PHB, MM, DMG covers

[Baby Samurai]

That is a preposterous vaticination.

Please don't bring the pope into this.

 

[GoodKingJayIII]

...tieflings added as a PC race...

Is that confirmed?

 

[Delta]

Does the MM cover look a bit like Orcus? Just looking at the nasty skull-topped sceptre there

Yes, it's an identical design to the prototype Orcus gargantuan miniature:
http://public.fotki.com/rottgutt/gen-con-2007---day-one/

 

[Klaus]

Is that confirmed?

Yep.

 

[Baby Samurai]

Yep.

And hopefully they won't have that nonsensical -2 to Cha…

 

[Mercule]

Is that confirmed?

I believe the quote I saw was directly from a WotC designer/developer.

On this, I'd dearly love to be proven wrong, though. The tiefling's inclusion as a PHB race points to a direction I'm not comfortable with. Not because of the "Satanic" connotation -- I kinda dig the idea of the occasional tiefling PC. I just do not want them to ever, ever, ever, EVER be considered as common as elves and dwarves. Tieflings are an oddity and an aberration, not a stand-alone race. Something on par with half-ogres.

I think the ever-increasing "beastification" of tieflings in D&D art has encourage my reluctance to embrace them. If they are nearly indistinguishible from humans and may pop-up in various bloodlines from time to time, that's one thing. If they look monstrous and hideous (ala the PHB art), I want them relegated well to the background. Those freaking horns and tail are absurd. I really don't want to be able to tell from (most) art whether a character is tiefling or human. The 3.5 MM depiction of a tiefling struck me as what the extreme range of non-human appearance should look like, not the near-human. Do that, and I'm okay with them being in the PHB.

 

[RFisher]

The covers are good, although the logo itself might be a bit better, I guess

A good RPG logo needs, IMHO, two qualities:

The name needs to be very readable & clear. I should be able to stand across the room from the book, squinting, & immediately now the name even though I'd never seen it before.

Secondly, it needs to be reproducible well in black & white.

Anything else is gravy. So, while I can't disagree with "might be a bit better", it still scores an A on my scale.

 

[Klaus]

The counter art I did for Fiery Dragon of a tiefling only had differing eye colors (one blue, one yellow) as a hint of fiendish heritage (and the aasimar had a metallic sheen on his skin and pearlescent eyes). I dunno, I guess my tiefling image comes from Toni DiTerlizzi portrayal of them in Planescape. If 4e tieflings look like this, what will half-fiend and fiendish creatures look like?

 

[Klaus]

The covers are good, although the logo itself might be a bit better, I guess.

The new logo is so amazing, I have no words to describe it.

 

[GreatLemur]

I believe the quote I saw was directly from a WotC designer/developer.

On this, I'd dearly love to be proven wrong, though. The tiefling's inclusion as a PHB race points to a direction I'm not comfortable with. Not because of the "Satanic" connotation -- I kinda dig the idea of the occasional tiefling PC. I just do not want them to ever, ever, ever, EVER be considered as common as elves and dwarves. Tieflings are an oddity and an aberration, not a stand-alone race. Something on par with half-ogres.

The weird thing to me is that I haven't heard anything about Aasimars also being included. It seems kind of weird to have one without the other, you know? For that matter, the Genasi should be in there, too.

And, you know, maybe they are. I mean, this guy is kinda funny looking. Earth Genasi, maybe?

Anyway, I'm guessing that the inclusion of Tieflings (and possibly other planar races) in the PHB is a move to showcase their new solution to the old level adjustment problem. I expect that Tieflings will be balanced with the other races at first level, and they'll just have access to lots of interesting racial feats as they advance.