Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

D&D 4th Edition: 1 day until multiclassing Preview. (38)

DevoutlyApatheticDevoutlyApathetic I've Done WorseRegistered User regular
edited April 2008 in Critical Failures
Current news implies that the GSL (that lets people publish stuff for 4th D&D) includes language that makes it mutually exclusive with the OGL (the thing that let people publish stuff for 3.x D&D). Possibly over the entire depth of a company. [Insert Nerd Rage]

Lastest bit: Mini-PHB PDF. Collected info from various leaks in one handy place!

A new, now less ugly book edition is nigh!

products_dndacc_217367200_lgpic.jpg

Previous cover:
Spoiler:

This will be updated soon with more details (suggestions welcome) but for now:

Enworld, really the best place to find 4th edition information.

Wizards main site. A close 2nd.

Hell, otherwise known as the Wizards 4th edition board.

Latest news: OGL and SRD access will be restricted for the first 4 months to those willing to pony up 5 grand and sign some NDA's. Perhaps this will stem the tide of absolute crap in the opening months of 4th lifespan.

What's Changed?

A large amount. For a quick idea go buy Star Wars Saga edition.

Races:
Spoiler:

DevoutlyApathetic on
Trogg wrote: »
Not as positive as AIDS and cancer, but positive nonetheless.
«13456768

Posts

  • Cilla BlackCilla Black Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Yeah I'd be interested. But it's still too soon to make anything remotely concrete.

  • ElderCatElderCat Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited January 2008
    Will you be using the Wotc Online Tools to run it?

    enforceruserbarsplitcro.png
  • IncenjucarIncenjucar QA Tester -> Game Producer Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    edited January 2008
    ElderCat wrote: »
    Will you be using the Wotc Online Tools to run it?

    Right now I expect to talk myself into trying it out, but I'm not 100% certain of it. One way or another, I intend to use what's available to make sure it's as painless to go digital as possible.

    freefallagentad_zps635a83ed.png
  • PonyPony Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Mmmm.... new thread smell.

  • IncenjucarIncenjucar QA Tester -> Game Producer Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Smells like team spirit.

    Must be a warlord feat.

    freefallagentad_zps635a83ed.png
  • PonyPony Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Warlords: Like bards, but less gay.

  • LardalishLardalish Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    I would love to play if schedule allows.

    Any info on the typical campaigns you run? RP heavy, combat oriented, high powered, low powered? Just curious about your style.

  • IncenjucarIncenjucar QA Tester -> Game Producer Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    edited January 2008
    I'm a fairly flexible DM. I tend towards quasi-realism in the sci-fi sense... I like to make things actually make sense... less random encounters and more meaningful encounters... if you run into a pack of half-dragon dire wolves there is a reason they're there, politics happen, etc.

    I also tend to be pretty comfortable with weird ass shit, unless all the players want to keep the campaign more traditional, I have no problem with someone playing something somewhat over the top, so long as it can still get along in the world.

    Scan through my wiki homebrew if you want to get an idea for the ideas I generate when left to my own devices; it's more or less the setting I submitted to WotC for 3E (Curse you, Hellcow, and your magitech!)

    My only really strict thing is to have everyone in the party genuinely cooperative... if two players want to have squabbles, that's fine, but in-game PVP gets tedious -fast- unless it's some long-developed thing, like two characters spending ten levels as rivals culminating in an honor dual.

    freefallagentad_zps635a83ed.png
  • PonyPony Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    there are so many people bitter at keith baker because his "steampunk magitech thing" got picked instead of their epic tale of dark fantasy or whatever

    eberron is still great

    not knocking your setting at all incen, haven't even looked at it

    but just sayin'

  • DisruptorX2DisruptorX2 Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Incenjucar wrote: »
    I'm a fairly flexible DM. I tend towards quasi-realism in the sci-fi sense... I like to make things actually make sense... less random encounters and more meaningful encounters... if you run into a pack of half-dragon dire wolves there is a reason they're there, politics happen, etc.

    I also tend to be pretty comfortable with weird ass shit, unless all the players want to keep the campaign more traditional, I have no problem with someone playing something somewhat over the top, so long as it can still get along in the world.

    Scan through my wiki homebrew if you want to get an idea for the ideas I generate when left to my own devices; it's more or less the setting I submitted to WotC for 3E (Curse you, Hellcow, and your magitech!)

    My only really strict thing is to have everyone in the party genuinely cooperative... if two players want to have squabbles, that's fine, but in-game PVP gets tedious -fast- unless it's some long-developed thing, like two characters spending ten levels as rivals culminating in an honor dual.

    Can I be an anthropomorphic bi-sexual fox Psionicist who wields a buster sword and has a dark past? Also, he's a half-fiend and his eyes glow different colours depending on his mood.

    Seriously, though, I'd be interested, though I doubt my schedule would permit it. I'll PM you when I get around to it.

    1208768734831.jpg
  • IncenjucarIncenjucar QA Tester -> Game Producer Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    edited January 2008
    I'm not against him. I had a few pleasant chats with him back when the news was broken. I wouldn't have been able to match him anyways, I have way too little experience and way too much ADHD.

    Besides, I get to pretend that Shifters and Incarnium are ripped off from my setting submittal. :P

    --

    Disruptor: Yeah, sure, if you're a multiclassed tiefling fleshwarper/psiwar. You will probably be laughed at by the other fleshwarpers though.

    freefallagentad_zps635a83ed.png
  • PonyPony Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    based entirely on the preview shit they have released thus far, a human warlord looks very appealing.

    i like being the buff guy. it's why i tend towards clerics.

    warlord is a different kind of buff guy, and tha'ts cool.

  • INeedNoSaltINeedNoSalt Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Who is the goddamn cover artist on that book

    I really hate that guy's art.

    sometimes you just gotta do a thing
  • DisruptorX2DisruptorX2 Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Who is the goddamn cover artist on that book

    I really hate that guy's art.

    Its the guy who can't draw feet or faces, right?

    1208768734831.jpg
  • PonyPony Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    wayne reynolds is the rob liefeld of the RPG art world

    they really need to stop using him

    he really is terrible

  • InquisitorInquisitor Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    So, is that thing with horns an Eldarin or whatever?

    B7ozVfx.png
  • IncenjucarIncenjucar QA Tester -> Game Producer Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    edited January 2008
    For some reason the people who do the D&D art refuse to follow the text for tieflings. :|

    freefallagentad_zps635a83ed.png
  • PonyPony Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Inquisitor wrote: »
    So, is that thing with horns an Eldarin or whatever?

    It's a Tiefling.

    Eladrin are high elves

    Say it with me now

    Eladrin=High elves.

    Elves=Wood elves.

    That's all.

    Eladrin are the hoity-toity Rivendell-like elves in their ivory towers and flowing robes

    Elves are the people in tree-villages with bows and capes made of woven leaves

    they're two subraces of the same basic race

  • PonyPony Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Incenjucar wrote: »
    For some reason the people who do the D&D art refuse to follow the text for tieflings. :|

    in what way

    do you mean the planescape tieflings

    who all look different because they are all people with a hint of demonic lineage?

    yeah because that's not what a 4e tiefling is

    they're a distinct race and they all have horns and a tail like that

    all of the tieflings in the art look like that

  • LitejediLitejedi Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Re: Pony.

    Well, let me explain how I see it as being pretentious. For D&D, I usually like fun romps of awesome characters messing up bad guys. The "style" of the new system seems to be attempting to be edgier, more extreme, darker. But all in such a way that every hero is looking like an anti-hero, and everyone will have pathos from some terrible past. But it's not *really* dark, it's just dark in the way that emo kids are dark, plastic and manufactured.

    3DS FC: 1907-9450-1017
    lj_graaaaahhhhh.gif
  • InquisitorInquisitor Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Ah, I see. Weird name distinction to make but, it's no real big difference.

    I guess I just didn't think that Tieflings got horns that big. That's far less subtle then I am used to seeing.

    B7ozVfx.png
  • InquisitorInquisitor Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Litejedi wrote: »
    Re: Pony.

    Well, let me explain how I see it as being pretentious. For D&D, I usually like fun romps of awesome characters messing up bad guys. The "style" of the new system seems to be attempting to be edgier, more extreme, darker. But all in such a way that every hero is looking like an anti-hero, and everyone will have pathos from some terrible past. But it's not *really* dark, it's just dark in the way that emo kids are dark, plastic and manufactured.

    Uhh. Things being edgier, more extreme and darker are really all up to the DM and the people playing the game, isnt it? Likewise isn't a hero actually being an anti-hero and having a terrible past completely up to the player?

    B7ozVfx.png
  • PonyPony Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Litejedi wrote: »
    Re: Pony.

    Well, let me explain how I see it as being pretentious. For D&D, I usually like fun romps of awesome characters messing up bad guys. The "style" of the new system seems to be attempting to be edgier, more extreme, darker. But all in such a way that every hero is looking like an anti-hero, and everyone will have pathos from some terrible past. But it's not *really* dark, it's just dark in the way that emo kids are dark, plastic and manufactured.

    and you are basing this on what

    the existence of the tiefling and the warlock in the PHB

    or perhaps wayne reynold's unfortuante and shitty "extreme" art that has been all over the place

    because god i hate wayne reynold's art too but it doesn't make the game "pretentious"

  • IncenjucarIncenjucar QA Tester -> Game Producer Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Pony: Races and Classes said slender tail and hidable demonic features, not tails bigger than your legs and horns bigger than your torso.

    Page 46, "Their small horns, their thin tails..."

    freefallagentad_zps635a83ed.png
  • PonyPony Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Inquisitor wrote: »
    Ah, I see. Weird name distinction to make but, it's no real big difference.

    I guess I just didn't think that Tieflings got horns that big. That's far less subtle then I am used to seeing.

    just like the 4e eladrin is a different thing than the 3e one, the 4e tiefling is a different thing than the 3e one.

    the 4e Tieflings are basically devil people. descendants of a fallen empire that had made a pact with devils, the tieflings all carry that fiendish lineage.

    apparently they can "tap into" that lineage even further. they can take feats to grant them wings and whatnot

  • DisruptorX2DisruptorX2 Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Pretentious would be like me, and being condescending towards the juvenile GRIM AND DARK feel you are talking about. In other words, the exact opposite.

    And yes, the x-treme cover art certainly doesn't help. :P I used to think tieflings were pretty cool. But all good things must come to an end, they are being marketed as the new drow.

    I don't really care though, because thats just their base setting. I can't say I ever played Greyhawk, either.

    1208768734831.jpg
  • PonyPony Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Incenjucar wrote: »
    Pony: Races and Classes said slender tail and hidable demonic features, not tails bigger than your legs and horns bigger than your torso.

    Page 46, "Their small horns, their thin tails..."

    meh

    i prefer the art to the single line of text anyway

  • LardalishLardalish Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Incenjucar wrote: »
    I'm a fairly flexible DM. I tend towards quasi-realism in the sci-fi sense... I like to make things actually make sense... less random encounters and more meaningful encounters... if you run into a pack of half-dragon dire wolves there is a reason they're there, politics happen, etc.

    I also tend to be pretty comfortable with weird ass shit, unless all the players want to keep the campaign more traditional, I have no problem with someone playing something somewhat over the top, so long as it can still get along in the world.

    Scan through my wiki homebrew if you want to get an idea for the ideas I generate when left to my own devices; it's more or less the setting I submitted to WotC for 3E (Curse you, Hellcow, and your magitech!)

    My only really strict thing is to have everyone in the party genuinely cooperative... if two players want to have squabbles, that's fine, but in-game PVP gets tedious -fast- unless it's some long-developed thing, like two characters spending ten levels as rivals culminating in an honor dual.

    Fine with me, this sounds excellent.

    Again, if schedules allow me to, I would love to play.


    And even though its months away, Im thinking Dragonborn defender-ish.

    God damnit, I need to stop making characters for games that are months away.

  • InquisitorInquisitor Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Pony wrote: »
    Inquisitor wrote: »
    Ah, I see. Weird name distinction to make but, it's no real big difference.

    I guess I just didn't think that Tieflings got horns that big. That's far less subtle then I am used to seeing.

    just like the 4e eladrin is a different thing than the 3e one, the 4e tiefling is a different thing than the 3e one.

    the 4e Tieflings are basically devil people. descendants of a fallen empire that had made a pact with devils, the tieflings all carry that fiendish lineage.

    apparently they can "tap into" that lineage even further. they can take feats to grant them wings and whatnot

    Hmm. Now I'm just trying to figure out if my knightly type character would feel the need to purge such a race from the world or if they could be redeemed or not.

    B7ozVfx.png
  • IncenjucarIncenjucar QA Tester -> Game Producer Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    edited January 2008
    I prefer the text simply because the art looks like Disney's gargoyles got their wings clipped. :P

    Also, that is a HELL of a lot of mass to have attached to your ass.

    I honestly think the guy just had a hardon for that one painting in the 2E PHB with the topless girl with the big giant tail.

    --

    Inq's claimed Defender #1, but we'll see how it goes. Alas, it's a LONG way until release day, and since I'll be trying to move to another state around August, my usual steady schedule will evaporate. :P Just gotta see cross your fingers.

    freefallagentad_zps635a83ed.png
  • PonyPony Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    there's something that baffles me

    the people i see who complain the most about things like say, the player races or the points of light campaign setting, are the same people who generally discard the PHB races and play their own homebrew settings anyway.

    it's like complaining about stuff they aren't going to use anyway.

    it's weird.

  • IncenjucarIncenjucar QA Tester -> Game Producer Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    edited January 2008
    I think people think that new information will invalidate their homebrews through some kind of sympathetic magic.

    Alternatively: Grognards are fanbois, fanbois don't make sense.

    freefallagentad_zps635a83ed.png
  • PonyPony Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Apparently, the DMG comes with a sample town, adventure hooks, and a starter dungeon.

    I intend to run that when the game first comes out to get the hang of running it.

    Later, I might whip up some kind of homebrew setting or races or whatever.

  • IncenjucarIncenjucar QA Tester -> Game Producer Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Yeah. I figure Core 3+ DMG adventure + first WotC adventure is the best way to learn the game while I start applying rules to my homebrew.

    Starting off with homebrew just begs for a migraine.

    freefallagentad_zps635a83ed.png
  • InquisitorInquisitor Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Nice, I just found a short but sweet distilled version of key chivalric code points, that will make a great reference point if I decide to make a truly knightly character. And with Cavalier as a prestige class (or whatever they are actually called in 4th edition) it's sounds like a good idea.

    B7ozVfx.png
  • PonyPony Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Incenjucar wrote: »
    Yeah. I figure Core 3+ DMG adventure + first WotC adventure is the best way to learn the game while I start applying rules to my homebrew.

    Starting off with homebrew just begs for a migraine.

    yeah

    how are you going to expect to balance a new race or class you create if you don't even know how the existing things gel with the rules

    also, apparently a starting adventure will be coming out for 4e before the core books come out, with pre-gen'd characters, so i might be interested in buying and running that to see how it works out.

  • PonyPony Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Inquisitor wrote: »
    Nice, I just found a short but sweet distilled version of key chivalric code points, that will make a great reference point if I decide to make a truly knightly character. And with Cavalier as a prestige class (or whatever they are actually called in 4th edition) it's sounds like a good idea.

    Paragon Paths.

    They are different from Prestige Classes in one very significant aspect: You don't leave your class to enter them.

    You just tack them right onto your class, giving you more powers and customization options.

    same with epic destinies

  • IncenjucarIncenjucar QA Tester -> Game Producer Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Yeppers. I'm grabbing as much as I can as soon as I can.

    I just wish Amazon shipped faster so I wouldn't be debating between paying full price and getting them later. :P

    But I've got some Borders cards to burn anyways, and a decent discount once a week there, so whatever.

    freefallagentad_zps635a83ed.png
  • PonyPony Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Kits and class varients have sort of backdoor snuck into 4e.

    By adding new powers in supplement books, they essentially change what a class can do

    by adding Class Training feats, you can make varient class concepts with very little changes.

  • InquisitorInquisitor Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Pony, that makes so much more sense that it's not even funny. Prestige classes really only made a lot of sense for things like Assassins, where you had to join a specific guild for specific training. Now it's much more of a "I'm a warrior with some extra focus towards mounted combat". It sounds like a much more natural evolution for a character.

    B7ozVfx.png
«13456768
This discussion has been closed.