Strangely enough, they went and delivered _another_ one last night, so I suppose I've got one that I can thoroughly desecrate with a highlighter, if I go back through it again...
There are next to no crunchy bits in the book; just flavortext and insight into the design process.
Some notes below, just the first chunk of things that really stood out to me, filtered for DS relevancy. Afterwards, some thoughts on what this will mean for DS4.
------------------
- Darkvision is generally eliminated (30)
- Races will have abilities that open up as you advance in level. Baseline is higher (more along the lines of LA +1/2 in current levels)
- Level Adjustment is dead, dead, dead
- Ability score adjustments do not have to balance out to zero.
- Some of the more powerful racial abilities will be made feats.
- Humans are described as corruptible.
- Explicitly described classes: Cleric, Fighter, Rogue, Warlock, Wizard
- Several of the other classes are given short (three paragraph) writeups at the end of the section. This includes all of the current core classes, plus a swordmage and the warlord.
- No feats will require a specific class. They may, however, require race, trained skill, or a certain level.
- Feats aren't as "conditional" ... they're more like always-on adjustments. No round-to-round math as with the current incarnation of Power-Attack.
- Combat and Non-Combat roles for classes are considered, and balanced, separately. This means that the Rogue doesn't suffer in combat because it has lots of non-combat applicable skills.
- Skill points are going away. Count of individual skills has been halved, in many cases by joining related skills (Hide + Move Silently)
- Warlocks can make one of four types of Pacts -- Infernal, Vestige, Star, or Fey. Yes, I mention this for a reason
- Warlocks are Arcane Strikers.
- Item Creation feats go away. Metamagic feats as we know them go away.
- Schools of magic go away. Spells get grouped by effect; implements (wand, staff, orb) work with particular effect types. Mention is made of new implements in the future.
- A lot more room for power specialities has been left open. Wizards have had some abilities reduced or removed, particularly in the realm of Enchantment (== mind-affecting == psionics) to leave room for other power sources to shine through.
- Wizards really get played up as the glass cannon.
- Alignment has become strictly optional. You may choose to align yourself, but most are unaligned. Spells and effects keyed off alignment are all but gone.
- All 4e classes have some ability to self-heal. Leaders can do things to make that self-healing more effective. Some effort has gone in to make sure that clerics are not just heal-bots.
- If (*if*) I'm inferring from this right, Multiclassing is going to be VERY different. You'll be able to take "Wizard Training" or "Fighter Training" feats to pick up _some_ features of other classes. To become "the archtypical Rogue with a bit of spellcasting knowlege". Even if multiclassing doesn't go away, it's not your only option anymore ...
- Warlords are Martial Leaders.
- PrCs are gone. Instead, you pick up a "Paragon Path" at level 11. Paths are made to be attractive to at least two different classes, but could be more. There's a wide set of combinations, apparently.
- And, in the Epic Tier, you get an Epic Destiny. Things like become the rebirth of the ancient hero, become a grand archwizard ...
-------
So, it seems to me that you're core is your class. In each of the three Tiers, you've got something that's also addative to your class progression. Heroic: Your Race; Paragon: Paragon Path; Epic: Epic Destiny. None of these halt or interfere with your class progression.
There's a strong emphasis on streamlining things.
Obviously, one of our biggest jobs will be to adapt the races.
From descriptions, it's starting to look a lot like gladiators are Fighters. 4e fighters are full-on weapons masters, etc. It also looks like DS1/2 Fighters are Warlords -- more emphasis on leadership in battle.
It occured to me, and as I think about it, I like the idea, that we can use the Warlock class to represent Cerulian, Shadow and Necromants. Instead of a pact with a devil, they've made a pact with Tithian. *I* think it works out rather nicely. ;) Of course, I havn't seen the mechanics of it all.
One of our earliest jobs will be to develop approrpiate races, since we're garunteed that the only one that's appropriate is Human. It also looks like it will be more work to develop a race. But there's a lot more room to work with.
We've probably got at least another year after initial release before a Psionic sourcebook comes out. In playtest, it's been mentioned a couple of times, that Dave Noonan has played a wizard as a psion. It's a possiblitity, but given some of the power differences, probably an unsatisfying one. (Draloric and I talked to him when 3e was first coming out. He did the same thing then.) We'll have to see what things look like a bit further down the road.
Obviously, I want to keep Defiling and Preserving as a choice that Wizards have to face constantly. New system, there may be real ways to work with that without being completely over the edge. We'll have to see what the mechanics of spellcasting -- particuarly implements -- look like.
I suspect that Druids and Barbarians aren't coming out until a later book. I suspect that they'll come out with a "Nature" power source. Much is made of Druids and their shapeshifting.
I see Templars as Divine Controllers. I also see them, at the moment, as the only class we really have to _add_ to core. Even then, if we can see templars as Divine Defenders, paladin might work. I just don't think that role fits the concept.
The three paragraph Ranger writeup makes no mention of spellcasting. Still no solid idea of what their Power source is.
http://www.enworld.org/index.php?page=4e#rules
Obviously, I want to keep Defiling and Preserving as a choice that Wizards have to face constantly. New system, there may be real ways to work with that without being completely over the edge. We'll have to see what the mechanics of spellcasting -- particuarly implements -- look like.
While we don't know anything about it now, it might be interesting to make defiling its own implement. That way (if I am understanding things correctly -- a big if that is probably incorrect) both defilers and preservers will always have the option, and it would have the effect that (I infer) everyone wants, which is more powerful defilers.
While we don't know anything about it now, it might be interesting to make defiling its own implement. That way (if I am understanding things correctly -- a big if that is probably incorrect) both defilers and preservers will always have the option, and it would have the effect that (I infer) everyone wants, which is more powerful defilers.
The idea of implements seems a little troubling for the Dark Sun setting as anything that makes a character stand out as a wizard is bad news in a setting where most wizards are very secretive about being wizards. There might need to be some reworking in that area specifically for that reason. The loss of the old school and specialization system doesn't seem to present any problems however, since the idea of specialist wizards in the setting was alway a bit dubious.
On another note it seems as though standard elves are actually moving a bit closer to their DS counterparts what with them being described as: as tall or taller then humans and the mentions of their superior movement... so maybe a little less adjustment will be necessary for them. The Dragonborn might work out pretty well as a basis for the Pterrans, though Tieflings will probably just have to be discarded even as a source of ideas for converting races.
And does this mean you will give us the final Core 3.5e document you have done at this moment so that those who will NOT move to 4e will still have something to enjoy?
I´m with Grummore. DS4e is madness... like a never ending conversion.
I´d rather go for an update in athas.org´s DS3.5e conversion.
A revision would be very welcome too. IIRC, there were plans to review some minor issues, such as the mechanics of the elven run (replace the Concentration Skill check for a Fort DC with base DC 10, +1 for each subsequent day on the run), and major issues, such as the gladiator class (Jon´s thread), among other controversial points where athas.org conversion notoriously failed to achieve general acceptance (such as the defiling system).
P.S.: About 4e topics, I like to hear that are PrCs gone. Indeed, in my game they are already gone. I had a simple reason to do that: When PrCs where first introduced, WotC promissed that the PrCs would not function like the old "KITS" from 2e, but this is exactly what they have become. Instead of using PrCs as truly special classes, with rich backgrounds, campaing-related prerequisites hard to accomplish, WotC have banalized the use of PrC, adopting it for mundane roles such as the "cavalier", the "assassin", the "ninja", etc..., that´s lastimable.
As I have shown to the people here at the other thread "Gladiator revision?", the combat classes that I use in my game [soldier/nomad/gladiator/savage] are supposed to work alone, without PrCs.
The union of Hide + Move Silently skills also makes sense. Indeed, one of my players always argued with me about this mechanic... it just didn´t make any sense for him always make two seppare checks (Hide and MS) to accomplish a single action: move stealthy. Maybe I can grant his claim now.
Actually, Tielflings could be Tower Freaks, or New Races or whatever you call them in your game. So, not standard, but still usable.
unlikely. Unlike current situation, Tieflings are a single race that breeds true in 4e. Doesn't fit with pristine tower in the slightest anymore.
The idea of implements seems a little troubling for the Dark Sun setting as anything that makes a character stand out as a wizard is bad news in a setting where most wizards are very secretive about being wizards. There might need to be some reworking in that area specifically for that reason. The loss of the old school and specialization system doesn't seem to present any problems however, since the idea of specialist wizards in the setting was alway a bit dubious.
Heck, DS1/2 explicitly rejected specialist wizards (ignoring illusionist); losing them is no great loss.
The implements will become yet another thing that the wizard has to go to great effort to conceal while within a city state. It will have an impact, but I'm not necessarily sure it is bad. It partially depends on how necessary an implement is. From what I'm gathering, they're not strictly necessary, but they sure do help.
Might depend on what's happening to components too -- it might turn out to be a wash.
On another note it seems as though standard elves are actually moving a bit closer to their DS counterparts what with them being described as: as tall or taller then humans and the mentions of their superior movement... so maybe a little less adjustment will be necessary for them. The Dragonborn might work out pretty well as a basis for the Pterrans, though Tieflings will probably just have to be discarded even as a source of ideas for converting races.
Everybody got a little bit taller. Just because the elves got taller doesn't make them any better a mechanical fit for DS.
Everybody got a little bit taller. Just because the elves got taller doesn't make them any better a mechanical fit for DS.
Well yes that's completely superficial, but the fact that they have superior movement abilities might make them easier to convert. Other things might tie in a little better too considering they are more nomadic, tribal, and morally ambiguous and those similarity in culture might be expressed in the rules in a way that makes conversion easier. At any rate it seems as though 4e are much more similar to DS elves then 3e elves were.
Actually, Tielflings could be Tower Freaks, or New Races or whatever you call them in your game. So, not standard, but still usable.
An individual character could be a new race and based off of a Tiefling, but they are all different so you couldn't really take it much further then that unless, you wanted to make them a New Race like the Lask or something.
Also, there are currently rules for using disguise to hide spellbooks, this might work for implements as well.
My understanding of wizard implements is that they make certain types of spells more powerful, but you don't need them to cast spells. I think they'll make play very interesting in city states, where wizards have to decide if a spell is important enough to make it worth bringing out an implement. The addition of a "implement pocket" spell that works like familiar pocket should be enough to allow wizards to be at their full power level while still making it difficult to be a wizard on Athas. Wizards using implements also fits with the obsidian orbs that DKs use. The obsidian orbs are just some advanced implement. Ideally there'll be some relation between the orb implement and the use of obsidian orbs, but that really depends on what the orb implement ends up doing.
I hadn't thought about this before flip mentioned it, but Warlock will probably match really well to certain types of casters. My impression of the flavor for casters who get their power from somewhere other than living things is that they often end-up getting random at-will or always-on powers that in 3rd ed are best handled with templates. Making them go warlock, or use a feat similar to "warlock trained", will hopefully work better.
I'm a bit frustrated at not finding a compilation of what 4E will do. I've heard about implements, 30 levels, heroic this, elite that, but I don't know what they mean, and the 4E boards are of course in total disarray.
I'm a bit frustrated at not finding a compilation of what 4E will do. I've heard about implements, 30 levels, heroic this, elite that, but I don't know what they mean, and the 4E boards are of course in total disarray.
Flip's link to Enworld in post #2 has a pretty decent overview of what is known to date. Enworld also has regular updates (usually daily) on news snippets that are released in designer blogs and articles here and there. This latter selection is a bit haphazard, but it's a vast improvement over WotC's own 4e boards
...Could it be possible the info I seek is also in the Wizards Presents books WotC just published?
Some of it will be, but not all (or necessarily even most.) Most of the "scoops" are coming from designer blogs, interviews and design & development articles featured on Gleemax. The "Wizards Presents..." books do have some info, though, but were put together a short while back. A fair amount of 4e material has been trickling out since.
Gish lovers (and those who are, um, gish-curious), I've got your back. Terminology Note: When I say "gish," I'm not referring specifically to githyanki fighter/wizards. Nor am I talking about a really good Smashing Pumpkins album, Gish. I'm talking more generally about characters who are capable melee combatants and reasonably good arcane spellcasters, too.
One of the things I'm working on is some character-building pieces to support the archetype. And as I write, I wonder, "I'm not sure the gish needs the help. He might be OK with just our crazy new multiclassing rules."
Multiclassing: New multiclassing rules, you ask. Yep, we've got 'em. Multiclass characters are running at a couple of our internal playtest tables right now. Early results are promising, but we're talking about only a couple of characters, so we haven't seen broad proof of concept yet.
It's easy to critique 3e multiclassing, but it's also important to remember that they represent a massive, double-quantum leap from multiclass/dual-class rules in 1e/2e. We really like the configurability and freedom of 3e multiclassing, the way it's extensible even when you add new classes to the mix, and how it respects (to a degree, anyway) the changing whimsy of players as their characters evolve.
But it's got some problems--and in particular, it doesn't tackle the gish very well. There's the arcane spell failure problem, which takes some levels of the spellsword PrC, a little mithral, and some twilight enhancement to take care of. But beyond that, the low caster level can be just crippling for the fighter/wizard who wants to blast the bad guys into oblivion, rather than use his spellbook as a really good utility belt.
So that's one big problem--the caster level situation. In 3e, we've cemented over that with some prestige classes and feats. But there's another problem: Your journey through the "Valley of Multi-Ineffectiveness." For the gish, it's hard to truly be, well, gishy at low levels before you've figured out a reasonable answer to the armor problem. You can't really wade into melee like a fighter, because you're gonna get creamed. So you have to take an "I'm basically a wizard for now" or "I'm basically a fighter for now." That works, but you're just biding your time until you get to play the character you want to play.
And for the gish's cousin, the wizard/cleric, his "Valley of Multi-Ineffectiveness" isn't quite as deep, but it lasts a little longer--until he qualifies for mystic theurge, anyway.
So the improvement we're seeking from the multiclass system is something that solves some specific math problems (the caster level thing) and some specific career-path problems (letting you feel like a blend of classes from the get-go).
The Gish, Today: So what does this mean for our gish PCs at the playtest tables? Well, from very early levels, he's weariing armor, stabbing dudes, and casting spells. He's not as good at stabbing as the fighter, nor as good at casting as the wizard. But he's viable at both. In theory.
In theory? Well, like I said, the gish characters don't have a lot of mileage on them yet. And creating hybrid characters involves a careful balancing act. Multiclass characters can't be optimal at a focused task (because that horns in the turf for the single-class character) and they can't be weaksauce (because then you've sold the multiclass character a false bill of goods and he doesn't actually get to use the breadth of his abilities). There's a middle ground between "optimal" and "weaksauce" that I'll call "viable." But it's not exactly a wide spot of ground.
Finding that viable middle ground isn't a problem unique to 4e. The 3e designers (myself included) took lots of shots at it; the bard, the mystic theurge, and the eldritch knight are all somewhere on the optimal-viable-weaksauce continuum. And any WoW shaman, druid, or paladin knows firsthand the sorts of continual rebalancing they've undergone as Blizzard tries to keep their hybrid classes in the middle of that continuum.
Poses a very good possibility for finally being able to realize the wonders and joys that are Advanced Beings. Dragons, Avangions, SotLs, and Elementals really should be, y'know... the best at what they do.... not second-fiddle in magic and psionics against anyone who didn't multi-class and happens to be 1/2 - 2/3 their level.
Cliff, which one you think best fits the Templar Knight concept introduced in DS3? 4E Paladin with martial feats and stuff, or 4E Warlord?
I don't know what you mean by the Templar Knight. Been a while since I dug through a lot of things. I'd also like to add I'm assuming that's a PrC, and I never really got into most of the PrC's...
PrC, meant to be a martial enforcer for SKs. It's got a bit of templar in it, a bit of soldier.
Ahh, explains why I never saw it. As I said, I didn't get into all the PrC's. Honestly, I don't think I've even actually looked at the PrCs for DS3 at all. They just weren't appealing to me, or applicable to what I was working on.
This:
Poses a very good possibility for finally being able to realize the wonders and joys that are Advanced Beings. Dragons, Avangions, SotLs, and Elementals really should be, y'know... the best at what they do.... not second-fiddle in magic and psionics against anyone who didn't multi-class and happens to be 1/2 - 2/3 their level.
I agree. Given that becoming a dragon currently only requires manifesting 6th level powers, my hope is that in 4th ed you'll be able to accomplish something similar by going full wizard casting and taking feats that give you some of the psion's abilities. The idea of using feats to let characters have abilitites from other classes has come up in multiple 4th ed previews, if not in what you quoted.
A basic version of Dregoth for example clocks in at CR37 while an advanced version post Dregoth Ascending is CR49 (Stage 9 Dragon, modified Dracolich template, 12 level od Dragon Ascensent PrC).
A 2nd ed lvl 21 Dragon clocks in at CR 22. Level 30 one is CR36. As a monster they get d12 HD, dragons saves, Dragon BAB and ability socres,dual psionics/mgic progression etc.