4E already released!

[Jorian Drake]

I've already established that it's going to be useless to me. But what makes another useless thing preferrable? If I do buy some P&P books that I'll never ever use, why that one?

 

At least D&D has some familiarity for me. I've read a number novels and played several games that were based on the Forgotten Realms part of it.

well, the SAGA edition star wars books are influenced by KOTOR, for sure, it has 'sentinel flava' in it

[Spider]

Is vampire 3.5 somehow more useful to someone who will never P&P than D&D 4.0? Is Vampire's art better? Is there more likely to be a Vampire 3.5 video game for me to use the books as background for when playing?

 

Just a clarification, he is talking about two different games. Vampire and D&D 3.5 aren't even shipped by the same companies. And Vampire is a setting, the rulebook is World of Darkness (which do have better art than 3.5). It's a lot likelier that there will be a D&D 4.0 videogame though. Considering how well Bloodlines did I'd be amazed if any company will touch the White Wolf properties with a ten foot pole.

 

So if you're never ever going to play with them, I'd say go for 4.0.

[Tale]

Is vampire 3.5 somehow more useful to someone who will never P&P than D&D 4.0? Is Vampire's art better? Is there more likely to be a Vampire 3.5 video game for me to use the books as background for when playing?

 

Just a clarification, he is talking about two different games.

Yeah, I didn't catch "or" the first time I read it.

Edited June 7, 2008 by Tale

[H]

If you aren't going to actually use P&P rulebooks, but for whatever want to buy one, get either Mage: The Ascension, Planescape Campaign Setting boxed set or one of the Changeling games. These have the prettiest art and the most interesting fluff text.

 

EDIT: Forgot about Ravenloft and Dark Sun. Those are cool as well.

Edited June 7, 2008 by H

[Soul]

For starters, I tend to ignore most RPG codex posters, because almost all of them are ****, although some can be nice.

 

Anyway, I do have some doubts about 4th edition, but I wouldn't mind to skim through a few pages and see what it's like. From what I've heard, there's a whole lot of powers that any class can use, which would be appealing for a shonin styled game.

[Tale]

Apparently Succubi are devils now. I wonder if that means Erinyes have been switched to demons or if they're gone altogether. I also wonder if there's any accounting for this change. Something like the Succubi got tired of the Glabrezu and Balors biting off their heads on a whim and decided to defect.

Edited June 9, 2008 by Tale

[Magister Lajciak]

Apparently Succubi are devils now. I wonder if that means Erinyes have been switched to demons or if they're gone altogether. I also wonder if there's any accounting for this change. Something like the Succubi got tired of the Glabrezu and Balors biting off their heads on a whim and decided to defect.

 

There is no accounting of the change in the metastory at all (and the Erinyes, I believe no longer exist in 4E). In fact, the whole 'old' metastory running over the previous editions is gone, as WotC decided to reimagine the game for the new generation of players.

[Tale]

This is what I found. http://forums.gleemax.com/showpost.php?p=1...amp;postcount=5

 

the erinyes and the succubus were holding down pretty similar territory, so we've decided that they're the same monster, called the succubus, and it's a devil.

 

So, you can look at that however you want. And you could say that Erinyes are Succubi. You can probably make up whatever justification for the demonic Succubi of older editions you want.

Edited June 10, 2008 by Tale

[Magister Lajciak]

This is what I found. http://forums.gleemax.com/showpost.php?p=1...amp;postcount=5

 

the erinyes and the succubus were holding down pretty similar territory, so we've decided that they're the same monster, called the succubus, and it's a devil.

 

So, you can look at that however you want. And you could say that Erinyes are Succubi. You can probably make up whatever justification for the demonic Succubi of older editions you want.

 

Right, but that is a design explanation, not a metastory explanation that you seemed to be asking for (as in, there is no continuity with the previous editions and no "in game reason" why they switched to devils - there is only a design reason).

[Sand]

I have read through the books and I am largely unimpressed. I will not be purchasing 4e products, nor will I be using them for any of my campaigns.

[Jorian Drake]

heh

 

 

[Sand]

Well, they did totally destroyed the magic system of the game. Now it is a "Power" system and everyone gets "Powers." And each "power" comes from a different "Power Source" even though they are basically the same, follow the same mechanic, and ultimately uberfied and boring.

Edited June 10, 2008 by Sand

[Jorian Drake]

Well, they did totally destroyed the magic system of the game. Now it is a "Power" system and everyone gets "Powers." And each "power" comes from a different "Power Source" even though they are basically the same, follow the same mechanic, and ultimately uberfied and boring.

sorry, but magical powers were till now from seperate sources aswell (paladin, druid, wizard, bard, sorcerer, ect), i don't see any difference in that compared to the new system

[Sand]

Well, they did totally destroyed the magic system of the game. Now it is a "Power" system and everyone gets "Powers." And each "power" comes from a different "Power Source" even though they are basically the same, follow the same mechanic, and ultimately uberfied and boring.

sorry, but magical powers were till now from seperate sources aswell (paladin, druid, wizard, bard, sorcerer, ect), i don't see any difference in that compared to the new system

 

No. Of the base classes Paladin, Cleric, Ranger, and Druid were all Divine spells. Wizard, Bard, and Sorcerer were all arcane spells. 2 catagories. Frankly I would rather have them go the Arcana Evolved route and eliminate the distinction of Arcane and Divine and have them just be spells. What class you are determines how many spells you have, how you cast them, and complexity of spells you are allowed to cast, while the spell power itself comes from one "source."

 

With how they set it up you have Martial Power, Arcane Power, Divine Power, then later on you will have Primal Power, Psionic Power, and so forth and so on. It seems every other class is going to have its own "Power" source. Ridiculous.

Edited June 10, 2008 by Sand

[Magister Lajciak]

Actually, a better division of power sources is one of the things I do like about 4E. I have been ruling for a long time in my games that there are more power sources than arcane and divine and always considered nature (for example) its own power source, though I did not call them power sources of course and I did not have a 'martial' power source. Rather, psionics, nature, philosophy, arcane magic, divine magic and so on represented the varieties of supernatural that could be used to fuel various supernatural effects, each, of course, being particularly suited to different types of effects.

[Sand]

To have a new power source for every class or two is just stupid.

[Joseph Bulock]

Just to counter all the haterade in here, I wanted to say that I'm really excited about running my 4th edition game, and that the new rules have excited my entire player group, two of which are first timers, and two of which are veteran PnP gamers. I've yet to find anything any major negatives, and there are so many improvements that I can't imagine going back to 3.5 for any of my games. The high points for me are the simplified multi-classing, the simplified races (making it much easier to create my own for a homebrew setting) and the fact that every class has a tactical decision to be made every round.

[Tale]

The primary forum I visit is talking about getting an online game of it going. Wonder how that's going to turn out. Maybe I'll actually get some (virtual) PnP.

[Jorian Drake]

The primary forum I visit is talking about getting an online game of it going. Wonder how that's going to turn out. Maybe I'll actually get some (virtual) PnP.

that you already had:

 

KOTOR

IWD

NWN

 

ect..

 

 

all of them are "virtual pnp" with their own houserules even

Edited June 11, 2008 by Jorian Drake

[I want teh kotor 3]

4e FTW! Now I dont have to jack my DM's books everytime I want to check something about a magic weapon. Oh that and Fighters are (at least in my opinion) slightly better this ime around.

[J.E. Sawyer]

No. Of the base classes Paladin, Cleric, Ranger, and Druid were all Divine spells. Wizard, Bard, and Sorcerer were all arcane spells. 2 catagories.

There are two types that can be subdivided into numerous sources.

 

Wizards = academic book learnin'.

Sorcerers = innate power from draconic lineage.

Warlock = demonic/fey link from a pact or lineage.

Cleric = directly granted by deity or "self-granted" by personal philosophy.

Druid = directly granted by deity or by nature itself.

Paladin = directly granted by deity or ???

Ranger = directly granted by deity or by nature itself.

 

There are/were also campaign-specific sources. E.g. in FR Mystra regulated the Weave, from which most arcane casters drew their power in a variety of ways. However, Shar controlled the Shadow Weave, from which arcane casters could also draw power. Also in FR, clerics/druids/rangers/paladins must worship a deity to gain spells, which is different from the core rules.

 

To have a new power source for every class or two is just stupid.

As the list above shows (and all of that stuff is directly confirmed in the 3E/3.5 rulebooks), 3E/3.5 always had a variety of sources within those two categories. 4th Ed. just makes more use of those distinctions.

[Jorian Drake]

Well done Mr. Sawyer!

A splendid riposte!

[Stephen Amber]

Wizards = academic book learnin'.

Sorcerers = innate power from draconic lineage.

Warlock = demonic/fey link from a pact or lineage.

Cleric = directly granted by deity or "self-granted" by personal philosophy.

Druid = directly granted by deity or by nature itself.

Paladin = directly granted by deity or ???

Ranger = directly granted by deity or by nature itself.

 

You forgot bards who's magic comes from "the heart". Which basically means it doesn't matter where the magic comes from...it simply works.

[Sand]

Sorry, J.E.. You are wrong. There are arcane and divine power when it comes to the base classes in the PHB 3.5. How they access those powers differ, but irrelevant to the fact that there are only arcane and divine.

Edited June 12, 2008 by Sand

[Tigranes]

I'm not one to speak up on P&P of course, but Stephen Amber's point seems right to me this time. It's always been the case that every class has its own powers, and they all come from some sort of 'source' that justifies it. It's just that the 4th edition goes and formalises that into separate 'Powers', which I think makes it less realistic and sounds ridiculous, but it is not an aberration in terms of substance.