Yep, 4th Edition is coming out....

[Rotipher of the FoS]

Is anybody else out there having trouble accessing the WotC site, now that their melodramatic countdown has run out...?

[NykylaiHellray]

I am having trouble to. Guessing the traffic must of crashed it =/

[Guardian of Twilight]

Is anybody else out there having trouble accessing the WotC site, now that their melodramatic countdown has run out...?

Sadly, yes. Hope that it clears up soon...

[Igor the Henchman]

Me too.

Nice beholder, though.

[Guardian of Twilight]

Is there a link that could be posted showing the new artwork? I haven't seen any of it as of yet...

A click on either of the links will show the artwork. Ah, but here's a short cut.

http://www.wizarduniverse.com/magazine/ ... fm?popup=1

Thank you, I appreciate it. I actually saw this in an article, but just thought that it was there to add pizazz to the page.


Here is the article that I saw earlier... http://www.icv2.com/articles/home/11123.html

[Spiteful Crow]

Not all of Fourth Edition’s changes will add to the game by subtraction; many rules tweaks they’ve experimented with in books all over Wizards’ RPGs will show up as well. For example, Slavicsek tells us that “The Tome of Battle: The Book of Nine Swords book, which gave fighter-type characters the same types of options spellcasters do by basically giving them spells for fighters,” was received very well. “That idea has been extremely popular, and we’re adopting something similar for Fourth Edition.”

WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! I'm glad they're using that for the new melee system. Having "I hit it." as your only option takes all the fun out of fighters.

[NeoTiamat]

Hmm. Fighters that don't require a PrC to be useful? Sounds interesting. Hopefully they remain in the realm of the possible and don't just become wizards with swords, but we'll see.

I kind of thought they were scraping the barrel for the most recent releases (Skill tricks? Reserve feats? Monster Manual *V*?), so this isn't much unexpected.

[Spiteful Crow]

I kind of thought they were scraping the barrel for the most recent releases (Skill tricks? Reserve feats? Monster Manual *V*?), so this isn't much unexpected.

Don't forget Complete Champion!

[Jakob]

Care for a few videos... Or a demo of dndinsider?
http://forum.ars-arcana.it/showthread.p ... 8#post7838

[Guardian of Twilight]

Care for a few videos... Or a demo of dndinsider?
http://forum.ars-arcana.it/showthread.p ... 8#post7838

Great vids, thanks for the link!

[The Giamarga]

Look to the down-right corner...




from this thread: http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t ... ge=2&pp=40

[Jakob]

Oh, I forgot... A present from the staff of Ars Arcana.

[Ail]

Hi all,

I just got here today and I still have all the links to read. At any rate, this is not that surprising, history wise. And in fact, it is basic economy at work. The other day I heard a tidbit on history channel about capitalism in the US. They said an economist around the 1940s, if I'm not mistaken, gave the theoretic basis for it to work: 'we have to create need in the consumers so they have to buy our new products all the time to fund the enterprises and promote evolution. This requires that the products are not made to last.' Or something along those lines.

Well, that is the problem with RPGs. They DO last! So, WotC really have to invent something new from on. I don't think it is bad, and it was more or less due. I mean, if we look back, TSR and WotC have made cycles of around 10 years, if I'm not mistaken: 1979 AD&D (more or less), 1989 AD&D 2nd Ed, 2000 3E. Granted, 3.5 was an extra in this, but there were also midway revisions for some books of AD&D between editions. A new edition after 8 years, considering that they made an effort to be more global this time and that means selling at a growing rate, does not seem that bad.

Now, does that mean I'll switch to 4E? Probably not. I was very quick to embrace 3E and 3.5 because I was starting a campaign at the time and converting from 3.0 to 3.5 when it happened was very easy, but as other people have said above, I want to make my investment pay. And my biggest investment has actually been in time to develop my campaign. It hasn't finished yet and will not in the foreseeable future so I don't want to change rules.

Perhaps later, if I look at the rules and like them. Actually, I see each new edition as a call for new players, and not the old ones. I admit that as I get old, my flexibility decreases and I like the old things so I see no reason to change. Actually, I still have a fond dream of someday learning the rules of OD&D, AD&D1 and playing campaigns with them ( I know AD&D 2nd Ed already, I began with them).

This is kind of always buying new computers to play the latest games. But then you reach an age when you don't want to play the latest games anymore, because you're fed up, have no more time or simply lost interest. And then you stop updating your computer every now and then, and do it only when it really is so old that your other computer needs demand it. So, I look at this pragmatically and say: good for WotC, I don't blame them for that at all, but I may not go along with it. Just that.

Oh, about the art. The art of 3E really was the one thing I disliked about it and still do today. If they are going back to the likes of Caldwell, Elmore, Easley or Stawicki, then fore sure I'll at least take a peak at them. Those were great times for the art of D&D... nay, wonderful times instead... Personal opinion, of course.

Alex

[The Giamarga]

Speaking of art i liked Robh Ruppel and Brom. But also Talon Dunning.

Check out htis thread on ENWorld: http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=204241
for some tidbits...

[Rotipher of the FoS]

Look to the down-right corner...

Given that "Zelandor" is probably somebody's homebrew world, I wouldn't take that "Ravenloft" on the list too seriously. It probably just means that people can type in the names of their PCs' game-settings of origin -- current, OOP, or homemade -- same as they can type in their characters' names in the space above that.