Autor Thema: D&D 4e Smalltalk  (Gelesen 268633 mal)

0 Mitglieder und 1 Gast betrachten dieses Thema.

Offline Visionär

  • Unten ohne
  • Mythos
  • ********
  • Free hugs!
  • Beiträge: 8.800
  • Username: sohn_des_aethers
RE: D&D 4e Smalltalk
« Antwort #125 am: 23.10.2007 | 09:07 »
Die neuen Zombies gefallen mir auch hervorragend
Stop being yourself! You make me sick!

Offline 6

  • Der Rote Ritter
  • Moderator
  • Titan
  • *****
  • So schnell schiesst der Preuß nicht
  • Beiträge: 30.359
  • Geschlecht: Männlich
  • Username: Christian Preuss
    • Miami Files
RE: D&D 4e Smalltalk
« Antwort #126 am: 7.11.2007 | 13:56 »
Die meisten werden es schon wissen, aber es hat sich scheinbar geklärt, warum die Ability-Boni auf der Spined Devil-Karte plötzlich um 3 höher waren als man sie von 3.5 kennt. Die Boni unter 4.0 berechnen sich jetzt (Ability/2) - 2 statt wie bisher (Ability/2) - 5.
Ich bin viel lieber suess als ich kein Esel sein will...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Nicht Sieg sollte der Zweck der Diskussion sein, sondern
Gewinn.

Joseph Joubert (1754 - 1824), französischer Moralist

Offline Meister Analion

  • manchmal lustig
  • Famous Hero
  • ******
  • Der Meister hat immer recht!
  • Beiträge: 2.678
  • Geschlecht: Männlich
  • Username: Meister Analion
RE: D&D 4e Smalltalk
« Antwort #127 am: 7.11.2007 | 19:32 »
Die meisten werden es schon wissen, aber es hat sich scheinbar geklärt, warum die Ability-Boni auf der Spined Devil-Karte plötzlich um 3 höher waren als man sie von 3.5 kennt. Die Boni unter 4.0 berechnen sich jetzt (Ability/2) - 2 statt wie bisher (Ability/2) - 5.
Nein, ist nur ein unbestätigtes Gerücht^^
Ich denke eher, es bleibt beim alten, auf der Karte ist halt noch halber level dazugerechnet für Ability-Checks. Der Devil hat ja auch nur +4 auf Schaden und nicht +7.
PS: alle Aussagen sind nur meine persönliche Meinung. Ihr habt meine ausdrückliche Erlaubnis, eine andere Meinung zu vertreten.

A government is a body of people usualy notably ungoverned.

Offline Selganor [n/a]

  • Moderator
  • Titan
  • *****
  • Beiträge: 34.048
  • Geschlecht: Männlich
  • Username: Selganor
RE: D&D 4e Smalltalk
« Antwort #128 am: 25.11.2007 | 15:54 »
Erste Infos aus dem demnaechst erscheinden Preview-Buch zur 4. Edition (Races and Classes):
Zitat
  • The book is just fluff, no game statistcs or any rules in it.
  • Diferent D&D designers have written different parts of the book, it's definatly teamwork. It is always mentioned who wrote which chapter or which paragraph.
  • The races mentioned in detail are Humans, Dwaves, Eladrins, Elves, Halflings, Tieflings, and the "mystery race", Dragonborn. Each of these races gets some pages, humans I think had the most with 4 or 5, eladrin the least with 1,5. There are 4-5 paragraphs each on some other races as well. I remember drow and gnome, but there were maybe 2 or 3 more. The gnome part was titled "The problem with gnomes" or something like that.
  • The Dragonborn in their picture looked like big and well muscled lizardmen. They were antropomorphic, had two legs and no wings. It looked as if their hands had claws. If I had to judge by the picture, they should get natural bite and claw attacks.
  • Halflings looked just as 3ed halflings (no hobbits).
  • The classes section had details about five classes: Cleric, Fighter, Rogue, Wizard, and Warlock. Each of thes gets 3-4 pages. Then - as with the classes - there is an "other classes" section with 3-4 paragraphes for each class. I remember paladins, rangers, druids, barbarians, swordmages and warlords among those.
  • I couldn't find any mention in the book why they chose to write about some races and classes in detail, and why some get only some paragraphs. While for some of the "lesser" races and classs it did say that those would appear probably in later D&D proucts, I couldn't find any passage saying that those and only those detailed would be in the PHB. (Five base classes certainly seem to much.)
  • Besides races and classes there were some chapters about the designwork, about the basic things they are trying to achieve, and so on. One interesting little info I remember is that there will be just one progression for all classes, and differences between them will come from their different character ablities, feats and so on. If I remember well, BAB (and AC?) was among the things mentioned. Hp was probably also on this list, butu I don't remember well anymore, sorry.
  • There were two pages about the design history, which the different stages were, and when they began.

The art looked good, often there was a pencil sketch (concept art), and the final colored version side by side.
Die Infos sind zwar noch nicht bestaetigt, scheinen aber soweit zuverlaessig zu sein.

Danke an ENWorld fuer das Posting ;)
Abraham Maslow said in 1966: "It is tempting, if the only tool you have is a hammer, to treat everything as if it were a nail."

Offline Selganor [n/a]

  • Moderator
  • Titan
  • *****
  • Beiträge: 34.048
  • Geschlecht: Männlich
  • Username: Selganor
RE: D&D 4e Smalltalk
« Antwort #129 am: 29.11.2007 | 09:03 »
Doppelpost:

Inzwischen sind mehr Infos (diesmal bestaetigt) ueber das Preview aufgetaucht:

Races und Classes
Abraham Maslow said in 1966: "It is tempting, if the only tool you have is a hammer, to treat everything as if it were a nail."

Offline Tantalos

  • Bayrisches Cowgirl
  • Administrator
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Beiträge: 7.061
  • Username: J.Jack
RE: D&D 4e Smalltalk
« Antwort #130 am: 29.11.2007 | 09:21 »
Damit der Selganor nicht immer Doppelposten muss:

Hier mal ein paar Feats aus dem PHB4 aus einem Designartikel...


Zitat
Here are four examples of feats taken from the latest draft of the 4th Edition Player’s Handbook. The first two demonstrate the minor evolution of familiar favorites from 3rd Edition, while the other two show off some new tricks. As always, nothing’s final until you read it in the printed book, so take these with a grain of salt.

Toughness
Tier: Heroic
Benefit: When you take this feat, you gain additional hit points equal to your level + 3. You also gain 1 additional hit point every time you gain a level.

Alertness
Tier: Heroic
Benefit: You don’t grant enemies combat advantage in surprise rounds.
You also gain a +2 feat bonus to Perception checks.

First Reaction
Tier: Paragon
Benefit: If you are surprised, you may spend an action point to act during the surprise round.

Golden Wyvern Adept
Tier: Paragon
Benefit: You can omit a number of squares from the effects of any of your area or close wizard powers. This number can’t exceed your Wisdom modifier.
Rebellion? Läuft gut!

Illusionista

  • Gast
RE: D&D 4e Smalltalk
« Antwort #131 am: 29.11.2007 | 09:45 »
Ich lasse mich einfach mal überraschen wie diese neue Edition wird. Mich stossen jedoch diese Miniaturenhypes der Wizards ab. Aber trotzdem, ich kenne es ja, das Coreset wird mit Sicherheit gekauft. Ich hasse mich. ;D

Aradur

  • Gast
RE: D&D 4e Smalltalk
« Antwort #132 am: 30.11.2007 | 01:32 »
Hallo,

ich werde es nicht kaufen, das neue D&D 4.0 frühestens die 4.5 ;-) oder vielleicht die 5. Edition. Vielleicht. Oder gar net mehr D&D unter dem Verlag...

Warum? Weil
... nur in deutsch sammle und spiele, der Abstand zwischen 3.0 dt. und 3.5 dt. war mir einfach zu kurz.
... ich nicht mehr einsehe, ständig für Core Rules Geld auszugeben, die ich doch nicht ganz lese.
... ich nicht mehr über Regeln usw. diskutieren möchte, sondern dann auch mal wirklich spielen will. Ich denke, wenn ich dann die 4.0 kann, wird die 4.5 oder 5. bereits wieder draußen sein ;-)
... ich bereits das MiniaturenGame in 3.0 und 3.5 zu stark betont finde. Und in 4.0 wird das allem Anschein nach weiter ausgebaut. Und das Halma bzw. TableTop kann ich mit anderen Systemen "günstiger" spielen. Die Talente in 3.0 nzw. 3.5 sind schon stark auf Plastikpöppel schieben ausgerichtet.
... ich die Politik bestimmter Verlage bzgl. der Gewinnorientierung einfach nicht mehr mag, bzw. diese Art und Weise zu überzogen finde.
... ich hier ausreichende Schrankmeter an Material habe, was ich noch lesen kann.
... ich langsam alt werde, und net jeden Hype mitmachen muß ;-)

Gruß

Aradur

Offline Tantalos

  • Bayrisches Cowgirl
  • Administrator
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Beiträge: 7.061
  • Username: J.Jack
RE: D&D 4e Smalltalk
« Antwort #133 am: 30.11.2007 | 07:33 »
Das ist ja dein gutes Recht  ;)
Rebellion? Läuft gut!

Illusionista

  • Gast
RE: D&D 4e Smalltalk
« Antwort #134 am: 30.11.2007 | 08:49 »
Naja an Regeldiskussionen beteilige ich mich fast nie. Ich hasse sie ehrlich gesagt, denn es artet im Web immer darin aus, wer welche Passage am Besten auswendig kann oder wer am Besten quotet, nur um einem Anderen zu zeigen wie schlecht seine Regelkenntniss sind. ::)Als ob es nichts Wichtigeres im Leben gibt. Das Coresystem landet jedenfalls definitiv in meinem Regal. Regeln die mir als SL nicht passen, fliegen raus und sollte mir die 4. nicht gefallen, dann war es das mit D&D 4 für mich und wir zocken die 3.5er und True20 weiter. Weiss eigentlich jemand, ob D20 Modern dann auch noch mal neu aufgelegt wird?

Offline Selganor [n/a]

  • Moderator
  • Titan
  • *****
  • Beiträge: 34.048
  • Geschlecht: Männlich
  • Username: Selganor
RE: D&D 4e Smalltalk
« Antwort #135 am: 30.11.2007 | 09:12 »
Weiss eigentlich jemand, ob D20 Modern dann auch noch mal neu aufgelegt wird?
Laut aktuellem Stand afaik nicht.
Abraham Maslow said in 1966: "It is tempting, if the only tool you have is a hammer, to treat everything as if it were a nail."

Illusionista

  • Gast
RE: D&D 4e Smalltalk
« Antwort #136 am: 30.11.2007 | 09:29 »
Eigentlich schade aber war wohl nicht so sehr der finanzielle Bringer. Wird die 4th Edition eigentlich immer noch diese nervigen Attacks of Opportunity haben?

Offline Tantalos

  • Bayrisches Cowgirl
  • Administrator
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Beiträge: 7.061
  • Username: J.Jack
RE: D&D 4e Smalltalk
« Antwort #137 am: 30.11.2007 | 09:33 »
Japp, aber warum nervig? Ich finde die toll...
Rebellion? Läuft gut!

Illusionista

  • Gast
RE: D&D 4e Smalltalk
« Antwort #138 am: 30.11.2007 | 09:50 »
Nein ich sage sogar, meine persönliche Hassregel. Wenn Du einen Sl hattest, der die Regeln wirklich auswendig rezitieren konnte und Du alles tun mußt, damit du nicht ständig durch sowas drauf gehst, entwickelst Du einen Hass auf sowas wie diese AoO Regel. Klar wenn ich in einem Kampf Mist baue, krieg ich eine drauf aber man muss nicht noch künstlich alles tun, damit es schlimmer wird. Wenn ich einer Finte zum Opfer falle, okay. Aber nur, wenn ich mich als erfahrener Kämpfer ein wenig bewege und nur weil ich ein angrenzendes Feld streif, in dem ein anderer günstig steht, ich eine draufkriegen soll, ist etwas merkwürdig. Ich kassiere im Sparring auch nicht einen Treffer nach dem anderen, wenn ich mich bewege. Im Gegenteil, beweg ich nicht, krieg ich eher eine drauf. :DAber es ist zum Glück nur eine Regel, die man als SL nicht nutzen muss und mit diesem Regelfanatiker spielen wir mittlerweile nicht mehr. Denn außer Dungeon unser kannte der irgendwie nix.

Offline Wawoozle

  • Sultan des Unterwasser-Kingdoms
  • TechSupport
  • Mythos
  • *****
  • would you kindly
  • Beiträge: 10.620
  • Geschlecht: Männlich
  • Username: Wawoozle
RE: D&D 4e Smalltalk
« Antwort #139 am: 30.11.2007 | 09:54 »
Du weißt aber schon das Du, wenn Du die AoO weglässt, einen großteil der Feats vergessen kannst ?

Darüberhinaus frage ich mich warum ihr mit einem System spielt das Regelteile hat die du sogar "hasst".
Nehmt doch True20 oder Blue Rose das ist im Prinzip ähnlich wie D20 aber bspw. ohne AoO.
Ihr wollt doch alle den Nachtisch zuerst !

Illusionista

  • Gast
RE: D&D 4e Smalltalk
« Antwort #140 am: 30.11.2007 | 09:57 »
@Wawoozle

Ich verweise auf ein Posting in diesem Thread, etwas höher. Da steht doch das wir True20 zocken. ;Dich habe aber irgendwie das ungute Gefühl das True20 demnächst ausgetwentied hat. Keine Ahnung warum.

Offline Wawoozle

  • Sultan des Unterwasser-Kingdoms
  • TechSupport
  • Mythos
  • *****
  • would you kindly
  • Beiträge: 10.620
  • Geschlecht: Männlich
  • Username: Wawoozle
RE: D&D 4e Smalltalk
« Antwort #141 am: 30.11.2007 | 10:05 »
Wer lesen kann ist klar im Vorteil... :)

Warum Du das gefühl hast weis ich allerdings nicht.
Green Ronin hat mit True20 ein eigenes System draussen das im großen und ganzen als "fertig" zu bezeichnen ist.
Die können sich jetzt auf andere Dinge konzentrieren.

WotC dagegen muss seine Kunden weiter mit neuen D&D Versionen melken, aber deren Kunden stehen da ja auch drauf. Seltsamerweise :)
Ihr wollt doch alle den Nachtisch zuerst !

Offline Tantalos

  • Bayrisches Cowgirl
  • Administrator
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Beiträge: 7.061
  • Username: J.Jack
RE: D&D 4e Smalltalk
« Antwort #142 am: 30.11.2007 | 10:11 »
Muuuuuh...


Zitat
Wenn Du einen Sl hattest, der die Regeln wirklich auswendig rezitieren konnte und Du alles tun mußt, damit du nicht ständig durch sowas drauf gehst, entwickelst Du einen Hass auf sowas wie diese AoO Regel
Da würde ich mal einfach sagen: Arschloch-SL ich weise meine Spieler darauf hin, dass sie eventuell einenAoO abbekommen, wenn sie deis und jenes machen. Das steht aber auch nirgendwo in den 3.5 Regeln, dass man das machen sollte, aber richtig fair ist das nicht, wenn der SL Regelunkenntnis ausnutzt. Ob das in D&D 4 besser wird?
Rebellion? Läuft gut!

Offline Haukrinn

  • Überschriftenmaschine
  • Mythos
  • ********
  • Jetzt auch mit Bart!
  • Beiträge: 10.978
  • Geschlecht: Männlich
  • Username: haukrinn
RE: D&D 4e Smalltalk
« Antwort #143 am: 30.11.2007 | 10:50 »
Das steht aber auch nirgendwo in den 3.5 Regeln, dass man das machen sollte, aber richtig fair ist das nicht, wenn der SL Regelunkenntnis ausnutzt. Ob das in D&D 4 besser wird?

Klar, da wird explizit drin stehen, dass der SL die Regelunkenntnis seiner Spieler möglichst hart bestrafen nicht unfair ausnutzen soll.  ;D

Und ich weise als SL meine Spieler auch immer darauf hin, dass sie, wenn sie ihre Züge wie geplant durchziehen, von mir eine AoO ab bekommen. Und meine Spieler machen das mit mir glücklicherweise auch genauso oft...  :)
What were you doing at a volcano? - Action geology!

Most people work long, hard hours at jobs they hate that enable them to buy things they don't need to impress people they don't like.

Illusionista

  • Gast
RE: D&D 4e Smalltalk
« Antwort #144 am: 30.11.2007 | 11:34 »
Tja das Wort Arschloch-SL trifft den Nagel auf den Kopf. :DBei Shadowrun war er auch so ätzend. Und als Spieler bei SR waren seine Charaktere spieltechnisch saueffektiv, über den Rest lege ich den berühmten Mantel des Schweigens. Und zu True20, naja ich denke, falls es irgendwie Änderungen gibt in diesem ganzen OGL,SRD Gesocks, könnten GR eventuell ne neue Version machen oder sich auf die 4th Edition konzentrieren. Idealismus hin und her, was zählt ist der harte Dollar auf der Gewinnseite. Aber back to 4th Edition. Ich bin gespannt, wie sich das Magiesystem ändert oder ob es sich überhaupt großartig ändert.

Offline Selganor [n/a]

  • Moderator
  • Titan
  • *****
  • Beiträge: 34.048
  • Geschlecht: Männlich
  • Username: Selganor
RE: D&D 4e Smalltalk
« Antwort #145 am: 30.11.2007 | 17:38 »
Ich bin gespannt, wie sich das Magiesystem ändert oder ob es sich überhaupt großartig ändert.
Zitat von der 4th Edition Info Page auf ENWorld:
Zitat
    *  Vancian 'spell slots' will be reduced in how much they control a caster's total ability -- "Vancian magic system – there’s an element of that we held on to, but it’s a much smaller fraction of their overall power. A wizard will never completely run out of spells. They can run out of their “mordenkainen’s sword, however” (source).
          o Mike Mearls -- "BTW, who knew that so many people disliked Vancian spellcasting? The entire audience in yesterday's seminar cheered and clapped when we told them it was (mostly) gone."
          o Vancian system survives, but it's only a "fraction" of the magic (or magic options) available to characters: "a wizard who casts all his memorized per day spells should be at about 80% of power."
          o Chris Perkins on Vancian magic -- "It’s safe to say that the “Vancian” spellcasting system has received as much scrutiny as every other aspect of the D&D game. One thing we don’t want is a character running out of cool things to do in combat. In 4th Edition, all characters have a selection of at-will, per-encounter, and per-day resources. The exact mechanical execution of this base concept will be disclosed in the coming months on D&D Insider and the Wizards Presents: Races and Classes preview book, so no spoilers here!"
          o Will the new wizard resemble the 3.5 warlock {given the reduction in Vancian magic)? "Wizards will more resemble 3.5 wizards than 3.5 warlocks."
    * It seems like four "classic" wizardly implements - the orb, staff, tome, and wand - are to play a more central role in the Wizard character class. Each implement is associated with certain types of magic: orb for terrain control, manipulation and divination; staff for forcefully projected powers as well as flight and telekinisis; tome for teleportation, summoning, shapechanging; and wand for long-range effects and protection.  The wizard can cast without the items, but is likened to "a slightly near-sighted man with glasses"; holding the associated implement grants a benefit to the wizard’s attack. The article refers to "the wand spell cinder storm", which implies that each spell will be an orb, staff, wand or tome spell.
          o Update - conspiracy theorists ahoy! All references to the "tome" have been edited out of the above article, leaving orb, staff and wand only. Why? I don't know! But there were references to the "tome" before, and now there aren't. Instead, we have extra flavour text, referring to Iron Sigil [potent defenses when invoking spells of thunder or force] and Serpent Eye [enchantment, beguiling, and ensnaring] traditions (orb), disciplines of the Hidden Flame [fierce powers of fire and radiance] and the Golden Wyvern [battle-mages] (staff), and Emerald Frost adepts [powers of cold and deadly acidic magic] and Stormwalker theurges [spells of lightning and force] (wand).
          o Bart Carroll on the change: "Hmm, well we do say it in the Design & Development column intro: "Keep in mind that the game is still in a state of flux, as refinements are made by our design and development staff." Case in point -- take another look at the most recent Wizards and Wizard Implements article. A revised version has just been posted, with several changes to the original article posted Friday [Note from Morrus - it wasn't there on Friday; it appeared today]. The version you see now is the version that should have originally gone live."
          o Note: breschau posted the original article.
          o Dave Noonan has spoken a little more about wizards implements (the orb, staff, wand, and elusive tome). He mentions that the level of importance attached to these items has not yet been finally decided ("The pendulum has swung around a lot during design on the implement issue... Right now the pendulum is resting somewhere in the middle.") He compares it to a fighter and his weapons: "...it might be worthwhile to think of a wizard's implements as analogous to a 3e fighter's weapon choice--if you assume that the fighter hasn't deeply, deeply specialized in that weapon through feat choice. Mid-level Tordek prefers axes, sure, and he probably has an advantage with an axe that's substantial but not overwhelming. You put a polearm in his hands, though, and he functions just fine. And he's accessing the salient properties of the polearm--reach, for example."
          o He also confirms that the design intention is that these things be adjustable to work in your campaign -- "You can add your own implements and disciplines/traditions to the mix. Doing so takes some work, but it's not a massive undertaking."
          o And on the nature of the described traditions: "...traditions are not groupings (fluffy or otherwise) of spells/spell schools/etc... I can see how someone could read the preview article and make the reasonable speculation that the traditions we mention are analogous to spell schools or domains. While that's a decent guess, and it fits the available data, it's not a correct guess."
          o Wizardly orders: "They're not really specializations in the sense of 3rd Edition specialist wizards; choosing one doesn't make the spells belonging to another unavailable to you. Basically they're a mechanism by which we answer the question, "How did your wizard learn magic? Was he trained in a magical academy, tutored by a single mentor, etc., etc." So each order provides a subset a spells your character is *best* at, but doesn't replace the notion of spell school from previous editions."
          o Implements: "Wizard implements now provide your character with a reason to care about a signature weapon in much the same way that the fighter cares about a signature sword. We think it's a good thing. Many other implements have been suggested, including things such as mask, dagger, and (of course) tome."
    * On spell selection: "Every class gets cool "non-attack" power choices as well as attack power choices. Wizards will still be able to cast spells such as Disguise Self, Jump, or Levitate. It's true that we'd like to "narrow" wizards a bit, and save (for example) some illusion spells for an honest-to-gosh Illusionist class down the road, or necromancy spells for a Necromancer. But wizards will still "splash" at least a few of the iconic powers in these themes of magic. For example, wizards still have Invisibility available to them. But when the Illusionist class comes around, he'll have better Invisibility options."
    * To the question of whether XP will be required to make magic items Andy Collins replied, "No, Hell No." How magic items will be made in character wasn't discussed beyond a vague statement that you wouldn't be burning a feat on it, and out of character the structure of magic item creation will become more loosened.
          o Magic Item Creation. "We tried to fool ourselves into the fact that there was a hard pricing, but we started recognizing that with MIC, that we should look at them more wholistically. There will not be magic item creation rules for DM’s as we realize that as professional game designers we don’t even get it right every time. We’re going to give you lots and lots of examples and suggest that you build it, test it, etc. " (source).
          o Will it be easier for a wizard to create magic items? "Yes, characters can still build magic items, it will be a way for characters to acquire things, but it will be more flexible and easier. There will be a preview article on this in two weeks on D&D Insider. Three releases a week (this one will be on Wed).". (source).
    * Designer Dave Noonan has posted in his blog on Gleemax that he is working on designing rods. Noonan writes that he's considering two possible designs: one that "constrains the design space" from the very beginning (in other words, there's a finite number of rods that can be designed) and the other that allows an "expansive design space."
    * David Noonan's latest blog post mentions the Eye of Vecna, the Axe of Dwarvish Lords, and Purple Worms: "A significant breakthrough with artifacts—the new direction looks promising, and the two I’ve written so far (Eye of Vecna and Axe of the Dwarvish Lords) are things I’d put into my campaign in a heartbeat. The only significant downside? Each individual artifact takes up some real estate—more than we planned. But they’re frickin’ artifacts, man! So we’ll see. My next step is to wave them under the noses of some colleagues and see if we can’t get another page or two for the artifacts section. And it’s also a good time for me to ask the “Is Dave crazy?” question of my colleagues, because artifacts have become more than just really good magic items with backstories."
    * Rodney Thompson on how magic items won't be as necessary to character advancement -- "Last night at dinner Andrew Finch and I had an interesting discussion about the way magic items are going to work in 4th Edition. Since I was busy running Star Wars games and hosting my own seminars I didn't get to go to any of the D&D panels, so I don't know how much they revealed about magic items. Anyways, Andrew and I were having a bit of a disagreement about the way magic items contribute to the D&D experience. (As an aside, Andrew and I have had many such conversations back at the office, especially in a Star Wars context where loot and gear are almost meaningless). We both agree on this: finding a magic item is a tangible player reward that helps keep the game moving forward for the players. While XP may be its own reward, it's a delayed reward. When I conclude an encounter, I get XP, but I don't get its effects for another few encounters. The presence of magic items provides an immediate reward (or, at least, the potential for an immediate reward) at the conclusion of the encounter. You don't have to actually get a new magic item for the potential for reward to be there, and in many cases you'll feel as though you've been rewarded when someone else gets an item. In 4E, I think there is going to be a very interesting dynamic between magic items and players. I believe it was mentioned that some traditional things about magic items were going the way of the dodo, and that magic items aren't going to be required to do cool things at high levels. While that may be true, I think people are still going to want magic items because they are going to provide some cool and exciting effects. There's going to be a new dynamic where players are going to want new things but not necessarily need them as much to remain competitive, which I'm thinking is going to actually cause the "I'm happy for someone else when they get loot" mentality to spread. If I don't get new magic items for a while, I'm not becoming underpowered per se, so it's much easier for me to feel rewarded when someone else picks up a new magic item."
    * "Wizards will be able to cast 25th-level spells." 4E mechanical designer Logan Bonner also comments very briefly on the rumours of 30th level spells -- "Power level corresponds to the character level at which you gain the power."
          o Dave Noonan: "30 discrete levels of spells would be too fine a level of gradation, so we shouldn't expect to see spells occupying every spell level."
    * Fireballs don't deal 1d6/level damage any more. Also, game breaking spells pells that fundamentally change the gaming scenario, like etherealness, scrying, and save or die effects) "have been addressed as well".
          o The 4th Edition fireball has not only an attack roll, but you can crit with it? "A brief playtest note from last night's game, DM'd by Dave Noonan: I rolled not one, but *two* critical hits with fireball attack rolls last night. The second actually one-shotted a tough troglodyte skirmisher; just smoked him outright, full hp to dead in one go. Oh, and I had a great initiative roll, so it was the very first thing that happened in the fight. Hee hee hee! Scoring criticals with attack spells is *fun.* My warlord/wizard sure feels like he kicks some butt!"
    * "Certain spells are gone, period (wish for sure)."
    * Mentioned a "ray of freezing cold".
    * Warlock seen using "Mire of Minauros" which dissolved a couple of vampires, with an acidic bog.
    * Reference to sleep, magic missile and a "short teleport" (dimension door, or a new teleport variant?)
    * Wizards have been seen to use a "wizard strike" (twice in a single combat) and a "once-per-day scorch" which blasted three opponents who were lined up in a row.  Neither appear to be spells.
          o Wizards get a couple of decent ranged area attacks per encounter.
          o Wizards have a "wizard strike" which injures and pushes foes; warlords have a "tactical acumen" ability which can give bonuses to allies (source).
    * Will we still have x/min level Buffs? "Nope. Buff durations will be drastically modified."
    * On save-or-die spells -- "We're trying to get away from mages that rely primarily on Save or Lose/Die spells. For example, we're basing most things around doing HP damage, then tying conditions to HP loss. We do not want characters dying from a single failed die roll.... "
    * Increase of magic across the board in all aspects of the game.
    * Disrupting spellcasting has been removed: "...he pointed out that it was largely a one-skill tax on PC spellcasters, and it tended to swing to extremes. Either you had your Concentration maxed and could ignore the problem, or you didn't and it was far too easy for a spellcaster to be unable to cast. Instead, you can pick up powers that can mess with spellcasting and other abilities."
    * David Noonan on spells:

      "After two class meetings yesterday, I discover that I'm still smitten with the way we're "siloing" PC capabilities now. For example, it was always unfortunate how phantom steed had to compete with fireball on a wizard's "Spells Prepared" list. Don't get me wrong: Both spells are great, and they both have their place. But when all eyes at the table turn to you, it's a lot better to say, "I didn't prep phantom steed, but I've still got fireball," rather than "I didn't prep fireball, but I've still got phantom steed." Phantom steed suffers by comparison, despite its coolness, and thus it's relegated to scroll use and the occasional splash from a high-level wizard.

      Not so in 4e. We've devised various ways of grouping like capabilities with like capabilities, so you don't have to sacrifice phantom steed's utility for fireball's killin'-the-bad-guys effectiveness. You'll get both. And one of the clever bits in D&D--figuring out combat uses for utility spells and vice versa--remains.

      In some ways, it's like having a major and a minor in college. And 4e characters are looking a lot more well-rounded than their 3e counterparts."
Sieht also nicht so aus, als wuerde sich viel aendern ;D
Besser zu lesen unter http://www.enworld.org/index.php?page=4e#magic
Abraham Maslow said in 1966: "It is tempting, if the only tool you have is a hammer, to treat everything as if it were a nail."

Illusionista

  • Gast
RE: D&D 4e Smalltalk
« Antwort #146 am: 30.11.2007 | 18:06 »
Hmm also werden wir wohl doch bei True Sorcery bleiben. Naja egal wie, die Corebooks kauf ich und sei es nur um sagen zu können wie schlecht oder was auch immer ich die neue Edition find. In den Realms spielen wir nicht und Eberron ist mir auch schnuppe. Also aufs nächste Jahr warten. ich hoffe nur, dass die Bücher nicht so ein imo blödes Format haben wie das neue Star Wars. Das sieht einfach ziemlich blöd im Regal aus.

Offline Jürgen Hubert

  • Adventurer
  • ****
  • Weitgereister
  • Beiträge: 535
  • Geschlecht: Männlich
  • Username: Jürgen Hubert
    • Sunken Castles, Evil Poodles
RE: D&D 4e Smalltalk
« Antwort #147 am: 2.12.2007 | 14:39 »
Ich werde es mir auf alle Fälle kaufen - schon allein damit Urbis auf dem neusten Stand der Regeln bleibt.

Mal schaun, wie viele Retcons ich einfügen muß...   ;)
Die Arcana Wiki - Inspirationen für Rollenspieler aus der realen Welt

Sunken Castles, Evil Poodles - Übersetzung deutscher Sagen und Legenden ins Englische

Offline bolverk

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Beiträge: 1.079
  • Geschlecht: Männlich
  • Username: bolverk
RE: D&D 4e Smalltalk
« Antwort #148 am: 3.12.2007 | 03:15 »
ich hoffe nur, dass die Bücher nicht so ein imo blödes Format haben wie das neue Star Wars. Das sieht einfach ziemlich blöd im Regal aus.

Und die Chrakterbögen erst... *schauder*
"Anyone can be a winner if their definition of victory is flexible enough."
- DM of the Rings

Illusionista

  • Gast
RE: D&D 4e Smalltalk
« Antwort #149 am: 3.12.2007 | 09:56 »
Naja wenn ich das so auf Enworld verfolge, bin ich langsam aber sicher skeptisch. Magier mit Stäben? Die Schulen nicht mehr so wie früher. Und Zauberer können in schwerer Rüstung ohne Abzug zaubern ohne einen Feat dafür ausgeben zu müssen? Also das paßt mir überhaupt nicht.

Hier das Quote von Enworld:

We know the wizard. Their focus is not more an evoker than anything else. They blast enemies while remaining in the back.

Spells are divided among at will (lesser power than a fighter’s melee attack), per encounter, per day (the really powerful stuff, these are the most powerful abilities in the game) and rituals. Rituals cover magic item creation, and non-combat spell (divinations are prime examples).

Schools are dead, long live the implements: the orb, the staff and the wand (with others, such as the dagger, possible in later supplement). Staffs are for rays and cones, wands for long distance control, while orb stands for blasts, terrain control, and retributive and perception based effects.

Divinations, long range teleport, restorative effects (the cleric’s remove disease for example) are rituals.

Evocation and illusion is there and now they are the focus of wizardry.

Necromancy was nerfed mostly by removing save or die effects.

Transmutation was a haphazard pile of powers (according to them), and some part remains, other do not.

Enchantment is nerfed to be saved for other classes (others they state that it will be the psi).

Wizards spell failure due to armor is gone (hurray!). Picking the right feats wizards can go around in heavy armor.

Feats don’t have class as a prerequisite. Race, level or skill training might be needed, but no class. You can steer your character wherever you want.

There are class training feats (Fighter training, Wizard training, Warlock training, etc.) that gives some power of that class to someone not in that class.

Power progression

There is 2 or so pages on tiers of power (heroic, paragon and epic). The important part is the paragon paths and epic destinies. They replace prestige classes. They are additional power/abilities, that you can choose once you hit 11th or 21st level. They are very much like prestige classes and battle captain, mystic theurge, weapon master, prince of knaves and cavalier are mentioned.

Epic destiny gives few but very powerful ability. Also it describes how you exit the world (seem like at level 30 you retire). You can become a demigod for example.

Epic level game is much about slaying gods and clearing the Nine Hell (I made the last up).

In the cleric section they muse about gods being redesigned, and one of their goals is, that they can be challenged by epic level characters.