4e-'Essentials' Preview.

[Asbestos]

Its an 'Ampersand' article, so I'm not sure how much non-DDI people can see.

http://www.wizards.com/DND/Article.aspx?x=dnd/dramp/20100709

But, here's a snippet:
"Compatibility: The Essentials products aren’t a new version of the Dungeons & Dragons roleplaying game, though they do give us a chance to clean up and clarify a few things that have been causing issues the past two years. In the end, current players had to endure as few changes as possible. The only changes we embraced were ones that we would have implemented even if we were not producing the Essentials products. That’s why things like the new approach to racial stat modifiers appeared in Player’s Handbook 3 and the higher monster damage appeared in Monster Manual 3. Regardless of the directions the Essentials products took, we wanted to implement these new approaches in the game.
Player Choice: Players had to feel they were making important, interesting choices at each step in the character creation process. From picking a class to choosing a feat, these decisions had to feel vivid and meaningful.
World Flavor: The character classes, powers, and other features had to have a place in the Dungeons & Dragons world. It is easy to divorce mechanics from any sort of grounding in the “reality” of the world. We wanted to avoid that by providing a context and logic that underscored the options we were presenting.”

and, the new Cleric, its a lot like the old cleric. And by 'old' I mean 'Pre-4e'.

"CLASS TRAITS
Hit Points: You start with hit points equal to 12 + your Constitution score. You gain 5 hit points each time you gain a level.
Bonus to Defenses: +1 to Fortitude, +1 to Will
Healing Surges per Day: 7 + your Constitution modifier
Armor Proficiencies: Cloth, leather, hide, chainmail; light shield, heavy shield
Weapon Proficiencies: Simple melee, simple ranged
Implement Proficiencies: Holy symbols
Class Skills: Arcana (Int), Diplomacy
(Cha), Heal (Wis), History (Int), Insight
(Wis), Religion (Int)

Heroic Warpriest

In the heroic tier, your abilities as a warpriest focus on directing the magic offered by your domain. You learn to call down new effects as your mastery increases.

Warpriest Heroic Tier
Total XP Level Feats
Known Class Features and Powers
0 1 1 Healing word Domain features Channel divinity powers Daily power
1,000 2 1 Utility power
2,250 3 — Domain encounter power
3,750 4 1 Ability score increase Holy cleansing
5,500 5 — Domain feature Daily power
7,500 6 1 Utility power
10,000 7 — Domain encounter power
13,000 8 1 Ability score increase Resurrection
16,500 9 — Daily power
20,500 10 1 Domain feature Utility power"

The 'Warpriest' is 'Wis/Con' instead of anything Str based.

So, is this the new 'Cleric' is the PHB1 essentially trash? I'm confused by this.

[Asbestos]

Or perhaps these are just 'alternative classes'?

"Compatibility

As you can see, we made a number of changes in our approach to class design. At the same time, we placed compatibility as our number one goal. This arrangement forced us to take a path that allowed us to add new design to the game without replacing existing classes. We decided that introducing new variations of existing character classes was the best way to meet that goal.

In the Essentials products, we’re introducing new variations of the core classes in a manner similar to sub-classes from older editions of the game. The easiest way to explain the concept is to show an example.

There are two new types of fighters, the slayer and the knight, in the Essentials products. The slayer is a heavily armored defender whose two-handed weapon attacks let the class lean into the space normally occupied by the striker. The knight, on the other hand, is entirely the selfless defender who protects the weak and innocent from marauding monsters.

As fighters, the slayer and the knight can both take feats, powers, and abilities that require the fighter character class. However, they also have class features and unique powers that other fighters cannot take. The rules for sorting this out are simple. If a class gives you a power that has a level in its stat block, you can swap that power for one of the same type (at-will, encounter, daily, or utility) and the same or lower level. If the power doesn’t have a level, you can’t swap it for a different power.

The great thing about this approach is that it allows us to build character classes that feel unique when compared to other options. We can mold sub-groups of powers to allow a new type within a class to fill a different role or embrace mechanics that highlight the unique features of a specific setting or genre.

With these rules in hand, we designed classes that fit within the story and conceptual framework of our existing classes while stretching the mechanical limits we had previously worked under. I’ll be showing you examples of these classes through the summer, starting with the cleric at the end of this column."
So confused.

[Zen Master]

Ok, so ... just 10 books, eh, and then you're set to go?

This is my most solemn oath: I vow to never again spend money on a WoTC product.

[Touchy]

How about wait and see before over-reacting?

[Maeglin_Dubh]

Or use Microlite20.

Ran a game tonight. No prep. NPC's take 3 minutes to write up.

Combat, including grappling, multiple times, took about ten minutes.

And the condensed rulebook fits in your pocket.

[Touchy]

Or use Microlite20.

Ran a game tonight. No prep. NPC's take 3 minutes to write up.

Combat, including grappling, multiple times, took about ten minutes.

And the condensed rulebook fits in your pocket.

Advertising doesn't do any good, it just starts arguments.

Edit: And grappling isn't complicated in 4e, so you really can't use that argument like 3.5.

[Hyooz]

Or use Microlite20.

Ran a game tonight. No prep. NPC's take 3 minutes to write up.

Combat, including grappling, multiple times, took about ten minutes.

And the condensed rulebook fits in your pocket.

Even better: Play RISUS.

Character gen takes seconds. Combats a few minutes, and the whole rulebook fits on an index card. 3x5 even.

[Reynard]

How about wait and see before over-reacting?

Reasonable behavior? On the internet? Madness, madness I say.


So confused.

Really? Seems like they made class variants (or possibly pre-made builds) that fit character archetypes. Kind of like what people already do using careful selection of powers and class features, but now it's been done for them.

[Zen Master]

How about wait and see before over-reacting?

Overreact? I've never bought 10 books for any of the numerous systems I've owned over the years.

But it's mainly rhetorical. I have the 4e core books, and 4e is the absolute pits - it is without comparison the worst roleplaying system I ever mistakenly spent money on.

[Touchy]

Overreact? I've never bought 10 books for any of the numerous systems I've owned over the years.

But it's mainly rhetorical. I have the 4e core books, and 4e is the absolute pits - it is without comparison the worst roleplaying system I ever mistakenly spent money on.
Then... why did you buy 10 books?

[Ravens_cry]

I don't play 4E, so it hardly matters, but would you people call this 4.5 or more Dungeons and Dragons Basic Set-Fourth Edition?

[Kurald Galain]

Heroic Warpriest
Strangely enough, the whole warpriest doesn't strike me as all that different from the PHB1 cleric in 4E. I don't really get the point of 4Ess so far, except as marketing hype.

It seems that instead of rituals, you get holy cleansing and resurrection abilities (which, at a wild guess, will duplicate the effects of the remove condition and raise dead rituals) and your level-3 and level-7 encounter powers are preselected based on your domain. I suppose this might make character creation a bit easier because you get less choices?



Edit: And grappling isn't complicated in 4e,
That's because grappling doesn't exist in 4E.

[Touchy]

Strangely enough, the whole warpriest doesn't strike me as all that different from the PHB1 cleric in 4E. I don't really get the point of 4Ess so far, except as marketing hype.

It seems that instead of rituals, you get holy cleansing and resurrection abilities (which, at a wild guess, will duplicate the effects of the remove condition and raise dead rituals) and your level-3 and level-7 encounter powers are preselected based on your domain. I suppose this might make character creation a bit easier because you get less choices?


That's because grappling doesn't exist in 4E.

They have "Grapple" they just call it Grab, it's much more simple, you make a strength check versus reflex, they fail their grabbed, they can escape using either a skill check athletics(Versus your fort), or Acrobatics.(Versus your reflex)
Infact, the brawling fighter build in MP2 gets alot of grabs due to their powers granting it to them.

Unless you want to argue that Grabbing isn't grappling, in which case, I won't fight because it'd take 5 pages.

[Kurald Galain]

They have "Grapple" they just call it Grab, it's much more simple, you make a strength check versus reflex.
Yeah, I know how it works, but it isn't grappling. All it does is immobilize the target (except if they can teleport); it doesn't prone them, disable them, prevent spellcasting, or hamper them in attacking like you would expect grappling to.

[Touchy]

I don't play 4E, so it hardly matters, but would you people call this 4.5 or more Dungeons and Dragons Basic Set-Fourth Edition?

Their advertising it as a basic set somewhat, they even have the retro-box art, they don't call it 4.5 so it's not really 4.5 to me, just revisions.

Also Kurald, arguing with you is very tempting, but I need my sleep. Can we agree to disagree?

[hamishspence]

I'm interested- primarily because of the Shadow classes- assassin, necromancer, hexblade.

Unless there will be a PHB4 that does them in full detail. So far the assassin's been DDI only- will it stay that way?

[Kurald Galain]

Their advertising it as a basic set somewhat, they even have the retro-box art, they don't call it 4.5 so it's not really 4.5 to me, just revisions.
I'm only tempted to use the term "4.5" because it's a lot shorter than "essentials". It's not the exact same thing as 3.5 was, but then 2.5 was not the exact same thing either.



Also Kurald, arguing with you is very tempting, but I need my sleep. Can we agree to disagree?
I don't agree to that :smallbiggrin:


Unless there will be a PHB4 that does them in full detail. So far the assassin's been DDI only- will it stay that way?
There are not, to my knowledge, plans for a PHB4, or indeed for Arcane/Divine/Primal Power 2, or for Adventurer's Vault 3. If I understand WOTC correctly, there are two or three "core 4E" books still in the queue, and every future book after that will be of the Essentials line.

[HMS Invincible]

Strangely enough, the whole warpriest doesn't strike me as all that different from the PHB1 cleric in 4E. I don't really get the point of 4Ess so far, except as marketing hype.

It seems that instead of rituals, you get holy cleansing and resurrection abilities (which, at a wild guess, will duplicate the effects of the remove condition and raise dead rituals) and your level-3 and level-7 encounter powers are preselected based on your domain. I suppose this might make character creation a bit easier because you get less choices?



It says any subclass can still choose any of the original powers of the same class. So the cleric still has access to all its powers, and those of the warpriest.
This is just an option instead of picking battle cleric or devoted cleric, like when martial power brought ruthless ruffian rogues. Each subclass gets their own special feats/powers/class features but they can still use generic rogue powers if they want.

You are right though, I don't see anything new, you're still learn powers at the same time as other classes. This is a disappointment compared to the PHB3 psionic classes. That had some innovation at least.



That's because grappling doesn't exist in 4E.
I'm very tempted to try to grapple someone in my 4e game now. Not grab, grapple. I'm thinking my DM will say I fail horribly and I get OAed for my trouble. He might turn it into a mini-skill challenge if he was feeling generous though.

[Zen Master]

Then... why did you buy 10 books?

Which part of 'I've never bought 10 books for any of the numerous systems I've owned over the years' do you want me to explain further?

[Kurald Galain]

Which part of 'I've never bought 10 books for any of the numerous systems I've owned over the years' do you want me to explain further?
Although to be fair you won't need ten books for essentials, either. Of the ten main products listed for essentials, three are tile sets, one is a dice set, one is the compilation Red Box, and one is called the DM's Kit which may well be a DM screen or something.

That does leave you with the essentials equivalent of PHB1, PHB2, DMG/Rules Compendium, and MM. Four books, with a fifth (PHB3) planned.

I'm not sure how that's supposed to work: perhaps instead of one big PHB (containing eight classes and rules), they'll have three small ones (two containing four classes each, and one rules compendium)?

[Kurald Galain]

Some more tidbits,

* They're going to use monster tokens (i.e. small round pieces of cardboard) either alongside or instead of miniatures. Come to think of it, there don't seem to be any minis planned on the essentials line, and the PHB Minis series is defunct, too.

* There will be a kind of character that doesn't get daily powers.

* There are intended to be classes that are easier to play than a PHB1 standard, and other classes that are more difficult to play; just like how in earlier editions, a fighter is more straightforward to play than a wizard. I'm not sure how they seek to accomplish this, though, and it is already the case in the 4E PHB1 that a ranger is more straightforward than a warlock, anyway.

[Zen Master]

Although to be fair you won't need ten books for essentials, either. Of the ten main products listed for essentials, three are tile sets, one is a dice set, one is the compilation Red Box, and one is called the DM's Kit which may well be a DM screen or something.

That does leave you with the essentials equivalent of PHB1, PHB2, DMG/Rules Compendium, and MM. Four books, with a fifth (PHB3) planned.

I'm not sure how that's supposed to work: perhaps instead of one big PHB (containing eight classes and rules), they'll have three small ones (two containing four classes each, and one rules compendium)?

Ah - my bad. So it's more a case of marketing their own merchandise than an plan to build the system so 10 books are actually required.

Actually, this doesn't do much to change the fact that I feel WoTC are trying to screw me over. Which again doesn't change my vow to never buy their products again.

[zugschef]

i can't believe, that wotc is really so bold to do the exact same thing, which they apologized for when introducing 4E, again, with the only difference, that they didn't even wait 3 years, as it was the case with 3E.

i personally was pretty sure that they would rather introduce 5E than an update for 4E. but in the end it doesn't change the fact, that i was right to ignore 4E, because i was sure, that it wouldn' last very long. maybe i'll give 4Ess a try. maybe. probably not.^^

[hamishspence]

All the old stuff will still function (without requiring modifications, as 3.0 content did).

It's closer to the Players Option books in 2nd ed, sometimes nicknamed "2.5" than 3.5 was when compared to 3.0.

[BobVosh]

Ah - my bad. So it's more a case of marketing their own merchandise than an plan to build the system so 10 books are actually required.
I can't fault them for that. Although I really want to, simply because of how I feel about 4ed.


Actually, this doesn't do much to change the fact that I feel WoTC are trying to screw me over. Which again doesn't change my vow to never buy their products again.

What about when/if WotC makes 5ed?

[FelixG]

Some more tidbits,

* They're going to use monster tokens (i.e. small round pieces of cardboard) either alongside or instead of miniatures. Come to think of it, there don't seem to be any minis planned on the essentials line, and the PHB Minis series is defunct, too.

WoTC's next marketing campaign:

"Now from Wizards: Dungeons and Dragons 4e: The board game! Its still an RPG honest! Please give us money...please?"

In all honesty when i first picked up 4e i thought it was a joke and it struck me as a boardgame for people who want to just pick something up and go than a true RPG.... So it leads me to wonder why they are trying to reup the same system that seems to be failing to win over alot of supporters than get cracking on the next (read: good) edition of DnD?

[Kurald Galain]

"Now from Wizards: Dungeons and Dragons 4e: The board game! Its still an RPG honest! Please give us money...please?"
There actually is a D&D boardgame being produced, yes.


So it leads me to wonder why they are trying to reup the same system that seems to be failing to win over alot of supporters than get cracking on the next (read: good) edition of DnD?
Because it is more profitable to get new players into the D&D franchise, than to retain those players familiar with earlier editions. The former group is simply much, much bigger.

Besides, everybody and their grandma has a different opinion on this. You can find literally any permutation of "I [love/hate/am indifferent about] 4E because it is [similar to/different from/the exact opposite of] that older game [1E/2E/3E/GURPS/WOD/FATAL] that I used to [play/ignore/burn the books of/meet my first girlfriend in]".

[Fortuna]

"I [love/hate/am indifferent about] 4E because it is [similar to/different from/the exact opposite of] that older game [1E/2E/3E/GURPS/WOD/FATAL] that I used to [play/ignore/burn the books of/meet my first girlfriend in]".

The idea of using that construction in referencing meeting one's first girlfriend is... disturbing.

[Xallace]

The idea of using that construction in referencing meeting one's first girlfriend is... disturbing.

It's Edition War Mad Libs!

[Fortuna]

It's just the 'used to meet my first girlfriend in' bit. I wouldn't bat an eyelid at 'met myfirst girlfriend in'.

[hamishspence]

There actually is a D&D boardgame being produced, yes.

I have pleasant memories of playing the old Dungeon boardgame when I was young. It may have been simple, but it was fun.

[FelixG]

Lawl @ the FATAL reference

[Draz74]

There are not, to my knowledge, plans for a PHB4, or indeed for Arcane/Divine/Primal Power 2, or for Adventurer's Vault 3. If I understand WOTC correctly, there are two or three "core 4E" books still in the queue, and every future book after that will be of the Essentials line.

If that's true, it really shoots the "this isn't 4.5e!" claim in the face. (Yeah, I understand that older 4e material is still valid ... but that just means 4e to 4.5e is a more backwards-compatible change than 3e to 3.5e. It's still a half-edition change IMO.)

[Kaiyanwang]

If that's true, it really shoots the "this isn't 4.5e!" claim in the face. (Yeah, I understand that older 4e material is still valid ... but that just means 4e to 4.5e is a more backwards-compatible change than 3e to 3.5e. It's still a half-edition change IMO.)

I dare you to say it on the WotC boards :smalltongue:

[Zeta Kai]

They're going to use monster tokens (i.e. small round pieces of cardboard) either alongside or instead of miniatures. Come to think of it, there don't seem to be any minis planned on the essentials line, and the PHB Minis series is defunct, too.

I find this interesting, as it sounds like they are gradually withdrawing support for the miniatures line. IIRC, one of the big reasons that 4E ended up the way that it did is because minis were the most profitable part of the entire 3E product line. My only guess is that this is no longer the case, so they are backing out.

If the above is true than 4E might have turned out very differently if they had waited a couple of years to release it. Ah, what could have been...

[senrath]

Well, I do know that they no longer give out free minis to the DMs that run Gameday events. Which I was disappointed to find out.

[Loren]

My read of the situation is that Essentials are supposed to be a "basic" version of 4E, which begs the questions as to whether an "advanced" version will be forth coming. My guess would be yes. By running three lines of 4E )essentials, core, and advanced) Wizards would be able to market to a wider range of tastes. While this is likely driven by a desire for profits (hence the additional merchandise) I don't think we should complain too much as we'll be getting more options to customize our characters/ games. The key to the success of such a move by wizards would be the interoperability between the variants. If they can integrate well they can function both as supplements and as standalone systems, making them appealing to a wider audience than if they only stood alone.
I've actually been arguing in favour of tokens for years. With the random packs of minis it is next to impossible for a DM to create a collection that will give them all the options they could want at the gaming table without buying an excessive number of minis or purchasing them from a secondary source. Wizards could assemble large box sets of minis to sell to DMs, but frankly, an appropriate set of minis to represent an MM (with multiples for minions) would still be very expensive. Cardboard tokens, however, would be very inexpensive to produce. As a result, Wizards could sell them at a healthy profit, produce large collections to give DMs flexible collections at a reasonable price, and unique sets could be sold along with other products, such as adventures, increasing their utility to the customer and thereby their retail value, and finally, they would be much easier to organize and store. It simply makes sense both for the company and for the players.
Minis are nicer though, and I think a market will continue for them (I certainly like having a small collection of them). However, they simply are not as well suited to a semi-free form RPG as other products.

[Kurald Galain]

My read of the situation is that Essentials are supposed to be a "basic" version of 4E, which begs the questions as to whether an "advanced" version will be forth coming. My guess would be yes. By running three lines of 4E )essentials, core, and advanced)

...Wizards would be competing against itself. This does not strike me as good business practice. Also, your hypothesis does not match up with the "future products" listing on the WOTC site.

[Mando Knight]

It's just the 'used to meet my first girlfriend in' bit.

"Hey, there, honey. I was just thinking of you, so I decided to pull out your old character sheet. Remember that time I accidentally spilled Coke on you? Yeah, of course you do. The stain's still right on you, isn't it?"

[Crow]

Haha, so instead of releasing a "4.5e", they are just going to gradually do pretty much the same thing and call it "essentials".

Funny.

[Kurald Galain]

Haha, so instead of releasing a "4.5e", they are just going to gradually do pretty much the same thing and call it "essentials".

Perhaps it is essential for their cashflow? :smalltongue:

All lame jokes aside, I think I'll just start calling it 4.4 for now, because I'm tired of typin' ou' th' wor' essentia'. And hey, if I call it 4.4 then nobody can accuse me of calling it 4.5!

[Kaiyanwang]

Haha, so instead of releasing a "4.5e", they are just going to gradually do pretty much the same thing and call it "essentials".

Funny.

Maybe time proves us wrong, but it was my first impression as well.

[tbarrie]

Ah - my bad. So it's more a case of marketing their own merchandise than an plan to build the system so 10 books are actually required.

Actually, this doesn't do much to change the fact that I feel WoTC are trying to screw me over. Which again doesn't change my vow to never buy their products again.

Well, it certainly shows that they're trying to sell you stuff. If your policy is never to buy anything from anybody who's trying to sell you something, I foresee difficulties.


...Wizards would be competing against itself. This does not strike me as good business practice. Also, your hypothesis does not match up with the "future products" listing on the WOTC site.

If all three "levels" work together as parts of the same game, then they're not really competing with themselves. And the product catalogue currently only extends a few months past the debut of the Essentials line, so it doesn't really tell us anything that it lists only Essentials products past the fall.


All lame jokes aside, I think I'll just start calling it 4.4 for now, because I'm tired of typin' ou' th' wor' essentia'. And hey, if I call it 4.4 then nobody can accuse me of calling it 4.5!

I've done the math, and it's clearly only version 4.29. (Based on previews, recalculation pending actual release)

[Bagelz]

first off, this is pretty much an excuse to sell more books without developing more more crunch.
This is not 4.5 any more than the X power lines were. You can think of these as extra arcane power/ martial power except not grouped by power source.
There will be some new gimmicky stuff (for example domain powers instead of encounter powers). But then again phb3 psionics changed the powers/leveling process, and noone accused that of being 4.5.
All this will do is make your character builder updates take longer.

~bagelz

[Maeglin_Dubh]

I'm personally ok with the whole token thing. I know I can't afford the money for miniatures, and tokens are a much better option for most of the gamers I know.

As for the rest, well... We don't really use much of the 4E splatbooks anyways, and we probably won't use these either.

[Thajocoth]

I'm not seeing how this is different. They're slowing down now that they've got all the basic content out. They're creating sample builds (that's all the Warpriest is... It's a Cleric with specific choices chosen.) They're reprinting the rules with the errata that they already made. They're applying a few little tweaks that they recently decided on (monsters deal more damage & you'll have a choice for one of your two racial stat bonuses). It's only a few books, some tilesets, and a bag of dice.

I'm not seeing how this is really a change to anything. It's really, more than anything, a lack of a change. Since it's release, 4e has had a constant flow of new stuff.

[Matthew]

Same old, same old. Good luck to them! I hope they come up with some good internal art to complement the cover. :smallbiggrin:

[Dragosai]

As a few people have said above the “essentials” product line is going to be the “basic” box set for 4E. All they (WOTC) are trying to do is re-package the way the release future products, get more players into the game, step 3 profit. People can call it whatever they want and all the ignorant people who never tried 4E or worse the ones that did but didn’t understand the rules will bitch and moan, which is sad because all they are really doing is turning new people to the hobby off. I can only hope that any “new” role players out there fully understand the utter cesspool that is the internet and its forums and make an educated choice in what rules they use to have endless hours of fun.

[Loren]

the write up for Heroes of the Forgotten Kingdoms states that "Each class comes with a set of new powers, class features, paragon paths, epic destinies, and more that beginning players can use to build the characters they want to play and experienced players can plunder for existing 4th Edition characters."
This sound to me more like it is intended to work along side existing 4E, whole providing a simpler option for new players. I really don't think this should be seen as an attempt to replace or even up date 4E.

A for a "4E advanced" not being in the upcoming roster. You are right, but not that Wizards tend to go through a yearly cycle. If a "4E advanced" is coming I'd expect it in the fall, taking up the same spot in the cycle that Essentials is in this year. If I was wizards I'd like to see feed back on essentials before committing to another similar concept.

On another note, the write up of another product has this line,

Gazetteer: The Nentir Vale provides the definitive guide to the Nentir Vale region, introduced in the D&D Starter Set and the Dungeon Master's Kit.

since the starter set and the DM's kit are essentials products it seems like essensials will be giving us a new standard setting.

[Gryffon]

There may not be an Advanced set coming out. But releases in the Spring definitely call back to the advanced rules released for AD&D 2nd edition. In march we'll see "Player's Option: Heroes of Shadow" featuring the print of the Assassin as well as the Hexblade and the Necromancer. Being as that's the only thing we know about it currently, it's hard to tell what exactly they mean by Player's Option, as opposed to making this a PHB4.

[Meta]

I dare you to say it on the WotC boards :smalltongue:

Done and done :smallamused:

But really this seems to be a reboot for 4e. Call it what you will, but the fact that essentials is pretty much all the release calendar is covered in is a good indicator this is WotC's priority.

They may develop it as backwards compatiable to avoid the angry mobs, but by not releasing any new non-essentials material they're definitely looking to make some bucks off this new line. And first and foremost WotC is a business and to my knowledge the subsequent 4e books were selling less and less.

[Gryffon]

And first and foremost WotC is a business and to my knowledge the subsequent 4e books were selling less and less.

The subsequent books were more and more specialized. I think by definition you're not going to sell as many. Who besides a DM needs the a book on Metallic dragons, or the Elemental Chaos. And out of those DMs, how many plan on taking their campaigns there?

[Crow]

I can only hope that any “new” role players out there fully understand the utter cesspool that is the internet and its forums and make an educated choice in what rules they use to have endless hours of fun.

Funny, as the talk going on in that "cesspool" a couple years ago, is exactly what spawned much of what 4th edition is today.

[Kaiyanwang]

As a few people have said above the “essentials” product line is going to be the “basic” box set for 4E. All they (WOTC) are trying to do is re-package the way the release future products, get more players into the game, step 3 profit. People can call it whatever they want and all the ignorant people who never tried 4E or worse the ones that did but didn’t understand the rules will bitch and moan, which is sad because all they are really doing is turning new people to the hobby off. I can only hope that any “new” role players out there fully understand the utter cesspool that is the internet and its forums and make an educated choice in what rules they use to have endless hours of fun.

You know, I hope that people make their choices looking at quality more than to the brand name.

And, YOU KNOW, there are people that don't like 4th edition because does not fit with their idea of D&D, not because didn't undestand the rules. :smallamused:

[Dragosai]

You know, I hope that people make their choices looking at quality more than to the brand name.

And, YOU KNOW, there are people that don't like 4th edition because does not fit with their idea of D&D, not because didn't undestand the rules. :smallamused:

Oh Kaiyanwang, I do know that. I am not questioning that at all, like I said people will play what they are having fun with and that’s how it should be. My remark was meant more for the 4th ED bashers as every post/comment/thread I have seen with people bashing 4th ED said people always seem to have no idea about what they speak and thus their arguments make little since and most times contradict what they are trying to say.

[Loren]

The change in purchasing probably also reflects the availiblity of player content via DDI. I think it is notable that the essentials books will be paper back. Basically, they'll be a cheap, easy way to get into the game and then players may be expected to subscribe to DDI. It seems to me that they are realizing that for many players physical copies of books are no longer as important as they were.

Question, will all books become paperback or just some books?

[Kaiyanwang]

Oh Kaiyanwang, I do know that. I am not questioning that at all, like I said people will play what they are having fun with and that’s how it should be. My remark was meant more for the 4th ED bashers as every post/comment/thread I have seen with people bashing 4th ED said people always seem to have no idea about what they speak and thus their arguments make little since and most times contradict what they are trying to say.

Aw,in this case, a chance of flamewar.. lost.

Nevermind :smallfrown:

:smallwink:

Roland, I'm joking.. put down that gun please..

[Tiki Snakes]

Just Re: Boardgame upcoming comments, I'm pretty sure I've seen a 3.5 boardgame version in my local gaming shop. I'm guessing there have been several at this point.

:smallsmile:

[Reverent-One]

I find this interesting, as it sounds like they are gradually withdrawing support for the miniatures line. IIRC, one of the big reasons that 4E ended up the way that it did is because minis were the most profitable part of the entire 3E product line. My only guess is that this is no longer the case, so they are backing out.

I've also read an article explaining that takes far more time to prepare the specific miniatures for an adventure they write than they have and also that there are customs issues with sending those miniature's internationally.

[Gralamin]

I'm not sure what to think of essentials yet. I definitely see why people would liken it to a 4.5, but we have essentially no information yet. I'm taking a wait and see approach.


They may develop it as backwards compatiable to avoid the angry mobs, but by not releasing any new non-essentials material they're definitely looking to make some bucks off this new line. And first and foremost WotC is a business and to my knowledge the subsequent 4e books were selling less and less.
Putting aside that, as far as I know, WOTC does not release sales figures, All subsequent books are expected to sell less and less. In general in the RPG market, each expansion book is expected to sell between 1/4 and 1/8th of the copies as the originals (And expansions of expansions even less so). Though this information is from a smaller company, so it might be different for someone as big as WotC.

At the same time, a lot of the materials in some of the less selling books appears in DDI. This is a good reason not to get a lot of those books if you have it. And a lot of people do, or buy it every few months for a large update.

[Tengu_temp]

Just Re: Boardgame upcoming comments, I'm pretty sure I've seen a 3.5 boardgame version in my local gaming shop. I'm guessing there have been several at this point.

:smallsmile:

Did it involve nailing them for 4 damage?

[Meta]

The subsequent books were more and more specialized. I think by definition you're not going to sell as many. Who besides a DM needs the a book on Metallic dragons, or the Elemental Chaos. And out of those DMs, how many plan on taking their campaigns there?

Nah, I mean like MP2 was less popular than MP, AV2 was less heralded than AV, etc. Same target audience, less bang for buck. DDI and Errata are the biggest reasons btw, not because WotC expects books to not sell well. That's just silly, they wouldn't waste their time

[Jackgar]

Ok, so ... just 10 books, eh, and then you're set to go?

This is my most solemn oath: I vow to never again spend money on a WoTC product.

You don't play Magic the Gathering then, I take it?

[Kurald Galain]

And we have a new preview for 4.4, this time of the wizard class.

Again, this is not a big difference from the 4.0 wizard, except that it hints at several things that aren't in the preview yet.

Like the cleric, he no longer gets ritual casting, so it's a safe bet that rituals are not considered "essential". Given that many people consider them a waste of space in 4.0 as well, this doesn't strike me as problematic.

The wizard no longer gets an implement mastery, but is instead allowed to "specialize" in one of three schools: evocation, enchantment, illusion. At a wild guess, each of those specializations is going to give an effect similar to what the implement masteries did (for instance, evocation => wand of accuracy, enchantment => orb of imposition, illusion => staff of defense), but will only work with spells of the correct school.

No more tomes. No reference to summon spells. Spellbooks and cantrips are still there. At-wills are different, and you get magic missile for free. Well, you got it for free in 4.0 anyway given how cheap master wands are.

(edit) oh, here's an interesting thought: stat-based rider effects appear to be gone. None of the new powers do things like "push equal to your wisdom mod" or "penalty equal to your cha mod", everything is simply a fixed number. Is this one of the things that makes 4.4 easier to play?

Overall, nothing here strikes me as a particular big deal.

[Zen Master]

What about when/if WotC makes 5ed?

I dunno ...

The way I'd love for it to be is this: WoTC makes a great system, then publishes add-ons like campaign worlds, adventures, and for what it's worth splat books - they can't hurt as long as I don't buy them.

Every once in a while, the system might need an update. So lets say every 10 years I'm required to replace .... pretty much everything. Fine by me.

The way it is, is this: WoTC makes a great system, then almost immediately publishes a reasonably unneeded but improved update. At the same time, they publish all sorts of things - almost all of which is of quite extraordinarily low quality. Then, alsmost immediately after the update, they completely reform the system into what I have no words to describe other than dungheap perhaps - and then almost immediately they issue another update.

This is an excellent strategy for making sure I spend no more money on their stuff.

5e? Give it some years, and if it's somehow better than 3.5, I might buy it. But WoTC has made sure that I'll look keenly for valid alternatives, before I consider buying it.

[BobTheDog]

(edit) oh, here's an interesting thought: stat-based rider effects appear to be gone. None of the new powers do things like "push equal to your wisdom mod" or "penalty equal to your cha mod", everything is simply a fixed number. Is this one of the things that makes 4.4 easier to play?

That specific power made me :smallconfused:. Is it just me or is it plain better than Thunderwave in most cases (as in, when you're not a Wis wiz)?

[Ormagoden]

I have the 4e core books, and 4e is the absolute pits - it is without comparison the worst roleplaying system I ever mistakenly spent money on.

But it's an awesome board game!

[Kurald Galain]

That specific power made me :smallconfused:. Is it just me or is it plain better than Thunderwave in most cases (as in, when you're not a Wis wiz)?
It is not always better: Thunderwave does a lot more damage, can be turned into a close burst with a cheap master wand, and has the tactical option that it can push your allies. Assuming a 14+ wis, I would prefer TWave myself, although YMMV. Note that wizards need decent (if not stellar) wis to qualify for certain feats anyway.

The size difference is less than it seems: that new power is 5x5, but TWave is 4x4 with Enlarge Spell (and honestly, does any wizard not take that?) and can be 5x5 with Resounding Thunder.

[Matthew]

Just Re: Boardgame upcoming comments, I'm pretty sure I've seen a 3.5 boardgame version in my local gaming shop. I'm guessing there have been several at this point.

:smallsmile:

Yes, indeed:

Dungeons & Dragons Basic Game (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/17804/dungeons-dragons-basic-game) (2004)
Dungeons & Dragons Fantasy Adventure Board Game (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/6366/dungeons-dragons-the-fantasy-adventure-board-game) (2003)
Dungeons & Dragons Adventure Game (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/18212/dungeons-dragons-adventure-game) (2000)

[HMS Invincible]

It is not always better: Thunderwave does a lot more damage, can be turned into a close burst with a cheap master wand, and has the tactical option that it can push your allies. Assuming a 14+ wis, I would prefer TWave myself, although YMMV. Note that wizards need decent (if not stellar) wis to qualify for certain feats anyway.

The size difference is less than it seems: that new power is 5x5, but TWave is 4x4 with Enlarge Spell (and honestly, does any wizard not take that?) and can be 5x5 with Resounding Thunder.

Counterpoint, the new spell targets enemies only. Which can either be a good or bad thing. Personally, I would pick the new spell early on, and then switch over to thunderwave as I got higher level.

[Nu]

The new spell also targets Will, which makes it much more likely to hit and more attractive to Crystal Orb users (though the damage bonus wouldn't apply) and has the psychic keyword, so it should work with Psychic Lock builds.

All in all, I think I'll be reserving judgment on these until we get more details on the scaling class features but I will say I like the new wizard powers.

[Kurald Galain]

The new spell also targets Will, which makes it much more likely to hit
Note that the difference between "targeting fort" and "targeting will" is vastly overstated on forums.

It's certainly a good power. It just isn't automatically better than Thunderwave.

[Nu]

Note that the difference between "targeting fort" and "targeting will" is vastly overstated on forums.

It's certainly a good power. It just isn't automatically better than Thunderwave.

While this may be the case, the front line fighters who are likely to be the ones that get in the wizard's face likely have lower Will than Fortitude. At least, I have found this to be true at lower levels. Targeting Will also gives it positive interaction with the Crystal Orb and certain paragon path features (Divine Oracle, Life Singer).

Though I agree that it's definitely not "automatically" more useful than Thunderwave. I can certainly see the reasons for favoring Thunderwave. I'm just happy there's an alternative to Thunderwave that's about as good for the wizards who choose to specialize heavily in Will-targeting illusion and/or psychic powers.

[Gralamin]

Currently, I'm starting to think Essentials is not a 4.4, but more of a 3.8. This bugs me for various reasons, but I'll keep watching it just in case.

[ninja_penguin]

Hum, sounds like I apparently had an entirely wrong idea of what the essentials were. I thought it was just a fully updated/errated reprinting of large portions of stuff. I was looking at getting the MM equivalent in the hopes of getting more monsters in the sexy MM3 format, but that was pretty much it. Everything else we've got is pretty much what we're keeping.

Oddly enough, it gives me a slightly better/different perspective on the 3.5/4e changes. I feel pretty set with 4e right now, and it's what we're playing, so I'd probably stick with it.

Although if this essentials stuff plays better online, it might sucker me into a core set.

[Kurald Galain]

And here is some more essential news about the upcoming 4.4 release!

According to a recent podcast, fighters and rangers (and possibly rogues) will not have daily powers any more. People were expecting them to get more encounter or at-will powers in exchange, but it turns out they don't. This is intended to make the classes easier to play.

Furthermore, certain classes will not have at-will powers, and just use basic attacks instead. Assumedly, class features will compensate for these changes.

[Kaiyanwang]

This last thing suggests that Gralamin may be right. This seems more a 3.9.

And is clearly not intended (at least mainly) for new players. Is intended for old players that didn't switched to 4th edition. Is not for call people in, is for call people back.

No warlord (martial healing oddities), wizard schools, no martial daylies..

And in the end, when seeing the red box image, I'm sure that I'm right.

[FelixG]

This last thing suggests that Gralamin may be right. This seems more a 3.9.

And is clearly not intended (at least mainly) for new players. Is intended for old players that didn't switched to 4th edition. Is not for call people in, is for call people back.

So it seems like they are finally starting to pay attention to how many people hate their new board game? Surprise surprise...

I wonder if they will try to buy the rights to PF next so that they can attempt to get the fan base back to their own company

[Matthew]

Arguably, listening to their online fan base is what got them into this mess. :smallbiggrin:

Seriously, though, this is an interesting development. Anecdotally, I was playing D20/4e the other night and I noticed my pregenerated Dark Sun Mul Brawler seemed to have very few powers.

[R. Shackleford]

I like 4e. :smallfrown:

I like the idea of options, and it was only a matter of time before things started getting weird and breaking the cookie-cutter mold that 4e has had since the start.

Honestly, as a DM, I don't care. 4e makes running combat easier which means I can focus on RP and junk.

As a player, nothing has been said about bards yet, so I really don't give too much of a damn until Bards get some more options.

Yes, I'm saying 4e Bards need more options. Especially the Half-Elf Bards. I demand five at-wills before paragon and nothing less!

Anyway, I guess its nice that WotC is trying to reclaim older players? Because it feels like in Magic right now, all they seem to be doing is driving them away.

[FelixG]

Arguably, listening to their online fan base is what got them into this mess. :smallbiggrin:

Seriously, though, this is an interesting development. Anecdotally, I was playing D20/4e the other night and I noticed my pregenerated Dark Sun Mul Brawler seemed to have very few powers.

As a Mod developer and helping with some other side work there is one thing i have come to trust and rely on:

The people who dont enjoy things are the ones that complain the loudest, the ones who enjoy things the way they are are busy playing the game.

Example: 2000 people could buy a game and be playing it, 200 of those 2000 HATE part of it, they go onto the forums and bitch up a storm about the stuff they hate, the other 1,800 are happily playing their game. The developers look at the boards and go "dear god, everyone posting hates X, lets fix X." then the 1,800 people who were happily enjoying their game that gets patched go 0.o at what those idiotic 200 complained about and got their way.

[Kurald Galain]

This last thing suggests that Gralamin may be right. This seems more a 3.9.
You know, I don't think that's really true.

There's no skill points. No vancian casting or scribing scrolls. No druidic animal companions or favored enemies. There's still martial encounter powers which have the same fluff issue as martial dailies do. No save-or-dies, save-or-loses, or long-lasting buff or debuff effects. No level adjustment races, or prestige classes. There are many fundamental things of 3E missing.


Anecdotally, I was playing D20/4e the other night and I noticed my pregenerated Dark Sun Mul Brawler seemed to have very few powers.
Low-level characters are like that. I find that once you've played a few level 5-10 characters, a level-1 character feels rather limited. Of course, that's pretty much true in every edition of D&D.


Yes, I'm saying 4e Bards need more options.
While you have a good point, they're unlikely to get them. There's no Arcane Power 2 planned, and no bard class planned for 4.4. This is actually worse for artificers, runepriests, and seekers, who didn't even make it into their first *power book.

Particularly fighters and wizards get lots and lots of extra support in Dragon magazine even if they don't necessarily need it. I suppose this is because those classes are much, much more iconic than a seeker or runepriest.

[Matthew]

As a Mod developer and helping with some other side work there is one thing i have come to trust and rely on:

The people who don't enjoy things are the ones that complain the loudest, the ones who enjoy things the way they are are busy playing the game.

Example: 2000 people could buy a game and be playing it, 200 of those 2000 HATE part of it, they go onto the forums and bitch up a storm about the stuff they hate, the other 1,800 are happily playing their game. The developers look at the boards and go "dear god, everyone posting hates X, lets fix X." then the 1,800 people who were happily enjoying their game that gets patched go 0.o at what those idiotic 200 complained about and got their way.

Exactly so.



Low-level characters are like that. I find that once you've played a few level 5-10 characters, a level-1 character feels rather limited. Of course, that's pretty much true in every edition of D&D.

Well, I was playing a level one enlightened ardent the time before that, which is what I was comparing it to. :smallwink:

[Kaiyanwang]

You know, I don't think that's really true.

There's no skill points. No vancian casting or scribing scrolls. No druidic animal companions or favored enemies. There's still martial encounter powers which have the same fluff issue as martial dailies do. No save-or-dies, save-or-loses, or long-lasting buff or debuff effects. No level adjustment races, or prestige classes. There are many fundamental things of 3E missing.


See, maybe you are right about this for the sake of the "edition number" (say, 3.8 vas 4.4 vs (2^e)4/5x).

But, you just listed things that people complained about, but for 3rd edition. Long lasting buffs mainly, maybe (and the mess of high levels). Less about favored enemy (but was the mechanic of the "sucky" ranger).

Smells like "looking backward but have no fear, really bad mechanics you complained about are FOREVER gone".

And per encounter martial moves (maybe) can be "explained" better.. Tome of Battle comes in my mind. Just think about how they said how much was of inspiration for 4th in Races and Classes (debatable).


Just another thing: 1st level char ARE limited. And this is just right. Assumong that both players and DM are not newbies, you have to build up story and world, as well as interation between players that, being humans, you never know what can happen. Better keep things simple and face these complication when the campaign begins.

If you want moar dakka at start, start the campaing levels later. But a starting point with less things is vital for this kind of games. IMO, of course.

[Xallace]

And per encounter martial moves (maybe) can be "explained" better.. Tome of Battle comes in my mind. Just think about how they said how much was of inspiration for 4th in Races and Classes (debatable).

You think the Martial Encounter powers will be rechargable, like in Tome of Battle? That would certainly give the Martial Power source a shtick. And honestly I was hoping for some larger differentiation between the sources.

[Kurald Galain]

But, you just listed things that people complained about, but for 3rd edition.
I don't think I did. I don't believe that "skill points, vancian casting, scribing scrolls, druidic animal companions, favored enemies" are things frequently complained about.



Smells like "looking backward but have no fear, really bad mechanics you complained about are FOREVER gone".
But there are also mechanics that aren't complained about, but are gone anyway, such as those long-lasting buffs. There are also mechanics that are complained about a lot, but don't appear to be leaving any time soon. It remains to be seen whether 4.4 will contain e.g. power points, skill challenges, or rituals, just to name a few mechanics frequently complained about.

Overall I get that WOTC's marketing department really wants everybody to see a correlation between mechanics complained about, and mechanics removed in future editions; but I don't see much of this correlation in practice.


You think the Martial Encounter powers will be rechargable, like in Tome of Battle?
No, I don't. I think the Martial shtick will be class features that enhance their basic attack. The Arcane shtick appears to be half damage on a miss, and the Divine shtick appears to be healing. Primal and Psionic power source do not appear to be planned for 4.4, although Shadow is.

[Kaiyanwang]

I don't think I did. I don't believe that "skill points, vancian casting, scribing scrolls, druidic animal companions, favored enemies" are things frequently complained about.

I can see for scribing scrolls.. and I already said that FE was a part of the old ranger.

But seems to me that a lot of people praised the 1/2 level thing for skills.. maybe I'm wrong. Part of the "brokennes" of druid was the animal companion added to a lot of other things, so you can keep people (mainly, the current 4th fanbase) quiet not re-introducing it. Or at least, designers could have tought this (pure speculation, of course).

And, both here and in ENworld, I've seen people complain about Vancian Casting haveing no sense, being out-of-date, and the like. Maybe I perceived the criticisms as more diffuse than they are, of course.



But there are also mechanics that aren't complained about, but are gone anyway, such as those long-lasting buffs. There are also mechanics that are complained about a lot, but don't appear to be leaving any time soon. It remains to be seen whether 4.4 will contain e.g. power points, skill challenges, or rituals, just to name a few mechanics frequently complained about.

I'm sure it was not the only thing in your mind, but seems to me that long lasting buffs were seen as problematic, expecially if you had to re-calculate the whole party stats once the BBEG debuffed with an area dispel.



Overall I get that WOTC's marketing department really wants everybody to see a correlation between mechanics complained about, and mechanics removed in future editions; but I don't see much of this correlation in practice.


You know the 4th far better than me. I just trust more of your opinion than mine in this specific topic.


You think the Martial Encounter powers will be rechargable, like in Tome of Battle? That would certainly give the Martial Power source a shtick. And honestly I was hoping for some larger differentiation between the sources.

I don't think so.. expecially becasue they said "more simple". A recharge mechanic ntroduce complexity. I just said that encounter powers are more explainable hand have +2 save vs nerdrage* because of ToB precedent. Nothing else.


*Not intended to mock someone in particular. Reading my usual complaints about 3rd and 4th (even if different), you could think that I'm always in state of NERDRAGEEE :smallwink:

[Eldan]

Actually, I always thought the 1/2 level thing for skills was one of the most nonsensical things in 4E. Why is the archmage better at acrobatics than the first level rogue?

Of course, I'm also about the only person in the world who thinks that vancian casting is both cool and fluff-appropriate, so I might be wrong.

[Xallace]

No, I don't. I think the Martial shtick will be class features that enhance their basic attack.

Certainly makes sense.


I just said that encounter powers are more explainable hand have +2 save vs nerdrage* because of ToB precedent. Nothing else.

Oh, sorry; that was the "general You" I used instead of the "specific You." I was just thinking out loud. :smallsmile:

[Zombimode]

Actually, I always thought the 1/2 level thing for skills was one of the most nonsensical things in 4E. Why is the archmage better at acrobatics than the first level rogue?

As I understand, he isnt. Because DCs are raised by 1/2 level too, making the skill increase pretty pointless in the first place.

[Kaiyanwang]

Of course, I'm also about the only person in the world who thinks that vancian casting is both cool and fluff-appropriate, so I might be wrong.

You are not alone, man. Not that I disike other sub-systems, quite the opposite. But you are definitively not alone.



Oh, sorry; that was the "general You" I used instead of the "specific You." I was just thinking out loud. :smallsmile:

Of course. Sorry if I seemd upseto or the like. I was not. Have patience, english is not my native language, I struggle sometimes to find the right tone :smallwink:

[kjones]

As I understand, he isnt. Because DCs are raised by 1/2 level too, making the skill increase pretty pointless in the first place.

Is that how it works? So for a level 1 rogue, climbing up the wall is DC 15, but for the level 30 wizard, climbing the same wall is DC 30?

[Tiki Snakes]

Is that how it works? So for a level 1 rogue, climbing up the wall is DC 15, but for the level 30 wizard, climbing the same wall is DC 30?

Not as such. The idea is that by the time you've got to level 30, you're not just hopping over a garden fence anymore, trying to overcome a significantly more hardcore bit of walling.

[Tehnar]

Actually, I always thought the 1/2 level thing for skills was one of the most nonsensical things in 4E. Why is the archmage better at acrobatics than the first level rogue?

Of course, I'm also about the only person in the world who thinks that vancian casting is both cool and fluff-appropriate, so I might be wrong.

2 thumbs up for this.

[Oracle_Hunter]

Is that how it works? So for a level 1 rogue, climbing up the wall is DC 15, but for the level 30 wizard, climbing the same wall is DC 30?
I guess this is still a misconception people have?

4e skills are calculated as follows:
Ability Score + Training (+0 or +5) + 1/2 LV

Skill Checks come in two forms:
- Static (e.g. climbing a wall)
- Scaling (e.g. convinving a guard)

PCs get better are dealing with their surroundings as they level. So a 20th Lv Fighter isn't going to fail to clear a 5' pit. Heck, even the 20th Lv Wizard who has literally been to Hell and Back has picked up enough from the School of Hard Knocks to be able to clear that same pit.

However, some things do become more difficult even as the PC improves. It's harder to hit a Lv 20 Fighter than it is to hit a Lv 1 Fighter even if all he has is a pair of pants. It is also harder to convine a King to send an army than it is to entice a barwench into a roll in the hay.

[BlckDv]

Is that how it works? So for a level 1 rogue, climbing up the wall is DC 15, but for the level 30 wizard, climbing the same wall is DC 30?

A straight forward reading of pg. 42 and it's surroundings in the 4e DMG certainly promote this view. Tasks are rated Easy Moderate and Hard, and then given a sliding DC based on rating and level. Now, I think it is well within the intended scope of a DMs powers in 4e to take the reading that climbing a given wall is a Moderate or Hard task for a level 1 PC, but an Easy task for a level 20+, making it a relatively easier check, but still a harder objective DC for the level 20 than the level 1.

There are exceptions, with Athletics (Jumping) being a key one, as the distance you jump is a direct "numbers go up" formula based on your skill check, up to cap, meaning a level 30 scrawny mage can likely jump further than a level 1 aerialist rogue.

And the level gap is a straight up benefit against traps and monsters, as the DC to defeat a given trap with a given skill is static, and the DC to use most skills on monsters is opposed to a stat of that monster, so a level 30 Human Archmage with an 8 Dex untrained (+14 Acrobatics) would in fact have an easier time than a level 1 Halfling Rogue with a 20 Dex trained (+12) wiggling free of a grab. I've heard it claimed this is just fine and that it is OMG Suxx0rz broken, your mileage may vary.

[Oracle_Hunter]

A straight forward reading of pg. 42 and it's surroundings in the 4e DMG certainly promote this view. Tasks are rated Easy Moderate and Hard, and then given a sliding DC based on rating and level. Now, I think it is well within the intended scope of a DMs powers in 4e to take the reading that climbing a given wall is a Moderate or Hard task for a level 1 PC, but an Easy task for a level 20+, making it a relatively easier check, but still a harder objective DC for the level 20 than the level 1.
Note that DMG 42 is labeled "Rules for Things the Rules Don't Cover" :smallsigh:

Basic game-mechanics like climbing walls and escaping grasps are well detailed in their own sections. Jump DCs depend on distance, Climb DCs by the surface, and Perception DCs by the thing being seen.

But when you're dealing with a random thing a PC wants to do, DMG 42 tells you what sort of DCs to use depending on the level of play. It's better than pulling numbers out of "thin air" anyways :smalltongue:

For the record: escaping a grab is an Athletics v. Fort or Acrobatics v. Reflex - and monster defenses scale with level.

[BlckDv]

Note that DMG 42 is labeled "Rules for Things the Rules Don't Cover" :smallsigh:

Basic game-mechanics like climbing walls and escaping grasps are well detailed in their own sections. Jump DCs depend on distance, Climb DCs by the surface, and Perception DCs by the thing being seen.

But when you're dealing with a random thing a PC wants to do, DMG 42 tells you what sort of DCs to use depending on the level of play. It's better than pulling numbers out of "thin air" anyways :smalltongue:


Yeah, I'll gladly concede these bits :smallwink:, I stuck with the wall as it was the example given in the thread, even though my brain told me walls have set DCs like traps, should have gone with something else, like say keeping hold of a rope while a horse drags you.

Even here I'll note I think DM Common Sense can always kick in and say "If this was DC 15 last week when you were level 5, I'm not going to make it DC 18 now because you leveled up" But if the DM WERE to up the DC, it would be kosher by the rules.



For the record: escaping a grab is an Athletics v. Fort or Acrobatics v. Reflex - and monster defenses scale with level.

Here I was being unclear, so don't blame you for attacking an issue that was beside my point. If the PCs are fighting level appropriate monsters, yes, but if they were each grabbed by the same monster type, the level 30 would have the edge, regardless of the monster level.

My intent was to show that having leveled up DOES mean some things that were real threats (being grabbed by a level 5 mob at level 1) become far less intimidating for no reason other than pure leveling. With no effort ever put to becoming more agile, the Wizard has done so. I'm fine with the hand wave that a life adventuring rubs off on you in many diverse ways, but I know many folks are not, and wanted to give a fair example to illustrate what may annoy them as best I understand.

[Oracle_Hunter]

My intent was to show that having leveled up DOES mean some things that were real threats (being grabbed by a level 5 mob at level 1) become far less intimidating for no reason other than pure leveling. With no effort ever put to becoming more agile, the Wizard has done so. I'm fine with the hand wave that a life adventuring rubs off on you in many diverse ways, but I know many folks are not, and wanted to give a fair example to illustrate what may annoy them as best I understand.
Fair enough.

It's a bit of an odd example though, since D&D has always been about characters getting better at stuff without specific training. Specifically, BAB, but Saving Throw modifiers are another fine example.

I guess what always annoyed me is how borked the 3.5 skill point system was, and that people are still complaining about the elegant fixes 4e implemented without even knowing how they work!
It's bad enough that 20th level Fighters can fail to jump 5' pits, but I'm currently playing a CHA 7 Aristrocrat (don't ask) who is always going to be able to out-Diplomance the party face (a CHA 14 Commoner - really don't ask) because Aristrocrats have such nice synergy bonuses. In 4e, higher ability scores do matter when taking skills and wizards don't beat fighters at arm wrestling.

[Kurald Galain]

But seems to me that a lot of people praised the 1/2 level thing for skills.. maybe I'm wrong.
Oh, they do. But I don't think I've heard a lot of complaints about skill points. I suppose people like both systems, then.


And, both here and in ENworld, I've seen people complain about Vancian Casting haveing no sense, being out-of-date, and the like.
Yeah, good point. Vancian casting was certainly impopular with many people.


Is that how it works? So for a level 1 rogue, climbing up the wall is DC 15, but for the level 30 wizard, climbing the same wall is DC 30?
In theory, the L1 rogue is climbing small garden fences, whereas the L30 wizard is climbing backward-sloping animated walls made of lava.

In practice, there are some adventures involving e.g. sneaking around a regular city and intimidating the local thugs, that are written for paragon tier but are exactly identical to such adventures at heroic tier, except that the DCs are all appropriately higher.

[Kaiyanwang]

In practice, there are some adventures involving e.g. sneaking around a regular city and intimidating the local thugs, that are written for paragon tier but are exactly identical to such adventures at heroic tier, except that the DCs are all appropriately higher.

You mean, the rule is actually very good, but Wotc authors, once again, didn't read they own rules when writing a module/book/whatever :smallwink:

[Reluctance]

Yeah, I'll gladly concede these bits :smallwink:, I stuck with the wall as it was the example given in the thread, even though my brain told me walls have set DCs like traps, should have gone with something else, like say keeping hold of a rope while a horse drags you.

Even here I'll note I think DM Common Sense can always kick in and say "If this was DC 15 last week when you were level 5, I'm not going to make it DC 18 now because you leveled up" But if the DM WERE to up the DC, it would be kosher by the rules.

Yes, slavish devotion to RAW can lead to logic holes the size of small planets. My problem with this argument is that the people who use it invariably follow up by saying that 3.5 is a superior game. For all its strengths, RAW that strictly model reality is not one of them.

As for skills auto-scaling, you're talking about characters who have braved the gates of heaven and hell alike. A 3.5 character casting a Grease spell on himself to escape from a grapple is fine, but understanding that an epic level 4e character can do the same thing without needing an explicit rule for it seems to give people pause. If anything, these "if there's no rule for it, it doesn't happen" and "explicitly Epic characters can live entirely Heroic lives" people are what really make me worry for the game's health.

[Kurald Galain]

Newsflash: the 4.4 Fighter is up! (http://www.wizards.com/DnD/Article.aspx?x=dnd/dramp/20100723)

The knight is a str/con based fighter that (unlike the regular fighter) gets plate mail, and diplomacy instead of streetwise.

They do not get attack powers at all, just utility powers. Instead, they get a bunch of stances that can be activated at-will, and that augment their basic attacks. For instance, a stance lets you do "cleave" on all your melee attacks.

Also, apparently they no longer mark their enemies, but get an aura that gives all adjacent enemies -2 to hit other people. The combat challenge or combat superiority. There is mention of a shield block power, and of course this aura doesn't work with reach weapons anyway.

So far it gets a firm "meh" from me, although it definitely looks easier to play.

[Kaiyanwang]

Maybe they plan to increase the difficulty of these classes past level 10? Maybe adding encounter powers later?

This could be reasonable, after all, just think (in 3.5 terms) about a PH fighter that multiclasses in Warblade at level 11.

/speculations

One thing I find really annoying: they didn't get rid of the usual "whatever stat" thing. Why should I deal more damage the more healthy I am?

[Eldan]

As for skills auto-scaling, you're talking about characters who have braved the gates of heaven and hell alike. A 3.5 character casting a Grease spell on himself to escape from a grapple is fine, but understanding that an epic level 4e character can do the same thing without needing an explicit rule for it seems to give people pause. If anything, these "if there's no rule for it, it doesn't happen" and "explicitly Epic characters can live entirely Heroic lives" people are what really make me worry for the game's health.

For me, the difference between these two things is not even really in the mechanics, but in the play style they encourage.

When I was new to 3.5, we didn't really know most of the spells we could cast, even if we had them in our spellbooks. It was new and exciting.

The first time one of us said "I use grease to escape the ropes!" everyone stared at him and then congratulated him for a good idea.

With the 4E method as you described it above, your character can automatically do that. The player doesn't have to think of a way to use or combine his character's abilities to solve the encounter, he has to say his character solves it (with more or less description) and his character does it.

And going back to the earlier example: yes, I don't get the reason why an epic character has to be competent at everything. Thorgar Irontooth is a level 24 barbarian. Does he know more about the theory of magic than Beb Fingertwiddle, the apprentice? Not necessarily. And why would Golgotar Amberspark, the Archmage of Sunfire be the better climber than Siv, the orphan who makes his living as a cat burglar?

I think there should be the option to make your mage also a competent climber, but the system shouldn't automatically assume it.

[Athaniar]

This... what? Wizards, the system was perfectly OK. I DO NOT want a 4.5/4.4/4E Light or whatever you call it. Now give me my Player's Handbook 4 before I evoke World Serpent Rage upon you.

[shadowmage]

I just heard on the Tome Show podcastfrom one of the writers for Wizards that the Essentials line is a closed 10 book set. So no it is not 4.5. I know someone else stated earlyer in this thread we would see no more Powers books and such. It seems that is not true. They also said they have The Heros of Shadow come out which to me sounds like a Shadow Power source book and it is not part of the Essentials line.

[Kaiser Omnik]

I don't know... There might be useful things in the Essentials line, but mostly it seems like ideas that go against their original design for 4th edition, or things that should have been incorporated right from the start to make sense (or not confuse a great deal of players with a normal class and its "essential" counterpart). And the "back to 3rd edition" vibe of some changes just feels strange, as much as I like 3rd edition. I will wait until I see the whole thing, but currently the Knight seems like the worst of the lot in the previews.

At least it's "only" 10 products, so we'll get back to our regular fun afterwards. I just hope it doesn't create a rift between Essential players and other 4th edition players.

(And how can they say everything is compatible...without a proper mark, it seems the knight won't benefit from a lot of powers based on the ability to mark!)

[Kurald Galain]

I just heard on the Tome Show podcastfrom one of the writers for Wizards that the Essentials line is a closed 10 book set. So no it is not 4.5.
This is incorrect. It is neither a 10-book set, nor is it closed: it is a set of ten items, including tile sets, dice sets, a gift box, and presumably a DM screen. It is not closed, as it is the new direction for all future products. However, we don't yet now in how much this "new direction" actually changes anything.

Whether it "is" or "is not" 4.5 is completely a moot point, because that term isn't defined anywhere. Many people call it four point something as a shorthand, and some people seem to read an insult in a simple fractional number.


I know someone else stated earlyer in this thread we would see no more Powers books and such. It seems that is not true.
It is true in that no more books by that name are planned. Heroes of Shadow is not a Foo Power book, in that it contains new classes (which all Foo Power books don't) and follows the 4.4 "new direction".


And the "back to 3rd edition" vibe of some changes just feels strange, as much as I like 3rd edition.
I suspect they're doign that because they feel they're losing players to Pathfinder.


I just hope it doesn't create a rift between Essential players and other 4th edition players.
D&D players are a Broken Base (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BrokenBase) if ever I saw one, so a rift seems likely. At the very least, WOTC seems to have dropped the ball big time on these previews, in that they seem to generate strife rather than desire in the community.

[shadowmage]

Kurald Where are you getting your info that it is more then 10 books/items? I tend to belive someone that works for Wizards more. Yes he said he is not the most in the know person so he could be wrong, but I would lean more towards what he says. Also so you know it is Robert Schwalb, the guy who has worked on the new Dark Sun books. Just so you know where I am getting my info. And for those interested it is The Tome Show 141.

[BlckDv]

With each preview release, I have become more jaded and weary about the "essentials" line, and the endless denials that it is 4.4 from WoTC (methinks the lady doth protest too much...)

I'll be honest, however, that I suspected the way Essentials would go when PHB III came out. In earlier editions, I have often loved the *idea* of Psionics, but usually not allowed it in my game for the simple reason that I am a simple minded pooh brained DM. I found out the first campaign I did allow Psionics that it was one straw too far for me, having to shift between Vancian casting, physical combat, and seperate defense based psionics was too much for me to play monsters with well thought out tactics and coherent responses to player tactics in action. I respect DMs who have no trouble juggling it at all, and do not think that psionics lessens a game.

Amid the many changes of 4e, the one that I enjoyed the most as a DM was the unification of mechanics. I *knew* how many "better than at will" powers each player and monster would have, and could put a lot of thought into how to best employ them, or plan for the players to employ them. I was actively EXCITED after the monk preview.. finally, Psionics was going to be a playable element that used familiar mechanics that would not require me to shift mental gears mid fight to use. Then we got the other classes, with their "no encounter power, but power points!" setup, and I wept.

This is based solely on my limits as a DM, and my expectations, Please do not misread my statements to say that this was "bad" or "good" for the game as a whole, I am not qualified to judge that.

That said, it was a very clear signal to me that WoTC was NOT committed to the streamlined universal progression mechanics that had defined early 4.0, and I knew for certain they would going forward feel no obligation to stick to the At-Will/Encounter/Utility/Daily setup, and we would likely see ever wider and more elaborate departures from it.

4.4 for me was announced with PHB III, and it failed to shock me that Essentials would fly the banner proudly, marching forward to claim lands from 4.0

I don't know if I will allow Essentials material in my game, while I am sad and weary, I do try to remain open minded until I have the actual full product to judge. But whether I do allow it or not, I will not consider it to be the same game I was playing six months ago.

[Kurald Galain]

Kurald Where are you getting your info that it is more then 10 books/items?
From WOTC, of course. Note that I never said it was more than ten. It is precisely ten. However, you mentioned ten books, and it is not ten books. It is four books, three tile sets, one dice set, one boxed set, and DM accessory that may be a book, screen, or something else.

[Snowstorm]

Maybe I'm just weird, but I actually like the look of the new Knight here.

Hopefully the utilities and additional class features can make up for the loss of power from the lack of Daily-type attacks, though.

[shadowmage]

From WOTC, of course. Note that I never said it was more than ten. It is precisely ten. However, you mentioned ten books, and it is not ten books. It is four books, three tile sets, one dice set, one boxed set, and DM accessory that may be a book, screen, or something else.

Ah Ok I stand corrected. Sorry for misunderstanding.

[Nu]

Also, apparently they no longer mark their enemies, but get an aura that gives all adjacent enemies -2 to hit other people. The combat challenge or combat superiority. There is mention of a shield block power, and of course this aura doesn't work with reach weapons anyway.


There's an undocumented "Battle Guardian" feature that to me sounds like it could be a marking/punishment mechanic. At least, I'm hoping it is.

I'm concerned about just how "backwards compatible" this is, given the lack of Encounter/Daily powers. I suppose people who were complaining about fighters only being able to pull off their awesome moves once per day/encounter will be pleased, though.

[Kylarra]

Oh, they do. But I don't think I've heard a lot of complaints about skill points. I suppose people like both systems, then.I've seen a fair amount of dislike for the 3.X skill system. While it's not a direct critique of skillpoints per se, since it does encompass things like lack of points, poorly chosen skill lists and nonscaling DCs, it's at least related I suppose. I personally prefer the trained/untrained model since it streamlines things and avoids the 5 ranks in balance to counter grease, 8 ranks in craft(underwater basketweaving) to qualify for underwater basketweaver's awesome lv 1 ability and the rest just go into the standard skills you actually care about.

[Boci]

I personally prefer the trained/untrained model since it streamlines things and avoids the 5 ranks in balance to counter grease, 8 ranks in craft(underwater basketweaving) to qualify for underwater basketweaver's awesome lv 1 ability and the rest just go into the standard skills you actually care about.

That last one, is it an very popular jokes amougst D&D players, or is there actually some poorly thought out PrC from some obscure sourcebook?

[Reverent-One]

I'm concerned about just how "backwards compatible" this is, given the lack of Encounter/Daily powers. I suppose people who were complaining about fighters only being able to pull off their awesome moves once per day/encounter will be pleased, though.


They do not get attack powers at all, just utility powers. Instead, they get a bunch of stances that can be activated at-will, and that augment their basic attacks. For instance, a stance lets you do "cleave" on all your melee attacks.

Are you guys not seeing the encounter attack power they previewed in the article? And the similar sounding abilities on every level you normally get an encounter power? Like most of the kit builds in Essentials, it looks like the encounter powers are pre-choosen for the knight, but it should be like clerics with domains and allow the knight to swap them out with other encounter powers.


It is not closed, as it is the new direction for all future products. However, we don't yet now in how much this "new direction" actually changes anything.

Incorrect. The Essential line ends with the 10 products, period. And the Essential's line has yet to show any "new direction" that's not marketing hype, some renaming, and a switch from hardcover to paperback. Mike Myrles (however you spell his last name) said in the last D&D podcast that after the essential books they'd be back to books just like the ones they're making now. The essential books are an entry ramp into D&D 4e, which thus far seems to continue in the same direction it's been going, as an evolving, growing game system.



It is true in that no more books by that name are planned. Heroes of Shadow is not a Foo Power book, in that it contains new classes (which all Foo Power books don't) and follows the 4.4 "new direction".

It's true no other such books have been announced, but that doesn't mean any others are planned. And even if there are no more books called "X Power", but instead books called "Heroes of X" that included the sorts of things that would be in the X power books, there is little real difference. I'd guess that Heroes of X is a way to introducing new classes without needing PHB 4,5,6,...Infinity and combine with other power source themed goodies.

[Telasi]

I'm quite pleased with the look of the Essentials classes, though I wish Wizards had thought out their presentation of the previews better. As it stands, the new wizard has come out with some benefits, which is a plus in my opinion. I'm unsure about the other classes because the information is far from complete.

My primary concern is the fact that Wizards is being inconsistent with their implementation of the rules. Since PHB III was released, Wizards has drifted from the previously established class format. This worries me, because it goes against the stated goals for the Essentials line and 4e in general: simplification. Wizards has also protested allegations that the new classes will be fully compatible with current materials, but I have difficulty comparing the Knight to the present Fighter.

On the plus side, I approve of the book format change; less expensive paperback books are friendlier to my wallet and my back. I am also happy to see the rules compendium; I can finally avoid having to carry 3+ books to my sessions.

I will certainly be buying Heroes of Forgotten Kingdoms in September to evaluate the alterations, and I reserve judgement 'til I have the book. Here's hoping Wizards does well with it.

[Nu]

Are you guys not seeing the encounter attack power they previewed in the article? And the similar sounding abilities on every level you normally get an encounter power? Like most of the kit builds in Essentials, it looks like the encounter powers are pre-choosen for the knight, but it should be like clerics with domains and allow the knight to swap them out with other encounter powers.

That's possible, though not confirmed. Then again they are marked as "Fighter Attack" rather than "Fighter Feature" so it seems likely.

Still not too sure on the daily front though. I hope it has something to swap for daily powers too.

[Kurald Galain]

Are you guys not seeing the encounter attack power they previewed in the article?
That's because this so-called attack power doesn't actually give you an attack. It's really a utility power with a red header line.



Incorrect. The Essential line ends with the 10 products, period. And the Essential's line has yet to show any "new direction" that's not marketing hype,
Sure, but WOTC has stated that any books for the foreseeable future will use the design from 4.4. And, we're seeing a new direction right here: a class that doesn't have attack powers.


And even if there are no more books called "X Power", but instead books called "Heroes of X" that included the sorts of things that would be in the X power books, there is little real difference.
The point is that, as announced, the "Heroes of Shadow" book does not include the sort of things that would be in the Shadow Power book.

[Reverent-One]

That's because this so-called attack power doesn't actually give you an attack. It's really a utility power with a red header line.

The power allows you to make a 2[W] damage attack once per encounter (+any other benefits to basic attacks you have), sounds like an encounter power to me. It's not like we haven't seen stuff like this before, the Bravo multi-class and other similar ones had encounter powers that just boosted the damage of an At-will and added perhaps another minor benefit.


Sure, but WOTC has stated that any books for the foreseeable future will use the design from 4.4. And, we're seeing a new direction right here: a class that doesn't have attack powers.

I'm sorry, how is that count as a "new direction"? They've been experimenting with and making changes to class design since PHB I. They could have put the Knight out in a Martial Power III or a PHB IV book and no one would have thought it a "new direction", rather than the next step in the direction 4e has been heading since the beginning.


The point is that, as announced, the "Heroes of Shadow" book does not include the sort of things that would be in the Shadow Power book.

Really? I haven't seen much more about it announced other than that it'll include the three shadow classes, have you heard about anything else that's going to be in it? It's supposedly 320 pages long, and even if it is slightly smaller than one of the hardcover books (9x6 inches as opposed to 11x9), that's still as much or even more content than a PHB, enough to hold far more than just 3 classes,. And I am making the perhaps dangerous assumption that it's mostly going to be focused on the shadow power source, but that seems like enough room to hold the 3 classes, whatever you would normally have in a "shadow power" book, plus even a few other things.

[Kurald Galain]

The power allows you to make a 2[W] damage attack once per encounter (+any other benefits to basic attacks you have), sounds like an encounter power to me.
Yes, an encounter utility power. This is just hairsplitting though, the point is that it plays differently. You don't have to select one out of several encounter attack powers when creating your character, and you don't have to select one out of several attack powers to use during your round in combat.



I'm sorry, how is that count as a "new direction"?
Well, for starters, they're rewriting the most common classes and races. For another, they're aiming for tokens instead of minis.



Really? I haven't seen much more about it announced other than that it'll include the three shadow classes,
Well, there you go. Foo Power books never contain new classes, and this one does. If anything, Heroes Of Shadow is more like a PHB4 than a Foo Power book.

[Mando Knight]

Honestly, "Utility" might just be the placeholder power marker for their templates, and they forgot to switch it to "attack" for that power. Wouldn't be the first time WotC undercooks its copypasta.

[Reverent-One]

Yes, an encounter utility power. This is just hairsplitting though, the point is that it plays differently. You don't have to select one out of several encounter attack powers when creating your character, and you don't have to select one out of several attack powers to use during your round in combat.

Yep, it is hairsplitting to say that a knight gets no encounter attack powers.


Well, for starters, they're rewriting the most common classes and races. For another, they're aiming for tokens instead of minis.

New builds to a class is not the same as rewritting a class, and bringing the older races in line with the newer one is not a new direction, but just making sure everyone is facing the same way. And the difference between tokens/mini/coins/whatever else one might use to represent characters on the field are purely cosmetic and says little about the direction of the game.


Well, there you go. Foo Power books never contain new classes, and this one does. If anything, Heroes Of Shadow is more like a PHB4 than a Foo Power book.

Don't change changing your argument around, you said "The point is that, as announced, the "Heroes of Shadow" book does not include the sort of things that would be in the Shadow Power book. " We were discussing whether or not the Heroes of X books might include the stuff from a X power book. The existence of some things (like classes) that are not normally in a X power book does not mean that the things that usually are in them aren't going to be in the Heroes of X book. And if WoTC includes those things in a Heroes of X book, then the non-existence of a similar X Power book is unimportant.

[Matthew]

So, no more printings of the core D20/4e rulebooks...

Mana Nation - No Reprintings (http://www.mananation.com/exclusive-wizards-reprinting-core-dungeons-dragons-books/)

[Kurald Galain]

Mana Nation - No Reprintings (http://www.mananation.com/exclusive-wizards-reprinting-core-dungeons-dragons-books/)

Yeah, I don't think that move by WOTC surprises anyone.

[Matthew]

Yeah, I don't think that move by WOTC surprises anyone.

Indeed not. Interesting to see it actually happen, though.

[mobdrazhar]

definately not... but then again the site only says it's a tip and not that it's confirmed... we would have to wait and see

Edit: fixed stupid lack of spelling :smalleek:

[Mushroom Ninja]

So, no more printings of the core D20/4e rulebooks...

Mana Nation - No Reprintings (http://www.mananation.com/exclusive-wizards-reprinting-core-dungeons-dragons-books/)

Very interesting. I guess I hadn't really realized how serious WotC was about the Essentials line, assuming that this is true, of course.

[Matthew]

Yeah; as far as it goes, I rather like the "knight" class as presented and do not have any real money invested in D20/4e products, so I am generally well disposed towards this development.

[Lord Raziere]

definately not... but then again the site only says it's a tip and not that it's comfirmed... we would have to wait and see

I'm taking this "tip" with a grain of salt, it could just a rumor flying around from someone who hates Essentials.

[shadowmage]

Well for me it is kind of a No Duh. I mean they have Rules Compendium and the Essential line that will have a Players hand book, monster manual and DMG, why would you make yet another set of books you can buy? Why reprint another book with just errata or 3 books when, as far as I know I could be wrong, the Rules Compendium will cover all of it. I guess what will make it 4.5 for me is if the new content can not be used with the old books.

[Kurald Galain]

I'm taking this "tip" with a grain of salt, it could just a rumor flying around from someone who hates Essentials.

I'm not sure if I follow you. Why on earth would anyone who dislikes 4.4 want 4.0 to go out of print?

[Tiki Snakes]

I'm not sure if I follow you. Why on earth would anyone who dislikes 4.4 want 4.0 to go out of print?

fear mongering I believe is the allegation. Trying to demonize Essentials?
Though the comment in the linked thread suggesting that they aren't reprinting anytime soon because they simply have enough stock right now does have the ring of truth that the original rumour lacks.

[Nu]

There's an undocumented "Battle Guardian" feature that to me sounds like it could be a marking/punishment mechanic. At least, I'm hoping it is.

It would appear that Battle Guardian IS a punishment mechanic that works in conjunction with Defender Aura (http://community.wizards.com/dungeonsanddragons/blog/2010/08/03/a_closer_look_at_the_characters_of_game_train), though it's a bit different than Combat Challenge. It doesn't stop movement, but it does work as an Opportunity Action rather than an Immediate Interrupt.

At first glance I think I like Combat Challenge better simply for the ability to cancel a shift, but with some decent MBA boosting I could see Battle Guardian becoming better at keeping multiple enemies subject to punishment. Edit: Whoops, forgot that the Combat Challenge immediate interrupt doesn't actually cancel a shift, that's related to Combat Superiority. I guess it's mainly OA vs. Imm. Interrupt then.

Bludgeon Expertise also looks... somewhat interesting. I wonder if this means there will be different expertise feats with different bonuses, and I wonder how they will compare to Versatile/Weapon Expertise.

[Kurald Galain]

At first glance I think I like Combat Challenge better simply for the ability to cancel a shift, but with some decent MBA boosting I could see Battle Guardian becoming better at keeping multiple enemies subject to punishment.
Battle guardian appears to be easier, because you don't have to remember the difference between opportunity and immediate actions. In fact it wouldn't surprise me if 4.4 didn't contain immediate actions at all.


Bludgeon Expertise also looks... somewhat interesting. I wonder if this means there will be different expertise feats with different bonuses, and I wonder how they will compare to Versatile/Weapon Expertise.
Weapon Ex is not a feat bonus, Bludgeon Ex is.

And I'd say Heroic Effort takes the cake. It is much better than anything a 4.0 human character can take.

[Nu]

Weapon Ex is not a feat bonus, Bludgeon Ex is.


Unless I am mistaken, both Weapon and Implement Expertise were errata'd to feat bonuses (to be the same as Versatile Expertise).

But yes, Heroic Effort certainly looks very nice.

[Kurald Galain]

Unless I am mistaken, both Weapon and Implement Expertise were errata'd to feat bonuses (to be the same as Versatile Expertise).
Oops. Yes, you are correct. Weapon Ex is a feat bonus, and several other feats were errata'ed to not be a feat bonus so that they can stack with Weapon Ex.

This means that Bludgeon Ex does not stack with Weapon Ex, and is simply better until level 14. I think it's likely that 4.4 will not contain Weapon Ex, and that the bonus from Bludgeon Ex increases at levels 15 and 25. It's very likely that there will be e.g. Slashing Ex, Archery Ex, and similar feats, and probably that those classes that use both weapons and implements will be changed to use either.