# Necro is IN! Planned Products



## Orcus (Jan 8, 2008)

WotC just had a conference call with the publishers yesterday and have posted their OGL and SRD plans on their site today, as most of you know. I wanted to let everyone know that Necromancer Games is IN! in conjunction with Paizo. We will have products for GenCon or shortly thereafter. 

Products include:

*1. Tome of Horrors 4E:* if WotC leaves monsters out of the offial rules, we will put them back in (cant say which ones cause we dont have the rules yet). Plus all the classics from the original Tome that you want in your 4E game will be back.

*2. Advanced Player's Guide:* To be designed in part by industry insider Ari Marmell, if they left classes and races out, we put them back in (Of course, we can't say if bards or druids or barbarians or gnomes or half-orc are or arent in 4th edition, but we know some stuff has been cut, and whatever is missing we will create for you with work by respected designer Ari Marmell.)

*3. Tegel Manor.* A 4E version of the 1E Judges Guild classic.

*4. Winter's Tomb.* A free, downloadable PDF along the lines of Wizard's Amulet, Necro's Ennie-winning introductory adventure, that will help jump start your 4E campaign. 

_Winter's Tomb_ will be available at the first day 4E products can be released. _Tome 4E_ should be available at GenCon with the _Advanced Player's Guide_. _Tegel_ is also targeted for GenCon. Dates could slip pending WotC's delivery of the design kits. 

We have been planning this stuff for months, privately.  

You trusted us to help put the 1E back into 3E, now we are doing the same for 4E!

Viva Necro!


----------



## Stormtalon (Jan 8, 2008)

And now we know what happened to everyone's favorite bloodsucking rodent.


----------



## Kid Charlemagne (Jan 8, 2008)

Great news, Clark!


----------



## Jack99 (Jan 8, 2008)

Orcus said:
			
		

> WotC just had a conference call with the publishers yesterday and have posted their OGL and SRD plans on their site today, as most of you know. I wanted to let everyone know that Necromancer Games is IN! in conjunction with Paizo. We will have products for GenCon or shortly thereafter.
> 
> Products include:
> 
> ...




Argh, for a sec I thought we would have the necromancer in the 4e PHB1 or something...

JK, I am extremely pleased that you are going to be doing 4e material.


----------



## Dragonblade (Jan 8, 2008)

Nice! I plan on buying all the WotC stuff, but I'll probably be picking up this stuff as well!


----------



## mhensley (Jan 8, 2008)

I'll start saving up now.  Yay!


----------



## S'mon (Jan 8, 2008)

This is good.  I might well buy Tegel Manor to convert to C&C and not get the 4e rules, though!


----------



## catsclaw227 (Jan 8, 2008)

As I stated in another thread, excellent news, Clark!  These books are on my buy list for sure.


----------



## tenkar (Jan 8, 2008)

I can see where my money is going this summer


----------



## Rechan (Jan 8, 2008)

This is assuming that they won't stop you from publishing the Gnome, Druid, Barb, Necromancer, etc first by saying it's not up for grabs in the SRD.


----------



## Orcus (Jan 8, 2008)

By the way, working on the Advanced Player's Guide (name may change, I'd love to call it something else) has been hillarious. I literally have no idea what is in my own book since I dont have the rules yet and any work that has been done has been by a freelancer under an NDA. So I said--you know what I want, get going! He has created classes and races but he cant show them to me yet. How funny is that!

But my directive was this--if it is 1E, it has to be there. If there are no monks or bards or barbarians or gnomes or druids or half-orcs, then make them. Our players need to be able to run those kinds of characters. Right away. 

But I know one day WotC will publish official books with that content. So I wanted to keep our book short and usable. I didnt just want to make some hardback to cash in. I wanted a book designed by a design expert--heck, he may even be working on the official versions one day--that people could get right away to fill the play gap for classes that arent in the core 4E rulebooks. 

You will also get some alternatives to rules if there is stuff in 4E that I want to improve. Some notes on alignment as an optional rule. Some variant monsters, such as the succubus as a demon and some of the classic monsters "done right" presented as variants so that you can preserve your game with 1E feel.


----------



## takasi (Jan 8, 2008)

Two Questions for Clark:

1.) Will we see Winter's Tomb on Free RPG Day?  WotC mentioned this as the first day to publish.

2.) Have you considered if WotC's license might not let you do something like an 'Advanced Player's Guide'?


----------



## Orcus (Jan 8, 2008)

Rechan said:
			
		

> This is assuming that they won't stop you from publishing the Gnome, Druid, Barb, Necromancer, etc first by saying it's not up for grabs in the SRD.




If they do, then we can't do the product. But I've got races and classes all written and ready to go--though I havent been able to even look at it  Was it a gamble? Yes. Will it pay off? Dont know till I see the OGL.


----------



## Orcus (Jan 8, 2008)

takasi said:
			
		

> Two Questions for Clark:
> 
> 1.) Will we see Winter's Tomb on Free RPG Day?  WotC mentioned this as the first day to publish.
> 
> 2.) Have you considered if WotC's license might not let you do something like an 'Advanced Player's Guide'?




1. I hope so. I'm still working on lining up a special someone to help me with Winter's Tomb and the follow up adventures for it (you'll know his name from Dungeon).

2. Yes, I took a risk. I may wind up having used certain undead rodent freelancer and not get to do anything with his content. It is, in my view, a gamble worth taking. We'll see what WotC says.


----------



## tenkar (Jan 8, 2008)

hmmm... you could start a thread asking for suggestions as to the name of the book... not that I can think of any at the moment


----------



## Orcus (Jan 8, 2008)

tenkar said:
			
		

> hmmm... you could start a thread asking for suggestions as to the name of the book... not that I can think of any at the moment




Oh I already have a name in mind: probably the same one as you


----------



## Beckett (Jan 8, 2008)

Orcus said:
			
		

> By the way, working on the Advanced Player's Guide (name may change, I'd love to call it something else) has been hillarious. I literally have no idea what is in my own book since I dont have the rules yet and Ari is a freelancer under an NDA. So I said, Ari--you know what I want, get going! He has created classes and races but he cant show them to me yet. How funny is that!




 That is pretty good. You should be able to take a glance at it once your check clears.

I'll be keeping an eye out for this. Although I'm starting fresh with 4E, I like having lots of options for my players, and I've always been pleased with Ari's work.


----------



## jester47 (Jan 8, 2008)

Hey Orcus, how about Entombed Arcana- 
Tributes Unearthed Arcana - indicates that the stuff inside is from an older tradition...


----------



## Sitara (Jan 8, 2008)

Hmm...

1) How exactly didi Ari marmell design the stuff if he does not have the rules yet? (since the rules have yet to be released even to freelancers who pay the $5000)

2)I really think you have jumped the gun on this; not due ot the gamble you took but due to posting your players guide here. I think it would be prudent to wait  abit and read the OGl before announcing anywhere else.

3)I seriously doubt WOTC will alow anyone to fill the gap for barbarian/druid et al. Especially since the Ogl now requires the PHB even for 3rd party products; I think designing new classes might be not as..open as before.

4)Look forward to the free adventure.  I enjoyed the wizards amulet, even though I am not really into krawls at all; perhaps this time it will be a Warlock who will have need of ocmpanions and will be plagued by a haggidy old wizard seeking to steal his 'new' type of magic. 

Regards and best of luck with your company and 4E!


----------



## catsclaw227 (Jan 8, 2008)

Sitara said:
			
		

> 1) How exactly didi Ari marmell design the stuff if he does not have the rules yet? (since the rules have yet to be released even to freelancers who pay the $5000)



I've predicted a month or so ago that Ari has had the rules (via playtesting) for a while.  And I am REALLY stoked about this one.  I have been a fan of his work for a while.


----------



## Stormborn (Jan 8, 2008)

EDIT:  Basically what he said.


----------



## tenkar (Jan 8, 2008)

Sitara said:
			
		

> 3)I seriously doubt WOTC will alow anyone to fill the gap for barbarian/druid et al. Especially since the Ogl now requires the PHB even for 3rd party products; I think designing new classes might be not as..open as before.




I seriously doubt it will be anywhere as restrictive as you think.  Classes and races have been tinkered with in one way or another since the earliest editions of the game.  Major mechanics changes (True20, M&M, etc) are where I expect the OGL will be less flexible.


----------



## Orcus (Jan 8, 2008)

Sitara said:
			
		

> Hmm...
> 
> 1) How exactly didi Ari marmell design the stuff if he does not have the rules yet? (since the rules have yet to be released even to freelancers who pay the $5000)
> 
> ...




1. Select freelancers have had the rules for some months now. I just decided to contact one and say: I know you cant tell me what you are doing, but here is what I want you to do, can you do it? He said "yes."

2. No need to wait. Its my plan, if I cant do it then I cant do it. And it wont be my fault if I cant. I want people who are thinking about 4E and making decisions to know that we will help them fill gaps and we will help bring 1E themes and ideas to 4E. I want them to know that right away. If something ties my hands, so be it. But people need to know that Necro is out there bringing classic gaming and classic gaming options to 4E. 

3. We'll see. You might be right. But I have a funny feeling that WotC knows when the official version comes out, people will use that. I dont think wotc is worried about little ol' me. But I am convinced that they know that I can get a certain message out to our established fans who trust us to deliver content. 

4. You know, I got literally hundreds of emails from people saying "we werent that excited about 3e but we decided to check it out when we downloaded Wizard's Amulet." WotC knows Necro can do that for 4E too. And our plan for Winter's Tomb is to highlight some of the new stuff from 4E. Just like Corian in WA was a sorcerer (highlighting a new class), Winter's Tomb will have similar highlights of some of the strengths of the new rules--terrain as part of encounters, new fun monsters, plus all of that old school Necro goodness!


----------



## Orcus (Jan 8, 2008)

catsclaw227 said:
			
		

> I've predicted a month or so ago that Ari has had the rules (via playtesting) for a while.  And I am REALLY stoked about this one.  I have been a fan of his work for a while.




Lots of freelancers have the rules. Its the publishers that dont.  Not yet, anyway.


----------



## Rechan (Jan 8, 2008)

I am glad that Ari's getting to sink his rodentile fangs into more fleshy dead trees!


----------



## Sitara (Jan 8, 2008)

But there is absolutely no way WOTc will allow anyone to publsh the 'core's' before them. How they stop them is what will beinteresting.


----------



## Cadfan (Jan 8, 2008)

WOTC can't really stop them from releasing a druid or a barbarian.  How could they?  Normally stupid crap like renaming "Barbarian" to "Blarbarian" is not a sufficient way to get around legal restrictions, but this may be the one case where its possible.  A rule that banned classes named "barbarian" would be bypassed by releasing a "berserker" class.  A rule which banned classes that used "rage" mechanics would be so broad that it would create more problems than WOTC would want to face.  They'll probably just permit the release of whatever people want to release.

WOTC can just permit people to write whatever they want, and then just sit back and let most gamer's preference for "official" materials ensure that later releases of similar material will sell well.

That being said, best of luck to your company.  I doubt most of your product line will interest me, as I am not in the market for nostalgia or resentment over cut material.  I do promise to give Winter's Tomb a lookover, though.  A high quality prewritten adventure to help ease myself and my players into 4e would be appreciated.  Please make it fully playable with official materials, rather than with your other books.


----------



## Grazzt (Jan 8, 2008)

tenkar said:
			
		

> hmmm... you could start a thread asking for suggestions as to the name of the book... not that I can think of any at the moment




Ya know....we actually did that for the _Tome of Horrors_. And that's where the name of the book/series came from


----------



## Orcus (Jan 8, 2008)

Sitara said:
			
		

> But there is absolutely no way WOTc will allow anyone to publsh the 'core's' before them. How they stop them is what will beinteresting.




I dont think they care. They know the PHB2 or whatever will sell like crazy whether or not I have given an alternate version/

You have to remember--when 3E came out, Steve Wieck and I published the Creature Collection, a hardback monster manual that came out A MONTH BEFORE THE OFFICIAL MONSTER MANUAL (yes, you read that right; if you werent around back then, a third party publisher put out a hard cover core rule book looking monster book BEFORE WotC published the official MM. hard to believe, but true). And no one cared. In fact, Ryan Dancey (then head of D&D and the father of open gaming) paraded it around teh WotC offices as a testiment to the strength of open gaming. And guess what, everyone still bought the Monster Manual. 

I dont see any reason for them to stop it at all. In fact, I see them as encouraging stuff like this. If they want to do it on DDI (as they are doing the halforc apparently) they will. Will that hurt my book? Maybe. But that isnt the point.


----------



## Drkfathr1 (Jan 8, 2008)

Oh I can't wait for #1 and #2 on your list! Count me in!


----------



## tenkar (Jan 8, 2008)

Sitara said:
			
		

> But there is absolutely no way WOTc will allow anyone to publsh the 'core's' before them. How they stop them is what will beinteresting.




But what is core?  AS far as WoTC is concerned the new "core" is the classes and races that will be in the 4E Players Handbook, DMG and MM.  If it ain't in there it should be free game.  Heck, variant classes of the new "core" will trot out fairly quickly as they have in the past... it is the nature of the game.


----------



## Sitara (Jan 8, 2008)

Thanks for the replies Orcus. I hope you get to publish a 1E type Assassin core class. 

And yes, I believe you about the WA emails. that really was a great adventure. i think one of the main reasons was the way you tied all the pre-generated pc's togather, with some small amountsof fluff thrown in. (i.e. the wizard wanted Corian's power/amulet, etc)


----------



## FATDRAGONGAMES (Jan 8, 2008)

Great news Clark-I can't wait for ToH and the Player's Manual.


----------



## Psion (Jan 8, 2008)

Orcus said:
			
		

> *1. Tome of Horrors 4E:* if WotC leaves monsters out of the offial rules, we will put them back in (cant say which ones cause we dont have the rules yet). Plus all the classics from the original Tome that you want in your 4E game will be back.
> 
> *2. Advanced Player's Guide:* Designed in part by industry insider Ari Marmell, if they left classes and races out, we put them back in (Of course, we can't say if bards or druids or barbarians or gnomes or half-orc are or arent in 4th edition, but we know some stuff has been cut, and whatever is missing we will create for you with work by respected designer Ari Marmell.)




Would you look at that. I may buy 4e after all.


----------



## takasi (Jan 8, 2008)

I think the assumption people are making is that WotC is "holding back" gnomes, half-orcs, monks and other 'classics' just so they can sell them (perhaps with DDI) later on.  

There is also the possibility that WotC dropped these classes because they don't want to confuse new players with old baggage.  With Necromancer games, they can actually appease the old timers and at the same time keep the grognard stuff away from new players.  A win-win!


----------



## Tewligan (Jan 8, 2008)

Sitara said:
			
		

> But there is absolutely no way WOTc will allow anyone to publsh the 'core's' before them. How they stop them is what will beinteresting.



I would guess that, at the VERY most, they would have to change the names of their versions of classic races/classes - of course, words like "barbarian", "druid", and "gnome" were in use well before D&D showed up, so that probably isn't even a problem.

Also, I would guess that Clark knows the ins and outs of how things like this work much better than you and I put together - if he thinks it's worth the gamble, I'm going to trust him and wait for June with bated breath!


----------



## TerraDave (Jan 8, 2008)

Yeah!


----------



## Reaper Steve (Jan 8, 2008)

Orcus said:
			
		

> a third party publisher put out a hard cover core rule book looking monster book BEFORE WotC published the official MM. hard to believe, but true). And no one cared.




Well, I do think they cared and are taking steps to prevent a recurrence. Hence the fact that you can't publish a 4E book until 1 Aug, almost 2 months after the core release.

As far as new races and classes, esp 3rd party takes on the absent ones, I can see both sides.  I wouldn't be surprised if the OGL stated 'no new races or classes' or some derivative of that. Later, that restriction could be removed. That's my guess... as time does on, the OGL will become less and less restrictive. For now, they will keep a tight hold. As the product line matures, they will open up the license to allow for more creative development which will spawn the ideas and developers that will bring about 5E.


----------



## Orcus (Jan 8, 2008)

Reaper Steve said:
			
		

> Well, I do think they cared and are taking steps to prevent a recurrence. Hence the fact that you can't publish a 4E book until 1 Sep, almost 3 months after the core release.
> 
> As far as new races and classes, esp 3rd party takes on the absent ones, I can see both sides.  I wouldn't be surprised if the OGL stated 'no new races or classes' or some derivative of that. Later, that restriction could be removed. That's my guess... as time does on, the OGL will become less and less restrictive. For now, they will keep a tight hold. As the product line matures, they will open up the license to allow for more creative development which will spawn the ideas and developers that will bring about 5E.




We'll see. You might be right. I said this was a gamble. 

Come on 6s!!!!!


----------



## Reaper Steve (Jan 8, 2008)

Orcus said:
			
		

> We'll see. You might be right. I said this was a gamble.
> 
> Come on 6s!!!!!




I'm not sure I have a stance yet, other than I am glad that are taking steps to increase third party quality. Mostly, I'm interested in actually seeing the decision they make and how it plays out. So, I wish you and Necro luck... I'm sure there will be a market for your mentioned products if they are permitted. 

6s? (As in 6-6-08?)


----------



## jester47 (Jan 8, 2008)

Grazzt said:
			
		

> Ya know....we actually did that for the _Tome of Horrors_. And that's where the name of the book/series came from




I thought it was supposed to be the Creature Catalog but WotC said no not that title and THEN you had the suggestions...


----------



## EricNoah (Jan 8, 2008)

I think it would be counterproductive for anyone at WotC to micromanage what classes or races could or couldn't be developed.  Anything that's not in the original core, I would think, would be fair game for 3rd party development.  There will probably be lots of druid and barbarian and gnome and half-orc variants out there.  WotC won't care.  They'll sell the official ones later.


----------



## tenkar (Jan 8, 2008)

Reaper Steve said:
			
		

> I'm not sure I have a stance yet, other than I am glad that are taking steps to increase third party quality. Mostly, I'm interested in actually seeing the decision they make and how it plays out. So, I wish you and Necro luck... I'm sure there will be a market for your mentioned products if they are permitted.
> 
> 6s? (As in 6-6-08?)




Necro upped the bar for third party products years ago.  They and a few others have been publishing consistently quality products for a few years now.

As for WoTC decision and how the OGL will play out... Clark might be a gambler, but the investment he is making is that of someone that is pretty sure the are holding a strong hand of cards... I suspect the gamble has less risk then here some might think.


----------



## Lord Mhoram (Jan 8, 2008)

Glad to see the new Clark.

I always figured some of the very first 3rd part books for 4th ed would be doing the classes/races that Wizards didn't do in the PH. I can't wait to see the books.


----------



## tenkar (Jan 8, 2008)

EricNoah said:
			
		

> I think it would be counterproductive for anyone at WotC to micromanage what classes or races could or couldn't be developed.  Anything that's not in the original core, I would think, would be fair game for 3rd party development.  There will probably be lots of druid and barbarian and gnome and half-orc variants out there.  WotC won't care.  They'll sell the official ones later.




Yep, and since the 3rd party classes will fall under the OGL, some might even be lifted more or less intact by WotC for their yearly updates.


----------



## Spinachcat (Jan 8, 2008)

I am concerned about how playtested such products may be that are published so fast out of the gate.  Remember how the Creature Collection needed erratta? 

New classes / races really need playtesting most of all.


----------



## Grazzt (Jan 8, 2008)

jester47 said:
			
		

> I thought it was supposed to be the Creature Catalog but WotC said no not that title and THEN you had the suggestions...




Not at all. We decided to change the name because it was too close to "Creature Collection" (the book Clark mentioned above). Peeps kept getting that book and the Creature Catalog website mixed up... (like referring to the book as the Creature Catalog for example).

So, in order to avoid that.... here we are, years later....Tome of Horrors.


----------



## Mercule (Jan 8, 2008)

Best of luck, guys.  I know who's at the top of my watch list for 4E, now.

And, I know that I'll be able to get the right "feel" from 4E, even if WotC goes all Feng Shui on me.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Jan 8, 2008)

Orcus said:
			
		

> *1. Tome of Horrors 4E:* if WotC leaves monsters out of the offial rules, we will put them back in (cant say which ones cause we dont have the rules yet). Plus all the classics from the original Tome that you want in your 4E game will be back.
> 
> *2. Advanced Player's Guide:* To be designed in part by industry insider Ari Marmell, if they left classes and races out, we put them back in (Of course, we can't say if bards or druids or barbarians or gnomes or half-orc are or arent in 4th edition, but we know some stuff has been cut, and whatever is missing we will create for you with work by respected designer Ari Marmell.)



Sold.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Jan 8, 2008)

Now, where's the Goodman Games thread like this, dagnabbit?


----------



## Voss (Jan 8, 2008)

Can some change the thread title please?  I realize that people care about this, but I really thought someone caught an announcement of a WotC product with a Necromancer class.


----------



## wykthor (Jan 8, 2008)

Orcus said:
			
		

> *2. Advanced Player's Guide:* To be designed in part by industry insider Ari Marmell, if they left classes and races out, we put them back in (Of course, we can't say if bards or druids or barbarians or gnomes or half-orc are or arent in 4th edition, but we know some stuff has been cut, and whatever is missing we will create for you with work by respected designer Ari Marmell.)!




Okay, I *HAVE* to ask this    . Is there a chance Ari could include a no-wotc-but similar-enough 4E Shadowcaster version?


----------



## edemaitre (Jan 8, 2008)

*Necromancer is in for D&D4e!*

I'm already looking forward to Tome of Horrors and the Advanced Player's Guide! "Fourth Edition rules, First Edition flavor," here we come!


----------



## tenkar (Jan 8, 2008)

Voss said:
			
		

> Can some change the thread title please?  I realize that people care about this, but I really thought someone caught an announcement of a WotC product with a Necromancer class.




And what would you change it to?  Heh.  I can see the confusion for some, but for many Necro is a publisher first... Everquest Class second 

To me at least


----------



## Set (Jan 8, 2008)

I also got my hopes up seeing the word Necromancer, since it's one of my favorite class types.  But hey, the Advanced Players book might in fact have something on that sort of thing!

It's like a niche all it's own, the classes based on having (or placing during combat) multiple minions, such as Necromancers, Summoning-based characters, dudes with Leadership, Rebuke-Clerics with plant/construct/ooze/fire creature/whatever minions, etc.


----------



## ZombieRoboNinja (Jan 8, 2008)

I'd be really surprised if WOTC was upset by the Advanced Player's Guide. It would actually help fill in a gap for them, because the people who absolutely refuse to switch to 4e unless they can recreate their half-orc barbarian would have a stopgap solution until the "official" WOTC material comes out months or years down the line.

In the longer term, if Necro is "putting the 1e in 4e," they'll probably be doing different things with the classes and races anyway. For example, the 4e druid (according to R&C) will be primarily a shapeshifter, while I'm guessing Orcus' will be more of the jack-of-all-trades nature-priest we know and love from 3e. They can even "adjust" the existing PHB classes if they want: more illusion/enchantment/necromancy spells for wizards, say, or "grittier" powers for fighters, or hobbit-style halflings.


----------



## Reaper Steve (Jan 8, 2008)

tenkar said:
			
		

> Necro upped the bar for third party products years ago.  They and a few others have been publishing consistently quality products for a few years now.




My comment was not meant to imply that Necro's past products weren't up to par on quality. I do recognize them as a top third party publisher.

Rather, my comment was in approval of the phased OGL that is designed limit and delay substandard stuff from appearing in the early days of 4E.


----------



## Almacov (Jan 8, 2008)

I'm most definitely interested in this Marmellized 4th edition content.   
Heroes of Horror, Tome of Magic, and Complete Mage were in my top five favourite WotC released books for 3.5.
I look forward to this new Tome of Horrors too. The first one had me at "Adherer".   

(Oh, I must second wykthor's Shadowcaster question. My 3.5e homebrew features them pretty prominently.  )


----------



## JoeGKushner (Jan 8, 2008)

AFAIC, this is the best 4e news I've heard thus far.


----------



## Wyrmshadows (Jan 8, 2008)

Orcus said:
			
		

> We'll see. You might be right. I said this was a gamble.
> 
> Come on 6s!!!!!




Good luck man.   

With the coming of 4e, due to what I have been hearing until the recent Mearls' interview regarding non-combat related RPing, I have much more fallen into line with the 4e doubters. I am looking forward to folks like you, Paizo, Green Ronin, Mongoose, Paradigm and others producing innovative products for 4e that will cater to a variety of gaming styles.

I'm not exactly a 1e style DM (well maybe if storytelling in the old DL1-14 mode is a 1e DM) but I share more stylistically with 1e and 2e than I do with a lot of 3e and with most of what I have heard about 4e in regards to mechanics if not fluff.

Can't wait to see what you come up with.



Wyrmshadows


----------



## Voss (Jan 8, 2008)

tenkar said:
			
		

> And what would you change it to?  Heh.  I can see the confusion for some, but for many Necro is a publisher first... Everquest Class second
> 
> To me at least




Maybe Necromancer Publishing's (Games? Whatever the company title is) Planned Products.  Or Planned products for Necromancer <games/publishing/?> It doesn't really matter as long as it isn't typed as a 4e thread with a title that simply says Necro is in! Planned Products.  

What does everquest have to do with anything, btw?  In D&D alone a 'necromancer' has been a concept since at least 2nd edition.  A strong one, with a lot of support.


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone (Jan 8, 2008)

edemaitre said:
			
		

> I'm already looking forward to Tome of Horrors and the Advanced Player's Guide! "Fourth Edition rules, First Edition flavor," here we come!




Can I get an "Amen"?


----------



## Klaus (Jan 8, 2008)

Orcus said:
			
		

> WotC just had a conference call with the publishers yesterday and have posted their OGL and SRD plans on their site today, as most of you know. I wanted to let everyone know that Necromancer Games is IN! in conjunction with Paizo. We will have products for GenCon or shortly thereafter.
> 
> Products include:
> 
> ...



 Clark,


I want IN, dammit!


----------



## Brown Jenkin (Jan 8, 2008)

Glad to see you doing the Advanced Player's Guide (hopefully) and it may be enough to consider going to 4E (from probably not). Any consideration on an Alternate Players Guide as well that would bring 1e flavor back to the 4e PHB with regards to the classes/races offered there. I would like 1e elves, fighters, palidans, etc. as well.


----------



## der_kluge (Jan 9, 2008)

Orcus - can you give us some more info on Tegel Manor?

Level range?

book size?

Is Tegel Manor a Wilderlands product, or is it setting neutral?


----------



## Merlin the Tuna (Jan 9, 2008)

Orcus, you've been absolutely great here ever since the 4e announcement.  I'm too much of a whippersnapper to be clamoring for 1e flavor, but the way you've handled yourself and the admiration you've gotten from the community means that I'll definitely be looking over the Advanced Player's Guide, and Winter's Tomb might be the top of my 4e to-do list.  You're a good salesman -- maybe I'll finally get around to buying a 3rd party product this edition.


----------



## Mighty Veil (Jan 9, 2008)

Tewligan said:
			
		

> I would guess that, at the VERY most, they would have to change the names of their versions of classic races/classes - of course, words like "barbarian", "druid", and "gnome" were in use well before D&D showed up,




I was thinking the same thing. Just don't call them some expect 3rd party name, like berserker for barbarian. Be clever instead!

Saxon, Ovate, Shaolin. Nome (could probably call it "classic gnome" too since 4e gnomes are getting revamped), half-ork. And you could throw in other 1e fav's like CAVALIER, and Assassin, and rogue-acrobat.


----------



## Raven Crowking (Jan 9, 2008)

Cadfan said:
			
		

> WOTC can't really stop them from releasing a druid or a barbarian.  How could they?  Normally stupid crap like renaming "Barbarian" to "Blarbarian" is not a sufficient way to get around legal restrictions, but this may be the one case where its possible.  A rule that banned classes named "barbarian" would be bypassed by releasing a "berserker" class.  A rule which banned classes that used "rage" mechanics would be so broad that it would create more problems than WOTC would want to face.  They'll probably just permit the release of whatever people want to release.
> 
> WOTC can just permit people to write whatever they want, and then just sit back and let most gamer's preference for "official" materials ensure that later releases of similar material will sell well.




Please note, however, that there is apparently a "community standards" clause in the upcoming "d20-tiered-STL-called-OGL" that, apparently, would allow WotC to pull the plug on anything they wanted to. There very well may not be a sufficient way to get around legal restrictions in this case.

That said, I do wish Necromancer the best of luck.  This is the first bit of news that makes me even remotely interested in 4e.    


RC


----------



## bmcdaniel (Jan 9, 2008)

Spinachcat said:
			
		

> I am concerned about how playtested such products may be that are published so fast out of the gate.  Remember how the Creature Collection needed erratta?
> 
> New classes / races really need playtesting most of all.




QFT. Especially because once a DM allows a class/race into the game, its awfully hard to remove it later when it becomes clear its unbalanced. An unbalanced monster, magic item or spell is more easily disposed of.


----------



## Raven Crowking (Jan 9, 2008)

takasi said:
			
		

> I think the assumption people are making is that WotC is "holding back" gnomes, half-orcs, monks and other 'classics' just so they can sell them (perhaps with DDI) later on.




Considering the announcement re: half-orcs appearing on Insider, I would consider that a pretty safe bet.  Wanna bet that a pay model is operation when the half-orc appears?

RC


----------



## WhatGravitas (Jan 9, 2008)

Orcus said:
			
		

> 1. Select freelancers have had the rules for some months now. I just decided to contact one and say: I know you cant tell me what you are doing, but here is what I want you to do, can you do it? He said "yes."



That's still funny! 

And soooo good! Must buy!

Cheers, LT.


----------



## The Little Raven (Jan 9, 2008)

Reaper Steve said:
			
		

> Well, I do think they cared and are taking steps to prevent a recurrence. Hence the fact that you can't publish a 4E book until 1 Sep, almost 3 months after the core release.




August, not September.


----------



## Glyfair (Jan 9, 2008)

Raven Crowking said:
			
		

> Please note, however, that there is apparently a "community standards" clause in the upcoming "d20-tiered-STL-called-OGL" that, apparently, would allow WotC to pull the plug on anything they wanted to. There very well may not be a sufficient way to get around legal restrictions in this case.
> 
> That said, I do wish Necromancer the best of luck.  This is the first bit of news that makes me even remotely interested in 4e.



Clark hasn't exactly kept his plans for 4E secret.  He's been saying for months that he wants to make everything "missing from the core" available as soon as he can (largely in reference to _Tome of Horrors_.  WotC surely knows this and still invited him to the conference call.

While there might be some niggling details that won't fly, I doubt he will have major problems releasing the sort of products he wants to release.


----------



## Charwoman Gene (Jan 9, 2008)

I'm sure Orcus knows he is creating a stopgap book.  It will not sell well after 2009.

I've never bought a Necromancer (or non magazine Paizo) Product.  I am buying the Player's Guide and the ToH.

I want Half-Orc Barbarians, Gnome Druids and Half-eLF Bards attacking Frost Giants and Erinyes!   Seriously, having a "temp replacement" book is brilliant.


----------



## Henry (Jan 9, 2008)

Reaper Steve said:
			
		

> 6s? (As in 6-6-08?)




Has it really been too long since people rolled 3d6 for ability scores? 

Clark, you you just gave me a 4e shiver.  Thanks for getting me more jazzed than I have been in a while.


----------



## Almacov (Jan 9, 2008)

Charwoman Gene said:
			
		

> I'm sure Orcus knows he is creating a stopgap book.  It will not sell well after 2009.




I know *I'd* still pick it up after '09. 
I doubt that Wizards will have covered all of the same ground by then, and even the ground that is covered twice will be covered _differently_ each time.

In any case, sounds like pretty delicious stuff. 
And yes, Erinyes and Frost Giants are must-haves.


----------



## Reaper Steve (Jan 9, 2008)

Mourn said:
			
		

> August, not September.



Corrected, thanks!


----------



## Magus Coeruleus (Jan 9, 2008)

WotC won't have issues with this.  Remember that in addition to driving core book sales, 3rd party OGL products provide free testing grounds for WotC.  They will be well within their rights to look at the response to Necro's take on these classes and yoink and modify what they like for their later products.  OGL = partly free R&D.


----------



## Reaper Steve (Jan 9, 2008)

I've been thinking more about whether or not the OGL/SRD will limit new races, classes, monsters, etc., specifically the revival of those 'left out' of 4E.

I'm coming to the opinion that WotC has nothing to lose and everything to gain by allowing them to be published. Those that only want 'official' products will ignore the 3rd party stuff. While WotC won't bring everything back into 4E, I'm sure that when they get around to publishing the official version of something, it will hold the most traction.
Likewise, the 3rd party stuff may be the ticket some player's need to get into 4E: _"Dangit, I'm not playing 4E unless I can be a gnome bard/druid in love with an erinyes with a vendetta against frost giants!"_ OK, here's some Necro books... welcome to the game.

So, I guess i don't really see a valid reason for placing that type of limit on the third parties. We'll know soon enough!


----------



## Waylander the Slayer (Jan 9, 2008)

Are you sure you can publish these books you are planning before seeing the new license? (unless you have seen it already). The announcement seems a bit premature?


----------



## Alzrius (Jan 9, 2008)

In all honesty, this is the single best piece of news I've heard regarding 4E, bar none.

Clark, _The Crucible of Freya_ was the first 3E adventure I used, and I look forward to history repeating itself with _Winter's Tomb_. Kudos to you and everyone at Necromancer!


----------



## moriarty777 (Jan 9, 2008)

At first I had little interest in 4th Edition save for a bit of curiosity.  However, I think that with a proposed Tome of Horrors and some sort of advanced player's guide are the two things that will make the purchase of the 4th Edition core set a viable option.

Thanks and good luck!

M


----------



## Orcus (Jan 9, 2008)

Klaus said:
			
		

> Clark,
> 
> 
> I want IN, dammit!




Claudio, email me. I have an evil little plan that has working with you written all over it...

Clark


----------



## Orcus (Jan 9, 2008)

Almacov said:
			
		

> I know *I'd* still pick it up after '09.
> I doubt that Wizards will have covered all of the same ground by then, and even the ground that is covered twice will be covered _differently_ each time.
> 
> In any case, sounds like pretty delicious stuff.
> And yes, Erinyes and Frost Giants are must-haves.




Yeah, you will get that from us. And lets not forget *demonic* succubii.


----------



## Agamon (Jan 9, 2008)

Judging by the response to this thread, Clark, I think WotC should give you your publisher kit for free.


----------



## Orcus (Jan 9, 2008)

Charwoman Gene said:
			
		

> I'm sure Orcus knows he is creating a stopgap book.  It will not sell well after 2009.
> 
> I've never bought a Necromancer (or non magazine Paizo) Product.  I am buying the Player's Guide and the ToH.
> 
> I want Half-Orc Barbarians, Gnome Druids and Half-eLF Bards attacking Frost Giants and Erinyes!   Seriously, having a "temp replacement" book is brilliant.




CG, thanks for that. 

You know, one of the joys of running Necro is that it isnt my main job. It is a side business for me. As a result, I dont have to always chase the money. I have the luxury of being true to what Bill and I decided was our company vision--we wanted to make the stuff that we want as gamers, we wanted to be the company that we wished existed when we were in our teens and twenties buying game stuff every week. And we can do that.

The APG is a great example. As a business, I could fluff out 129 pages which is the min for a hardback and jack up the price and make more money. But that isnt what I would want as a gamer, so that is not how I am going to do it. For that missing content that I think will likely come officially from WotC in a year, I want that in a more temporary format like a softback as a gamer. It is more portable with the core books. And then later I can keep it and use it as optional stuff. Its easy for me as a real world gamer to want and to use. 

Our goal is always "what would I want as a gamer." Then, the cool thing about being a publisher, I get to make it for myself and have it printed  And I get a free copy. Its so rad.


----------



## Orcus (Jan 9, 2008)

Agamon said:
			
		

> Judging by the response to this thread, Clark, I think WotC should give you your publisher kit for free.




They understand. They know the value of the 3E publishers. I've had long conversations with Scott Rouse about this exact point. 

I think Wizards is an awesome company and the people there are cool. But on the internet, the big guy always gets a bit of a Microsoft label (and, right or wrong, WotC inherited some of the baggage and bad will of TSR policies). WotC has seen and they know that as the "big guy" they wont have the street cred of some of the third party guys, particularly Necro and Paizo and GR and Goodman (by the way, I am geeked that Joe is going 4E, go Joe!). Its just the price of being the big guy on the block. They know that people who would ordinarily not pick up 4E will consider it because a publisher they trust is going to support it. As I've said before, I cant tell you how many people have emailed me to tell me that Wizard's Amulet was their first 3E game and until they stumbled on it and found it for free they had no plans on going 3E. 

Bottom line: they know that companies like Necro can convince people who might not look at 4E to take a peek. 

Heck, just read this thread. The proof is in the pudding as they say. Clearly WotC made the right choice to work with the publishers. And I commend them for understanding that. Because that says the understand the market. That means good things for D&D long term, in my view. So big props to WotC from me.


----------



## Father of Dragons (Jan 9, 2008)

Hm, if it's going to be a smallish book, I wonder if it would make sense to print it in 6"x9" format like SWEE or the Green Ronin player's guides?

Have everything that is in 1E but not 4E?  The 1E Illusionist hasn't really had a strict equivalent since then , really -- now how would you go about *that* in 4E I wonder?


----------



## Neil Bishop (Jan 9, 2008)

Psion said:
			
		

> Would you look at that. I may buy 4e after all.




Yeah, that's the way I'm now feeling. I had no interest in 4E but I really like Necro's stuff... and I'll probably want to keep buying it so I will, most likely, end up with 4E.


----------



## Kunimatyu (Jan 9, 2008)

Awesome news, Clark! I'll be buying both -- even though I LIKE the directions WotC is taking the game.


----------



## Orcus (Jan 9, 2008)

Kunimatyu said:
			
		

> Awesome news, Clark! I'll be buying both -- even though I LIKE the directions WotC is taking the game.




I like some of the stuff they are doing, too. And I trust the people there to do some good new stuff. But I know there are some changes (succubii) and omissions (classes and races and frost giants) and other things and I just want to fill the gaps and provide some alternate ways to do things so people can convert stuff and make transition to 4E easier.


----------



## Sitara (Jan 9, 2008)

i think you ought to design the PG with a long term view in mind, not just as a stop-gap. If you design it with that intent (slick and well thought out, in hardcover, maybe with future support in splats) then sales will continue after 'official' version are released. Some people may prefer your version over WOTC's. (for intance, the Borderer from mongoose's conan d20 and the Woodsman from Wheel of Time d20 are preferred by many over the dnd Ranger)

And what, may I ask is your full time job?


----------



## Raven Crowking (Jan 9, 2008)

Orcus said:
			
		

> Yeah, you will get that from us. And lets not forget *demonic* succubii.




Woot!


----------



## FATDRAGONGAMES (Jan 9, 2008)

Orcus said:
			
		

> They know that people who would ordinarily not pick up 4E will consider it because a publisher they trust is going to support it. As I've said before, I cant tell you how many people have emailed me to tell me that Wizard's Amulet was their first 3E game and until they stumbled on it and found it for free they had no plans on going 3E.




Wizard's Amulet is what got us to convert from our long running AD&D game, and from the rumblings players in my one group are starting to make it looks like this announcement is what tipped the scales for our group to go to 4E.


----------



## The_Baldman (Jan 9, 2008)

Orcus said:
			
		

> 1. Select freelancers have had the rules for some months now. I just decided to contact one and say: I know you cant tell me what you are doing, but here is what I want you to do, can you do it? He said "yes."




and I'm just waiting to see what happens when said freelancers non-compete part of his NDA signed for playtesting kicks in. That should be interesting. 

You guys don't think Wotc is actually going to give material to people earlier then publishers and not protect themselves from that person using it against them ?

Trust me I have about a half dozen ideas already for products for 4E that if I could do anything about I would in two seconds.


----------



## glass (Jan 9, 2008)

Rechan said:
			
		

> I am glad that Ari's getting to sink his rodentile fangs into more fleshy dead trees!



So am I. I will definitely be buying this and the Tome, unless I spend all my money just _getting _to GenCon. 


glass.


----------



## der_kluge (Jan 9, 2008)

Clark - what can you tell us about Tegel Manor?

Level range?  Page count?

Is it a Wilderlands' product?


----------



## thundershot (Jan 9, 2008)

Clark, just a thought...

4E halflings are moving even farther away from the Hobbit design. What's the chance that you can provide us with Hobbits (or whatever name you use)?

Also, please try to come up with niches for the races like 4E is doing and class roles. That way it meshes better and will have a greater likelyhood that it'll get used.

Can't Wait!
Chris


----------



## Elodan (Jan 9, 2008)

Clark,

Awesome news.  Like a lot of others here my interest in 4E has gone from "meh" to "most likely will buy."



			
				wavester said:
			
		

> and I'm just waiting to see what happens when said freelancers non-compete part of his NDA signed for playtesting kicks in. That should be interesting.
> 
> You guys don't think Wotc is actually going to give material to people earlier then publishers and not protect themselves from that person using it against them ?
> 
> Trust me I have about a half dozen ideas already for products for 4E that if I could do anything about I would in two seconds.




Off topic a bit but I'm curious as to why you would think a playtest NDA have a non-compete clause?


----------



## The_Baldman (Jan 9, 2008)

Elodan said:
			
		

> Off topic a bit but I'm curious as to why you would think a playtest NDA have a non-compete clause?





because I'm not stupid nor is Wotc (just don't ask my wife that question)

The playtest lid is going to be off shortly regardless because at DDXP we will have a ton of 4th edition preview material. That material is only run by playtesters, LFR campaign staff members (also testers), or Wotc staff (which I guess either wrote it or tested it).

If there is a freelancer who has the materials to work on future Wotc products and is also using it to gain an advantage for himself or a 3rd party over somebody else I fully expect bad things to happen to that person and perhaps that company as well.  I love the OGL and what it enables 3rd parties to do but they should all be on an even and open playing field. In this case it seems that's not happening.


----------



## Horacio (Jan 9, 2008)

I guess that if Clark has said that he has spoken witha freelancer and that everything is ok, then everything is ok.

Speacially because Clark IS a lawyer


----------



## The_Baldman (Jan 9, 2008)

Horacio said:
			
		

> I guess that if Clark has said that he has spoken witha freelancer and that everything is ok, then everything is ok.
> 
> Speacially because Clark IS a lawyer





Clark may have spoken with him but I doubt he's seen his NDA nor have I seen his NDA myself. Just saying I doubt that what is happening is cool. Wotc may or may not care that's not my call to make. Just pointing out that what is happening could be legally a problem and I like Necro Games and would hate for something bad to happen to any 3rd party company over something that could have been prevented.

Personally I don't think it's cool or remotely fair myself (though I'm not exactly going to loose sleep over it either). 3rd party publishers should stand or fail on their talent on a level playing field. I guarantee if people found out Paizo has been testing the materials for months now (not saying they have in any fashion - but in the 3rd party company fold they are definetly extremely close to Wotc personal) they would throw a fit about how unfair that would be and how could anybody compete with them at launch. Same thing is happening here. Necromancer Games could put out a product that has twice the work time on it by somebody with twice the experience with 4th edition then any other company at a cost of nothing to themselves (other then the cost to initial use the materials at launch).


----------



## Horacio (Jan 9, 2008)

Honnestly, and please take no offense, as no offense is intended. 

Clark is a lawyer, and a succesful publisher. I guess he cares about his Necro Games even more than you or me (I'm a big fan of them too). So I think that he has already asked himself all those questions, and that if he had decided to go ahead it's because he believes that legally it's o.k., and then I guess that he is right (or at least righter than me or you, suppossing you are not a lawyer and/or publisher).

About if it's fair or not... If it's legal to hire freelancers, any company can do it, so the playing field is levelled, isn't it ?


----------



## The_Baldman (Jan 9, 2008)

Horacio said:
			
		

> Honnestly, and please take no offense, as no offense is intended.
> 
> Clark is a lawyer, and a succesful publisher. I guess he cares about his Necro Games even more than you or me (I'm a big fan of them too). So I think that he has already asked himself all those questions, and that if he had decided to go ahead it's because he believes that legally it's o.k., and then I guess that he is right (or at least righter than me or you, suppossing you are not a lawyer and/or publisher).
> 
> About if it's fair or not... If it's legal to hire freelancers, any company can do it, so the playing field is levelled, isn't it ?





No offense taken my friend. It's a game and takes a lot more then that to offend me (for example making me watch the 1st D&D Movie again would fall into that category).

He may very well have asked himself those things or maybe not. I tend not to assume if I can. He may be totally unaware of that clause in the NDA as well. He may be totally aware and totally good and I'm just worrying about nothing. Would rather point it out then watch something bad happen.


----------



## Orcus (Jan 9, 2008)

wavester said:
			
		

> If there is a freelancer who has the materials to work on future Wotc products and is also using it to gain an advantage for himself or a 3rd party over somebody else I fully expect bad things to happen to that person and perhaps that company as well.  I love the OGL and what it enables 3rd parties to do but they should all be on an even and open playing field. In this case it seems that's not happening.




I dont want this great thread to descend into a legal argument. Who knows what will happen. I would never try to upset WotC on purpose and if I ever did anything to upset them I would absolutely 100% make it right. I have always been a good partner with them and, as a result, I have been trusted in the past with some content such as permission to do the original Tome of Horrors. That said, I dont see a non-compete applying to a process that WotC themselves is creating, releasing and supporting--namely, OGL products. OGL products simply are not competing with WotC. We are all part of the same WotC marketing and promotion web. That is why third party publishing exists--because it helps WotC, not because it hurts WotC. And please know that use of freelancers is very common. Heck, lots of Necro books have been done that way. We dont have massive staffs of in house writers. And on top of that all the freelancers I deal with, and this one in particular, have the utmost professionalism. I would never ask them to see protected content and they would never provide it.


----------



## TarionzCousin (Jan 10, 2008)

Orclarkcus, I love your attitude and your willingness to gamble your money on these sorts of things. I salute you.   

P.S. _Eldritch Sorcery_ is fantastic!


----------



## The_Baldman (Jan 10, 2008)

Orcus said:
			
		

> I dont want this great thread to descend into a legal argument. Who knows what will happen. I would never try to upset WotC on purpose and if I ever did anything to upset them I would absolutely 100% make it right. I have always been a good partner with them and, as a result, I have been trusted in the past with some content such as permission to do the original Tome of Horrors. That said, I dont see a non-compete applying to a process that WotC themselves is creating, releasing and supporting--namely, OGL products. OGL products simply are not competing with WotC. We are all part of the same WotC marketing and promotion web. That is why third party publishing exists--because it helps WotC, not because it hurts WotC. And please know that use of freelancers is very common. Heck, lots of Necro books have been done that way. We dont have massive staffs of in house writers. And on top of that all the freelancers I deal with, and this one in particular, have the utmost professionalism. I would never ask them to see protected content and they would never provide it.





I am all for keeping this a non-legal arguement (because I'm not a lawyer nor do I even want to pretend to be one). 

Wotc has created a process for the new OGL for 4th edition. We all saw it earlier this week and I personally think it's a great idea to boost the initial quality of 4th edition d20 party product and hopefully create a more robust market. I believe the D20 market was severely hurt with the glut of crappy products out of the gate and people stopped being willing to dig through them to find the golden nugget. Most stores stopped stocking them because more then half rotted on the shelf or discount bin. 

I know freelancers are used and heck I've been one myself on more then one occassion. I just see using a freelancer who happens to be a 4th edition playtester to work on a project before the OGL is even out or paperwork on the new deal signed is a bit crossing the line. That's my line though. The fact the NDA contains a non-compete and a date furthur stregthens my belief that it's in there for exactly this kind of situation.


----------



## Orcus (Jan 10, 2008)

Kunimatyu said:
			
		

> Awesome news, Clark! I'll be buying both -- even though I LIKE the directions WotC is taking the game.




You've hit on a good point--you dont have to dislike what WotC is doing to find these products appealing. The APG and Tome 4E will provide you alternatives once the official stuff comes out.


----------



## Reynard (Jan 10, 2008)

Orcus said:
			
		

> You've hit on a good point--you dont have to dislike what WotC is doing to find these products appealing. The APG and Tome 4E will provide you alternatives once the official stuff comes out.




I have a question: What happens if the terms of the OGL prohibit your intent with the APG?  While it seems certain that WotC will think adventures and monster books and settings are great for 4E, they might not think so much of alternate PHBs (and PHB addendum's that contradict the intended design flavor and goals of 4E, anyway).  The only chane, at all, that I will purchase 4E is if Necro or another 3rd party manages to get the D&D back in D&D.  if WotC decides that is against their best interests and includes provisions to, say, not allow publishers to create "new" missing stuff until it appears in a WotC book and gets added to the SRD, will Necro still jump on board?

(Note: I realize the new OGL will be under NDA -- a fact that concerns me to no end, BTW -- but I assume you cna answer the above questions witout breaking said NDA.)


----------



## drothgery (Jan 11, 2008)

wavester said:
			
		

> I know freelancers are used and heck I've been one myself on more then one occassion. I just see using a freelancer who happens to be a 4th edition playtester to work on a project before the OGL is even out or paperwork on the new deal signed is a bit crossing the line. That's my line though. The fact the NDA contains a non-compete and a date furthur stregthens my belief that it's in there for exactly this kind of situation.




Err... I suspect Ari has pre-release copies of the 4e rules because he's also a WotC freelancer (I've got a few WotC books at home with Ari's name on the cover), and working on WotC 4e products right now, not because he's a playtester. And as such the NDA he's signed is probably quite different than the one a playtester would sign.


----------



## Orcus (Jan 15, 2008)

I'll worry about the legal stuff, guys. Dont worry. It will either work or it wont. If it works, you all win. If it doesnt, then its my problem. 

I am really thrilled to hear some people who were wondering about what they would do with 4E are now thinking of getting involved or seeing our announcement as good news for their involvement with 4E. WotC was right -- people really do trust the third party publishers that they like. You guys know we can deliver what we say we will, and that thing we deliver is gaming the way you like it. 

I'm excited about being able to bring these important things to the most current version of the game (boy I sure hope the OGL lets us).

Clark


----------



## Alaric_Prympax (Jan 16, 2008)

Very little of what I've seen of 4e has excited me.  But from what I hear here form Orcus has peaked my interest somewhat.

In Orcus we trust and I'll leave it at that.


----------



## Klaus (Jan 17, 2008)

Orcus said:
			
		

> Claudio, email me. I have an evil little plan that has working with you written all over it...
> 
> Clark



 Sure, NOW I see this post.

E-mail sent, Clark!


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Jan 18, 2008)

Clark, I know that you guys are unlikely to do a full specialist wizard class for every 3E specialty, but if you have to pick just one, pick illusionists. 

You guys are my only hope currently of moving my gnome illusionist/bard/gnome paragon over into 4E in 2008, probably as a gnome illusionist with whatever that bard feat tree thing is called.


----------



## Mouseferatu (Jan 18, 2008)

Whiz, I can't make any promises, and I can't talk about what my plans are. (Even to Clark, as of yet, much less you.)

But I'll say this...

I like illusionists.


----------



## catsclaw227 (Jan 18, 2008)

Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> Whiz, I can't make any promises, and I can't talk about what my plans are. (Even to Clark, as of yet, much less you.)
> 
> But I'll say this...
> 
> I like illusionists.



<drool />


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Jan 18, 2008)

*happy gnome dance*


----------



## Grazzt (Jan 18, 2008)

Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> But I'll say this...
> 
> I like illusionists.




Have to. The Illusionist was a 1e staple.


----------



## Henry (Jan 20, 2008)

Wavester just put this really odd thought in my head about a bunch of publishers who have to sign an NDA with a non-compete clause in it in order to see the new OGL, the document that allows them to produce competitive material... and my head just exploded from the circular logic. 

But then, Scott and the other guys and gals at WotC aren't insane, so I doubt it's worth worrying about for anyone but Clark and Ari. 

Here's to hoping that a lot of other 3rd party people follow in Necro's footsteps.


----------



## Mouseferatu (Jan 20, 2008)

Henry said:
			
		

> But then, Scott and the other guys and gals at WotC aren't insane, so I doubt it's worth worrying about for anyone but Clark and Ari.




Either that, or Clark and Ari are _also_ insane, and thus can't smell the forest for the fish.

Or something.


----------



## Tewligan (Jan 22, 2008)

I hope Ari also likes necromancers. Plus, really, a book of character classes put out by Necromancer Games really should contain their namesake!


----------



## goodmangames (Jan 27, 2008)

*New Dungeon Crawl Classics Modules Now In Stores*

Dungeon Crawl Classics fans have two new adventures hitting stores this week! Look for these at your local game store:

DCC #52: CHRONICLE OF THE FIEND
GMG5051, 112 pages, $21.99
This special tournament module was used for the Fourth Annual Dungeon Crawl Classics Open Tournament at Gen Con Indy 2007. It includes the official tournament scoring system, pregenerated characters, and illustrated player handouts. Four apprentices of a venerable hedge mage return from running errands to discover that their master’s tower has been burned to the ground! Arming themselves with the meager equipment undamaged in the fire, they set out to rescue him. Thus begins a series of adventures that stretches many years, as the young servants mature into mighty heroes and finally confront their master’s killer. This adventure module was originally played as a three round tournament with level 0 characters in round one, level 8 characters in round two, and level 10 characters in round three. In home play, the three adventures can be spread over an ongoing campaign.
More info at http://www.goodman-games.com/5051preview.php

DCC #30: VAULT OF THE DRAGON KINGS, TOURNAMENT EDITION
GMG5101, 288 pages, boxed set, $79.99
Vault of the Dragon Kings is the official tournament module of the Second Annual Dungeon Crawl Classics Open Tournament at Gen Con Indy 2005. This limited-edition tournament version presents everything needed to play a tournament in your own home! Included within you will find the 128-page adventure, six heroic miniatures representing the pregenerated characters, six monstrous miniatures representing the denizens of the Vault, four player packs, three official DM scoring packs, and a new sequel adventure that allows you to connect the Vault of the Dragon Kings to an ongoing campaign.
More info at http://www.goodman-games.com/5101preview.php


----------



## JoeGKushner (Jan 27, 2008)

?

I think this deserves it's own thread eh?



			
				goodmangames said:
			
		

> Dungeon Crawl Classics fans have two new adventures hitting stores this week! Look for these at your local game store:
> 
> DCC #52: CHRONICLE OF THE FIEND
> GMG5051, 112 pages, $21.99
> ...


----------



## DaveMage (Jan 27, 2008)

JoeGKushner said:
			
		

> ?
> 
> I think this deserves it's own thread eh?





UNLESS....

Goodman and Necromancer are merging!

The new company will be called "The Good Necromancers!"

We'll have tea, crumpets, and exploding devils.


----------



## goodmangames (Jan 27, 2008)

Uh, whoops... I think I clicked the "reply" button instead of "new post." My apologies... any moderators out there, feel free to delete that post!

Thanks,
Joseph


----------

