One of them is a street smart minority who plays by his own rules, the other is a stuffy, uptight upholder of the law. Can they work together to bring down the evil crime lord?
It's not in my wiki, but the setting's spellcasters are, most visibly, elementalists.
All rising up the earth so they can cast down fire without getting walloped.
When I first saw Avatar, I was all, "SHIT."
It was kind of like crying during sex when I was watching it.
Yeah, it's always kind of awesome yet horrifying to see one of your ideas in a TV show or movie. On the one hand, it totally validates that you idea was, in fact, awesome. On the other hand, god damnit no one is going to believe I came up with it on my own anymore.
My first Gorkamorka Nob was named "Grimgor", assembled from the name generator. GW then went ahead a couple years later and made that the name of a fluff character. Pissed me off.
My first Gorkamorka Nob was named "Grimgor", assembled from the name generator. GW then went ahead a couple years later and made that the name of a fluff character. Pissed me off.
You should be glad he survived long enough and got enough teef to get off the planet the hulk crashed into.
delroland on
EVE: Online - the most fun you will ever have not playing a game.
"Go up, thou bald head." -2 Kings 2:23
My fantasy tends more towards Avatar or Vampire Hunter D.
Man, I'd love to homebrew up an earth, water, air, and fire bender classes for 4th edition.
One of my friends was going to run a Mutants and Masterminds game and I was working on an Earth Bender. I was super depressed that he never followed through with that.
And isn't Vampire Hunter D pretty explicitly SciFi?
I meant more the style of it than the robotic horses and bitchy vampires of it. :P
Even the robotic horses and what not are rather fantasy-esque. They use technology, but the two aren't mutually exclusive, and it would seem that VH D treats its technology as rare artifacts (one guy laboring to make horses--no Ford of robot horse manufacturing). It still (in my opinion) follows most of the tenets of fantasy, even with robot horses and grenade launchers.
piL on
0
Options
OtakuD00DCan I hit the exploding rocks?San DiegoRegistered Userregular
edited January 2008
Y'know, there's nothing against making use of a "Future-Fantasy" setting. It lets you be futuristic AND gives you a ton more freedom than say, Sci-Fi.
I think detecting internet sarcasm requires a fucking super-power.
Also: I'm giving in and buying the Eberron setting. Do the halflings need to ride dinosaurs? I'd rather they were detectives, with wide brimmed hats and slowly rotating fans. I mean, if you're telling me a partial inspiration for your setting is film noir, that's what I envision.
Nope, the dinosaur riders are the 'country' halflings. The city halflings are much more metropolitan, have control of the main continent's Healers Guild and many of its Inns and 'Sharn: City of Towers' even has a halfling mafia.
I have given up all hope and I have been drawn back into D&D. The reason I know this is true is because I just went to the trouble of listening to the D&D podcast (best part? they start the show by saying "Roll for Initiative!").
Unless my ears and comprehension failed me, I believe they discussed the fact the 4e will by and large do away with direct ability damage and bonuses (for instance, temporary dex damage from poison, or +2 strength from gauntlets of ogre power).
The justification? Ability scores affect so many different things, that you are bound to forget that say, that bull's strength will boost your climb roll, or that poison damage will lower your AC. And this stuff slows down the game.
Discuss.
edit: forgot the justification
OhtheVogonity on
Oh freddled gruntbuggly...thy micturations are to me/ As plurdled gabbleblotchits on a lurgid bee
They snuck ability enhancements out of Star Wars and nobody seemed to notice or care.
Obviously, they're basically throwing D&D on its head and people are panicking, but there was panic when 3e was announced.
Besides, things like Bull's Strength are relatively useless in a loot-heavy playstyle. Also, with a shift away from gear-centric character improvement they have an opportunity to make attributes even more important, which I figure they will.
Don't look for a "dump stat" in 4e because it won't exist for any of the classes if they want to remain competitive towards the top and far side of the bell curve of power.
I think it's a pretty solid idea, it'll just be interesting to see what they do instead for those bonuses/minuses that are usually accrued.
For instance they said that the gauntlets of ogre power will still be in there, but what in the hell will they do? Just add a bonus to your damage roll? A once per day do-something-super-strong power?
Is ray of enfeeblement gone?
I'm not opposed, there's just a lot of stuff they'll have to change and it'll be interesting to see what they do to cope with it.
It seems to me that they don't seem as worried about offending the long-term hardcore players this go around. I remember that their PR campaign for 3e was basically, "We swear we won't fuck over the sacred cows. We promise.". I for one think they did a pretty solid job of digging it out of the maze of tables and obscure rules, and it looks like they will build on that success fairly well. I for one didn't miss 18/00 strength.
OhtheVogonity on
Oh freddled gruntbuggly...thy micturations are to me/ As plurdled gabbleblotchits on a lurgid bee
As I can see it, Ray of Enfeeblement still has a place in the game. That one is only during the duration of the battle, it lasts for 20min if you're 20. The way I understood it is they were getting rid of the "heals at the rate of one point per day" damage. I could be wrong, but thats what it sounded like to me.
I'm pretty sure condition tracks of some sort are in, but I've read so much conjecture and hearsay that it's hard to keep it separated from the actual facts.
Also many of the facts have been changing so... um.. maybe? :P
I have given up all hope and I have been drawn back into D&D. The reason I know this is true is because I just went to the trouble of listening to the D&D podcast (best part? they start the show by saying "Roll for Initiative!").
Unless my ears and comprehension failed me, I believe they discussed the fact the 4e will by and large do away with direct ability damage and bonuses (for instance, temporary dex damage from poison, or +2 strength from gauntlets of ogre power).
The justification? Ability scores affect so many different things, that you are bound to forget that say, that bull's strength will boost your climb roll, or that poison damage will lower your AC. And this stuff slows down the game.
Discuss.
edit: forgot the justification
I'm torn on this issue. On the one hand, they are absolutely correct. On the other, I've just added magic item bonus' to my regular stats since forever and never once has it been problematic. Also, if you're willing to go the extra nerd mile and spend 5 bucks on some plastic paper covers and dry erase markers, stat modifying on the fly becomes stupid easy.
I'm torn on this issue. On the one hand, they are absolutely correct. On the other, I've just added magic item bonus' to my regular stats since forever and never once has it been problematic. Also, if you're willing to go the extra nerd mile and spend 5 bucks on some plastic paper covers and dry erase markers, stat modifying on the fly becomes stupid easy.
Well, it is a simplifying factor, which I will view as a good thing. And it doesn't really hurt anyone in particular, as it will be gone, point blank (aside from stat points from leveling up). It might also be a power balance thing. From what it appears their goals are, they want as much of a character's power and coolness and such tied in to the character itself. It might be to the point where screwing with ability scores, which are the very base (mechanically) of a character, throws the whole thing off the rails.
It's part of the backlash against a character being defined more by his gear than the way he was put together.
I for one hope they don't take it too far. Magic items are fun as hell and introduce good motivators into an adventure as well as eagerly sought after rewards.
Any wild speculation about magic items for us to argue about?
P.S. I use nerd furlongs
OhtheVogonity on
Oh freddled gruntbuggly...thy micturations are to me/ As plurdled gabbleblotchits on a lurgid bee
The one thing I don't like about this is it removes an avenue of attack. Now granted, attacking stats was poorly balanced in 3.x but having that complexity has a value.
I am slightly mollified from my cursory reading of Races and Classes, hopefully I'm fretting over nothing.
The one thing I don't like about this is it removes an avenue of attack. Now granted, attacking stats was poorly balanced in 3.x but having that complexity has a value.
I am slightly mollified from my cursory reading of Races and Classes, hopefully I'm fretting over nothing.
I do see your point of view. I'd really hate to see them strip away so many mechanics (or at least too many good ones) that the game is less rich and we start clamoring for more complexity because the game has become too simple.
That said, one of the knocks on the game for a long time has been it's complexity and penchant for charts (never where you can find the fuckers). I imagine it's probably also a good commercial move to make the game easier on beginners. Lower the barrier for entry and all that.
OhtheVogonity on
Oh freddled gruntbuggly...thy micturations are to me/ As plurdled gabbleblotchits on a lurgid bee
If it was about R&C one thing that caught my eye was repeating the "Options, Options, Options" thing that was central to 3.x while mentioning it applied to in combat options as well. That is a pleasing statement to me.
Edit: Charts can eat a dick. Most of the current charts are just worked out math for you. I don't really need to look at them to play/update except for possibly the spell charts.
I have never had any problems figuring out any of the previous editions' rules and charts and whatnot. However, I would rather have a simple system and more players than a complex system and less players.
Also, simple does not necessarily mean lack of depth. Take 40K: the rules are pretty simple when it comes down to the individual unit. The complexity comes from the use of different tactics and the near infinite possible combinations of forces. I hope 4E is the same way, where each individual ability is easy to understand and use, leaving the complexity to the imagination of the players and any combination of simple powers they can imagine to form complex, awesomely unique characters.
I want players to be able to look at a stat line and say, "Oh, I understand how that works!" From there, they can move on to, "I wonder what happens if I do this?" This would be a vast improvement over the, "How does that work?" and, "I don't get it," that we often see in current and previous editions.
delroland on
EVE: Online - the most fun you will ever have not playing a game.
"Go up, thou bald head." -2 Kings 2:23
The whole point behind the removal of stat items is because stat items are as generic as fucking possible and are just another form of leveling up, rather than doing something actually new and interesting.
I remember someone in the last thread mentioning something about attack "chains" for a monk-like character where one attack would lead to different stances, etc.
This isn't exactly the same but in Races & Classes the fighter is mentioned to have an attack that raises his AC by 2 if it connects, it's not too big a stretch to think there might be similar attacks that could raise his attack bonus on the next attack, or inflict other penalties. What would be cool is linking these together so if you want to use a big attack next turn, you can use an attack-bonus-boosting attack to increase it's chance of connecting, or if you're surrounded by enemies you can use the AC Boost attack so you can still deal some damage while reduing enemy efficiency.
In short, fighters look to be a lot cooler, and have more options on how to direct their efforts in battle.
I mean, it won't make a difference for people like me or you, who post on message boards about D&D, but for other people first impressions are very important. And that cover is a terrible first impression.
Perhaps like some of the older covers, with those standard completely mixed parties bustin' in on some baddies. You know what I mean.
Barbarian shattering the door, axe in hand, while an elf wizard lurks in the doorway fiddling with components and a halfling thief assesses the situation.
Come to think of it, I kinda miss those little cartoons they used to have in the first edition books. Well, the DMG at least. I think they may have been Foglio. Or at least some of them. I might also be misremembering things.
I think a huge single character piece would've been neat. Like a dwarf fighter looking off to the left whilst weighing his hammer knowingly in his hand.
Just dreaming out loud here.
Also: Am I reading things right and seeing that there will be a May release of the first 4e module. I assume the bare-bones rules with pregenned characters? Maybe I'll pick that up when time comes and run it and report back. You know for the good of the forum.
(This is all, of course, an elaborate ruse to keep me from thinking about how hard I'm going to be reamed this semester. Ugh.)
OhtheVogonity on
Oh freddled gruntbuggly...thy micturations are to me/ As plurdled gabbleblotchits on a lurgid bee
Hopefully they do some actual testing though, like they do with movie screenings.
They really should mix the art up in general though.
Everything from Flash Art to Anime to Brom.
Man, no. I don't want anime in my D&D books.
Edit: Unless, for some reason, it's appropriate. I guess anime would be perfectly appropriate in Oriental Adventures or whatever, but I'd rather not see it in the Player's Handbook.
Some games, anime style is appropriate. Exalted, for example. D&D is a different style, and it shouldn't be represented with anime (for the most part). High fantasy swords-and-sorcery adventure is best represented by terrible monsters, great heroes, epic battles, beautiful vistas, and dank dungeons, not necessarily by coronas of energy surrounding people as they scream loudly and throw power about randomly. Even wizards shouldn't be represented that way... their magic is different. Sorcerors you can make a case for, but it's still too much of a genre-breaker.
Even Oriental Adventures I'd see more in a kung-fu movie style instead of anime style. The difference is primarily in, again, the lack of coronas of "energy" or whatnot, attacks that seem more like godly smiting than two people fighting, and the like.
This is just a personal preference, of course, and I find that my opinions rarely seem popular, especially when people seem to miss my point, so let me end this by saying the artistic direction will not make or break the game for me, but I want the people attracted to the game by its art to get the game they wanted and enjoy it, rather than get the game they thought was Exalted 3rd Edition and break it.
Posts
It's not in my wiki, but the setting's spellcasters are, most visibly, elementalists.
All rising up the earth so they can cast down fire without getting walloped.
When I first saw Avatar, I was all, "SHIT."
It was kind of like crying during sex when I was watching it.
Yeah, it's always kind of awesome yet horrifying to see one of your ideas in a TV show or movie. On the one hand, it totally validates that you idea was, in fact, awesome. On the other hand, god damnit no one is going to believe I came up with it on my own anymore.
You should be glad he survived long enough and got enough teef to get off the planet the hulk crashed into.
"Go up, thou bald head." -2 Kings 2:23
One of my friends was going to run a Mutants and Masterminds game and I was working on an Earth Bender. I was super depressed that he never followed through with that.
Jordan of Elienor, Human Shaman
Even the robotic horses and what not are rather fantasy-esque. They use technology, but the two aren't mutually exclusive, and it would seem that VH D treats its technology as rare artifacts (one guy laboring to make horses--no Ford of robot horse manufacturing). It still (in my opinion) follows most of the tenets of fantasy, even with robot horses and grenade launchers.
Star Wars.
Nope, the dinosaur riders are the 'country' halflings. The city halflings are much more metropolitan, have control of the main continent's Healers Guild and many of its Inns and 'Sharn: City of Towers' even has a halfling mafia.
QFT!
Yeah, the fleshweavers in my homebrew are partly inspired by the Barbarois.
Unless my ears and comprehension failed me, I believe they discussed the fact the 4e will by and large do away with direct ability damage and bonuses (for instance, temporary dex damage from poison, or +2 strength from gauntlets of ogre power).
The justification? Ability scores affect so many different things, that you are bound to forget that say, that bull's strength will boost your climb roll, or that poison damage will lower your AC. And this stuff slows down the game.
Discuss.
edit: forgot the justification
Obviously, they're basically throwing D&D on its head and people are panicking, but there was panic when 3e was announced.
Besides, things like Bull's Strength are relatively useless in a loot-heavy playstyle. Also, with a shift away from gear-centric character improvement they have an opportunity to make attributes even more important, which I figure they will.
Don't look for a "dump stat" in 4e because it won't exist for any of the classes if they want to remain competitive towards the top and far side of the bell curve of power.
For instance they said that the gauntlets of ogre power will still be in there, but what in the hell will they do? Just add a bonus to your damage roll? A once per day do-something-super-strong power?
Is ray of enfeeblement gone?
I'm not opposed, there's just a lot of stuff they'll have to change and it'll be interesting to see what they do to cope with it.
It seems to me that they don't seem as worried about offending the long-term hardcore players this go around. I remember that their PR campaign for 3e was basically, "We swear we won't fuck over the sacred cows. We promise.". I for one think they did a pretty solid job of digging it out of the maze of tables and obscure rules, and it looks like they will build on that success fairly well. I for one didn't miss 18/00 strength.
Jordan of Elienor, Human Shaman
Also many of the facts have been changing so... um.. maybe? :P
I'm torn on this issue. On the one hand, they are absolutely correct. On the other, I've just added magic item bonus' to my regular stats since forever and never once has it been problematic. Also, if you're willing to go the extra nerd mile and spend 5 bucks on some plastic paper covers and dry erase markers, stat modifying on the fly becomes stupid easy.
LoL: failboattootoot
Well, it is a simplifying factor, which I will view as a good thing. And it doesn't really hurt anyone in particular, as it will be gone, point blank (aside from stat points from leveling up). It might also be a power balance thing. From what it appears their goals are, they want as much of a character's power and coolness and such tied in to the character itself. It might be to the point where screwing with ability scores, which are the very base (mechanically) of a character, throws the whole thing off the rails.
It's part of the backlash against a character being defined more by his gear than the way he was put together.
I for one hope they don't take it too far. Magic items are fun as hell and introduce good motivators into an adventure as well as eagerly sought after rewards.
Any wild speculation about magic items for us to argue about?
P.S. I use nerd furlongs
I am slightly mollified from my cursory reading of Races and Classes, hopefully I'm fretting over nothing.
in what way
That said, one of the knocks on the game for a long time has been it's complexity and penchant for charts (never where you can find the fuckers). I imagine it's probably also a good commercial move to make the game easier on beginners. Lower the barrier for entry and all that.
If it was about R&C one thing that caught my eye was repeating the "Options, Options, Options" thing that was central to 3.x while mentioning it applied to in combat options as well. That is a pleasing statement to me.
Edit: Charts can eat a dick. Most of the current charts are just worked out math for you. I don't really need to look at them to play/update except for possibly the spell charts.
Also, simple does not necessarily mean lack of depth. Take 40K: the rules are pretty simple when it comes down to the individual unit. The complexity comes from the use of different tactics and the near infinite possible combinations of forces. I hope 4E is the same way, where each individual ability is easy to understand and use, leaving the complexity to the imagination of the players and any combination of simple powers they can imagine to form complex, awesomely unique characters.
I want players to be able to look at a stat line and say, "Oh, I understand how that works!" From there, they can move on to, "I wonder what happens if I do this?" This would be a vast improvement over the, "How does that work?" and, "I don't get it," that we often see in current and previous editions.
"Go up, thou bald head." -2 Kings 2:23
Game needs more Folding Boat
This isn't exactly the same but in Races & Classes the fighter is mentioned to have an attack that raises his AC by 2 if it connects, it's not too big a stretch to think there might be similar attacks that could raise his attack bonus on the next attack, or inflict other penalties. What would be cool is linking these together so if you want to use a big attack next turn, you can use an attack-bonus-boosting attack to increase it's chance of connecting, or if you're surrounded by enemies you can use the AC Boost attack so you can still deal some damage while reduing enemy efficiency.
In short, fighters look to be a lot cooler, and have more options on how to direct their efforts in battle.
But that cover art is so god awful. 3rd and 3.5 had a good idea making each book look like some kind of tomb or somthing.
Keeps you swinging.
I also agree on the hideousness of some of the cover art. Though it's mostly the PHB.
It really just hurts my head how they have so much difficulty with the art.
I mean, geeze, you could just do a contest and have half the internet submit stuff, then pick the best ones and pay them off.
Considering how much high-quality art people do for WoW for free.
I mean, it won't make a difference for people like me or you, who post on message boards about D&D, but for other people first impressions are very important. And that cover is a terrible first impression.
That said, they WANT to get the 14 year olds.
Hopefully they do some actual testing though, like they do with movie screenings.
They really should mix the art up in general though.
Everything from Flash Art to Anime to Brom.
DiTerlizzi and Keith Parkinson in close second though.
Perhaps like some of the older covers, with those standard completely mixed parties bustin' in on some baddies. You know what I mean.
Barbarian shattering the door, axe in hand, while an elf wizard lurks in the doorway fiddling with components and a halfling thief assesses the situation.
Come to think of it, I kinda miss those little cartoons they used to have in the first edition books. Well, the DMG at least. I think they may have been Foglio. Or at least some of them. I might also be misremembering things.
I think a huge single character piece would've been neat. Like a dwarf fighter looking off to the left whilst weighing his hammer knowingly in his hand.
Just dreaming out loud here.
Also: Am I reading things right and seeing that there will be a May release of the first 4e module. I assume the bare-bones rules with pregenned characters? Maybe I'll pick that up when time comes and run it and report back. You know for the good of the forum.
(This is all, of course, an elaborate ruse to keep me from thinking about how hard I'm going to be reamed this semester. Ugh.)
It's been mentioned as placeholder art.
Looks more like something for a splatbook, after all.
As cool as the tome-looking covers are, I'm tired of most of them.
Man, no. I don't want anime in my D&D books.
Edit: Unless, for some reason, it's appropriate. I guess anime would be perfectly appropriate in Oriental Adventures or whatever, but I'd rather not see it in the Player's Handbook.
I'm with you on this, actually.
Some games, anime style is appropriate. Exalted, for example. D&D is a different style, and it shouldn't be represented with anime (for the most part). High fantasy swords-and-sorcery adventure is best represented by terrible monsters, great heroes, epic battles, beautiful vistas, and dank dungeons, not necessarily by coronas of energy surrounding people as they scream loudly and throw power about randomly. Even wizards shouldn't be represented that way... their magic is different. Sorcerors you can make a case for, but it's still too much of a genre-breaker.
Even Oriental Adventures I'd see more in a kung-fu movie style instead of anime style. The difference is primarily in, again, the lack of coronas of "energy" or whatnot, attacks that seem more like godly smiting than two people fighting, and the like.
This is just a personal preference, of course, and I find that my opinions rarely seem popular, especially when people seem to miss my point, so let me end this by saying the artistic direction will not make or break the game for me, but I want the people attracted to the game by its art to get the game they wanted and enjoy it, rather than get the game they thought was Exalted 3rd Edition and break it.