PDA

View Full Version : i finnaly did it, I bought 4E.



Vulture
02-14-2009, 09:49 AM
Anything i should look out for? i have been playing and DMing games for 3.5E

Arch Lich Thoth-Amon
02-14-2009, 10:17 AM
Anything i should look out for? i have been playing and DMing games for 3.5E
Congratulations on buying 4E, for i did the same. It's nice to know that one can run or jump into a game of any edition, and enjoy the comaraderie of a group of like-minded gamers.

The release of 4E marked the day i ceased being a collector of 3.5. In fact, i gave all my 3.5 material (modules and underdark books, excluded) to a hard-core gamer friend, and vowed never to be a collector again*. As far as what to get, i would follow the same logical path as 3.5, and pick up anything and everything that interests you.

*I still collect classic modules, WFRP(both editions), CGW, CT, and MT.

I'd like to say more, but i need to get ready to go back to DunDreCon, up here in the Bay Area, for i am slotted for an 8 hour game of 2E Ravenloft. May i not be turned!

Soft Serve
02-14-2009, 10:50 AM
I did it, I finally bought 4E.


I'm so...so sorry for your loss...


:D

MortonStromgal
02-14-2009, 11:40 AM
Anything i should look out for? i have been playing and DMing games for 3.5E

Try to leave your 3.5 brain at the door. Its a shiny new system but similar in enough ways to make you play 3.5 by accident and then think the game is screwed up when the rule really didn't work that way at all.

Grimwell
02-14-2009, 11:46 AM
Very good advice Morton, and honestly, the best advice. Don't try to find ways to run the edition like you have run prior editions; read it with new eyes and just absorb what it is at face value.

Suggestion for fun at the table: Now that your players will all have powers with evocative names and descriptions, get them to describe their attacks. There is no "I swing my longsword {rolls}..." in 4E.

Second suggestion: Keep a diary of your responses to the edition here as a blog! Ask questions! Post questions and insights! I like to gab :)

Aidan
02-14-2009, 01:16 PM
I second (third?) the suggestion to check your 3.5 brain at the door. I can't tell you how many times at the gaming table I've heard the dreaded phrase 'Well in 3.5...' It only leads to sadness.

Valdar
02-14-2009, 04:02 PM
Anything i should look out for?

Trolls mostly :D

Here are the biggest differences that come to mind:

--Fort, Ref, and Will are defenses that work like armor class, rather than being something the defender rolls to avoid an effect.

--Lots of things are gone, like Arcane Spell Failure, spell levels as distinct from character levels, stacking magic item plusses (no plusses to arrows or shields anymore- you just get bow or armor), etc. I made a list a while back: http://www.penandpapergames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6442

--Multiclassing is done by taking feats to do so, rather than taking levels in another class.

--Opportunity Attacks come up a lot less often- threatening reach is mostly gone, and things like drinking potions, grappling, and standing up no longer provoke. You only provoke by walking or running out of a threatened square, and making a ranged/area attack from a threatened square. Almost all creatures only threaten adjacent squares, even if they have reach.

--At first level, you add your con score, not bonus, to hit points. About half of the players I've played with get screwed up by this.

--You don't do half-again damage with a 2-handed weapon. You only do +1 damage with a versatile weapon used 2-handed.

--Reach weapons can attack into any square they can reach- no more "shifting grip". As above, you still only threaten adjacent squares though.

That's a start...

ronpyatt
02-14-2009, 08:46 PM
Great advise! And so very very apt to leave your 3.5 brain at the door.

4e has different game mechanic for everything. It's D&D with a different vision, and you'll need that fresh open mind.

Oh, you'll slip on a 3.5 rule every now and then. Don't worry, this will pass. Giggle like a manga-school-girl if you have to, but move on and give out lots of treasure.

Read the rule books a few times. You'll get more out of it each time.

Your first GM'ing session, at least, should be for practice.

Talmek
02-14-2009, 10:49 PM
I purchased 4e core rulebooks on eBay back in December, and spent the last month or so studying and comparing the two versions. After playing 3.5e for so long I had to really pay attention to the new/different rules in 4e.

Tonight, I've been working on creating my first 4e character, a dwarven warlord named Talmek (huh, imagine that). In the process of creating him, I've had some real difficulty with certain portions of character creation...more than likely just me not having memorized the locations of all the information I need.

Anywho, it's just been a pain here the past couple of hours so I figured I would take a break and throw a couple thoughts out there.

Welcome to 4e.

Aaron Young
02-14-2009, 11:54 PM
I also did, but I got one question...
When you go up in a level how many skill points do you get? I understand the prof part when u make tour PC but how many skill points??????

Valdar
02-15-2009, 01:57 AM
There are no more skill points. You add half your level to all your skills.

You can only get more skills by getting either the Skill Training feat, or take the appropriate multiclass feat.

Dark
02-15-2009, 07:56 AM
I for one love 3 and 3.5 but I am giving 4e a go in fact I am starting up a pbp game. It is different way to play that I was use to but at the same time it is different in a new kind of fun way like when you get a new pc game and boot it up way.

Aaron Young
02-15-2009, 09:14 AM
Ok? So if I'm a 2nd level I get one point and put that one point to any skill I am prof with??????

Kalanth
02-15-2009, 11:08 AM
I am a 4e-aholic and love the edition. I see a fair share of problems in there, but many of those problems are easily corrected once you are accustomed to how the game works. And definetly listen to the advice to check you 3.5 brain at the door. The game needs to be treated in a different way or you will not enjoy it for what it is.
--- Merged from Double Post ---

Ok? So if I'm a 2nd level I get one point and put that one point to any skill I am prof with??????

You don't get skill points. The ones you "train" in at the beginning of creation as the ones that have a +5, the rest are without. If you want to change the skills then you can retrain one item per level (feat, power, skill). Other than that when you hit level 2 (and all even levels) anything that says +1/2 level gets a point (all skills, to hit, defenses).

Valdar
02-15-2009, 01:29 PM
Ok? So if I'm a 2nd level I get one point and put that one point to any skill I am prof with??????

As Kalanth said, skill points are gone. The ability to put a point or two here and there was good for fleshing out your character, but useless mechanically, because by the later levels, you'd never succeed at any roll against them.

At 1st level, you pick the skills you're proficient in- these will always be attribute+1/2level+any racial modifiiers+5 for proficiency. You can get more skills with multiclass or Skill Training. The only way to raise a skill past this value is to take the Skill Focus feat, though some items will help out too.

So, unless you take feats, all your skills (trained or not) will go up by 1 every even level, end of story.

Aaron Young
02-16-2009, 07:45 AM
Ok I get the no skill points. But the 1/2 level think throws me off. I guess I'm stuck in the 3.5E. Can't turn off my brain:mad::mad::mad:

Kalanth
02-16-2009, 08:42 AM
Ok I get the no skill points. But the 1/2 level think throws me off. I guess I'm stuck in the 3.5E. Can't turn off my brain:mad::mad::mad:

Sounds about right. :) Its really just as simple as adding +1 to Skills, To Hits, Defenses, and Ability Check (not scores) every even level.

Aaron Young
02-16-2009, 11:20 AM
So what you are telling me is at levels 2,4,6 etc.... I add 1 to all my skills I'm prof in????:confused::confused:

Webhead
02-16-2009, 11:29 AM
So what you are telling me is at levels 2,4,6 etc.... I add 1 to all my skills I'm prof in????:confused::confused:

In 4e (and Star Wars Saga) essentially, all your skill checks (not just proficient or "trained" skills) are calculated as follows:

Skill total = [Ability Modifier] + [Half character level rounded down] + 5 (if "trained" in the skill) + 3 (if Skill Focus feat is taken) + [Racial/Item/Misc bonuses]

So, if I'm an 8th level human Rogue with 20 Dex and "trained" in Stealth with no other bonuses, my Stealth skill total = +14 [5 (Dex) + 4 (half lvl) + 5 (trained)]

Soft Serve
02-16-2009, 12:20 PM
I think I'll just wait another two years until they decide 4.5 or 5. E so I don't have to figure this one out...

Kalanth
02-16-2009, 12:43 PM
In 4e (and Star Wars Saga) essentially, all your skill checks (not just proficient or "trained" skills) are calculated as follows:

Skill total = [Ability Modifier] + [Half character level rounded down] + 5 (if "trained" in the skill) + 3 (if Skill Focus feat is taken) + [Racial/Item/Misc bonuses]

So, if I'm an 8th level human Rogue with 20 Dex and "trained" in Stealth with no other bonuses, my Stealth skill total = +14 [5 (Dex) + 4 (half lvl) + 5 (trained)]

Webhead has it spot on. Lets delve in further though. Webhead as shown what your skill is with no additional bonuses while trained. Lets say the same character is looking at their untrained skills:

Looking to use diplomacy untrained, the character does much the same as the trained example except one minor change.

+6 = 1 (Cha) + 4 (Half lvl)

Since the character is not trained in the skill they do not add the bonus for training but they still add their half level bonus for being level 8.

With defenses the equation is right about the same. Assuming this example character wears light armor, which allows them to use Dex or Int depending which is higher, the equation would look like this for armor with no bonuses for AC:

AC 22 = 10 + 4 (half lvl) + 5 (dex) + 3 (Leather Armor)

We will then use reflex to stick to the numbers we have. Lets say this character is of a race and class that does not give a bonus to Reflex, here is what his save would look like:

Reflex +19 = 10 + 4 (half lvl) + 5 (dex)

And finally, in those moments that the DM asks for an ability check that no skill is directly tied to. In those situations you would have a formula that looks like this:

+9 = 4 (half lvl) + 5 (dex)

As you can see, the half level bonus is applied to nearly every number in some way. A suggestion, if I may, is that if you are worried about forgetting these numbers you might want to google Hero Forge and download their 4th edition character builder. It uses excell, and its free. Using a tool like that will ensure that you are adding all the bonuses that apply each and every time. If you are willing to spend money, however, the Character Builder that WoTC released is outstanding and one of the best character makers I have ever used. Course, to get that you have to subscribe to DDI.


I think I'll just wait another two years until they decide 4.5 or 5. E so I don't have to figure this one out...

It may appear intimidating, but the math overall is actually easier than the math used to calculate the BAB or saving throws of a 3.5 character. That is impressive considering just how easier the math in 3.5 was.

Aaron Young
02-16-2009, 02:26 PM
I used the buildier from D&D insider. I love it. To bad it cost to build past 3rd level. If you buy the update version, do you need to stay subsribed to us it still. Or will it go back to the demo version??????

Kalanth
02-16-2009, 02:39 PM
I used the buildier from D&D insider. I love it. To bad it cost to build past 3rd level. If you buy the update version, do you need to stay subsribed to us it still. Or will it go back to the demo version??????

It will stay the full version. What the subscription gives you is access to the updates anytime a book is released. If this is not something you are concerned over then there is no need to continue the subscription (basically paying $14 for the builder). If, later on down the road, you want to update the program again because of a book you bought then simply sign up for another month and update the program as you can only update it while an active subscriber.

If you only use the core books then a one time purchase is good for you. I personally would just re-subscribe once a year when they release the newest players handbook. Doing that means that you get access to all the other content that came out while you were not a member.

Aaron Young
02-16-2009, 04:21 PM
Cool thank you. I know it is beening lazy using the builder.... But it is also just easier.... Hopfully my DM will let me make my PC this way....

Valdar
02-16-2009, 05:22 PM
I think I'll just wait another two years until they decide 4.5 or 5. E so I don't have to figure this one out...

I don't see how it's going to get any simpler. "Add half your level to D20 rolls and defenses" replaces 3.5e's skill points, BaB, and saving throws all in one go.

Kalanth
02-18-2009, 08:39 AM
I don't see how it's going to get any simpler. "Add half your level to D20 rolls and defenses" replaces 3.5e's skill points, BaB, and saving throws all in one go.

Just more anti-4th ed flaming as people look at the edition as the end of all gaming for some reason. Most of the people that think that are also the same ones that wont read the books.

ronpyatt
02-18-2009, 09:02 AM
There are no skill points to spend in 4e. (No worries about spending half points for non-class skills because they're gone.)

On your standard 4e character sheet there are boxes next to each skill. When you put numbers in the boxes (for example, Prof +5, 1/2 Lvl7= +3, Wis +2), you add those together to get your total Skill Bonus. You only have to do this once at any particular level. When you roll, add your skill bonus. Only 1 bonus number plus a d20.

For you anti-4e folks, stop trolling for a flame. Save it for your game.

Soft Serve
02-18-2009, 11:40 AM
Just more anti-4th ed flaming as people look at the edition as the end of all gaming for some reason. Most of the people that think that are also the same ones that wont read the books.

I'm not flaming 4E, I'm just pissed that I got 30 3.5E books in PDF and my $200 worth of D&D books sitting next to me and they want me to buy all that all over again after I literally just got the collection full two weeks ago.

The way I'm behind D&D generations is going by the time I do get into 4E they'll have the fifth edition scheduled for release three days later. :(

Kalanth
02-18-2009, 12:45 PM
I'm not flaming 4E, I'm just pissed that I got 30 3.5E books in PDF and my $200 worth of D&D books sitting next to me and they want me to buy all that all over again after I literally just got the collection full two weeks ago.

The way I'm behind D&D generations is going by the time I do get into 4E they'll have the fifth edition scheduled for release three days later. :(

I understand your complaint. I just finished selling off the last of my 3.5 books (minus a couple odds and ends from Dragonlance). That was a prority to me when I heard that they would be releasing 4th edition and I discovered that I like 4th edition. I made back about half the money I spent, which is good for used books.

I look at 4th edition for some like that scene in Billy Madison where Winnona Ryder has to fight the big woman at the pizza shop. You know, the one with that quote, "I'm sorry. All I heard was blah, blah, blah, I'm a dirty slut." I have seen some win that fight, and some loose, but there is nothing wrong with being bitter, upset, or unwilling to change, its all a choice.

Aaron Young
02-18-2009, 07:52 PM
I wasn't flaming 4E... I read the books PH and the DM manual. But still didn't get it... Last night I finally sat down with my DM and he explained it all to me.

I hate the idea how I need the PH 2 to get more classes and races.. To me it is just tring to get more money from us players.... I understand they are a business but it still suckss... But now I understand 4E I think it sounds like fun. I'm sorry you think I was flaming... We can't all be as smart as you people....

Aidan
02-18-2009, 08:57 PM
I hate the idea how I need the PH 2 to get more classes and races.. To me it is just tring to get more money from us players.... I understand they are a business but it still suckss... But now I understand 4E I think it sounds like fun. I'm sorry you think I was flaming... We can't all be as smart as you people....

How is this any different than 3.x? One of my DM's has several feet of 3.5 books on his shelves.

Etarnon
02-18-2009, 09:27 PM
Hey Soft Serve, years from now, my groups in Pittsburgh will still be playing 3.5 when you are in your 20's man.

Come visit.

Soft Serve
02-18-2009, 09:30 PM
Hey Soft Serve, years from now, my groups in Pittsburgh will still be playing 3.5 when you are in your 20's man.

Come visit.


the best news ever...:D:D

Dark
02-18-2009, 09:50 PM
I still from time to time play 1st but as I said I have found good in all and if a old fart like me can say that about 4e then....:confused:....Well you know us old folks we like to ramble on a bit.....What was I talking about again? :confused: Oh yes 4e is different but in a good way give it a chance and who knows you may find yourself liking it. ;)
--- Merged from Double Post ---
In fact I am starting a 4e pbp game so if some of you new to 4e want to venture in with me please by all means send me a pm.

Arch Lich Thoth-Amon
02-18-2009, 10:37 PM
Dark is correct. 4E is good, just different than 3.5. Of course, i found differences in all the editions and yet, found good times with every edition.

LastGunslinger
02-18-2009, 10:38 PM
Anything i should look out for? i have been playing and DMing games for 3.5E
Although I am a little disapointed about the replacement of half-orcs and gnomes with tieflings and dragonborn, I am otherwise extremely pleased with 4.0
Trust me, you'll feel the same once you use "flames of phlegethos" on a group of unsuspecting Kobolds. >:)

Aaron Young
02-18-2009, 10:38 PM
True but the classes and races were in one book in 3.5....
DM manuals are a differnt story though.....

Soft Serve
02-19-2009, 12:18 AM
THEY GOT RID OF HALF-ORCS AND GNOMES?!?!?!


...now I want to play 4E...:D


hate gnomes, I really do. If it means them taking half-orcs with them I am willing to make that sacrifice.

Grimwell
02-19-2009, 12:32 AM
You don't need 4E to get rid of half-orcs or gnomes. Just a campaign where that's the sensible thing to do. :)

Kalanth
02-19-2009, 06:47 AM
I wasn't flaming 4E... I read the books PH and the DM manual. But still didn't get it... Last night I finally sat down with my DM and he explained it all to me.

I hate the idea how I need the PH 2 to get more classes and races.. To me it is just tring to get more money from us players.... I understand they are a business but it still suckss... But now I understand 4E I think it sounds like fun. I'm sorry you think I was flaming... We can't all be as smart as you people....

No need for the bitter tone at the end, but overall I just wish more people would do as you did. Taking the time to have it explained and listening to that explanation are important steps.

I don't mind the selling of books so much this time around. I am not buying as many (only 5 of what has been released so far) and that makes buying a new PHB every year easier to swallow. Besides, I enjoy the idea of there being a little mystery in the future as you never know what gems you might find in an unpublished book.

Vulture
02-19-2009, 07:13 AM
when i first heard about 4e i didnt like it or even want to try the system, now that ive had a few days to read the core rules books i have to say that im impressed and will have to play a few games

Webhead
02-19-2009, 08:57 AM
THEY GOT RID OF HALF-ORCS AND GNOMES?!?!?!


...now I want to play 4E...:D


hate gnomes, I really do. If it means them taking half-orcs with them I am willing to make that sacrifice.

I, on the other hand, didn't like gnomes until 3e came out. What they did with the gnomes made them worth playing (and my favorite "core" race of 3.X edition). No longer were they midgets with long, white beards, huge noses and pointy, red hats. They were actually cool. They ain't your grandma's Tinker Gnomes (blech).

In fact, I liked gnomes so much in 3.X that I took an idea from Unearthed Arcana and designed a campaign setting where the gnome subraces were the only "core" race that still existed (the idea of the campaign was that all the other "core" races disappeared ages ago and the adventures of the PCs would slowly uncover exactly what happened to all of them).

4e apparently changed them again to a more "sprite" or "fairy" type creature, but they haven't described them enough yet for me to decide if I like what they have become.

Kalanth
02-19-2009, 09:09 AM
4e apparently changed them again to a more "sprite" or "fairy" type creature, but they haven't described them enough yet for me to decide if I like what they have become.

I get the impression they wanted to take the gnome back to the comic relief character like it was in the late 80's early 90's. This impression comes from watching that video they put out with the gnome being excited that he is a monster, "I'm a monster, rawr!"

I like the Eberron gnomes, intellectual and interesting, and tend to have the gnomes on my homebrew act this way.

Aaron Young
02-19-2009, 09:59 AM
I liked the gnome to a point. As a pc I don't like them but as a side kick they are good. I think they play good bards.:cool:

Soft Serve
02-19-2009, 11:24 AM
Travellocity ruined gnomes for me. I can look at that picture of the gnome in eberron pulling out a wand and blasting away a monster 3 times her height and I can't help but wonder how much she'll save me compared to hotwire.com or priceline. If I can get a visit from William Shatner then to hell with gnomes.

Webhead
02-19-2009, 12:05 PM
Travellocity ruined gnomes for me. I can look at that picture of the gnome in eberron pulling out a wand and blasting away a monster 3 times her height and I can't help but wonder how much she'll save me compared to hotwire.com or priceline. If I can get a visit from William Shatner then to hell with gnomes.

World of Warcraft also did nothing to help the image of gnomes as a race to be taken seriously. I'm sorry, there's not a single gnome character model configuration that doesn't look at least somewhat stupid. Tubby, fat-headed, bulbous-nosed stumpies with bad haircuts. Only the female gnome characters look half-decent. :rolleyes:

Valdar
02-19-2009, 12:10 PM
There's an article up on DDI about gnomes and half-orcs ("The Gnome, The Bad, and The Ugly")- it's a really good read if you have a subscription. Here are the highlights:

--Gnomes will not destroy the Fantasy/Medieval setting by being high-tech.
--Gnomes are about being small and beneath notice, able to magically fade from view- they won't make good defenders.
--Gnomes will cover the types of characters that gnome players want to play: "Some gnomes wander the world with kender-like curiosity and wonder, some gnomes are full of humor and practical jokes, some gnomes traffic in secrets, and some gnomes have escaped the slavery of the fomorians but retain a strong sense of bitterness over the experience."
--There's no satisfying explanation for half-orcs that both makes sense and avoids the subject of rape, so they made the half-orcs' background obscure: "An obscure legend claims that when Corellon put out Gruumsh's eye in their primeval battle, part of the savage god's essence fell to earth, where it transformed a race of humans into fierce half-orcs. Another story suggests that an ancient hobgoblin empire created half-orcs to lead orc tribes on the empire's behalf. Yet another legend claims that a tribe of brutal human barbarians chose to breed with orcs to strengthen their bloodline. Some claim that Kord created half-orcs, copying the best elements from the human and orc races to make a strong and fierce people after his own heart. If you ask a half-orc about his origin, you might hear one of these stories. You might also get a punch in the face for asking such a rude question. "

Gnome and Half-Orc are gone only until next month though- they're coming back in PHB2, due out Mar 17.

Webhead
02-19-2009, 12:28 PM
--Gnomes are about being small and beneath notice, able to magically fade from view-

Something that was built into the background of gnomes in 3.X but which wasn't expressed in game mechanics. It described that gnomes and gnome villages were expertly (even magically) disguised and wouldn't be seen by passersby unless the gnomes wanted them to be.


...Gnome and Half-Orc are gone only until next month though- they're coming back in PHB2, due out Mar 17.

I wonder if that means there is going to be any difference between gnomes as PCs in PHB2 and gnomes as PCs as they exist in the MM...

Kalanth
02-19-2009, 12:45 PM
I wonder if that means there is going to be any difference between gnomes as PCs in PHB2 and gnomes as PCs as they exist in the MM...

If it is anything like the Drow and their MM vs. PC versions (see Players Guide to Forgotten Realms) then I would say they will share similarities from what is there along with new aspects to the race. I like the summary of the article and will have to look that up when I get home. New races don't usually get my blood boiling (most of the characters I play are MM races these days) but I am intregued by what may be there in the PHB2.

1958Fury
02-19-2009, 02:07 PM
--There's no satisfying explanation for half-orcs that both makes sense and avoids the subject of rape, so they made the half-orcs' background obscure: "An obscure legend claims that when Corellon put out Gruumsh's eye in their primeval battle, part of the savage god's essence fell to earth, where it transformed a race of humans into fierce half-orcs. Another story suggests that an ancient hobgoblin empire created half-orcs to lead orc tribes on the empire's behalf. Yet another legend claims that a tribe of brutal human barbarians chose to breed with orcs to strengthen their bloodline. Some claim that Kord created half-orcs, copying the best elements from the human and orc races to make a strong and fierce people after his own heart. If you ask a half-orc about his origin, you might hear one of these stories. You might also get a punch in the face for asking such a rude question. "

Hmmm. I'm not sure I like that. I've never really been fond of half-anything being a "race", including half-elves. I'd rather they just list full-blood races, then add a chapter with interbreeding rules and the stats of the most common combinations. But here they not only make half-Orcs a race, but they take out the whole mixed heritage part and make them a full-blood race that just happens to be called "Half-Orc". In a way, it's closer to what I wanted. But it's still odd to me.

Aidan
02-19-2009, 02:14 PM
--There's no satisfying explanation for half-orcs that both makes sense and avoids the subject of rape, so they made the half-orcs' background obscure: "An obscure legend claims that when Corellon put out Gruumsh's eye in their primeval battle, part of the savage god's essence fell to earth, where it transformed a race of humans into fierce half-orcs. Another story suggests that an ancient hobgoblin empire created half-orcs to lead orc tribes on the empire's behalf. Yet another legend claims that a tribe of brutal human barbarians chose to breed with orcs to strengthen their bloodline. Some claim that Kord created half-orcs, copying the best elements from the human and orc races to make a strong and fierce people after his own heart. If you ask a half-orc about his origin, you might hear one of these stories. You might also get a punch in the face for asking such a rude question. "

Whey the hell do they feel the need to sanitize the half-orc origin? When I start my campaign, half-orcs will have the same origin they did in 1e.

fmitchell
02-19-2009, 05:56 PM
Whey the hell do they feel the need to sanitize the half-orc origin?

Because WotC doesn't want the subject of "rape" to taint their wholesome family game about killing ugly-looking people and taking their stuff.

Seriously, if they took "orcs" out of the Always Chaotic Evil ghetto, orc hybrids would make more sense. As one of the official backstories suggested, maybe barbarian tribes of orcs and humans intermarried for political reasons. Maybe an orc prisoner fell for her (or his!) captor; maybe a human fell in love with an orc.

Or maybe orcs do what humans have done throughout the history of warfare: slaughter, pillage, and rape. Since a human/human hybrid doesn't get any stat bonuses, though, we can sweep it under the rug.

Aaron Young
02-19-2009, 10:57 PM
:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::laug h::laugh::laugh:

Aidan
02-19-2009, 11:24 PM
Actually, now that I look at it, it doesn't really preclude forceful mating, in fact the last two sentences seem to indicate that all these other stories are a polite coverup, a way to dance around what really happened should you wish to avoid it.

Vulture
02-20-2009, 09:44 AM
[quote=fmitchell;62646]Because WotC doesn't want the subject of "rape" to taint their wholesome family game about killing ugly-looking people and taking their stuff.[quote]

:mad:Cry me a river. i think that most of us who play are mature enough to handle that. Damn political correctness. When i played a Half-orc i cared little for how i was created just what my character goals were and how i could accomplish them.

Aaron Young
02-20-2009, 11:02 AM
I don't think their was much political correctness back in the days of old. Plus who cares were the breed came from. Let the people who play the game come up with there own story.

Arch Lich Thoth-Amon
02-20-2009, 11:22 AM
This pc bs is really beginning to annoy me.

Valdar
02-20-2009, 12:40 PM
I've been wondering if the decision on what to do about the half-orc was really based on PC/Sanitization, and after re-reading the article, it's not that clear that that's what's going on- Here are some more relevant quotes (Wish I could quote the whole thing, but that would get Farcaster some unwanted legal attention...):

"Half-Orcs present a problem, as only copious amounts of hand waving can make this race exist without some nod toward the dark tendencies that led to their creation. We have introduced a number of races that replace the better aspects of the half-orc, including tieflings and dragonborn. It's time to let the half-orc fade from the game. (Later in the edition if a better story comes along, we can reexamine this decision.)"

Now, Bill did make some good points in that short paragraph. Tieflings fill the same sort of walk-the-edge, bad-guy psychographic niche that half-orcs have in the past, and dragonborn fill a similar tough brute role. Forcing players to confront the issues surrounding what could get a human and an orc to produce a half-orc child has never been a fun part of the game.
Ultimately, though, by the time serious work got underway on Player's Handbook 2, we were pretty sure it was time to find a story good enough that it would let us reexamine that decision. How could we do a barbarian class without the half-orc? More importantly, how could we do Eberron and House Tharashk without the race?"

"The idea that humans, no matter how savage, would "get along" with orcs in "that way" is a huge stretch. It was an eyebrow-raising moment for me when I read the original Eberron, and those orcs and humans had more common ground. Savage humans, to me, would be more likely to kill orcs (in really mean ways) and take their stuff than find common ground with them. Further, in trying times, savage people are less accepting of outsiders, not more. Add evil to the mix, and the prospect of even "separate but equal" cohabitation starts to beggar the imagination."

There's more stuff there, but I think that gets the point across. If there was a desire to avoid the "ugly backstory", it was because the designers found the idea genuinely distasteful, not that they were trying to make the game more politically correct or kid-friendly. Add to that the idea that none of the backgrounds really made sense- even the rape origin was an example of the "Mars Needs Women" trope, ignoring the fact that Orcs are a separate species and not just dirty, smelly invaders who want our women (and as a result, would probably find Humans as hideous as we do them.)

Then again, if Half-Orcs are not sterile, then biologically Orcs are technically not a separate species from Humans, so who can say...

Dimthar
02-20-2009, 01:37 PM
Then again, if Half-Orcs are not sterile, then biologically Orcs are technically not a separate species from Humans, so who can say...

We need to forget our Genetics 101. In a Fantasy/Mythological world the Legend of the Minotaur is not a legend but Documented History.

.

Aaron Young
02-20-2009, 02:32 PM
I think they should have just left them..

agoraderek
02-21-2009, 05:56 PM
I look at 4th edition for some like that scene in Billy Madison where Winnona Ryder has to fight the big woman at the pizza shop. You know, the one with that quote, "I'm sorry. All I heard was blah, blah, blah, I'm a dirty slut."

FYI. That was Mr. Deeds, not Billy Madison.

:)

Soft Serve
02-22-2009, 04:41 PM
Hey come on guys...We don't need to argue over the half-orcs creation or how family friendly it was.

For now I say we should celebrate that the gnomes are gone!!!


Albeit only until march but they're finally gone!!!

YAY!:biggrin:

Aaron Young
02-22-2009, 05:28 PM
The gnomes are in the monster manual.

Soft Serve
02-22-2009, 11:28 PM
And that's where they belong.

Seriously Svirfneblin? or however they're spelled would be more accepted by me then a normal friggin gnome.

Kalanth
02-23-2009, 08:51 AM
I do to gnomes the same thing I do to Psyclops when I run a Marvel Super Heroes game. I wipe out the population prior to first session in some dramatic way so that I don't have to think about the element I hate the most.

DragonPrince
02-23-2009, 09:15 AM
Well gnomes can be fun. I haven't bought 4.0 yet and don't know if I going to. I have enough 2nd and a couple 3.0 books. But u never know what can happen in the days to come.

Webhead
02-23-2009, 10:07 AM
Well gnomes can be fun...

Indeed. My favorite D&D character ever was a 3e gnome. That said, he was of the @$$-kicking variety and not the "I'm a silly putz" kind. He had a healthy sense of humor, sure (just about all my characters do), but when it came down to business, he was all about it.

I started another thread about the merits of gnomes as Barbarians a while back. You'd be staggered by the advantages gnomes get in comparison. The moral of the story? Never piss off a gnome with a glowing longsword strapped to his back and a frothing badger clutched on his shoulder. ;)

Aaron Young
02-23-2009, 10:25 AM
Ok?

InvestFDC
02-23-2009, 11:47 AM
.....
I started another thread about the merits of gnomes as Barbarians a while back. You'd be staggered by the advantages gnomes get in comparison. The moral of the story? Never piss off a gnome with a glowing longsword strapped to his back and a frothing badger clutched on his shoulder. ;)

A gnome can carry a badger? And a longsword? Wouldn't the badger be carrying both?:laugh:

Webhead
02-23-2009, 01:22 PM
A gnome can carry a badger? And a longsword?...

Yep. A longsword is essentially a gnome-sized greatsword, so he would wield it two-handed. And a badger is basically like a sentient, mobile blender only with all the perks that come with Wizard familiars...and more hit points than most of the other PCs.

...Wouldn't the badger be carrying both?:laugh:

Had one of those too! A dire badger mount to carry him into battle...with the Flight spell cast on him for good measure (and 3-dimensional combat tactics).

So really...it was a gnome, his greatsword, a blender and a flying carpet with claws.

Soft Serve
02-23-2009, 02:58 PM
And the whole time you played this gnome you didn't once stop to think...

"Maybe I could have just been a halfling and at least have been a little cool?" :biggrin:

I never include gnome lands in my games but I keep them alive just incase I do have that crazy player that wants to be one. Which is never...


Actually more often then not when a gnome is in my game it's thanks to the random generator for people in taverns I found that puts them there and then one or more PC's will start to hassle him and get their asses handed to them by some ogre thing in the corner for them having spilt his beer.

For some reason my usual PC's don't like to use magic either which is usually their downfall.

Webhead
02-23-2009, 04:12 PM
And the whole time you played this gnome you didn't once stop to think...

"Maybe I could have just been a halfling and at least have been a little cool?" :biggrin:...

Nah. Already had a halfling in the party and he wasn't nearly as cool as the gnome...though, to his credit, he was interested in learning a thing or two about fighting from the gnome. The halfling was rather psychotic, however.

Besides, halflings can't speak with badgers (burrowing mammals) and his entire concept was based around a close relationship with a special "fighting-art" the gnomes learned by watching and immitating badgers when they defend their dens. And there's nothing quite like watching an armed gnome go "Mr. Furious" on the bad guys when they really get under his skin (aka Barbarian Rage). :)

And besides that, OOC the gnome offered much better incentives for a warrior/mage type than halfling, so there wasn't even any deliberation on my part. And it was the concept that sold the character anyway: a gnome badger-fighter. The actual name of his order was "The Well-Respected Order of the Badger", the creme-de-la-creme of gnomish warriors.

frank634
02-28-2009, 11:46 AM
I also want to congratulate you on purchasing 4e.

I have found one of the best things to do is get involved with the RPGA Living Forgotten Realms. It is played at many game stores and at the cons. Its a lot of fun.

Windstar
04-26-2009, 12:06 PM
Although I am a little disapointed about the replacement of half-orcs and gnomes with tieflings and dragonborn, I am otherwise extremely pleased with 4.0
Trust me, you'll feel the same once you use "flames of phlegethos" on a group of unsuspecting Kobolds. >:)


Could be wrong, but gnomes and 1/2 orcs are availible.:)

Arch Lich Thoth-Amon
04-26-2009, 12:16 PM
You're correct, Windstar. Gnomes and Half-Orcs are in the PHBII, on pages 10 and 14, respectively. Also, let me say that the PHBII is worth the money.

MrFrost
04-27-2009, 05:09 PM
I'm so...so sorry for your loss...


:D

lol, i completly agree. Though if all you know is 3.5 then it shouldn't be too big of a deal but playing 2,2.5,3,3.5 i had found i am not very fond with the 4e and i like many others i know are going to stick with 3.5 and collect dust.

Dimthar
04-27-2009, 05:10 PM
Hey come on guys...We don't need to argue over the half-orcs creation or how family friendly it was.

For now I say we should celebrate that the gnomes are gone!!!

Albeit only until march but they're finally gone!!!

YAY!:biggrin:

They're back! and with a vengeance. Players Handbook II

:)

Windstar
04-27-2009, 07:53 PM
You're correct, Windstar. Gnomes and Half-Orcs are in the PHBII, on pages 10 and 14, respectively. Also, let me say that the PHBII is worth the money.


Thanks Thoth for the back up, and IMO all the 4e core books so far that I bought have been worth the money, now if I can only get my wife to understand..........

Aaron Young
04-28-2009, 08:39 AM
I have been tring to get my wife to understand. She just calls me a nerd

ronpyatt
04-28-2009, 08:44 AM
Now playing a Half-Orc Druid. It finally feels like 4th is the first time they got it right. Add an illusionist class, and it's all tasty gravy.

Aidan
04-28-2009, 11:43 AM
Illusionist is now a Wizard build detailed in Arcane Power.