Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Psion" data-source="post: 3822276" data-attributes="member: 172">1) Spreading the core across different books so WotC can re-brand supplements as core. So much for the &quot;I'll get the core books and then see&quot; plan. Of all these, I consider this one the most likely to come back and bite them. I'm a &quot;supplement a month&quot; guy, so it wouldn't make that much difference to me. But I think part of the large installed player base of D&amp;D arises from the fact you can plug into so much with just the 3 core books. I think many of the more casual players aren't going to bite.2) Replacing the great wheel with another overly specific cosmology. (I would have no problem replacing the great wheel with a generic baseline for a cosmology, but the cosmology presented is too specific for core books, and belongs in a setting.)3) I'm dubious about the per-encounter craze, but it may turn out alright. It doesn't sound like the designers are banking on it to the extent some were thinking they were.4) Re-imagining monsters. Succubi are demons, have been since 1e.5) I would say &quot;save or die&quot;, but I wonder if that's just a marketing thing and it's just a consequence of having no saves. Of course if you think save or die is a pisser, the DM rolling some dice and saying &quot;your dead&quot; sounds like even more of a pisser. Guess I'll wait and see on this one.6) Re-imagining monsters.7) Coring the Warlock.8) Concerned about skill system, too, but definitely need more detail here. I'm glad, at least, that the authors have said it won't be a clone of SWSE's skill system.9) Coring of tiefling.10) Re-imagining eladrin to be the supposedly non-subrace elf. A rose is a rose, no need to slaughter a functional creature to pretend it's a petunia.11) (Edit: Thanks Wayne) Monsters using different rules than PCs. This aspect is what sold me on 3e. Sure, it needed fixed. The designers apparently gave up.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Psion, post: 3822276, member: 172"] 1) Spreading the core across different books so WotC can re-brand supplements as core. So much for the "I'll get the core books and then see" plan. Of all these, I consider this one the most likely to come back and bite them. I'm a "supplement a month" guy, so it wouldn't make that much difference to me. But I think part of the large installed player base of D&D arises from the fact you can plug into so much with just the 3 core books. I think many of the more casual players aren't going to bite. 2) Replacing the great wheel with another overly specific cosmology. (I would have no problem replacing the great wheel with a generic baseline for a cosmology, but the cosmology presented is too specific for core books, and belongs in a setting.) 3) I'm dubious about the per-encounter craze, but it may turn out alright. It doesn't sound like the designers are banking on it to the extent some were thinking they were. 4) Re-imagining monsters. Succubi are demons, have been since 1e. 5) I would say "save or die", but I wonder if that's just a marketing thing and it's just a consequence of having no saves. Of course if you think save or die is a pisser, the DM rolling some dice and saying "your dead" sounds like even more of a pisser. Guess I'll wait and see on this one. 6) Re-imagining monsters. 7) Coring the Warlock. 8) Concerned about skill system, too, but definitely need more detail here. I'm glad, at least, that the authors have said it won't be a clone of SWSE's skill system. 9) Coring of tiefling. 10) Re-imagining eladrin to be the supposedly non-subrace elf. A rose is a rose, no need to slaughter a functional creature to pretend it's a petunia. 11) (Edit: Thanks Wayne) Monsters using different rules than PCs. This aspect is what sold me on 3e. Sure, it needed fixed. The designers apparently gave up. [/QUOTE]

Verification