The End of 4e D&D.

[Username17]

I think it's assumed, based on the phb3 races, that they'll just give every race in the book a floating stat to chose from. Granted they'll still probably miss some important combo like Wis/Cha or Int/Con again, or they'll forget that not everybody playing an int based class will want to be a fucking tiefling.

It's not very floating. The Shardmind gets to choose between being Int/Wis or Int/Cha. BFD.

-Username17

[sake]

True, but it's still better than what they were doing before. It means each race will have four or five classes/builds they're suited for, instead of one or two.

[Username17]

True, but it's still better than what they were doing before. It means each race will have four or five classes/builds they're suited for, instead of one or two.

It's still just two stat arrays per race. Let's say Drow get to be Dex/Cha or Wis/Cha. That would let them be Laser Clerics or Grindadins, but there is still no Dex/Cha build on that class list (Ranger, Cleric, Paladin, Druid, and Warlock).

Frankly, it looks to me like they are making a system in which there are 1-2 builds per race instead of 0-1 like you might at first think. But even then, it's only if they pick the right off-stats. If Drow are Dex/Cha or Dex/Int (like they were in 3e), then there will be zero builds available to them in the book they are printed in.

-Username17

[Windjammer]

In response to similar speculation on Enworld:

Perhaps that [ed. a "4.1"] is what the Rules Compendium is going to be about.

I think calling it 4.1e will leave a bad taste in everyone's mouth and won't sell hardly anything to anyone, do much brand damage, and spawn a bunch of "I told you so" flamewar threads. It was very clearly stated a while ago that there will be no "4.5", I doubt they want to make that same error again.

I pointed out this - stuff from as recent as two days ago at WotC' presentation at Gama:

All of the new D&D Essentials will have new material. Not a reprint of existing product.

The old hardback books are still supported.

No rules changes. This is still 4.0.

What IS interesting is that they didn't announce a continuation of the Core books. And one of their slides even says, "D&D - Replicating Success. Transforming D&D Products and Play." So it could be the case that there won't be no new Core books, but at the same time they don't seem to obsolete these books by way of making them (ever so slightly) rules incompatible with upcoming stuff.

Relevant slides:





I can't really read the text on the second one, and unfortunately there isn't a better image resolution around.

[The Man Who Killed Death]

From what I can make out the second slide's last three words in the first point are "among target audience."

And then the last part is:
"15 million active players."
"24 million [inactive?] players."

At least that's what I think I can make out.

[Aktariel]

I think it's 1.5 million, actually.

[koz]

Aktariel is correct, and the 24 million is 'lapsed' players.

If by 'lapsed' they mean 'don't play the current edition', I actually think it's possible. If this is the case, I'm amused. Intensely.

[The Man Who Killed Death]

I think it's 1.5 million, actually.

Yeah, you're probably right. There is a significant space in between the 1 and 5.

[Windjammer]

Aktariel is correct, and the 24 million is 'lapsed' players.

Thanks to both of you for deciphering it! My strained eyes pay their respects.

If by 'lapsed' they mean 'don't play the current edition', I actually think it's possible. If this is the case, I'm amused. Intensely.

By "lapsed" they don't just mean people who currently actively play 1E-3E, but also people who at one point played D&D (any edition) but currently don't - and haven't, for a long time. Suppose WotC are going on a naive calculation, which is multiply the number of red boxes sold (Red Box - both incarnations in the 80s) by 3 to 4 to 5 people, then I could see how they get their 24 million. I don't think it's realistic to think that for any lapsed gaming group out there that ever existed - that's your sets of 3-5 people each - it was only the DM who bought the Box.

[Username17]

On the other hand, that set of calculations is pretty interesting if they are applying it to the current edition as well. With 5 players a group and just the DM buying the DMG for some reason - that would be 300,000 DMGs sold. With maybe 1.5 million PHBs sold. That's pretty consistent with them having said that they had sold "hundreds of thousands" of books 10 months into the 4e cycle.

What's doubly interesting, is how incredibly catchable that is. Like seriously any medium sized game company could just catch 4th edition and start threatening the current leader - 3rd edition D&D. Shadowrun 4th edition, for example, sold more copies than all previous versions of the game combined. oWoD in its heyday sold more copies than the current edition of D&D is seemingly pulling off. If Catalyst just got on with it and died and was replaced by a publisher that paid writers a professional wage in a timely manner and thus generated a reasonable release schedule that they actually stuck to; or if CCP revived their White Wolf imprint and released a World of Darkness that people actually liked and wanted to buy - 4th edition could easily become the 2nd biggest RPG in print. Like, inside of six months.

That fact has got to be scaring the shit out of Hasbro execs. I expect D&D Essentials to mention 4th edition very little. After all, it's specifically geared towards people who were exposed to 4th edition books and decided not to buy.

-Username17

[FatR]

I don't think Hasbro execs give a shit. WotC on the other hand, probably shakes in his collective pants.

[Username17]

Reading through the commentary is a window into madness, because it appears to be a Twitter Feed. But I can confirm that the accompanying commentary says:

5:25 PM: Trask 1.5 million players. 24 million lapsed players

Here are their other dubious claims:

5:28 PM: Trask Red Box is a complete game experience.

5:30 PM: Trask After Red Box is the DM kit followed by Monster Vault that includes monster tiles

5:30 PM: Trask New books are trade paperback. Cheaper for new players

5:32 PM: Haaldaar All of the new D&D Essentials will have new material. Not a reprint of existing product.

5:33 PM: Trask The old hardback books are still supported.

5:34 PM: Haaldaar No rules changes. This is still 4.0

OK, to recap:

The new books are going to have "no rules changes," but miraculously be 1/10th as long as the normal books. Also they will be trade paperbacks for cost reasons, but be distributed in boxes with cardboard sheets and dice. The old hardcover books will be "supported" but they won't actually be making any more of them. The classes will be the same, they just won't have any of the same powers.

If that makes you go you probably aren't alone. They contradicted themselves repeatedly, just in the recap. I imagine the whole presentation had more declarative statements that made no sense in light of their other released claims. I really didn't get into the thing where they claimed promo figures were too expensive or their made plans to integrate dungeon tiles into the core game experience and make dungeon tile expansions into a core product. Because those are stupid and I don't care.

What I will do instead is try to parse what they fuck they mean by "no rule changes" when the new rules are stand-alone, massvely shorter, and contain no reprints. Here we go:


The concept is that they are at no point going to say you can't use the material in the hardbound books. They just aren't going to write any more of them or concern themselves in any fashion with how you might go ahead and do that. The new books will not explicitly reference any of the rules in the old books, and by extension will not change any of them.

So for example: the new rules might simply not mention Close Bursts or the Petrified condition (hey, they gotta cut something to get the whole book into 30 pages). But their story is that they have retained compatibility because they have not changed those rules. Or used them. You're still welcome to bring in a monster or a PC who uses stuff from the 4e rules that dos not appear in D&D Essentials. And then you'll use the 4e rules for that thing, and because of "Exception Based Design" it will be no more or less confusing than any other thing.

Similarly, the D&D Essentials Fighter will have all new abilities, because none of them will be reprints. So essentially it's a whole new class. But it's still called a Fighter, and they never explicitly told you that you couldn't go select powers from 4e books like Martial Power - they just aren't supporting it or thinking about it. So i might be really broken or simply nonsensical - there's no way to know and they don't care.

So basically they are rolling out a whole new edition with new classes, and new abilities in the classes, and new combat rules, and new monsters, and new everything. But they are not actually calling it a new edition and telling folks that if they want to they can go ahead and use materials from the previous edition straight across if they can figure out how to do it on their own. Like the transition from SR2 to SR3.

-Username17

[Windjammer]

Here we have a statement:

5:32 PM: Haaldaar All of the new D&D Essentials will have new material. Not a reprint of existing product.

which you gloss as entailing (among other things):

Similarly, the D&D Essentials Fighter will have all new abilities, because none of them will be reprints. So essentially it's a whole new class.

You've glossed the original statement as basically a universal quantification over 'new material' ('For every single sentence in the Essentials Players book: that sentence does not appear in the 2008 PHB 1.') whereas I'd gloss it as an existential one. The new product will have some new material in it, so that it can't be touted (as a whole) to be simply a reprint of an extant product.

You also seem to think that altering the prose in a rules text automatically means that we get new rules. If you think that (I'm not entirely sure), it's a non sequitur. Take your own re-write of the entry on Milestones in PHB 1 - that doesn't alter the rules, only their text. And that is exactly what I expect from the "Essentials" line.

See, I think they're actually too lazy to do an entire new design. They're simply taking the rules texts they have and simplify those. A less kind term would be "dumb them down". Per example, consider the minotaur's racial feature (if used as a PC race rather than a monster), and how they changed it from 2008 to 2010:

2008 version (MM, p.278):
"Ferocity: If you are reduced to 0 hit points, you can make a basic melee attack as a free action before falling unconscious."

2010 version (PHB 3, p.10)
"Ferocity: When you drop to 0 hit points or fewer, you can make a basic melee attack as an immediate interrupt."

Two points stand out:
(1.) Apparently the word "reduce" is to complicated, especially in the passive ("are reduced to").
(2.) On the other hand, a greater degree of precision in the rules bit: "as an immediate interrupt" specifies exactly where what when takes place. Sure, it presupposes that people know how interrupts work, but once they do, there's absolutely no room for interpreting it further.

That's the twin tendencies that I predict Essentials 4E will capitalize on - dumb down the prose, and rigidify the rules terms as much as possible. Not a bad way to go, I think.

The result, then, is a solidification of the 4.0 rules text, very far from a simple (if selective) reprint of the rules text they have in their books currently. Which is what the above quote says. It's 4.0. I do, however, predict outrage that the "new" class builds for rogue and fighter will simply be streamlined versions of extant builds (and their powers), with cleared up prose but new names and taglines. Imagine them releasing the reprint of the minotaur's "Ferocity" as "Brutality" or whatever. Yep, that's what I think we're going to get. A selection of level 1-3 powers, the 'simpler' ones with few conditional effects, with new taglines and names.

So for example: the new rules might simply not mention Close Bursts or the Petrified condition (hey, they gotta cut something to get the whole book into 30 pages).

This was refuted above. There's no claim by WotC that the 30 pages player book will contain the entirety of the rules in the game. You've already been pointed to the 64-page supplement for the DM in the 2010 Red Box, as well as the Rules Compendium for the "Essentials" line to come out later which clocks in at 256 pages (iirc).

[Kaelik]

Hey Windjammer, stop being an idiotic shill.

If they reprint the Fighter from PHB, that's a reprint, and therefore, violates the no reprint claim.

[Username17]

This was refuted above. There's no claim by WotC that the 30 pages player book will contain the entirety of the rules in the game. You've already been pointed to the 64-page supplement for the DM in the 2010 Red Box

I think... I think I need a LOLWUT Pear. I said it was 1/10th the size, and I mean it. They gave themselves 30 pages to do the text of a 320 page player's book, 30 pages to do a 320 page DMG, and 30 pages to do a 320 page Monster Manual. The monster manual is easy, you just print less monsters. Everything else requires jettisoning material that is actually part of the rules.

And yes, that's stand alone. It's supposed to be played. By itself. By new players. Players who have never seen a 4e PHB.

-Username17

[Windjammer]

I said it was 1/10th the size, and I mean it.

I don't doubt your meaning it, but the veracity of your claim - to wit:

They gave themselves 30 pages to do the text of a 320 page player's book (... ) And yes, that's stand alone. It's supposed to be played. By itself. By new players. Players who have never seen a 4e PHB.

Again, you take a statement made by a WotC official (reported on Twitter), in this case,

Red Box is a complete game experience.

and then gloss it by adding tons of information to it. "A complete game experience" could mean a number of things. Most likely, it's just a bullshit term to cover up the fact that the Red Box is mostly cripple ware with huge pointers to "The Full Game" even before your group hits level 4 - at which point your "complete game experience" is over. That's right, no level 4 powers, let alone paragon paths and epic destinies, or items or feats for these tiers of play.

We've already established above that the number of pages to consider isn't the 320 page total in the PHB, but the 80 or so pages of rules texts. (Plus, in this case, another 30 pages on level 1-3 powers and feats and items.)

So the real issue is how much of that info - a grand total of 110 - can fit into the Red Box' total page count. It can't possibly be all. Perhaps they left out rituals, perhaps they tossed out 60 pages of these 110, owing to the smaller page size and so on. But what none of this means is that the Red Box is an indicator of what the rules version and the extent of the rules amounts to for "Essentials D&D". Otherwise there wouldn't be the need for a Rules Compendium 8 times the size of the Red Box Player's Handbook.

I'm happy for you to disagree with these assertions, but why not engage these claims at a greater level of detail? I'm happy to be convinced of the opposite of what I claim in this post, so why not give it a shot. Thanks.

[Orca]

So, to squeeze their new edition into 60 pages, they'll be cutting a lot of stuff. If most of the conditions go and combat becomes almost entirely HP damage grind, would that be enough to do it?

[sake]

the DM quick start rules that came with Keep on the Shadowfell was under twenty pages and it had a pretty huge chunk of the game rules included in it (it even fit all the conditions into a single page). Add in another ten pages to jam in what major crunch stuff they left out and I could see it be doable.

And if they're only going up to level five, they could reduce a class down to like three pages each. And they'll probably have have less powers for each level any way (maybe only three of four options max), and all the classes will be switched over to 'A' (err... Or 'V'? I can't keep track of which letter represents which type of class) style, which would trim them down even more. Leave out 90% of the rituals and cut every item except the generic magic weapon/implement/armor/neck items.

I think it is possible to pull off without cutting out too much vital crunch, though they'd need to cut almost all the fluff and images to pull it off.

[Smeelbo]

Actually, considering that DDI subscriptions are mostly pure profit, and almost all development costs have already been paid for by the previously published volumes, what makes sense to me is that D&D Essentials might be really intended to recruit more DDI subscribers, rather than book buyers as much.

If D&D Essentials turned out to be how to use DDI to make a character, and, given a character sheet, how to play, that might actually be doable in the page count they have. It also makes sense from a long term planning perspective.

Then, only the DM would have to buy much in the way of actual books, which, in my experience, is exactly what happens.

Smeelbo

[RandomCasualty2]

Actually, considering that DDI subscriptions are mostly pure profit, and almost all development costs have already been paid for by the previously published volumes, what makes sense to me is that D&D Essentials might be really intended to recruit more DDI subscribers, rather than book buyers as much.

Well honestly, simplifying the system isn't going to recruit more subscribers. If anything, the best way to get subscribers for DDI is to have some ridiculously convoluted dumpster-dive-oriented system that makes it a total pain in the ass to make a character without the character generator because you've got to churn through tons of books.

Basically this would involve WotC lowering its book production costs, going to something softcover like the old Sword and Fist for 3.0, black and white pages, minimal artwork and basically just churning out a fuck ton of crap, each one containing powers for as many classes as they can think of. Effectively they use the M:tG principle of having like one or two really uber things for each class in there, and the rest of it is moderately playable or garbage.

The other option is basically to have the new edition be pretty much just a core book + DDI, expecting people to subscribe instead of printing books. That saves a lot of money on not having print runs or any of that. Effectively new shit just goes right into the char builder and compendium, instead of worrying about selling books at all.

[Previn]

This was refuted above. There's no claim by WotC that the 30 pages player book will contain the entirety of the rules in the game. You've already been pointed to the 64-page supplement for the DM in the 2010 Red Box

I think... I think I need a LOLWUT Pear. I said it was 1/10th the size, and I mean it. They gave themselves 30 pages to do the text of a 320 page player's book, 30 pages to do a 320 page DMG, and 30 pages to do a 320 page Monster Manual. The monster manual is easy, you just print less monsters. Everything else requires jettisoning material that is actually part of the rules.

And yes, that's stand alone. It's supposed to be played. By itself. By new players. Players who have never seen a 4e PHB.

-Username17

I'm rather looking forward to it, I kind of miss playing Advanced Heroquest on a random Saturday night and think it's great that they're putting it back into production.

[NineInchNall]

and then gloss it by adding tons of information to it. "A complete game experience" could mean a number of things. Most likely, it's just a bullshit term to cover up the fact that the Red Box is mostly cripple ware with huge pointers to "The Full Game" even before your group hits level 4 - at which point your "complete game experience" is over. That's right, no level 4 powers, let alone paragon paths and epic destinies, or items or feats for these tiers of play.

But that's ... that's what he said. They're taking a 320 page book and turning it to a 30 page book, which likely means that they're doing stuff like cutting out all Level 4+ powers, etc.

???

[Thymos]

But that's ... that's what he said. They're taking a 320 page book and turning it to a 30 page book, which likely means that they're doing stuff like cutting out all Level 4+ powers, etc.

To cut it into 30 pages probably means they are cutting out all powers. Classes too. Probably equipment and magic items as well. Basically everything that can be moved into cards is probably getting the axe.

[Windjammer]

and then gloss it by adding tons of information to it. "A complete game experience" could mean a number of things. Most likely, it's just a bullshit term to cover up the fact that the Red Box is mostly cripple ware with huge pointers to "The Full Game" even before your group hits level 4 - at which point your "complete game experience" is over. That's right, no level 4 powers, let alone paragon paths and epic destinies, or items or feats for these tiers of play.

But that's ... that's what he said. They're taking a 320 page book and turning it to a 30 page book, which likely means that they're doing stuff like cutting out all Level 4+ powers, etc.

We aren't debating whether material will get cut out of the Red Box compared to 4E PHB 1... we are debating what that means re: the hotly disputed question of what version of rules "D&D Essentials" will amount to. As in, will it be a 4.5? Will it be a vastly simpler game very much incompatible with 4.0? And so on. Frank argues (I think) that the reduction in quantity mandates a change in rules version - whereas I argue that this doesn't follow unless we add in the extra premise that "The Red Box will contain the entirety of the rules used by the D&D Essentials product line". I just don't see that extra premise, and Frank has neither pointed out where he has it from (other than making it up) or pointed out how his argument can be sustained in the absence of that extra premise.

----

Something else: Geez, I would have thought that WotC had planned not doing a Arcane Power and DMG 3 in 2010 all along, to not overburden themselves with product output in the 4th quarter of 2010 alongside all the effort they're pumping into the "Essentials" line. Turns out this is wrong. WotC WANTED to do a DMG 3 in 2010 when we were still in August 2009... and then in December 2009 they changed their minds all of a sudden. I blame it on poor sales for DMG 2, a book no one wanted (I certainly didn't) or at least not enough people wanted, as that happened inbetween these two dates in September 2009.

Here are the sources - it's Bill Slavicsek's "Ampersand" column in Dragon Magazine on both occasions.

1. Mid-August 2009:

An Early Look at 2010

Those of you familiar with our online catalog have at least heard mention of the above titles, but what's in store for 2010?

January starts off with 4th Edition's exploration of the Underdark, as well as a new player-focused product, a 32-page book dedicated to playing dragonborn (with the next such book coming in June, for playing tieflings). Later in the year, DMs can expect location-focused books: 32 pages along with a poster map, suitable for dropping into any campaign. The first of these will be Hammerfast, spotlighting a dwarven town, and Vor Rukoth, an ancient (and quite possibly haunted) ruin.

If 2009 was the Year of 2's, then 2010 is the Year of 3's. March features Player's Handbook 3, bringing back psionics to 4th Edition. Monster Manual 3 follows in April and Dungeon Master's Guide 3 (including advice on epic-level play) in September.

Other sourcebooks for 2010 include Martial Power 2 in February, bringing further options for your fighters, rangers, rogues, and warlords. In April, The Plane Above takes players to the Astral Sea.

Looking at the summer months, June brings the Player's Strategy Guide, akin to a computer strategy guide but for Dungeons & Dragons. It offers up advice for building the best possible player character from the options available (including tips and tricks for using D&D Insider's tools) and better fitting them into your party. July sees the Demonomicon as well as the next super-adventure following Against the Giants: 4th Edition's Tomb of Horrors!

2. And then in December 2009 (Dragon 382, p.115)

It was a great year, and 2010 promises to be even better. We’ve got Player’s Handbook 3 and Dark Sun on the horizon, among other titles. We’ve got some surprises in the area of miniatures that I hope to talk about next month. We’ll continue to expand and improve our digital offerings. And we’ve got a bunch of new stuff happening in novels that I’ll try to provide information on in the next month or so, including a new series of Dungeons & Dragons novels set in the world established in the core roleplaying game.

See? No mention of DMG 3. Not as conspicuous by not mentioning MM 3 either (which, I think, WILL come out later this year).

[hogarth]

So we're calling it. 4th edition D&D gets its last book around the September mark, with the Rules Compendium. There is never going to be an Arcane Power 2 or a Shadow Power or a Darksun Player's Guide or any of that. The DMG 3 will not happen.

I just checked the product list:
http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Catalog.aspx

Isn't the book "Player's Handbook Races: Humans" a 4th edition supplement? It's (supposedly) due out in December. Or do you think they're just flushing out the pipeline?