New Playtest up...

You could also read this as confirmation of the gnome, and we know he's out of PHB1. So don't get your hopes up. :p

I'm not going to read too much into this report -- as stated at the beginning, it was a conversion of the previous game, so some things that remain might only be approximations. Perhaps this playtest convinced them to postpone a class or three.
 

log in or register to remove this ad



Horacio said:
Excellent report!

But I'm not sure it means that Warlock is a class. He played a warlock, as Bruce Cordell played a psion. But maybe he used Sorcerer class as Mr. Cordell used Wizard class for his PC.

So I guess no warlock confirmation yet...
I think you are correct. People are reading to much into that report.
A lot of what they are talking about is patchwork stuff that was pulled together to maintain their on-going campaign.
I'd certainly prefer that everything they talked about was 4E as it stands.
But I also don't at all begrudge them wanting to keep their game going. And with that in mind I'm still glad to hear what we can. :)
 

Nyaricus said:
Sunuvabitch! THE WARLOCK CLASS HAS BEEN CONFIRMED!! This means the Warlock isn't getting folded into the sorcerer class!

This doesn't mean anything is confirmed. They are shoe horning in stuff so it fits with their current campaign. I understand people are excited and such, but anyone that thinks anything is confirmed at this point from a Blog post is setting themselves up for a fall.
 

I didn't see a confirmation of the gnome.

Several of us needed new races.

We don't know what he ended up playing.

And the warforged sounds like it is still being heavily developed.

we found out the warforged he was using was kinda broken

On the question of the sorcerer vs warlock...well this was a warlock, I think.

firing some eldritch blasts

Good information overall.
 

I love this quote:

"After the battle, it was a little different than the procedure that follows a 3E battle. Turns out the enemies don’t need magic weapons to be effective (because the math doesn’t need them to), so we didn’t have a bunch of magic loot that we didn’t really need and would only end up selling."

That will already save time at the table since because we need an "accounting" session every few weeks to sell off all the loot.
 

One thing really bothers me about these playtests... they are using a bunch of races and classes that aren't going to be in the game when it is released (and by their own words, haven't really been developed yet).

Why can't our official playtest reports be with elements that will actually be included in the Core books?
 

GlassJaw said:
I love this quote:

"After the battle, it was a little different than the procedure that follows a 3E battle. Turns out the enemies don’t need magic weapons to be effective (because the math doesn’t need them to), so we didn’t have a bunch of magic loot that we didn’t really need and would only end up selling."

That will already save time at the table since because we need an "accounting" session every few weeks to sell off all the loot.

I loved hearing this too. I can't tell you how much i hate picking up an official adventure and seeing all the enemies with "platemail +1." The NEED for magic in 3.5 is so prolific, to keep both PC's and monsters on an even playing field, that it totally sucks away any sense of magic to actually find a magic item. And then it introduces the whole sub-game of selling your loot off, which essentially turns D&D into Diablo.

I would much prefer magic to be rare enough that i would only consider selling it after considerably weighing the options, instead of "Oh, i already have three +2 swords, i better unload so i can try to buy a +3"

Bleh.
 

I can confirm that warlock is going to be somewhere as my jump drive from the presentation has a picture of a dwarf warlock. (and the new beholder). I was also told by one of the designers that gnomes will not be in the PHB1.
 

Attachments

  • 4 Dwarf Warlock.jpg
    4 Dwarf Warlock.jpg
    1.3 MB · Views: 182

Remove ads

Top