Issues with news for today (Friday 21-Sep-2007)

[Zaruthustran]

I guess we can just toss the campaign in the garbage and start fresh, or just wait until the options we need are available. Waiting won't be easy, especially if the changes in 4.0 are good ones. I don't like the idea of just throwing away the campaign either.

Just give me the same core classes, even if druid, monk and bard are cleric, fighter and rogue talent trees, respectively.

We don't know which classes will be in the PHB. But for the sake of argument let's say the bard is cut, and you play a 3E bard.

Well, why do you play a bard? What about the bard class enticed you? If you want to play an inspiring character with some skill at magic, I'm guessing you can play a Warlord/Wizard or Warlord/Warlock. It's easy enough to imagine the Warlord's buffs coming from songs, as opposed to the assumed shouted commands or whatever.

Point is, you can look at the core abilities and likely be able to build a 4E character with the same essential schtick. Sure, the name written above "class" on your character sheet won't be exactly the same. But if you're playing a chainmail-armored, sword-wielding character who inspires his allies and dabbles in magic, does it really matter if "bard" isn't written on your sheet?

-z

* Hint: write in "bard" anyway, and just use the rules for Warlord/Wizard.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I suspect the first 10 levels of any classes cut from the PHB will show up online at the same time as the 4E PHB hits store shelves.

 

[delericho]

Unfortunately, it's my belief that frustration, misundersanding and vagueness are going to be the norm for the next eight months rather than the exception.

I thought I saw a quote that the PHB would be finalised and off to printing by D&D Experience, and that there would actually be a copy available for (limited) viewing at that con? If that is the case, then between that and the preview books, I would expect to start seeing a huge amount of information coming out around that time.

We seem to be in the 'tease them' stage of the process at the moment. It is frustrating, and I wish it wasn't going on for so long. But on the other hand, if they told us everything now, what would they have for the next eight months?

Oh, and I found that quote. From Chris Tulach, we have that D&D Experience will be "the first place you can play the full-on, finished 4th Edition game" and "The final version of the Player's Handbook should be ready by D&D Experience, but the books will not have been printed yet." So, I guess I wasn't quite right in suggesting it will be available for viewing.

 

[Chocobot]

Another big part of conversion that probably won't be straightforward at all would be converting your gear. If 4e is designed to be less magic item dependent, then bringing over the same pile of loot could be either overpowering (for instance, if wealth guidelines have been reduced significantly) or useless (for instance, if all your AC bonuses no longer stack). You'll probably have to look up your wealth level and re-pick appropriate gear to outfit your characters.

 

[Morrus]

Another big part of conversion that probably won't be straightforward at all would be converting your gear.

Heh. My secret hope-against-hope (and I know I won't be this lucky), but if 4E were to be tailored to me specifically, the list of magic items in the 3.5 DMG would be scrapped. Completely. Gone. An entirely new list of evocative, mysterious sounding items would turn up.

Then they'd do the same with spells.

 

[No Name]

Point is, you can look at the core abilities and likely be able to build a 4E character with the same essential schtick.

True enough, and I can see it easily done with the bard. Not quite as easy with the druid though, and even less so with the monk.

Rules changes are fine with me if they're made to improve the game, and from what I've seen so far of 4e, I'm rather optimistic. But making changes for the sole reason of making things "different" annoys me. Cutting core races and classes, and substituting others in their place doesn't improve the game (imo). It's like WotC needs enough differences to say it's 4e instead of 3.75e.

I'll likely buy the PHB and DMG regardless of what they do. I am a D&D fan after all. But if stuff is bad enough (like the 2e years), I'll get my roleplaying fix from other games.

 

[tomBitonti]

You mean, how hard will it be to convert a 3E fighter into a 4E fighter?

Well, it depends on what you mean by convert.

(Remaining quote omitted.)

It's a new edition, after all--don't you want to try out some of the new options?

-z

That's a good test question. My guess is that a fighter would be the easiest to convert. And, that converting any spellcasters will be hard.

To provide a clarification of what about the placement of the articles that had links from the main news page that irked me is that the were links into the Dragon section of the Insider. I'm presuming that the Dragon section will be paid access only. The links were to a playtest report, and to a column on "rumors and speculations" (and not to the blog; that link works fine!) I don't consider either of those (as content) to be of the same caliber as the material that I used to get in the magazines.

As an aside, does anyone know what the policy is (or will be) for linking into the paid area of the insider?

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

Rules changes are fine with me if they're made to improve the game, and from what I've seen so far of 4e, I'm rather optimistic. But making changes for the sole reason of making things "different" annoys me. Cutting core races and classes, and substituting others in their place doesn't improve the game (imo). It's like WotC needs enough differences to say it's 4e instead of 3.75e.

See, I get the impression that they started with making the fundamental changes to the core of the game and the rest of the changes flowed outward from there.

So, if you decide that a core ideal in 4th edition is class balance and class roles. So you think what classes fulfill what roles and how to best make the classes fit that new ideal. You realize that there is no class in 3rd edition that really fills the leader role except the Cleric. The Bard SHOULD fit that role, but it's bad at it and a less popular class. It takes more fixing to make it work and less people will appreciate the work.

On the other hand, you think the idea of a character who inspires people to fight harder and to get up when hurt is a good one, so you make a class that fits that mold.

So, you have made the game better by changing a core assumption of the game to one that works better. In exchange you needed to make changes to accommodate the new core assumption.

I doubt they sat around and said "You know what...I'm bored with Gnomes, they've been in the PHB too long, let's put something different in there instead." I'm guessing it went closer to "What does being a Gnome mean? What is cool about playing Gnomes? Let's make a list of all the things that are cool and unique about Gnomes amongst everyone in the office. Let's do a poll of some players as well with the same questions. Wow...the list of answers to the question about what is cool about Gnomes has about 10 less entries than Dwarf and Elf and Human and Halfling. Maybe Gnomes just aren't as interesting as the rest of the races in the PHB. Maybe we could find a different race who IS."

 

[Dalamar]

True enough, and I can see it easily done with the bard. Not quite as easy with the druid though, and even less so with the monk.

My guess is that the cleric can patch in, at least temporarily, for a druid and a monk can be represented as a rogue or rogue/fighter focusing their rogue skill expertise thingy on the physical skills.

 

[DreamChaser]

I will probably be about 50% of the way through an Eberron campaign set in Sarlona when 4e comes out (yes, that means psionics which will have no initial conversion but are expected out at some point).

The nice thing about this is that my 3.5 books are not going to spontaneously combust the moment I buy 4e. Additionally, this overlap will afford my players and I the chance to become familiar with the rules and options without diving in to play immediately.

I understand the frustration about the non-support classes, but then I am a staunch opponent of converting characters. Your 3e character can stay 3e. We've all enjoyed it for years: We can enjoy going back to it from time to time. Let new ideas take hold in line with the new game. Who knows? You might find that you have a new favorite character.

DC