D&D 4E 4E: What we think we know

[gizmo33]

I agree, they lied through their teeth, but if they hadn't, it would have resulted in heavy financial loss for existing products.

So as an alternative they've sold a bunch of people stuff that they wouldn't want had they known what's coming. As it stands now, the financial loss was incurred by their customers. (golf clap)

 

[Vigilance]

No, but truthfulness counts for something. They should have at least been more vague rather than just outright lying.

Business is business, but lying is still unethical.

But didn't they say something to the effect of "it's not imminent"?

To me, 18+ months, which is what we'll get between that statement and the release of the 4e PHB, fits the bill of what I remember them saying.

Chuck (who's been predicting 2008 for years)

 

[demon_jr808]

I picked a great time to start coming back to the EN World forums.

 

[Olfactatron]

4th edition? I really hope it isn't like Saga. I like the complexity and obscurity of D&D. I had exhausted all the interesting builds in Saga in about a week of getting the book. And there are several significant rules changes that don't make sense, such as a full round action including your swift action, that wouldn't work well with certain D&D paradigms.

Static defense would also be a big problem if they kept iconic spells such as fireball around. Imagine you nuke a bunch of orcs and tank your roll. They all count as having made their save, as opposed to the current system where it would average out as the orcs each rolled a save. It would be a time saver, to be sure, but I would feel pretty gypped playing a caster if that were the case.

Another thing I really hope they avoid is the consolidation of classes into generic fighter/caster/skillguy. And then all fighters/caster/skillguys have the same base stats with only talents to differentiate them. And I really hope they don't go with Skills using the same resource as Feats as you gain levels.

There are things I liked about Saga though. The skill consolidation made sense, though pretty much anyone I've talked to went further and clumped climb, jump and swim into a skill called athletics. I liked the extra hitpoints at first level, so you can actually take a hit. Though I would have gone with a flat 20 point bonus rather than with 3xHD, so the d6 classes wouldn't have as big a gap between them and the d10 classes.

I think the people who enjoy lots of role-playing with lite rules should play another system. When I want that kind of experience that's what I do. I really enjoy Riddle of Steel and the various incarnations of the White Wolf games. And when I want to challenge myself to build interesting characters that take advantage of obscure synergies I play D&D and I love it. I hope they took gamers like me into account when designing the new system. I'd be really disappointed if everything got too simple.

 

[Ulrick]

Behold! 4th Edition Dungeons & Dragons! Where Wizards of the Coast go on an epic quest for more money!

(of course)

 

[TheLe]

If they go with Java, it'll be platform agnostic. If they go with .Net, IE only will be what we see.

I'm hoping for Java.

Not true at all. I develop in .net and Firefox works fine with it.

`Le

 

[Drkfathr1]

But didn't they say something to the effect of "it's not imminent"?

To me, 18+ months, which is what we'll get between that statement and the release of the 4e PHB, fits the bill of what I remember them saying.

Chuck (who's been predicting 2008 for years)

No, what they said was:

- when asked if 4E was in development, the answer was 'no, 4E is not in active development and the normal development cycle for a product of this type is 1.5 to 2 years'

So, anything said at D&D Experience by WOTC was misinformation. Now, the only way their statements could be true would be 'a ways off' = 1 year more or less and that development for 4E was already concluded by the time D&D Experience ran in Feb. Still, I think there have been yearly denials by WOTC that 4E was in active development, so basically, they have been misrepresenting the actual status of 4E since 2005.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

hmmm so subscription fee is more then Dragon and Dungeon Were but less then MMORPG's are
I'm guessing 12bucks amonth.
nominal fee i'm guessing 2bucks.

This DI sounds like its really gonna add up to hella expensive if its content you can't keep when your subscription runs out. I'm very sceptical of this. I might just keep using Kloogewerks for online play and poach players from the DI movement.

Thats what I thought. Its ing rediculous we cant get character generator software for less than 100 bucks... a year... RENTAL FEE.

 

[Sammael]

Not true at all. I develop in .net and Firefox works fine with it.

`Le

Yup. I've actually noticed that Firefox gives me better error messages when it comes to debugging .NET web services (which is odd, since that should depend on the web server, not the browser).

 

[Eldragon]

Since we don't know A) The Monthly cost B) The content provided It is WAY WAAAAY to early to speculate on the value of the online content to be provided by WotC. Simple as that. WotC knows their audience, and won't try to turn the hardcore D&D fanbase into a money machine.

Yup. I've actually noticed that Firefox gives me better error messages when it comes to debugging .NET web services (which is odd, since that should depend on the web server, not the browser).

Before we degenerate into a discussion about software APIs, lets just agree that some software companies make rich web applications that are IE only, and wont work on other browsers. So there is a risk that D&D Insider will be that way, but I kind of doubt it.