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.'"
News for Nerds.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
Will it be a DX10/Vista only title?
(Said in jest, not out of ignorance)
Bring back Dark Sun and Planescape you sons of bitches and then your game won't suck anymore. Heck, they even watered down Forgotten Realms for the 3rd edition. Once they stop being pussies and stop whining about their RPGs being too hard they will get the hard core gamers to come back.
Contributing to the prevention of teen pregnancy since 1974! (and not through any fault of the girls either)
The Banjo Players Must Die!
The first time you hear "got rid of useless feature X", that's a sure sign the game sold out to the mainstream.
To the true gamer, there is no such thing as "useless feature".
"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.'
Unfortunately I don't know whether to feel old or cool.
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
just as I was getting comfortable playing 3.5 !!
really, this D&D thing starts to smell like software with every now and then a shiny new release with fresh bugs and annoyances.
and then after a while, surprise surprise! bugfixes!
and then finally when you think things start to settle, tada, yet another 'upgrade' or whatever.
it starts to piss me off.
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.
Video 1
... check the Related Videos on the right side of any video you look at.
Video 2
Video 3
Video 4
Video 5
There are more
No one talked about this subject yet.But I wonder whether Dungeons & Dragons Online would be converted to 4th and how hard programmers and other stuff should work.Please enlighten me.
While I'm still not sure if I'll drop a bunch of money on getting this new edition when it comes out I'm slightly more optimistic about this edition of the game. The designers seem to have a few good ideas in their heads; not least of which is getting rid of those bloody prestige classes. I've lost count of the amount of times I've seen that feature abused!
Still, is it enough to get me to spend money? I dunno. And the sting of needing to update the material I've written hasn't quite worn off yet. It'd be nice, though, if they could cut down to one core rulebook, or failing that have a basic rulebook handling the first few levels -- sort of a digest version of the core rules
As a player of D&D since third edition (maybe four or five years going, now), I have to say that my group of friends is not particularly interested in investing the time and money of purchasing/learning the new 4.0 source books, when they're finally released. We just don't have a need for them.
As of right now, most of our gaming sessions (which last between 4 and 6 hours) involve at most, a dozen die rolls that mean anything, and I'd say more often than not, a session ends without a single combat. I guess our campaigns have evolved into what could be considered drama. And to be honest, it's a much more enriching experience than a traditional hack & slash game that I so often see with newer/younger players.
This isn't to say we won't do a bit of research into the new system, but if all it does is revise the combat and levelling system, then we won't be adopting 4.0.
It's more a matter of the value you can get out those skills. You might have an actual need for 'use rope' once every five sessions, while other skills such as 'spot' or 'diplomacy' would be used repeatedly during a session. So you have the choice of spending your limited number of points gaining ranks in a skill that might eventually be useful versus one you know will be used over and over.
The other side of this is that the people writing the adventures know that most players don't take those skills. So they don't add events that require the skills, or provide alternative ways of solving the problem. So it spirals down fast.
my scout/assassin, Ropeman the Forger, is going to need a little work.
No Longer a Menace to Society.
Alexandria Morrigan born 2/22/01 l. 20.5in wt. 7 lbs. 5 oz.
Well, I hope you make it clear to your players that their actions are irrelevant and you are the one directing the play and not them.
Deleted
And rule-hounds like you are why I and my core group of friends migrated from D&D to the Storyteller system (White Wolf games like Vampire: The Masquerade and such). We actually wanted to (gasp!) have fun instead of drowning in the mountains of rules. In Storyteller, the GM develops a basic story outline, often with much input from the players, and then starts the improv act. It's liberating, being that much in control of your character while still having a skeleton of a backstory to keep you within sensible bounds. The only dice rolls we ever did were for situations that couldn't be properly acted out, such as fights. When you wanted to mesmerize a victim, you acted it out instead of rolling (though the rules allowed for either), and if you did it well it worked; if you didn't, well that's "life" and you learned to be a better actor.
I guess it's all about whatever makes you happy, but not everyone who is into non-computerized roleplaying can have fun with a mind full of numbers and dice rolls.
I am surprise someone from this list hasn't talked about the possible forking between the 3.0/3.5 Open Gaming License (OLG) and the proposed new 4e OGL. Unlike a new version of Linux, the new D&D rules do not have to be under the old OGL, they are in effect a completely new operating system for D&D. It has been confirmed there will be a version of the OGL/D20 license, but with some added restrictions: 1) Professional game companies will need to pay a license. 2) Fan/Non-Pro offerings will have to be through their site www.gleemax.com (unconfirmed). Here is a list of known stuff about the new edition on the ENWorld forums: http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=204119 Gleemax.com has stirred some controversy already because of the Terms of Service. The most blatant is that anything you post their grants Wizard's of the Coast limited rights to republish your material and limits your ability to publish anything that uses their IP, e.g. Greyhawk, Planscape, Forgotten Realms, etc. So, what does this all mean? Well, if the use restrictions on the 4e OGL/D20 license are, well too restrictive (and kinda takes the O out of OGL) that will mean a fork in the D&D development path. Some publishers will want the latest and greatest and put up with it, others will not and use the 3e OGL which has no licensing fees and cannot be terminated. There are already some development forks in 3e, Green Ronin's True 20 and Mutants and Masterminds rules, Iron Heroes and Arcana Evolved from Malhavoc Press (Monte Cooke) which take the core mechanics in new and different directions. Anyway, my two coppers on the subject, Saracenus
Brilliant joke, sir.
"I hope to God clerics got toned back a bit..."
Whose God are you hoping to? The overpowered Cleric's, or yours?
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
mod parent interesting
The AD&D 3.5 manuals are just too damned complicated. Hundreds of pages and table after table after table. It's more like a software spec than game instructions. No one new is going to get onto this. If you're going to make it that complex, let a computer handle all that messing around.
Enter WoW. It's the AD&D online that AD&D never had. Must irk them to see all that money going to someone else. Their own DDO Stormreach bombed. This is a desperate ploy to cling some of their market back. If they can find people who'll pay $$$ for all new AD&D 4.0 books. In this day and age of the net does it have to be WOTC that rewrite the rules a few solitary voices claim so badly need repairs. Nope. Fans could do this by themselves. WOTC, like the RIAA, are on an outdated business model.
If someone went to a VC with this as a business plan, they'd get laughed out of the office. WOTC on their way out.
Of course, if your on board with the D&D Insider your probably going to need to buy the core set. The Insider is actually the Dungeon and Dragon magazines which WOTC brought back in house, combined with a ton of digital tools such as an online game table, dungeon master tools, character creator and visualizer, and other features. That would probably be the only reason to buy the core set, unless of course you have some reason to want to see WOTC succeed, which I do. Of course that doesn't mean I'm going to buy supplements I'll never use. I'm pretty far from the completist.
This really isn't a money grab, at least not on some levels. Yeah, I'm sure Hasbro is happy about the core set, but Third Edition being tapped dry. There is nowhere else to go. I don't want to see WOTC die. If they don't release a new edition, its over. Look at whats been released lately, compendium after compendium, splatbook sequels, worthless environment books, adventures I have no interest in playing. Nobody is buying these books, nobody but completists, and there isn't enough of those to keep a company afloat. Besides, there is plenty of rules that need to be tweaked, plenty of skills that need to go, plenty of classes that need revision. Third edition was broken the day they released it, ask Monte Cook, who wrote third edition.
Its time to take what everyone learned playing third edition for the last eight years, and make the game better. WOTC deserves their coin for what they do. Of course, I'm a WOTC fanboy, what do I know.
-- 4 8 15 16 23 42
D20 modern came out years before World of Warcraft and used a talent tree progression system. If you talking about that.
If your talking about not using XP for item crafting...well a ton of games does that.
And if your talking about...well I can't think of much else really that is comparable.
Blizzard will always be ahead of them? You do know that Dungeons and Dragons came out 30 years before the release of World of Warcraft, right? WoW copied Dungeons and Dragons HP system! Blatant ripp-off! And levelling. And the idea of getting exp from killing things and completing quests. Not to mention the platnuim-gold-silver-copper exchange rate (minus the gold for WoW). The class system too. Talents are basically feats, to be honest (some have prerequisites...wait just like in DnD!). The only major difference between a talent and a feat is that feats use a core level based prerequsite, whereas feats have a prerequisite both level based AND based on the amount of feats gained prior (but not specific feats), much like the martial arts styles of various 3rd party books.
The idea of rangers getting pets was done first in DnD. Oh, and the idea of dark elves. Yeah, they were in Tolkein, but they were short and midgety and more like dwarves even in those books to be honest. Sithulus is based around Dark Sun in more ways then I can count (especially in history/background of the whole magic war, the bugs just make it more obvious). Yeah, part of it is Dune and even Starship Trooper driven too...but Darksun is present if you know what your looking for.
The concept of charging as warriors do so is really a DnD thing too (is really an overrun/bullrush in so many ways). A warlock's shadowball and evocations are based directly on the Richard Wulf 3rd party book (one of the first open liscence e-books, if not one of the first and most popular D20 system books released after the Player's Handbook came out). Weapon proficencies being dependant on class is a DnD innvoation. I'm not sure about skills though...
The list goes on. And as for your precious blizzard--there's a good company. Sure they fired their entire d20 book writing staff, released a new set of books for 3.5 that were identical in every way except with art (naming things like "More..." and "The Expanded...") and the author's names suddenly changed! The list goes on.
Blizzard is good at a lot of things. But not innovation. They are good at bringing together multiple genres of games. Perfecting genres even. They are great at details and have decent storylines...but in the end can you find me one game that's a "WoW clone" that's not an "everquest" clone? Didn't think so.
Great at marketting too. The same people who made fun of me for playing EQ now play WoW more than I ever have.
Ginga no Rekshiya Mata Each page.
Economist Levit wrote a book called "Freakonomics". He talks about how people are willing to pay so-called Experts on the assumption that their advice is worth gold. Trouble is these experts have their own agendas: WOTCs is to sell you a whole new collection of books. At least that's how they figure it. Experts use tricks like information hoarding to convince you only their word can be trusted.
;-)
WOTC, despite the names, aren't Gods. They don't have a divine touch. Fans could rewrite the rules. There's no reason a competent group of fans couldn't do their own rewrite. WOTC would of course do everything in their power to thwart that, and propagate the myth that they're so much better at this than anyone else.
I look at the vast hardbound spaghetti code tomes that is "Got to Collect them all!" AD&D 3.5, and disagree. Don't think for a moment that the D&D 4.0 effort is the work of divine artists struggling for perfection. It's suits with sales targets. If AD&D 4 turns out to be only 16 pages long, I'll retract that. What are the chances of that?
So I've read some of the quotes by the posters...
DnD is still pretty popular, but what happens is that those of us above the age of 30 who still play or enjoy the game find it more and more difficult to see a campaign through. Couples with kids that host. People show up with lots of beer. Then of the 4 hours of play time, too many people jump out of character.
It takes time and dedication, and sadly as people grow up, time is extremely limited.
Life takes interesting turns, but the most interest is when you're off the beaten path.
The price of their core books is entirely realistic. I work for a major textbook publisher. Anytime somebody complains about buying a $100 textbook when it only costs $3.79 to print one reveals a true ignorance of how business works. There are so many people behind that book.The rest of that $96.21 goes to the authors, the writers (it's a terribly annoying difference), the editors, the marketers, the advertisers, the printers, and scores of other people.
The price is not the problem. The problem is that instead of coming out with a new edition every six months or so, they would do better to spend longer crafting this book and listening to their market... or, if you want terms you can understand, WotC has been consistently taking 10 when they should be taking 20.
Don't cry "Oust Bush," cry "Restore Freedom!" Don't support a candidate who isn't doing anything to unravel Bush's web.