I know it might be frowned upon to revive this, but I'm still wondering if people are waiting to play Epic until they get more support (like I am), or if the same amount of people would play Epic as now if they'd released support for it?
Mainly, I ask this because the third (and likely fourth) Draconomicons were also killed with the "restart" of 4e in Essentials. Though I suppose I should be somewhat happy that they included the hatchlings for the new Dragons in MM3...
Which CB do you mean? Were they collecting data from CCB? And if they were only collecting data from OCB
I meant the OCB, but I didn't say they were only collecting data from it. In fact, the developer's comment that few people were playing epic campaigns was made prior to there even being an OCB. They got that data through basic market research, I presume.
Though it would make sense that less epic tier games are being played, because it wasn't heavily resourced (it needed strong customization)
I think less epic tier campaigns are player because games start at or about level 1, and it can take years of constant play to reach level 21. Lots of campaigns die natural deaths before then and people start new campaigns at lower levels.
So until they have an indication that a significant number of people are playing epic campaigns, I don't think we'll see another DMG.
I love DMG2, but I'm not sure there's a whole lot more to say about DMing in general that makes it worthy fo a hardcover book. The more DMGs you put out, the more niche the advice is going to be.
I'd probably disagree with the last paragraph. I have had a lot of use out of the DMG2- it contains a lot of new game mechanics and ideas that are pretty priceless.
My regrets about the DMG3 are- it was never released, the abandonment of the numbering releases (PHB 4 anybody??).
If this book is ever released I am very sad it will be after the Essentials corruption of 4E. Basically, it will be essentialized- and that makes me a sad panda. I wish the DMG3 was released while Heinsoo, Collins, Noonan, Slavicsek and Schubert were still employed by WotC.
If this book is ever released I am very sad it will be after the Essentials corruption of 4E. Basically, it will be essentialized- and that makes me a sad panda. I wish the DMG3 was released while Heinsoo, Collins, Noonan, Slavicsek and Schubert were still employed by WotC.
98% of Essentials is a different way of building characters. From a DM's perspective it has had very little impact on the mechanics of running a game. I fail to see how a DMG3 would be 'corrupted' by Essentials. And this is coming from someone who doesn't particularly care for E-classes.
If this book is ever released I am very sad it will be after the Essentials corruption of 4E. Basically, it will be essentialized- and that makes me a sad panda. I wish the DMG3 was released while Heinsoo, Collins, Noonan, Slavicsek and Schubert were still employed by WotC.
98% of Essentials is a different way of building characters. From a DM's perspective it has had very little impact on the mechanics of running a game. I fail to see how a DMG3 would be 'corrupted' by Essentials. And this is coming from someone who doesn't particularly care for E-classes.
Well, with the coming of essentials we had a revision of the monster stats (a huge enough of a change that Wizards felt the need to release monthly updates of the Monster Manual creatures), a nerfing of magic items into a rarity system, a move towards tokens instead of minis (although 2012 will see a release of minis again), a revision of the difficulty class table, the move from a monster manual to monster vaults, random magic item tables, rare magic items getting a bump up in powers (encounter powers as powerful as daily), and so on. If these changes constitute the 2% of the remainder your terrible percentage, well, that speaks for itself. everything above impacts a DMG (and not the PC realm).
But, I could have just have as easily said 'the Essentials fluffyness of 4E', or 'the Essentials supersillyrenditioness of 4E', there really isn't much you can do about it. It is how I feel about the Essentials Era of 4E and I could care less if you agree with me or not.
Well, with the coming of essentials we had a revision of the monster stats (a huge enough of a change that Wizards felt the need to release monthly updates of the Monster Manual creatures), a nerfing of magic items into a rarity system, a move towards tokens instead of minis (although 2012 will see a release of minis again), a revision of the difficulty class table, the move from a monster manual to monster vaults, random magic item tables, rare magic items getting a bump up in powers (encounter powers as powerful as daily), and so on. If these changes constitute the 2% of the remainder your terrible percentage, well, that speaks for itself. everything above impacts a DMG (and not the PC realm). But, I could have just have as easily said 'the Essentials fluffyness of 4E', or 'the Essentials supersillyrenditioness of 4E', there really isn't much you can do about it. It is how I feel about the Essentials Era of 4E and I could care less if you agree with me or not.
1. Monster Manual 2 gave us nifty stuff like minions with roles, as well as adjusted the monster's stats to be more in-line with the original Dungeon Master's Guide. Monster Manual 3 increased the deadliness of monsters, my guess is to ensure that even with monsters that are 2 levels below the lowest level party member, the party would still be threatened significantly. The changes to the original Monster Manual -- reflected in the Monster Vault and other monster updates -- merely reflect the intent in the changes made in the previously released material.
2. The Rarity System never actually "nerfed" any magic items; even when you look in Mordenkainen's Magic Emporium and reprints of magic items with their rarity added, you'd find that the material released have, at worst, included the errata that had been released in previous updates. The only thing that it did was allow the DM tighter control of magic items, with the full awareness that there are certain possible item/feat/power combinations that might ruin some of the games run by certain DMs, and the item rarity would make those items a reward rather than another item in the grocery list.
3. Since when did any Dungeon Master's Guide -- or any reference, for that matter -- insist the use of any specific item to represent monsters or characters? Tokens, minis, icons, origami, even potato chips with markings on them for all I care... all of them can be used to represent creatures and/or objects on a grid. If you're feeling mighty creative, you might even want to put in super-realistic terrain with miniatures, lighting, etc. BUT that still doesn't change the fact that it works just as well, in terms of representing where you are on the map, if you put in poker chips on a 20"x30" illustration board with a grid and plastic covering you can use a white marker on.
I'd like to see that 4E book that states that you must use tokens or minis when playing the game. (not that anyone can't just ignore it anyway)
4. The difficulty class table has been revised already, it's an old errata that's been there since... last year I think. Then they released an updated DC table in Heroes of the Fallen Lands (at 8/12/19 + 1/2 level, instead of 5/10/15 + 1/2 level, give or take). What sort of changes are you talking about? If you're thinking about the articles written by Mike Mearls, it's likely going to appear in 5E, not 4E, due to the way it completely scraps the existing skill system.
5. Monster Manual, Monster Vault, different name, same banana, neither is related to Dungeon Master's Guide 3.
6. Random magic item tables? Oh you must mean the one defined in the Rules Compendium instead of the one in the Dungeon Master's Guide. Well, aside from the fact that nobody is telling you to use the one in the former instead of the one in the latter, I wouldn't be surprised if Dungeon Master's Guide 3 would contain both, or maybe even a third option if need be (personally though, I find that while the idea of having everything jam-packed into one book allows players to easily play the game with just one book, it easily gets messy and redundant).
7. Magic items in the rarity have rarely been considered as that good even in the forums.
- - - - - I would likely expect the following from Dungeon Master's Guide 3:
1. Epic tier support. DMG began with heroic tier play, DMG 2 focused on paragon tier play, so naturally DMG 3 would likely go for epic tier play. 2. Alternative forms of storytelling/gaming. DMG gave us a sort of "new DM's guide to DM'ing", DMG 2 already gave us Vignettes and other nifty "extras", so the DMG 3 I'm expecting to see things like copy-pastes of what's already released in Dragon's Unearthed Arcana (strongholds, gambling, jousting, minions, etc.) as well as other forms of roleplay that might have not reached DMG 2. 3. Expansion on the Alternative Rewards list. 4. Additional houserule suggestions.
As for it being "an Essentials corruption of 4E", I look at Heroes of Shadow, and while the new options don't seem as appealing hardcore-wise as the original content, I see no reason why Essentials wouldn't be at least considered, because in spite of the changes it had introduced, as long as they keep Dungeon Master's Guide 3 in context -- as in, for Dungeon Master support only (and not the mish-mash hell that they did with the Essentials books [at least that's how I see it, orgaization-wise]) -- I'll be happy enough
You are both rational and emotional. You value creation and discovery, and feel strongly about what you create. At best, you're innovative and intuitive. At worst, you're scattered and unpredictable.
If you're crossing the street and see a city bus barreling straight toward you with 'GIVE ME YOUR WALLET!' painted across its windshield, you probably won't be reaching for your wallet.
This is what I believe is the spirit of D&D 4E, and my deal breaker for D&D Next: equal opportunities, with distinct specializations, in areas where conflict happens the most often, without having to worry about heavy micromanagement or system mastery.
I would likely expect the following from Dungeon Master's Guide 3:
1. Epic tier support. DMG began with heroic tier play, DMG 2 focused on paragon tier play, so naturally DMG 3 would likely go for epic tier play. 2. Alternative forms of storytelling/gaming. DMG gave us a sort of "new DM's guide to DM'ing", DMG 2 already gave us Vignettes and other nifty "extras", so the DMG 3 I'm expecting to see things like copy-pastes of what's already released in Dragon's Unearthed Arcana (strongholds, gambling, jousting, minions, etc.) as well as other forms of roleplay that might have not reached DMG 2. 3. Expansion on the Alternative Rewards list. 4. Additional houserule suggestions.
And that is a full complement if stuff for Epic Dungeon Mastering : A Dungeon Masters Guide
Well, with the coming of essentials we had a revision of the monster stats (a huge enough of a change that Wizards felt the need to release monthly updates of the Monster Manual creatures), a nerfing of magic items into a rarity system, a move towards tokens instead of minis (although 2012 will see a release of minis again), a revision of the difficulty class table, the move from a monster manual to monster vaults, random magic item tables, rare magic items getting a bump up in powers (encounter powers as powerful as daily), and so on. If these changes constitute the 2% of the remainder your terrible percentage, well, that speaks for itself. everything above impacts a DMG (and not the PC realm). But, I could have just have as easily said 'the Essentials fluffyness of 4E', or 'the Essentials supersillyrenditioness of 4E', there really isn't much you can do about it. It is how I feel about the Essentials Era of 4E and I could care less if you agree with me or not.
1. Monster Manual 2 gave us nifty stuff like minions with roles, as well as adjusted the monster's stats to be more in-line with the original Dungeon Master's Guide. Monster Manual 3 increased the deadliness of monsters, my guess is to ensure that even with monsters that are 2 levels below the lowest level party member, the party would still be threatened significantly. The changes to the original Monster Manual -- reflected in the Monster Vault and other monster updates -- merely reflect the intent in the changes made in the previously released material.
2. The Rarity System never actually "nerfed" any magic items; even when you look in Mordenkainen's Magic Emporium and reprints of magic items with their rarity added, you'd find that the material released have, at worst, included the errata that had been released in previous updates. The only thing that it did was allow the DM tighter control of magic items, with the full awareness that there are certain possible item/feat/power combinations that might ruin some of the games run by certain DMs, and the item rarity would make those items a reward rather than another item in the grocery list.
3. Since when did any Dungeon Master's Guide -- or any reference, for that matter -- insist the use of any specific item to represent monsters or characters? Tokens, minis, icons, origami, even potato chips with markings on them for all I care... all of them can be used to represent creatures and/or objects on a grid. If you're feeling mighty creative, you might even want to put in super-realistic terrain with miniatures, lighting, etc. BUT that still doesn't change the fact that it works just as well, in terms of representing where you are on the map, if you put in poker chips on a 20"x30" illustration board with a grid and plastic covering you can use a white marker on.
I'd like to see that 4E book that states that you must use tokens or minis when playing the game. (not that anyone can't just ignore it anyway)
4. The difficulty class table has been revised already, it's an old errata that's been there since... last year I think. Then they released an updated DC table in Heroes of the Fallen Lands (at 8/12/19 + 1/2 level, instead of 5/10/15 + 1/2 level, give or take). What sort of changes are you talking about? If you're thinking about the articles written by Mike Mearls, it's likely going to appear in 5E, not 4E, due to the way it completely scraps the existing skill system.
5. Monster Manual, Monster Vault, different name, same banana, neither is related to Dungeon Master's Guide 3.
6. Random magic item tables? Oh you must mean the one defined in the Rules Compendium instead of the one in the Dungeon Master's Guide. Well, aside from the fact that nobody is telling you to use the one in the former instead of the one in the latter, I wouldn't be surprised if Dungeon Master's Guide 3 would contain both, or maybe even a third option if need be (personally though, I find that while the idea of having everything jam-packed into one book allows players to easily play the game with just one book, it easily gets messy and redundant).
7. Magic items in the rarity have rarely been considered as that good even in the forums.
- - - - - I would likely expect the following from Dungeon Master's Guide 3:
1. Epic tier support. DMG began with heroic tier play, DMG 2 focused on paragon tier play, so naturally DMG 3 would likely go for epic tier play. 2. Alternative forms of storytelling/gaming. DMG gave us a sort of "new DM's guide to DM'ing", DMG 2 already gave us Vignettes and other nifty "extras", so the DMG 3 I'm expecting to see things like copy-pastes of what's already released in Dragon's Unearthed Arcana (strongholds, gambling, jousting, minions, etc.) as well as other forms of roleplay that might have not reached DMG 2. 3. Expansion on the Alternative Rewards list. 4. Additional houserule suggestions.
As for it being "an Essentials corruption of 4E", I look at Heroes of Shadow, and while the new options don't seem as appealing hardcore-wise as the original content, I see no reason why Essentials wouldn't be at least considered, because in spite of the changes it had introduced, as long as they keep Dungeon Master's Guide 3 in context -- as in, for Dungeon Master support only (and not the mish-mash hell that they did with the Essentials books [at least that's how I see it, orgaization-wise]) -- I'll be happy enough
Ugh.
1. The changes in MM3 were finalized with the Monster Vault. Whether or not the changes were in momentum, they were made concrete with the release of Essentials. People hide behind the fact that Wizards was going in this direction or not. The point is, the Evergreen made this change permanent, not the Monster Manual 3.
2. Yes- the rarity system nerfed magic items. If you bother to read the Mordenkainen's Magnificent Emporium, which I own, rare magic items now have an encounter ability THAT USED TO BE DAILY. This was done to make rare items more unique and more old school- balance thrown out the window for more powerful magic items- thus rarity nerfed magic items.
3. Since the DMG stopped being printed and the Essentials Dungeon Master's Kit replaced it as Evergreen. That kit contains tokens and non miniatures. Also, random miniatures DDM was canned. The Rules Compendium cites the rules examples with pictures of tokens, not miniatures. The TREND is that tokens are now referenced instead of minis. NEVER did I say that the DMG insists that you have to use tokens/miniatures. It's just that tokens are the staple instead of minis- something that the EVERGREEN product promotes!
4. AGAIN- the new DC tables were made into EVERGREEN and replaced the old DC tables that my Deluxe DMG had. Who cares if it was errata before- printed evergreen makes it permanent.
5. Monster Vault is still a REALM OF DMING!! The first DMG had rules to level up or level down monsters, add templates, creat monsters. This 'banana is tied in with the DMG- period.
6. The printed EVERGREEN has random magic item tables, not the parcel system.
7. I care less if the rare systems has been considered 'good'. The forums are not the official printed version of D&D. The Essentials Evergreen is.
Since the Core books were stopped in printing, and Essentials was made evergreen, you have to look at the rules the evergreen is promoting. Essentials, and the era afterwards, is justified is being referenced as corrupted. Massive volumes of DDI articles are being written to bring CORE back into the fold of the current 'design philosophy of Essentials.
Instead of releasing a .5 edition, we just got Essentials and a slow 'revision' of older material into being 'Essentialized' that's corruption to me.
1. The changes in MM3 were finalized with the Monster Vault. Whether or not the changes were in momentum, they were made concrete with the release of Essentials. People hide behind the fact that Wizards was going in this direction or not. The point is, the Evergreen made this change permanent, not the Monster Manual 3.
There were no changes in math or presentation from MM3 to the MV. Nothing was 'finalized' between them. The same monster stat blocks also appeared in other non-Essentials books like the Dark Sun Creature catalog before that time. The change pre-dates Essentials. Not only that, you're the first person I've ever encountered to object to the changes. Monsters that are actually a threat and stat blocks that are more readable are generally considered to be Good Things.
2. Yes- the rarity system nerfed magic items. If you bother to read the Mordenkainen's Magnificent Emporium, which I own, rare magic items now have an encounter ability THAT USED TO BE DAILY. This was done to make rare items more unique and more old school- balance thrown out the window for more powerful magic items- thus rarity nerfed magic items.
I don't think you know what 'to nerf' means. It means to take something powerful and reduce its power. What you are saying is the opposite. At any rate, if you don't like rares, don't use them. The vast majority of items are Uncommon and they work the same as they ever did.
3. Since the DMG stopped being printed and the Essentials Dungeon Master's Kit replaced it as Evergreen. That kit contains tokens and non miniatures.
"And non-miniatures"? What the heck are you talking about? And are you really MAD that WotC is offering DMs a cheap, flexible alternative to collecting expensive minis?!?
4. AGAIN- the new DC tables were made into EVERGREEN and replaced the old DC tables that my Deluxe DMG had. Who cares if it was errata before- printed evergreen makes it permanent.
There is no "deluxe" DMG. There was a DMG that came in a box set, but it was the same as the DMG you bought alone. Anyway, if you're accusing Essentials content of including up-to-date errata, well, uh.... guilty as charged???
Capitalizing "evergreen" a lot does not make it a thing. Honestly I'm not even sure what you're talking about.
Well, obviously you don't like the direction D&D is going in. You're entitled to your opinion. But Essentials is a specific line of books and style of class design and most of the changes you object to were in motion before it or really have nothing to do with it. I guess if you don't like errata and tougher monsters then it's true that you probably wouldn't like a DMG3, because it would doubtless include those things. Of course the real meat of a DMG tends to be advice and inspiration on how to run a great game, much of which will be applicable no matter what 'version' of 4e or even what RPG you play. That was certainly the case with the first two. If you want to ignore really useful, solid material like that just because "OMG ITEM RARITY!!11!" be my guest. The rest of us will go on looking forward to it and/or mourning its loss if it never comes out.
The deluxe are the three core books that had all the errata updated in them. I stand my ground- Essentials ushered in changes to a lot of aspects of D&D that suck. Making a rare magic item more powerful than an uncommon is destroying the balance of magic items. Nerf should be changed to unbalanced. I don't resent tokens, per say, I just resent that they replaced miniatures. However, we are getting minis again.
Evergreen is powerful. Borders, before it closed, was where I ran delves every other week for new players. The PHB, MM and DMG were no longer there for purchase. The Essentials line was. What is in print becomes the officially sanctioned rules, the most exposed to casual buyers. Essentials superseded Core, rewrote and printed over it.
I would likely expect the following from Dungeon Master's Guide 3:
1. Epic tier support. DMG began with heroic tier play, DMG 2 focused on paragon tier play, so naturally DMG 3 would likely go for epic tier play. 2. Alternative forms of storytelling/gaming. DMG gave us a sort of "new DM's guide to DM'ing", DMG 2 already gave us Vignettes and other nifty "extras", so the DMG 3 I'm expecting to see things like copy-pastes of what's already released in Dragon's Unearthed Arcana (strongholds, gambling, jousting, minions, etc.) as well as other forms of roleplay that might have not reached DMG 2. 3. Expansion on the Alternative Rewards list. 4. Additional houserule suggestions.
And that is a full complement if stuff for Epic Dungeon Mastering : A Dungeon Masters Guide
I fully agree, so long as it don't assume that you're using Essentials... I refuse to rebuy everything, so I've not gotten any Essentials, stuff, but sections that don't work if you just have magic items working the old way (no "rarity" rating, for example), would make DMG3 rather disappointing for me.
Of course, I'll also never know when it comes out because I wouldn't know what new name to look out for. That's why I liked the 4e numbering system. Should new players pick up PHB2? Sure! But don't expect to have all the rules to build a new character in there, or descriptions of the roles and such. That's what the first PHB is for.
