D&D 4E 4E PHB II & DMG II 1 year after release (and a new one every year after that)

[Korgoth]

I certainly don't see myself shelling out for 3 new 'core' books every year. Hopefully supplementary products (adventures, etc.) will not rely too much on "core plus" books.

Why on Earth would you need more than 1 PHB, or DMG? If someone can explain this, have at it.

 

[mhacdebhandia]

Need? No. Want? Yes.

I mean, lookit: people bought the Expanded Psionics Handbook because they wanted psionics in their game.

The first Fourth Edition Player's Handbook is subtitled "Arcane, Divine, and Martial Heroes", and we have good indications that the second Player's Handbook will include psionics.

The only difference, as far as I can tell, is that they'll use the Player's Handbook series to introduce alternative sources of power and, presumably, alternatives to the existing core classes and races - sort of a mix of "capsystem" books like the Expanded Psionics Handbook and "splatbooks" like the Complete and Races series.

So you'll buy a single book with, say, psionics, incarnum, and pact magic, labelled Player's Handbook II, rather than the Expanded Psionics Handbook, Magic of Incarnum, and Tome of Magic.

In fact, Tome of Magic itself - presenting three different sources of magic - is probably a good example of how the Player's Handbook sequels will manifest themselves.

 

[Korgoth]

Need? No. Want? Yes.

I mean, lookit: people bought the Expanded Psionics Handbook because they wanted psionics in their game.

The first Fourth Edition Player's Handbook is subtitled "Arcane, Divine, and Martial Heroes", and we have good indications that the second Player's Handbook will include psionics.

The only difference, as far as I can tell, is that they'll use the Player's Handbook series to introduce alternative sources of power and, presumably, alternatives to the existing core classes and races - sort of a mix of "capsystem" books like the Expanded Psionics Handbook and "splatbooks" like the Complete and Races series.

So you'll buy a single book with, say, psionics, incarnum, and pact magic, labelled Player's Handbook II, rather than the Expanded Psionics Handbook, Magic of Incarnum, and Tome of Magic.

In fact, Tome of Magic itself - presenting three different sources of magic - is probably a good example of how the Player's Handbook sequels will manifest themselves.

So a better value for the money is the idea? That and a unified product (as in if I don't DM I don't need the DMG VIII, etc.)?

 

[Khairn]

You seem to have the ability to make posts from the future with knowledge of how 4e IS that we simply don't have yet.

Just repeating what I'm reading and understanding. You don't draw the same conclusion? No problem. Its a free forum.

My crystal ball is as accurate as yours.

 

[Kobold Avenger]

It's
Arcane Striker: Duskblade
They really do fill into that role, since they have spells and options that allow them to inflict a lot of damage to a single target or massively enhance their melee attacks. Also some of their spells allow them to move around the battlefield, and defend only them from short-term. I'd say they fit into the Striker role far better than the Sorcerer will.

 

[IanArgent]

But these books aren't optional, they are core. They'll be core for the RPGA, supported and promoted by the DDI, and tied into the basic 4E game. New adventures provided in E-Dungeon and E-Dragon will introduce the new classes, PrC's, monsters and action zone rules. They'll introduce new rules for FR (in 2008) and Eberron (in 2009), and have them published in the new core PHB and DMG. Try to see it from WotC's point of view and you will see how these all tie in together and promote each other.

Uh, yeah. But correct me if I'm wrong, but this is already happening with the current splatbooks. RPGA uses (most of) the extra sources, the last ffew issues of Dragon & Dungeon have used this extra material, etc. I think you've just discovered the theory of marketing...

WotC is re-inventing the game, (not just the physical game but the buyers / sellers game as well) and doing so in a way that many of our paradigms as to what they are providing and what (and how) we will be playing the game are being challenged. Its not necessarily a bad thing and may result in some great adventures for many people, and that's great. But its also looking to be very costly.

More costly than a minimum of a $30 hardback book per month? That's what it takes now to be "fully" up to date (give or take).

Look, I've already made my decision, and will be playing 3.5 until I eventually move to one of a number of different games that I'm looking at like Exalted, Runequest and Artesia. I'm just really stunned at the depth of the changes WotC has brought in, and hope that everyone else can see them as well.

If wizards can break out of the book-of-the-month-club mentality forced on the RPG industry by comics distributors, more power to them. If I can get away with buying 2 or 3 (depending on whether the DMG heads a series or not) rules book s a year, plus 1 or 2 settings expansions, rather than 4 "Races" books, 3 "complete" books, a Monster Manual, and the aforementioned settings books, I'm for it.

 

[Gentlegamer]

Sounds like a quasi-Unearthed Arcana (1e) way to expand the official rules. I definitely like this approach over the more narrowly-focused race and class-specific "splatbooks."

Will the sequential versions of the rule books contain all the rules to play, or be just expansions of the first book in the series?

 

[UndeadScottsman]

Ooh, this is an interesting concept. PHB2 was fantastic (The DMG2 not so much, IMO. However, if they move magic items and stuff to the PHB, then I won't need to worry about the DMGs.. though I'd wonder what the 4th edition DMG will contain, precisely.)

Anywho, combined with what we know, I see things going like this.

Every year we get a PHB, DMG, MM and campaign setting. I'm betting we'll also get a sort of "complete" book for each of the three powers introduced in the PHB that year, that will expand upon the powerbases in the PHB. (We already know of an Arcane and a Martial book to follow the first PHB)

The mention of a dragon-focused book makes me think we'll also see getting targeted monster books (Like the Draconomicon, Libris Mortis, Lords of Madness, Fiend Folio, Fiendish Codex's) alongside the general purpose MM. And there will likely be extra, general purpose books flavored here and there (Like mentioned the Magic Item book; I'd expect to see a plane book in this vein)

My only question is will they put a priority on tying as much as possible together, thematically, or will they just be more concerned about just producing content and getting it into the players hands.

 

[mhacdebhandia]

So a better value for the money is the idea? That and a unified product (as in if I don't DM I don't need the DMG VIII, etc.)?

Well, for instance, they certainly got full mileage out of the psionics system for a full-length hardcover product - but they had a lot of history to work with.

I would argue that Magic of Incarnum suffered from being "stretched" to fill a full-length hardcover, on the other hand, because the concept is good but didn't quite have the legs. No-one really needed the incarnum-oriented races, for instance, and I suspect they're only in there because the psionics book had psionic races.

Meanwhile, I suggest that Tome of Magic had just about the right length to cover three complete systems - whether or not you like them or consider them balanced, it's a good way to introduce new concepts into the rules without padding them out with by-the-numbers chaff to fill a full-length book. There aren't any pact magic- or truenaming-oriented races in that book, for instance, because there doesn't need to be.

Now, given all this, I think it implies that psionics' showing up in a Fourth Edition Player's Handbook II won't get the breadth of coverage that they did in the Expanded Psionics Handbook - but, on the flipside, perhaps this won't matter very much at all, because perhaps the nature and format of Fourth Edition mechanics doesn't require hundreds of pages for spells/powers/abilities, prestige classes, et cetera.

 

[mhacdebhandia]

It's
Arcane Striker: Duskblade
They really do fill into that role, since they have spells and options that allow them to inflict a lot of damage to a single target or massively enhance their melee attacks. Also some of their spells allow them to move around the battlefield, and defend only them from short-term. I'd say they fit into the Striker role far better than the Sorcerer will.

Hmm. I think it's true that the duskblade, as currently written, seems like a striker more than any other role.

On the other hand, I don't see why you're (seemingly) fixated on the idea that a striker has to be dealing melee damage. If a sorcerer in Fourth Edition can be said to have killed the warlock and/or the warmage and taken their stuff, what's wrong with an arcane striker that works through direct-damage spells and the like, with warlock-like movement and defence abilities?

The wizard and the sorcerer are getting further apart. The wizard is supposed to be filling the Controller role, and I'm not sure I see a plausible way in which the sorcerer could be a Leader or a Defender.

In fact, I would suggest the duskblade - as an armed, armoured spellcaster - makes a better Arcane Defender, if you change the emphasis from spell-powered melee offense to spell-boosted defensive fighting.

Basically, my point boils down to the fact that the classes are going to change in Fourth Edition - there's only so much we can guess based on what we know now.