-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
D&D 4E No more reprints of the 4E core books?
- Thread starter Eridanis
- Start date
I'm A Banana
Potassium-Rich
Totally unsubstantiated rumor. Let's get that out of the way first. I don't necessarily believe it. It's vaguely plausible, but controversial, which makes it good rumor-mill fodder. That doesn't rule out it also being true, but it certainly leads me to skepticism.
About the 4.5ing going on: It's a marketing game.
[sblock]
That's not what (most? any?) people are saying by claiming this is 4.5.
Let's have a bit of an education.
In the lead up to 3.5, the designers made the point, time and again, that this was the same game, and you didn't have to update anything, and these changes were basically optional, and that no one was throwing away your old ranger, but here's a new one, if you want, that we think is maybe better than the old one. 3.5 didn't delete old material. 3.5 didn't burn all the 3.0 books. 3.0 and 3.5 were totally cross-compatible, and that was announced loudly in the build up to 3.5.
Ditto with 2e Skills & Powers.
That does sound familiar to what is happening now.
Skills and Powers fell into the trap of not actually being compatible. I really don't think that's gonig to happen now.
What made "3.5" something of a problem was that the implied upgrade was there, and it made a swath of products a little difficult to use, because it felt like a break with what had come before. The books looked different, and the improvements were obvious, and it felt a little lame buying anything that came before the break.
That may or may not happen now.
Mearls has said on here that they still plan on printing pre-essentials style classes, and if that stays true, then the whole "this is a new game!" effect will be diminished significantly. By not calling it "4.5" or anything, they also rather strongly convey a message of "same game" (which the term "3.5" did not do).
That's 90% marketing buzz, though. That's controlling consumer perceptions.
The big test will be in the releases. But 4e's releases have been constantly changing (the difference between the first MM and MM3 is marked, at least as distinct at the transition between 3.0 and 3.5, but without any of the nerd rage that typified that transition), so it's harder to tell if there's a "hard break."
In a way, there's been many soft breaks. Which might be successful in limiting the nerd rage. Maybe it's easier to accept Essentials having already accepted the PHB3, which was easier to accept after the PHB2, and so on.
Saying "THIS ISN'T 4.5!!!!" is just as inane and meaningless on the surface as saying "THIS IS CLEARLY 4.5 UNDER A DIFFERENT NAME!!!!!" What "4.5" means is a pretty fluid, dynamic, and subjective thing. Ultimately, what it signifies is a "significant break." Even if the 3.5 transition was not that significant of a break, the impression is that it was.
FWIW, it doesn't look like Essentials will be a significant break to me. Not publishing the first core books anymore would nudge it more in that direction, but I'm not even sure it would complete the transition. It's a possibility that WotC may plan to phase out all the core books like this, so that we're all running on a constant 4.x treadmill, keeping up with the most recent versions, using DDI to access past versions, etc. Not sure that would be smart, but it's an idea.
But this line looks bigger than the PHB3, and bigger than 3.5 was, but not quite a "Skills & Powers" debacle.
[/sblock]
On the change itelf, if true?
It seems like a silly thing for them to do, to stop supporting their current edition by letting a book lapse out of print like that. Where will the people Essentials hooks go to find a more complex fighter, or a martial healer, or a rogue with dailies, or whatever, if they want it? If this does happen, I bet we'll see a "revised" PHB, with erratta and such included, pretty soon.
About the 4.5ing going on: It's a marketing game.
[sblock]
Thanlis said:
That's not what (most? any?) people are saying by claiming this is 4.5.
Let's have a bit of an education.
In the lead up to 3.5, the designers made the point, time and again, that this was the same game, and you didn't have to update anything, and these changes were basically optional, and that no one was throwing away your old ranger, but here's a new one, if you want, that we think is maybe better than the old one. 3.5 didn't delete old material. 3.5 didn't burn all the 3.0 books. 3.0 and 3.5 were totally cross-compatible, and that was announced loudly in the build up to 3.5.
Ditto with 2e Skills & Powers.
That does sound familiar to what is happening now.
Skills and Powers fell into the trap of not actually being compatible. I really don't think that's gonig to happen now.
What made "3.5" something of a problem was that the implied upgrade was there, and it made a swath of products a little difficult to use, because it felt like a break with what had come before. The books looked different, and the improvements were obvious, and it felt a little lame buying anything that came before the break.
That may or may not happen now.
Mearls has said on here that they still plan on printing pre-essentials style classes, and if that stays true, then the whole "this is a new game!" effect will be diminished significantly. By not calling it "4.5" or anything, they also rather strongly convey a message of "same game" (which the term "3.5" did not do).
That's 90% marketing buzz, though. That's controlling consumer perceptions.
The big test will be in the releases. But 4e's releases have been constantly changing (the difference between the first MM and MM3 is marked, at least as distinct at the transition between 3.0 and 3.5, but without any of the nerd rage that typified that transition), so it's harder to tell if there's a "hard break."
In a way, there's been many soft breaks. Which might be successful in limiting the nerd rage. Maybe it's easier to accept Essentials having already accepted the PHB3, which was easier to accept after the PHB2, and so on.
Saying "THIS ISN'T 4.5!!!!" is just as inane and meaningless on the surface as saying "THIS IS CLEARLY 4.5 UNDER A DIFFERENT NAME!!!!!" What "4.5" means is a pretty fluid, dynamic, and subjective thing. Ultimately, what it signifies is a "significant break." Even if the 3.5 transition was not that significant of a break, the impression is that it was.
FWIW, it doesn't look like Essentials will be a significant break to me. Not publishing the first core books anymore would nudge it more in that direction, but I'm not even sure it would complete the transition. It's a possibility that WotC may plan to phase out all the core books like this, so that we're all running on a constant 4.x treadmill, keeping up with the most recent versions, using DDI to access past versions, etc. Not sure that would be smart, but it's an idea.
But this line looks bigger than the PHB3, and bigger than 3.5 was, but not quite a "Skills & Powers" debacle.
[/sblock]
On the change itelf, if true?
It seems like a silly thing for them to do, to stop supporting their current edition by letting a book lapse out of print like that. Where will the people Essentials hooks go to find a more complex fighter, or a martial healer, or a rogue with dailies, or whatever, if they want it? If this does happen, I bet we'll see a "revised" PHB, with erratta and such included, pretty soon.
Klaus
First Post
Outside of nostalgia, there's no good reason for the PH1, DMG1 and MM1 to remain in print if most of what they contain will be in the "evergreen" Rules Compendium, the two Player Essentials books, Dungeon Master Kit and Monster Vault.
I'll be shocked if PHB1 material vanishes from the Character Builder or the Compendium (though I would not be all that surprised if non-Essentials versions of classes that have Essentials and non-Essentials versions are hidden by default in new installs). WotC is not going to send ninjas to our homes to grab our PHB1s.
But if you can't get the old PHB1-exclusive content in print any more, then it's very hard to argue it's not being phased out. And while you kind of expect everything except the core 3 (and in 4e as it has been, PH2) to go out of print and become unavailable at some point long before an edition runs out, phasing out PHB1 is kind of a big deal.
One thing that people should keep in mind is Mike Mearls' statement that he still uses PHB1 as his primary design source. Now if the Essentials was a signaling of 4.5 (which I don't believe), why would he use an outdated and no longer valid reference book as his primary design source.
Someone more familiar with the 3->3.5 switch will hopefully jump in and give more information, but were the changes from 3->3.5 large enough that it would be no longer possible to use the 3.0 PHB as the primary reference in designing for 3.5??
Someone more familiar with the 3->3.5 switch will hopefully jump in and give more information, but were the changes from 3->3.5 large enough that it would be no longer possible to use the 3.0 PHB as the primary reference in designing for 3.5??
I'm A Banana
Potassium-Rich
Nope.
Obryn
Hero
I dunno which you're "nope"-ing, but I don't think it would be generally possible. A pretty huge percentage of the spells in the game were changed either slightly or dramatically, monsters received some big changes to their progression, etc. When those same monsters often reference spells by name rather than effect, you're looking at trouble for adventure and class design, at least.
4e is a lot more modular, so that problem's not necessarily there.
-O
ExploderWizard
Hero
I don't want to disrupt the flow of air into the logic engine or anything but generally you don't completely toss out Mark I while developing Mark II until Mark II is operational.
We will see how primary PHB 1 remains after the release of the essentials products.
I'm A Banana
Potassium-Rich
You don't need to get that specific. Some spells were changed, but it didn't make it any different to write an adventure for the spells. Monster progression was different, but the best way to make a monster was still to just "use other monsters as a guideline," and even if they used the old version of the monster, the scenario wouldn't play out markedly differently.
3.5's changes were not that massive. They were less massive than the 3.5 -> Pathfinder change, and that kept compatibility sacrosanct.
I didn't see a problem. I don't see a major problem with 3.0 -> Pathfinder, either. I don't see a problem for 4e vis a vis Essentials either. It doesn't matter all that much.
TarionzCousin
Second Most Angelic Devil Ever
Um, what?
Similar Threads
