D&D 4E Rant on the 4E "Presentation"

[Nifft]

Others like myself don't get a lot of street cred because we have low post counts or don't like to hear ourselves post. Note that does not imply that all people with high post counts just like to see their thoughts online.

High postcount means moral and intellectual superiority. It's a fact.

- - -

Seriously, though, what's this specific info going to do for you? If you knew halflings were in, but didn't know how thoroughly they'd decided to change the race called "halflings", would you really have gained anything?

In other words, without the full context, you're basically asking for the illusion of being well informed. This is very dangerous for WotC, because without that context, you will form your own assumptions about what must be implied. Even if you assume correctly, a thousand other people will guess wrong -- and they will feel betrayed when the true context is revealed.

So: would you rather know you're ignorant now, or feel angry and betrayed when you turn out to be ignorant later?

Me, I'll take conscious ignorance.

Cheers, -- N

 

[broghammerj]

Off the top of my head, we've heard:

1. Specific character ability examples....We've been told about spellcasters using their staff to inflict damage and drive a character back a few squares.....

Any reason why they can't put up a specific feat or power and "feature" it on the website....Heres the new wizard pushback ability and how it works. Instead we get a bunch of vague descriptions which do nothing to excite me about how the game is played and more importantly tell me nothing on how its been improved.

2. Specific monster examples....They went through several specific questions in the monster podcast...We've seen a full monster stat sheet.

That monster stat sheet is buried where? I saw it here on Enworld but go to DnD insider and search spined devil. You can't even find it. Access to organized info is a real problem. Enworld is great, but that is a lot of people searching blogs, forums, etc to compile this info. To me this is free marketing help which WOTC doesn't have. Quite frankly if DnD Insider is supposed to be so great, its simple task of disseminating information to the fandom is quite poor. It makes me wonder how well it will serve as a product in 4E.

3. Magic Items

Not a lot here yet, but we have heard you'll still have items, but they won't be quite as important.

Can't they feature some specific magic item and tell us how it works as an example? I am not clamoring for a list of items. All I know is it fixes the Christmas tree effect. WTF is the Xmas tree effect and how is that circumvented in the new edition?

I mean, really, it seems to me we're getting a fair amount of fairly specific information.

We are getting some hints at what is in and what is out but nothing on how they work. Some things that seem utter nonsense to me. Why can't they "officially" release the list of core races and classes? Does that cause a rift in the space time continum? Now other product I can think of releases completely unorganized and hidden details about a product.

 

[broghammerj]

Seriously, though, what's this specific info going to do for you? If you knew halflings were in, but didn't know how thoroughly they'd decided to change the race called "halflings", would you really have gained anything?

If I was marketing 4E, my approach would be completely different. I would slowly over time announce which races will be in the core book, say one per week. Combine that with the classes and call the column something like "The Core" That gives you a slow roll out and eats up two months of preview time.

At the end of the role out I would choose to feature one race (say halflings) They would have a nifty fluff like write up the current one on elves with a stay tuned for next week on the mechanic. Then I would give a relatively detailed writeup of powers and level advancement of halflings. People would say, "Wow, look what they did to change halflings." Then I wouldn't reveal any more races. A similar approach could be done with classes (say fighter). I would probably not reveal any races or classes which are new to this edition.

Part of the role out would feature the per encounter, per day mechanic and how it works. Perhaps I use the halfling fighter that I previewed in my earlier weeks.

As for spells I would feature a spell at 1st, 5th, 10th, 15th, and 20th level with real details and descriptions. Thats five weeks of spells.

I would feature some specific feats. I don't see how showing 3 or so cripples the game.

Five new magic items could be featured.

Don't forget reveals from campaign books.

I could go on and on. The info may actually give some idea of how the game works but clearly not make enough available to attempt to "play" without the core books.

Don't get me started on the lack of online character creation and battlemap previews which don't exist. There have been no previews of the online content which stands to be the most revolutionary and most expensive expansion for 4E

 

[JoeGKushner]

Joe, I am glad you are sounding off on this. You are someone who is relatively "respected" around here. Others like myself don't get a lot of street cred because we have low post counts or don't like to hear ourselves post. Note that does not imply that all people with high post counts just like to see their thoughts online.

Well, that's the good thing about the internet. YOu can pretty much talk to your hearts content.

Don't get me wrong, it's not that I want to dislike 4e. Some of the mechanics sound great and it sounds like there is a lot of potential but at the same time I keep getting this feeling that it's a fight between making the game very accessible to a new crowd by chucking out the things that made 3e a complex but more copmlete game and adding a lot of flash which has already caused some feedback based on naming conventions. I see things like points of light and think, "interesting core bit." I then hear that they're invaliding every FR product on the market with a 100 year time skip and other nonsense to bring the game in line with 4e.

I hear about some of the interesting mechanics and go, "That sounds interesting," then hear that some... less than standard choices are going to be part of the core rules.

I hear that we'll have 4e with 'Classic' Adventures but know that some of the designers don't like adventures that I consider classic (and the official publication listed them as top 30.)

I hear that there's going to be a 4e SRD but we've had Orcus mention several times that he hasn't received it, which cuts into the very real possiblity of Necromancer using it in '08 if they have to miss the convention season.

I hear lots of nifty things about the game mechanics completely out of context and they sound very interesting, but we don't have a list of core races, classes, etc...

I hear that they have playtesting, and well, it's pretty much closed and was done in an amazingly short time.

I hear that they have preview books, and no one can explain what's in them that makes them worthy of purchase ranging from fans who like art books to people who say there no game mechanics to one of the WoTC guys admiting that it's not really marketed right as of now.

They cancel Dungeon and Dragon magazine knowing for months what's got to be done and the first shots out the door are adequate at best. At best. We've got less than two weeks or so till the end of the month so I'll give 'em the benefit of the doubt and hope we'll see a really awesome PDF download for both Dungeon and Dragon, but I wouldn't place any money on it.

I've gone from hopeful to full on cynic mode.

 

[JoeGKushner]

You make a very good point.

But it misses the opposite side of the coin. The missing pieces. For example, if the core rules are missing X race and that's your favorite race and makes the game for you, you know that the game isn't for you. Ditto for classes.

High postcount means moral and intellectual superiority. It's a fact.

- - -

Seriously, though, what's this specific info going to do for you? If you knew halflings were in, but didn't know how thoroughly they'd decided to change the race called "halflings", would you really have gained anything?

In other words, without the full context, you're basically asking for the illusion of being well informed. This is very dangerous for WotC, because without that context, you will form your own assumptions about what must be implied. Even if you assume correctly, a thousand other people will guess wrong -- and they will feel betrayed when the true context is revealed.

So: would you rather know you're ignorant now, or feel angry and betrayed when you turn out to be ignorant later?

Me, I'll take conscious ignorance.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Scholar & Brutalman]

Playtesting done?

I hear that they have playtesting, and well, it's pretty much closed and was done in an amazingly short time.

Where did you hear that?

What I'm reading on the developer blogs is that playtesting is still ongoing:

From Wotc_ScottR on 16 October:

I also saw a big thick binder with really early PHB and Monster Manual in it. This will go through many rounds of revisions as playtest data rolls in but it feels good to see progress.

From WotC_Dave on 19th October:

Daily Work: More work on monster customization for the DMG. Thus far, the numbers look promising, and I'll start testing 'em this afternoon. And I'm thinking about what I'll write for a short adventure for a future playtest wave.

I don't see them saying playtesting is done. I think a better criticism would be that outside playtesting has only just started.

 

[JoeGKushner]

Basing it on a few rounds heard about.

One of 'em by Orcus fairly recently.

Because if they PHB draft is due to WotC today, then what the heck are they playtesting--since playtesting just started? You absolutely cannot tell me that there is any time in the production process of this product to make any significant changes to the core rules as a result of playtesting at this point--playtesters would have to play for a month or two, then groups would have to send in reports, those reports would have to be reviewed and compiled and WotC would have to decide what to implement. Its Oct 5 today, there is no way that is less than a 2 month process. So that is Dec 5. And I'm sorry, but there is no way they arent hard into layout by then. They need the PHB to press (my guess only) by early Jan to make their release date. So what the heck is this playtesting for? I dont know. There is simply no time to incorporate anthing from playtesting given the timeline required to make a massive launch like this.

Not official but I thought we had something around that the rounds of playtesting were done and that they were doing edits now.

I'll have to look around for a link but I'm always glad t obe proven wrong.

 

[Nifft]

You make a very good point.

But it misses the opposite side of the coin. The missing pieces. For example, if the core rules are missing X race and that's your favorite race and makes the game for you, you know that the game isn't for you. Ditto for classes.

Thieves don't exist in 3e. Did all the old Thief players skip 3e and 3.5e?

Half-elves do exist in 3e. Do all the players who used to go crazy for half-elves still play them?

Between the answers to these two questions, you'll see a deeper truth. The names matter less than the mechanics, and the mechanics are only evaluable in context.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Raven Crowking]

And we've already seen a complete monster write-up.

Jury's out on whether or not the Spined Devil was a "complete monster write-up" or a shortened form for stat cards.

RC

 

[Raven Crowking]

With 3e, the fundamentals of the game had changed much more dramatically than they will with 4e.

Jury's out on that, too.

RC