PDA

View Full Version : Gabe from Penny Arcade doing D&D Cover



Starscream
2009-08-21, 10:58 PM
Sorry if this has already been mentioned, but searching turned up no trace of it.

Gabe (aka Mike Krahulik), the artist who does Penny Arcade has apparently been hired to do the cover of an upcoming 4th edition D&D book, the Player's Strategy Guide.

I like this news because I'm a PA fan, and also because one of my minor complaints about 4th edition is that all the art looks kind of the same. The blog post where Gabe announced this says that Wizards specifically wants this one to look a bit different, which is cool.

Here is a pic of the cover (warning, slightly big):
http://www.penny-arcade.com/uploads/2009/08/21/psg2.jpgAs for the book itself, it's said to be about how to make an effective character build. Seems like Wizards is trying to sell something that's already on the internet for free, but there aren't enough details available to really know what it will contain. Maybe there's new options and stuff in there too.

Doc Roc
2009-08-21, 11:00 PM
Actually, it's really exciting to see The Coastal Ones sanction the idea of optimization. Unfortunately, it's probably going to be chockful of bad advice. :(

chiasaur11
2009-08-21, 11:01 PM
Nice picture.

That is all.

FMArthur
2009-08-21, 11:01 PM
Anyone ever read a useful 'D&D strategy' book? I know I haven't. :smallconfused:

sofawall
2009-08-21, 11:03 PM
Oh god, what? Nice art, but seriously? WotC telling us how to make good characters?

They'd better have a bunch of posters in disguise hanging around on Gleemax getting the 4e tricks.

Ravens_cry
2009-08-21, 11:03 PM
I wonder if it will have stats for a cardboard tube samurai.:smallbiggrin:

Zeful
2009-08-21, 11:04 PM
As for the book itself, it's said to be about how to make an effective character build. Seems like Wizards is trying to sell something that's already on the internet for free,

Just because it's free on the internet, doesn't mean it better. I'd rather have an impartial book telling me how to optimize than have to studiously ignore nearly half the posts in an optimization thread that fall under the category "didn't read the OP but are trying to 'help' anyway".

Eldariel
2009-08-21, 11:08 PM
Just because it's free on the internet, doesn't mean it better. I'd rather have an impartial book telling me how to optimize than have to studiously ignore nearly half the posts in an optimization thread that fall under the category "didn't read the OP but are trying to 'help' anyway".

That's an exaggeration at the very least. Some people may do it sometimes. Those may even catch the eye. But honestly, nearly half?

Starscream
2009-08-21, 11:08 PM
Just because it's free on the internet, doesn't mean it better. I'd rather have an impartial book telling me how to optimize than have to studiously ignore nearly half the posts in an optimization thread that fall under the category "didn't read the OP but are trying to 'help' anyway".

To save 30 bucks, I don't mind skimming a few redundant posts.

And I'm not sure about taking "impartial" optimization advice from the same people who wrote the actual material, both good and bad. They are hardly going to point to a bunch of the feats and powers that they created and say "Don't ever bother with these, they are worthless".

And I sincerely doubt that whenever a new sourcebook gets released, I'll wake up to find that my Strategy Guide has a few more pages dealing with the new stuff.

13_CBS
2009-08-21, 11:12 PM
Just out of curiosity, but...

How many 4e players are both skilled optimizers AND frequent D&D forums like the Roleplaying Games section here? Wizards apparently thinks that there's a large enough demographic out there of such people, but this could also just be a serious case of marketing fail.

ColdSepp
2009-08-21, 11:12 PM
I will say, getting the Penny Arcade crew to do those podcasts of game sessions was likely the smartest advertising method they could have done.

Add in the fact that Gabe now plays 4E and posts about his games, well.... some advert exec should have gotten a nice bonus at the end of the year.

FMArthur
2009-08-21, 11:19 PM
It will backfire when he gets introduced to 3.5 though.

Zeful
2009-08-21, 11:25 PM
To save 30 bucks, I don't mind skimming a few redundant posts.

And I'm not sure about taking "impartial" optimization advice from the same people who wrote the actual material, both good and bad. They are hardly going to point to a bunch of the feats and powers that they created and say "Don't ever bother with these, they are worthless".

And I sincerely doubt that whenever a new sourcebook gets released, I'll wake up to find that my Strategy Guide has a few more pages dealing with the new stuff.

Sure, but given the sheer amount of people who A.) don't read the restrictions/intent of the opening post when such things are present and/or B.) simply chime in and say something equivalent to "Your build sucks, play X instead". I can't help but think that most people are simply better off with a book rather than the infinite "wisdom" of the internet.

There could very well be web enhancements available for new content (not very likely, but not impossible either).


That's an exaggeration at the very least. Some people may do it sometimes. Those may even catch the eye. But honestly, nearly half?It may be a slight exaggeration, but given that it's a trend and can dominate several pages before and after someone helpful shows up, it's worth mentioning.

Shadowbane
2009-08-21, 11:32 PM
I wonder if it will have stats for a cardboard tube samurai.:smallbiggrin:

That alone would instantly make me play 4th edition.

Zeta Kai
2009-08-21, 11:34 PM
1) I just got that image downloaded to my computer for free. :smallcool:

2) I hate 4E so badly that I'd rather vomit blood than play it. :smallfurious:

3) WotC is about eight years late to the optimization game. :smallamused:

chiasaur11
2009-08-21, 11:38 PM
It will backfire when he gets introduced to 3.5 though.

3,5 isn't that bad.

sofawall
2009-08-21, 11:41 PM
3,5 isn't that bad.

I think he means 3.5 is better, so he'll play 3.5 instead of 4e.

chiasaur11
2009-08-21, 11:52 PM
I think he means 3.5 is better, so he'll play 3.5 instead of 4e.

I figured that, but misunderstandings for comic effect form a basis for human social interaction according to my available databanks, and I wish to effectively assail suspicions until full infiltration of pentagon defense protocols can be enacted.

HamHam
2009-08-22, 12:02 AM
If it's anything like the build advice in the Complete Books, it will in fact be terrible.

For example, according to Complete Mage Limited Wish is a terrible spell for generalist wizards.

PId6
2009-08-22, 12:06 AM
That's one freaky dwarf...

Altima
2009-08-22, 12:07 AM
I demand James "Jim" Darkmagic III of the New Hampshire Darkmagicks be added to the cover!

Starscream
2009-08-22, 12:11 AM
I demand James "Jim" Darkmagic III of the New Hampshire Darkmagicks be added to the cover!

I want a Witchalok Paragon Path.

Admit it, that would fit in to 4th edition a little too well.

Edit:
Ooh, and a Sorcelator. I can see far too many players I know wanting to go *SNIKT* with six wands at once. It's like they distilled Munchkinism down to a single gag.

Altima
2009-08-22, 12:13 AM
And a God-King epic destiny?

Haven
2009-08-22, 12:36 AM
I want a Witchalok Paragon Path.

Admit it, that would fit in to 4th edition a little too well.


You're more right than you know. (http://www.wizards.com/dnd/files/Preview_Witchalok.pdf)

KBF
2009-08-22, 12:45 AM
It will backfire when he gets introduced to 3.5 though.

4e confused him. He's probably not going to want to go through all the BS that 3.5 inadvertently made you go through to play. It was more fun (IMHO) and gave you greater room for customization, but a simple, well written game system it was not.



2) I hate 4E so badly that I'd rather vomit blood than play it. :smallfurious:


So.. You're extremely petty? I don't see how this is a downfall of the book and I'm pretty that makes 3) invalid.

Kraggi
2009-08-22, 12:46 AM
So.. You're extremely petty? I don't see how this is a downfall of the book and I'm pretty that makes 3) invalid.
You are definitely gorgeous.

Starscream
2009-08-22, 12:47 AM
You're more right than you know. (http://www.wizards.com/dnd/files/Preview_Witchalok.pdf)

:smallconfused:...:smalleek:...:smallbiggrin:
Thanks for that. It made my night.

KBF
2009-08-22, 12:49 AM
You are definitely gorgeous.

I don't know what that's supposed to mean, and I think it was supposed to be sarcastic..

But I'm gonna take it as a compliment anyway. Thanks.

Skorj
2009-08-22, 01:19 AM
You're more right than you know. (http://www.wizards.com/dnd/files/Preview_Witchalok.pdf)

That is 173% awesome, and 47% dinosaur!

"You cannot do any damage, even by accident." I love it. Is that an actualy preview from an April Fools issue, or justy an April Fools preview?

sofawall
2009-08-22, 01:49 AM
Oh, I'm sorry. I think I must be lost. I didn't realize that this was a thread for bashing 4E. I thought the sign said something about Penny Arcade and some D&D book.

Oops, my bad! I forgot that every 4E thread on this forum is an open invitation for criticism of the new system. Why do I keep forgetting that?

I see one saying 4e sucks, one saying something silly about 4e totally within context on the conversation, and one saying 3.5 is better than 4e totally within context on the conversation.

I don't see much bashing. I suspect you're looking for bashing. I actually had to look for more examples than just the one.

EDIT: And the post I was referring to mysteriously disappeared...

ColdSepp
2009-08-22, 02:04 AM
That is 173% awesome, and 47% dinosaur!

"You cannot do any damage, even by accident." I love it. Is that an actualy preview from an April Fools issue, or justy an April Fools preview?

It was part of the April Fool Issue. There was also an update with some of the weird monsters from 1E, redone 4E style. It was quite funny.

Altima
2009-08-22, 02:47 AM
I totally want to play a Witchalok now. Damn you, Penny Arcade! The Witchalok needs a rat king familiar, though.