D&D 4E 4E tidbits from WotC blogs (Updated:David Noonan on Social Interactions)

[Glyfair]

James Wyatt's blog updated:

So finally today I had time to really dig in to the Demons entry of the MM. Ah, tasty, tasty.

What can I say about demons? As with so many other things, the entry is a mix of old, familiar faces (writing the vrock now), some more recent additions to the D&D world (there's a demon from MM5 in here), and one or two brand-new demons to round out the batch. Not every demon from 3e appears here, of course. But we'll have a number of MMs through the life of 4e that will cover the familiar bases as well as explore a lot of new ground. That's the fine line we're walking these days.

A very enjoyable part of this work is designing sample encounters for the monsters. We talked just today about whether that would be better on D&D Insider, but we agreed that it's important to reinforce the message that an interesting encounter consists of multiple, different monsters grouped in interesting ways.

 

[Shade]

Woo-hoo! One of my absolute favorite types of monsters made it through seemingly unscathed. The fact that he mentions "we'll have a number of MMs through the life of 4e that will cover the familiar bases" lets me rest comfortably knowing that they aren't going "all-new".

 

[Mouseferatu]

Complaint about them "wasting space" on sample encounters in 5...

Edit to add some content of substance: Having written many 3.5 monsters with "sample encounters" in the format, I have to say that I never thought it all that onerous, since it only took up a paragraph or three.

Still, I have to admit, I felt it was a paragraph or three that could've been used elsewhere.

But that was 3E. Given 4E's greater emphasis on groups of adversaries, I can absolutely see why it's a more important section now than once 'twas.

 

[Shade]

It's interesting to see the inclusion of something from MMV so soon in the new edition. That's definitely a different approach from past editions. I kinda like it.

 

[Doug McCrae]

Pity the vrock is still in. Most of the MM 3e demons are pretty goofy imo. Only the balor, marilith, succubus and bebilith (or retriever - don't need two spider demons though) are any good.

 

[TwoSix]

Pity the vrock is still in. Most of the MM 3e demons are pretty goofy imo. Only the balor, marilith, succubus and bebilith (or retriever - don't need two spider demons though) are any good.

I have to agree...I like my demons more "twisted humanoid" looking than undeniably alien.

 

[Charwoman Gene]

While I admit that this post could be twisted. Read in context, we know there are only 8 classes.

Okay, The Post I saw was different, that is unequivocal. 8 Classes.

 

[AdmundfortGeographer]

That means the monk may be in 4E, but not core.

I think we're also going to have a new definition of what "core" is. I read in another thread, maybe another forum, that we'll be getting regular (annual?) updates to the PHB, MM, and DMG. So PHB1, MM1, and DMG1 will be followed by PHB2, MM2, DMG2 the next year (along with a new setting book), and that will be followed by a PHB3, MM3, and DMG3 the year after that (with yet another setting book).

Etc., etc.

Except for the new setting books, WotC were going to consider all PHB#, MM#, and DMG# books to be Core. So if the monk appears in PHB2 it is still core, if we get a steamwright in a PHB4 it will also be Core.

 

[Glyfair]

Okay, The Post I saw was different, that is unequivocal. 8 Classes.

Yeah. Merric's thread is nice, but it would be really nice to have a thread that lists only those that are clear statements about 4E (subject to change, of course).

 

[Szatany]

Pity the vrock is still in. Most of the MM 3e demons are pretty goofy imo. Only the balor, marilith, succubus and bebilith (or retriever - don't need two spider demons though) are any good.

Still, diversity is good, and vrock is one of the few demons that can fly (and have sonic abilities).