log in or register to remove this ad

 

4E 4E: What we think we know

RFisher

First Post
Snapdragyn said:
Given that they've said (a WotC designer post in the bard thread) that WotC will consider PHB2, DMG2, etc. 'core', how will this affect your own outlook on the definition of 'core'?

Not at all, of course.

I think we're in for a big disjunction between what WotC envisions the word meaning, & how 'core-only' DMs & players use the word. :(

So? They can use language however they want. I'm still going to be picky & choosy about what I buy no matter what they call any of it. If I have to say something like "only the first 4e PHB" to make it clear to players what I mean when I tell them what's allowed (without DM approval) because Wizards is calling lots of supplements "core", no big deal.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Snapdragyn

Explorer
RFisher, thanks for your comments. That's exactly what I expect to see a lot of DMs do, & I think WotC is just completely out of sync with reality if they expect otherwise. It's for that reason that I really hope they will change their minds about keeping the Bard out of the PHB & putting it into PHB2; I know that if they do that, I'll not get to play a Bard with some DMs. :(

New information: WotC_Logan, in a couple of posts here on EN World, confirms the following:

  • 8 classes in PHB (I think this had been hinted but not directly stated)

  • Monk is in. ( *blink* )

  • DR is out.


Edit: See Glyfair's post a few down from this one for direct links to WotC_Logan's statements. Thanks Glyfair!
 
Last edited:

Ashrem Bayle

First Post
Have we got official word as to whether or not Saves and AC works like 3.5, or like Saga? The few times I've seen "AC" mentioned could have very easily been a slip.

Also...

So it sounds like psionics are going to be in the DMG and essentially be a "power source template" stacked over spells. That makes sense. I'd like to see a massive list of generic spells, and then you apply an arcane, divine, psionic, incarnum, etc "template" to them.
 

Szatany

First Post
Snapdragyn said:
RFisher, thanks for your comments. That's exactly what I expect to see a lot of DMs do, & I think WotC is just completely out of sync with reality if they expect otherwise. It's for that reason that I really hope they will change their minds about keeping the Bard out of the PHB & putting it into PHB2; I know that if they do that, I'll not get to play a Bard with some DMs. :(

New information: WotC_Logan, in a couple of posts here on EN World, confirms the following:

  • 8 classes in PHB (I think this had been hinted but not directly stated)

  • Monk is in. ( *blink* )

  • DR is out.
I find some of those revelations hard to swallow. Link please.
 

AdmundfortGeographer

Getting lost in fantasy maps
Snapdragyn said:
  • 8 classes in PHB (I think this had been hinted but not directly stated)
Monk is in and DR is out I know about. But all I have seen about the classes is that WotC developers/designers said they had eight classes at the start of internal playtesting.
 



Logan_Bonner

First Post
Snapdragyn said:
  • 8 classes in PHB (I think this had been hinted but not directly stated)

  • Monk is in. ( *blink* )

  • DR is out.

Nobody has said which 8 classes are in or out of the PH1. We've talked about classes in seminars and on the boards, and we've mentioned way more than eight classes in them. All the classes in the 3.5 PH will appear at some point in the game's lifespan, but the only ones you can call "confirmed" in the PH1 are fighter, rogue, cleric, and wizard.
 


AdmundfortGeographer

Getting lost in fantasy maps
WotC_Logan said:
All the classes in the 3.5 PH will appear at some point in the game's lifespan, but the only ones you can call "confirmed" in the PH1 are fighter, rogue, cleric, and wizard.
Is it conceivable that current 3.5 classes might be reimagined as prestige classes (whatever they look like in 4e)?

Which book will prestige classes (or their 4e equivalent) appear in, PHB# or DMG#?

Will single-setting-per-year books, like the August 2008 4e FRCS, introduce base classes?
 

Nebulous

Legend
I'd like to know this: will 4e take the idea from SWSE and have first level PC's considerably tougher? so that never again will you have a mage wander into a dungeon with 4 hp?
 

Glyfair

First Post
Nebulous said:
I'd like to know this: will 4e take the idea from SWSE and have first level PC's considerably tougher? so that never again will you have a mage wander into a dungeon with 4 hp?

One of the designers was answering a question about hit points on the official forum and stated the idea behind HP in 4E is that you won't have to worry about dying from a single blow at 1st, 10th, or 30th level (or something like that).
 

Nebulous

Legend
Glyfair said:
One of the designers was answering a question about hit points on the official forum and stated the idea behind HP in 4E is that you won't have to worry about dying from a single blow at 1st, 10th, or 30th level (or something like that).

hmm. that's interesting.
 

RFisher

First Post
Snapdragyn said:
RFisher, thanks for your comments. That's exactly what I expect to see a lot of DMs do, & I think WotC is just completely out of sync with reality if they expect otherwise. It's for that reason that I really hope they will change their minds about keeping the Bard out of the PHB & putting it into PHB2; I know that if they do that, I'll not get to play a Bard with some DMs. :(

Is it really so much more likely that you'll be allowed to play a Bard simply because the class is in the PHB1? Is it really so much more likely that you won't be if it isn't?

& even if it is, don't you expect there will be plenty of other interesting PC possibilities for you to explore in a PHB1 sans Bard? Save the Bard ideas for the DM that lets you play a Bard, whether the class is in the PHB1 or not.

I figure they're putting together the best (in their opinion, of course) PHB1 they can given the constrains they're under. That likely means making a lot of very tough decisions. If deferring the Bard is the lesser of two unfortunate choices, can we really begrudge them that?
 


zoroaster100

First Post
Glyfair said:
One of the designers was answering a question about hit points on the official forum and stated the idea behind HP in 4E is that you won't have to worry about dying from a single blow at 1st, 10th, or 30th level (or something like that).

This could mean introducing a new mechanic or it could mean simply that first level characters start with more hit points and that the game is balanced in such way that damage capability for monsters of a proper "challenge rating" (or whatever term is used in 4e) can't bring down a character of the appropriate level in a single blow.
 

Presents for Goblins

Advertisement2

Advertisement4

Top