Thoughts on 4.0 now that the fervor has died down a bit

[Reaperbryan]

The two Dragonborn are Reptus with simple weapon swaps (Reptus Grunt & Reptus Female Cleric), the Tiefling Warlock is Damien, Hellborn Wizard. THe only model I'm having trouble with is the Elf Wizard, there's very few wizards with orbs in the range, and no elves. I'd use the Citadel High Elf with Annulian Crystal, but the local GW didn't have one, and by the time I got over my impulse and looked at the online store I realised it cost four times as much as a reaper fig..

You can't use Elquin the Daring (02974) and swap in the orb left over form Damien Hellborn Wiazrd instead of the staff he's holding?

[Shin Okada]

If you need an orb, you can always visit some DIY shop, craft shop, etc. for finding beads, cheap gem stones, etc.

[neil]

You can't use Elquin the Daring (02974) and swap in the orb left over form Damien Hellborn Wiazrd instead of the staff he's holding?

 

Nah, he's holding the staff in the wrong hand (and his left arm is in a wierd pose for an orb)

[Qwyksilver]

For those of you that are also irked because Gnomes are not in the PH, check out the back of the Monster Manual. There are stats/racial traits for about a dozen demi-human races that you could use as a PC, including the g-Nomes.

[Star Drifter]

Doesn't that kind of mean that a player (especially online) now needs two player's handbooks and the Monster Manual in order to play a gnome bard?

 

This is seriously the kind of pricing scheme and poor planning that I would expect to read about in Knights of the Dinner Table. Only it's real now. Like, seriously real. Not a satire of reality, but real reality.

 

"Twinklefemur the gnome bard? Sure you can play him in 4e. You'll just need the Player's Handbook to roll your character, the Player's Handbook II for the Bard stats, and the Monster Manual for the gnome. I hope Twinklefemur is worth about $104.85 plus tax to you."

 

This isn't a joke in a comic book any more.

[Gimp]

There are a lot of other classes that it wouldn't cost that much, and most groups are likely to have all the books available for other reasons anyway. Most players wouldn't have to buy all the books individually if they belonged to a group. Even online players can share information.

 

If someone doesn't, and it means that much to play a gnome bard on their own, rock on.

 

I don't expect the majority of players will be that interested in playing gnome bards. Some, yes, but nothing close to a majority. Other classes, and races, can be fun as well.

 

I've been playing D&D for over thirty years, off and on, and have never had a party member interested in playing a gnome. I know there are players that do, but I've never played with one.

[Lars Porsenna]

Anecdote is not singular for evidence.

 

In OUR group we had plenty of gnomes. Most popular race? No, but we've had several over the years.

 

3e would allow a gnome bard to be built with 1 book. 4e you can do it with 3 books. Inherently 3e gives players many more options, and 4e does not.

 

Damon.

[Yoshi]

They had better bring gnomes back-or it'll be (bad pun warning) gnome-more mr. nice guy!

[Gimp]

Anecdote is not singular for evidence.

 

In OUR group we had plenty of gnomes. Most popular race? No, but we've had several over the years.

 

3e would allow a gnome bard to be built with 1 book. 4e you can do it with 3 books. Inherently 3e gives players many more options, and 4e does not.

 

Damon.

That would be why I noted there were groups that did have gnome players. I've even known some players that liked to play them, but never in any campaigns I was involved in.

 

The question becomes whether it was a plot they knew would force more players to purchase extra books to keep playing gnome bards, or simply something they felt was of low enough importance it could be left for groups to cobble together.

 

While their overall strategy must be to sell product to continue as a viable company, I doubt gnome bards were a driving sales force in their choices.

 

Since even 3e groups tended to have a player's handbook, a monster manual, and another supplemental book or two, the category and number of books required is largely moot. Only a player without access to a group, or not wanting to buy any addititional material beyond the PHB, is actually restricted from playing a gnome bard in 4e. The PHB and monster manual are pretty much required to play. The only real extra would be whether the group felt the single extra book, and the additional material it gave, were worthwhile.

 

There has been enough material released for D&D through the years that any new version would have to pick and choose what they will print in any single book based on value and cost. With many of those choices being subjective, some players would be disappointed regardless of the material left for other books.

[Lars Porsenna]

There has been enough material released for D&D through the years that any new version would have to pick and choose what they will print in any single book based on value and cost. With many of those choices being subjective, some players would be disappointed regardless of the material left for other books.

 

I would me more inclined to agree with this argument if the book didn't have so much white space, and the font wasn't so much larger than previous editions.

 

Damon.

[Star Drifter]

I don't think this was any grand conspiracy. I do believe that they tried to produce a product that was meant to please the greatest number of players.

 

It's just that I'm an irate old man now. I grew up laughing at this kind of practice, thinking it would be terrible if anyone ever made it a reality. Now it's a reality.

 

Also, I loved playing Bards.

[Gimp]

There has been enough material released for D&D through the years that any new version would have to pick and choose what they will print in any single book based on value and cost. With many of those choices being subjective, some players would be disappointed regardless of the material left for other books.

 

I would me more inclined to agree with this argument if the book didn't have so much white space, and the font wasn't so much larger than previous editions.

 

Damon.

They had to go to a larger font for all of us old timers still playing.

 

The biggest costs are from the full color glossy printing, more than the page count, and definitely more than the white space.

 

I have an RPG book on order in one of my local stores. Also full color and full size. It's a $60 book. I've purchased or seen several others over the past year at more than $40 a pop for full color glossy prettiness.

 

Would you prefer a $60 price tag to get into the new game, or multiple $30-35 books you can buy as you want and can afford? For new, and especially younger, players, the ability to get into a game for less can be important, while the look also has to look good enough to grab customers' attention or they'll play something else.

 

WotC can want content, but they also need to pay expenses and turn a profit to stay viable.

 

I have several good games around the house. Some are very good games, but weren't marketed well enough to catch players' attention. Those are some very good out of print games.

[Lars Porsenna]

WotC can want content, but they also need to pay expenses and turn a profit to stay viable.

 

Which they are fully capable of doing...AND turn a profit...since they had been doing it for the last eight years.

 

The argument that somehow they cannot put the same level of content in the 4e PHB and not turn a profit, especially when I feel there is a lot more "wastage" per page than previous editions, doesn't convince me.

 

Damon.

[Gimp]

They could put the same word and picture count in the books and still turn a profit on each book.

 

I'm simply pointing out that, in order to turn an effective profit they can build their business on, they might have to charge more for those individual books. They might be able to make a specific profit above cost on each book sold, but lose on the line due to overall decreased sales due to sticker shock.

 

When they released 3rd, I was both surprised and impressed that they artificially kept the price down for a while in order to entice older players to make the switch. After a while, they brought the book price up, but still kept it below a lot of their competitor's prices. I'd be happy to have seen them do the same this time around, but it was a very dangerous move back then, and would be worse now in the current economy.

 

At $35 a pop, the new books are in line with what most full color, hard bound books of equivalent size and content are running. The books don't carry everything every player might want, but they're not $50 a pop, either, and so are much easier for a player or group to budget. You can argue that some games give more content, though others give less for that price. D&D is also the high end of the market, and like many products at the high end, they could feel justified in charging more. You can play with Converse, or you can play with Nike, and still have fun with the game, but you'd be paying a very different price.

 

While some players want more from 3rd in the books, others didn't like some of that excess, and are happy without it. How many thousands of feats were there by the end of the run? How many were used very often? The same can be asked for spells, or even fully constituted race and class options. D&D as a whole grew an awful lot since the 70's, and eveyone had different parts they liked more. One group's trash was another group's treasure.

 

Whether the content of the 4th books is worth the price is a value judgement each player will have to make for themselves. Some are happy, some will buy and grumble about the amount of content, and some will not think it worth the cost and pass. WotC made their choices on what they thought would make a viable product, and consumers now get to vote with their money on whether they agree.

 

How much content for any given price is for the bean counters to decide, and for the consumers to ratify. What any consumer feels is a justified cost for any level of profit vs a level of content is a value judgement based on their aesthetics, and may have nothing to do with the realities of the market.

 

If it's worth it to you; buy it. If it isn't; dont. If the consumers indicate they don't agree with WotC, they will notice.

[haldir]

I'd never would have gotten the core 4th books if I didn't stumble across them on walmart.com of all places. I think I got the gift set for like 45 or 50 bucks?? I don't think I'd gotten them If they were more. Just wasn't set on getting 4th, as I was sticking with Paizo choice. I guess curiosity got the better of me + figured "hey at that price, it won't hurt to take a look at them." I also got them just in case something comes up locally (thou of course it hasn't).

 

RM