|
8 months ago ::
Sep 28, 2012 - 9:54AM
#21
|
Date Joined:
Sep 19, 2007
|
" We are not looking for articles that add new mechanical elements (such as powers and feats) to the game. The current edition contains thousands of these elements, and the digital tools (D&D Character Builder, D&D Compendium, et al.) are bloated with options. We will only publish new mechanics if we find the underlying story extremely compelling and the mechanics are necessary to support the narrative. "
Horsefeathers!
Don't try to make it sound like you are doing us 4E fans a favor by attempting to control bloat. Every edition bloats near the end of its life cycle, in five years, Next will be no exception. 4E players want crunch. There are tons of holes in classes and races that want filling. Wizards has teased us with a number of articles and hints, and now has no intention of delivering.
Things they have told us were in the pipeline that are now unlikely to see the light of day. Autumn and Winter Sentinels. Bladeling articles that was scheduled for July (they even commisioned the artwork and included it in the Art download).
4E authors have hinted at other things, either in the books or in interviews. It was hinted that there were originally four Virtues for Cavaliers and four Vices for Blackguards. Heroes of the Elemental Chaos briefly describes 5 Monk traditions.
Then there are things that need to be fixed. Beastmaster Rangers need to be updated to not be a trap option. Binders need to be fixed so that they can actually fill the Controller role. Races which have received penalties because of their "potential roleplaying power" need to receive another balance pass (Shade, Hengeyokai).
4E players want all of this and more, glut be damned. Fluff is kind of nice to read, when well written, but none of us really needs it or wants it. For example, there is maybe one "Eye on.." article every six months that gets used in my campaign, and that gets heavily reworked to fit into my own campaign world. On the other hand, every piece of crunch has the potential to be used at my table.
The truth of the matter is that they don't want crunch becuase they don't want to pay a DDI person to code it and because they don't want to task anyone with playtesting it. As far as they are concerned, 4E is done.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Sep 28, 2012 - 10:10AM
#22
|
Date Joined:
Oct 24, 2001
|
I'm sorry if you don't agree with my opinion. But there is a reason it's my opinion.
You need not apologize for our disagreeing with your opinion. It is yours, and you acknowledge it is an opinion. But...
I think we're trying to understand the reason for your opinion.
My 2e Paranoia game is alive and well. My 3e Shadowrun game is alive and well. My 2e Marvel Superheroes game is alive and well. None of these have current support.
Dead-to-you is not dead.
Here are the PHB essentia, in my opinion: - Three Basic Rules (p 11)
- Power Types and Usage (p 54)
- Skills (p178-179)
- Feats (p 192)
- Rest and Recovery (p 263)
- All of Chapter 9 [Combat] (p 264-295)
A player needs to read the sections for building his or her character -- race, class, powers, feats, equipment, etc. But those are PC-specific. The above list is for everyone, regardless of the race or class or build or concept they are playing.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Sep 28, 2012 - 10:51AM
#23
|
|
|
I'm sorry if you don't agree with my opinion. But there is a reason it's my opinion.
You need not apologize for our disagreeing with your opinion. It is yours, and you acknowledge it is an opinion. But...
I think we're trying to understand the reason for your opinion.
My 2e Paranoia game is alive and well. My 3e Shadowrun game is alive and well. My 2e Marvel Superheroes game is alive and well. None of these have current support.
Dead-to-you is not dead.
Dead to me is not having offcial support any longer. If the game is out of print and is no longer getting updateds it's dead.
Oh and sorry about the "my opinion" thing, it seems like I dropped it after that. I meant to put more emphasis on "my", but It came out as me trying to explain it but not doing so.
“The oldest and strongest emotion of mankind is fear.” - H. P. Lovecraft Games I Play: - D&D 4e - D&D 3.5 - AD&D 2e - Pathfinder - Call of Cthulhu
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Sep 28, 2012 - 11:01AM
#24
|
Date Joined:
Sep 23, 2008
|
@MalakLightfoot: Hear, hear! We should start coming up with a list of what is needed, and perhaps even try to find those willing to work on these items as submissions.
So far, we need:
Essentials
Binder: New power options. Perhaps new pacts (Dark, Infernal).
Blackguard: Two unnamed vices (perhaps Treachery and Greed).
Cavalier: Two unnamed virtues (possibly Justice and Hope).
Mage: Transmuters, Summoners, and Abjurers.
Sentinel: Autumn and Winter aspects.
Warpriest: War, Strength, Nature (or Animal and Plant), Magic and Healing domains.
Dragon
Winning Races: Bladelings, Hengeyokai, Shades
Anybody else have any ideas?
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Sep 28, 2012 - 12:10PM
#25
|
|
|
malak and gelatinous have done a good job extrapolating the unfinished spots of 4e, but keep in mind, things malak mentions such as the sentinel stuff and vices are already said to exist; they dont need submissions about it. another example is when schwalb said on his blog he had runepriest stuff he turned in. the point is, just bc they dont want that stuff submitted doesnt mean they dont already have it on file or wont release it. keep in mind, when battle cleric stuff finally came out, it was written by mearls.
now do i feel 100% that we will see that stuff? no. do i want to? yes. but i think that we have to differentiate between stuff that is rumored to already exist, like excerpts from published books, and what they want solicit from the fans. i know thats cynical, but its my opinion: i think specific fixes are far more likely to come from wizards staff rather than random submissions.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Sep 28, 2012 - 12:28PM
#26
|
Date Joined:
Nov 30, 2010
|
That would explain why battle cleric lore is so broken for hybrids, frothsof...
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Sep 28, 2012 - 1:13PM
#27
|
|
|
That would explain why battle cleric lore is so broken for hybrids, frothsof...
i hear this quite a bit, and it is indeed a very attractive hybrid option, so much so that i even have a hybrid lfr ranger/cleric. but...is it really that good, or are we just in shock that the strength cleric is finally worth a damn? true story: i started 4e with a str cleric right from the phb. after suffering like a dog, i convinced my dm at the time to let me hybrid fighter when hybrids came out. i paid my dues and i think while the newish hybrid cleric is damn-good-no-question-about-it, there are other hybrid options that are just as good. i think that the expertise feat, forget what its called, paladins usually take it, but its the +1 ac to basically everyone is more overpowered. but ever since elvin chain shirts, i havent really sweated it. a dm can always challenge a party, and people pay dues to get high stats and defenses.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Sep 28, 2012 - 2:05PM
#28
|
Date Joined:
Jun 30, 2008
|
The problem with hybrid cleric is that it breaks the normal hybrid armor rules in that getting scale never costs you a feat no matter what. Giving all templars scale proficiency by default would fix the problem without breaking anything at all and would fix the problem with Divine Healer, which is murky RAI already, and getting BCL that way.
And warpriests really don't need more domains, but some more feats would be good. Clerics as a whole have more than enough at will and encounter powers and each domain adds about 11 new cleric powers along with another paragon path variation. What they mainly need is a better way to switch out encounter powers in heroic without having to use their multiclassing option with Novice Power to do it. Or at least a feat that is slightly better than reserve manuever in paragon, maybe gives a skill bonus or something and lets you pick a different domains encounter power.
Mage is similar in that they work fine and don't need more builds or powers at this point. Maybe some feats would be nice, but I don't know if they actually need any.
my handbooks & builds
Show
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Sep 28, 2012 - 2:20PM
#29
|
Date Joined:
Jun 15, 2004
|
I think we're trying to understand the reason for your opinion.
My 2e Paranoia game is alive and well. My 3e Shadowrun game is alive and well. My 2e Marvel Superheroes game is alive and well. None of these have current support.
my 2¢:
It's probably just semantics: someone using the term 'dead' merely to indicate a 'no longer supported' product. However, publisher's (especially WotC) can do a lot of marketing, game store support, convention support etc. that can serve as the 'critical-mass' to generate/maintain interest. As a social game, RPG's can sometimes depend upon this interest to get a group together.
Sure, a persuasive GM could get a group together without any interest, but some of us (for various reasons) prefer to be part of something bigger. Examples:
- we want multiple groups,
- we enjoy being part of something popular
- we enjoy the excitement of officially sponsored game stores and conventions
- we get tangible rewards for running official games
- new stuff gets us excited
- we're susceptible to advertisement
etc.
For myself: I reap huge benefits from running supported games... such that my own preference of the game itself almost isn't even a consideration. I'm going to play whatever everyone else is playing, and what is most supported.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Sep 28, 2012 - 10:39PM
#30
|
Date Joined:
Oct 30, 2011
|
Sheep aside I agree. A game is still alive for anyone playing that system and a DM can always play the game he wants. I have friends that had tried 4e and been turned off by it. This was mostly because they were part of a group that already decided they didn't like it before giving it a chance. They came and played with my wife and I a 4e game and loved it. The one friend still plays with another group and he said to me I don't know why I even still play with them. He also pointed out that the amount of RP in a game is completely group dependent. Because he didn't think you could RP with 4e until he came to 4e and got us to RP more than we were used to doing.
|
|
|
