| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| SirUrza |
Posted - 11 Jan 2008 : 04:37:03
It's less useful then Races & Classes. There's a lot of beautiful art and that's about it.
Mentions they're giving the green dragon a face lift to make it more distinctive then generic dragons, like we've seen with their other 3E dragon overhauls.
Basic info on different types of campaign settings, underdark (art is beautiful), and the different planes. Talk about changes to demons/devils, info on giants and such. A little bit about the elves, if I read it right... Corellon is less concerned with regular elves and more interested in the new ones... stupid.
Looks like they're changing creature types too.
Githyanki got several nods in the book.. could it be they plan on using these plane invading bad guys more? I've wanted to see more myself since Incursion.
That's really all I can say. If you didn't buy Races & Classes, then you don't need this either. |
| 10 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 18 Jan 2008 : 18:33:17
quote:
Originally posted by Ardashir
Some things that they're trumpeting as 'new' have been around in an unofficial way for a long time (for example, good monsters)...
I totally agree. For example, it was mentioned that 4E will emphasize the fact that D&D worlds don't have real world analogues.
Sound familiar? That's what many of us have argued about the Realms for a long time--it isn't supposed to be a direct parallel of the real world. |
| Ardashir |
Posted - 18 Jan 2008 : 17:46:17
Yes, some of the 4th Ed stuff looks good. I just feel like they're tossing the baby out with the bath-water. Some things that they're trumpeting as 'new' have been around in an unofficial way for a long time (for example, good monsters), and some other parts give me the feeling this will be as much, if not more of a, tactical wargame as the D&D I grew up with. Not that there's anything wrong with tactical wargames, mind... but it's not what I want out of my D&D. |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 17 Jan 2008 : 23:36:33
quote:
Originally posted by Ardashir
From what I've read, devils are gone and angels are evil. Because "they weren't useful before". :faceplant: Odd, I never had any problems with them. I must be a freak.
Devils are still around--angels aren't all evil, they can now just be of any alignment (depending on the god they serve).
I don't like the idea that NPCs have to be non-good in order to be viable enemies.
That being said, there ARE 4E concepts I like--I appreciate, for example, how there will be more emphasis on fantastic settings (hopefully that will include more landscapes in the artwork). |
| SirUrza |
Posted - 17 Jan 2008 : 19:47:43
The only problem with devils IMHO is that most times, your cleric (or wizard) while powerful enough to fight said devil/demon with a party, is not powerful enough to summons an equally powerful angel to fight the devil/demon. |
| Ardashir |
Posted - 17 Jan 2008 : 17:56:23
From what I've read, devils are gone and angels are evil. Because "they weren't useful before". :faceplant: Odd, I never had any problems with them. I must be a freak.
And oh yes, BIG CHANGE: not all evil monsters are actually evil! This is treated as a Very Big Thing.
I saw some stuff I liked, a little, but mostly I'm getting less and less enthused about the new D&D the more I read about it. Esepcially since we're getting constantly assured that we'll love it and "It's totally cool!" |
| SirUrza |
Posted - 11 Jan 2008 : 19:08:51
As quoted from the book...
"To the World design team, the "world" of the Dungeons & Dragons game doesn't refer to a specific setting, such as Eberron, nor does it refer to a particular planet, such as Toril. For our purposes, the concept encompasses a huge set of shared assumptions for play that Dungeons Masters use when designing adventures or a campaign. The world of D&D is, in business terms, its product identity - how people perceive the game distinguishes it from other fantasy-themed hobbies."
Basically generic blanding of themes and concepts of D&D.. the anti-setting they're pushing in the core books. |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 11 Jan 2008 : 15:50:01
quote:
Originally posted by ShepherdGunn
Did they even mention the Forgotten Realms in the book? "Worlds" kinda made me think they were going to add a section saying "Here's a little about the Forgotten Realms, and here's some about Eberron, and here's some about Ravenloft..." or am I completely off the mark on that.
I wondered about that myself, but I saw a Table of Contents on EnWorld, and apparently "worlds" refers to general types of settings (the Underdark, the Planes) rather than "official D&D settings". |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 11 Jan 2008 : 15:48:29
quote:
Originally posted by SirUrza
Corellon is less concerned with regular elves and more interested in the new ones... stupid.
I've that all the gods in general are becoming less racially focused than they were in the past. |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 11 Jan 2008 : 15:47:20
This book is out in stores already? |
| ShepherdGunn |
Posted - 11 Jan 2008 : 12:12:42
Did they even mention the Forgotten Realms in the book? "Worlds" kinda made me think they were going to add a section saying "Here's a little about the Forgotten Realms, and here's some about Eberron, and here's some about Ravenloft..." or am I completely off the mark on that. Was it just a "Here's more about how cool the Monsters are gonna be! Look at the beholder! Look at the beholder! Look at the beholder!" dog and pony show? |
