D&D 4E 4E tidbits from WotC blogs (Updated:David Noonan on Social Interactions)

This is all well and good, but I must take everything said by all these people with a grain of salt - nay, a salt lick. The game designers, for the most part, are loyal gamers, and they put a lot of themselves into the product they're now promoting, but in the end, I have to remind myself that the reason they're saying all this stuff is they have a vested interest in selling this product. I really have to wait and see for myself if it will be worth switching, because I'm simply too cynical to take the word of anyone who is directly linked to what they're persuading you to use / buy / play. It's the same reason I don't believe anything that Public Relations people tell me; they're PAID to make manure look like chocolate. If I try it and like it, then I may eventually purchase it.

And I just can't shake the feeling that I've heard it all before, anyway. Every edition is touted as better than the one before, but it's not always true! They'll tell you that the rules for the new system are streamlined and trimmed down from the glut of rules from the previous edition. Whose responsibility is it for that glut, huh? They build a brand new house, smelling all fresh and glistening in the sun, and then they fill it with clutter. Then, instead of cleaning up the mess (which is what I consider 3.5), they build a new house!

The move from 2nd to 3rd edition I understand; WotC had just bought TSR, and released 3rd Edition in large part to make the game a WotC product, not a purchased TSR product. 4th Edition just smells funny to me, and no amount of sweet talk is going to convince me otherwise until I try it for myself and review the 4eSRD.

Presto2112 said:

And I just can't shake the feeling that I've heard it all before, anyway. Every edition is touted as better than the one before, but it's not always true! They'll tell you that the rules for the new system are streamlined and trimmed down from the glut of rules from the previous edition. Whose responsibility is it for that glut, huh?

Click to expand...

You know what, mate?

They're not even trying to sell it to you as "trimming down the glut". That sentiment appears nowhere in their press releases and public comments, because it would be silly of them to suggest that they're not trying to sell you many many rulebooks full of rules.

What they do say is that they're making the rules simpler. Not fewer, necessarily, but simpler: fixing grapple checks, making multiclassing work more smoothly, et cetera.

They're not trying to sell you a book filled with fewer rules. They're trying to sell you books filled with better rules - at least, in their opinion.

mhacdebhandia said:

You know what, mate?

They're not even trying to sell it to you as "trimming down the glut". That sentiment appears nowhere in their press releases and public comments, because it would be silly of them to suggest that they're not trying to sell you many many rulebooks full of rules.

What they do say is that they're making the rules simpler. Not fewer, necessarily, but simpler: fixing grapple checks, making multiclassing work more smoothly, et cetera.

They're not trying to sell you a book filled with fewer rules. They're trying to sell you books filled with better rules - at least, in their opinion.

Click to expand...

Morrus will NOT shut down the house rules section of enworld and declare a victory. NOONE is going to declare 4e perfect. But it's a huge step in the right direction. Way more so than a patch would have done.

The reason for this is not
1st edition (new shiney product- who cares if somethings dont mesh)
2nd edition ( lets add things product- lets include everything)
3rd edition( this product needs fixing-)
3.5 (err needs more fixing)

This is actually the first stable d and d game sequal.

Li Shenron said:

The articles about multiclassing sounds promising. The problem is being addressed so there' good hopes that it will lead to solid results... at least if the playtesting time is enough (6 months is not that long).

Click to expand...

Yeah, it doesn't seem long for material they're just now developing. But what about some of these other concepts they've been working on for 2 years? Overall, given how long 4e has been hidden, i would hope that they've put most of these ideas through the wringer. Especially if much of it is based on Book of 9 Swords.

Nebulous said:

Yeah, it doesn't seem long for material they're just now developing. But what about some of these other concepts they've been working on for 2 years? Overall, given how long 4e has been hidden, i would hope that they've put most of these ideas through the wringer. Especially if much of it is based on Book of 9 Swords.

Click to expand...

6 months of playing a campaign every other day is long enough considering the average player plays only once a week.

Umbra_Kaitou said:

So what do you think the chances are that Monks are in and DR is out >_> *clings to frail hopes*

Click to expand...

Very good.

WotC_Logan said:

Very good.

Click to expand...

...Well, there's one for the 'Confirmed' checklist.

WotC_Logan said:

Very good.

Click to expand...

<george takei>Oh, my.</george takei>

EDIT: So, if DR is out, I wonder if "Armor Class" now decreases damage done by attacks instead of (or in addition to) reducing the chances of hitting, or if it's been replaced by percentage-based resistances, or what? Maybe the same things that granted DR are just represented by extra hit points, coupled with a vulnerability to whatever used to bypass that DR? So lycanthropes get double hitpoints, but silver weapons do double damage to them?

DonTadow said:

6 months of playing a campaign every other day is long enough considering the average player plays only once a week.

Click to expand...

Once a month here, my friend. Sometimes more. Although i fondly recall the days of once or twice a week gaming.

So monks are in, warlords are added, & there are supposedly fewer classes than 3.x?

What other than bards (grrrr! ) got axed?