D&D 4E No more reprints of the 4E core books?

[ggroy]

I'm reserving judgement until the books release.

This is probably the better approach to take, despite my own cynical views.

 

[ggroy]

I'm curious whether Skills & Powers was literally considered "2.5" back when it was released. I was only playing intermittently at the time, but I don't recall anything like that. I've always been under the impression that "2.5" was applied retroactively to Skills & Powers when 3.5 came out.

Looked through my copy. From skimming it, I didn't see "2.5E" written anywhere.

 

[Shazman]

If it's true, I'll be disappointed. I was flat-out told by Bill Slaviscek and Greg Leeds that there wouldn't be a 4.5. It's going to be difficult to support that claim if they're no longer printing the core rules.

WotC representatives told you something, and you believed them? What did we learn from the statments made at D&D Experience in 2007? Fool me once. Shame on you. Fool me twice. Shame on me.

 

[Stoat]

Could you play 3.0 PCs with 3.5 PCs and not have any balance problems?? (Serious question, I never played 3.0)

IMO, you could. The 3.0 Ranger is more front-loaded than the 3.5 ranger, so you might have issues with some weird ranger multiclass. The Monk changed, I don't recall how, but since 3.5 monks were kinda sucky, it wouldn't make a difference.

The real trick is the differences in spells between 3.0 and 3.5. Haste, as an easy example, is much more powerful in 3.0.

And that illustrates one reason why I don't think 3.5 is a good analogy for the Essentials. 3.5 modified tons of spells. The equivalent in 4E would be a modification to tons of powers. But 4E powers have been modified continually through errata since the edition launched.

The difference is between a product that changes a number of game elements all at once in ways they had not previously been changed (3.5) and a product that presents changes that have already been made over a period of two years through errata (4.0 essentials).

 

[Imaro]

So why do you think if they learned a lesson are they repeating the same tactics?

When did I say they were repeating the same tactics? The same tactic would be to officially announce essentials as a .5 edition.

 

[Charwoman Gene]

First off this is neither here nor there as far as my point.

Second... there's much more on the site that supports what I'm saying... as an example here's part of an interview on the WotC site...

And what exactly is your point, sweetie?

Admin here. You're being condescending and rude. Look for my email. ~ PCat

Yes, I was not following Wheaton's Law. Sorry about that.

 

[Imaro]

And what exactly is your point, sweetie?

Follow along... my point "Sweetie" is that "Is compatible with"... doesn't necessarily mean... "Is the same" ... in WotC market speak.

 

[Mengu]

Could you play 3.0 PCs with 3.5 PCs and not have any balance problems?? (Serious question, I never played 3.0)

I suppose you could try to play a 3.0 character in 3.5, but it wouldn't happen without half the table yelling at you, "No, Bull's Strength doesn't work like that any more."

Surprisingly, this is not all that different than someone with a PHB, but unaware of updates, trying to use Righteous Brand, or Rain of Blows, or Infernal Wrath.

The difference is that updates to 4.0 have been happening more gradually. So we could think of each update as 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, etc. If you want to call Essentials 4.5, sure why not, but you will get 4.6, 4.7, 4.8 in a matter of months, not years.

The update system to 4.0 is a lot more dynamic than it was in previous editions. Good or bad? That's debatable, but IMO, the approach is much more modern.

 

[ExploderWizard]

Follow along... my point "Sweetie" is that "Is compatible with"... doesn't necessarily mean... "Is the same" ... in WotC market speak.

Of course not. Logically if they were the same then compatibility isn't even an issue to be discussed. It would be like saying " PHB 1 is compatible with PHB 1." Duh.

 

[Imaro]

Of course not. Logically if they were the same then compatibility isn't even an issue to be discussed. It would be like saying " PHB 1 is compatible with PHB 1." Duh.

Yet there are some people claiming that because they announced essentials products are compatible with the old 4e stuff... the rules are the same... this is not necessarily true.

Edit: Duh.