Search results

It's nice that you've resigned yourself to loathing 4th Ed. months before substantial information is even set to come out. Disliking the little information - a series of ambiguous articles on design philosophy, pieces of subjective concept and promotional art, and anecdotes about malleable fluff...

Thanks for telling us that. As we come closer to release, we'll begin seeing advertisements in the appropriate venues. Penny Arcade, for instance, always runs banners for the newest Magic: The Gathering set. Expect pages in enthusiast magazines like EGM, bumps in television blocks like Adult...

You propose an interesting system, but I don't believe it's the one we'll find in the Monster Manual. Your equation starts to break down when, for instance, you introduce monsters without limbs or brains. A beholder might make a great master or blaster, but it's particularly unsuited for being a...

I don't like the phrase, "change for change sake," getting thrown around. That and the words 'MMORPG' and 'WoW.'

I wish they'd chosen more evocative names for monster roles. I'm slowly assembling a personal lexicon of terms more appropriate than the one the designers use. I like 'brute,' but I think 'sneak' is better name than 'lurker,' and 'sniper' is much more catchy than 'ranged attacker.' I know...

Dear lord, I sincerely hope that that manticore sketch is a kitsch throwback to 1st Ed. because it embarrasses me to look at it. The article's heart was in the right place, but it raises some questions. First, how can I balance battles against a single opponent? Does every monster having...

Of course, but there's only so many characters one can shove into a group. Would have been nice to see how halflings roll, but I'm sure they're eager to show off their newfangled races.

I think they're trying make everyone more active in combat. Clerics being viewed as chores is a legitimate issue, though. Whose wonderful idea was it to include warlords, warlocks, and warforged in the same book. I enjoy war as much as the next fellow, and I understand why they'd want to avoid...

I'm cautiously optimistic about 4th Ed. I believe it will improve on 3rd Ed. in nearly every conceivable way. I just need to remind myself of that whenever I read the words 'warlord,' 'tiefling,' or 'acid,' or think about how 8 isn't divisible by 3.

But...I like cute symmetries! Hell, I even get annoyed when they're not there. I think they lend the proceedings a sense of comprehensiveness.

I subscribe to the theory that future Players Handbooks will introduce new power sources. I wonder, however, if they might introduce two new sources, and flesh out the sources from previous books. As for consumerism, I'll be purchasing future supplements based on quality, rather than...

That Wizards will make asymmetrical and uncomprehensive design choices for the first three rulebooks, so that they can sell sourcebooks to plug the holes later. I'm looking at you, "lack of swordmage in the Players Handbook, despite the continued redundant presence of wizards and sorcerers."...

That would be unfortunate, because the Dungeon Masters Guide, with the red dragon looking through his orb at those two characters from the Players Handbook, would lose some of its impact.

Wizards has always taken a very affirmative action approach with their cover art. I can't think of a single sourcebook cover that featured multiple characters of the same race. I think, then, that it would be odd for the Players Handbook, with its multitude of races, to feature members of only...

I was examining the cover of the 4th Ed. Players Handbook again and, despite the lack of fine detail, thought that the spellcaster in the rear looked draconic. It's an unsubstantiated tangent, but it makes some sense in the context of both the game and illustration. After all, half-outsiders are...

Well, they've already stated that bards are arcane leaders. Admittedly, they don't actually use the word "arcane," but I can't conceive of them designing a singing power source. Please don't argue with me on this point. It makes me wonder which role will have the greatest instance of power...

Humans generally compose between a quarter to a third of my settings' civilized population. Other races split the remaining portion evenly amongst themselves, the exception being exotic races, like tieflings or elan. That way, humans are the most populous race, but don't crowd everyone else out.

I was slightly annoyed when Mr. Baker stated that certain power source/role combinations might be redundant, while others would be unrealized. Were I responsible for 4th Ed's design, I'd give each power source a presence in three roles. That way you'd have nine classes in the Players Handbook...

Dwarfism, the medical condition, takes it's name from the mythical creatures, rather than the other way around. You know, I've never thought about the nomenclature of miniature things in fantasy settings.

I kicked myself for not covering every possible contingency in my last post. This is the internet, after all. What I mean is that, while the names elf, gnome, and dwarf are all invented by humans to describe imaginary creatures in folklore, you could believe that, in your setting, those...