General RPG DiscussionDiscussion of all RPGs and non-system-specific topics. DM/GM/player issues, settings, etc. Rules discussion belongs in one the forums below.
Gamers Online Now: 1,141
204 members and 937 guests
Most users ever online was 4,029, 8th April 2009 at 05:04 PM.
This product is 56 pages long and free. Cover, credits, intro and ToC take up 4 pages. I counted 17 pages of adds many of them for other Rite... [Read More]
Evocative City Sites Lorn's Entrepot (Abandoned Warehouse) by Rite Publishing. I was given this product for the purposes of this review. This product is 47 pages long. Cover, Credits, two pages of... [Read More]
Feats 101 by Rite Publishing. I was given this product for the purposes of this review. I have not yet played using these feats my review is based on reading the feats and checking a few against... [Read More]
The Plane Below: Secrets of the Elemental Chaos is a 4e D&D product describing some of the different planes in the 4e Cosmology. The book is a typical hard bound book that Wizards of the Coast... [Read More]
To anyone who had purchased the book (and I recommend it).
Under the Monk Feats it references "Secret Techniques" but so far I haven't found anywhere in the book that explains what these techniques are. Am I missing something?
But maybe a/ they're gambling they'll sell enough copies before the SRD changes to be worthwhile, or b/ WotC won't enforce the retroactive clause, or c/ they have a loophole, or d/ I haven't understood the GSL correctly - which is entirely possible!
-Hyp.
I thought I once read somewhere that the vast majority of 3PP books make the majority of their money within the first month of release, so I think it makes sense to release them now, before March rolls around and GSL/SRD issues come to the fore. I like XRP and GG, but I seriously doubt that the APG or FH will make any kind of serious dent to the PHBII sales because they feature similar classes, and I'm pretty confident that the WoTC versions will come to dominate the larger 4e gamer consciousness, so the time to publish is now. That said, releasing books like the APG and FH will garner their respective publishers even more gamer goodwill and nicely allows them to position themselves among the top tier 4e 3PPs.
__________________ Veronica: Where's your brother?
Dick: I think he took Ghost World up to his room. They're probably up there making love. Or playing Dungeons and Dragons. Or both, at the same time. They're both, like, 12th-level dorks. I'm just sayin'
After finishing watching 36 Chambers of Shaolin, I was highly in a mood to read about such a class.
One thing that's interesting is that monk has no armor proficency but does have abilities that work with cloth armor. Feat use or errata... Probably feat use.
A lot of the monks abilities/powers, allow him to negate some damage/attack, but puts him at a disadvantage. In some ways I can see how this will work, but in others, I'm wondering how they'll scale up in terms of armor class. I haven't played enough high level 4e to know yet.
Another difference between FFS and APG, which I'm admittedly surmising only from the druid preview Goodman Games put out and my own full copy of APG, is that while the APG constrains itself to the core three power sources (Martial, Divine, Arcane), FFS took the plunge and reeled in the Primal power source. While I can admire that tactic as a selling point, I personally prefer the APG because it stuck with what we already know.
One thing that's interesting is that monk has no armor proficency but does have abilities that work with cloth armor. Feat use or errata... Probably feat use.
Which feat? There is no Armor Proficiency (Cloth) feat...
... and that's because "All characters are proficient with cloth armor", PHB p212.
I mostly want to know how it stacks up against the APG from an editting perspective...and what the publisher's policy is on incorporating errata into PDFs.
And I hope they do more proofreading before releasing the paper version, because I downloaded the Druid Preview PDF and found mistakes such as:
(1) Under Druid, Summon Animal Companion, Wolf: "When your bear is hit by a . . . succeed, your bear is unharmed. . . . checks using your bear." (It should be "wolf" instead of "bear" in each case in that paragraph.)
(2) New Keyword "Summon" or "Summoning" (both are used): Level 1 Encounter Wilding "Courageous Companion" has the "Summoning" Keyword; Level 1 Daily Wilding "Summon Swarm" does not have either one, but has the "Conjuration" Keyword instead; Level 5 Daily Wilding "Summon Treant" has the "Summon" Keyword. It's inconsistent: if a Summons can be a Conjuration, why define a new "Summon" Keyword at all?
Personally, I would have expected a 3.5e-reminiscent 4e Druid to have Light Shield Proficiency; but I know it only costs a Feat, so no problem.
On a fluff note: what font size is used to carve 50 Rituals (using Runes) into a single Fetish? Font size 0.05? Where do Druids get the microscopes needed to read that? (Rituals take many pages each in a book.)
And I hope they do more proofreading before releasing the paper version, because I downloaded the Druid Preview PDF and found mistakes such as:
(1) Under Druid, Summon Animal Companion, Wolf: "When your bear is hit by a . . . succeed, your bear is unharmed. . . . checks using your bear." (It should be "wolf" instead of "bear" in each case in that paragraph.)
(2) New Keyword "Summon" or "Summoning" (both are used): Level 1 Encounter Wilding "Courageous Companion" has the "Summoning" Keyword; Level 1 Daily Wilding "Summon Swarm" does not have either one, but has the "Conjuration" Keyword instead; Level 5 Daily Wilding "Summon Treant" has the "Summon" Keyword. It's inconsistent: if a Summons can be a Conjuration, why define a new "Summon" Keyword at all?
Personally, I would have expected a 3.5e-reminiscent 4e Druid to have Light Shield Proficiency; but I know it only costs a Feat, so no problem.
On a fluff note: what font size is used to carve 50 Rituals (using Runes) into a single Fetish? Font size 0.05? Where do Druids get the microscopes needed to read that? (Rituals take many pages each in a book.)
I can't comment on the proofreading because I'm not involved in that, but in terms of "font size," I think druids are more likely to create individual symbols that represent their rituals, rather than carving numerous words on their implements.
I can't comment on the proofreading because I'm not involved in that, but in terms of "font size," I think druids are more likely to create individual symbols that represent their rituals, rather than carving numerous words on their implements.
Thanks for the clarification. I'm personally going to interpret that to mean that the runes on the implements are reminders/boasting, and that each F.H. Druid needs to buy a Ritual Book out of their starting 100 gp in order to hold the actual content of their known Rituals, thus: Ritual Book (50 gp) + Hide Armor (30 gp) + Standard Adventurer's Kit (15 gp) = 95 gp, leaving 5 gp for a weapon -- and each of the listed weapons costs 5 gp or less.
That works for me. (It even reflects the feel of 3.5e Druids' having less starting wealth than some other classes.)
(I would much rather interpret it that way than to think that Druids do not need to read their rituals in order to cast them.)
( /tuxgeo mentally castigates himself for imagining Illiterate Ritual Casters. (IRC))
Last edited by tuxgeo; 11th October 2008 at 05:53 PM..
Reason: Changed "all of the listed weapons" to "each . . ." Also, an acronym.
Which feat? There is no Armor Proficiency (Cloth) feat...
... and that's because "All characters are proficient with cloth armor", PHB p212.
-Hyp.
That's a very good point. However, it's also listed with every character class. More importantly, and what I was thinking, was "If a specific rule contradicts a general rule, the specific rule wins." Not listing cloth armor as a valid armor type... oversight or class design?
That's a very good point. However, it's also listed with every character class. More importantly, and what I was thinking, was "If a specific rule contradicts a general rule, the specific rule wins." Not listing cloth armor as a valid armor type... oversight or class design?
Obviously an oversight, because there is no Armor Proficiency (Cloth) feat in the PHB. So even if you wanted to train your monk in cloth armour (assuming it was purposeful design), you wouldn't be able to.
__________________ Iain Fyffe
Original member of the Rouseketeers!
I have played 4E. And just like all other editions of D&D, it is awesome!
no one quotes me in sigs - Crothian
For some reason, this doesn't fill me with rage. I must be interwebbing wrong. - Cadfan
Obviously an oversight, because there is no Armor Proficiency (Cloth) feat in the PHB. So even if you wanted to train your monk in cloth armour (assuming it was purposeful design), you wouldn't be able to.
And yet instead of being blank, under armor profiency it says "None."
And yet instead of being blank, under armor profiency it says "None."
That's a pretty specific call no?
Re: "Forgotten Heroes" Monk and/or Cloth Armor Proficiency:
Could they be drawing a fine distinction between Proficiency and Training?
In looking at the F.H. Druid Preview PDF, I see that they list "Weapon Proficiencies," but list "Armor Training" instead of "Armor Proficiencies" -- could this mean that they hold that the Monk possesses Cloth Armor Proficiency without having had to take specific Training to get it?
(Or am I imagining too fine a point?)
Gamers Online Now: 1,141
Linear Mode
