|
Wizards has posted a picture of the cover for PHB 3 here. It doesn't tell much, but it does tell us that there will be no martial or arcane classes, and that Minotaurs and Githzeri are in as core races.
Another PH? I like 4e but I don't like how we have to buy the new books to get the new races, classes or monsters. I still don't own PH2 but I did get MM2. It's getting expensive to play this game lol
|
Another PH? I like 4e but I don't like how we have to buy the new books to get the new races, classes or monsters. I still don't own PH2 but I did get MM2. It's getting expensive to play this game lol
That's no different than any other edition. In 3e, you had 7 races and 11 classes (unless I am miscounting) in the PHB. That was it. But there were lots of other races and classes in other books released subsequently.
And, just like 3e, you can play the game using only the options in the original PHB and it works just fine.
And, a lot of the new material is available with a DDI subscription, so there are even ways to workaround getting the new books. Don't be discouraged :)
Another PH? I like 4e but I don't like how we have to buy the new books to get the new races, classes or monsters. I still don't own PH2 but I did get MM2. It's getting expensive to play this game lol
Technically, you don't need to buy the books to get these races...you just need to subscribe to DDi to get the Compendium and the Character builder. The month after the books are out, their contents are added to these applications.
(currently you don't even need to buy the subscription, as you have access to the trial versions (levels 1-3) for free)
Also, this isn't really a 4e thing. If you wanted to play a Goliath in 3.5, you needed Races of Stone, etc. 4e has definately stepped up in the production of these books, I will give you that :)
Ninja-ed!
|
Wizards has posted a picture of the cover for PHB 3 here. It doesn't tell much, but it does tell us that there will be no martial or arcane classes, and that Minotaurs and Githzeri are in as core races.
I'm hoping that Thri-Kreen make it in there (although if they have to wait til the Dark Sun Players Guide, I suppose I can live with it) :)
I'm sorta wondering what they'll do for Divine and Primal classes. All of the roles are already covered by both power sources, so any new classes they have will double up on existing roles. I'm leaning towards a new divine striker that uses ranged attacks, but beyond that I'm kind of lost.
Given that they tend to do 8 classes per book, I guess we're looking at 4 psionic, 2 divine, and 2 primal?
We know that one of the psionic classes is the Monk (striker). A 4th Edition translation of the Psionic Warrior is the most likely candidate for the psionic defender, although I hope they change the name...it is descriptive of what it is, but not very evocative.
Psion would probably be the controller. There is no previous class that is really analogous to a leader for a psionic source, so that will be completely new.
|
Well, as I read that monks are supposedly being made psionic now or something, this does give me hope for Githzerai Monks! Joy! But ya. I know that you don't NEED all of the books to play, it's just funny how these are coming out so fast. One after the other, very little time in between. I just finished reading the second one, and now there's a preview for he third. Anyhow, our group decided when we started to only use the core three and PHB2. Our wallets just can't afford another wall of books.
|
|
Well, as I read that monks are supposedly being made psionic now or something, this does give me hope for Githzerai Monks! Joy! But ya. I know that you don't NEED all of the books to play, it's just funny how these are coming out so fast. One after the other, very little time in between. I just finished reading the second one, and now there's a preview for he third. Anyhow, our group decided when we started to only use the core three and PHB2. Our wallets just can't afford another wall of books.
Well, PHB3 isn't due out until Spring 2010. WotC has announced that they will fully preview a new class from PHB3 each month starting in July via DDI.
To be honest, I like how WotC is handling the books now. I really don't feel a pressing need to get all of the "powers" books, as I don't need those at the table. Buying a PHB a year and keeping a subscription to DDI for the character generator is good enough for me.
Given that they tend to do 8 classes per book, I guess we're looking at 4 psionic, 2 divine, and 2 primal?We know that one of the psionic classes is the Monk (striker). A 4th Edition translation of the Psionic Warrior is the most likely candidate for the psionic defender, although I hope they change the name...it is descriptive of what it is, but not very evocative.
Psion would probably be the controller. There is no previous class that is really analogous to a leader for a psionic source, so that will be completely new.
I am going to guess that there will be 2 psionic strikers, the Soul Knife was so popular I bet it will make a come back. Being a striker that is kind of mid to short range, like the rogue and avenger. The Pyshic Warrior (defender), Psion (controller), the Wilder (ranged striker), and the Ardent (leader). Which would leave only 3 between the other two power sources, and I would guess 2 of them will be ranged strikers one for each power source.
|
|
I am going to guess that there will be 2 psionic strikers, the Soul Knife was so popular I bet it will make a come back.
I'm willing to bet that we see something with the Soul Knife name, but it will more resemble a mix of the soul knife and the soulbow PrC from Complete Psionics. Since we are bring back psionics, I'd like to see a 4E version of the Divine Mind, which would be able to fit into either the psionic or divine power source. Such a class would easily fall into the leader or the controller category.
It's difficult when you feel like you are the only one contributing to purchasing the books, especially given how expensive they are.
I am (usually) the main purchaser of books for my gaming group. We now have approx. 11 people in the group, and I was very pleasently surprised when we ended up with about 5 player's books and 3 DMGs when 4e came around.
I have decided this time (meaning 4e vs. 3e) that I am going to buy only those books I personally can make use of. That means I bought Martial Power and Arcane Power (as I play a sorceror in one game and a fighter in the other), but someone else in the group can pony up for the Divine Power book.
I seemed to remember the 3.x release schedule to be more of a strain on my wallet then the 4E releases. One book a year unless I want to have further options in established classes like the Power books offer. Plus the release of the campaign settings at one campaign guide, one player guide, one adventure seems nifty enough. I didn't have to get the FR Campaign Guide because I will never run something in the Realms, ever but the Player's Guide offered alot more to the game then Realms material. Anyways, one is I like the release schedule they have adapted now.
Another PH? I like 4e but I don't like how we have to buy the new books to get the new races, classes or monsters.
There's always a D&D Insider subscription.
But really, are you saying they should just be giving out books' worth of new races, classes and monsters for free? I mean, what's the alternative to buying them?
Another PH? I like 4e but I don't like how we have to buy the new books to get the new races, classes or monsters.There's always a D&D Insider subscription.
But really, are you saying they should just be giving out books' worth of new races, classes and monsters for free? I mean, what's the alternative to buying them?
Settle down, Francis. His complaint has already been answered multiple times in this thread, and with a lot less snark.
Another PH? I like 4e but I don't like how we have to buy the new books to get the new races, classes or monsters.There's always a D&D Insider subscription.
But really, are you saying they should just be giving out books' worth of new races, classes and monsters for free? I mean, what's the alternative to buying them?
Settle down, Francis. His complaint has already been answered multiple times in this thread, and with a lot less snark.
** spoiler omitted **
It wasn't snark. I'm actually really curious to hear what he would have preferred to having to buy new books. I mean, we are talking a lot of material here. It's not the sort of thing a company tends to just release for free, especially considering the man-hours put into design & development.
** spoiler omitted **
Hmmmm... from the insult following telling another person to calm down, I'm going to guess that it is coming from you.
|
I have decided this time (meaning 4e vs. 3e) that I am going to buy only those books I personally can make use of. That means I bought Martial Power and Arcane Power (as I play a sorceror in one game and a fighter in the other), but someone else in the group can pony up for the Divine Power book.
*Sigh* Sadly, for me, I think I am playing Pokemon ... 'gotta catch 'em all!' I have 3 PHB, 2 PHB2 and FRPG, then one of everything else on our table. I kinda buy for the table, but it's more because I have three kids and if I hope to read anything I have to throw a bone out there to distract them ...
** spoiler omitted **Hmmmm... from the insult following telling another person to calm down, I'm going to guess that it is coming from you.
It wasn't meant as an insult. It was meant as a friendly reminder to a fellow 4E supporter to perhaps respond more calmly to what was either an incredibly ignorant and poorly worded complaint or a poorly executed troll (and after re-reading the post, I suspect the former).
Scott has a reputation for being over-zealous in his response to 4E criticism. On the one hand, I sympathize with him. The shear amount of ignorance and misinformation about 4E that is perpetuated on the 'net is suffocating. Paizo isn't quite as bad as some other forums **cough**giantitp.com**cough**, but it's no secret that some people are pretty vocal about their hatred for WotC around here. On the other hand, the two posts immediately following southwestsamurai's fairly eloquently pointed out the flaws in his logic and illustrated the alternatives, so was it really necessary for Scott to reengage 11 posts later?
My response was intended as a friendly jab to say, "Let it go, dude." This little one's not worth the effort." :)
|
|
My response was intended as a friendly jab to say, "Let it go, dude." This little one's not worth the effort." :)
I concur. I'm not a 4e fan by any stretch, but I think it is important to remember the thread notes:
"Talk about 4th Edition here. Politely. Personal attacks or insults directed at other members of the Paizo community, or other companies in the industry, will not be tolerated."
Anyway, ON TOPIC!
Is it just me, but do Minotaurs not really work as PCs. I think its the fact that I don't believe it should be a game of monsters killing monsters. Thoughts?
Cheers! :D
|
|
duh, Minotaurs = Tauren. The Wow-isation of 4e continues.
Here's a case in point of someone who has nothing nice to say about 4E and so decides to shoot his uninformed mouth off.
Nearly two decades prior to the release of WOW Minotaurs were a playable character race in Dungeons and Dragons, 1st Edition, under the Dragonlance setting. Circa 1987/88 if I remember correctly.
I've played quite a few games of 4E and it feels NOTHING like WoW. Except, perhaps, that it would be a great system to convert WoW into a Tabletop RPG. While the folks at Blizzard staunchly defend the World of Warcraft d20 system, I didn't feel that captured much in the spirit of WoW either.
(Sorry - Tiger's temper is a bit riled up today.)
duh, Minotaurs = Tauren. The Wow-isation of 4e continues.Here's a case in point of someone who has nothing nice to say about 4E and so decides to shoot his uninformed mouth off.
Nearly two decades prior to the release of WOW Minotaurs were a playable character race in Dungeons and Dragons, 1st Edition, under the Dragonlance setting. Circa 1987/88 if I remember correctly.
I've played quite a few games of 4E and it feels NOTHING like WoW. Except, perhaps, that it would be a great system to convert WoW into a Tabletop RPG. While the folks at Blizzard staunchly defend the World of Warcraft d20 system, I didn't feel that captured much in the spirit of WoW either.
(Sorry - Tiger's temper is a bit riled up today.)
No Dave, there really is a WoW-ification tendency in 4e. It is there in everything from monster names to the powers system.
We cannot get away from the fact that 4E does include many elements which are similer to games like WoW. And it would do every one a lot of good if the pro-4e lobby would stop the laughable attempt to say that those paralels cannot be drawn. It makes you look defensive.
Conversely, Gorbacz and others like you. You don't like these elements, fine. That doesn't mean that some of the changes that have been made that move 4e to look a little more like WoW are bad, you just don't like them, that is all. You could very well be wrong and they could make the game, a better game. You are forgetting that wow has a usership that exceeds all Pen and Paper roleplaying games a hundred fold.
While i think that WotC have lost the plot with regards to campaign settings and what makes a good adventure, i have really liked the 4e player books.
I am really looking forwards to see what they do with the psionics.
|
|
There is nothing really wrong with WoW (or other MMORPGs) influencing TTRPGs anyway - it is just another source of influence along with many. It has been discussed here before but as the computer and online media have grown (which basically didn't exist when D&D was invented) they will have a growing influence, as did the fantasy books and pulps of EGG's youth. That's just a reflection of the context in which D&D operates these days.
And yes, I'm looking forward to see how they deal with psionics too, as I'm a big Eberron fan and it is fairly integral to that setting.
All of these things feed off each other. I don't play WoW myself, so I don't see the parallels, whereas I do see the book/comic/film and genre influences.
Either way, as long as I get stuff which feeds my imagination and helps me create and play in entertaining worlds, I honestly don't care which came first. I like 4e hugely, but it's not the be all and end all. If I find something I like better or want to incorporate from another source, I will. Just like we've all always done. :D
I am also looking forward to both psionics and Eberron.
|
|
Minotaurs are tough as a PC race.
I played the Dragonlance minotaurs in AD&D and in the three groups we played with, they always seemed to distract the party significantly, even in the campaign where we were doubling for Huma and Kaz themselves.
After that, I took over as DM and discovered that Minotaurs, like other exotic creatures that have sufficient intelligence to be PCs (centaurs, dragons, bugbears, giants, etc.) all work terrifically well as NPCs, whose engagement with the party can be explained in the milieu but whom the party is not expecting to try and integrate into their intimate social circle.
When 3rd edition arrived and Savage Species came out, I rushed to the other side of the screen to play a minotaur again, believing that the problem in AD&D was the rules and not the race. Again I encountered the same challenge from the group. When Dragon 320 came out and gave me the chance to play a brass dragon, I built one to be bard-like in his ability to support all the other PCs without supplanting anyone (as the minotaur did in almost all situations of intimidation or making a dramatic entrance). Even there, the party couldn't seem to integrate the dragon as one of the PCs, the race always made the character stand apart from the group.
In the end then, this is what I have been able to conclude from trying to use more exotic races over the course of ten years of gaming:
1. If the whole party is exotic, then it can work for the whole party. A party of humanoids (goblins, hobgoblins, and bugbears) works a LOT better than a party with just one humanoid.
2. Exotic races make for great NPCs as the tendency towards cliche with standard races (gruff dwarves, prankster gnomes, etc.) is even more pronounced with an exotic race and can really assist the players in discerning the core of the NPC, whether it plays to the cliche (strong savage minotaur) or against it (urbane contemplative minotaur) because the strength of the cliche serves as a template for the players to contrast with the NPC as portrayed, making the quirks much more apparent.
3. The sizzle of playing an exotic race is great, the struggle of integrating them into a party is greater. I stopped DMing for a time so I could play exotic race PCs. In so doing, I made my DMs job a TON harder. He now needed to figure out challenges to adapt to a flying, house-cat sized dragon who was terrifically charismatic and wanted more than anything else to start collecting and hoarding treasure. At the same time, the rest of the party were all medium-sized young bipedal walkers who wanted to make their name in the world. As a quick example: pit traps were irrelevant to my PC and thus became irrelevant to the party which had my little dragon serve as scout.
4. Computer games and books can mislead us as to which new concepts are going to work well in a role playing game. In both a computer game and a book the author has the ability to control the plot and the course of adventure more than a DM does in an RPG. Weiss and Hickman can make minotaurs into a regular race in the Dragonlance books. WoW can make minotaurs or panda-men into something mundane. Players can do that much less easily. They are used to seeing tall people and short people, thin people and fat people, gruff people and polite people. Because of that, the standard races can fit into their social imagination pretty easily. How do you act around a dwarf? Put your character into a discussion with a grumpy thick short person in your imagination and you are off. How do you act around a horned half-man half-bull with horns and a snout that is a foot taller than anyone you can imagine meeting? A much more difficult extrapolation.
Exotic races are neat, just don't be surprised if you end up not being able to integrate them into a party with standard race PCs. PHB3 offers them for a reason: the audience expects to see their RPG give them the ability to express their fantasies and minotaur PCs have become a staple of current fantasy thanks to WoW.
|
|
Two comments:
- the MM2 (at least - probably the MM too) explicitly say that "exotic" monsters-turned-PCs can be unbalancing , and more or less (but not quite) advises against it. And these are all humanoids - there are no rules as yet for playing dragons
- the PC races presented are fairly balanced against one another. They generally take off some of the more unbalacing stuff (like powerful build for minotaurs in the MM) and so there isn't the rules-problems you might otherwise get with a straight conversion from the MM
My experience of it was in 3e with an ogre PC. And it was problematic, I agree, though not too bad. You had to bend some rules (an ogre in Silvermoon - hmmmm) and he could also overshadow (reach and large weapons) but he also had definate weaknesses too (lack of hp due to the ECL). I think something vaguely humanoid isn't too bad, but anything that has significant powers and abilities (such as flight) is almost certainly bad news. But yeah, the ogre was cool too.
We also had a hobgoblin PC in a long-running Eberron campaign. That really had very little impact (other than the +1 ECL adjustment, which I decided wasn't warranted and ignored for that PC) but of course hobgoblins are integrated with the setting as potential PCs, and a hobgoblins only real claim to fame is that they get quite good stats (otherwise they are not terrifically different from any other humanoid race).
In the very first D&D game I played in as an "adult" (in 1992) after an about 8 year break from the game during high school and college, I was in a party with a lizard man and a minotaur. So, yeah, the minotaur is obviously all about WOW. :-/
That aside, I have to agree with the note that there are WOW-ish elements to D&D 4E. But... the game is a whole lot of fun to play, so who cares.
It wasn't meant as an insult. It was meant as a friendly reminder to a fellow 4E supporter to perhaps respond more calmly to what was either an incredibly ignorant and poorly worded complaint or a poorly executed troll (and after re-reading the post, I suspect the former).
I didn't mean that you were insulting Scott, but that you were insulting southwestsamurai (who seems to have made a minor explosion of flames in his first post since 2007) by calling him a troll. That you did so while telling another poster to calm down seemed off.
I got your point, and agree with it. I just felt the post would been stronger if not for the spoiler and it's contents.
-
And now a discussion about the comparisons between WoW and 4e.
Bleh. I refuse to acknowledge this topic or give any additional opinion on it.
Although I'm now irritated that this has set off a mini discussion on 4e PC races in my head that I am resisting posting because this is supposed to be about Player's Handbook 3 rather than random thought that pops into my mind.
this is supposed to be about Player's Handbook 3 rather than random thought that pops into my mind.
On that note, so, the PH3 has Minotaurs and Gith (zerai or yanki or both?) in it. And it has psionic, divine, and primal classes. Any predictions (and yes, I know that there are several threads on WOTC's boards on the subject).
I honestly have no ideas for additional divine and primal classes. For Psionic, I want to see the monk (skriker), soulblade (striker), psion (controller), ardent (leader), and [psychic warrior... but hopefully a new name] (defender). That would result in a 5 psionic classes and 1 divine and 2 primal or 2 divine and 1 primal.
this is supposed to be about Player's Handbook 3 rather than random thought that pops into my mind.On that note, so, the PH3 has Minotaurs and Gith (zerai or yanki or both?) in it. And it has psionic, divine, and primal classes. Any predictions (and yes, I know that there are several threads on WOTC's boards on the subject).
I honestly have no ideas for additional divine and primal classes. For Psionic, I want to see the monk (skriker), soulblade (striker), psion (controller), ardent (leader), and [psychic warrior... but hopefully a new name] (defender). That would result in a 5 psionic classes and 1 divine and 2 primal or 2 divine and 1 primal.
Maybe a Fury for a primal ranged striker, and maybe an Oracle for a divine ranged striker. Since they are both lacking a ranged striker. I think the Wilder will be a ranged striker for psionics too.
this is supposed to be about Player's Handbook 3 rather than random thought that pops into my mind.On that note, so, the PH3 has Minotaurs and Gith (zerai or yanki or both?) in it. And it has psionic, divine, and primal classes. Any predictions (and yes, I know that there are several threads on WOTC's boards on the subject).
I honestly have no ideas for additional divine and primal classes. For Psionic, I want to see the monk (skriker), soulblade (striker), psion (controller), ardent (leader), and [psychic warrior... but hopefully a new name] (defender). That would result in a 5 psionic classes and 1 divine and 2 primal or 2 divine and 1 primal.
I imagine both the githzerai and githyanki will show up in Player's Handbook 3. Both have already been seen in the Monster Manual, so I don't think that they are going to separate them into different books, or only release one. I'm not sure about the rest. I believe that WotC is likely to repeat what they did in Player's Handbook 2 and have about half of the races to not have appeared in another WotC 4e book. Those races could be anything from a previous edition to a new creation. If forced to guess, I would end up saying a ghost race and nezumi.
I think that your choices for classes are pretty much my own, however I think that they are more likely to have no more than four psionic classes make their appearance. I would say that, but I'm having trouble thinking of a divine or primal class that wouldn't be pushing into another power source and not overlap too much with existing classes.
Edit: Aside from detritus's reasonable suggestions.
One of the races in PH3 is going to be the Wilden, sort of the 4e update to the Killoren. They put out a playtest article for them a little while back.
I keep trying to decide which of the names I like better, but my results keep being skewed by Wild Thing playing in the back of my head.
Edit: And, why not, the link for people with DDI subscriptions here.