D&D 5E Lots Of Art (and some Warlock stuff)

[doctorhook]

Oh, hey, if you'Ve followed his blog or Boing Boing at all, he's all about the edition war. Made no bones that he loathed 4e and thought it was terrible. If you're a big 4e fan, you are not one of his readers.

Fair enough! I certainly haven't.

Still, giving a forum to a traitor smacks of pandering. I don't like letting the rebels think they've won; it's a slap in the face of loyalists!

 

[Uder]

Comments like the following:

Somebody who's been following D&D anytime since 2008 would know what an edition-war-y thing to say this is. It's possible the author knew that, but I have to question the judgement of any writer who begins his pitch with an insult to a portion of his readers.

Well, a lot of people are hoping they got it right this time. Pointing that out in on an editorial-focused site like boing2 is not exactly edition warring - it's just opinion. Sometimes we have to go out and look at the unmoderated world and realize it's okay to talk about what we think.

 

[Zarithar]

Is WAR art that surprising? He drew a fair amount of art for 4E and 3E too. Sure, his pieces are pretty iconic in Pathfinder now, but before there even was a PF, he was just as iconic for 3.5E Eberron.

My D&D journey has been an odd one filled with detours. It started with the Holmes Basic Set > AD&D > AD&D 2nd Edition/Red Box Basic Set (all the way through the "Companion" set) > Long hiatus in which I played lots of PC games such as EverCrack, World of Warcrack, etc > 4e > Pathfinder > 5e!

With the exception of picking up (but never playing) the 3 core books for 3.0, I had no experience with 3.0 or 3.5. Long story short... that is why I missed the Wayne Reynolds WoTC art, and have therefore always associated him strongly with Pathfinder!

 

[Li Shenron]

Here is the most recent information about warlocks that I'm aware of:

http://www.wizards.com/DnD/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4ll/20140303

http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/dndqa/20140307

Which, amongst other things, tells us that their spell slots refresh on a short rest.

I am a little bit confused at reading these again...

Sounds like the Warlock gets cantrips, spells and invocations.

Cantrips are at will, as usual.
Spells normally would be daily, but for the Warlock they refresh on a short rest.
Invocations are at will, but one of the article mentions them as "rituals", does that mean they take 1 hour to cast? I doubt.

Furthermore there's that "Mystic Arcanum" that some says are heightened spells, but from the Q&A it seems to me that this is the mentioned "some high-level spells that they can cast only once per day", so e.g. one additional 6th level spell 1/day, then one additional 7th level spell 1/day, then 8th and 9th, completely separate from the known 1-5th level spells.

I don't know what to think, but these sound like a lot of stuff. Four separate spellcasting mechanics (as clerics) don't exactly make for a low-complexity game, and overall the amount of cantrips+spells+invocations known is not that limited.

 

[Iosue]

Oh, hey, if you'Ve followed his blog or Boing Boing at all, he's all about the edition war. Made no bones that he loathed 4e and thought it was terrible. If you're a big 4e fan, you are not one of his readers.

Cite? Because I've looked over all his posts on Boing Boing as well as his personal blog and some other articles and the most edition warry thing I've found is this.

As an old AD&D player, I’m not a fan of 4th edition but I’m hoping someone can persuade me.

Everything else I've seen just seems to indicate that he's a guy who used to play D&D back in the 1e days and his main interest is playing those editions again for the nostalgias. In his articles on 5e he's noted that 4e was contentious, and some D&D fans went to Pathfinder, which, while negative of 4e, doesn't seem to me like a misrepresentation of the facts. At the least, I've seen nothing indicating that he "loathed 4e and thought it was terrible."

 

[wedgeski]

Yeah I agree, it's a trivial sentence. Stuff like that is annoying, like someone saying " Well it may or may not ....". Of course it may or may not, WTF other possible choice could there be!? Its a sentence people say to act as though they are contributing to the conversation but clearly have no meaningful input.

Wow. I feel like my actual point was lost in an attempt to seem super-clever. The point was this: artwork always polarises on ENW (and everywhere else). Threads like this *usually* devolve into "I love it, and it tells me this about the edition" versus "I hate it, and it tells me this about the designers".

Next time I'll just say that!

 

[wedgeski]

Edit: Move along, move along..

 

[wwanno]

I don't like Wayne Raynold's art (actually never did).

I want Elmore, Easley and DiTerlizzi back *sniff* *cry*

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I don't like Wayne Raynold's art (actually never did).

I want Elmore, Easley and DiTerlizzi back *sniff* *cry*

Sadly, Elmore and Easley are both basically retired (as they probably want to be at their age!) and DiTerlizzi is definitely too expensive for WotC now!

Personally I don't need old favourites back, but I do want to see new artists that pack the same punch. Unfortunately, the bulk of those seem to go work for M:tG, computer games or the like instead of the less-profitable D&D or other RPGs.

 

[wwanno]

Lockwood would be good for me, I loved the details of his art back in the 3.x era.