WotC_Shoe: A tiny, tiny hint on new weapons post-PHB

You know, I've bought a lot of splatbooks, and UA was above and beyond my favorite.

Sure, I don't use much of it, but it was so inspiring in suggesting how you could further change and mutate the system into what you want that it effectively functions far better than more utilitarian books. Sure, I use a few things from Complete Warrior fairly often, but it's not such a pervasive useful thing.

As for 'they should get more customers, not publish more books,' that has never, ever, ever worked for RPGs. So you're saying they should destroy themselves out of esthetics?

3.5e actually did a lot better than some editions, as far as power creep; while unbalanced crap did come out, it was more random. That is, in every work there was the chance of one or two things being absurd, so over time, while the number of absurdities did go up, it wasn't a sweeping general thing. And it hasn't been hard to identify the stupid stuff and go 'ok, NO Radiant Servant of Pelor. Just... no.'
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Derren said:
I wonder if this a ploy to sell more books or if I should be worried that 4E will be shipped rather unfinished.
It's a total ploy that the PHB isn't a 1,000 page book with every possible spell, weapon, armor and bit of equipment imaginable.

The fiends!
 



Dr. Awkward said:
Isn't this standard operating procedure? Practically every one of my 3.5 books has some kind of bizarro exotic weapons in the back.

uh ya....

...though you could argue (as others in this thread are) that the 3rd ed PHB had some of the bizzaro weapons. And I felt compelled to add some weapons that were omited.
 



Celebrim said:
I don't know if you mean that as sarcasm, but yeah, the ever growing list of splatbooks was one of my problems with later 3rd edition. Alot of dross with the pearls in that list.

Is this really something that 4E purports to solve? That's the WotC business model (and quite successful, admittedly); I don't see them changing it just for a new edition.
 

moritheil said:
Is this really something that 4E purports to solve?

Not at all. But solving the splatbook problem is something I've seen alot of people excited about 4E citing as thier reason for being excited.
 

Ruin Explorer said:
I feel the exact opposite way, for the reason you kind of touched on. In 2E, unless you were interested in the precise subject the book was about, you could ignore it, and know that it had nothing for you. This saved me from many purchases. In 3E, every book was about many more things. Instead of The Complete Fighter's Handbook, we got Sword & Fist, which was full of junk for Fighters, Monks, and many other classes. Instead of The Complete Book of Dwarves, we get Races of Stone, with not only Dwarves, but multiple other races, and an entirely new an extraneous to requirements race (I actually kind of like the one in Races of Stone, but Illumians? OH COME ON).

For me, I ended up with more books that were "mostly useless" in 3E than in 2E, simply because to get the small core of useful material from any given book, I had to purchase one that was full of junk I didn't give two sods about AND which had LESS information on the things I did care about as a result.

I completely agree with you which is why I did not buy any of WOTC's class or race splat books. In contrast, I bought books like Green Ronin's Shaman's Handbook and Witch's Handbook (I even still plan to buy Mongoose's Quintessential Monk, Rogue, Sorcerer, and Wizard books despite them being 3.0).

Had WOTC focused on a single book per core or new base class, I may have been more likely to buy some of their splat books (assuming the quality of the material was good) .
 

Remove ads

Top