On the topic of the Anita Blake series, I've decided to give it ago as it's been recommended in blurbs in the back of the Dresden Files books, as well as the ascertation that in later books it devolves into a blossoming orgy of lycanthropic sex.

It piqued my interest.

And perhaps gnomes have been banished to the MM due to the fact that America is by a large a very gnomophobic nation.

Well, yeah...in later books in the Anita Blake series it is rather...naughty...  :p

Lycanthropes?  There's a wolf!  Were?  Over there, and yes.

On Anita Blake:
http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2008/6/2/

Oh, yeah: off topic! :(

*holds out hands for slapping*  Sorry, BCM.  :(

No, there nurse! Me doctor. You Mr. Berkinshaw.

Wow, and to think I thought the Clerical Quintet was a good series, but man, completely devoid of any lycanthropic orgies. What was I thinking!?

edit: So...back to 4th ed...
This message was last edited by the player at 15:54, Mon 09 June 2008.

*can't help but giggle lots*  I really, really enjoyed that series, too.  And I loved it when Drizzt et. al., got to go meet Cadderly et. al. ...

*tries frantically to think of something to say about 4e to avoid getting BCM angry*

*can't so runs away quickly before BCM catches her*

Wow, someone doesn't like the system ;-)

The 4e OGL is to be published next week.

Having made a character, I see why it got the MMO comparison - chosing powers felt a lot like chosing what skills to take on Guild Wars. heh. Especially my Daily and Utility spells, as a Wizard.

Just my two cents, I'd rather not bother changing all my DnD roleplaying to a new edition.  I've always played 3.5, and I'm used to it.

*chuckle* As one who started playing AD&D when they didn't need an edition number (because there was only the one edition), I'll have to say that you get used to the changes after a while.

I can't comment on 4e yet, as my books still haven't been shipped to me, but every edition so far improves some thing and breaks some things that work.  I've also found that it's rare to find a large group that agrees on which thing are fixes and which are breaks.

I think it does a great job on the whole, and I personally so far prefer playing it over 3.5.  However, I agree with the people who say that at the moment it would be a lot of trouble to switch everyone over.  I am converting a personal campaign of mine, and I am having to House Rule a lot of stuff just because of missing races and classes.  Assuming ROA doesn't want to House Rule, then it seems ROA couldn't swap over at least until they come out with Druids, Barbarians, and a couple more races.  WotC hasn't even gotten to the Nature power source, so there really isn't even anything close to Druids and Barbs.

http://www.wizards.com/default...dnd/4pod/20080618e23 - the latest D&D Podcast is in video-form, where you can see a 4e combat ran with level 15 characters, played by various people working at WotC.  I was able to check it out before work this morning, and it looked pretty cool - and boy, would I love the chance to work in that building!  :p

Well, my books finally came in, and I've been doing some reading over the weekend. R.I.P. D&D... It's not as bad as I had feared from their preview, and it's actually a playable game system, but calling it D&D is a travesty. As far as I can tell, they've given up a lot of flexibility and a lot of the story/RPG side of things for flashier combats and not much else. It doesn't sound like an even trade to me. The little bits of RPG fluff they weave into the mechanics have about as much depth as the plot on a typical porn flick.

So in effect you need the rulebook to tell you how to roleplay?

Well there's just not a lot of choices nor RPing options in there, so I don't know I'd exactly say it that way.  :p

More like the book tells you how to create and level up a character just like in a video game instead of an actual role-playing game.  It's not bad.  I like it in it's own way, and on PbP there are more options for RP, but I far prefer 3.5.

Nope. But if they're going to provide setting details and other 'fluff', those details should encourage the roleplay experience, rather than discourage it.

It sounds like they're trying to make their product appeal to a wider audience by watering it down. If you take away the RP it turns D&D into a more mainstream board game.

And may I ask what details 4E's books have left out that 3E's core books included? Because I haven't really seen much of a difference. 3E might've spit out just a little bit more on the Greyhawk setting in the core rules, but I really don't think its supposed to be the job of the basic ruleset to create the world in which your characters play.

The core books are supposed to tell you how to play the game, how to run the game, and give you a monsters to challenge the PC's every step of the way.

4e actually HAS a mechanism for creating and running social encounters in the rules, rather than having your DM make up something, which is what folks had to do in 3e.

As for setting fluff, aren't they putting out the Forgotten Realms books in August and September? You know, letting the players get used to the mechanics before coming out with the big fluff books?

My order from Amazon still hasn't showed up, but I am running the H1 book in a game here. So far I am pretty sure I will never convert any of my existing 3.5e games over to 4e, but I do like the 4e rules and if I were to start up another D&D game (unlikely) it would be in 4e. And if I could find some players local to me, I'd definitely play 4e live over 3.5e live. I love how every person in the party now has something to do that is actually meaningful, even at level 1. No more spellcasters sitting back trying not to be a target, now they can always do their basic spell attacks every round. That to me is a big improvement. The game seems more team-focused which is great in my opinion.

Bah, half the fun was trying to make your character useful :D

After my first look and talking to some people around here that tried it, they do not like the new edition.

Some of the racial powers are incredibly broken, especially for bypassing traps. The classes are very similiar in powers, just different names and flavor texts. It is designed to only have abilities and skills that can be part of computer gaming world.

A lot of classes change powers and flavor, a lot of classes aren't around, a race or two is not around.

The skill system is nowhere near as robust or helpful. You are down to about 14 skills, no item creation feats. I have heard multi-classing just destroys any character. You pretty much have to be single class.

I do not think ROA shoudl convert and if it does, I will have to back out.

From what has been discussed in the DM's Lounge, I certainly do not foresee us moving to 4e.  Most of the DMs seem to prefer 3.5, plus changing would be nearly impossible and we'd have to fast forward many, many years and also make many of our characters obsolete (plus fast-forwarding that much would mean many of our PC would be dead of old age).  If, and this is a big if since we're all so busy, anybody decided to run any 4e games, it would likely not be a part of RoA as we know it but perhaps an off-shoot that is based on RoA as we know it.  This is not being talked about or anything, but that this is the only way I think any of us might run any 4e games unless they are simply independent on RPoL.