So, eladrin's can teleport around? ..nail...coffin...rogue already obsolete?

[Fifth Element]

Most posters I think probably share the sentiment that they may have 'concerns.' I'd rather voice them now than AFTER the product comes out

It's a trust issue. Call us gun-shy after 2.E.

How many 4E designers worked on 2E? That was a different company, to begin with. How many were even game designers when 2E was released, for that matter?

On another matter, I have just the item for you. It's a "Jump to Conclusions" mat. I'm going to make a million dollars on that one. Just in the 4E forum, I'd say.

 

[Emirikol]

And this is the same "company" and the same designers? 2E had some of the most dramatic changes of the game and a LOT of stuff got mucked up and we didn't have any kind of forum like this to express it in.

jh
P.s. Thanks for the relentless comments btw. I've really appreciated my chance to air some concerns without any prejudicial or belittling lectures whatsoever

 

[Plane Sailing]

So, the "eladrin" can teleport around eh? Most races can see in the dark. Magic can pretty much duplicate any "natural effect." What's the point of skills again? It will be interesting to see how the hypermagical system of 4E is going to balance this.

How do you suppose they will overcome making the rogue obsolete at 1st level? You dont' need his climb or stealth abilities if you can just teleport at 1st level. Is he just relegated to the role of comic relief in 4E?

jh

Goodness me! You've spotted the elephant in the room! They have obviously completely overlooked this and the rogue is not worth having!

Or not.

You have take a couple of snippets of information and jumped four miles to a conclusion which seems completely unsupported. Is there any particular reason that you're doing this? I hope it isn't just an attempt to stir up dissension for example, goodness knows we have enough of that at the moment.

Regards

 

[The Little Raven]

But don't expect people to not react to things they have been shown in the context that has been provided.

 

[Imp]

But why would you jump to conclusions when you could teleport to them?

* flees *

 

[RigaMortus2]

The rogue is obsolette because an elf has a teleport ability? What? That doesn't even make sense.

 

[VirgilCaine]

Invisibility has always been better than Move Silently Hide. Has the rogue always been obsolete?

Never.

In my game, the wizard is too busy crowing about wanting/getting Cloudkill to prepare Knock and Invisibility. I've got a Rogue5/Diviner4 and a straight Rogue9 and they aren't overshadowed at all.

I also have to say that Dwarves will ALWAYS have darkvision in any D&D game I run.

A race that lives underground...that carries "shoot-me sticks" AKA torches everywhere?

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

By the same reasoning that you can't be critical of something because you don't know enough, then you also can't be supportive of something because you don't know enough. So if you like 4E based on what you have seen, but also agree with this statement, then you are missing something.

I guess for both sides it is a question about how you present concerns and like.
"Oh my god! The designers are great! They removed Vancian magic! Finally, the game will be fun again!"
"Oh my god! The designers are stupid! They removed Vancian magic! Now wizards are totally overpowered because they can cast spells all the time, and nobody will play a fighter or Rogue anymore!"

Both extremes are... short-sighted. The first one doesn't seem to care at all about the alternate mechanic in place, and how this change will affect the game. The other doesn't seem to believe the designers could have created an alternate mechanic that will work.

The first one might be more constructive if he explains why he disliked Vancian magic and what he hopes/expects this will achieve or what they will do to make it work.
The second one might be more constructive if he explains why he always loved Vancian magic and what risks he sees in removing it from the game, or possibly what counter-measures to his fears could exist.

Some of the best threads in the D&D 4 forum so far have always been those that weren't just "pro" or "con" but those that discussed the possibly implications and possible implementations of the rules.

Never.

In my game, the wizard is too busy crowing about wanting/getting Cloudkill to prepare Knock and Invisibility. I've got a Rogue5/Diviner4 and a straight Rogue9 and they aren't overshadowed at all.

I also have to say that Dwarves will ALWAYS have darkvision in any D&D game I run.

A race that lives underground...that carries "shoot-me sticks" AKA torches everywhere?

Why do they rely on eyes at all? I mean, think about it, all these twisted passages with no light? Why use eyes, if sound travels so much better? And you can't see dangerous gas-leaks anyhow, better to rely more on your trusty dwarven nose!

 

[RPG_Tweaker]

I also have to say that Dwarves will ALWAYS have darkvision in any D&D game I run.

A race that lives underground...that carries "shoot-me sticks" AKA torches everywhere?

While I understand where your perception of dwarves may come from, I myself have never thought they were completely subterranean creatures. I suppose I was driven more by old drawings where they were depicted with torches and lamps.

If they were prone to darkness, I would expect them to have light sensitivity. Of course, back in 1E, they had infravision, which would only help see hot spots and warm-blooded creatures, so light sources would still be needed to see most of the time.

From that I assumed they lived in cities and castle built in rugged mountainous terrain; about 25% of which was surface-based. I also conjectured they tended high altitude crops and beasts. Of course they have extensive underground fortifications and mines, but the entire population didn't live there.

I remember a really great Warhammer picture in Dragon magazine of a mountainside stronghold with houses and buildings in the background, and the foreground, an array of forces were there, including an ogre and a dwarf riding a mean-looking boar. It really captured what I'd always imagined the surface-side of a dwarven city looking like.

When 3E introduced darkvision to solve for the headaches of DMing infravision, it conflicted with their established need for light. I gave them elvish low-light vision.

As for "shoot-me sticks"... that's what hooded lanterns are designed to prevent. Dwarves are quite mechanical you see...

Then again, IMC, only monsters have darkvison; goblinoids and drow (as elves) equally have low-light vision.

 

[BryonD]

That doesn't follow at all.

Yes it does.

The rest of your post is based on selectively defining positive comments in one narrow "good" track and concerned comments in one narrow "bad" track. If instead of cherry-picking like this you back up and look at all comments, both pro and con, you will find that there are very reasonable conclusions being reached on both sides and absurd speculations and misplace assumptions being placed on both sides.

And as a completely separate point, people ARE going to react to what they are provided and to expect anything different is absurd.

And Mourn, yes, I am most certainly jumping to conclusions. I'm doing with full knowledge. But so are you. Anyone not an insider who has stated an opinion is jumping to conclusions.