• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

New Design: Wizards...

As long as they provide the rules for creating my own traditions, I could care less what the 'factory' traditions are. And put them in the PHB not the DMG, please.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Irda Ranger said:
Then they should just call it Transmutation. "Serpent's Eye" tells me nothing. It's verbiage. It's useless. It's a big frickin' impediment to understanding and rules mastery.

Very well said. I prefer the term "jargon," but "useless verbiage" has a poetic quality.

Transmute, Illusion, Necro-, ... these words actually mean something. They have roots in the Latin / English speaking traditions. They help me understand what a spell is supposed to do; how it's supposed to work.

Jargon creates unnecessary barriers for new players. It's just bad design for a core rulebook.

Quite frankly it's so elementary I am sure my concerns are completely misplaced.
 


gothmaugCC said:
I stand corrected. I bow to your superior knowledge.

*races home to check his copy*
And this, my friends, is why the Tome should remain as an implement. :p

It might be cut from the first PH, but hopefully it will make a re-appearance in a supplement. Perhaps the self-referential Tome of Magic? ;)
 



Snapdragyn said:
I really wish people could get past the idea that names = organization. That is an assumption, & IMO a poor one. We don't expect Transmutation organizations in 3.xe just because Transmutation exists as a school of magic; I likewise see no reason to expect Serpent's Eye as an organization (as opposed to named tradition) in 4e.

For that matter, given how little we actually know, isn't it possible that these sample names/traditions/organizations/whatevers are just that--samples? For all we know, the wizard picks from a variety of "talent trees," schools of magic, or some other means of dividing powers, and these names simply refer to some organizations that combine them?

In that respect (and I think someone else may have suggested this), the Iron Sigil then becomes the wizardly equivalent of a god, such as Asmodeus. Worshipers of Asmodeus (using 3E as a baseline) tend toward LE alignment, and have access to domains X, Y, and Z. Similarly, wizards of the Iron Sigil tend toward blah personality, and have access to orb spells of effects A, B, and C.

And just like clerics need not choose from the default list of gods, unless the DM decides to use them in his campaign, wizards need not choose from the listed traditions, unless the DM decides to use them in his campaign.

Obviously, I have no way of knowing if this setup is how they're going. But I think it's no less feasible than anything else, and the fact that it's at least possible just goes to show how little we actually know.

(I can say, though, that if these traditions are, in fact, optional, or merely represent a few choices among may, that I wish the article had made that fact clear. It would have prevented a lot of fretting.)
 

JVisgaitis said:
This is super way off topic, but Peter B who did the cover for Psionics Unbound? Looks very cool.

Drew Baker... who may very well become the Arcanis cover artest... the cover for Psionics Unbound is amazing... hell its my PC's wallpaper.
 

Mouseferatu said:
In that respect (and I think someone else may have suggested this), the Iron Sigil then becomes the wizardly equivalent of a god,

If we get a list of traditions that "use this focus, and these two spheres of magic"...

And a list of those spheres, maybe one from utility, one from combat...

Wow... awesomeness. They successfully MtA'ed D&D for me...

This is my uber wishful hope...
 

Eric Anondson said:
I'd rather Serpent's Eye IS an organization than the name of category of the spells.

Amen. I'm comforting myself with the fact that flavor is not likely to make it into the 4e SRD, so hopefully there's some mechanical backup here.
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top