Races and Classes--I has it!


log in or register to remove this ad

breschau said:
I work in publishing so I might be able to answer what's going on. Most stores get their shipments a week or so ahead of time so they can put the books out on the shelf on the day of release. Some stores don't honor that and simply put the books out when they are received. It's bad form but lets threads like this happen. Same thing with the last Harry Potter book that some guy got shipped before the actual release date. The bigger the book, the more this bothers the publisher.

Having worked in several bookstores, a 'week ahead' is a generous estimate, except in the case of really big name books. With something like this, where chain bookstores will maybe get 5 copies (if that), the receiver probably won't even bothering looking at the street date lists, unless they happen to be a D&D fan. No one involved will likely know or care that they weren't supposed to put it out. Now that probably won't be true for the new core books. If WotC's (and Hasbro's) PR people do their job, those should be noted as a fairly significant release, but it is always helpful if they ship in a box by themselves with big letters on the side saying 'Strict on Sale', xx/xx/xxxx.

More often than not though, for the decent chain stores that are on the major shipping routes, small stuff like this will actually arrive on the release date. At least in my experience.
 
Last edited:

Irda Ranger said:
It did, but Scott (despite how he answers inquiries on the matter) is not a god, so it doesn't work.

Shssh! Don't tell him!

Well, I'll blame the spell failure on the fact that I didn't phrase it as a yes/no question.
So here goes again:
"Of the following two articles on warlocks--the R&C version and the Oct Design and Development version--is the latter the most representative of the current state of the Warlock's design in 4E?"
 

Reaper Steve said:
Yeah, which is why my original guess was the Oct article as the more current. BUt since R&C matches the newer wizard article, it gave me something to hang my hat on.
The wizard information posted from R&C matches the old website article more than the revised one. R&C talks about matching certain types of effects with each implement, while in the revised one, implements were more like flavorful addition to the 6 named wizard schools.
 

Atlatl Jones said:
The wizard information posted from R&C matches the old website article more than the revised one. R&C talks about matching certain types of effects with each implement, while in the revised one, implements were more like flavorful addition to the 6 named wizard schools.

The original article had four implements (inc. tome.) the current has just three, like R&C. But I do agree that the R&C text about the purpose of the implements is closer to that of the original article.

I'm willing to bet that we'll see three versions: the design article, the R&C article, and ultimately the finished deal in the PHB. The latter is all that will matter, but following the course they take to get there is pretty awesome.
 

Rechan said:
The R&C was finalized in August. The warlock article was written in October.

No, the warlock article was published in October. It may have been written long before that - I know they did that for SW Saga (but those releases had to be okay-ed by Lucas Arts, so that might affect timing).
 


WayneLigon said:
Most modern fantasy, though, uses 'Sidhe' for 'tall elves that look like beautiful humans, maybe with pointed ears'. That's the image most readers are going to associate with the term.

I know. But as someone of Irish ancestry, it's still somewhat annoying to see the lustful, wild, trickster Aes Sidhe reduced to such a boring, Victorian English conception.

Of course, maybe that's another one of the Good People's jokes...
 


I found some copies on the shelf Sunday at one of our major book store chains. It didn't seem right to read it yet, so I told a manager about the release date and he pulled them right away.
 

Remove ads

Top