Slashdot Mirror


Dungeons & Dragons 4th Edition, Latest News

Lord Aramil of Dreadwood writes "Blogger and Dragon magazine writer Jonathan Drain is tracking the latest developments on the new D&D edition. Highlights include: Thirty levels instead of twenty, no more XP costs for magic items creation, flexible talent trees replacing feats and prestige classes, a new racial bonuses system that obsoletes ECL, and an end to rubbish skills like Forgery and Use Rope. A quote from the blog: 'Unlike 3.5, all the changes this time around sound like they're definitely for the better... If nothing else, at least they have the opportunity to get rid of Mialee.'"

4 of 350 comments (clear)

  1. Interesting by The+Clockwork+Troll · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When I first saw the headline, I said to myself, "are they kidding?"

    In this age of MMORPG's, where issues with game balance can be tweaked monthly, the game universe can be expanded just as often (if not on the fly), and campaigns can involve real-time cooperation among dozens of players, could there really be a thriving market for a pastime as "last-gen" as D&D?

    Then it occurred to me, at least with D&D you're actually interacting with real, identifiable people. No griefing, no gold farming, no bots, no avatars with tearing polygons, no server lag to contend with.

    Then I could see the market.

    --

    There are no karma whores, only moderation johns
  2. More levels... sigh by mlts · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I know that having more levels is the "in" thing to do.

    Originally, in AD&D First Ed, you hit level 20, there was a high chance that your DM would suck up your char sheet because your character was so powerful that it was a god, and not a minor one.

    The first MUDs were somewhat based around that, when you hit the topmost level, you became an immortal. The level limit for "ascension" ended up being between 20-30.

    As time went on, this limit climbed to 40, 50, then on some MUDs, even was as high as level 100.

    Around 1999, MMOs came into the picture. UO didn't use a level based system, but EQ did. To keep players going, and the game interesting for people at the level cap, the original level 50 limit was raised to 60, 65, 70, now 75, and in the next major expansion 80. EQ2 similar, except the game is structured by tiers, starting at 50, then 60, now 70, and will be 80 come the next expansion. WoW too. Next expansion, level 80.

    There is something lost in this climb for levels, to the detriment of everything else. In WoW, level pretty much is the gauge of your character's abilities, so a character that is level 70, that has crappy equipment is more often asked for groups/raids than a level 65 with excellent stuff.

    I used to DM, and have been since First Edition AD&D. In campaigns, levels were there, but they were mainly a gauge of progress, of what difficulty I needed to make encounters. Characters had a lot more ways to progress and gain in power. They could gain reputation by pushing back orc scout parties, learn spells (In First Ed., magic items were VERY rare, and a +1 sword would be something that would be a 3-4 session campaign, but worth obtaining.), and perhaps travel, guarding trade caravans (or waiting until the caravan was alone, then sacking the people on it.) As the party grew, they became impressed into a local ruler's service as a scout group for taking care of enemies and seeking relics, then the party eventually was able to start their own kingdom after a number of fights, and having to not just go head off places, but make sure the kingdom was in good order while they were gone.

    I like levels at a low number. For a lot of intents and purposes, 20 is enough. Epic levels in third edition and up never really played a part, because at that level of character power, I'd have to move the party off of the usual medieval fantasy world into either different spheres (Spelljammer), or do like everyone and their brother does, and start plane hopping, which meant that it wasn't really my campaign world, but just using the Planescape sourcebooks pretty much verbatim.

    Maybe I am an old timer, but I try to get player characters to grow "horizontally", and focus on getting reputation, gear, and status with their class guilds, rather than climb the numbers with regards to level. When getting status and doing missions, the XP comes in its due time.

  3. Re:Now that's what I call by KDR_11k · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The problem with MMORPGs is that a lot of the fun in a P&P RPG copmes from the dynamic between the players and GM, in an MMORPGs there's no GM, only rules that the players sooner or later try to bend their way and exploit in every way possible.

    --
    Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
  4. Re:WOTC Death Throes by Koiu+Lpoi · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Just because it's possible doesn't mean it's the norm, nor does it mean it's right. I'm sure you enjoy roleplaying getting 30 pieces of Boar Meat or Skeleton Bones for the local "quest giver". Yeah. Seems like a realistic and engaging world to me. Griding to level 70 really makes me create characters that are engaging and unique and create moral dilemmas by themselves. Everytime I hear something about going on raids and running instances really gets me into character and makes me think that I'm somehow not just another generic Human Mage. The fact of the matter is, D&D is designed as a game that engages your imagination and encourages roleplaying, while WoW is a game designed to get you to keep grinding and collecting widgets so you'll buy the next month of the subscription. While you may not play it that way, it's still how it was designed and intended to be played. It sounds like you've never played D&D under a good DM.