D&D 4E What sort of 3rd party 4e books do you want?

[dmccoy1693]

but what in 3e is there to be nostalgic for?

The "poor farmboy that picked up a sword and went off to make to make a living at it" concept. I don't believe this is possible when "fighters have spells". The two concepts, IMO, are not compatable.

Settings that like a magical medieval and feel familiar. nFR doesn't sound familiar, it sounds shoehorned. Paizo's pathfinder world is being called "The New Greyhawk" for a reason, it feels familiar and feels like a magical medieval world.

 

[Benben]

So, people are already making judgments on what they do and don't like in the new edition, so I suppose it's time for us to start planning how 3rd party publishers can meet your demands for quality game material outside the core rules.

What 3e era books would you like to see revised? What do you think was never properly covered? What holes do you think there are in the rules, things from previous editions that won't be available from WotC at the beginning of the new edition?

I want a set of good kingdom management rules. It will allow players to view economics, faith, morality, diplomacy, military, art, and academics as resources and attributes for their point of light. Then it will give me rules for building and handling kingdom level encounters.

A really good Golden Age of Islam setting. Yes I want my Al-Qadim, but I'll take any setting that covers the Middle East.

A really good Asian setting. And even though it dilutes the history, I want it to be pan Asian and cover India, China, Tibet, Thailand, Japanese, and Mongol cultures.

 

[kennew142]

The "poor farmboy that picked up a sword and went off to make to make a living at it" concept. I don't believe this is possible when "fighters have spells". The two concepts, IMO, are not compatable.

Settings that like a magical medieval and feel familiar. nFR doesn't sound familiar, it sounds shoehorned. Paizo's pathfinder world is being called "The New Greyhawk" for a reason, it feels familiar and feels like a magical medieval world.

We have never seen any of the designers say that fighters will 'have spells' in the next edition. This is a claim made by people who want to disparage the new edition. If the books we've told are significant previews of 4e are in fact significant previews, fighters and rogues will have talents that are in effect maneuvers. Some of these talents will be clearly supernatural in nature, but most of them will not. There are more than enough mundane maneuvers (some of the best in the Bo9S) for any fighter who to be completely mundane, albeit skilled. The fencer I built for Expedition to Castle Ravenloft, doesn't have a single supernatural ability (nor will he).

The ability of all classes to heal themselves does not imply spells or supernatural ability either. It is perfectly in line with the only definition of hit points ever given in the D&D rules. Since hit points reflect luck, stamina and skill, a fighter will be able to 'heal' themselves by gaining a second wind, like Indiana Jones does when he 'shakes it off' in the middle of a fight.

I could be wrong, since I've never seen the 4e rules, but this is the way it works in SWSE and Bo9S.

IMO "the poor farmboy that picked up a sword and went off to make to make a living at it" concept will work just fine in 4e. Some people have always treated the fighter as a kind of default class, with no training or skills required. IMO Fighters have always required extensive training. If you want someone in D&D 3.X who has never had any martial training, you should probably be playing a commoner. If however that farmboy with a sword has someone (anyone) give him some training with it, he should be a fighter.

 

[Rechan]

IMO "the poor farmboy that picked up a sword and went off to make to make a living at it" concept will work just fine in 4e. Some people have always treated the fighter as a kind of default class, with no training or skills required. IMO Fighters have always required extensive training. If you want someone in D&D 3.X who has never had any martial training, you should probably be playing a commoner. If however that farmboy with a sword has someone (anyone) give him some training with it, he should be a fighter.

This.

Where'd that poor farmboy pick up Weapon Focus or Cleave from? How about how to wear armor? Or familiarity with all martial weapons?

Where'd that poor street urchin learn to find and disarm traps? Or sneak attack for the vitals?

They will likely be no more "spells" then 3e feats. Here's an example of a 4e Per Encounter ability for a rogue:

Combat Feint.
Make a will attack with your bluff modifier against opponent. If you beat his Will Defense, you have combat advantage (ability to sneak attack) him.

The reason this is a Per Encounter ability is because a "Hey, look behind you!" only works once before everyone you're fighting sees you do it and won't fall for the same trick twice.

 

[Rechan]

I'm certain we'll see alternate Wizard Implements or Wizard Traditions, so I won't even bother with that.

Maps that provide large areas for movement. Dynamic environments to do stuff in.

Traps. Traps traps traps.

Variant warlock pacts. Enchanters (for those who hate Psionics, even though I love psionics). Divine Strikers and Controllers. New power sources.

Adventures with the social rules built in. I'm certain there will be the 1e feel guys who want to publish dungeoncrawls, but I feel we need to see people exercising the social activities.

 

[Irda Ranger]

The Book of Subtle Wizards: Enchanter, Illusionist & Necromancer

The Book of Non-Evil/Creepy Warlocks: Angels & Elementals

Magical Medieval Society (Revised for 4E)

d20 Gothic: A Sourcebook for the Age of Exploration, Steam Power and Not-Quite-Modern Adventuring

 

[KingCrab]

4e Feats Renamed! Embarassed by having to play with such horrible feat names? Worry no more! With our new product, your feat names will never humiliate your character again!

 

[Cadfan]

I don't know what full products I would like to see.

But I know what character options and expansions I'd like. Stick them in whatever product they most fit.

1: A character who can use shuriken in a manner that is actually useful. The best option for this in 3e was a Scout, and even then you took a big hit in effectiveness compared to just using a shortbow and spending a feat on quickdraw. I had a lot of fun with a houseruled, edited scout, but I'd like there to be an official option.

2: The Shadowcaster. Its odd that I like this guy so much considering that mechanically he embodies much of what I hate about 3e magic- per day abilities, tendency to nova with extreme effectiveness, then suck the rest of the day. But he was a triumph of theme, both in the "shadow" theme, and in the "creepy nega-magic from an alternate universe" theme.

3: The Hexblade. I could talk for a long time about what worked with the hexblade's design, and what didn't, but I'll spare you all.

4: Psions that aren't just wizard ripoffs. I want a psion to float above the ground and wreck things with his mind. I don't want a psion who casts fireball. Er, sorry, who casts spells almost functionally identical to fireballs, but with different names.

5: A swashbuckler/duelist type character. Historically that gets folded into the rogue. That didn't work quite right in 3e. Maybe it will work in 4e, but if not, I want a swashbuckler class.

6: The swordsage. Again, this is a melee class that actually had magic mixed into it in a way that was elegant and which didn't overshadow the "melee" part in terms of theme. Shadow Hand was especially nice.

7: A "magical girl" class. Fully anime styled. In 3e, this is actually the warlock class. In 4e, that may not be the case. If WOTC is too afraid to make a genuine magical girl, they can call it a warlock who has made a pact with celestials, or just a new class type that uses pact magic like a warlock, but pacts with good beings.

3e Warlock = magical girl.
Flies? Check.
Shoots rays of light at people? Check. They can even blind.
When wounded can recover her hit points and attack again? Check. Class feature.
High charisma? Check.
Fights with a sceptre? Check, though we call it a mace.

 

[Torgan]

Settings that like a magical medieval and feel familiar. nFR doesn't sound familiar, it sounds shoehorned. Paizo's pathfinder world is being called "The New Greyhawk" for a reason, it feels familiar and feels like a magical medieval world.

I don't write often on these forums, but I couldn't resist to answer to this nonsense. How can a world be called medieval when youngster with a sword become epic characters in only 12 adventures ? Paizo has always make a very good job and their adventure path are perhaps the best ones ever published, but they have the "medieval feeling" only for the 3 or 4 first adventures.

 

[Rechan]

Revisited fluff. And by this, I don't just mean "De-Fluff 4e". No, something like Paizo's Monsters Revisited; re-designing the fluff associated with humanoids and monstrous humanoids.

I want fluff that makes the old stuff look sexy again.

A campaign world that isn't Medieval Europe Fantasy. Come on, give us Arabian fantasy, or Polynesian/Eastern Pacific. Go a little wild.

The Book of Subtle Wizards: Enchanter, Illusionist & Necromancer

Necromancy is subtle?

The Book of Non-Evil/Creepy Warlocks: Angels & Elementals

My one issue with this is that the reason people make pacts with Devils is because it's easy. Power, right there, at your fingertips, got it.

It shouldn't be easy to make pacts with Angels. If it was, anyone could do it.

If anything, the Angelic warlock should have to jump through more hoops.