| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Great Reader
USA
7106 Posts |
 Posted - 12 Jun 2008 : 00:47:59
|
quote:
Originally posted by Varda And did you read the mess of gods? Bahamut, Corellon and a sort of new gods with gods stolen from another settings...
Well, that's nothing new--it's at least as old as 3E. The 3E "core gods" were slightly tweaked Greyhawk gods.
quote:
Where are the gnomes?!
In the Monster Manual. |
"Instead of asking why we sleep, it might make sense to ask why we wake. Perchance we live to dream. From that perspective, the sea of troubles we navigate in the workaday world might be the price we pay for admission to another night in the world of dreams."
--Richard Greene (letter to Time) |
 |
|
|
Kajehase
Great Reader
Sweden
2104 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jun 2008 : 15:03:37
|
quote:
Originally posted by VardaThe island of Lantan will be disappear because the new rules? xD
Um... the majority of the Lantanese population has always been human you know... |
There is a rumour going around that I have found god. I think is unlikely because I have enough difficulty finding my keys, and there is empirical evidence that they exist.
Terry Pratchett |
|
|
|
Morentis
Acolyte
USA
4 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jun 2008 : 18:40:54
|
I've already purchased the three core rulebooks, and my girlfriend and I are still running through "Keep on the Shadowfell." I find the new rules and powers intriguing. My opinion on the new system as a whole isn't yet fully formed; there are things that I like, things of which I'm uncertain, and things that don't sit well with me. I freely admit to liking the 3E wizard's ability to lay waste to small villages, and since I've tended to play in small (one- or two-player) campaigns over the past few years, my wizard's ability to hold his own in a solo fight has been important.
I'm not at all enthused about the 4E changes to the Realms, but I do intend to check out (thought not necessarily buy) the new Realms sourcebook when it's released. |
|
|
|
Alisttair
Great Reader
Canada
3054 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jun 2008 : 13:44:52
|
| Oh yes, I did buy the Player's Handbook last week (thank god for the Canadian dollar being so good, 40$ sure beats the 50-60$ it would have been a few years ago) |
Karsite Arcanar (Most Holy Servant of Karsus)
Anauria - Survivor State of Netheril as penned by me:
http://www.dmsguild.com/m/product/172023 |
|
|
|
Chosen of Moradin
Master of Realmslore
Brazil
1120 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jun 2008 : 15:38:53
|
Iīm with Krashos, here. I like too much of most of the changes, and my gift set will come to my hands in the next month - but one of my players received the books this week, and we take a look at them.
Probably, I will start something with the new rules, in the 3rd edition setting. |
Dwarf, DM, husband, and proud of this! :P
twitter: @yuripeixoto
Facebook: yuri.peixoto |
|
|
|
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Great Reader
USA
7106 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jun 2008 : 18:07:20
|
My 4E core rulebooks arrived yesterday! I'm still digesting the new rules--if I got the chance to play a 4E game, I could probably whip up a good character without too much trouble. I like what I've seen of the rules so far--PCs have tons of options to choose from, and the books are easy to use and understand. |
"Instead of asking why we sleep, it might make sense to ask why we wake. Perchance we live to dream. From that perspective, the sea of troubles we navigate in the workaday world might be the price we pay for admission to another night in the world of dreams."
--Richard Greene (letter to Time) |
|
|
|
Chosen of Moradin
Master of Realmslore
Brazil
1120 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jun 2008 : 18:25:14
|
I feel the same thing when I look the books, Rino. Now, itīs too easy to explain the rules, and to use them in the game. And the rules support a more cinematographic style of combat, with tons of tactical options for all classes. This is very good to all.
To roleplay, we donīt need of much, everyone could handle easily this aspect of the game, but now, for the first time, I think that my dwarf warrior will be very useful, donīt matter the level of play.
|
Dwarf, DM, husband, and proud of this! :P
twitter: @yuripeixoto
Facebook: yuri.peixoto |
|
|
|
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Great Reader
USA
7106 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jun 2008 : 18:31:56
|
Indeed--the books do cover the roleplaying aspect of the game, and as I said in another thread, the game has as much or as little roleplaying as the players want it too. I also think it's wonderful that plain vanilla fighters have much wider variety of actions to take in combat than before.
I'd say that if people are unsure about this new ruleset, at the very least, they should give it a look first before dismissing it out of hand. They just might like what they see. |
"Instead of asking why we sleep, it might make sense to ask why we wake. Perchance we live to dream. From that perspective, the sea of troubles we navigate in the workaday world might be the price we pay for admission to another night in the world of dreams."
--Richard Greene (letter to Time) |
|
|
|
Mace Hammerhand
Great Reader
Germany
2296 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jun 2008 : 18:38:10
|
Voted no, but I guess you saw that coming. I don't doubt that it's a nice/ok system, but I've invested far too much in 2nd and 3rd edition to switch. It isn't like the (A)D&D I've come to love in the last 2 decades.
I'm not unsure about the rules, rather I'm sure that 4e is not for me. |
Mace's not so gentle gamer's journal My rants were harmless compared to this, beware! |
|
|
|
Afetbinttuzani
Senior Scribe
Canada
434 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jun 2008 : 18:55:12
|
No. The 4E Realms does not interest me at all and Iīm still just scratching the surface of the possibilities for the 2E Realms.
I admit to being somewhat interested in how the 4E core rules might streamline game play for my younger players. The 2E rules are, letīs face it, complex and unwieldy. However, I have my doubts about adapting the 4E rules to my mountains of FR 2E material. I canīt stomach the thought of adapting every single NPC and Monster. 
Afet |
Afet bint Tuzaní
"As the good Archmage often admonishes me, I ought not to let my mind wander, as it's too small to go off by itself."
- Danilo Thann in Elfsong by Elaine Cunningham |
Edited by - Afetbinttuzani on 13 Jun 2008 18:56:55 |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31701 Posts |
Posted - 14 Jun 2008 : 02:06:05
|
| I've got some questions for those with the new Monster Manual. What's it like? Is it all just stat-blocks and rules, or are the older 'Creature Descriptions' and 'Society/Ecology' sections also included? |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 14 Jun 2008 : 05:18:26
|
Imagine, if you will, an amalgam of the 1e MM and the last few 3e MMs - you get a small bit of descriptive text, but most of it is statblock (like in 1e), but you also get several variety of a single creature to make up your 'mob' (like in some of the MM4 and MM5 entries).
For instance, creatures like Orcs have a shooter, a barbarian-rager type, a leader type, ect, ect...
If you ever played the minis it is very similar for the DM - you just put together an effective 'warband' from the choices that monster entry offers. It simplifies DMing quite a bit, really - there is little need for prep with encounters anymore.
But to answer your question - no, you don't get anything like the lore we were used to in 2e and 3e. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 14 Jun 2008 05:19:01 |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31701 Posts |
Posted - 14 Jun 2008 : 07:23:56
|
| My purchasing of the 4e MM was based partly on the likelihood that it may possibly contain some worthwhile lore -- reflecting some of the 4e changes to the various monstrous creatures. I was simply curious about having access to updated creature entries. Since that's apparently not the case, I can't see any particular reason for me to actually buy it. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
|
|
|
Purple Dragon Knight
Master of Realmslore
Canada
1796 Posts |
|
|
Stonwulfe
Seeker
Canada
81 Posts |
Posted - 14 Jun 2008 : 16:30:21
|
(Keep in mind that what follows is such: I have the belief that "opinions are like orifices, everyone has a couple", and that this is just my own particular drivel - and therefore open to all constructive and non-constructive criticism.)
I don't know if it will be useful to anyone, or even desired, but I will be opening a thread later this upcoming week (possibly as early as today) to compose something I've been meaning to write for a while.
I think it would be beneficial to give a detailed blow-by-blow breakdown of the new PHB, DMG, and MM for 4th Edition from the position of the experienced DM/Player, and what it will mean to the Forgotten Realms specifically. I'm not talking about a thirty-page document, here, but something concise, constructive, and showcasing how it can be capitalized upon by those willing to make the change. (Even if they completely disregard 4e FR.)
Therefore, I'll start on this document today, as a website, and I'll repost it as a link or a post in a new thread.
Mod Edit: Watch the language please.
|
Edited by - Stonwulfe on 14 Jun 2008 18:01:57 |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 14 Jun 2008 : 21:02:42
|
Looking forward to that. I have the books, but I do like to hear others opinions of them, and I can't really form a solid opinion until I've played a game with them.
quote:
Originally posted by Purple Dragon Knight
If you want new lore, I'd look this way: Classic Monsters Revisited
Thats my next purchase from Paizo (probably Monday - I'm on a tight budget these days) - I heard it was kick-a... ummm... really good. 
Its also just what I've been wanting for a while - a detailed look into the Goblinoid races and what makes them tick. Its a damn shame the 'Monsters of Faerûn' never got much coverage aside from their rather brief MM entries. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 14 Jun 2008 21:04:18 |
|
|
|
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Great Reader
USA
7106 Posts |
Posted - 15 Jun 2008 : 19:41:49
|
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
I've got some questions for those with the new Monster Manual. What's it like? Is it all just stat-blocks and rules, or are the older 'Creature Descriptions' and 'Society/Ecology' sections also included?
There is some lore about the monsters, but not that much overall. |
"Instead of asking why we sleep, it might make sense to ask why we wake. Perchance we live to dream. From that perspective, the sea of troubles we navigate in the workaday world might be the price we pay for admission to another night in the world of dreams."
--Richard Greene (letter to Time) |
|
|
|
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Great Reader
USA
7106 Posts |
Posted - 15 Jun 2008 : 19:43:03
|
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
My purchasing of the 4e MM was based partly on the likelihood that it may possibly contain some worthwhile lore -- reflecting some of the 4e changes to the various monstrous creatures. I was simply curious about having access to updated creature entries.
There is some of that. For example, the notorious drider entry--we learn that in 4E, turning into a drider is a blessing of Lolth, not a curse. |
"Instead of asking why we sleep, it might make sense to ask why we wake. Perchance we live to dream. From that perspective, the sea of troubles we navigate in the workaday world might be the price we pay for admission to another night in the world of dreams."
--Richard Greene (letter to Time) |
|
|
|
Stonwulfe
Seeker
Canada
81 Posts |
Posted - 16 Jun 2008 : 19:19:28
|
quote:
Rinonalyrna posted:
"Indeed--the books do cover the roleplaying aspect of the game, and as I said in another thread, the game has as much or as little roleplaying as the players want it too. I also think it's wonderful that plain vanilla fighters have much wider variety of actions to take in combat than before.
I'd say that if people are unsure about this new ruleset, at the very least, they should give it a look first before dismissing it out of hand. They just might like what they see."
That's one of the things I didn't include in my review, because it's not greatly covered in the book (PHB) itself; roleplaying. There are some excellent tips for new players on roleplaying, and it's standard fare as far as 'hints & tips' go, but every group is different and often the DM and the experienced players set the tone that the rest of the group learns from.
One of the benefits of 4e - often called one of it's worst traits (I disagree) - is that there is so little campaign setting and roleplay-directed content. There is, in my opinion, just enough of this material to convey what D&D is all about and how the various mechanics apply to possible scenarios. This quite ably plants the PHB in the position of the Player's Core Rule Book. It is what it is, a book that guides players in the mechanics of the game, and the advancement of their characters. It is not a campaign-driven supplement.
Even the DMG (whose review I'm writing now) contains a lot of information on how to guide roleplay, construct fantasy settings, create mediating factors in the gameplay, and encourage roleplay; it does not commit the sin or error of enforcing a specific campaign or scenario. The furthest it goes is to provide an example town in its appendices, and even this playable town exists more as a control sample. |
|
|
|
Aaron Highcolor
Acolyte
USA
45 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jun 2008 : 16:55:25
|
I voted yes. I'm the person in my group that has always been the first to "jump on the bandwagon". They all complained and hemmed and hawed when 3.0 came out, but they did change. As it evolved into 3.5, it no longer was what I wanted out of the game. The fluidity (at least to me) was gone. There were rules for everything. It even got to the point that we each had a Rules Compendium so that we could look up whatever we were going to do in order to help speed up play. A single combat with 4 players and a DM could eat up most of a single 5 - 6 hour play session.
That being said, I was intrigued by the "streamlining" that 4th Edition offered. I had my books before the release date (comes with being friends with the owner of my FLGS), and I enjoy most of it. Do I like the fact that they broke high elves (Eladrin) and wood elves (Elves) into separate groups? Eh, I can live with it, I suppose. Do I like the fact that tieflings are a core race? Again, I can take it or leave it. Same with the Dragonborn. I like the fact that there is not a rule to cover everything that you want to do (going back to 1st Ed, where I started!), and it is up to DM judgement. I like all the options for powers that each class has -- hopefully they'll add more so that every 2-weapon style ranger isn't using the exact same powers. I like that a wizard at low levels is no longer a 1-and-done type of character.
I don't like that almost all magic items are combat oriented (and yes, I know that they were trying to get away from characters being dependent on magic items, but hey), and that healing potions are useless when you are out of healing surges. I've read the arguments on the WotC board, and I still say that they are magic, that they should heal SOMETHING when used, even if there are no surges left. And yes, I know that they are trying to avoid the Wand of CLW hording that was prevalent in 3.X.
Overall, I like the new edition, and I really don't have any intention of going back to 3.x (except for Saga Edition Star Wars), and I am willing to give the 4E Realms a chance. I realize it's different, and they are gearing it towards players without the extensive knowledge of the Realms that you all have (I don't have a ton of knowledge, only the fluff that I have in some older TSR products and all of the 3.x stuff and novels that I have read), but you have to admit that all the background fluff can be daunting to new players.
Edit: I forgot to add that the lack of the ecology and fluff in the Monster Manual is something that I would definitely change! |
Run when you have to, fight when you must, rest when you can. |
Edited by - Aaron Highcolor on 17 Jun 2008 17:06:00 |
|
|
|
scrivenerofdoom
Acolyte
3 Posts |
Posted - 29 Jun 2008 : 16:13:41
|
I'm not planning to buy 4E for at least two years and then, maybe, not at all. My group is really enjoying 3.5E again. We've just started a fresh campaign set in Ashabenford in 1372 DR. We've all agreed that the FRCS is the baseline and that none of the novels set at any time since have any effect on "our" FR.
We've streamlined the skills (it's really helped me as the DM: I hadn't realise until now how much effort I put into getting the skill calculations right [not that I necessarily need to but I have an unwritten agreement with my players that NPCs/monsters play by the same rules as PCs]) but now have one feat per level. So while advancement has been slowed by mutual consent, the players feel like their characters are developing as they level.
Most importantly of all, I have just about every WotC book for 3.xE (missing Incarnum and some Eberron/Ebbbbbbbbbbbbbberrrrrrrrrrrrrrron books) and a lot of third party stuff and I really don't need anything else to run the game I want to run.
So I'm not criticising 4E (although I think a lot of the lore changes are gratuitous the lover's tiff/Spellplague is one of the dumbest things ever invented for a fantasy world outside of certain comics) but I am enjoying what I've got. |
Fatalistically yours,
The Scrivener of Doom
"Each being has an eternal resting place that is chosen for him or her at the moment of creation. Life is a process of seeking that place and eternal rest. Existence is but a brief aberration in an eternity of death. Power, success, and joy are as transitory as weakness, failure, and misery. Only death is absolute, and then only at its appointed hour. Seek to bring order to the chaos of life, for in death there is finality and a fixedness of state. Be ready for death for it is at hand and uncompromising. Life should be prolonged only when it serves the greater cause of the death of the world. Undeath is not an escape or a reward; it is simply a duty of a chosen few who serve the Lord of the End of Everything." |
|
|
|
Sanishiver
Senior Scribe
USA
476 Posts |
Posted - 29 Jun 2008 : 19:54:43
|
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
I am however more intrigued as to how the mechanics of 4E will translate into the Realms. Given that the Spellplague accounts for the changes to magic and the way casters now learn and cast their spells, I'm curious as to how this applies to magic items.
This has been my concern since GenCon of last year.
And not just with magic items, but with magic in general.
I do have hope that the Ritual-based magic system is what will keep all the cool variety of magic in the Realms alive well into the future. |
09/20/2008: Tiger Army at the Catalyst in Santa Cruz. You wouldnt believe how many females rode it out in the pit. Santa Cruz women are all of them beautiful. Now I know to add tough to that description.
6/27/2008: WALL-E is about the best damn movie Pixar has ever made. It had my heart racing and had me rooting for the good guy.
9/9/2006: Dave Mathews Band was off the hook at the Shoreline Amphitheater.
Never, ever read the game books too literally, or make such assumptions that what is omitted cannot be. Bad DM form, that.
And no matter how compelling a picture string theory paints, if it does not accurately describe our universe, it will be no more relevant than an elaborate game of Dungeons and Dragons. --paragraph 1, chapter 9, The Elegant Universe by Brian Greene |
|
|
|
Gwydion669
Acolyte
USA
14 Posts |
Posted - 30 Jun 2008 : 08:43:36
|
I'd rather be flayed, rolled in salt, and locked in a room for 24 hours with all my ex-fiances.
Not that I have anything against the 4e game ... I simply refuse to financially support a company which is murdering the Realms I have loved for close to 25 years.
Candlekeep gets my support. WotC does not.
While I whimper and mourn, I'll keep playing games like "Harp & Chrysanthamum" in NWN2. |
|
|
|
StarBog
Learned Scribe
United Kingdom
152 Posts |
Posted - 30 Jun 2008 : 12:08:12
|
quote:
Originally posted by Gwydion669
I'd rather be flayed, rolled in salt, and locked in a room for 24 hours with all my ex-fiances.
Ha. If your ex-fiances are anything like my ex-fiancees then I understand where you're coming from perfectly.
At this point I intend to complete my collection of pre-4e FR stuff and not go near 4e FR with a bargepole.
But then this is quite a common reaction it seems. |
|
|
|
TheLemming
Acolyte
Austria
16 Posts |
Posted - 01 Jul 2008 : 08:28:24
|
Well, after pre-ordering the gift-set for quite a long time, I have to vote yes - and I was joyfully looking forward to find at least some good ideas in this.
At the moment I'm more thinking about taking the very few good ideas in this, port them to 3.75 (Pathfinder) and return the 4th edition books once and for all to the shelves.
|
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 01 Jul 2008 : 22:13:09
|
I will admit that there is some very good ideas in them, but I also feel they "threw the baby out with the bath-water". It seems they got so caught-up in streamlining that they manage to suck much of the flavor right out of the game.
I was reading through some more of the stuff last night (mostly the MM), and I almost felt like I was reading a set of miniatures rules (which I am very familiar with, being a Warhammer & Warmachine gamer as well). The fact that boss creatures have 'auras' that effect all nearby units is SO much like a miniatures game it isn't even funny. Or even like a CCG - you play a certain card, and it 'bumps' all your other cards (I used to play MtG as well).
I'm thinking about doing a review of the 4e MM... even though the fluff was practically non-existant (there are NO explanations of what things look like, and not every creature has a pic!) I still found I like its design over-all, from a DM's point-of-view. The rules they can keep, but I am going to have to adapt a lot of the ease-of-use that is built into the new system.
|
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 01 Jul 2008 22:13:31 |
|
|
|
Varl
Learned Scribe
USA
284 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jul 2008 : 19:22:07
|
quote:
Originally posted by Aaron Highcolor
I don't like that almost all magic items are combat oriented (and yes, I know that they were trying to get away from characters being dependent on magic items, but hey), and that healing potions are useless when you are out of healing surges. I've read the arguments on the WotC board, and I still say that they are magic, that they should heal SOMETHING when used, even if there are no surges left. And yes, I know that they are trying to avoid the Wand of CLW hording that was prevalent in 3.X.
Horrible. They actually made a rule that says you can't drink a potion if you run out of these bizarre healing surges? Why? What rationale is given for that stroke of genius? That's got to be the most ridiculous rule I've ever heard of.
If they truly wanted to avoid the Wand of CLW hoardings problem, here's a thought: let the DM decide. I can't think of any greater sin in game design than to have a system that dictates precisely how many healing apparati a DM should make available to the characters because apparently DMs are unable to determine for themselves exactly how much healing magic they want in their games, so let's make a rule for it. Unbelievable.
They might as well have a good aligned deity slice the Goddess of Magic in two....oh wait. 
As for the thread topic, I think you can guess my purchasing choice. |
I'm on a permanent vacation to the soul. -Tash Sultana |
Edited by - Varl on 07 Jul 2008 19:23:01 |
|
|
|
Talwyn
Learned Scribe
Australia
222 Posts |
Posted - 16 Jul 2008 : 00:35:20
|
A definate no from me on 4E.
I have an excellent collection of 1st & 2ndEd. material as well as a building collection of 3.5 now. Since 4E has reared its ugly head, its had a unexpected but welcome side effect in that all 3 & 3.5 items are suddenly very cheap and I'm taking full advantage of this and I suggest other players & DM's here do as well if you are not go to take the plunge into the cesspit that is 4E.
My main complaint with 4E is how it completely destroyed what was a vibrant, alive and wonderfully thought out fantasy setting. Downsizing the number of deities by three quarters and completly changing the nature of magic in order to fit into a new game system is like putting a dead horse behind a broken cart then flogging it to get signs of movement. I also generally resent the loss of books on principle now that much of the new source material will be online content. I love books and have an extensive library. I'm ok with PDF formats and use the PC to help in DM'ing however a PC or laptop isn't the sort of thing you can take tobed for a bit of light reading before you drift off into sleep and reams of loose sheets of paper are always annoying, even if stapled together.
I see 4E as not being D&D but rather a new game with the D&D logo slapped onto the front in order to help it sell. Lets face it, if it didn't have D&D on it, would anyone here really think about buying it?
From looking at the couple of polls here on CK regarding peoples attitude to buying 4E, it appesar that roughly 60 to 70% of folks aren't willing to shell out hard cash for this new system. That's bad news for WoTC that core fans of D&D and specifically FR are saying "NO WAY" to 4E. So this brilliant business strategy is appearing to be more like a petard which WoTC are busily hoisting themselves on. How long then is the fuse and when will it blow up in their faces is the next question? 
Personally, I really do not understand why they had to eviscerate FR to introduce a new game system? Surely they would have suspected that most of the core FR fans would be incensed and would react negetively to their new product? Whatever  
To me 4E is re-inventing the wheel, a pointless, unnecesarry and expensive exercise in futility. We didn't need it nor was it asked for by the gaming community. If WoTC wanted to bring out a new game system, that's their perogative but they should have done a dam site more market research before foisting this cart load of manure on us.
It would have shown them in raw data that 2/3rds of gamers aren't keen on it and it'd only upset and annoy many of them. Again I'm astounded by this really shoddy business decision which seems to ignore a lot of really vital points such as it will be unpopular with their core market. The cynic in me though believes that whatever suited monkey who thought up this nightmare will no doubt receive their massive bonus from the parent corporation even though they've crippled the goose that lays golden eggs.
|
Over the centuries, mankind has tried many ways of combating the forces of evil...prayer, fasting, good works and so on.
Up until Doom, no one seemed to have thought about the double-barrel shotgun.
EAT LEADEN DEATH DEMON!
Terry Pratchett
|
|
|
|
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Great Reader
USA
7106 Posts |
Posted - 16 Jul 2008 : 17:55:29
|
I've said this before, and I hope no one minds that I'm going to say it again.
If 4E is a totally different game and "D&D" in name only, does it also follow that the same was true for 3E? That system was also pretty different from 2E and the other editions that came before it. And I know for a fact (having taken a look at some very old internet posts) that people decried 3E when it came out and claimed that it was no longer D&D.
Please keep in mind that I'm only discussing the ruleset here (not the FR setting), and I'm also trying to be objective (even though I do like 4E rules). |
"Instead of asking why we sleep, it might make sense to ask why we wake. Perchance we live to dream. From that perspective, the sea of troubles we navigate in the workaday world might be the price we pay for admission to another night in the world of dreams."
--Richard Greene (letter to Time) |
|
|
|
Hawkins
Great Reader
USA
2131 Posts |
Posted - 16 Jul 2008 : 18:37:40
|
quote:
Originally posted by Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Please keep in mind that I'm only discussing the ruleset here (not the FR setting), and I'm also trying to be objective (even though I do like 4E rules).
If for nothing else, much of the flavor of monsters and the cosmology were changed in 4e (I too am just talking about the core, and not about FR). |
Errant d20 Designer - My Blog (last updated January 06, 2016)
One, two! One, two! And through and through
The vorpal blade went snicker-snack!
He left it dead, and with its head
He went galumphing back. --Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking-Glass
"Mmm, not the darkness," Myrin murmured. "Don't cast it there." --Erik Scott de Bie, Shadowbane
* My character sheets (PFRPG, 3.5, and AE versions; not viewable in Internet Explorer)
* Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Reference Document (PFRPG OGL Rules)
* The Hypertext d20 SRD (3.5 OGL Rules)
* 3.5 D&D Archives
My game design work:
* Heroes of the Jade Oath (PFRPG, conversion; Rite Publishing)
* Compendium Arcanum Volume 1: Cantrips & Orisons (PFRPG, designer; d20pfsrd.com Publishing)
* Compendium Arcanum Volume 2: 1st-Level Spells (PFRPG, designer; d20pfsrd.com Publishing)
* Martial Arts Guidebook (forthcoming) (PFRPG, designer; Rite Publishing)
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Will you buy the 4th Ed.?
