PDA

View Full Version : 4 Ed Elf preview



MammonAzrael
2007-12-21, 06:13 AM
Bill Slavicsek has given us a preview of the Elf class in his latest Ampersand article:

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/dramp/20071221

And for those of you who aren't subscribed:
I've been trying to decide what glimpse into the D&D 4th Edition process I could share with you this month. I wanted something cool, something big, something that said "Happy holidays" to everyone in the D&D community.

So I looked around at what the team and I are working on during these last few days of the work year. James Wyatt, Mike Mearls, and I are reviewing every playtest comment, every monster entry, and every rules element, but nothing in that process seems exactly right for what I'm imagining.

I'm busy putting the finishing touches on the skills chapter, paragon paths, epic destinies, and magic items, but that stuff still needs to go through the editors before it's ready for prime time viewing.

Michele Carter, Jeremy Crawford, and Kim Mohan -- excellent editors all -- are neck-deep in the Player's Handbook, scrubbing classes and powers so that they really shine and making sure that everything synchs up from one chapter to the next. One place where they feel pretty much done (at least until James, Mike, and I come back with an adjustment based on the feedback we're reviewing) is the races chapter. Maybe something in there will satisfy my holiday spirit …

I just stepped over to talk to Andy Collins, my mechanical design and development manager (he oversees all of the mechanical game designers and developers that work on my team) to see what he thinks would make a good present. After a brief conversation, and a courtesy call to Scott Rouse to get his buy off, we're all in agreement. I'm going to share with you the first look at a D&D 4th Edition race entry. And, since it is the holiday season, what better place to start than with the elf.

In the current 4th Edition preview book, Races and Classes, we talked a bit about our approach to races. Let me add to that before you skim down to look at the elf. One of the changes that we decided on early for player character races was that we would only provide ability score bonuses. Penalties based on your choice of race are a thing of the past. We wanted to make sure each race had powers and abilities that set it apart and helped make it feel more like the race in question. We also worked on some size issues to make better sense of the various characters and their place in the world. Finally, we looked at the flavor and back story to make sure that each race had a unique role that didn't impinge on any of the other races in the game.

OK, enough with the chit-chat. Let's unwrap your present!
Elf

Quick, wary archers who freely roam the forests and wilds.

Racial Traits

Average Height: 5' 7"-6' 0"
Average Weight: 100-130 lb.

Ability Scores: +2 Dexterity, +2 Wisdom
Size: Medium
Speed: 7 squares
Vision: Low-light

Languages: Common, Elven
Skill Bonuses: +2 Nature, +2 Perception

Elven Accuracy
Elf Racial Power

With an instant of focus, you take careful aim at your foe and strike with the legendary accuracy of the elves.

Encounter
Free Action
Personal
Effect: Reroll an attack roll. Use the second roll, even if it's lower.

Elven Weapon Training: You gain proficiency with the longbow and the shortbow.
Wild Step: You ignore difficult terrain when you shift (even if you have a power that allows you to shift multiple squares).
Group Awareness: You grant non-elf allies within 5 squares a +1 racial bonus to Perception checks.
Elven Accuracy: You can use elven accuracy as an encounter power.

Wild and free, elves guard their forested lands using stealth and deadly arrows from the trees. They build their homes in close harmony with the forest, so perfectly joined that travelers often fail to notice that they have entered an elven community until it is too late.

Play an elf if you want …

* to be quick, quiet, and wild;
* to lead your companions through the deep woods and pepper your enemies with arrows;
* to play a ranger, a rogue, or a cleric.

Physical Qualities

Elves are slender, athletic folk about as tall as humans. They have the same range of complexions as humans, tending more toward tan or brown hues. A typical elf's hair color is dark brown, autumn orange, mossy green, or deep gold. Elves' ears are long and pointed, and their eyes are vibrant blue, violet, or green. Elves have little body hair, but males often grow long sideburns. They favor a wild look to their hair, which is often a shaggy mass of braids.

Elves mature at about the same rate as humans but show few effects of age past adulthood. The first sign of an elf's advancing age is typically a change in hair color -- sometimes graying but usually darkening or taking on more autumnal hues. Most elves live to be well over 200 years old and remain vigorous almost to the end.

Playing an Elf

Elves are a people of deeply felt but short-lived passions. They are easily moved to delighted laughter, blinding wrath, or mournful tears. They are inclined to impulsive behavior, and members of other races sometimes see elves as flighty or impetuous, but elves do not shirk responsibility or forget commitments. Thanks in part to their long life span, elves sometimes have difficulty taking certain matters as seriously as other races do, but when genuine threats arise, elves are fierce and reliable allies.

Elves revere the natural world. Their connection to their surroundings enables them to perceive much. They never cut living trees, and when they create permanent communities, they do so by carefully growing or weaving arbors, tree houses, and catwalks from living branches. They prefer the primal power of the natural world to the arcane magic their eladrin cousins employ. Elves love to explore new forests and new lands, and it's not unusual for individuals or small bands to wander hundreds of miles from their homelands.

Elves are loyal and merry friends. They love simple pleasures -- dancing, singing, footraces, and contests of balance and skill -- and rarely see a reason to tie themselves down to dull or disagreeable tasks. Despite how unpleasant war can be, a threat to their homes, families, or friends can make elves grimly serious and prompt them to take up arms.

At the dawn of creation, elves and eladrin were a single race dwelling both in the Feywild and in the world, and passing freely between the two. When the drow rebelled against their kin, under the leadership of the god Lolth, the resulting battles tore the fey kingdoms asunder. Ties between the peoples of the Feywild and the world grew tenuous, and eventually the elves and eladrin grew into two distinct races. Elves are descended from those who lived primarily in the world, and they no longer dream of the Feywild. They love the forests and wilds of the world that they have made their home.

Elf Characteristics: Agile, friendly, intuitive, joyful, perceptive, quick, tempestuous, wild.

Male Names: Adran, Beiro, Carric, Erdan, Gennal, Heian, Lucan, Peren, Rollen, Soveliss, Therren, Varis.

Female Names: Adrie, Birel, Chaedi, Dara, Ennia, Farall, Harrel, Iriann, Lia, Mialee, Shava, Thia, Valenae.

Elf Adventurers

Three sample elf adventurers are described below.

Varis is an elf ranger and a devout worshiper of Melora, the god of the wilds. When a goblin army forced his people from their woodland village, the elves took refuge in the nearest human town, walled and guarded by soldiers. Varis now leads other elves and some human townsfolk in raids against the goblins. Although he maintains a cheerful disposition, he frequently stares into the distance, listening, expecting at any moment to hear signs of approaching foes.

Lia is an elf rogue whose ancestral forest burned to the ground decades ago. Lia grew up on the wasteland's fringes in a large human city, unable to quite fit in. Her dreams called her to the forests, while her waking hours were spent in the dirtiest parts of civilization. She joined a group of adventurers after trying to cut a warlock's purse, and she fell in love with the wide world beyond the city.

Heian is an elf cleric of Sehanine, the god of the moon. The elven settlement where he was born still thrives in a forest untouched by the darkness spreading through the world, but he left home years ago, in search of new horizons and adventures. His travels lately have brought rumors to his ears that danger might be brewing in the ancient forest, and he is torn between a desire to seek his own way in the world and a sense of duty to his homeland.

Well, there you have it. The first unveiling of a full race entry from the 4th Edition Player's Handbook. Oh, what the heck. I'm feeling generous this morning. It must be the season. Here's a racial feat you can peek at, too.

Elven Precision [Elf]

Prerequisites: Elf, elven accuracy racial power, heroic tier
Benefit: When you use the elven accuracy power, you gain a +2 bonus to the new attack roll.

OK, I better stop here or I'll be tempted to show you the entire class chapter. Hmmm … maybe next time? Anyway, have a great holiday season and remember to …

Keep playing!

--Bill Slavicsek

From the way Elven Accuracy is set up, I'm guessing that it'll be part of the Elf package, every elf gets it, and it's usable once per encounter. 7 square speed I assume means 35' per round, to represent their agility and speed. Wild Step refers to shifting, could that be the free 5' step?

Reinboom
2007-12-21, 06:24 AM
Lots of dropped hints.

It's fortunate the squares is definite form of movement. It allows it easier to define the movement to make more sense for a person's game.
Elves are now more human like, which is interesting, and more wild.
Also, it's nice to see it isn't married to a class. If all the racial abilities are that simple, then they can be bent easily. Accuracy could be for a ray caster, for example.

I'm liking this.

appending_doom
2007-12-21, 06:40 AM
They seem to have abandoned the idea of creating balance through shafting one ability score for another. Interesting thought.

MammonAzrael
2007-12-21, 06:44 AM
Indeed. If all the classes get ability bonuses, and no penalties, it's still balanced. Just in a more fun way.

SweetRein, good point about the Ray attacks, I didn't think of that. Though with the Wisdom boost, they might be more friendly to Cleric battle spells that require an attack roll.

Belial_the_Leveler
2007-12-21, 06:46 AM
Reduced the elven lifespan by a factor of three. I guess the vast majority of faerun elves (or any elves really) have just turned to dust since they should have been dead for several centuries... :smallconfused:

kamikasei
2007-12-21, 06:51 AM
Also, it's nice to see it isn't married to a class. If all the racial abilities are that simple, then they can be bent easily. Accuracy could be for a ray caster, for example.

As written, it could be used by a swordfighter. It doesn't mention ranged attacks, only attack rolls, unless I missed something.

Looks interesting. I'm curious as to what aspects of current elviness they've given to the Eladrin instead, and which are simply gone. The Elf/Eladrin split could actually be very close to an idea from my own setting, but done as two races rather than one race at different ages.

kamikasei
2007-12-21, 06:52 AM
Reduced the elven lifespan by a factor of three. I guess the vast majority of faerun elves (or any elves really) have just turned to dust since they should have been dead for several centuries... :smallconfused:

Or perhaps the 4e Forgotten Realms book will describe slightly different elves, just as it does now (remember, FR elves are human-height, while PHB elves are shorter).

Dausuul
2007-12-21, 07:06 AM
Reduced the elven lifespan by a factor of three. I guess the vast majority of faerun elves (or any elves really) have just turned to dust since they should have been dead for several centuries... :smallconfused:

I'm pretty neutral about that bit, since I always re-fluff elves to live forever anyway.

The Group Awareness worries me a little, since it's one of those "everybody gets +1!" abilities that can be such a pain to track... but at least it's an always-on thing, so players in a party with an elf will get used to it. Here's hoping there aren't too many of those.

Wild Step is excellent, the sort of thing that will make elves really "feel" like wild hunters in play. I strongly approve. Looks like "shift" is the 4E term for "5-foot step."

Elven Accuracy--also very good. A once-per-encounter re-roll is much better than a constant fixed bonus.

I do hope they include distance measures in feet as well as squares, perhaps in parentheses after the square measurements. Not all groups think in battlemat terms.

Badgerish
2007-12-21, 07:08 AM
that's interesting stuff and finally some hard-info \o/ interesting turn of fluff with the "play an Elf if you want to..." and sample char ideas.

that racial feat is however really, really weak! +2 tohit for 1 roll per encounter! :(

'shifting' as a new name for 5' step does sound reasonable. If so I like the 'Wild Step' feature, both useful and part of the sure-footed style

Mr. Friendly
2007-12-21, 07:19 AM
Indeed. If all the classes get ability bonuses, and no penalties, it's still balanced. Just in a more fun way.

SweetRein, good point about the Ray attacks, I didn't think of that. Though with the Wisdom boost, they might be more friendly to Cleric battle spells that require an attack roll.

Well don't forget the much maligned Golden Wyvern Adept, that needs Wisdom as an attribute for maximum usefulness. It seems like they are shifting towards a higher level of MAD for all classes. Which is good given that they are pushing towards point-buy. The net result is more balanced characters.


Reduced the elven lifespan by a factor of three. I guess the vast majority of faerun elves (or any elves really) have just turned to dust since they should have been dead for several centuries...

Not at all. This is just the default elf. We have yet to see what Faerunian Elves will look like. I imagine the races of each world will be different; just like they always have been. :smallbiggrin:


that's interesting stuff and finally some hard-info \o/ interesting turn of fluff with the "play an Elf if you want to..." and sample char ideas.

that racial feat is however really, really weak! +2 tohit for 1 roll per encounter! :(

'shifting' as a new name for 5' step does sound reasonable. If so I like the 'Wild Step' feature, both useful and part of the sure-footed style

I don't think the racial feat is weak. I mean, it is, but... since it is for a per encounter ability; a per encounter ability you are almost certainly going to use every encounter... you will get your money out of it.

Plus, the racial feats may all be on the weak side, which is fine if they give them to you for free as you advance...

Caewil
2007-12-21, 07:24 AM
Hrm. Very SAGA like abilities. Good to see they've streamlined the skill system too. Perception encompases spot, listen and sense motive in SAGA, so it shouldn't be too different in 4e.

Marius
2007-12-21, 07:28 AM
Hrm. Very SAGA like abilities. Good to see they've streamlined the skill system too. Perception encompases spot, listen and sense motive in SAGA, so it shouldn't be too different in 4e.

Actually I think that Sense Motive is not part of Perception, you only use perception por deceptive appearances and Will Defense for deceptive information.

Mr. Friendly
2007-12-21, 07:37 AM
Actually I think that Sense Motive is not part of Perception, you only use perception por deceptive appearances and Will Defense for deceptive information.

My personal bet is that Bluff and Sense Motive are being folded together as "Manipulation"; at least that's what I am doing for my D&D 3.95 notion.

I also think that Tumble and Balance will be folded together, and that Jump, Climb and Swimm will become Athletics.

That's my wild guess though.

Dausuul
2007-12-21, 07:40 AM
I don't think the racial feat is weak. I mean, it is, but... since it is for a per encounter ability; a per encounter ability you are almost certainly going to use every encounter... you will get your money out of it.

Plus, the racial feats may all be on the weak side, which is fine if they give them to you for free as you advance...

Feats overall may be on the weak side. They did say they were moving in the direction of feats being small, static bonuses. And if they're balancing these against, say, drow SLAs, I think this one is pretty reasonable.

Marius
2007-12-21, 07:56 AM
My personal bet is that Bluff and Sense Motive are being folded together as "Manipulation"; at least that's what I am doing for my D&D 3.95 notion.

I also think that Tumble and Balance will be folded together, and that Jump, Climb and Swimm will become Athletics.

That's my wild guess though.

In SW:Saga tumble, balance and escape artist are folded in acrobatics but climb, jump and swim are still skills. Diplomacy and Intimidate are now Persuasion; Bluff and disguise are Deception. Sense motive was split in two, if you want to see through a disguise you use Perception if you want to see through a lie you use Will defense.

Titanium Dragon
2007-12-21, 08:07 AM
I like the "all upside" racial bonuses; they're going to be much easier to balance. I also like the racial skill and what it implies; namely, that lots of abilities will be usable once per encounter, which is a good way to balance things.

Mr. Friendly
2007-12-21, 08:08 AM
In SW:Saga tumble, balance and escape artist are folded in acrobatics but climb, jump and swim are still skills. Diplomacy and Intimidate are now Persuasion; Bluff and disguise are Deception. Sense motive was split in two, if you want to see through a disguise you use Perception if you want to see through a lie you use Will defense.

Hrrm, interesting. I like it. I personally would still fold Climb, Jump and Swim into Athletics, if nothing else for simplicities sake.

Saph
2007-12-21, 08:18 AM
Hmm. Mixed bag.

Elven accuracy and the speed increase both look nice. Elven Precision looks weak, though, and I really don't like the implications of Group Awareness - those things are a pain to keep track of, especially if there are multiple ones in the party. (So that's +1 from Elf A, and +2 from Human B, but -1 from C, and a circumstance penalty from . . .)

I like the new elves, but I really, really hope they don't shoehorn all the Forgotten Realms elves into being elves or eladrin. It'll make no sense at all and completely screw up the continuity.

- Saph

Morty
2007-12-21, 08:25 AM
Mixed feelings here. Seems okay overall, but I don't like the lack of racial penalties. Also, I'm damned if I know why they decided to use abstract "squares" instead of feet.

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2007-12-21, 08:29 AM
The Group Awareness worries me a little, since it's one of those "everybody gets +1!" abilities that can be such a pain to track... but at least it's an always-on thing, so players in a party with an elf will get used to it. Here's hoping there aren't too many of those.


I was thinking the exact same thing.

And...

"Ohh I am 30 feet away from the elf so I'd better take a step closer so I can see things more clearly!"

Mr. Friendly
2007-12-21, 08:31 AM
Hmm. Mixed bag.

Elven accuracy and the speed increase both look nice. Elven Precision looks weak, though, and I really don't like the implications of Group Awareness - those things are a pain to keep track of, especially if there are multiple ones in the party. (So that's +1 from Elf A, and +2 from Human B, but -1 from C, and a circumstance penalty from . . .)

I like the new elves, but I really, really hope they don't shoehorn all the Forgotten Realms elves into being elves or eladrin. It'll make no sense at all and completely screw up the continuity.

- Saph

I don't think you will have to worry about either of those. Assuming that 4e carries over the "no stacking the same bonus type" from 3e, then the Elf bonus is a racial bonus and won't stack...

I would guess in most cases it won't come up that often since you will be rolling Perception checks just before a battle. All it means is everyones marching order will be within 5 squares of the Elf....

I don't think they will "shoehorn" that much in Faerun. According to my Races and Classes book, yes they are folding the subraces, but that may not happen on Faerun, but even if it does, they say that even though the subraces are folded, it's just to reduce paperwork and that the differences between the elves is cultural. So the subraces are still there, the min-maxxing like crazy is gone. Which is fine, because honestly the majority of the Elven subraces existed so you could pick one to better dump that -2 on a stat you didn't need. Without the racial penalties, there is much less need for 500 different combos of elf.

Uncle Festy
2007-12-21, 09:47 AM
Just a couple of bits and pieces to throw out there that I noticed, and thought were important.
-More varied speeds
-They've turned Knowledge (nature) into Nature
-Elves are no longer the masters of arcane magic, and it is specifically noted that they prefer divine magic (which makes sense with their wis bonus)
-Eldarin are (presumably) the new masters of the Arcane
-Rangers now worship gods, not abstract concepts (see the example ranger)
They have something called Characteristics (probably similar to something in the PHBII)
-Feats are weaker
-Racial abilities are stronger
-The idea that your racial abilities increase by your level is either outside of the entry or gone
-They still have Drow :smallannoyed:
As for the overall experience - wow. Just - wow. I've never wanted to play any non-human, because an extra skill point and feat was easier to work with and more interesting then any racial abilities. But now? I may actually have to stray out of my native territory, and try a demi-human with 4E. :smallbiggrin:
-Uncle Out

Starsinger
2007-12-21, 09:50 AM
-The idea that your racial abilities increase by your level is either outside of the entry or gone

But now? I may actually have to stray out of my native territory, and try a demi-human with 4E. :smallbiggrin:
-Uncle Out

Actually, IIRC racial abilities have been stated to have been designed as feats since they first talked about the concept for 4e.

Also.. the term Deim-human is offensive.. :smalltongue:

Green Bean
2007-12-21, 09:59 AM
I'm liking this. Racial bonuses instead of penalties, abilities generic enough to be useful for a wide variety of builds, and superfluous skills folding together seems to be an overall positive.

*waits for someone to post how this means 4e is turning into Warcraft*

Azerian Kelimon
2007-12-21, 10:04 AM
Amazing. Not only does the new elf seem really like a Wood Elf instead of a pretender, the special power is neat, and there're no ability score penalties (Which always made me doubt playing another race, I want my characters to be, at least, average at everything), but it seems mostly everyone is satisfied by what we can see.

kamikasei
2007-12-21, 10:17 AM
-They've turned Knowledge (nature) into Nature

They're doing this with a lot of skills that now look like Knowledge(X) -> X. It's probably more than that, though; Nature is probably Knowledge (nature) + Survival, Arcana is Knowledge (arcana) + Spellcraft, etc.


-Rangers now worship gods, not abstract concepts (see the example ranger)

Not necessarily - they may just assume all characters have some god, and an iconic of a class will have a god appropriate to that class. It doesn't mean a Ranger will have to have a deity.

Starsinger
2007-12-21, 10:19 AM
Not necessarily - they may just assume all characters have some god, and an iconic of a class will have a god appropriate to that class. It doesn't mean a Ranger will have to have a deity.

Although it might be interesting if the reason PCs (and BBEGs) are stronger than regular NPCs is that PCs (and BBEGs) are all champions of some god or another, and that explains why they can do such amazing world bending stuff.. and while I doubt that's the core case, it's totally going into my homebrew 4e campaign setting.

Mr. Friendly
2007-12-21, 10:20 AM
-They've turned Knowledge (nature) into Nature

I would also surmise that Survival may be folded into that as well.


-Elves are no longer the masters of arcane magic, and it is specifically noted that they prefer divine magic (which makes sense with their wis bonus)
-Eldarin are (presumably) the new masters of the Arcane

Yes, according to Races and Classes, the more Arcane style "high" elves are the Eladrin. I would guess they are getting either +2 DX and +2 INT or +2 INT and +2 CHA.


-Rangers now worship gods, not abstract concepts (see the example ranger)
They have something called Characteristics (probably similar to something in the PHBII)

I'm at work and can't actually see the sample ranger. Does it just say "he worships X" or does it make some actual notation of a required deity. In any case,, a Ranger always could worship a deity. See also: Drizzt Do'Urden and his deity Mielikki.


-Feats are weaker

This particular racial feat is weaker. Since we have no context of the racial feats, like if they are freebies you pick or whatever, they may be intentionally weaker feats. Consider the new Alertness feat; one feat to not be flat-footed? (Or rather to deny enemies "combat advantage", the new flat-footed it seems)


-The idea that your racial abilities increase by your level is either outside of the entry or gone

It's outside of the entry. My wild guess is that you get racial feats every so often. This balances against 'monstrous' races who also get racial feats every so often to gain the abilities they should have. (Wings for Dragonborn, SLAs for Drow and similar)


-They still have Drow :smallannoyed:

They are a popular and iconic D&D race. To get rid of them would drive fanboys insane. It would also kill off one of the most (if not the most) popular FR character of all time.


As for the overall experience - wow. Just - wow. I've never wanted to play any non-human, because an extra skill point and feat was easier to work with and more interesting then any racial abilities. But now? I may actually have to stray out of my native territory, and try a demi-human with 4E. :smallbiggrin:

Well you have missed out on quite a lot then. I really liked 3e's Arcane Archer. In 2e Elves were the bomb-diggity (despite the level restrictions); Bladesingers, Infiltrators... they had some sweet kits.

Edit: Ninja!

Azerian Kelimon
2007-12-21, 10:20 AM
I hope that's not the case. Since WoTC has skewed concepts, LG gods are supreme good 'n stuff, CG gods are stupid "My way or the highway" jerks, and NG is always LG or NG in disguise. Even when players play them appropiately and realize HOW you should play a char of such an alignment.

Nightgaunt
2007-12-21, 10:35 AM
Making races more modular to fit different design concepts is certainly cool in my book. The lack of weaknesses is also interesting, as others have said balance can still be achieved that way without frustrating players. Two minor gripes, others like the idea of measuring speed in boxes, I don't like it. There is something about the idea of measuring the things I do in terms of squares that takes me a step out of the fantasy. It's a minor thing really, but it is there.

Average Height: 5' 7"-6' 0"
Average Weight: 100-130 lb.

I know elves are lithe but I am picturing someone 6'0 tall and 100 pounds and it's kinda icky. :smalltongue: They must have tiny little breakable bones, little popsicle bone elves.

Thinker
2007-12-21, 10:36 AM
Mixed feelings here. Seems okay overall, but I don't like the lack of racial penalties. Also, I'm damned if I know why they decided to use abstract "squares" instead of feet.

Maybe not all campaign worlds should have to rely on feet? The less things dependent on that, the better.

Starsinger
2007-12-21, 10:36 AM
I know elves are lithe but I am picturing someone 6'0 tall and 100 pounds and it's kinda icky. :smalltongue: They must have tiny little breakable bones, little popsicle bone elves.

Or slightly hollow bones, like birds. (although I think bird bones are totally hollow)

Nightgaunt
2007-12-21, 10:48 AM
Maybe not all campaign worlds should have to rely on feet? The less things dependent on that, the better.

That's actually a good point, although for abstraction purposes I wish they choose an arbitrary system of measurement that was not identical to the mats we're playing on. It's nit-picky but my head sees this:

Ranger: Keldurn, you must attack the enemies are closing in!
Keldurn: Aye, lad I can't, me axe only flies three squares and they be five squares away.
Ranger: Keldurn, I told you to buy the bow, I can strike at ten squares!

Or even better...

Shopkeeper: What can I do for you today?
Keldurn: Aye, I'm looking to get to Tarmok's Falls, where is that?
Shopkeeper: Oh, Tarmok's Falls is 100 Decasquares from here, they have a tower that raises at least 10 squares up, you can see from quite a distance.
Keldurn: Aye, thank ye kindly.

:smallbiggrin:

Green Bean
2007-12-21, 10:53 AM
That's actually a good point, although for abstraction purposes I wish they choose an arbitrary system of measurement that was not identical to the mats we're playing on. It's nit-picky but my head sees this:

...

:smallbiggrin:

It beats:


Ranger: Keldurn, you must attack the enemies are closing in!
Keldurn: Aye, lad I can't, me axe only flies 4.56 meters, and they be 7.62 meters away.
Ranger: Keldurn, I told you to buy the bow, I can strike at 15.42 meters!

:smallwink:

hamlet
2007-12-21, 11:14 AM
I had a nice, long, ranting post going that the internet ate. Which I'm sure many of you will celebrate.

Suffice to say, I don't like it. Not one freakin' bit.

It seems that, despite claims to the contrary, 4th edition will be so tightly tied with the minis and battlemat concept that playing it without them will be almost impossible. It strikes me as tremendously stupid to measure movement in "squares."

Player1: How big is the cavern?
DM: 10 squares by 15 squares.
Player1: Wow, that's big . . .
Player2: Ok, how the <blank> much is a "square"?
DM: . . . don't know.

Thinker
2007-12-21, 11:26 AM
I had a nice, long, ranting post going that the internet ate. Which I'm sure many of you will celebrate.

Suffice to say, I don't like it. Not one freakin' bit.

It seems that, despite claims to the contrary, 4th edition will be so tightly tied with the minis and battlemat concept that playing it without them will be almost impossible. It strikes me as tremendously stupid to measure movement in "squares."

Player1: How big is the cavern?
DM: 10 squares by 15 squares.
Player1: Wow, that's big . . .
Player2: Ok, how the <blank> much is a "square"?
DM: . . . don't know.

Player1: How big is the cavern?
DM: 10 <campaign specific measurment> by 15 <campaign specific measurement>.
Player1: Wow that's big . . .
Player2: Ok, how the <blank> much is a "<campaign specific measurement>"?
DM: Oh its about 4 feet.

Telonius
2007-12-21, 11:30 AM
Honestly, I don't care if they measure distance in squares, feet, glorpleprodgers, or light-years. As long as the scale is consistent, it doesn't matter. It's been years since I've played without a battlemat anyway, so that won't alter anything for me.

I really like the skill-folding that's implicit here. For the fluff - going by Tolkien, these guys look like they're the Mirkwood elves, with Eldarin being the Noldor. Very, very interesting. I like it so far.

EDIT: For the weight ... I'm 6'0, and was about 140lbs back when I was in college (yay Ramen and mac&cheese :smalltongue: ). It was teetering over the border of really unhealthy-looking, but I have a pretty big frame. Something with narrower shoulders and hips, or wirier muscles, might not look that weird.

Dausuul
2007-12-21, 11:58 AM
Player1: How big is the cavern?
DM: 10 <campaign specific measurment> by 15 <campaign specific measurement>.
Player1: Wow that's big . . .
Player2: Ok, how the <blank> much is a "<campaign specific measurement>"?
DM: Oh its about 4 feet.

Yeah, that's silly too. Except that in that case it's the DM being silly rather than the rulebook. In my experience, most people just use "feet."

I have no objection to including measurements in squares; it's very handy for combat with minis. But I'd like it if they included the distance in feet as well, probably in parenthesis:

Movement: 7 squares (35 feet)

fendrin
2007-12-21, 11:59 AM
squares vs 5' increments... using squares makes the math easier.
It's easier to multiply the # of squares by 5 to get the distance in feet than to divide the distance in feet by 5 to get the # of squares. Even in 3.X everyone (who had played for more than a couple sessions) knew that a square was 5' and vice versa.

Don't like it? White out and a pen. It's the same in the end, just a little easier now.

As for the battlemat, no battlemat, no issue. It's been the same all along. I remember the "good ol' days" having an effectively infinite amount of space to run a a battle in, because no one knew where anybody was. I also remember using dry erase boards where the scale was vague, and distance only as relevant as the DM's artistic skills (mine suck). then I had the bright idea to use graph paper and push pins on a cork board (wait which red pin is orc #1?). Then I shelled out for a vinyl battlemat, put some numbers on some colored discs (poker chips) and never looked back. you don't want to use a battlemat? Go for it. It's no harder now than it was then.

EDIT:
For reference, I made the change from 2e to 3e during the dry erase board era.

Mr. Friendly
2007-12-21, 12:03 PM
Yeah, that's silly too. Except that in that case it's the DM being silly rather than the rulebook. In my experience, most people just use "feet."

I have no objection to including measurements in squares; it's very handy for combat with minis. But I'd like it if they included the distance in feet as well, probably in parenthesis:

Movement: 7 squares (35 feet)

I also think they are leaving it as blank "squares" so people can scale up and down distance as they need.

It's also useful for saving the lives of catgirls. By not tying a "square" to 100% exactly five Imperial feet you can avoid all sorts of bizarre things that come up. Like the whole replacing 5' step with "shifting"; it just gets rid of ridiculous arguements that happen WAY too often.

KIDS
2007-12-21, 12:05 PM
It... it's very awesome. I am quite impressed by the elegant design; of course I won't be cheering until I see the whole game but it looks quite promising.

Starsinger
2007-12-21, 12:06 PM
I also think they are leaving it as blank "squares" so people can scale up and down distance as they need.

It's also useful for saving the lives of catgirls. By not tying a "square" to 100% exactly five Imperial feet you can avoid all sorts of bizarre things that come up. Like the whole replacing 5' step with "shifting"; it just gets rid of ridiculous arguements that happen WAY too often.

Like hallways being exactly 5/10/15 feet wide. Never 7 feet wide halls, or 21 feet wide, or 13 feet wide.. always some multiple of 5.

Mr. Friendly
2007-12-21, 12:15 PM
Like hallways being exactly 5/10/15 feet wide. Never 7 feet wide halls, or 21 feet wide, or 13 feet wide.. always some multiple of 5.

Well that's precisely my point. Virtually every module WotC comes out with has some bizarre distance for height or width, some non-divisible by 5 width specifically. Then they think you will draw that out on a battlemap? I usually round it off, but sometimes you can't.

Then there are idiotic arguements that will happen every so often...

This is an example of an actual arguement:

Player: Ok I move here. *moves miniature* I attack this guy *indicates enemy*
DM: He's too far away.
Player: But I have a Spiked Chain, it has reach.
DM: Yeah it does have reach, but in this case he is on the back side of his square about to coup d'grace your friend. You just moved as far as you could, so you just barely entered your square. Clearly the book says this chain is exactly 7 feet long, so you can't reach him.
Players: WTF?
DM: *coup d'grace PC*

Obviously it is a stupid arguement, but it wouldn't have happened if we generically quantified it as "squares" not a specific distance.

Morty
2007-12-21, 12:30 PM
Maybe not all campaign worlds should have to rely on feet? The less things dependent on that, the better.

It's still better that relying on abstract "squares". I just hope they'll provide square/feet table, otherwise how will DM know how many squares does an area cover?
And I still think that lack of racial ability penalties is dumb idea.

Telonius
2007-12-21, 12:31 PM
Like hallways being exactly 5/10/15 feet wide. Never 7 feet wide halls, or 21 feet wide, or 13 feet wide.. always some multiple of 5.

Oh yah, dem's da union regs. Can't be makin' any oddball hallways now, it'd trow de accountin' gnomes all in a futz. Hey, we don't make da rules, we just build da hallways.

Theodoxus
2007-12-21, 12:39 PM
I don't understand how the elf is supposed to be granting the group awareness thing... I mean sure, it might have a higher base chance for perception, but that doesn't mean it will succeed 100% of the time.

"Shh, I think I heard something" the elf ranger said. The party gathers around and listens intently. "Yeah, definintely coming from the left" says the halfling. - that I get.

"Uh, i think I just missed my perception check" the elf mutters. "Yeah, there's a goblin ninja in your face, you ninny" the halfling giggles.

So, the elf provides a +1 perception how? Fluffwise it makes no sense, mechanically it makes no sense... if the elf fails his perception check, everyone else still gets theirs? wtf?

Telonius
2007-12-21, 12:46 PM
... maybe the elf makes people a little jumpier than usual, so they're more likely to notice things? Or maybe they just radiate an aura of elfiness that makes people more perceptive? :smallconfused: Kind of a stretch, yeah. That particular bit of fluff would have to be described in some better detail.

Artanis
2007-12-21, 12:52 PM
The thing about feet vs. squares is that as far as I can tell, they already do everything in squares on the back-end, and then multiply that by 5 and put the feet measurement in the books. "Adjacent" is always adjacent squares, which could in theory be anywhere from 1' to 14' apart. A 5-foot step? One square. And nearly all the official maps I've ever seen (on the website and such) have everything fit nice and neat into the grid.

Uncle Festy
2007-12-21, 12:55 PM
...Varis is an elf ranger and a devout worshiper of Melora, the god of the wilds. When a goblin army forced...

...Lia is an elf rogue whose ancestral forest burned to the ground decades ago. Lia grew up...

...Heian is an elf cleric of Sehanine, the god of the moon. The elven settlement where he was born still thrives...

What I was refering to by "rangers worship gods" was that the cleric and the ranger both mention gods worshiped, whereas the rouge doesn't. If the god worshipped is always mentioned, then why doesn't the rouge have it? Admittedly, the link between the ranger and the god, "devout worshipper" is looser then the one between the cleric and the god "cleric of", so it's possible that rangers are more like paladins, in that they worship a god, but don't draw their power from said god. It seems relatively clear (relative to anything else we can surmise from an incomplete game) that there is, at least, more of a link between ranger and god, and rouge and god. What that actually means is up for discussion.

Tallis
2007-12-21, 01:03 PM
I like it. It has a good feel to it. Splitting the elves into 2 races is a good move I think. The fact that the two races are still related to each other is also a good move.
Shorter lifespens I'm not sure about, hopefully the Eladrin keep the longer elvish lifespans. I don't much like the long shaggy sideburns idea, they do seem to lean towards the anime type depiction of elves, but thats just fluff and easily changed so no big deal.

They refer to Lolth as a god. Wonder if they're actually changing her to a male or just using the wrong word there. Of course they could also be changing gods to more abstract genderless concepts...

As for the movement being measures in squares; they do the same thing in Star Wars saga edition and then define a square as 2 meters (maybe 1, not sure). Presumably they will tell us how bg a square is and are just writing it this way to minimize the math necessary during combat.

Tallis
2007-12-21, 01:08 PM
What I was refering to by "rangers worship gods" was that the cleric and the ranger both mention gods worshiped, whereas the rouge doesn't. If the god worshipped is always mentioned, then why doesn't the rouge have it? Admittedly, the link between the ranger and the god, "devout worshipper" is looser then the one between the cleric and the god "cleric of", so it's possible that rangers are more like paladins, in that they worship a god, but don't draw their power from said god. It seems relatively clear (relative to anything else we can surmise from an incomplete game) that there is, at least, more of a link between ranger and god, and rouge and god. What that actually means is up for discussion.

Devout worshipper could also just be a character description with no mechanical effect.
The rogue might not worship any particular god. Maybe she turned away from her god when her home was burned down and living among humans has kept her away from them.
Maybe rangers do get their powers from gods now.
There isn't enough information to know the writers intent here.

Thinker
2007-12-21, 01:16 PM
It's still better that relying on abstract "squares". I just hope they'll provide square/feet table, otherwise how will DM know how many squares does an area cover?
And I still think that lack of racial ability penalties is dumb idea.

Yes, but you hate everything you see about 4th Edition. Every time a new excerpt comes out you shout about how you don't like it. I'm beginning to feel that I should dismiss your arguments as you seem to be trying to find any flaws you can.

Leicontis
2007-12-21, 01:19 PM
What I was refering to by "rangers worship gods" was that the cleric and the ranger both mention gods worshiped, whereas the rouge doesn't. If the god worshipped is always mentioned, then why doesn't the rouge have it? Admittedly, the link between the ranger and the god, "devout worshipper" is looser then the one between the cleric and the god "cleric of", so it's possible that rangers are more like paladins, in that they worship a god, but don't draw their power from said god. It seems relatively clear (relative to anything else we can surmise from an incomplete game) that there is, at least, more of a link between ranger and god, and rouge and god. What that actually means is up for discussion.
First, makeup doesn't worship anything. [/petpeeve]

Second, maybe the rogue isn't particularly reverent? She might not have a great education, and as such might not even know enough about the gods to have any particular desire to venerate one. Different characters have differing levels of piety - some non-clerics are still fanatical followers of their gods, while others take more of a live-and-let-live attitude towards the gods.

I'm wondering what they're going to do for humans. Racial ability penalties were there to put ability scores on balance with those of a human (in theory), with "average human" being 10-11 across the board. With no racial ability penalties, does this mean that humans are going to have ability score bonuses? In what? If not, what are they going to have instead?

Morty
2007-12-21, 01:22 PM
Yes, but you hate everything you see about 4th Edition. Every time a new excerpt comes out you shout about how you don't like it. I'm beginning to feel that I should dismiss your arguments as you seem to be trying to find any flaws you can.

First, it's not my fault I don't like most things I recently see about 4ed- though maybe I've really been to whiny. Second, I tend to focus on things I don't like, because otherwise I'd just say "alright, that was good". If you want to interpret it as "hating everything about 4ed", that's your choice. I actually found this article perfectly fine, except those two issues- but since everyone likes it as well, why should I repeat what everyone else says? And while squares are quite minor, lack of racial ability penalties is preety bad.

Starsinger
2007-12-21, 01:23 PM
I'm wondering what they're going to do for humans. Racial ability penalties were there to put ability scores on balance with those of a human (in theory), with "average human" being 10-11 across the board. With no racial ability penalties, does this mean that humans are going to have ability score bonuses? In what? If not, what are they going to have instead?

In place of 2 +2 bonuses in designated spots, humans might get a single +2 to any ability score of their choice.

fendrin
2007-12-21, 01:24 PM
They refer to Lolth as a god. Wonder if they're actually changing her to a male or just using the wrong word there. Of course they could also be changing gods to more abstract genderless concepts...

I noticed this too. In fact, all deities mentioned are described with 'god'. Sehanine is also typically female, if my realms-knowledge serves me...

Thy could be moving in a gender-neutral deity direction, or just gender-neutral terminology ('god' is typically a male term, but can also be used gender-neutrally; the same as is happening with 'actor' and 'alumni'. really, it's a limitation of the English language that such terms don't exist separate from the masculine, but it's a lot easier to change how words are used than to introduce new variants on words)

Kiirseva
2007-12-21, 01:30 PM
"Group Awareness: You grant non-elf allies within 5 squares a +1 racial bonus to Perception checks."

Here's to hoping that Group Awareness, and other party bonuses, just flat-out apply to your party/allies/friendlies.

I'm surprised they aren't moving towards that just with the way spells like Bless work in D&D Minis (it hits your entire warband for simplicity, and last the entire battle) and other spells are moving towards per day/per encounter/at will.

Mr. Friendly
2007-12-21, 01:32 PM
"Group Awareness: You grant non-elf allies within 5 squares a +1 racial bonus to Perception checks."

Here's to hoping that Group Awareness, and other party bonuses, just flat-out apply to your party/allies/friendlies.

I'm surprised they aren't moving towards that just with the way spells like Bless work in D&D Minis (it hits your entire warband for simplicity, and last the entire battle) and other spells are moving towards per day/per encounter/at will.

I think they are. We haven't seen Bless yet, but they have talked about Per Encounter rituals, which I wouldn't be surprised that Bless was one of. What they do mention of per encounter buffs is they last the encounter so you don't need to keep tracking it.

Kiirseva
2007-12-21, 01:42 PM
I think they are. We haven't seen Bless yet, but they have talked about Per Encounter rituals, which I wouldn't be surprised that Bless was one of. What they do mention of per encounter buffs is they last the encounter so you don't need to keep tracking it.

Well, I mean more for the range.

Why stop to check 5 squares when you could just have that +1 on your sheet?

Maybe just when in the same encounter with your elf buddy? It's not that big of a deal with this one, but I'm thinking of the bonuses that players will always be moving just a few more squares to get, whether they're aware of them IC or not. I care less about the IC/OOC awareness of these things, and more about it slowing the combat round down with players counting squares and hmming and hawing about saying they're done.

Dausuul
2007-12-21, 01:44 PM
I don't understand how the elf is supposed to be granting the group awareness thing... I mean sure, it might have a higher base chance for perception, but that doesn't mean it will succeed 100% of the time.

"Shh, I think I heard something" the elf ranger said. The party gathers around and listens intently. "Yeah, definintely coming from the left" says the halfling. - that I get.

"Uh, i think I just missed my perception check" the elf mutters. "Yeah, there's a goblin ninja in your face, you ninny" the halfling giggles.

So, the elf provides a +1 perception how? Fluffwise it makes no sense, mechanically it makes no sense... if the elf fails his perception check, everyone else still gets theirs? wtf?

That aspect doesn't really bother me, actually. I chalk it up to the elf's innate attunement to her surroundings; the elf's allies pick up some of that attunement simply by being near her.

My problem is with the mechanics of tracking piddling little situational bonuses.

fendrin
2007-12-21, 01:49 PM
I don't understand how the elf is supposed to be granting the group awareness thing...

How about this: the elf guides the party in how to keep watchful. Designates a visual search pattern. Or, they have an air of watchfulness that inspires others to be the same way. Or, they have a pseudo-magical aura. Maybe they produce a pheromone that affects the parts of the brain that processes perception in others nearby. Maybe it's an effect of an herb that elves smoke as part of a cultural ritual. The +1 is due to second-hand smoke.

Yeah, lots of fluffy reasons you could put on it. Personally, I like the idea of psychotropic elves over hippie elves, but whatever suits your fancy.


"Group Awareness: You grant non-elf allies within 5 squares a +1 racial bonus to Perception checks."

You know, i think this is a bad combination of trying to make all characters team players without making them use actions to do so, and trying to put logical limits on it.


Here's to hoping that Group Awareness, and other party bonuses, just flat-out apply to your party/allies/friendlies.

I'm surprised they aren't moving towards that just with the way spells like Bless work in D&D Minis (it hits your entire warband for simplicity, and last the entire battle) and other spells are moving towards per day/per encounter/at will.

Well, first off, that 'all in the warband' approach works in small scale encounters (as typically seen in minis), but not so well for larger scale activities. For instance, if the elf gets separated fro the group, the ability shouldn't apply.

Here's the big distinction: elf and non-elf go scouting down the hall. The non-elf scout gets the perception bonus. the rest of the party does not get the bonus, should something come sneaking up behind them.

Now, if you want to houserule it for simplicity's sake, go for it.

Ew, houserules on a system that hasn't been finished yet. Maybe we should avoid that for now... :smallyuk:


Well, I mean more for the range.

Why stop to check 5 squares when you could just have that +1 on your sheet?

Maybe just when in the same encounter with your elf buddy? It's not that big of a deal with this one, but I'm thinking of the bonuses that players will always be moving just a few more squares to get, whether they're aware of them IC or not. I care less about the IC/OOC awareness of these things, and more about it slowing the combat round down with players counting squares and hmming and hawing about saying they're done. Yeah, I do agree with you there. Though, I would be leary about making it encounter-based, as perception is one thing that is definitively useful outside of an encounter.

Thinker
2007-12-21, 02:30 PM
First, it's not my fault I don't like most things I recently see about 4ed- though maybe I've really been to whiny. Second, I tend to focus on things I don't like, because otherwise I'd just say "alright, that was good". If you want to interpret it as "hating everything about 4ed", that's your choice. I actually found this article perfectly fine, except those two issues- but since everyone likes it as well, why should I repeat what everyone else says? And while squares are quite minor, lack of racial ability penalties is preety bad.

No one is saying you should necessarily like it. I haven't liked everything about it, nor do I expect anyone to. I haven't been very vocal about my likes or dislikes myself. I don't think there is a game system that is perfect for anyone's needs, but they are working on a best-fit. This seems to support my best-fit so far. Sorry if I seemed a bit blunt with my other post (or even this one).

SurlySeraph
2007-12-21, 02:45 PM
Meh. I don't much like how there aren't racial penalties anymore, since I think that gave the races a lot of their flavor. It just seems weird for all races to be all beneficial.

They're definitely making the elves basically all wood elves. I guess I'm glad that they're splitting off the elves and eladrin, if only because it means we won't have tons of subraces that have nothing in common except pointy ears and "[adjective or environment] elf" in their names.

Mr. Friendly
2007-12-21, 02:50 PM
Meh. I don't much like how there aren't racial penalties anymore, since I think that gave the races a lot of their flavor. It just seems weird for all races to be all beneficial.

They're definitely making the elves basically all wood elves. I guess I'm glad that they're splitting off the elves and eladrin, if only because it means we won't have tons of subraces that have nothing in common except pointy ears and "[adjective or environment] elf" in their names.

I'll give you a great case against racial penalties: It starts with Half and ends with Orc.

Orcs and Half-Orcs got screwed because they were strong. Then people avoided playing them and found they could make better builds without them.

I admit though, one thing that bothers me about the all positives thing is that it almost forces you to go point buy. It's almost like they are balancing against point buy... however if *everything* is equally strong, then I guess it doesn't matter.

Starsinger
2007-12-21, 03:03 PM
I guess I'm glad that they're splitting off the elves and eladrin, if only because it means we won't have tons of subraces that have nothing in common except pointy ears and "[adjective or environment] elf" in their names.

Humans mate with other species to create "Half-X's" (and Centaurs).. elves mate with the dictionary.

SurlySeraph
2007-12-21, 03:16 PM
I'll give you a great case against racial penalties: It starts with Half and ends with Orc.

My group house-ruled that they get +2 Con as well to be balanced. Elves have -2 Con, Dwarves have -2 Cha, etc., and they're balanced. Drawbacks and advantages should come out equal.

And, though I really like point buy, you're right that they're balancing towards it, and that annoys me a bit. Along with the increasing focus on squares and positioning and whatever the hell that online resource thing they've been talking about is, it seems to me like 4e is going to have a much bigger emphasis on standardizing how to play.


Humans mate with other species to create "Half-X's" (and Centaurs).. elves mate with the dictionary.

May I sig that?

Starsinger
2007-12-21, 03:45 PM
May I sig that?

Yes you may

Nightgaunt
2007-12-21, 03:56 PM
It beats:


Ranger: Keldurn, you must attack the enemies are closing in!
Keldurn: Aye, lad I can't, me axe only flies 4.56 meters, and they be 7.62 meters away.
Ranger: Keldurn, I told you to buy the bow, I can strike at 15.42 meters!

:smallwink:

Point taken, but at least meters means something outside of the game, though I always thought it was funny that PC's can automatically know the exact distance of their adversaries at all times. I think I'd have a hell of time knowing if the guy charging me was 30' away or 35' away. :smallconfused: So I guess squares are as good as anything.

Point Conceeded.

Sebastian
2007-12-21, 03:59 PM
I don't understand how the elf is supposed to be granting the group awareness thing... I mean sure, it might have a higher base chance for perception, but that doesn't mean it will succeed 100% of the time.

"Shh, I think I heard something" the elf ranger said. The party gathers around and listens intently. "Yeah, definintely coming from the left" says the halfling. - that I get.

"Uh, i think I just missed my perception check" the elf mutters. "Yeah, there's a goblin ninja in your face, you ninny" the halfling giggles.

So, the elf provides a +1 perception how? Fluffwise it makes no sense, mechanically it makes no sense... if the elf fails his perception check, everyone else still gets theirs? wtf?

So, if there is an elf disguised as a human in the group people should find it out because they are more perceptive now? :)

And what happen if he is asleep or unconscious? the group get the bonus all the same? :smallbiggrin:

Yeah, it is wonky, but if you want to play 4e is better than you get used to it, it is just a hint of course, but I have the strong impression that in 4e fluff come after crunch, i.e. first they come up with a mechanic, then they come up with some kind of explanation for it, and if the explanation don't work well, patience, it just mean that "a wizard did it". This is not the first time we have seen it, even late 3.x had the same problem but it seem that here are taking it a step further.

Nightgaunt
2007-12-21, 04:01 PM
I admit though, one thing that bothers me about the all positives thing is that it almost forces you to go point buy. It's almost like they are balancing against point buy... however if *everything* is equally strong, then I guess it doesn't matter.

The only place I think it really matters, is the place the mighty Wizards are aiming for; the hearts and minds of the player. People who played half-orcs, even a good build, always felt like they were getting ripped off. By going all positive you are much more likely to make people feel better about their choices, whatever that choice may be. So even if it is balanced exactly the same way as 3rd edition was, it will alter the way you see the game by not having any penalties.

Balance matters less in a game of this scope anyway, with a DM who can shift things to balance out a problem anyway... Well Assuming you have a competent DM of course.

@Sebastian
As for the elf having his own version of an Aura of Competence, my guess would be it is an active thing. If the elf is asleep it probably doesn't work, and if the elf is pretending not to be an elf it may not work. Though if a human has something similar (or all races have something similar) it does make disguise much harder.

TheThan
2007-12-21, 04:03 PM
I like what I see, though it doesn’t completely alleviate my fears about 4.0.

Miles Invictus
2007-12-21, 04:15 PM
The only place I think it really matters, is the place the mighty Wizards are aiming for; the hearts and minds of the player. People who played half-orcs, even a good build, always felt like they were getting ripped off.

Damn straight. Compare what the Half-Orc gets to what the Elves, Dwarves, Halflings, and Gnomes get, and tell me there wasn't any malice or stupidity involved in the design process.

Learnedguy
2007-12-21, 04:36 PM
Heh, these new elves seem to be a lot more humane. Which I like, as I've always bugged myself on any race that, as a rascial charastic seem to have insufferable arrogance hard-coded into their spines.
Thank alot for that one Tolkien...:smallannoyed:

Durendal
2007-12-21, 04:41 PM
I think people are missing one big thing about this article, no mention of alignment. There was no "elves favor the Chaotic Good alignment becuase of blah blah blah."

Now this doesn't mean that aignment is completley out, but I think it means that it will take a lesser priority, which in my opinion is a good thing. Hopefully we won't see the stupid alignment restrictions on classes either.

RTGoodman
2007-12-22, 02:28 AM
Maybe I'm not remembering correctly, but didn't they say in some older preview that races we're going to get abilities as they grew in level so that your race actually mattered after creation?

This preview, to me, doesn't seem to be like that. Sure you've always got that +1 to Perception and the re-roll once per encounter, but it doesn't mention actually gaining (or even improving) abilities at higher levels. Maybe, as someone said, characters will get some bonus racial feats as they grow or something like that, but as of now this seems... well, not as much difference as I expected.

I sort of thought that each race would have a progression like a class, or (for a better example) like the spell-like abilities of some templates, which are gained by HD. Elves, for instance, would start with extra proficiencies and the alertness bonus, gain a speed boost around 3rd level, get the accuracy thing at maybe 5th or so, and then those would improve or others would be added every few levels.

Maybe I'm wrong, but what this preview says to me is that they're not really changing as much as I previously thought. The ideas and terms, yes. The mechanics? Not so much, besides abilities being per [round/encounter/day] instead of just per day.


Other than that, though, it looks decent. I'm looking forward to getting the Races and Classes book at some point soon, so I'm hoping it'll have more info (though probably not).

MammonAzrael
2007-12-22, 03:17 AM
Or he couldn't reveal everything in that article. Or maybe you get a new racial feat every couple levels, allowing you to "customize" your elf.

And Races and Classes is mostly fluff, no hard crunch, and lots of explaining. Still good to read tough.

Maroon
2007-12-22, 05:25 AM
Not specifically about this preview, but... let me get something straight. The Elves, the fey who have been expelled from the perfect hippie paradise of the Feywild, are all arboreal and huntery and illiterate, while the Eladrin, the ones who stayed, are all bookish and living in towers and casting spells? How does that make sense, except in a 'boy, these Elves must be compensating for something' way?

Kiirseva
2007-12-22, 05:38 AM
It just dawned on me:

No mention of trance or immunity to sleep effects. No bonus vs. Enchantment (probably due to lack of schools). Hm.

Maroon
2007-12-22, 05:48 AM
It just dawned on me:

No mention of trance or immunity to sleep effects. No bonus vs. Enchantment (probably due to lack of schools). Hm.They might get racial feats for those or something. Apparently they made race matter more at higher levels by making it matter less at lower levels.

Morty
2007-12-22, 06:01 AM
I think people are missing one big thing about this article, no mention of alignment. There was no "elves favor the Chaotic Good alignment becuase of blah blah blah."

Now this doesn't mean that aignment is completley out, but I think it means that it will take a lesser priority, which in my opinion is a good thing. Hopefully we won't see the stupid alignment restrictions on classes either.

Holy crap, I didn't notice that. Does it mean that races will be no logner pidgeon-holed into stupid "usually X" stereotypes? I realy hope so.

Kurald Galain
2007-12-22, 06:23 AM
Not that it matters in the slightest in actual play, but I notice that elf maximum age is "over 200", whereas (a long time ago) it used to be "about 650"...

Oh and yeah, getting a "racial bonus" because somebody of a different race is nearby is silly, and it's probably one of those things that people will forget and that won't matter anyway since it's only a +1.

Haley: Elf senses tingling! There's a secret door over there!
Vaarsuvius: How can you have elf senses, you are a human, for crying out loud!
Haley: That's because you are standing next to me.
Vaarsuvius: And how can you be sensing something with my elf senses when I don't notice any portals around here at all? ARGH!

MammonAzrael
2007-12-22, 06:34 AM
It just dawned on me:

No mention of trance or immunity to sleep effects. No bonus vs. Enchantment (probably due to lack of schools). Hm.

I think that was all related to the fluff of elves being naturally magical, and thus will translate over to the Eladrin.


I think people are missing one big thing about this article, no mention of alignment. There was no "elves favor the Chaotic Good alignment because of blah blah blah."

Now this doesn't mean that alignment is completely out, but I think it means that it will take a lesser priority, which in my opinion is a good thing. Hopefully we won't see the stupid alignment restrictions on classes either.

It's probably because WotC is trying to downgrade the importance of alignment as much as possible. From what I've read, 4th won't pay much more than lip service to alignment.

kamikasei
2007-12-22, 07:05 AM
It just dawned on me:

No mention of trance or immunity to sleep effects. No bonus vs. Enchantment (probably due to lack of schools). Hm.


Elves are descended from those who lived primarily in the world, and they no longer dream of the Feywild.

"Dream of the Feywild" == trance, perhaps? That's how this looked to me when I first read it.

Beleriphon
2007-12-22, 07:13 AM
In place of 2 +2 bonuses in designated spots, humans might get a single +2 to any ability score of their choice.

I actually expect that they'll be like Saga, they get extra skills and feats. Humans might also have some kind of racial ability that lets them reroll any one skill check for some kind of cost (an action point maybe?). That seems to fit nicely into the human as a generalist concept that D&D tends to espouse.

fendrin
2007-12-22, 09:25 AM
I actually expect that they'll be like Saga, they get extra skills and feats. Humans might also have some kind of racial ability that lets them reroll any one skill check for some kind of cost (an action point maybe?). That seems to fit nicely into the human as a generalist concept that D&D tends to espouse.

Given the new setup, I would expect a re-roll power to be once per encounter, once per hour, or once per day.

Also, I would expect that there would be a human racial feat that gives them a +2 on the re-roll.

What is also probably way overpowered but possible is that humans can take general feats in the place of racial feats.

I also wouldn't be surprised by a human racial feat increasing their skill point bonus from 1 point per level to 2 points per level.

You know, I think humans must be the hardest race to balance, with their versatility. I mean, there's a reason that most optimized builds in 3.X seem to be made from humans.

I also hope the dragonborn can't 'carry over' any racial feats or abilities. I would hate to see 'multi-racing' be the new way to cherry-pick. I might have to re-fluff dragonborn to be born as such. Like medium-sized kobolds.

Mr. Friendly
2007-12-22, 09:32 AM
I also hope the dragonborn can't 'carry over' any racial feats or abilities. I would hate to see 'multi-racing' be the new way to cherry-pick. I might have to re-fluff dragonborn to be born as such. Like medium-sized kobolds.

I don't understand what you mean. How would the dragonbord "carry over" racial feats and such? Carry over to what?

Rachel Lorelei
2007-12-22, 09:35 AM
In 3.5 Dragonborn are other races that become Dragonborn through a ritual. They lose their old racial abilities, keep their old racial stat mods, add the Dragonborn stat mods, and get the Dragonborn racial abilities.

I think Fendrin is under the misapprehension that 4E Dragonborn are going to work the same way. They're not; they're a race of their own.

fendrin
2007-12-22, 10:39 AM
In 3.5 Dragonborn are other races that become Dragonborn through a ritual. They lose their old racial abilities, keep their old racial stat mods, add the Dragonborn stat mods, and get the Dragonborn racial abilities.

I think Fendrin is under the misapprehension that 4E Dragonborn are going to work the same way. They're not; they're a race of their own.

100% correct. I hadn't seen any Races and Classes info yet... too busy spending money on other people to spend any on myself...

Matthew
2007-12-22, 11:23 PM
Wow, this article contains a perfect example of description/mechanical conflict. In the 'Elvish Strife, Separation, and Rebirth' article we're told that few Elves choose to become Clerics, but in the Elf mechanics we're told to choose an Elf if we want to play a Cleric, presumably because they get +2 to Wisdom...

I call shenanigans on that!

Rachel Lorelei
2007-12-22, 11:54 PM
Wow, this article contains a perfect example of description/mechanical conflict. In the 'Elvish Strife, Separation, and Rebirth' article we're told that few Elves choose to become Clerics, but in the Elf mechanics we're told to choose an Elf if we want to play a Cleric, presumably because they get +2 to Wisdom...

I call shenanigans on that!

Why? Few elves, overall, choose to become clerics. NPCs aren't optimal, and elves making good PC clerics doesn't make Elven culture lend itself to religious devotion.

Matthew
2007-12-22, 11:59 PM
Why? Few elves, overall, choose to become clerics. NPCs aren't optimal, and elves making good PC clerics doesn't make Elven culture lend itself to religious devotion.

If that were the case, they might as well have said that few Elves choose to become adventurers, preferring to remain in NPC Classes, if you see what I mean. Presumably, this is a measure of the adventurer population, rather than the population at large.
Of course, if you see player characters with player character classes as fundamentally different from NPCs with player character classes, then I'm just at odds with the design methodology. I don't see a distinction between PC and NPC Adventurers, least of all in terms of optimisation.

Rachel Lorelei
2007-12-23, 12:12 AM
The distinction between PC and NPC characters with class levels is that the PC character is created with the advantage of metagame knowledge. Elves don't know that those elves who become clerics are on average a little more potent than, say, Eladrin who do the same. Players do, so they might create an elven character who becomes a cleric for whatever reason.

Tallis
2007-12-23, 12:12 AM
Not that it matters in the slightest in actual play, but I notice that elf maximum age is "over 200", whereas (a long time ago) it used to be "about 650"...

...and a long, long time ago the maximum age was 2000years (for grey elves). They just keep dying younger an younger.

Matthew
2007-12-23, 12:20 AM
The distinction between PC and NPC characters with class levels is that the PC character is created with the advantage of metagame knowledge. Elves don't know that those elves who become clerics are on average a little more potent than, say, Eladrin who do the same. Players do, so they might create an elven character who becomes a cleric for whatever reason.

Which, I believe, is what I am calling shenanigans on. Why bother saying that few Elves become Clerics if you then expect it to be one of the main Class choices of mechanically minded players who choose Elves? That appears to be sending mixed messages to the audience, as far as I can see.

Rachel Lorelei
2007-12-23, 12:25 AM
Which, I believe, is what I am calling shenanigans on. Why bother saying that few Elves become Clerics if you then expect it to be one of the main Class choices of mechanically minded players who choose Elves? That appears to be sending mixed messages to the audience, as far as I can see.

Because... PCs don't have to be typical members of their culture? And, in fact, often aren't? Few elves become clerics. If a third or a quarter of PC elves become clerics, that makes maybe half an elven cleric a PC party (which is the only PC party in the world). That's hardly creating an abundance of clerics.

Making an elven cleric creates an elven cleric in the world. It doesn't say anything about overall default-elven-culture trends. I don't see the shenanigans.

Matthew
2007-12-23, 12:31 AM
Because... PCs don't have to be typical members of their culture? And, in fact, often aren't? Few elves become clerics. If a third or a quarter of PC elves become clerics, that makes maybe half an elven cleric a PC party (which is the only PC party in the world). That's hardly creating an abundance of clerics.

Making an elven cleric creates an elven cleric in the world. It doesn't say anything about overall default-elven-culture trends. I don't see the shenanigans.

Surely, that applies to NPC Adventurers, not just PCs, or are you saying that PC Adventurers should be marked out from NPC Adventurers as special in some way? If that's the case, then why bother with Adventurer Classes at all? Why not only make special Player Character Classes that are only available to actual Player Characters? Maybe that's what they're doing, I don't know.

Seriously, though, if you really don't think these two statements are at variance, then that's your perogative; I don't imagine that there's much point my trying to convince you otherwise.

Rachel Lorelei
2007-12-23, 12:51 AM
Surely, that applies to NPC Adventurers, not just PCs, or are you saying that PC Adventurers should be marked out from NPC Adventurers as special in some way? If that's the case, then why bother with Adventurer Classes at all? Why not only make special Player Character Classes that are only available to actual Player Characters? Maybe that's what they're doing, I don't know.
Adventurer classes exist to provide humanoid opponents with PC-style abilities as enemies, I'm guessing. I'm not saying PCs should necessarily be special (although they already are, by virtue of the game being about them)--I AM saying that the PCs are 4-6ish people in a huge world, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with one or more of them defying the cultural trends of their race, for optimization reasons or otherwise.


Seriously, though, if you really don't think these two statements are at variance, then that's your perogative; I don't imagine that there's much point my trying to convince you otherwise.
I just don't see your point. Are you suggesting that PCs should always follow the guidelines? How is "few" or "many" even meaningful in PC creation, when you're making one character?

Elves can become clerics. Most of the time, they don't--that means the world won't have many elven clerics. It will have some. Maybe a PC will be one of them more often than not, since elves are good at it. Where's the conflict? Elven clerics are still rare.

I'm not sure of why you have a problem. Do racial trends have to match up with optimal mechanics, for you? If not, where's the problem with elven cleric PCs being one a small number of elven clerics, rather than one of many?

Matthew
2007-12-23, 07:19 AM
Adventurer classes exist to provide humanoid opponents with PC-style abilities as enemies, I'm guessing. I'm not saying PCs should necessarily be special (although they already are, by virtue of the game being about them)--I AM saying that the PCs are 4-6ish people in a huge world, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with one or more of them defying the cultural trends of their race, for optimization reasons or otherwise.

Neither am I. What I am questioning is the wisdom of making these two statments:

Elves generally aren't Clerics.
You should choose an Elf if you want to play a Cleric.

Player 1: "I want to play a Cleric."
Player 2: "You should choose Elf as your race, then."
Player 1: "I thought Elves generally weren't Clerics?"
Player 2: "Who cares? You derive the best mechanical advantage from going against the stereotype."

Seems bonkers to me, especially when the stereotype has been created as part of this edition.


I just don't see your point. Are you suggesting that PCs should always follow the guidelines? How is "few" or "many" even meaningful in PC creation, when you're making one character?

Elves can become clerics. Most of the time, they don't--that means the world won't have many elven clerics. It will have some. Maybe a PC will be one of them more often than not, since elves are good at it. Where's the conflict? Elven clerics are still rare.

The point is that this encourages a disproportionate number of Player Character Adventuring Elf Clerics, as opposed to Elf Fighters, Warlords or whatever. I'm saying that the guidelines don't match up.


I'm not sure of why you have a problem. Do racial trends have to match up with optimal mechanics, for you? If not, where's the problem with elven cleric PCs being one a small number of elven clerics, rather than one of many?
I don't have a problem, but I don't think the designers have connected these two statements. In fact, I suspect that this is an editorial oversight libel to confuse new players. And, yeah, I do think racial trends should match up with optimal mechanics, but more importantly I think mechanics and mechanical advice should support the description of the default setting.

If the advice refers only to the +2 Bonus to Wisdom, then there are two expectations in play. Elf Player Characters generally have a higher than average Wisdom, so you should play one if you want to be a Cleric, or that Player Characters should have the maximum possible score in their prime Attribute, so you should choose an Elf if you want to be a Cleric. Either way, it sounds like a party is fairly likely to have an Elf Cleric in it. Of course, that rather depends on the context [i.e. what is recommended of the other races].

It seems to me that they would have been better served saying "you should put your highest Attribute in Wisdom if you want to play a Cleric," which is perfectly reasonable. Why bother saying you should choose an Elf if you want to play a Cleric? I suspect somebody just looked at the mechanics and paid no attention to the associated decription (or vice versa).

If the intended meaning is "Though few Elves choose to become Clerics, their Racial Wisdom Bonus means that they can derive a mechanical advantage from doing so," then it needs to be clearer, in my opinion.

dentrag2
2007-12-23, 07:46 AM
im ok with it, but if i have to deal with overpowered elves.......

Why cant we get kobolds as a player race? they have a level adjustment of plus 0, so it should be ok. besides, i like kobolds......:mitd:

dr awesome phd
2007-12-23, 10:51 AM
Eh, I'd have to say that I'm pleasantly surprised. While some of the post has no point of reference (i.e. "Squares" for movement, which is probably just a 5' increment anyway), it was still very exciting to see some of the things they've done and read a little fluff, too.

Theli
2008-01-06, 06:02 PM
Dear god I hope elves are the only race with something like this. This could become a book-keeping (and mapping) nightmare. Not to mention it makes no f-ing sense. If the elf spots something, he should tell you. There is no reason that having somebody near you should make you more perceptive without them somehow transmitting the information to you.


(Copying this from another thread to keep all the discussion in one place...)

Actually, it may not be a bookkeeping issue. It seems that perception isn't going to rolled in most cases. The DM will just have a list of the perception values of each of the members of the party, and they would compare the DC, of whatever it is to be spotted, to this number.

So if the elf is indeed the best spotter, they will automatically see everything first for whatever can be seen. And others will be able to see IN ADDITION to the elf.

Chances are, it's main use is to help people keep from being surprised.

It's no easy to figure out why it might make sense as simply the result of an elf's *presence*, so hopefully they'll do a good job of explaining it. Although I'm kinda wary that they may simply go the "magical aura" route. As if the elf's magical nature helps their allies see and hear...

Crow
2008-01-06, 06:08 PM
(Copying this from another thread to keep all the discussion in one place...)

Actually, it may not be a bookkeeping issue. It seems that perception isn't going to rolled in most cases. The DM will just have a list of the perception values of each of the members of the party, and they would compare the DC, of whatever it is to be spotted, to this number.

So if the elf is indeed the best spotter, they will automatically see everything first for whatever can be seen. And others will be able to see IN ADDITION to the elf.

Chances are, it's main use is to help people keep from being surprised.

It's no easy to figure out why it might make sense as simply the result of an elf's *presence*, so hopefully they'll do a good job of explaining it. Although I'm kinda wary that they may simply go the "magical aura" route. As if the elf's magical nature helps their allies see and hear...

Thanks for the copy over.

If somebody has a higher perception rating than the elf, then there might be some problems. But if they go on to explain it as "magical" like you say, there isn't a whole lot to say past that.

When I mentioned book-keeping problems, I was thinking more for the DM. The DM seems to have plenty to think about already than which characters are within X ft. of the elf at any given time. And then if you need to be worrying about who is within x ft. of the dwarf, etc... If they make this something that is common among the races, each race having something special that it imparts on allies within x ft...It will get old really fast.