Gen Con: Slavicsek says core books will continue to be published, other tidbits

[JohnSnow]

The tweets I saw said that "when the time was right" was WotC's response to when they would do a new print run of the PHB. Apparently they haven't decided whether they will print a corrected version (errata changed) or just do another print-run of the original book. I imagine which will depend on how far along they are with this edition, how soon or if they plan to switch editions, and whether they think enough people will buy it to justify the expense of new formatting that would be required.

 

[giant.robot]

"When the time is right" isn't so much about switching editions but when there's an actual need to print new books. If they decided tomorrow to print a new run of PHBs with errata changes in them they would have to pull back every copy of the current PHBs in their various distribution channels. This would cost them far more money than simply waiting until the channel has dried up and printing new copies when there's demand for them. There's little reason to do a new run of Core rulebooks until there's demand that outstrips their current supply. New players they gain through the Red Box and Essentials products will likely generate some demand for the Core rulebooks but it's not likely that there will be a demand large enough to justify new print runs, especially with updated copy since this requires a lot of extra QA effort (expense). A lot of Red Box players will likely just move onto Essentials books.

In publishing you want to have an edition that is almost set in stone and just print a million copies of that. Every additional book printed lowers the per-book print cost since the fixed costs of the books are amortized over a larger number of units to be sold. I think WotC is waiting to see what the demand for the Core books are like once they get Essentials out in the market whether or not to do another print run or update the books and do a run. This is likely to have nothing at all to do with a new incompatible edition of the rules but instead publishing economics.

 

[Rechan]

-Someone asked about Con/Int races and martial controllers: WotC has no pressing desire to try to fill "holes" in certain power type or stat combos since a fundamental part of the design philosophy of 4e is to avoid needless symmetry.

Grr. It's not just "needless symmetry". When you want to play an Infernal Warlock or a Swordmage that uses Con, or an Artificer, an Int/Con race would be of GREAT USAGE.

There are many races that are the "best choice" for some classes do to their racial packages. So a race for the Int/Con wouldn't be needless symmetry, it would be filling a niche.

 

[Riley]

Grr. It's not just "needless symmetry"....
There are many races that are the "best choice" for some classes do to their racial packages. So a race for the Int/Con wouldn't be needless symmetry, it would be filling a niche.

I suspect that niche will be filled with the release of Essentials. Apparently all races will be modified a la PH3, with every race having one fixed stat bonus, and a pick-one-of-these-two stat bonus.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Grr. It's not just "needless symmetry". When you want to play an Infernal Warlock or a Swordmage that uses Con, or an Artificer, an Int/Con race would be of GREAT USAGE.

There are many races that are the "best choice" for some classes do to their racial packages. So a race for the Int/Con wouldn't be needless symmetry, it would be filling a niche.

One could however equally ask why you need a CON/INT race to play your infernal warlock with. You have choices of races that have a CON boost, an INT boost, and some combinations with CHA too (which is never useless to a warlock). Just because the theoretically ideal race doesn't exist for warlocks doesn't mean that race NEEDS to exist. In fact it might be better if it didn't since it would instantly become the defacto warlock choice.

 

[Rechan]

One could however equally ask why you need a CON/INT race to play your infernal warlock with.

Which I would counter with why you need more races than human.

Just because they are not a necessity does not mean that it wouldn't be wanted, or wouldn't make things balanced. But there are no races to make the Int/Con class combos on par with all the other combos that have races that make them advantageous.

At this point it's an issue of balance. Especially because there are several races that qualify for some. Str/Con and Int/Cha being the most prevalent. Thus you have several racial choices for Str/Con or Int/Cha to work with classes that facilitate those, but in some cases only one choice for the stat boost/class combo, and in the Con/Int case, none.

It's unbalanced.

since it would instantly become the defacto warlock choice.

And since every other class has a defacto choice, why shouldn't warlocks get one?

 

[JohnSnow]

And since every other class has a defacto choice, why shouldn't warlocks get one?

I predict that with the release of Essentials, the tiefling will become an Int/Con or Cha race.

 

[Jack99]

Grr. It's not just "needless symmetry". When you want to play an Infernal Warlock or a Swordmage that uses Con, or an Artificer, an Int/Con race would be of GREAT USAGE.

There are many races that are the "best choice" for some classes do to their racial packages. So a race for the Int/Con wouldn't be needless symmetry, it would be filling a niche.

I predict that with the release of Essentials, the tiefling will become an Int/Con or Cha race.

Yep.

 

[AngryMojo]

I predict that with the release of Essentials, the tiefling will become an Int/Con or Cha race.

Agreed. It's always struck me as odd that the race that created the infernal pact wasn't ideal at it.

 

[Greatwyrm]

Agreed. It's always struck me as odd that the race that created the infernal pact wasn't ideal at it.

I dunno. You make a deal with a devil, you may not like the terms.