180 replies to this topic

[Deathsangel]

Read this and as VIIIofSwords I will wait with commenting as I am unsure of how they will implement this all. The x per encounter thing was long known to me and personally I am con.
I know they want to make level 1 characters able to beat a group of goblins, but I find that a bit over the top for 1st level heroes
Oh well, just wait and see. I will stick with 3.5 no matter what, more so because I have so many books and rather skip a version... if I ever switch at all.

[aVENGER]

healing an ally by smiting enemies is a little bizarre.

Agreed, the whole concept of Renewing Smite sounds extremely silly. Heh, with Evil Paladins and all, I'm starting to think that the 4E Paladin revision was done by some WoW/Diablo2 kiddie.

[VIIIofSwords]

The concept seems rather similar to an ability from the Death Knight hero of WC3, albeit with altered execution. An ability like that doesn't quite make sense for good paladins, but holy warriors of evil gods would probably use it rather frequently.

[Lord Ernie]

I don't see why it doesn't make sense, really. All depends how you view a smite. "Holy <fill in god's name>, aid my allies and smite my enemies!". Problem solved.

Seriously, while the ability makes little sense technically, flavourwise it fits the paladin perfectly (kill the enemy, heal his friends), and that's more than can be said about some feats I've seen. What's more, diversifying smites only makes a paladin more interesting, since in 3.0/.5 there was little reason to level a paladin beyond level 4; spellcasting, yes, but going fighter/divine champion usually paid off a lot more.

On another note, I find it amusing people seem to be getting pissed off over the new 'fluff' in the PHB. I've heard various complaints around the boards that there's too much crunch and too little fluff these days (granted, in FR works), and now WotC increases the fluff in the core books, they complain about too much fluff.

Edited by Lord Ernie, 30 November 2007 - 04:53 AM.

[Deathsangel]

I am more for different aura's than different smites, but I reckon that is very personal taste *shrugs*

When it comes to paladins I like this Revised Paladin by OneWinged4ngel (and help from the board). I think the different aura's are great, normal smite, and with the x per encounter it is already partial 4th edition / ToB (not in favor of that, but again that is personal) like.

@Lord Ernie: People are specific in their demands; more fluff in the CS books, rulls in core. However, I agree with you. Even if people do have a very specific opinion they do seem to complain a lot

[VIIIofSwords]

Because, in general, giving players what they want has a tendency to turn out badly.

[aVENGER]

OMG, they killed Kenny Tyr! You bastards actually did something right WOTC!

Honestly, I was having a hard time imagining how Tyr could remain the LG God of Justice after he slaughtered Helm apparently out of sheer boredom. Torm will be more than a worthy successor and I wholeheartedly agree with this change.

[Tempest]

Bah-I like Tyr much more than Torm, and think the silly deified paladin should have been the one to go, if any.

Because, in general, giving players what they want has a tendency to turn out badly.

Quoted for truth.

[VIIIofSwords]

To be honest, I've never been fond of Tyr or Helm, but I'm a little apprehensive about having Torm basically take both their places. Though, as the link pointed out, he does make for a very interesting counterpoint to Bane.

[Kellen]

I have to admit I am a little leery of Torm stepping away from the core of his portfolio and character. Not to mention that the reason for his resurrection was his unflinching loyalty and duty. Is he now forsaking that?

[aVENGER]

It's possible that Tyr might abdicate willingly after the whole love triangle/murder fiasco. Perhaps he'd even ask Torm to take his place.

In other news, Wizards can now cast spells in Heavy Armor without penalty.

Edited by aVENGER, 02 December 2007 - 11:15 PM.

[Bluenose]

So what happens to Tymora now? Is she still going to be Tyr's trophy-wife, or has her brain started working properly again? I'm not against the idea of Torm becoming more prominent in place of Tyr, but I'd like to know what happens to tymora before I'm entirely happy.



On wizards. I play wizards a lot in my home group, more than the other players combined. I don't mind the "wizards can cast in armour" bit, but it's not something I feel much enthusiasm for. I'm not a fan of the wizard as an outright blaster, and that seems to be one of their main roles. I do like some of the more subtle spells, many of which are enchantment. I do like the idea of ritual magic, especially as some of the spells involved are really awkward for DMs - high level divinations and teleport can make a dungeon superfluous. And I really like the implements, if they're done the way I hope. I hate the way a wand runs out of charges, and hopefully now it's going to function more like a longsword+1 would.

Thinking about it, I wonder if Savras' death is related to the change in the wat divination magic works? Maybe they thought he'd be superfluous if it was a ritual effect.

[Tempest]

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. I cannot say that I like it

.

/wince

Another nail in the coffin for 4E as I see it. WotC is killing DnD as we've always known it.

[Lord Ernie]

Oh, please, enough with the dramaticisms, there's quite enough of that in the 4th edition announcement forums.

First of all, DnD as we've always known it is simply not a valid metaphor. I haven't played OD&D, but from what I've read, it was significantly different from 2nd, and that was again significantly different from 3rd. Especially so in the way multi-classing worked, which is the bulk of rules in this one. And we don't have the full report on that one, either - who knows, they might even hit home this time and make an intuitive yet fun system (3rd could be called fun, but intuitive? Not really.).

Second, as for the exit rules and battling gods: that's a DM's decision to make. If you don't want to have your characters face gods, then don't. Rule nr. 0 is there for a good reason.

Third, what is the core of D&D? The crux of it all, to me, is a system which provides rules to make both roleplay and interesting, team-based combat possible in the typical 'D&D-ised' fantasy setting. I have seen nothing which proves or indicates this will not be possible with 4th.

Also, note that most of the 'inside' news (meaning, not the official announcements) was made by playtesters of a version a couple months old. Implementations of these things change - it's why they use internal playtesters in the first case.

[VIIIofSwords]

In other news, Wizards can now cast spells in Heavy Armor without penalty.

I am not a fan of this idea. Part of what appealed to me about the class, at first, was how easily killed they were at early levels, but patience and skill paid off if you could get them powerful enough. I was opposed to letting wizards cast spells while wearing armor with penalties, let alone without.

Another nail in the coffin for 4E as I see it. WotC is killing DnD as we've always known it.

I don't know about that. My jury's still out on how the new epic levels work (it worries me if the bit about "challenging the gods" is correct), but the rest of the stuff could theoretically work and be fun to play, so long as they don't screw the whole system up. I'm willing to wait for concrete details on this one before making any final decisions.

[Lord Ernie]

Note that they never said: "wizards can wear heavy armor". They said "arcane spell failure is gone". We have no idea of how Armor Proficiency is implemented, how multi-classing works, and what sort of penalty you get for wearing heavy armor without proficiency. Without the full details of any of these, well... we don't really know anything.

[aVENGER]

Actually, the exact quote from ENWorld was:

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

That seems pretty straightforward to me.

[Azkyroth]

Can't you arrange to cast in armor in 3/3.5E with the right set of feats and/or prestige classes too?

[Deathsangel]

Actually, the exact quote from ENWorld was:

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

That seems pretty straightforward to me.

It seems to me as well.

I, personally, am no fan of:
*Armoured wizards (even with wizards)
* Focused wizards (the statement evocation and illusion is there main thing)
* Battling gods

I also se some of the best ideas of 4e here:
* Rituals, if implemented like Unearthed Arcana and thus take a huge amount of time (cause that is not stated!), for some more Dungeon problematic spells like teleport
* Same for restoration stuff, if the 'hp' is going to be changed as said with the wound points it is good to make healing less rapid
* Feats that allow for a bit more flexibility (gaining some class powers of others)
* Wizards more like the current shadowcasters with at will, per encounter, per day

I shrug about:
* implementations of wands and stuff. Since the current staffs and wands will be less neccessary because of the at will / per encounter stuff, they put it in this way. It is okay, but I am not thrilled about it.
* The tiers part. It is now a bit unclear to me and I need to see more to judge it.

Taking into account that the 1st and 3rd things of the things I don't like it is easy to implement rule nr. 0 for I reckon I like most of these previews of playtesting, which indeed may change as Lord Ernie says

The gods stuff, just well me. A bit too many changes, though I agree I don't see Tymora and Tyr as a logical couple... but they are really cutting down on the number of gods... who

[vilkacis]

Wizards can now cast spells in Heavy Armor without penalty.

About bloody time. I've never heard a good explanation as to why they couldn't do this before.