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

Something like an Arcana Evolved for 4E. Take the good stuff, throw out strange D&Disms, like divine magic, make a non-roled based class model (AE does this pretty well, all-mage parties work out there).

While the roles are neat, and divine magic is somehow very D&Dish, I'd still like to see a "more open" variant.

Cheers, LT.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Lord Tirian said:
divine magic is somehow very D&Dish

I disagree. This is far older than D&D.

The Book of Exodus makes a clear distinction between the miracles granted to Moses and the powers of the sorcerers of the Pharaoh. The same distinction is made between the miracles of the Apostles and the demonstrations of Simon Magus.

That's a perfect historical precedent for the division between arcane magic and divine magic.
 

RangerWickett said:
. . . Pardon me while I reel for a bit.

What does '3rd edition feel' mean? I'm trying my best not to be snarky, but what in 3e is there to be nostalgic for?

Racial Pantheons

Realms without numerous changes.

Monsters and Players using same rules for character advancement.

Prestige Classes.

Little things.
 

Rechan said:
Necromancy is subtle? :)
Compared to Evokers? :)

Rechan said:
If anything, the Angelic warlock should have to jump through more hoops.
Why? The Angel probably tithes 10% of his per-day powers to good causes anyway, so if the Warlock is at all nice and pilgrim-like, he's as good a vessel as any ...

JoeGKushner said:
Racial Pantheons

Realms without numerous changes.

Monsters and Players using same rules for character advancement.

Prestige Classes.
lol. Not trying to start an edition war, but I'm happy to let everything on this list go. When I read that list I see:
1. Duplicative gods.
2. Realms with Elminster lording it over everyone and taking all the hot chicks.
3. Monsters with way more rules than they need.
4. Clumsy patches on a poorly designed multiclassing mechanic.

:) I say that in good cheer though, since I have no issues with you preferring 3.x the way it is (game on!). I guess there is a 3E "feel", I just don't like it. :)
 

Besides books for variant classes and things, including Warlock variants, I would much like to see some video-game based 4e material by those people who make that sort of thing. Also, a new BoEF might be a nice supplement :p
 

JoeGKushner said:
Racial Pantheons

Realms without numerous changes.

Monsters and Players using same rules for character advancement.

Prestige Classes.

Little things.

You forgot "Lots of spikes, buckles, straps, and asymmetrical armor."
 

Irda Ranger said:
Compared to Evokers? :)
Anything's subtle compared to Evokers.

Why? The Angel probably tithes 10% of his per-day powers to good causes anyway, so if the Warlock is at all nice and pilgrim-like, he's as good a vessel as any
Because getting an Angelic patron shouldn't be easy. It shouldn't be the road to easy power, the same way going over to devils is. That's why sometimes good mortals do it, or are corrupted - it's fast and has lots of immediate benefits.

Compare being a Paladin with being a priest. A paladin has to do a lot of extra legwork, because he's got a Code. He's Special, and he's got extra restrictions. Meanwhile, the lawful good cleric only loses his goodies if his alignment shifts.
 
Last edited:



Rechan said:
Because getting an Angelic patron shouldn't be easy. It shouldn't be the road to easy power, the same way going over to devils is. That's why sometimes good mortals do it, or are corrupted - it's fast and has lots of immediate benefits.
Who said being good all the time was easy? Infernal demons are much easier (more fun?) to satisfy because you get to be selfish and wallow in the sin of your choice while you're doing it; they don't care. I expect Angelic Warlocks would have to hold to a similar code as Paladins.
 

Remove ads

Top