D&D 4E New 4e Info! GAMA Tradeshow Scoop

[pukunui]

The official line in the 2e days was that Athas was contained in an impenitrable crystal sphere, so it couldn't be accessed via spelljamming.

That's right. I remember now.

Ravenloft took place on a demiplane inside the plane of shadow, and a large conceit of the setting in 2e times was that it "stole" major villians (and other people) from other published settings. So it was definitely linked to the other known game worlds - jsut a part of the larger TSRverse, as hong says.

Yes, that's what I was saying. The demiplane of Ravenloft linked to all the other campaign settings, but just because it did that, it doesn't mean that all the other campaign settings were in the same physical universe. They could have all been in their own universes and still all have links to Ravenloft. That's what I was getting at. Same goes for Planescape really ... it had links to all the other campaign settings but that didn't mean that all the other campaign settings were in the same physical universe and could thus be reached by spaceship. But that's what Spelljammer was all about and that's why I didn't like that particular setting.

 

[Vempyre]

In 4E, aren't hit points no longer = physical damage?

They never meant physical damage in any edition of DnD, period.

 

[Kobold Avenger]

Really, how much difference is there between a Religion and a Faction (other than the fact that Factions' proponents are not granted spells)? Actually, in D&D, a Faction's proponents could be granted spells out of the sheer power of their faith. Core D&D calls than an "Alignment Cleric", but you could also have an "Unaligned Belief System Cleric", couldn't you?

It's yes and no for factions, some really do resemble certain religions, others resemble political groups, and a bunch based off of things that philosophers from the 19th century and other eras.

Some faction members could be clerics of their own philosophies, even though I felt that in 3.5e terms Ardents would probably work better in some cases. Though it doesn't necessarily mean there's going to be a lot of "Paladins of the Revolutionary League" in a 4e version of Planescape, maybe just some.

 

[Revinor]

They never meant physical damage in any edition of DnD, period.

Hit points mean two things in the game world: the ability to take physical punishment and keep going, and the ability to turn a serious blow into a less serious one.

Unless you want to argue that punishment <> damage, I think you should change your statement to

"HPs never meant only physical damage in any edition of DnD comma period".

But it seems that when before they were maybe 50:50 (or 30:70, doesn't matter), in 4th edition they are more like 1:99 in favor of 'avoidance' part.

 

[Vempyre]

"HPs never meant only physical damage in any edition of DnD comma period".

That might be more appropriate. Was what I meant. HPs are abstract and do not reflect how badly wounded you are in general.

All versions of DnD never had you have any ill effect from loss of hps, even at 1hp you could always fight at full efficiency. The only exceptions to that were the power words spells and some other rare spells (and some of the stupid 3.5 revisions), which always have been wonky spells anyway.

 

[small pumpkin man]

I should probably not use word 'enchant'. I meant just using the the power and go on killing the low level monsters. 'Enchant' is valid till end of encounter.

I think you missed the important part of the post which pointed out that the ability was a daily, and thus could not be "spammed" in any sense of the word. The only similar at will power we've seen give temporary hp, not healing, so it may not end up a huge problem.

 

[Zil]

But if you ask the crowd "Which is better?", I imagine the debate would be quite vigorous!

Would it? You have a crowd of people in some city and three people putting forth the originally posited philosophies (paraphrased):

1) Treat others as you would have them treat you (the moral choice which provides a net gain for any civilized society)
2) Kill, pillage and rape (the immoral choice which is at odds with any type of civilization and is a net loss for the majority)
3) A philosophy espousing meditation and transcendence of some kind.

I have a very hard time with seeing any civilized crowd arguing for 2. If anyone within a city really believed in (2), they would probably keep it to themselves or be sure to not talk about unless they are in the company of others with similar views because any civilized society will take action to remove a perceived threat like someone espousing (2).

As for 3, sure, there may be some debate between those two groups, but they aren't really in opposition.

I don't think there would be a lot debate. Certainly nothing that could lead to the rise of the philosophies espoused by many of the factions in Planescape.

To make your debate more valid, you could have (2) apply only to some kind of hated outsiders to the group in question. Then (1) and (2) could really come into opposition within the same group. But even then, you're not going to get into debates over the meaning of life, transcendence, or things metaphysical. It's more a debate about morality. You would need to flesh things out more - what do these groups believe about the metaphysical underpinnings of the multiverse. How do those differ from each other and what are the implications?

 

[Irda Ranger]

I have a very hard time with seeing any civilized crowd arguing for 2.

See, right there? You're making assumptions. Just because you aren't swayed by it does not mean that everyone else feels the same way. Different strokes for different blokes. Especially in a city with frickin' demons walking the streets and influencing people.

But fine, whatever. None of the Factions require the existence of any particular God or Pantheon anyway, so they can exist in 4E as easily as 3E. Just plot Sigil down sonewhere (or nowhere in particular) and say they're there.

 

[jelmore]

Lots of powers listed for both of the above. Basically, we have the whole of the Justiciar paragon path now.

We do have the whole Justiciar paragon path. The excerpt of paragon paths on the WotC says a paragon path consists of:

* 11th: Paragon path feature
* 11th: Paragon path action point feature
* 11th: Paragon path encounter power
* 12th: Paragon path utility power
* 16th: Paragon path feature
* 20th: Paragon path daily power

Just Spirit (11th level path feature)
Each ally adjacent to you can reroll one saving throw at the end of his or her turn.

Just action (11th level path feature)
When you spend an action point to take an extra action, each enemy adjacent to you is weakened until the end of its next turn.

Just Radiance Justiciar Attack 11
Encounter * Divine, Implement, Radiant
Standard action Close burst 5
Target: Each enemy marked by you in burst
Attack: Charisma vs. Will
Hit: 2d8 + Charisma modifier radiant damage, and until the end of your next turn, the target cannot make an attack that does not include you.

Strike Me Instead Justiciar Utility 12
Daily * Divine
Immediate Interrupt Personal
Trigger: An ally within 5 squares of you is attacked
Effect: The attack misses all of your allies it targets, but automatically hits you even if you weren't a target of this attack.

Just Shelter (16th level path feature)
Allies adjacent to you are immune to fear and charm effects and receive a +1 bonus to saving throws.

Challenge the Unjust Justiciar Attack 20
Daily * Divine, Implement, Radiant
Standard action Close burst 10
Target: Each enemy in burst
Attack: Charisma vs. Will
Hit: 3d8 + Charisma modifier radiant damage, and the target is marked until the end of your next turn.
Miss: Half damage, and the target is marked until the end of your next turn.

 

[Remathilis]

Yeah, this. I've got about as much interest in Eberron and Faerun being linked as I do in seeing the Doctor's TARDIS appear on CSI, or someone trying to make an official, canonical Star Wars/Spider-man crossover.

I, OTOH, think those two things would be hella-sweet!