300 times now,) it's just not my style.
No fluff is bad. Maybe experienced DMs and players can come up with their own, but people who pick up 4e as their first Roleplaying game (which I don't think it is anymore, but that's beside the point), will see that there is no fluff. They see combat stats.
How are those guys supposed to come up with fluff without a reference first? How are they supposed to know that there even is supposed to be fluff?
Books like Pathfinder are perfect because they give your imagination a nice jump start. 4e tells you what damage a fireball does.
Anyone got a link to Clark's review? Can't find it.http://necromancergames.yuku.com/reply/158152/t/I-have-the-3-core-rule-book s.html#reply-158152
Here ya go - over at Necro's site :-)
Is it just me, or is most of his good points: "This looks pretty, this is well organised, they changed the game and rub it in your face"?
That's like saying: "This cow was a well-bred cow. It was butchered properly, and they made a movie out of it for little kids to watch". I'm not against doing the butchering properly, mind you. But that's not all of what I look in my meal. I want it properly prepared, with proper cooking or grilling (or whatever fits - and I want to be able to choose how I want it) and I want it seasoned. Condiments. Sauce. Side dishes.
It seems that 4e is just a piece of well-butchered but raw and unflavoured meat, and they're selling it like this in the restaurant.
I expect more of a role-playing game than combat stats.
Well from what ive seen so far I get the impression that damage and amount of Hp dont scale up that well
Interesting. Even though they did stuff like 1/2 level to damage?
I have not read the Combat section since every picture is miniatures, miniatures and more miniatues. Oh yes I know, "You don't need miniatures to play." well technically you don't need a fork and spoon to eat, but here is your spaghetti and soup, have fun!
Another metaphor that just sums it up for me perfectly.
I was visiting a friend who went ahead and got his copies through the early seller mentioned earlier. After reading his 4E PHB I canceled my pre-order.
It was pretty much what I was afraid it would be. Its not a bad game and a lot of the ideas I agree with but the implementation makes it a game I'm not interested in. I played a lot of WoW and the whole time I was reading it I was thinking "this makes a nearly perfect table top WoW simulation."
Their implementation of Wizards was the game breaker really.
I read through the 4th ed PHB and hoped that WOTC was playing the biggest practical joke EVER! The pictures are uninspiring, the layout sucks, the target audience happens to be 8 year olds with learning disabilities, the half elves have a bonus to CON! the races and deities where chosen by superficial, panderers. the mechanics ARE SO BORING, thanks for coming up with a game were everyone get the same boring progression. the writing put a crayon in your hand and directs you to make a Styrofoam hero. the system may be good for table top miniature battles, but does nothing for the entire rest of the game. (oh, and the skills system that fights character customization.) the system may run well, it just it further from what D and D SHOULD be.
I would give this book a c-, a grade that makes it not have enough pedigree to be called Dungeons and Dragons. My group will not be buying these books (thank you Paizo for giving us an options!)
|
|
I read through the 4th ed PHB and hoped that WOTC was playing the biggest practical joke EVER! The pictures are uninspiring, the layout sucks
I beg to differ. As much as I don't like the overall focus of the new edition, I think that the layout adopted in the new manuals (or in the PHB, at least) is one the best ever.
It's clean, well organized, easy to read and peruse. It could benefit from small sidenotes pointing to later/former paragraphs (the way that was used in Ptolus), but otherwise is really good.
I have a bias against books that are "childlike" in organization. it is organized well, and they make sure to make small words and direct you to exactly which race to play with which class. fortunately they made every race to fit PERFECTLY with certain classes, how clean (and horribly boring) I know some people like the main artist but he really is not as good as the guy Pathfinder has. The Race and class pictures in Pathfinder have gotten much more praise from my group, people want to actually PLAY those characters! The 4ed PHB did not inspire me to make a character. (the tiefling look stupid, the dragonborn are boring, the elves and eladrin are subraces and dont need to fill the PHB, the halflings are boat folk (whos great idea was that?) and halfelves GET A +2 TO CON! (personal hang up) the humans are the only one i would play.
and having all the special abilities listed with the class made that section of the book very tiresome. (did like the str or con to fort, int or dex to reflex and wis or cha to Will)
it is simple to read, but so is winnie the pooh
got a lil' peak.
While I dug the art, I had ample time to look it over, and I will not be buying. I was on the fence about purchasing for purely nostalgic reasons, but after a good look that has passed.
If they come out with an artbook I will.
|
DMG advise section that was much praised was largely a waste of space. I couldn't believe some of it, e.g. the advice on Prima Donna players: "Ask them to stop or ask them to leave." Wow. Just wow. And not in a good way.
To be fair; when it comes down to it, those are really the only two options. Oh, sure, you can dress it up in a load of psychobabble (and, believe me, the 90's were full of pretentious waffle regarding roleplaying), but the end result is "You shape up, or you sling your hook.".
And, when you consider that the advice in the 1st Edition DMG literally consisted of "Hit them with random lightning bolts, and set blatantly obvious grudge monsters on them", then it is an evolution...
|
|
To answer the OP and try to be calm, I read through the books (save the DMG, which I didn't have time for. Work's been crazy) and it didn't change my mind. I'm still getting the PH, and I'm still planning on focusing most of my money on 3.P.
Here's my feelings on 4e.
Positive: It's a decent system. It's a great layout. It's simple. I don't really agree with throwing the magic items in the PH, but I understand why they did it. The idea of fighting balanced groups is pretty cool.
Negative: I did find the books a little rules heavy, the fluff not that inspiring (for me, not you maybe), the small sized player rule(s) hit me the wrong way, I still miss Gnomes, alignments not my cup of tea, paragon and epic didn't really make me want to play past 10th level, the ability boosts are just a little TOO munchkinish.... It just missed the point for me.
Other systems have done the same. Mage 2nd edition and Exalted (both editions) both come to mind. They too are good systems that I understood and still didn't want to play. It's not a bad thing. I'm not actually a collective of all their customers amalgamated into mecha-player who must be appeased. I'm the guy who bought most of their books, will buy one of their new ones, and probably wait for 5th edition.
Int is the new Cha. What does Int do? Everything Dex dows, minus a little. What is governed by Int? Answer: Two classes' abilities, and only the Wiz really needs it. I mean, Wizards just take the knowledge skills, and then everyone else can dump Int. Great, I'm going to have players with mentally retarded characters.
|
|
I reserve any negative comments about the 4e system until or if I read the core books. I do know that everything they showed in the previews did not impress me. I suspect that the next time I am at a book store after the books release I will pick one up and look at it. That said, it just isn't worth buying to me after the last year of "marketing" I have had to endure as a D&D player. I'm not a teenager. I'm not in my 20's. I've been playing D&D longer than some folks on this board have been alive. I played with the red box set. I played with 1st, 2nd, and 3rd editions. I never had a problem with an edition change before now. It isn't just about the changes to the system. It is about the flavor of the setting, the "feel" of the game. Everything I have seen about 4e doesn't feel like D&D. They absolutely butchered the Realms (my favorite setting). Anytime anyone complained on their messageboards about 4e, those people were censored and flamed at best, or outright banned at worst.
I don't see why it is that the 4e folks can't just go their way and the 3P can't just go our way. Both systems will exist with full support from their respective companies. If you love 4e, awesome for you. There is an entire community of folks over at WotC that LOVE 4e. If you don't want to hear negative thoughts about 4e, then why hang out on a board that is largely pro 3P? There are some folks that will play both, but I suspect that for many the reason they are going with 3P is they don't like 4e. So naturally they aren't going to have positive things to say. The system changes aren't the only problem though. They also killed the two best magazines in the gaming industry to bring control of the D&D brand all back in house. I think they did that because Paizo's work was better than their own staff's work.
Anyway, I don't understand why those who love 4e are suprised that they are getting a largely negative backlash here. If you want to discuss the game with folks that love it, there are far more of them than of us and all right there on WotC forums. I am not saying that 4e people aren't welcome here. Quite the opposite. I want anyone who can contribute to the community to feel at home here. That said, 4e is still a hot button issue for many D&D gamers. So it naturally devolves into argument with virtually no constructive thinking.
I am personally thrilled that 4e is there for those players who really wanted it. I hope all those folks have incredible fun with the game. I am also thrilled that 3P has given a 3.5 compatible alternative to 4e for those of us who did not want it. Why can't both groups coexist happily playing their respective games? I just don't get it. I am as guilty of this as anyone, but I am getting tired of the constant system bashing both groups engage in. It seems every other thread these days is 4e people hating on 3P or 3P people hating on 4e. I am as guilty as anyone, but I intend to not engage in that sort of debate anymore. If someone asks I will comment on the strengths of 3P from my perspective, but I think I am done commenting on 4e. Both games exist and have loyal supporters. I just want my hobby to be fun again instead of a constant flame war by two sides that can never convince each other of their respective viewpoints. Lets all just live and let live. Lets enjoy gaming no matter which system our groups use. Mostly, lets get this community back to being the best on the web instead of a non-stop 3P/4e war.
4E, 3.5, PRPG...
Still dead.
By and large it seems to me that they've taken 3.5, removed everything that was anything but in the most vague and/or indirect way D&D-like about it, wrote new band-aid material to fill the large gaps left, then repackaged it as D&D. It's like playing Warmammer FRP with fewer rules, no setting, and less interesting character types (and fewer of them).
Do not smeer WFRP with such words. *Crys*
I haven't seen the new rules, and I'm not particularly excited about 4.0 (I'm pretty much opposed), but I'm willing to try it out. I'll see about playing it at World Wide D&D Day next Saturday, but, until then, I just have to know one thing; HOW did they "fix" grapple?
Grapple in 3.5 was one of the most annoying rules I came across, and it pretty much was avoided by myself and my players because of all the frustrations we'd had with it. One of the first things they said about 4.0 when they announced it was "We fixed grapple!" Almost a year of previews later, and they still haven't shown me *how* they fixed it. I like Paizo's approach, though I haven't seen it in action yet (I plan on it when we start playing it next weekend).
But, to those who have seen the rules or maybe even have them in their hot little hands, what has been done in 4.0 to fix grapple? The empty promise of a fix that 4.0's announcement has made is there in the air, and I want to know what's been done by WotC in this regard.
4E, 3.5, PRPG...
Still dead.
Casts raise dead horse.
There you go. You should get that permanent negative level fixed, though. If you can wait till tomorrow, I can get restoration.
half elves have a bonus to CON!
Con and Cha apparently. Why? Because none of the "parent races" got either, and in fact one was infamous for getting a penalty in one.
How does that compute? How do you take a completely mediocre humanoid, and a agile and smart but frail humanoid, put them in the same chamber with a bucket of sangria, and the result is something that's pretty and tough? Do elven chicks only want human guys who look like bears, and human guys only the prettiest elf chicks?
Watch out for the half-orc, which will get +Int and +Dex.
It is a reuse. It's the cover of "The Sinister Spire", one of the 3.5 adventures.
They didn't even have the decency to hire an artist to insult me. Great.
;oD
Peace,
tfad
|
|
Just more of what most other people have said.
I was really excited about 4e and totally bought into all the hype of the positive changes they made. Then I heard about stuff like the dragonborn, which don't belong in core books in my opinion, and the exclusion of a ton of stuff I really like, and got much less excited.
I still thought I'd buy them just to see, but after looking at the character sheets they released for some convention or another, I really hated the look and feel of all the "at will, martial" powers, etc.
Saying something feels like "WoW" isn't just a derisive statement, like when people were slammed for saying the elf art looks "manga" without necessarily knowing anything about how manga looks. I've played WoW a ton, like I'm sure a lot of other people on these boards have. Those character sheets didn't feel like D&D, the roleplaying game experience. They felt like "push win button here, move 3 squares".
I won't be buying them. I will be buying the Pathfinder RPG in August. I think that has a lot more weight to it now that people have actually seen 4e. From this thread, it looks like people that were exited until the very end for it, are excited about it now, but for anyone who was doubtful, their doubts were confirmed.
In 4E he would gain a death penalty for that. I'm still still not sure if this was a intentional gag or merely a case of ignorance.
Casts raise dead horse.There you go. You should get that permanent negative level fixed, though. If you can wait till tomorrow, I can get restoration.
Bwahahaha. Returning from the dead incures a death penalty.
I think we can shut down wizards now. We just say that wizards is for the death penalty, have this as a proof, and let their headquarters be stormed by a mob of angry paci-fists or something.
|
before they graduate onto the the 'big boy' rules. I'm sure Paizo will appreciate all the new customers a few years down the road.Okay this s!&~ is getting on my nerves, what hell about pathfinder makes it more "Big boy" than 4E?
I will say two things :
- The rules of 4e have been intended to be easier to learn, deliberately, so that the new players can more easily learn them and grow into the hobby. Wizards have stated this themselves several times.
Face it : they have been built for a younger audience. And this is not necessarily bad either.
- Look at how eveil is portrayed in Pathfinder vs regular wizards D&D ? See no difference ? If so, I cannot help you.
Anyways, don't get upset over this, it will not help any on both sides.
Assuming a new player actually picks up a PHB,I tend to think the system which actually encourages/teaches the player to "roleplay" would be doing a good job at instructing what is roleplaying.
I agree. There were ideas for character roleplaying that even a "veteran" like myself found helpful. And there is much encouragement and guidelines throughout the PHB and the DMG to describe actions fully, rather than only discuss battles and such purely as crunch.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 6
|
And, when you consider that the advice in the 1st Edition DMG literally consisted of "Hit them with random lightning bolts, and set blatantly obvious grudge monsters on them", then it is an evolution...
Not to be a terrible thread-snarker (okay, maybe I am), but can you dig up your literal quote of that? Because I never read that in my 1st edition DMG.
I'm also a little picky about using "literally" when it isn't appropriate :)
|
I will say I was on the fence for a while, although I decided to support Paizo after their announcement. I took a look at the PHB and I liked the first couple of chapters. But once I got to the classes, I just wasn't impressed. I also found the power write-ups annoying to read with their colored borders, etc.
While I may play a game or two (I'm playing the Gameday in a week) I don't see myself putting any money down for the product.
I wonder what they have in store for 5e? One race and class per book? there's a right way to make money, and a wrong way. Selling us bits and pieces of a system and making empty promises is, in my book, the wrong way.
Have you ever seen Lord of the Rings rpg put out by ICE before the movies. (My wife bought a bunch of it to mine for info.) It was like this. You had to buy six books to get one complete entry for one creature/ item/ area. It was a giant pain in the ass. And it was very clearly done to force you to buy more of their books if you wanted the full game.
Hell yes, it DID change my mind!
I really thought, well it doesn't sound THAT bad.
Let's see what they've done FIRST and judge later.WELL. I came, I saw, I judged it CRAP!
While I didn't look at the combat or other mechanics, I looked over the races and classes.
This is just SO not ROLE(!)-playing anymore. I did not want to believe it at first, but this IS some friggin MMORPG (those actually don't even worth be called RPGs - they are ALL nothing but Third Person Action Adventure)!I AM SOOOOO DISAPPOINTED!!!
This kind of post is inflammatory and should be deleted by a moderator.
There is no excuse for this kind of threadcrapping. If you can't express your opinion in a polite and constructive manner, then don't express it at all.
Wait a sec. He is statting his opinion based one reading the books. Yes, he is expressing anger. Yes he is expressing outrage. But he hasn't attacked anyone but the rules system! Let him speak his peace.
Shows that you didn't even read the damn books. I aint got a problem with people not liking 4E or anything but at least actually know what your talking about.The fact that you said this:
[quote=]
While I didn't look at the combat or other mechanics, I looked over the races and classes.
This is just SO not ROLE(!)-playing anymore. I did not want to believe it at first, but this IS some friggin MMORPG (those actually don't even worth be called RPGs - they are ALL nothing but Third Person Action Adventure)!
The last time I checked, two people could read the exact same thing and come up with two totally different opinions. Do you really think calling someone ignorant isn't flaming them?
the halflings are boat folk (whos great idea was that?)
JRR Tolkien's, even though WotC claims to be moving away from Tolkien Mythos. (Remember Golums people before he got the ring. They were river folk very much like hobits.)
DMG advise section that was much praised was largely a waste of space. I couldn't believe some of it, e.g. the advice on Prima Donna players: "Ask them to stop or ask them to leave." Wow. Just wow. And not in a good way.To be fair; when it comes down to it, those are really the only two options. Oh, sure, you can dress it up in a load of psychobabble (and, believe me, the 90's were full of pretentious waffle regarding roleplaying), but the end result is "You shape up, or you sling your hook.".
And, when you consider that the advice in the 1st Edition DMG literally consisted of "Hit them with random lightning bolts, and set blatantly obvious grudge monsters on them", then it is an evolution...
Hey the 'Blue Bolt from Heaven' is a great learning tool. It's like training a cat or a small child with a squirt gun.
4E, 3.5, PRPG...
Still dead.
But at least we have meat.
I intend to do the same that Ed Greenwood did on his original Realms campaign. I'll ask my players what they'd like to do. Most possible we'll do a tryout game of H1 Keep on the Shadowfell. Then it's their vote that counts. We are five players and a DM. Whatever gets the most votes wins.
I'm still undecided. Now that there's more meat out there I like some of the changes and the possibilities, but I still long for old-style D&D. But my opinion can change. Every time I talk about some change that I find disgusting, my girlfriend surprises me saying that it's much better for the game. That's the way I discovered that she likes combat the most in D&D and that she finds it slow, who would have thought?
Tomorrow we'll try to play a game of the new D&D miniatures game and see what we think about it.
In the end, only time will tell. But my reluctance to change to change to 4th edition seems to be waning a bit.
Cheers!
Chief Creative Officer, Publisher
|
I really wanted to like 4e but...
It's hard for me to pin down my feelings here, but I feel like a real castle has been demolished to make room for a White Castle.That is more how I feel.
Oh noes!
I LOVE White Castle.
Hmmm. May need to change some serious plans here at the office...
I was kinda against it as i was against it with 2nd edition to 3rd edition. However after "looking" at the books I will not be buying it or running it. I started with D&D red book which was great when I was 8. Then each new addition progressed for me and i eventually switched to 3rd edition because a couple of new players were only familiar with that rules set. I have at least 10 other rpg games I could run. After looking at the rules I would rather teach them a different games rules set then try to teach them a munchkin happy version of basic d&d.
Besides rules are always simple with the core books. If all games stuck to core books and never produced any other suppliments then the games would be quite simple. However each new book adds a new layer of complexity and suddenly your streamlined rules hog up as much as you computer does after a year or two of useing it.
Side note
Shadowrun did the same thing with their 4ed I wonder if stupidity is contageous.
There is something... sinister about the mindset of people who the 4th edition books are clearly aimed at. The alignment butchery, the only good gods in the handbook part, the incredibly cheesy and militant look of the PCs combined with eyewatering, garrish and distatefull colors and stylings of american superhero comics, the U.S. Army recruitment slogans as motivations to play a particular race... No gnome (an obviously non threatening creature), no half-orc (an obvious meatshield for "the other side"). I tell you, if this is aimed at kids, then kids aren't all right at all. Just a feeling I get, especially after going through the MM. A friend of mine called 4ed - "D&D Extreme!!!!" after leafing through that book. Not only everything is evil, but is also aparently mindlessly bloodthirsty and ever ready to tear your pancreas out through your nose.
You might have something there. I haven't seen the rules, I'm anti-4th but because of the company. I'm sure the ruels are fine, and yes its a role playing game. But Role Playing starts as hack'n'slash and evolves into something else. I foundly remember a Robotech game that got into what do we do with an Invid captive, and what was the ethics of doing it. From what I'm reading here, 4th takes any whats the word I'm looking for????? Greay from the game. For instance it took a while for my current group to get where Half-Orcs come from. When they got it was "ohhhhhhh!" but it lead to the Half-Orc in the group to say no. My parents were Orcs, my mom was raped by humans. That's why I hate humans so much. It was a twist, but I let him go with it. But in 4th all players are White Knights, all the monsters are dark and evil. What about playing a evil part?
This was true to a degree with 3rd, Rogue instead of Thife, but it seems to have gone to the next step. Oddly, and this is base only on what I read it seems that 4th leaves less room for players (of any age) mature. Can you role play my example in 4th, sure. Will it be played, yes of course by experinced GMs who like the new system. But none of the products will encourage this sort of role playing. And I doubt if such example of deep role playing was in the role playing advise section of the book. If it is pleas corrent me since I do not know.
P.S. just out of curiousty, I've head that there no good dragons in the new MM, but I am assuming that dragonborn come from dragons, so are they evil alinged players. If so at lest that much holds to more mature palying.
I was kinda against it as i was against it with 2nd edition to 3rd edition. However after "looking" at the books I will not be buying it or running it. I started with D&D red book which was great when I was 8. Then each new addition progressed for me and i eventually switched to 3rd edition because a couple of new players were only familiar with that rules set. I have at least 10 other rpg games I could run. After looking at the rules I would rather teach them a different games rules set then try to teach them a munchkin happy version of basic d&d.
Besides rules are always simple with the core books. If all games stuck to core books and never produced any other suppliments then the games would be quite simple. However each new book adds a new layer of complexity and suddenly your streamlined rules hog up as much as you computer does after a year or two of useing it.
Side note
Shadowrun did the same thing with their 4ed I wonder if stupidity is contageous.
I am not sure if Xyll got it exactly right or exactly wrong here. As I have mentioned before, I started with the white box. I was still running 1e when friends asked in the late 90s (U1-U3). About 3-4 years ago, a friend who had played 2e in the military decided to GM 3/3.5. So, I learned a "new" set of rules. About 6 months later, the group I played with wanted the old curmudgeon to DM. The game we played with the ex-mil GM was pretty solid WotC 3.5 coreish books.
When I started, I immediately started adding JG, Arduin, FBI stuff I had. We initially played Siege of the Spider Eaters and moved to STAP. I suspect many of these people who hate 4e or 3e will be using rules from anything they can get their hands on. That's the way it has been since before those players tried to get that gem 30 years ago off the front cover of the 1e PH.
I should be getting my 4e books shortly after D-Day and will add those rules to the game I run. If I played as much as Lilith, I would probably be playing as she answered in a poll many many months ago. a 4e game, a d20 game and something else. People obsess too much about the rules. The reason that D&D is so successful 35 years after a couple of guys from Wisconsin put together a few wooden boxes to add to their miniatures fun is that a good GM can have a lot of fun eating pizza, drinking Mountain Dew and telling an exciting story with a little help from his friends.
For instance it took a while for my current group to get where Half-Orcs come from. When they got it was "ohhhhhhh!" but it lead to the Half-Orc in the group to say no. My parents were Orcs, my mom was raped by humans. That's why I hate humans so much. It was a twist, but I let him go with it.
And in 3e or PF, that can work. Usually, at leat 90% of half-orcs are the result of orcs raping humans, but that still leaves about 10% for other origins.
The only instance where I'd say that 100% half-orcs are sired the same way is in Midnight, where the dworg (half-orc half-dwarf; Midnight doesn't have any half-humans, since only the fey races, which share a common ancestry, can interbreed) are invariably the result of orcs raping dwarves. I think the other way around is a one in a million occurence, if it ever happens.
But in 4th all players are White Knights, all the monsters are dark and evil. What about playing a evil part?
I'd even say white against dark grey. If you want dark, contact a certain Mr. Logue ;-)
This was true to a degree with 3rd, Rogue instead of Thife
That was not done to make the thief/rogue less evil. It was done to illustrate the point that rogues are/can be so much more than thieves. It's still rogue because most roguish roles are, well, roghuish, but only a few involve stealing.
P.S. just out of curiousty, I've head that there no good dragons in the new MM, but I am assuming that dragonborn come from dragons, so are they evil alinged players. If so at lest that much holds to more mature palying.
It seems they're honourable. Shouts lawful good to me.
Funny thing is, 4ed seems like somebody got all the chauvinists, the immature, the powergaming, the unimaginative, the rustic and the badly undereducated people i ever kicked out of my games for being ridiculous and offensive and let them make a system (ideologically) just to get on my nerves.
Well, think positive: 4e could become the CounterStrike of PRGs - it keeps those immature pests away from the real games ;-)
But there's a catch. You cant make a tabletop Diablo clone. You can, but it gets really old really fast, and the only reason it works for Diablo** is that the computer is really fast at throwing dice and adjudicating rules. D&D 4ed is not a perfect tabletop variant of WOW, it's a slower, blander and mildly to severely offensive*** variant of WOW. It can't compete, cause I'll always choose WOW over it. And I hope their precious target audience does too.
That's the same what I've been saying for some time now: If you make your game similar to MMORPGs, it will be measured by WoW standards. Where it will lose. I doubt it will draw anywone away from WoW into 4e. If anything, it will make people pick up WoW instead of 4e.
the halflings are boat folk (whos great idea was that?)JRR Tolkien's, even though WotC claims to be moving away from Tolkien Mythos. (Remember Golums people before he got the ring. They were river folk very much like hobits.)
In the Hobbit/Lord of the Rings, they were actually quite hydrophobic in places. Not that they didn't wash, but boats and water were considered by many to be dangerous - and unnecessary to boot, what makes it worse.
I guess they wanted to steal ideas from Midnight, but since they did away with gnomes, they had to use the other small race. :D
I wonder what they have in store for 5e? One race and class per book?
Boosters.
Sorry for my earlier addled post kinda sleepy when i wrote it.
My major complaint is that their is to much difference in 4ed over 3rd from d&d to 1st ed to 2nd and 3rd their was a progression that stuck to the heart of the system. You could use things from second to third with some modification. i just think that 4ed would be like playing a new system. That being the case I would ratther teach my players shadowrun, deadlands, d6 starwars, palladium etc... then buy a new system of an old game where they diviate to far from the base.
shadowrun did this with their 4ed by adding new core stats and changing the die type make all of the other books very difficult to convert. I was so turned off by this that I was able to ressist buying it even from a used book store for $10.00.
THis is how I feel about fourth edition. Hopefully the pathfinder system will be as good as it seems and then I will have no problem playing this system for a long time.
Don't you hate it when you lose your core group 10 years of being able to pick up any new game out and run a campaign with veteran players. Now I am reduced to only fantasy based d&d due to new players. :( Unless I want to run a 2 man game instead of 6.
I've read a few posts here or there about some of the already implied problems.
It's actually kind of strange seeing people who argued things like DM Fiat to correct mechanic problems, dump stating, skills and abilities that lack performance, or spells/rituals that will either have to break into metagaming or be to clunky to be considered are now rather acceptable. Before they were part of the devils handbook.
Strange.
Most of the arguments around troublesome mechanics with this system (and the next) are silly. They take a small scope and blow things out of the normal view they should be held at. This will be done with 4th now...in fact if you look around you can see a bit.
The concept that they cannot be fixed or refined is also silly. After reading it and truthfully finding out what I expected (that this will change how I write/create/run the way I wish to) I was solid in my opinion. There isn't a perfect game out there; there isn't really a progressive happening that's making the game fundamentally better...just different. Bad mechanics that allow blatant exploits can be fixed, but that is an individual issue.
4th goes beyond that, making things fundamentally different in a way that I'm not thrilled with. The game will have it's complete own set of unique problems. The only way to erase that is to make the game run like an MMO, which would suck. I don't think 4th does that, although it's closer that 3rd was (and pathfinder is).
If the mechanics are loosened to allow for different concepts/builds that mimic specific fantasy ideals, the system will fray, just like the current WotC-3.5 has. I don't think they will though. Given the universal templates the game has, my guess is everything will fall into those templates. The ability to mimic fantasy will have to be written on equally purportioned lines.
In the end you will give a bit in either balance or flexibility. I know which one I would give in.