Some of your 4e Q's answered?

[Charity]

OK I have stumbled accross a thread here (http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1022209) The OP claims to have held the new core books in his hands.

The good folk at Enworld have summerised Tanus's posts for your convieniance.



Each class has it's own chapter that details different builds and lists the powers available (Between 3-8 per level it seemed). Monster entries are much shorter than in 3.5, but much more concise...

The books look and feel great, there seems to be more artwork and a more logical layout in all the 4e books. The new DM screen is 100% better than the old one...

Ok, multiclassing is done entirely through feats. You take one feat to multiclass and gain a power from that class, and then take additional feats to take more powers from the class.

Rituals are obtained by buying ritual scrolls or ritual books. Ritual scrolls are consumed after one use, books teach the ritual to you permanantly. All rituals seem to have a casting time of at least 10 minutes, require a material component, and require the use of the ritual casting feat (which wizards and clerics get for free at 1st level) Most of the divination spells in 3.5 are now rituals as well as some of the old illusion spells.

Each class has about 15 or so pages written about it which includes powers and paragon paths. It's possible to make characters that don't fall into their presupposed role, but you have to multiclass to do it (you'll need defender powers from fighter to be an effective rogue defender, etc.)

There are no subrace rules (drow, gold dwarf, etc.) in the PHB.

There are approximately 3 times the amount of feats in the 4e PHB as the 3.5 PHB.

The DMG is all about how to run a game. There is no reason at all for a player to have one.

Oh and by the way, Greyhawk, Ravenloft and Dark Sun are definately getting 4e campaigns down the line as well as Planescape and Spelljammer (which they just started working out). They assured us that we can look forward to most of the old campaign setting being remade, and mentioned the above by name...

Almost forgot to add, social encounters seemreally cool. Different encounters rely on different skills and number of successes. Some skills can be used to cancel out other player's skills. An example would be: You need 4 successful skill checks to convince the king a man was guilty, you could choose from diplomacy, bluff or intimidate. The Vizier wants to convince the king otherwise, so he can use his bluff to cancel out a successful diplomacy check that the PC made, etc...

Bill Slavicsek mentioned those by name as what we'd see after Forgotten Realms and Eberron were out. Greyhawk is a definate, he said they were working on the books for it, and Dark Sun is one that he mentioned "we would see down the line". I don't know if he slipped up or if he wasn't 100% sure, but he sounded pretty confident...

This is a twice snipped post so please forgive the English and lack of continuity.
Also this Talus guy admits himself that he only got a quick look at them and so has no really indepth insights... it has also been discussed that the multiclassing revelation isn't the whole story
As the tealady says

No one listen to Charwoman Gene. Charwoman Gene decide to start using other speech patterns.

Mike Mearls told me not three weeks ago that each class has a table the tells you "you get this much stuff for multiclassing this much into this class".

This was after the PH printing.

Feats are the entry points and "cost" for multi classing. *speculation*

When you gain a class power you can choose from your main class or any classes you have a feat in.

Paragon Path isn't directly related to multiclassing.

Multiclassing Preview 4/30.

[Dhavaer]

The long class descriptions sound a little worrying; 3.5 class descriptions were starting to get pretty inflated towards the end, but they never had their own chapters (Tome of Magic doesn't count: they had their spell lists, associated monsters, etc in with them too).

I like more artwork, I don't care about the DM screen. Feat multiclassing sounds interesting, I liked the 'Ascetic X' and related feats in 3.5.

Not sure about rituals; aren't all classes meant to get rituals? Do the martial classes' rituals work differently? I'm having trouble imagining how they could be the same.

I like players not needing the DMG; needing it for wealth by level, magic items, etc was annoying.

I've heard about the complex skill checks before, and I like the sound of them. Apparently they'll be used for things other than social encounters as well.

[Xefas]

Not sure about rituals; aren't all classes meant to get rituals? Do the martial classes' rituals work differently? I'm having trouble imagining how they could be the same.

It sounds to me like if a Fighter takes the feat "Ritual Training" (just a guess at the name) then he can use any rituals the party comes across just as well as anyone else.

It's just that Wizards and Clerics get "Ritual Training" as a bonus feat at first level.

Which, this makes sense to me. If a Wizard can spend a couple years in study leaning how to make people's heads explode at 20 yards over the span of 3 seconds, then who's to say a Fighter can't spend a couple levels learning how to, over the span of 200 times the length of time, produce a lesser effect when the instructions are right on hand?

[Charity]

The long class descriptions sound a little worrying; 3.5 class descriptions were starting to get pretty inflated towards the end, but they never had their own chapters (Tome of Magic doesn't count: they had their spell lists, associated monsters, etc in with them too).

I quite like the idea of the class section being a one stop shop as it were, I hate having to flick to x section to look at my spells, then y section to see my starting gold then friggin z section to look at the domains for various gods... gah. They will have to include 80 odd powers in each section, and cross classing tables/rules so it doesn't see that extreme.


Not sure about rituals; aren't all classes meant to get rituals? Do the martial classes' rituals work differently? I'm having trouble imagining how they could be the same.
Yeah I thought that too, and indeed have the same trouble envisioning how they will end up.



I've heard about the complex skill checks before, and I like the sound of them. Apparently they'll be used for things other than social encounters as well.

Yeah I just included that for completeness really.

... and how did I manage to screw up the thread title? ... *sigh*

[Roderick_BR]

Almost forgot to add, social encounters seemreally cool. Different encounters rely on different skills and number of successes. Some skills can be used to cancel out other player's skills. An example would be: You need 4 successful skill checks to convince the king a man was guilty, you could choose from diplomacy, bluff or intimidate. The Vizier wants to convince the king otherwise, so he can use his bluff to cancel out a successful diplomacy check that the PC made, etc...
OBJECTION!
Sorry, someone had to :smalltongue:
Hmm... how much can this source be trusted? If it's real, sounds like it'll be good.

[Charity]

I make no claims as to the reliability of the source.
Go to the original thread and decide for yourself, based on how much you like what he's saying apparantly thats the only logical thing to do...
Sorry couldn't resist...
Anyhow, in fairness, who can vouch for any forum posters credentials?

[Rutee]

Blah. I'm iffy on the one stop shop idea, but I'm used to games formatting things linearly. "Start with this step, then this one, then this one" in character creation. I /do/ like that there'll be lots of material on each class though.

[Charity]

It can still be step by step, just avoid the flick to this section between each step and you're golden.

[The Faceless]

Spelljammer?

Spelljammer?

They're bringing back Spelljammer? 4E now cannot come soon enough!

[Rutee]

...Seriously? I missed that in there.

*Rechecks*

Oh merciful Allah Thank you. I can have my fun with the victorians IN SPACE (http://www.webcomicsnation.com/shaenongarrity/narbonic_plus/series.php?view=archive&chapter=16755&mpe=1&step=1) theme once again.

[Skjaldbakka]

4E Spelljammer I can see. But 4E Ravenloft? I don't see how you can do Ravenloft justice with 4E. PCs are too . . . stalwart for that.

[Azerian Kelimon]

WOOHOO! ****ING YEAH, They're bringing Planescape back! I can't wait for 4e to come, so that I can have my philosophers with garrotes!

This tips me over to 4th ed unless it's a total disaster. All the GOOD CS' are coming back with 4th ed, at long last. I can't wait to see how Planescape will work now that out of combat interaction has a new, easier system.

[Tsotha-lanti]

I can't say I buy any of the setting stuff. Sounds like made-up fanwank rumors. Why would WotC suddenly put so much effort into resurrection all the old settings? The previous model (licensing settings out to outside parties to develop) seemed a lot more sensible, anyway, what with the OGL.

[Azerian Kelimon]

Maybe because THIS happened:

"Hey, Barney.
What up, Mike?
I was thinkin'...we're making a new edition, which is really, REALLY different from every previous one...
Yeah, so?
Well, many people are not gonna be happy with it?
Well, that's true. So, whachoo have in mind?
Bringing back the cult campaign settings which 3.5 didn't.
Hey, that DOES sound like a plan. If the geeks get sentimental, they'll go ahead and buy 4e to get to play those excellent settings. Good idea. Mike, you get a pay rise.
*Homerlike WOOHOO!*"

[Tsotha-lanti]

Doesn't sound likely. Hasn't it already been stated that the Forgotten Realms setting, for instance, is going to get a total remake? Planescape already got screwed from here to Sunday in 3.5. It's obvious - necessary, even - that they're going to re-imagine the settings, if they do publish them. I doubt they'd have any illusions about the reactionary outcry at "ruining our old favorite settings!" (similar to the outcry about 4E in general).

[Azerian Kelimon]

With years of abstinence in the middle, no one's going to complain even if they transform Spelljammer into Promethean: The Created and Planescape into Saint Seiya.

[Tsotha-lanti]

You're optimistic. :smallamused: Wanna buy some real estate near Baghdad? The place is perfect for a holiday resort.

Seriously though, what you postulate doesn't sound very likely at all. I don't see how publishing all the old settings themselves is suddenly a good business decision. (It is, however, something that many fans would desperately want to believe. Heck, may some developer over at WotC did say it because it's what they want to believe.) Financially, they're sure to be better off concentrating on non-campaign products and on the big campaign settings. Dark Sun, Ravenloft, and the like are better campaign settings than FR or Greyhawk, but it's because they're specific; and because of the specificity, they each appeal to smaller crowds. WotC is all about the big audiences. (Which is probably a good way to avoid TSR's fate.)

[illathid]

Except you know, that they've said each campaign setting is only going to have 3 books published in a year, and then they're done. So there will only be 3 FR 4e books total. Thats it. And it's going to be the same with Eberron. This means that there will be a lot less competition between the settings like there was in TSR's days.

[Morty]

If this thing about Planescape coming back is true it's awesome, but I'm not sure I belive it. After all, they removed Great Wheel from core because it was "too complicated".

[Starbuck_II]

Except you know, that they've said each campaign setting is only going to have 3 books published in a year, and then they're done. So there will only be 3 FR 4e books total. Thats it. And it's going to be the same with Eberron. This means that there will be a lot less competition between the settings like there was in TSR's days.

They said 3 books per AND adventure books. So they will still make books for FR but only for adventures.

[Azerian Kelimon]

Which seems to be a definitive answer for Tsotha's doubts. With three setting books, there's 'nuff space for, say, 5 or 6 settings, easily.

[Pauwel]

If this thing about Planescape coming back is true it's awesome, but I'm not sure I belive it. After all, they removed Great Wheel from core because it was "too complicated".

I don't see why Planescape can't have the Great Wheel just because core doesn't. Many settings have their own cosmologies.

[Morty]

I don't see why Planescape can't have the Great Wheel just because core doesn't. Many settings have their own cosmologies.

My point is, since they're so big on simplicity, find it strange they're reintroducing a cosmology that is everything but simple. They might simplify it, though.

[DeathQuaker]

I don't see why Planescape can't have the Great Wheel just because core doesn't. Many settings have their own cosmologies.

While that's true, everything we've seen about 4th Ed so far, including what was presented in the "Worlds and Monsters" seems to go against the grain of that thinking.

While WotC never officially put out a fully developed Planescape setting for 3.5, their adoption of the Great Wheel as official cosmology and the "Manual of the Planes" and "Planar Handbook" incorporated in a lot of Planescape fluff so that people could pretty much run a Planescape campaign or Planescape-like campaign easily enough if they were so inclined. (And even moreso if people used the stuff at Planewalker.org, which WotC was not a part of but they DID sanction, if I understand it correctly.)

More to the point, very little in core 3.5 directly conflicted with Planescape. You had the Great Wheel, Sigil, and the Blood War (Tanar'ri vs Baatezu) all intact right there in core. I could create a viable Planescape character with just the 3.5 core books.

It's very different with 4th Ed, where the new "background fluff" for the "Points of Light" setup is ENTIRELY different from how Planescape works. The look, the feel, the philosophy, the fluff, the crunch, all different. Why would they scrap the Great Wheel and all within it, only to say, "Oh, we'll bring it back later." That doesn't make any sense to me. It would take an incredible amount of work to re-work in what they scrapped--sure, different settings can have different cosmologies, but there would be so much one would have to learn/re-learn for a Planescape game it doesn't seem viable to me.

Unless they are making an entirely new setting and calling it Planescape (much like the new Forgotten Realms is really a re-imagining and not much like the old setting at all. Or for a non-gaming example, like how both Lindsay Wagner and Michelle Ryan both played characters known as "Jaime Sommers the Bionic Woman" on television, but the characters and situations were extremely different*). Which is quite possible...

...BUT is unlikely to draw in die-hard fans of the original (much like Forgotten Realms die-hards were outraged when they heard of the changes to their favorite setting). Sure, it may draw in new players and people who weren't into the old Planescape, but I'd wonder how fans of the older system would feel.

It all seems odd to me.... doesn't seem like a very profitable venture for them, and would take a lot of development time away from probably more profitable settings like Eberron and FR. I guess we'll have to get more information on it as it comes out.

As an aside, if they did do Planescape, I have to wonder if the new tieflings would replace Planescape's tieflings, or if they'd bring in a "new" race of humans with distant fiendish ancestors.

* And only Lindsay Wagner is the REAL Bionic woman.

[Puggins]

Why would they bring the Great Wheel back? Pretty simple answer: lots of people like it. They felt they could do a better, more consistent cosmology, but WotC isn't stupid- if enough people like the Great Wheel, it'll be back.

Of course, it won't be in the core books as the default cosmology, but why should that matter? Both Forgotten Realms and Eberron have unique cosmologies that look nothing like the Astral Sea. We know for a fact that the Eberron cosmology isn't changing, so clearly they're not afraid to publish different versions, and since Planescape is pretty much all about the Great Wheel.... well, there you go.

[Puggins]

As an aside, if they did do Planescape, I have to wonder if the new tieflings would replace Planescape's tieflings, or if they'd bring in a "new" race of humans with distant fiendish ancestors.

Considering that all that is necessary to change over 4e Tieflings to 3.5e Tieflings is to replace "they made a deal with demons" with "they got it on with Demons," I'd say Tieflings are staying the same with some minor fluff changes. See: Eberron Mind Flayers and Dragons.

[EvilElitest]

There are no subrace rules (drow, gold dwarf, etc.) in the PHB.

Really, i thought Drow were a main race now


Also they are brining back spelljammer and planescape? Wow, i actually considering getting 4E just for that


Considering that all that is necessary to change over 4e Tieflings to 3.5e Tieflings is to replace "they made a deal with demons" with "they got it on with Demons," I'd say Tieflings are staying the same with some minor fluff changes. See: Eberron Mind Flayers and Dragons.

Tieflings in 3E are totally different from Tieflings in 4E. They have demonic roots and thats about it really
from
EE

[Artanis]

If this stuff is true, then it looks pretty cool. The layout sounds cool (though I don't have any knowledge with which to make a relative judgement), and subraces always kinda pissed me off. Shorter monster entries is a good thing because they could get really long in the books, and even in the SRD could be godd*** huge.

I never got a chance to play Spelljammer, Dark Sun, or Ravenloft, so it would be cool to see them again.

Social Encounters seem like a VAST step up from anything that 3e even tried to do, and (potentially, not necessarily in practice) even a big step up from The Giant's Diplomacy fix.

All in all, this looks like a very interesting bit of info :smallsmile:




I'll keep an open mind though because these snippets (the board the link goes to is down :smallfrown: ) contradict a lot of what's been said already, and the multiclassing stuff seems a little inconsistant between the two posts, and I've been a Blizzard fan too long for those not to raise huge red flags for me. I'll wait for corroboration or (even better) official confirmation before assuming this stuff is set in stone or anything.

[Kurald Galain]

I don't see why Planescape can't have the Great Wheel just because core doesn't. Many settings have their own cosmologies.

Mainly because several class powers are tied into the default fluff.

[wodan46]

Wonder what the limits are for multiclassing.

Grabbing a Healing Word or Lay On Hands power would be handy, as it would give allow you to give any class considerable healing ability.

[Starbuck_II]

Really, i thought Drow were a main race now
EE

I'm really curious why you thought that. All the information I saw was Drow are being treated like Gnomes: PC write up in the Monster manual not the Players Handbook.

A 3.5 analogy: Grey Elves were given a PC write up in Monster Manual, but only High Elves were in Player's Handbook.

[DeathQuaker]

Why would they bring the Great Wheel back? Pretty simple answer: lots of people like it.

Then they shouldn't have taken it away to begin with.

That was my point. If they're "simplifying" the game and blatantly getting rid of Planescape fixtures, then trying to bring it back... well, it's a very back-asswards way of doing it.

It just seems like an odd way of going about doing things. That's all.

ANyway, it's all rumor, so no point debating it any further.

[Starsinger]

Not sure about rituals; aren't all classes meant to get rituals? Do the martial classes' rituals work differently? I'm having trouble imagining how they could be the same.

Ever since I first heard mention of rituals, I'd always imagined they'd be something like 3.5's Incantations (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/magic/incantations.htm)

[Ascension]

I'm really curious why you thought that. All the information I saw was Drow are being treated like Gnomes: PC write up in the Monster manual not the Players Handbook.

I thought the same thing for a moment, then remembered that it was Tieflings who are the default core anti-hero race now. I can see where it would be easy to think Drow instead.

[Tsotha-lanti]

I thought the same thing for a moment, then remembered that it was Tieflings who are the default core anti-hero race now. I can see where it would be easy to think Drow instead.

I figure the logic is mostly something like "Drow suck. D&D 4E sucks. Therefore, drow are in the D&D 4E PHB as a core PC race."

[wodan46]

Actually, I believe its because they stated that 4th edition would have exactly 3 flavors of elves only:
Eladrin, who are generally Wizards
Elves, who are generally Rangers
Drow, who are generally unneeded and unwanted.

As for when the drow show up:
"It also reveals that drow will be presented as a character race in the Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting in summer 2008."

On the bright side, given that everyone is yelling at WOTC for changing everything they liked, my presumption is that they are going to completely redesign the Drow, just as they redesigned the Elves into distinct magical high elves and bow happy wood elves.

[EvilElitest]

I'm really curious why you thought that. All the information I saw was Drow are being treated like Gnomes: PC write up in the Monster manual not the Players Handbook.

A 3.5 analogy: Grey Elves were given a PC write up in Monster Manual, but only High Elves were in Player's Handbook.
Races and classes had them as a core race along with Eldrains and normal elves, they are the only sub race to make the change (I wonder why :smallannoyed: )


that being said, the remake of the settings has actually made me consider rethinkg me 4E approach, because i love those settings



I figure the logic is mostly something like "Drow suck. D&D 4E sucks. Therefore, drow are in the D&D 4E PHB as a core PC race."

Considering we have plenty of actual reason on why we don't like 4E, i don't think we need those suggestions thank you very much
from
EE

[Rutee]

Mainly because several class powers are tied into the default fluff.

Doesn't the default fluff intentionally keep cosmology simple explicitly because that makes it easy to replace?

[EvilElitest]

Doesn't the default fluff intentionally keep cosmology simple explicitly because that makes it easy to replace?

I think it was going on with their general theme of simplicity equal better. As per normal, i suspect WotC doesn't actually understand how their game works very well (hence 3E problems) and just wanted to make it easier for themselves to keep track of things. Problem is that a lot of people liked the Great Wheel
from
EE

[wodan46]

Do remember that the first setting they release is going to to simple default setting, and they'll get to the magic trains later.

That said, I like the concept of having 1 Elemental Plane (Elemental Chaos) and 1 Alignment Plane (Astral Sea), rather than oodles of specific and rather bland planes (fire plane: everything is on fire, or throws fire, or is fire, or what not).

[EvilElitest]

Do remember that the first setting they release is going to to simple default setting, and they'll get to the magic trains later.

That said, I like the concept of having 1 Elemental Plane (Elemental Chaos) and 1 Alignment Plane (Astral Sea), rather than oodles of specific and rather bland planes (fire plane: everything is on fire, or throws fire, or is fire, or what not).

I'd prefer a mix, the specific alignment planes could be found within the larger planes, everybody is happy.
from
EE

[skywalker]

Do remember that the first setting they release is going to to simple default setting, and they'll get to the magic trains later.

That said, I like the concept of having 1 Elemental Plane (Elemental Chaos) and 1 Alignment Plane (Astral Sea), rather than oodles of specific and rather bland planes (fire plane: everything is on fire, or throws fire, or is fire, or what not).

I liked the separate elemental planes. I always liked the idea of a completely endless sea. Also, an elemental plane of air where powerful wizards build sky castles? Yes please. Altho I agree with you about the fire and earth planes. I also always wondered why there was a plane of water(quick, how many spells have the "water" descriptor?) and no plane of ice. Probably cuz an endless ocean is so much cooler than anything ice can come up with.

I will also miss Elysium. Where do good people go when they die? :smallsigh:

[Rutee]

I liked the separate elemental planes. I always liked the idea of a completely endless sea. Also, an elemental plane of air where powerful wizards build sky castles? Yes please. Altho I agree with you about the fire and earth planes. I also always wondered why there was a plane of water(quick, how many spells have the "water" descriptor?) and no plane of ice. Probably cuz an endless ocean is so much cooler than anything ice can come up with.

I will also miss Elysium. Where do good people go when they die? :smallsigh:
Put 'em in then. If there's very little class crunch that defaults to Cosmology, it shouldn't be a horror to rewrite. The problem with 3e's cosmology was how much spells relied on it.

[skywalker]

Put 'em in then. If there's very little class crunch that defaults to Cosmology, it shouldn't be a horror to rewrite. The problem with 3e's cosmology was how much spells relied on it.

I'm not whining, darlin.

I was just saying, I liked those planes.

EDIT: Planes, skywalker. "Planes." Possibly time for sleep.:smallbiggrin:

[tyckspoon]

I'd prefer a mix, the specific alignment planes could be found within the larger planes, everybody is happy.
from
EE

Right, those would be deific domains within the Astral Sea. Places where a power has claimed the area and shaped it to his, her, or its liking. If you really want a zone of Happy Fun Bob's Nigh-Infinite Ballpits and Skeeball, that can happen. It's just a little more like a 3.x demiplane or one of Eberron's planar moons.

[Mewtarthio]

That was my point. If they're "simplifying" the game and blatantly getting rid of Planescape fixtures, then trying to bring it back... well, it's a very back-asswards way of doing it.

Not really. They're rebuilding their campaign setting with a new default cosmology. However, because the Great Wheel is popular, they're releasing a 4e update to it, as part of an entirely different campaign setting (Planescape). The expectation is that most people will use the default cosmology, and that the majority of people who use the Great Wheel will do so as part of a Planescape campaign.

[EvilElitest]

Right, those would be deific domains within the Astral Sea. Places where a power has claimed the area and shaped it to his, her, or its liking. If you really want a zone of Happy Fun Bob's Nigh-Infinite Ballpits and Skeeball, that can happen. It's just a little more like a 3.x demiplane or one of Eberron's planar moons.

I just liked the orginization of the Great Wheel, its much more logical and niffty. Luckely, i can alter the 4E cosmology to suit my needs, so this is only one of my minor complaints
from
EE

[raygungothic]

Planescape! Spelljammer!

I think re-invention would be a much better way to treat these worlds (cosmologies. whatever) than attempting to re-hash them accurately within a different rules environment and gamer culture. It's only fair to judge this sort of thing by whether it succeeds on its own ground, not its faithfulness to the original - rather like a movie adaptation of a book.

And "hell yeah I'd buy 'em"! :smallbiggrin:

[EvilElitest]

Planescape! Spelljammer!

I think re-invention would be a much better way to treat these worlds (cosmologies. whatever) than attempting to re-hash them accurately within a different rules environment and gamer culture. It's only fair to judge this sort of thing by whether it succeeds on its own ground, not its faithfulness to the original - rather like a movie adaptation of a book.

And "hell yeah I'd buy 'em"! :smallbiggrin:

But the orginal is what made them unique and fun. A totally different spelljammer wouldn't be spelljammer, it would be something else
from
EE

[Rutee]

Planescape! Spelljammer!

I think re-invention would be a much better way to treat these worlds (cosmologies. whatever) than attempting to re-hash them accurately within a different rules environment and gamer culture. It's only fair to judge this sort of thing by whether it succeeds on its own ground, not its faithfulness to the original - rather like a movie adaptation of a book.

And "hell yeah I'd buy 'em"! :smallbiggrin:
As long as they keep the victorian ether science aesthetic of Spelljammer, I'll take it :smallyuk:

[Reinboom]

Then they shouldn't have taken it away to begin with.

That was my point. If they're "simplifying" the game and blatantly getting rid of Planescape fixtures, then trying to bring it back... well, it's a very back-asswards way of doing it.

It just seems like an odd way of going about doing things. That's all.

ANyway, it's all rumor, so no point debating it any further.

I don't think the Great Wheel removal was just for a simplification aspect, but to make it even less campaign specific.
I see it more like:
"We're removing air conditioning from being standard in this vehicle, that way the consumer can choose to either leave it like that and not worry about the hassle, they just let the windows down. Or they could have it installed. OR we could more easily install this all-in-one perfect climate control system for them. Or a pit of lava."

[EvilElitest]

As long as they keep the victorian ether science aesthetic of Spelljammer, I'll take it :smallyuk:

why is your face sour then?
from
EE

[tyckspoon]

"We're removing air conditioning from being standard in this vehicle, that way the consumer can choose to either leave it like that and not worry about the hassle, they just let the windows down. Or they could have it installed. OR we could more easily install this all-in-one perfect climate control system for them. Or a pit of lava."

Once I make it as an Evil Overlord, I am ordering a limousine equipped with a pit of lava.

[Azerian Kelimon]

Yeah, they're excellent Jacuzzis.

[Moff Chumley]

The smiley was directed at you, EE. Arrogance and pretension are not inexcusable, but ignorance is.

[Mewtarthio]

The smiley was directed at you, EE. Arrogance and pretension are not inexcusable, but ignorance is.

Isn't that the other way around?

And, in EE's defense, she was quoting raygungothic.

[Rutee]

It's a small yuk. It's a happy face. The smiley was in general, an amused look :P

[EvilElitest]

The smiley was directed at you, EE. Arrogance and pretension are not inexcusable, but ignorance is.

WTF? Just WFT?

And Rutee to see how a sour face is somewhat happy? Shouldn't you so this :smallamused: or this:smallwink: , or this:smallsigh:
am i missing something
from
EE

[Mewtarthio]

The trouble is that the :P emoticon is generally considered to be happy and playful. Unfortunately, that particular emoticon is best represented with the :smalltongue:. The :smallyuk: is just like the :smalltongue:, except it has an extra >, so it ends up looking like >:P, which is angry. Or possibly rendered lobotomized by a spike driven through its head; it's a little tough to tell.

[Dervag]

...Seriously? I missed that in there.

*Rechecks*

Oh merciful Allah Thank you. I can have my fun with the victorians IN SPACE (http://www.webcomicsnation.com/shaenongarrity/narbonic_plus/series.php?view=archive&chapter=16755&mpe=1&step=1) theme once again.If you really love Victorians in space, there's a somewhat old game called "Space 1889."

To summarize, Thomas Edison invents a reactionless space drive that exploits the properties of the luminiferous ether, goes to Mars, and finds technologically collapsed Martians living by their ancient canals.

Next thing you know, the major 'civilised powers' of the era are busily colonizing the planets. Cecil Rhodes would be proud. Heck, Cecil Rhodes is probably involved. After all, he did say:

"To think of these stars that you see overhead at night, these vast worlds which we can never reach. I would annex the planets if I could; I often think of that. It makes me sad to see them so clear and yet so far."

[EvilElitest]

The trouble is that the :P emoticon is generally considered to be happy and playful. Unfortunately, that particular emoticon is best represented with the :smalltongue:. The :smallyuk: is just like the :smalltongue:, except it has an extra >, so it ends up looking like >:P, which is angry. Or possibly rendered lobotomized by a spike driven through its head; it's a little tough to tell.

Ah the wonders of these little heads, what could they tell
from
EE

[Sebastian]

I don't think the Great Wheel removal was just for a simplification aspect, but to make it even less campaign specific.
I see it more like:
"We're removing air conditioning from being standard in this vehicle, that way the consumer can choose to either leave it like that and not worry about the hassle, they just let the windows down. Or they could have it installed. " "They just have to pay a little extra" an excelent analogy :smallbiggrin:

[Sebastian]

I liked the separate elemental planes. I always liked the idea of a completely endless sea. Also, an elemental plane of air where powerful wizards build sky castles? Yes please. Altho I agree with you about the fire and earth planes. I also always wondered why there was a plane of water(quick, how many spells have the "water" descriptor?) and no plane of ice. Probably cuz an endless ocean is so much cooler than anything ice can come up with.


There was a plane of ice. Where the plane of water border the plane of air you have the para-elemental plane of ice. And about the fact that plane were limitless expanse of a single element people keep forgetting elemental pockets , you could have a huge chunk of i.e earth, in the elemental plane of air, they are rare, but in an infinite plane you can still find a lot of them, and I ready to bet that even in the elemental chaos you will have something like the region of air, region of fire, etc, etc so that practically things will work almost exactly as before,the flavor text will be just a little more lame. (IMHO, Of course)

[skywalker]

There was a plane of ice. Where the plane of water border the plane of air you have the para-elemental plane of ice. And about the fact that plane were limitless expanse of a single element people keep forgetting elemental pockets , you could have a huge chunk of i.e earth, in the elemental plane of air, they are rare, but in an infinite plane you can still find a lot of them, and I ready to bet that even in the elemental chaos you will have something like the region of air, region of fire, etc, etc so that practically things will work almost exactly as before,the flavor text will be just a little more lame. (IMHO, Of course)

Wait, wait, I never heard of chunks of land/fire/anything else in the elemental plane of water. I completely forgot about the paraelemental planes. Is that where Celia came from?

[Mewtarthio]

so that practically things will work almost exactly as before,the flavor text will be just a little more lame. (IMHO, Of course)

Why do you say that? I'm not saying you're wrong, but I don't see why a plane in which all the elements swirl around and collide is any lamer than four planes that contain nothing but a single element and thematic creatures.

[Sebastian]

Wait, wait, I never heard of chunks of land/fire/anything else in the elemental plane of water. I completely forgot about the paraelemental planes. Is that where Celia came from?

I dunno, You should ask the Giant :) , my (quite confused, I admit) knowledge of the planes come from Planescape material, I remember elemental pockets from the manual of the planes 1st ed, I'm not really sure how they ported in 3e, but I suppose they are still there, but I never really followed 3e canon with any attention.

[Sebastian]

Why do you say that? I'm not saying you're wrong, but I don't see why a plane in which all the elements swirl around and collide is any lamer than four planes that contain nothing but a single element and thematic creatures.

Because the D&D cosmology was, at the very least, unique and distinctive to D&D, when you hear elemental plane of fire, para elemental planer of smoke, elemental plane of positive energy, you know you are talking of D&D, or a game heavily inspred by D&D. The elemental chaos, the feywild, the shadowfell (beside to show the almost morbid fascination of WotC for composite names) just sound so ... generic.
That I just happened to like this cosmology and the way it interacted with the rules, with undead created by negative energy and harmed by healing (another thing that 4e decided to get rid of) only make things worse.

[potatocubed]

Regarding Planescape...

I said some years ago (on this very forum, I believe) that Wizards could never release Planescape, and here is why:

Part of the coolness of the Planescape setting was that you never really knew what you were going to get. Exceptions, oddities, and special circumstances abounded. Things changed without reason or explanation. Why does the paraelemental plane of ice have an elemental lord when only full elemental planes are supposed to have one? Nobody knows, but he's there and he's nasty.

Part of Wizards' design philosophy is to have a consistent ruleset that covers every eventuality. Everything in the game must be quantifiable in terms of the rules that everyone uses. Random exceptions and loopholes are to be avoided where possible because they damage game balance.

I say that these two things are incompatible. Planescape has to fit into the overall 4e 'design scheme' because otherwise you'll get people taking 'unbalanced' feats and classes from Planescape and using them in other settings.

But... the moment you have to quantify the amount and type of damage dished out by the Lady of Pain, you've got a problem. It's easy to run a Planescape game in 3.5, and will probably continue to be so in 4e, because individual GMs don't have to worry about making all the rules consistent. Whether Wizards can plausibly put out a 4e Planescape setting is in serious doubt, because they do have to worry about that.

I will wait and see, I think, but I'm not holding out any hope.

EDIT: Although I reckon Dark Sun might have some promise.

[Rutee]

Because the D&D cosmology was, at the very least, unique and distinctive to D&D, when you hear elemental plane of fire, para elemental planer of smoke, elemental plane of positive energy, you know you are talking of D&D, or a game heavily inspred by D&D. The elemental chaos, the feywild, the shadowfell (beside to show the almost morbid fascination of WotC for composite names) just sound so ... generic.
That I just happened to like this cosmology and the way it interacted with the rules, with undead created by negative energy and harmed by healing (another thing that 4e decided to get rid of) only make things worse.
Yes, a plane of unilateral element is a totally unique concept, and DnD was a pioneer for making /it/, but elemental chaos? *That* was generic...

[Nikolai_II]

Mainly because several class powers are tied into the default fluff.

Fluff... it is malleable.. like fluff :smalltongue:

But yeah, they might not let Planescape have the Wheel, they might not make Spelljammer. Or they might. Who knows. Pester them enough and they will :smallwink: