Warforged: MM vs Dragon Magazine

[Blackeagle]

Hm, even the new & improved 4e warforged are lacking any protection from their innate armor.

Well, they explain why the decided natural armor was a bad idea on page 32.

For instance, later in the design process of 4th Edition, we discovered that racial AC bonuses, even if small, conflict with armor and treasure. It’s better for the game if you, the player, can use the nifty armor you buy or find. If your race’s natural armor doesn’t stack with that armor, what’s the point of having it?

 

[Dragonbait]

Hm, even the new & improved 4e warforged are lacking any protection from their innate armor.

Apparently they don't have any. The metal plates on their body are like skin. They now suit up like everyone else.

I like the new article for it's quality and information.

I liked how they had natural armor in 3E, but I can roll with the punch. It allows WF to take advantage of the cool armor the GM randomly rolls up now, especially if they are from a setting that would not have warforged-friendly items lying around in every treasure hoard.

 

[Blackeagle]

Double Post

 

[JohnSnow]

I'd buy that if one wasn't strictly better than the other. If one was balanced, how can the other be when its better in all ways?

Now, I thought the MM version was a bit weak, so the new version is fine with me. It just does seem strange to change it so completely.

Well, the argument can be made that the two entries serve radically different functions:

Monster Manual Entry - Race write-up for players who absolutely can't wait to stat up a character of the given race. Entries in the Monster Manual will be balanced, but probably a little on the weak side. Full PC write-ups will be more nuanced, and might be slightly more powerful as playtesting reveals places where improvements can be made without creating an imbalance.

In other words, the Monster Manual writeups are adequate, but probably tend to err a bit on the conservative side (i.e. "underpowered").

Make sense?

 

[blargney the second]

The space saved on the abbreviated entry in the MM left space for the gnome. Be happy.

 

[Wormwood]

I'd also like to point out the article's layout format. It is nicely formatted to read on a computer instead of trying to fit on a normal letter page layout.

The digital magazine layout is gorgeous. Hell, the entire 4e line is impressive from a design standpoint.

/does this stuff for a living

 

[Mort_Q]

It allows WF to take advantage of the cool armor the GM randomly rolls up now, especially if they are from a setting that would not have warforged-friendly items lying around in every treasure hoard.

I like it... having it attached gives a small advantage, and fits the Eberron image of being armoured and not wearing armour.

 

[Piratecat]

That's a great article, but they really should have caught the typo (us vs. use) on the second page. That's embarrassing.

Other than that? Very nice.

 

[sukael]

The ability to attach a two-handed weapon to one hand at only -2 to the attack rolls makes me wonder how many warforged rangers with dual greataxes or spiked chains will be popping up in the near future.

 

[Vempyre]

I am left wondering one thing : if you attach a plate armor, which slot(s) of attachment does it use??

both legs n arms as well as the chest and back?