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

[00Machado]

I don't like this. If they're rescaling the existing framework to fit into 30 discrete chunks rather than 20, I disagree with it on grounds of nostalgia: D&D has always been a 20 level game (in the incarnations I've played). If they're keeping scale the same, but offering more support for level 21-30, I question the usefulness of the material: how many games have you had which went on beyond 21st and you found yourself thinking "gee, I wish I had better options for 27th level"?

I think it would be better with 30 levels. People have often said that they miss the slower character progression, or rather than the faster character progression of 3.5 doesn't allow for keeping characters around for many adventures. Looking at things like the Adventure Paths, you'll have 12 adventures then retire a character. Doesn't seem like much. An oft suggested solution is to just reduce the amount of XP and wealth gained to the level you want for your games. That works, but it's a double edged sword. New abilities come into play less often. If you spread out the character life cycle over 30 levels, you get more power bumps, without necessarily needing to have a higher power level than the 20 level game. You can keep characters around longer, in theory. And even if levels 21 - 30 are for power levels above the current Level 20, I still think it's good to have it built into the core rules, rather than as a rules supplement. Players who want an old school feel can always chose to stop at level 20, and if they chose to continue, isn't it better to have the rules foe levels 21 - 30 integrated? And I'd also say if the chose to continue to 21 - 30, wasn't it good to have that option presented in the rules in the first place?

 

[Banshee16]

I'm not entirely convinced that's a bad thing, depending on how hard/expensive they make it to licence 4E. There are some great 3rd-party publishers to be certain, but (over the years) there has been some very, very bad ones too.

Maybe requiring a licencing fee will keep the quality up from the very beginning. Just a thought.

This is a possibility....requiring a licensing fee might allow them to keep production of products either to new companies with good backing, or experienced companies who gained a lot of traction with 3E (ie. Green Ronin, Privateer, Sovereign Press, Sword & Sorcery, Mongoose, Necromancer, etc.).

Really, those are some of the ones I'd love to still see product from.

I'm still not happy about the announcement....I was hoping that 4th Ed. was still another year or two away, instead of May 2008. Oh well. Guess we'll see. The D&D insider thing could go either way...might be useful, or useless. Now, if one could subscribe, and get updated mechanics of 3E books, that would be very, very cool.

Banshee

 

[Brennin Magalus]

We are probably getting off-topic..But yes, there was that infamous 3rd edition company that came in with a big wad, and a big name and made some of the worst stuff released in RPG history.

Mongoose: Quintessential Series.

 

[Hjorimir]

I'm offended by this statement - D&D is a 36-level game and always has been in any incarnation I've played it.

Kidding aside, the level-20 limit in 3e is arbitrary - there were no limits in 1e, the limit in OD&D was somewhere around 10 IIRC, the Basic/Expert/Companion/Master sets limited advancement to 36th level. 20 was a nice round number for 3e, but it was arbitrary.

My hope is that expanding out the top level of play means that they've balanced the damn game for levels over 15. It's been silly running a 3e game with 15th+ level characters. I suspect given what they did for Star Wars and what's in the release that theyr'e doing just that.

I see the expanded core rules to 30th level as a very smart move on their part. Build the game with the future in mind. 3E's epic rules are a stinker (a low point for the edition, really) and it is an obvious first step they can take to improve the game.

 

[Khairn]

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.

I mean no disrespect, but do you actually believe that WotC won't try to turn their customers into a money machine?

 

[TheLe]

Let me preface this by saying I'm not casting aspersions on you, your motives, or the quality of your products in what I am about to say:

Can you think of at least one competitor who can also afford $1000, but is otherwise, pretty much, a shoveler of sh*t?

And are you more concerned about that $1000 fee eliminating competition, or somehow acting as a gateway to quality?

I maintain that it will do the former, but will not significantly act in the latter capacity.

In fact a fee of any kind immediately puts the focus on "How best to publish for profit?" as opposed to, "How best to publish for quality?"

A $1000 or $2000 will eliminate competition, and has no bearing on quality what-so-ever. There have been plenty of instances where "big time publishers" have released total crap. In fairness though, it would certainly eliminate all those small publisher who release one or two total crap products then disappear.

Less competition means more money for the players who can afford the fee. Good for the publishers involved, but not so good for customers since they have less choice.

I'm not the only one thinking it, so don't hold my comments against me.

`Le

 

[Brennin Magalus]

I see the expanded core rules to 30th level as a very smart move on their part. Build the game with the future in mind. 3E's epic rules are a stinker (a low point for the edition, really) and it is an obvious first step they can take to improve the game.

I agree; the current epic rules are exceedingly lame.

 

[Glyfair]

Semi-humorous but completely legit -

Someone found on Amazon the "4th edition Monster Manual" here.

 

[TerraDave]

Mongoose: Quintessential Series.

Er, if that was the case, they were rewarded by market forces.

But seriously, wasn't talking about them. This other company was much, much worse. (Hint: FF, and not Fantasy Flight).

 

[catsclaw227]

If they go with .Net, IE only will be what we see.

I have developed many .NET apps that run on Firefox, Safari or opera.

I am hoping it is a Silverlight app, though as well. Platform agnostic, and much deeper capability than just an AJAX web app.