Search results

What I would like to see is a modular D&D where you tailor everything to your need. Kind of a point-based system but where you can create your own class and character. Plus I would like more depth outside combat.

The 8 letters for races were revealed a few weeks ago. It's in another thread.

I was surprised to see there are only 8 classes set for the PHBII, I thought there would be place for 2 or 3 more classes. So 8 classes and races is the standard for a PHB. :( Barbarian, Bard, Druid, Illusionist, Shaman, Sorcerer are sure bet. Less sure about the Telepath & Wilder. It could...

About the comment on 4E monsters/NPCs creation being "a point-based system without points". This is what I've been thinking a lot, since Mike Mearl made the comment about 4E being almost a classless system. IMO this does not only apply for monster creation, I think the whole 4E system was...

Maybe it has changed since, but in a The Tome podcast, Andy Collins mentioned alignment in 4E was only fluff (that there were no mechanical effects, like Detect Evil, etc.).

THIS is how I see it too.

IMO, it was a much needed cleanup, sorry for the fans who preferred the old alignment system from older edition. But alignment in 4E is only fluff, so there shouldn't be any problem for DMs to revert back to it. Philosophically, it's logical. Chaos is bound to create disorder, and is in direct...

I thought it was Erik le rouge? (from the viking legend)

I second THIS.

Do you honestly believe WotC would devalue FRPG and reprint what makes the FRPG core appeal into another PHB? This wouldn't make any sense. Plus think about all the people who will have bought the FRPG and will be frustrated to see all the stuff they already own reprinted again in another book...

Yep, I'm on the same page too. I hate incompleteness. That's also why I hate to wait until PHB II to get the Druid, Sorcerer, Barbarian, Shaman and Bard classes. This is also why I hate Mini boosters too, if you want 20 minions you have to buy 45 boosters, or buy them individually at a bigger...

You're right, it's like comparing oranges with apples, it's a bad example. Why choose a Hyundai when you can drive a Ferrari? Sure WotC is doing it right for many people. They had a project, and they did not spare a dime to give the best they could. And it shows. My idea may not translate well...

A few months ago I was very angry with the approach they (WotC) decided to take with their new 4E, when I was playing D&D long ago (AD&D 2E, minis weren't essential. Now, with the pure tactical advantages given by powers to slide and push your opponents, you need a battlemat (tiles) + minis or...

Its your allies powers + your int bonus, so you're right, it is [1d8+3]+4. Edit: I guess basic melee attack means it's not a power attack.

To notice its not just a piece of glass or a mirror, but a gem.

Well, it has been hinted at by Charwoman Gene, but it has not been officially confirmed yet. There is no more neutral but unaligned./nitpick

What is even more surprising is that I haven't encountered any Lawful Evil alignment yet. This support my theory that there will be no more Lawful Evil alignment in 4E.

Wed 05/28: Rituals (PH) 1 week before the Core Books are out. It's better than nothing!

I'm starting to like the Warlord's at-will powers very much! It seem to be fun to tell your allies who to strike :D

try this link it works better http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4pr/20080509a edit: sorry, your link didn't work the first time