D&D 4E Your plans for 4e

[Radiating Gnome]

Are you by any chance confirming the lack of guns in 4e?

Well, now, confirmation is tricky. I don't have anything in print, I don't have any sources I can name, I don't actually recall anyone saying this to my face . . .

So, sure, yes, Consider this solid confirmation. No Guns, no computers -- oh, and no cybernetic controlled cars and drones in Shadowrun 4e.

 

[Plane Sailing]

Are you by any chance confirming the lack of guns in 4e?

I hear nothing, -- N

That would be a cutback, since (as you recall), the 3.0e DMG had rules for guns and stuff in it...

 

[Nifft]

That would be a cutback, since (as you recall), the 3.0e DMG had rules for guns and stuff in it...

Indeed I do recall! They're even in the 3.5e DMG (p.146, above laser rifles).

Cheers, -- N

 

[seasong]

The online component can go hang itself. And I say this as someone who prefers PDFs (hell, I produce and sell PDFs for a living) over print for most purposes. Chief among the problems it has are DRM and being way, way, way overpriced.

However, as long as 4e does not require the online component, I'm in. It will probably be a year before I actually run anything in it, but that's because I have to build a world first, and if past experience is any indicator of future performance, a logical world design that incorporates D&D is never compatible between editions without an Epoch of the Gods rewriting the World with World-Shattering Events.

 

[(contact)]

D'oh!

I just got an email about the playtest -- first email with any rules. And I've been instructed not to let anyone know that I'm playtesting . . . so . . . everyone here forget I said anything. I'm going to be playing Shadowrun for the next year.

glowy gnome out

Sir, I am unaware of any such activity or playtesting - nor would I be disposed to discuss such playtesting if it was in fact happening, sir.

 

[Radiating Gnome]

The online component can go hang itself. And I say this as someone who prefers PDFs (hell, I produce and sell PDFs for a living) over print for most purposes. Chief among the problems it has are DRM and being way, way, way overpriced.

However, as long as 4e does not require the online component, I'm in.

It's my understanding that the game will be a complete game if all you get is the books, as much as the 3.5 edition is the full game with just the books.

Each book will come with a code that unlocks access to the online/electronic version of the book. It's not clear (at least to me) exactly what that looks like. That won't cost anything extra.

There will be a subscription service that will basically replace Dungeon and Dragon -- that's the Insider part. That service will include premium content meant to be the new outlet for Dragon and Dungeon types of magazine content. It's also going to include the character building tools and the virtual tabletop for playing games via computer (rather than at the table).

I'll be the first to admit that I've been lukewarm at best at WOTC's ability to deliver on electronic products and services in the past. Their much-promoted Gleemax dohicky is a skin over an old world message board. Their e-tools were a prettier but less useful version of the open source PCGen toolset -- a toolset they gutted to protect the E-tools footprint in the marketplace. I went from having a tool that I found immensely useful (PCGen pre-assertion of the WOTC copyright) to a frustrating attempt to use etools for the same functionality, and finally went back to sketching out NPCs on paper.

So . . . I'm a bit wary myself about the electronic side of the new edition. They're hanging out a big, big shingle, though. They're making a very big pitch. And I hope they can pull it off. I have nothing but buckets of respect for the team running the project, and there hasn't been an announced change in the game that I haven't liked the sound of.

I figure, if the only thing that works out is the new edition of the rules, I'm happy. If the other pillars of the offering they're promoting bear workable fruit, that's gravy.

Personally, I think the more interesting questions to think about are the ones you get to once you assume that they're going to be able to deliver on the Digital Initiative. For one thing, how does DI work for 3rd party publishers, if at all? Will WOTC release the Database API that describes how the game rules and stats are stored in their database so that third party publishers can provide their own data for DI users to access? The biggest example is probably Paizo and Pathfinder -- will Paizo be able to connect to the DI database and make their campaign world information (feats, class options, new monsters, etc) available?

What possible business reason would WOTC have for making that sort of service available? Will they make money from Paizo doing that? not likely. Will they maintain a larger subscriber base if they open it up in this way? Probably, but it comes with added expenses and the natural problems that come with adding someone else's data to your carefully maintained database. Is it worth it?

Clearly, I need to spend more time thinking about work .

-j

 

[seasong]

It's my understanding that the game will be a complete game if all you get is the books, as much as the 3.5 edition is the full game with just the books.

That's my understanding, also. I wouldn't have even mentioned it if I wasn't so annoyed with everything else they've said about the online component - my irritation spilled over into unlikely scenarios that would also be irritating.

Sorry.

 

[(contact)]

I'll be the first to admit that I've been lukewarm at best at WOTC's ability to deliver on electronic products and services in the past.

I think it's likely going to be exactly as poor as their current site and gleemax is.

Their much-promoted Gleemax dohicky is a tragically ugly and confusing skin over an old world message board.

Fixed it for you. The plan for gleemax is to add social networking functionality (members pages, wikis, blogs, etc.) to let us all meet gamers and interact around games. Again, what we have in our hands at the moment, web wise, is pretty underwhelming, so I'm not sure how the new insider/gleemax rollout is going to be fantastic.

If they'll let us complie the Dragon & Dungeon content into .pdfs (with a light enough DRM that I can share them between my computers at home), or if the DM tools are actually good (there's been exactly zero noise about that element, I notice -- I take that as a bad sign), then DnDinsider will be well worth it.

OTOH, if not, maybe not so much.

My general pattern with Dragon & Dungeon is that for the first year of a new release, I'll be all over it, but after that, my enthusiasm trails off, and despite the excitement I usually wind up using exactly none of the content in my game anyway*.

Paizo's Adventure Paths changed that for me, and I re-upped for them, so I'm open to the idea that something they'll do with Dragon/Dungeon will be great, but so far, I'm not seeing the "quest for excellence" James Wyatt was on about with regards to the online offerings.

In fact, I'm seeing a "quest for git 'er dun," which isn't likely to result in anything special.

Upside? 4e is going to be very good.

Downside? The internet/electronic aspect won't be.

Net? We'll all just keep on like we have been.

-----
* Not entirely true, I let the LoT heroes kill Warduke with extreme prejudice. They, of course, had no idea who he was.

 

[Plane Sailing]

My general pattern with Dragon & Dungeon is that for the first year of a new release, I'll be all over it, but after that, my enthusiasm trails off, and despite the excitement I usually wind up using exactly none of the content in my game anyway*.

Me too - I picked up Dragon again (after a 15 year hiatus) for about 3 months prior to the launch of 3e and for 12 months afterwards... but then found I wasn't getting any real use of it so stopped again.

Cheers

 

[seasong]

Upside? 4e is going to be very good.

This sums up my opinion better than I did. I got distracted from it by gleemax.