I am Wizards' Bitch [4e discussion]

Drew · August 18, 2007, 01:41:55 PM

Quote from: Pierce InverarityIf there absolutely has to be a new look, I would have commissioned the Cadwallon artists. But I know that makes me a minority of 1.

I love what I've seen of the Cadwallon art, but I think it would be considered a little too idiosyncratic for D&D.

A setting that employed the art direction team would be all kinds of cool, though. Imagine Greyhawk seen through the Cadwallon lens...

Drew · August 18, 2007, 01:43:40 PM

Quote from: SettembriniDo you know the german version for the hero quest and glorantha books?

So much better. I really have to wonder what they were thinking with US/UK edition. It's just crap.

RPGPundit · August 18, 2007, 01:51:25 PM

Quote from: Pierce InverarityDid I mention, and I'm honestly not sure if I'm actually joking here, that I kinda like the FtA cover image BETTER than the profoundly lame 4E PHB, MM and DMG?

I know they're by Wayne Reynolds. I don't care. They look like 2E garbage.

I would have commissioned Michael Komarck. A gamble, but an interesting one.

Is there a link to the cover images?

RPGPundit

Drew · August 18, 2007, 01:54:51 PM

Quote from: RPGPunditIs there a link to the cover images?

RPGPundit

The pics are a bit murky, but they're the best copies I've seen so far:

http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=204278

Pierce Inverarity · August 18, 2007, 01:55:00 PM

Quote from: SettembriniDo you know the german version for the hero quest and glorantha books?

Yes, and words fail me to describe the sheer awesomeness of them all.

But--they're the covers for the French edition, right? I guess the Germans then went on to use them for theirs?

Brantai: good point. Funny, this is where Rifts has a leg up over D&D. 30 or so core classes, 25 of which are butt kickers, each with its own flavor of awesome and subsystems to implement it. That's partly what makes Rifts clunky and front-loaded, but it's also why nobody ever complains about niche protection in that game... and why only true perverts would want to multi-class.

J Arcane · August 18, 2007, 01:59:14 PM

Quote... and why only true perverts would want to multi-class.

Quite a lot of the NPCs in various sourceboosk for the Palladium games, particularly Rifts and Palladium Fantasy, are multiclassed. Though oddly, I can't recall ever seeing multiclass rules in the books.

Dirk Remmecke · August 18, 2007, 02:01:30 PM

Quote from: RPGPunditIs there a link to the cover images?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJ3J8t2-RVs

Starting at minute 1:10.

James McMurray · August 18, 2007, 02:02:49 PM

Quote from: BrantaiI'm fine with archetype reinforcement as long as they offer more fucking archetypes.

I agree. If archetype reinforcement means I can't make a tribal shaman who found an ancient library and learned dark magics within (i.e. Barbarian 1 / Cleric 3 / Necromancer x) then it's a bad thing. If it curtails of min-maxing at the expense of creativity I'll be disappointed.

Aos · August 18, 2007, 02:13:19 PM

Quote from: Dirk Remmeckehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJ3J8t2-RVs

Starting at minute 1:10.

Thanks, i rather like those.

Temple · August 18, 2007, 02:29:13 PM

Quote from: James McMurrayI agree. If archetype reinforcement means I can't make a tribal shaman who found an ancient library and learned dark magics within (i.e. Barbarian 1 / Cleric 3 / Necromancer x) then it's a bad thing. If it curtails of min-maxing at the expense of creativity I'll be disappointed.

The way I understood it, youll have just the Barbarian (or whatever, maybe they dumped him and made him a Fighter path or something) with some funky abilities borrowed from a spellcasting class.

RPGPundit · August 18, 2007, 03:03:21 PM

Quote from: Dirk Remmeckehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJ3J8t2-RVs

Starting at minute 1:10.

Holy shit, they're asstastic. You're right, FtA!'s cover is better, and production-values isn't exactly our strongsuit.

RPGPundit

Dirk Remmecke · August 18, 2007, 03:46:12 PM

Quote from: RPGPunditHoly shit, they're asstastic. You're right, FtA!'s cover is better, and production-values isn't exactly our strongsuit.

You are mistaken if you think that I dislike the cover designs. Quite the contrary!

When I first saw those covers in that tiny, blurry Youtube video I knew WotC has a winner.
This, finally, is book design aimed at a mainstream audience*, while still being true to D&D's roots.

I like it a lot.

No...

I like it that much that I want to buy those books immediately.**

* as mainstream as heroic fantasy can ever get, that is
** and I don't want to be rude but FtA!'s cover does not stir that reaction in me

Erik Boielle · August 18, 2007, 03:55:00 PM

I think they are pretty cool.

Bradford C. Walker · August 18, 2007, 04:21:51 PM

The per-encounter design paradigm lends itself to shorter gaming sessions, about an hour or so, which is great for all those adult gamers out there that--for whatever reason--just don't play for the usual length of time that commonly goes with tabletop RPGs. Shorter sessions are more convenient, more casual-friendly, and thus can be done more frequently; with the online tools, it's also friendlier to doing it on the ad-hoc basis that's usually said of children and college students- hop online, play for an hour, log off and go do that other thing you do. It also means you don't have to prepare more than one encounter ahead of the players.

RPGPundit · August 18, 2007, 04:28:45 PM

They're a busy junky mess, too full of stuff, and trying too hard to show off the images that are supposed to represent their new rules system.
The only one that's bearable is the Monster Manual.

Note that FtA!'s cover is no work of genius or anything, but its better than the PHB if that's really their final product.

RPGPundit