Search results

My top concern is that the art won't appeal to me. My top question is, given that we have been hearing a lot about "monsters," what will combat against classed NPCs be like, and, for that matter, how will non-monster NPCs in general operate in the new system? I'll be the first to confess. Now...

I don't think there is any evidence for that. Mu-Tahn Laa is not a god, and demon lords were not listed alongside gods in the 3.X books.

According to Dave Noonan's latest blog, Chuck Norris will also appear as an arcane tradition. His associated implement is the roundhouse kick.

Exactly. The removal of XP as a component of magic item creation makes this even more viable and could even indicate that this approach will be suggested as an alternative right in the PHB or DMG.

Score!

I would much rather see new traditions introduced than new wizard PrCs, and many of the current wizard PrCs could probably be reimagined as traditions in the new edition. I'm liking the idea of traditions more and more.

Sounds like Chrono Cross to me.

Right, it's far from an airtight contradiction, but we don't have a lot of evidence for or against your theory at this point.

It is a possibility, but, IMO, it kind of contradicts what Noonan was saying with "You can add your own implements and disciplines/traditions to the mix." [source]

This is true, but I imagine there will still be something called a "+X longsword" in the game, and if a fighter can grab that sword and suddenly become X more effective, I have no problem with a wizard being able to pick up something called a "+X wand" and become equally more effective. If a DM...

Seconded! Definitely my #2 pick.

I like...both? The only differences I see are 1) removal of tomes 2) revelation of traditions I am quite certain that we'll see the concept of a tome/spellbook reinstated elsewhere in the rules, which is why I suspect it was removed. (For all we know, it will still exist as an implement, but...

Actually, summoning was mentioned:

I neither deny your points nor consider myself an expert. :o My point is that most of the disappointment I see with D&D psionics (aside from the "brokenness" argument) is that it doesn't accurately model a certain view of what "psychic powers" should be. I would like to see D&D psionics...

I took GreatLemur's reference to Uri Geller to refer to the contemporary mind-reading, spoon-bending view of psychics common in modern media. Wikipedia has a wealth of information regarding the man himself: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uri_Geller

I imagine that the designers would encourage you to do just that. If WotC wanted everyone to play with the same example names/organizations/fluff, they wouldn't publish multiple campaign settings. ;) As with the Bo9S disciplines they seem to resemble, I imagine the new wizard traditions will...

I could definitely go for that. As long as the fluff continues to move away from the Uri Geller, be it toward crystals and quantum physics or toward mysticism and ki, I'll be satisfied.

Neon Genesis Evangelion and Revolutionary Girl Utena are must-sees, IMHO, and I've heard both considered the best and most influential modern series. If you enjoyed what you saw, I'd recommend seeking out the rest of Cowboy Bebop, as it's often considered among the best as well. For some...

I do respect this position, but, if anything, I want more of that. I think D&D psionics should be more than the modern concept of psychic powers transplanted into a fantasy setting. I hope we still see soulknives in some form or another.

Definitely, and your read on the situation seems very close to mine.