# Tidbits from PHB Viewing



## thalmin

We got a chance to view the PHB, DMG, and MM tonight. While we had the books at the store for 2 1/2 hours, I only got to spend a few minutes with them. Here are a few notes (posted on this thread.) 

Nearly every class has 4 At-Wills available to chose from at 1st level, Wizard has 5. Same goes for Encounters. Fighter, Paladin and Rogue have 3 Dailys, everyone else has 4. More become available at higher levels.


----------



## thalmin

*Dragonborn*

The Dragonborn breath type is chosen at character creation.

Also, Dragonborn Females do have boobs, at least in the picture.


----------



## keterys

Fewer power choices at low level than I'd hoped. Ah well, time will solve that.


----------



## thalmin

*Multiclassing*

Multi-Classing requires a related Stat of 13+.
Each class has an Initiate Feat associated with it. Get to pick 1 Skill from class, also get 1 specified power.
There are also 3 Power Swap Feats starting at 4th level. Swap any (Encounter Attack, Utility, Daily) Power you have for one of equal or lower level from your chosen Multi-Class. The 3 feats are of different levels, one for each power type (Encounter, Utility, Daily.)


----------



## Rechan

thalmin said:
			
		

> Multi-Classing requires a related Stat of 13+.
> Each class has an Initiate Feat associated with it. Get to pick 1 Skill from class, also get 1 specified power.
> There are also 3 Power Swap Feats starting at 4th level. Swap any (Encounter Attack, Utility, Daily) Power you have for one of equal or lower level from your chosen Multi-Class. The 3 feats are of different levels, one for each power type (Encounter, Utility, Daily.)



Is the Multi-classing different with regards to Paragon Paths? Because we were told you can opt to Multi-class instead of a Paragon path.


----------



## thalmin

Rechan said:
			
		

> Is the Multi-classing different with regards to Paragon Paths? Because we were told you can opt to Multi-class instead of a Paragon path.



I didn't get a chance to check that out.


----------



## thalmin

*2-Weapon Fighting*

2-weapon fighting is a feat, but just gives a damage bonus, not an extra attack. The ranger can take an at-will that gives him an extra attack. I didn't see any others, but could easily have missed them.


----------



## thalmin

*Additional powers after 1st level*

More of each type of power become available at progressive levels. Some levels you gain additional Encounter, Utility, or Daily powers, otherwise you swap out for a new power. Some classes (spellcasters) get more to choose from. Numbers you can choose is the same for each class, Race can add to this.
The chart goes something like:
Level 1 (2 At-Will, 1 Encounter, 1 Daily, 0 Utility)
Level 2 (2/1/1/1)
3 (2/2/1/1)
5 (2/2/2/1)
6 (2/2/2/2)
7 (2/3/2/2)
and so on.


----------



## pukunui

Thalmin: I don't know if we already know any of this stuff or not, but were you able to:

*a)* determine what happened to Trapfinding (is it still a feat or is it a trained use of the Thievery skill or something else entirely?) and
*b)* determine whether Tumbling is something that only a rogue can do (and then only once per encounter) or is it a trained use of Acrobatics and the rogue just happens to have an encounter power with the same name?

EDIT: With this "swapping powers out" thing ... do you _have_ to swap out a power or can you choose to keep the ones you've got? Just curious. It seems like character rebuilding is not only part of core now but a required part ...

Thanks.


----------



## Bestopheles

*Posted it on the other thread too, but what the heck< I may as well post here:*



Shifters are actually cool. Once the hit bloodied, they get an ability that kicks in and last the last of the encounter that adds +2 spd and I believe + dmg (for shifter: razorclaw). The other shifter had another + ability that kicked in at bloodied and lasted the whole time.

Rogues are AMAZING. Like seriously, damn near Op. At 3rd level they get a utility power that lets them re-roll any bluff check (Trigger: when player rolls bluff, and doesn't like the look of the roll.) They also have a nice garrotte ability that does 7w and can be held for a bit...fun thing about holding it is that attacks on the rogue have a possibility of hitting the person you're choking). They get auto-escpape grapple abilities, and lots of things playing off Combat advantage (including one that we figured could add 7W dmg +10d8 +dex mod). Very sick.

Starpact warlocks can throw you into the stars and bring you back bent...and infernal pact locks can banish someone to hell for a time (keeping them there for up to 3 rounds with a minor action).

If you take multiclassing paragon path option, you get an at will ability of your new class at 11, and a new encounter and daily at upper levels.

Minotaurs are a MM race, and get a fun per encounter charge attack, and +2str and +2 con.

Doppelgangers get a "look like another humanoid" ability that's at will effectively.

Gnomes. GNOMES. Gnomes are insane. Gnomes can *turn invis* once per encounter after they've taken dmg. They can also choose to roll "hide" instead of intialtive at the start of an encounter. Hello Gnome Rogue. And by "hello" I mean, "Please, for the love of god, stop stabbing me in the back." My friends quote was "Man, I hate gnomes! They're stupid! But now I can't stop picturing a pack of gnomes sitting in the trees doing the clicking noise that the Predators make in the alien movies. Stupid stealth gnomes. I'm going to have to play one."

Bugbears get a dmg bonus for combat advantage I believe.

Rituals: range from cheap to learn and cast to expensive. As an example: Raise Dead costs 650GP to learn uses a 500gp reagent, and "scales" at levels. At lowever levels, it's "free" except for the reagent cost." At medium levels it's 5,000gp. And at epic levels it's 50,000. Oh, and the raised person gets a penalty of -1 until you've passed "3" milestones.

Oh, and another interesting/weird feature....there is an easy to cast ritual that clears 1 status ailment (curse, disease, etc) each time it's cast, but with a catch. You make a heal check, and your result ='s how much dmg the TARGET sick player takes while being healed. SO, a low roll can kill outright, or can do dmg. A high roll causes very little dmg.


That's all I got for the moment. If I can remember more, I'll put them up there.

Oh, and I forgot to mention>>>Timesstop is a spell in 4e. Gives you 2 extra actions, neither of which can be used for attack.


----------



## thalmin

pukunui said:
			
		

> Thalmin: I don't know if we already know any of this stuff or not, but were you able to:
> 
> *a)* determine what happened to Trapfinding (is it still a feat or is it a trained use of the Thievery skill or something else entirely?) and
> *b)* determine whether Tumbling is something that only a rogue can do (and then only once per encounter) or is it a trained use of Acrobatics and the rogue just happens to have an encounter power with the same name?
> 
> Thanks.



a) It's part of thievery.
b) I didnt check.


----------



## Sojorn

Bestopheles said:
			
		

> Oh, and I forgot to mention>>>Timesstop is a spell in 4e. Gives you 2 extra actions, neither of which can be used for attack.



Two extra standard actions?


----------



## A'koss

Did anyone catch what kind of ability score bonuses classes gained as they leveled?


----------



## Bestopheles

pukunui said:
			
		

> Thalmin: I don't know if we already know any of this stuff or not, but were you able to:
> 
> 
> *b)* determine whether Tumbling is something that only a rogue can do (and then only once per encounter) or is it a trained use of Acrobatics and the rogue just happens to have an encounter power with the same name?





Yeah, tumbling is a Rogue Utility power. Once per encounter, shift half your base move.


----------



## Bestopheles

Sojorn said:
			
		

> Two extra standard actions?




Yeah, I think so. We were rushing.


----------



## pukunui

thalmin said:
			
		

> a) It's part of thievery.
> b) I didnt check.



 Cool. Thanks. I really hope tumbling hasn't been reduced to a single encounter power. I really like being able to tumble all over the place in a combat ...


----------



## thalmin

A'koss said:
			
		

> Did anyone catch what kind of ability score bonuses classes gained as they leveled?



+1 to each of two different stats at about every 4th level, but there are a few levels (I think 11 and 21) where every stat gets a +1 bonus.


----------



## Rechan

Please explain what the Star Pact is, fluff-wise.


----------



## A'koss

thalmin said:
			
		

> +1 to each of two different stats at about every 4th level, but there are a few levels (I think 11 and 21) where every stat gets a +1 bonus.



Thanks Thalmin! That's almost exactly what I imagined it would be.   

Are the stats chosen for you depending on your class (which is what I expect) or do you choose?


----------



## Sojorn

Bestopheles said:
			
		

> Yeah, I think so. We were rushing.



I can imagine. 

The MM race entries sound really neat. And also sound like they might not be very hard to extend using the PHB races.


----------



## Sojorn

thalmin said:
			
		

> +1 to each of two different stats at about every 4th level, but there are a few levels (I think 11 and 21) where every stat gets a +1 bonus.



Awesome. No choosing between your main and secondary stats. Just your secondaries


----------



## Bestopheles

Rechan said:
			
		

> Please explain what the Star Pact is, fluff-wise.




Not to be a smart ass, but it's "Monsters from the stars."  One ability throws the person into "A dark and twisted area of space", for 7d10 dmg (and this could be off, I didn't write it down) where they float for a bit then fall down "mad"...considering everyone there enemy. They take Opportunity Attacks on everyone, and consider everyone an enemy.

I honestly got a psudonatural flavor...not in the "weird tentacle" way, but in the "things man was not meant to know kind of way."


----------



## mach1.9pants

@bestopheles: I assume shifters are a playable PC race in MM?
And 4E gnomes are whisper gnomes...great! No more stupid red hats (I almost puked in the Races of Stone gnome fluff!); but a stealthy and dangerous race of backstabbers. I can see my players suing this!


----------



## pukunui

Bestopheles said:
			
		

> Rogues are AMAZING. Like seriously, damn near Op. At 3rd level they get a utility power that lets them re-roll any bluff check (Trigger: when player rolls bluff, and doesn't like the look of the roll.) They also have a nice garrotte ability that does 7w and can be held for a bit...fun thing about holding it is that attacks on the rogue have a possibility of hitting the person you're choking). They get auto-escpape grapple abilities, and lots of things playing off Combat advantage (including one that we figured could add 7W dmg +10d8 +dex mod). Very sick.



I recently started playing SWSE and so I can't help but notice its influence on the 4e design here. SWSE has a number of talents that let classes reroll skill checks. I quite like it. Is the rogue's bluff reroll a "take the better of the two" or a "take the second result even if it's worse" power?



> Starpact warlocks can throw you into the stars and bring you back bent...and infernal pact locks can banish someone to hell for a time (keeping them there for up to 3 rounds with a minor action).



Sounds suitably bizarre. Can't wait to see it for myself!



> Gnomes. GNOMES. Gnomes are insane. Gnomes can *turn invis* once per encounter after they've taken dmg. They can also choose to roll "hide" instead of intialtive at the start of an encounter. Hello Gnome Rogue. And by "hello" I mean, "Please, for the love of god, stop stabbing me in the back." My friends quote was "Man, I hate gnomes! They're stupid! But now I can't stop picturing a pack of gnomes sitting in the trees doing the clicking noise that the Predators make in the alien movies. Stupid stealth gnomes. I'm going to have to play one."



Sounds like the whisper gnome is now the "default" gnome for 4e. Very cool.
EDIT: Ack! Ninja'd by the genuine Kiwi ...



> Rituals: range from cheap to learn and cast to expensive. As an example: Raise Dead costs 650GP to learn uses a 500gp reagent, and "scales" at levels. At lowever levels, it's "free" except for the reagent cost." At medium levels it's 5,000gp. And at epic levels it's 50,000. Oh, and the raised person gets a penalty of -1 until you've passed "3" milestones.



I have to say that I wasn't expecting this. I thought they said that Heroic level PCs would stay dead when they died. This makes it sound like they can't die ... becuase they'll just keep getting raised for virtually no cost and with no drawbacks whenever they do.



> Oh, and another interesting/weird feature....there is an easy to cast ritual that clears 1 status ailment (curse, disease, etc) each time it's cast, but with a catch. You make a heal check, and your result ='s how much dmg the TARGET sick player takes while being healed. SO, a low roll can kill outright, or can do dmg. A high roll causes very little dmg.



Now _this_ is very cool.


----------



## thalmin

A'koss said:
			
		

> Thanks Thalmin! That's almost exactly what I imagined it would be.
> 
> Are the stats chosen for you depending on your class (which is what I expect) or do you choose?



Your choice!


----------



## Bestopheles

mach1.9pants said:
			
		

> @bestopheles: I assume shifters are a playable PC race in MM?
> And 4E gnomes are whisper gnomes...great! No more stupid red hats (I almost puked in the Races of Stone gnome fluff!); but a stealthy and dangerous race of backstabbers. I can see my players suing this!




Yeah, there are at least 2 shifters in the MM (I only looked through it for 10 mins or so), and the general reaction from my friend and I (who are both total power gamers). was...yeah, ok, this is finally a race we'd like to play.

Warforged were in the book too, but stripped down a bit. Less immunities. And their encounter ability felt to me a bit meh...once per encounter when blodied you heal con mod + 1/2 level.   Still, not a bad race...but not so zomg overpowered as they once were.


----------



## A'koss

pukunui said:
			
		

> I have to say that I wasn't expecting this. I thought they said that Heroic level PCs would stay dead when they died. This makes it sound like they can't die ... becuase they'll just keep getting raised for virtually no cost and with no drawbacks whenever they do.



Yeah, that was my impression as well - I wonder though if Raise Dead has any conditions attached to it such as requiring a relatively whole body. Perhaps if you destroy the body (burn it, hack it to salsa...) it can't be raised?


----------



## mach1.9pants

Thanks for the info and scoops to you both....you lucky buggers!


----------



## A'koss

thalmin said:
			
		

> Your choice!



Sweet...


----------



## Rechan

Since Thalmin hasn't reposted these tidbits in this thread, I thought I would:



			
				thalmin said:
			
		

> The following monsters were listed with some info for use as playable character races:
> Bugbear
> Doppleganger
> Drow
> Githyanki
> Githzerai
> Gnoll
> Gnome
> Goblin
> Hobgoblin
> Kobold
> Minotaur
> Orc
> Shadar-Kai
> Shifter (2 types)
> Warforged






			
				thalmin said:
			
		

> These are the listed Dragons
> Black
> Blue
> Green
> Red
> White







			
				thalmin said:
			
		

> There are 5 Alignments
> Good
> Lawful Good
> Evil
> Chaotic Evil
> Unaligned
> 
> Among the gods I did not see any evil or CE listed.


----------



## thalmin

There's more on the other thread.

edit: I guess it's here now.


----------



## A'koss

mach1.9pants said:
			
		

> Thanks for the info and scoops to you both....you lucky buggers!



Thanks indeedy! This is like a dozen WotC "excerpts" all in one night!


----------



## Bestopheles

A'koss said:
			
		

> Yeah, that was my impression as well - I wonder though if Raise Dead has any conditions attached to it such as requiring a relatively whole body. Perhaps if you destroy the body (burn it, hack it to salsa...) it can't be raised?




Well, it's 650gp to learn the spell and a 500gp reagent to cast...so at over 1k gold a cast a low levels, it's already pretty damn expensive....plus you get the rez penalty. 

Of course, you can always just houserule it different.


----------



## pukunui

A'koss said:
			
		

> Yeah, that was my impression as well - I wonder though if Raise Dead has any conditions attached to it such as requiring a relatively whole body. Perhaps if you destroy the body (burn it, hack it to salsa...) it can't be raised?



 Yeah. I don't really like it. I can see myself putting restrictions on that ritual already ...

EDIT:







			
				Bestopheles said:
			
		

> Well, it's 650gp to learn the spell and a 500gp reagent to cast...so at over 1k gold a cast a low levels, it's already pretty damn expensive....plus you get the rez penalty.
> 
> Of course, you can always just houserule it different.



Ah so there _is_ a penalty at low levels? I didn't get that impression from your original post. That makes it a bit easier to swallow. Still seems kind of cheap and flies in the face of the "raise dead ain't gonna happen in the Heroic tier". I guess having to roll up a new low-level character isn't fun? Should be easy enough to just limit access to the reagent ...

Does the ritual have any other requirements? Like a whole body? Or that the person has only been dead for a short while? Any indication as to why it gets more expensive as you go up in level?


----------



## baberg

Thalmin, thanks for the info.

Will you be doing the same thing tomorrow?  If so, should we try to compile a succinct list of questions that you can "checklist" for all of us impatient, greedy players?


----------



## Twiggly the Gnome

Thanks for the reports.   

Did either of you catch what the Gnome ability score modifiers were?


----------



## Rechan

pukunui said:
			
		

> Ah so there _is_ a penalty at low levels? I didn't get that impression from your original post. That makes it a bit easier to swallow. Still seems kind of cheap and flies in the face of the "raise dead ain't gonna happen in the Heroic tier". I guess having to roll up a new low-level character isn't fun?






> Rituals: range from cheap to learn and cast to expensive. As an example: Raise Dead costs 650GP to learn uses a 500gp reagent, and "scales" at levels. At lowever levels, it's "free" except for the reagent cost." At medium levels it's 5,000gp. And at epic levels it's 50,000. *Oh, and the raised person gets a penalty of -1 until you've passed "3" milestones.*




3 milestones = 6 encounters.


----------



## t3nk3n

do either of you recall the fourth warlord encounter exploit (other than guarding attack, hammer and anvil and warlord's favor)?


----------



## A'koss

Bestopheles said:
			
		

> Well, it's 650gp to learn the spell and a 500gp reagent to cast...so at over 1k gold a cast a low levels, it's already pretty damn expensive....plus you get the rez penalty.
> 
> Of course, you can always just houserule it different.



True, it looks pricey, but WotC really led us to believe that returning to life was going to be more of a hurdle than just throwing money at the problem...


----------



## pukunui

Rechan said:
			
		

> 3 milestones = 6 encounters.



Yeah. I got the impression that the penalty didn't apply in the Heroic level because he said it was "'free' except for the reagent cost". I'm wondering if that could be clarified at all? What makes raise dead "free" for the Heroic Tier? Or rather, what makes it _not_ free for the higher tiers? Are there are other requirements besides the cost that have to be met before it works? And can it be confirmed that this -1 penalty for 6 encounters (almost a whole level's worth of encounters, if we go by the 10 encounters = 1 level model) applies to raise dead at all tiers?



			
				A'koss said:
			
		

> True, it looks pricey, but WotC really led us to believe that returning to life was going to be more of a hurdle than just throwing money at the problem...



This.


----------



## Fallen Seraph

Did you see what the actual mechanics of using a Ritual were?


----------



## thalmin

baberg said:
			
		

> Thalmin, thanks for the info.
> 
> Will you be doing the same thing tomorrow?  If so, should we try to compile a succinct list of questions that you can "checklist" for all of us impatient, greedy players?



Sorry, no. The books were brought in by one of our distributors, and the books left with him. You may still ask questions, we might remember something. As you can imagine, everyone wanted to spend more time with each of the books, especially the PHB. Some customers just wanted to drool, others wanted to look at the pretty pictures, while still others wanted to look up particular items or just get an overall feel of the books.
They are nice and easy to read (though nor when you are rushed while several people are looking over your shoulder asking you questions or to turn back to that other page.)


----------



## thalmin

*Warforged*



			
				Twiggly the Gnome said:
			
		

> Thanks for the reports.
> 
> Did either of you catch what the Gnome ability score modifiers were?



Sorry, I didn't.

I did get a bit on the Warforged
+2 STR, +2 CON
Speed 6
Vision Normal
+2 to Endurance Skill
Can wear armor


----------



## A'koss

Did either of you find any Paragon Paths or Epic Destinies that caught your eye? 

Any nifty Fighter powers?


----------



## Rechan

Did you look at the DMG at all?


----------



## A'koss

Anyone get a look at some of the heavyweights in the MM, for example... Orcus? An ancient Dragon? The Tarrasque? Even just some tidbits I'm sure would be interesting...


----------



## thalmin

As to the DMG, we looked at all three books, what would you like to know? Mostly it was info on running a game, virtually no info for players. A bit on terrain, a nice section on traps, a little on weather...
Many things, but I didn't read it much. I was looking for info on Craft or Profession skills, also Commoners and 0-Level options, but I came up with nothing. I could have missed it, but I was looking specifically.


----------



## Rechan

I imagine you didn't see anything on "How NPCs are treated differently than PCs".  

I'd honestly like to know about traps. Or any new stuff we haven't seen. One thing I'm really curious about is how outdoor, improvised (snares etc) traps will be handled, or the ye olde needletrap or pit trap.


----------



## valeren

Bestopheles said:
			
		

> Not to be a smart ass, but it's "Monsters from the stars."  One ability throws the person into "A dark and twisted area of space", for 7d10 dmg (and this could be off, I didn't write it down) where they float for a bit then fall down "mad"...considering everyone there enemy. They take Opportunity Attacks on everyone, and consider everyone an enemy.
> 
> I honestly got a psudonatural flavor...not in the "weird tentacle" way, but in the "things man was not meant to know kind of way."




darn.  i was hoping the warlocks would have some connection to the shadowfell instead of the far realms...


----------



## A'koss

I'd also be interested in hearing about how NPCs are handled...


----------



## Family

Did any stock monsters break the 1000hp barrier?


----------



## Korgoth

Star pact Warlocks sound like they have a dose of Cthulhu.  Very cool.


----------



## FitzTheRuke

For those complaining about raise dead

Gold is on a slightly different scale, too.  Most low-level magic items cost things like 360 gp. I KotS the reward for killing a whole slew of kobolds is 100gp for the whole party to share.

It's not quite like 3.x cash. 650 gp is a BIG expense for heroic tier adventurers.

Fitz


----------



## Stalker0

Did you guys happen to notice if intelligence actually does anything in teh game?

I mean, we know it effects wizard and warlord powers. But does it affect your skills, or have any other general effect on the game?


----------



## thalmin

Stalker0 said:
			
		

> Did you guys happen to notice if intelligence actually does anything in teh game?
> 
> I mean, we know it effects wizard and warlord powers. But does it affect your skills, or have any other general effect on the game?



It can affect Reflex, also some skills. Each of the "Saves" can be affected by either of 2 stats.


----------



## pukunui

FitzTheRuke said:
			
		

> For those complaining about raise dead
> 
> Gold is on a slightly different scale, too.  Most low-level magic items cost things like 360 gp. I KotS the reward for killing a whole slew of kobolds is 100gp for the whole party to share.
> 
> It's not quite like 3.x cash. 650 gp is a BIG expense for heroic tier adventurers.
> 
> Fitz



 That's good to know.


On an unrelated note: So it sounds like the metallic dragons are definitely _not_ in the first MM. I guess when WotC started saying that _all_ the Dungeons of Dread minis would be in the MM, they forgot about the copper dragon mini (yes, they originally said "all but one" but then they started saying "all of them" ... so someone screwed up).


----------



## hong

A'koss said:
			
		

> True, it looks pricey, but WotC really led us to believe that returning to life was going to be more of a hurdle than just throwing money at the problem...



 I think the idea is that in a genuinely-PoL setting, NPCs who can cast raise dead will be few and far between. You can't expect to wander into town, find your friendly cleric who's willing to raise anybody for 5000gp, and get on with it. Hence until your own cleric can do it, raising will be difficult.

Which can also apply to 3E, but without the overall PoL principle in the background, I'd hazard that most games just allow raising without fuss.


----------



## Spatula

Well, KotS has an NPC in town that can cast the ritual... and that's in the official 1st level adventure.


----------



## pukunui

Spatula said:
			
		

> Well, KotS has an NPC in town that can cast the ritual... and that's in the official 1st level adventure.



 Yeah, although they might have done that to make it easier for people using the pregens to get back into the fight without having to worry about not being able to make a new character.


----------



## Jack99

Question:

Did you see enough of the rituals to make a guess on how many there are? How often can a ritual be cast? Was any ritual class specific?

Anyway, I must admit that I am surprised regarding the dragons... ah well.

Cheers


----------



## pukunui

Jack99 said:
			
		

> Anyway, I must admit that I am surprised regarding the dragons... ah well.



Surprised about what? The lack of metallic dragons? If so, you're a bit behind on the scoops then, mate.


----------



## A'koss

hong said:
			
		

> I think the idea is that in a genuinely-PoL setting, NPCs who can cast raise dead will be few and far between. You can't expect to wander into town, find your friendly cleric who's willing to raise anybody for 5000gp, and get on with it. Hence until your own cleric can do it, raising will be difficult.



Well, KotS would seem to seem to disagree with that premiss - that wee little village has an NPC priestess who can raise dead. My central issue with it remains that it's just throwing money at the problem in the end, and that's not what we we're led to believe...


----------



## hong

A'koss said:
			
		

> Well, KotS would seem to seem to disagree with that premiss - that wee little village has an NPC priestess who can raise dead. My central issue with it remains that it's just throwing money at the problem in the end, and that's not what we we're led to believe...



 As said before, this may be an aberration because the PHB hasn't come out yet. Anyway, what method could work besides just throwing money at it? Doing a specific quest to raise someone, while it sounds nice, just isn't going to work in practice.


----------



## A'koss

hong said:
			
		

> As said before, this may be an aberration because the PHB hasn't come out yet. Anyway, what method could work besides just throwing money at it?



Honestly I was quite anxious to find out myself what they had cooked up. When they first started talking about raising the dead it sounded like they might have something interesting up their sleeve. My guess was that with the Shadowfell so prominant in the new cosmology (and where spirits first go when they die) that the ritual might send you to the Shadowfell to retrieve the PC spirit.


----------



## Sojorn

hong said:
			
		

> As said before, this may be an aberration because the PHB hasn't come out yet. Anyway, what method could work besides just throwing money at it? Doing a specific quest to raise someone, while it sounds nice, just isn't going to work in practice.



5,000 gp, the #9 treasure parcel for a level 15 group. Stat out a quick level appropriate encounter for your PCs and have them save their friend. With his help of course.

Oh, you meant putting a specific quest in the book. Yeah, that'd be no good.


----------



## hong

IMO the best way to make raising the dead rare and mysterious is to ban death. It works very well!


----------



## pukunui

A'koss said:
			
		

> My guess was that with the Shadowfell so prominant in the new cosmology (and where spirits first go when they die) that the ritual might send you to the Shadowfell to retrieve the PC spirit.



This is what I was thinking too.



			
				Sojorn said:
			
		

> 5,000 gp, the #9 treasure parcel for a level 15 group. Stat out a quick level appropriate encounter for your PCs and have them save their friend. With his help of course.



That works. I have to say that the one promise 4e really appears to be delivering on is the transparency of the mechanics. It really does look like it'll be easy to alter the fluff without altering the mechanics (so like, with magic items, if you don't want +x items, you just give your PCs the assumed bonuses instead and then the magic items can just have cool stuff ... or like what you've just pointed out with raise dead. Instead of saying, "You have to pay 5,000gp" you can just make it be a quest reward that just happens to be worth the 5,000gp you'd otherwise have had to pay.)


----------



## mach1.9pants

pukunui said:
			
		

> This is what I was thinking too.
> 
> That works. I have to say that the one promise 4e really appears to be delivering on is the transparency of the mechanics. It really does look like it'll be easy to alter the fluff without altering the mechanics (so like, with magic items, if you don't want +x items, you just give your PCs the assumed bonuses instead and then the magic items can just have cool stuff ... or like what you've just pointed out with raise dead. Instead of saying, "You have to pay 5,000gp" you can just make it be a quest reward that just happens to be worth the 5,000gp you'd otherwise have had to pay.)



House rule
Edit: I just started the quote when only the first paragraph was up, then the second appeared in my quote, which I quickly posted without reading your 2nd paragraph. Spooky our thoughts are combining like a big NZ DnD Whanau thing!


----------



## Spatula

The problem with the "quest to save our friend's soul" is that the dead character's player doesn't have a character to play, because his is slightly dead.  Not that a good group & DM couldn't work around it, but it's a bit too involved to be the standard.


----------



## pukunui

Spatula said:
			
		

> The problem with the "quest to save our friend's soul" is that the dead character's player doesn't have a character to play, because his is slightly dead.  Not that a good group & DM couldn't work around it, but it's a bit too involved to be the standard.



 Oh I agree. There are plenty of workarounds but the fact is, as I pointed out, it appears to be easy enough to work it in as part of the treasure or whatever rather than have it be an actual cold, hard cash payment.


----------



## frankthedm

mach1.9pants said:
			
		

> And 4E gnomes are whisper gnomes...great! No more stupid red hats



Someone else is wearing those now...









> Oh, and another interesting/weird feature....there is an easy to cast ritual that clears 1 status ailment (curse, disease, etc) each time it's cast, but with a catch. You make a heal check, and your result ='s how much dmg the TARGET sick player takes while being healed. SO, a low roll can kill outright, or can do dmg. A high roll causes very little dmg.



And here I thought discount chirurgery was more a WFRP thing!  very sweet.


			
				Bestopheles said:
			
		

> Not to be a smart ass, but it's "Monsters from the stars." One ability throws the person into "A dark and twisted area of space", for 7d10 dmg (and this could be off, I didn't write it down) where they float for a bit then fall down "mad"...considering everyone there enemy. They take Opportunity Attacks on everyone, and consider everyone an enemy.



 I'd be in a foul mood too if i just got _Hentacled_ for 7-70 damage! 


			
				Bestopheles said:
			
		

> I honestly got a psudonatural flavor...not in the "weird tentacle" way, but in the "things man was not meant to know kind of way."



 Tentacles just get used a lot since they are more unnatural  compared to the bony limbs of sentients.


----------



## mach1.9pants

frankthedm said:
			
		

> Someone else is wearing those now....



Nope cos that is not a _*stupid*_ red hat.
And I maligned Races of Stone, it is actually the images and fluff in Dragon #291 gnomes artiicle. There was even a [censored] side bar on pointy hats..... 







> The size of a gnomes pointy hat directly relates to his education...A gnome that cannot afford a magic pointy hat (FFS  ) often opt for a masterwork pointy hat (arrrghhh!!)....typically grants a +2 bonus to all diplomacy checks made with other gnomes(YOU CANNOT BE SERIOUS!)...A gnome caught wearing an inappropriate hat faces expulsion from his school...




Definitely the worst races write up that I have ever seen :vomit copiously:


----------



## frankthedm

Did we get all the Classic Demons I-VI?

*  Vrock*
 Hezrou
 Glabrezu
 Nalfeshnee
 Marilith
*  Balor*


----------



## Jack99

pukunui said:
			
		

> Surprised about what? The lack of metallic dragons? If so, you're a bit behind on the scoops then, mate.




Not really. All we had was the word of one playtester (massawyrm or whatnot), and we have known all along that not all playtesters had all of the rules. It was quite possible that he just hadn't gotten the metallic dragons. 

Either way, no biggie. Only metallic dragon planned in my world so far is S'Crado, tyrant-fisted (clawed) ruler of the Nerathian Empire (which still stands) for more than a millennium, and gold dragon par excellence. I doubt I will need his stats any time soon 

Cheers


----------



## pukunui

Jack99 said:
			
		

> Not really. All we had was the word of one playtester (massawyrm or whatnot), and we have known all along that not all playtesters had all of the rules. It was quite possible that he just hadn't gotten the metallic dragons.



Yes, that's what I had been thinking too considering that WotC started out saying that "all but one" of the _Dungeons of Dread_ minis would be in the first MM but then changed that statement after the new year to say that "all of them" would be. Looks like someone screwed up somewhere. Either that or the metallics yo-yoed in and out of the MM until they were finally left out for good.


----------



## UngeheuerLich

I am seriously annoyed if int has no influence on anything... (and if its just the number of languages you have/can learn)


----------



## Family

Int based Warlord...good fun!


----------



## Moon-Lancer

UngeheuerLich said:
			
		

> I am seriously annoyed if int has no influence on anything... (and if its just the number of languages you have/can learn)




The days of wizards with a trillion skill points are over... thank Merlin's beard.


----------



## thalmin

UngeheuerLich said:
			
		

> I am seriously annoyed if int has no influence on anything... (and if its just the number of languages you have/can learn)



Either DEX or INT can affect REFLEX. Each of the "Saves" is modified by the better of 2 stats. Also, Stat mods affect skills.


----------



## TheLordWinter

thalmin said:
			
		

> Either DEX or INT can affect REFLEX. Each of the "Saves" is modified by the better of 2 stats. Also, Stat mods affect skills.




I believe what people are complaining about is the lack of a sort of "passive" use for intelligence. Strength modifies to hit and damage rolls with melee weapons, dexterity modifies ranged weapons, constitution gets both the entire score added to your hit points and modifies your healing surges, etc. 

Intelligence used to be sort of the odd-ball out amongst the mental stats, since it would modify something (2nd ed. had Wisdom modifying your saving throws against mental effects and charisma determining followers, whilst 3rd edition cut any passive effects of Charisma and Wisdom adjusted your will save). 

Intelligence meanwhile has always had some effect, but if we're moving back towards a model closer to earlier editions, I wouldn't be surprised if Intelligence only effected several skills and your languages known.


----------



## Gloombunny

thalmin said:
			
		

> Either DEX or INT can affect REFLEX. Each of the "Saves" is modified by the better of 2 stats. Also, Stat mods affect skills.



But Dex also influences initiative and some ranged weapons, right?  And the Dex skills are kinda sexier.  It seems like if Int doesn't have anything else going for it, anyone who doesn't have class abilities based on Int would be better off with Dex.  Not to mention the classes that have abilities based on Dex, who will have next to no reason to be smart.


----------



## thalmin

I must admit to not looking at the abilities chapter other than Generation. We may see something more on thorough reading.


----------



## Protagonist

Maybe quite a few feats / powers / epic destiny abilities / paragon path features for non-int-based classes will benefit from a high int? This would make int a more "viable" choice from a crunch point for non-int-based classes.

Personally, I don't care if int ends up being less usefull than dex.

I am fortunate enough to play with a group that in 3.5 still decides do play half-elves because they want to and my players still (to a degree) invest in "dump stats" if they want to roleplay their characters that way.


----------



## Wormwood

thalmin said:
			
		

> 2-weapon fighting is a feat, but just gives a damage bonus, not an extra attack.



So unbelievably sweet!

Thanks!


----------



## invokethehojo

TheLordWinter said:
			
		

> I believe what people are complaining about is the lack of a sort of "passive" use for intelligence. Strength modifies to hit and damage rolls with melee weapons, dexterity modifies ranged weapons, constitution gets both the entire score added to your hit points and modifies your healing surges, etc.
> 
> Intelligence used to be sort of the odd-ball out amongst the mental stats, since it would modify something (2nd ed. had Wisdom modifying your saving throws against mental effects and charisma determining followers, whilst 3rd edition cut any passive effects of Charisma and Wisdom adjusted your will save).
> 
> Intelligence meanwhile has always had some effect, but if we're moving back towards a model closer to earlier editions, I wouldn't be surprised if Intelligence only effected several skills and your languages known.




At this point it looks like wizards (a to a much lesser extent the Warlord) are the only ones who benefit from intelligence.  Hopefully as time passes more classes will use it.  

Last edition intelligence got front chair (of the mentals), this edition I think that title now goes to Charisma.


----------



## phil500

Bestopheles said:
			
		

> Well, it's 650gp to learn the spell and a 500gp reagent to cast...so at over 1k gold a cast a low levels, it's already pretty damn expensive....plus you get the rez penalty.
> 
> Of course, you can always just houserule it different.




can any class learn it?


----------



## Andor

Moon-Lancer said:
			
		

> The days of wizards with a trillion skill points are over... thank Merlin's beard.




Yeah! 'cause God forbid that a class associated with wisdom, lore and learning might actually, y'know, know stuff....


----------



## Cirex

Andor said:
			
		

> Yeah! 'cause God forbid that a class associated with wisdom, lore and learning might actually, y'know, know stuff....




Clerics of knowledge God or similars didn't have so many skill points (INT was not a main stat)...and both classes could be considered "erudites".


----------



## Bestopheles

pukunui said:
			
		

> Yeah. I got the impression that the penalty didn't apply in the Heroic level because he said it was "'free' except for the reagent cost". I'm wondering if that could be clarified at all? What makes raise dead "free" for the Heroic Tier? Or rather, what makes it _not_ free for the higher tiers? Are there are other requirements besides the cost that have to be met before it works? And can it be confirmed that this -1 penalty for 6 encounters (almost a whole level's worth of encounters, if we go by the 10 encounters = 1 level model) applies to raise dead at all tiers?
> 
> This.




I was skimming the rituals because I only had a couple of minutes, but I think the - penalty always applies. I'm sure about the GP costs, but I was rushing a bit through the penalty stuff.


----------



## Bestopheles

Fallen Seraph said:
			
		

> Did you see what the actual mechanics of using a Ritual were?




Yeah, the "main" person starting a ritual must have the ritual caster feat (which wizards and clerics get for free). As far as I can tell ANYONE can assist after that though...it specifically mentions that other players helping (the ritual assistants I think it called them) can contribute to the casting of the ritual by helping with skill checks or spending healing surges if the ritual requires them. So again, they're trying to make it more of a team effort.

I can't remember if they said this or not in the magic item preview, but the disenchant ritual costs gold to cast and gives you enough "residium" for an item 5 levels lower then the party.

There are lots of the old spell lists coming back as rituals. And you can have level one rituals...Animal Messenger was level 1 I believe (numbers on this may be a bit off, again I was rushing) 50 gold to learn and 35 gold to cast...you can whisper a few words to random small harmless woodland creature and they'll take your message somewhere in range.


----------



## Bestopheles

pukunui said:
			
		

> Yes, that's what I had been thinking too considering that WotC started out saying that "all but one" of the _Dungeons of Dread_ minis would be in the first MM but then changed that statement after the new year to say that "all of them" would be. Looks like someone screwed up somewhere. Either that or the metallics yo-yoed in and out of the MM until they were finally left out for good.




Ok, re: dragons...dragons are INCREDIBLY nasty. Like, super nasty. An older white dragon has a sphere of super cold around it that does 30 pts of cold dmg every round. And anyone IN The sphere gets cover from those outside of the sphere. So basically melee can whale away every round...but they get flashfrozen, while ranged are getting penalties to attack.

Green is pretty nasty too. They have a poison attack, and if you get two poison counters you're out of the fight (can not attack) until you get unpoisoned. 

Oh, and before I forget...Storm giants are crazy as well. They have a sphere around them (3 squares I think) where the "elemental storms" are going crazy constantly....in that effect take 20 dmg, it's considered difficult terrain, and they get cover from outside.


----------



## thalmin

Bestopheles said:
			
		

> I was skimming the rituals because I only had a couple of minutes, but I think the - penalty always applies. I'm sure about the GP costs, but I was rushing a bit through the penalty stuff.



Too bad he didn't bring 10 more PHBs. It would have been great to get more book time, but, alas, he only had the one to bring.


----------



## Bestopheles

Jack99 said:
			
		

> Question:
> 
> Did you see enough of the rituals to make a guess on how many there are? How often can a ritual be cast? Was any ritual class specific?
> 
> Anyway, I must admit that I am surprised regarding the dragons... ah well.
> 
> Cheers




Ok, so yeah...this is not going to be so helpful, but in quick answer:

I'd say there are a few dozen at least.  I didn't see the rules about how often they can be cast, but the few casting times I noted were around 10 mins.  And I didn't see anything that was class specific (which doesn't mean that there aren't a few), but you do need the casting feat. So my understanding of Raise Dead (again, based on a very VERY quick read) was that anyone with the ritual caster feat that learned that spell would be able to cast it.


----------



## Bestopheles

thalmin said:
			
		

> Too bad he didn't bring 10 more PHBs. It would have been great to get more book time, but, alas, he only had the one to bring.




Yeah...thanks again for setting that up Thalamin. That made my night.


----------



## Stalker0

As for Raise Dead, I figure a dm can also implement a really simple houserule if he wants:

No character below paragon tier has a heroic destiny and so can't be raised. That's an easy way to make it hard at heroic level

The main problem of having raise dead as a cost is it penalizes the party for bringing a friend back as opposed to the guy making a new character. Thing is, I don't have a better system on hand either.


----------



## Bestopheles

Family said:
			
		

> Int based Warlord...good fun!




Oh yeah. Warlords Healing word power works the same as clerics (can use it 2 times per encounter, healing surge + 1d6 + cha,  per round, no "per day limits" like the DDExperience cleric).  One of my big worries was that warlords were going to underpowered in healing next to a cleric, but I can definitely say that is no longer a concern. 

And warlords in general are fun...lots of "make this big attack, and some nearby ally is insipired and can spend a healing surge" that kind of stuff. One ability called "Stand up the fallen" (or something close) allows a big attack followed up every ally in a 10 ft burst being able to use a healing surge if they'd like.

Oh yeah, this very cool epic attack that again did big melee dmg (7w + strength) and "routes" the enemy...every enemy in a burst (I think it either 10 or 5) is forced to move 1 square per INT bonus of the warlord AS THE WARLORD DIRECTS. I think that's called "Own the Battlefield." 

Seemed very cool.


----------



## Bestopheles

A'koss said:
			
		

> Yeah, that was my impression as well - I wonder though if Raise Dead has any conditions attached to it such as requiring a relatively whole body. Perhaps if you destroy the body (burn it, hack it to salsa...) it can't be raised?




There were a few conditions honestly...only one I can remember is time. I think it was within a few weeks, but again, I was rushing.


----------



## jaldaen

UngeheuerLich said:
			
		

> I am seriously annoyed if int has no influence on anything... (and if its just the number of languages you have/can learn)




I just had a thought... what if Int determines how many times per day you can activate magical items? It's not much, but if it was the only way to get more power uses from magical items... then it might be worth it in the long run.

The only problem would be coming up with the reasoning for it... especially when you have magical items created from both arcane and divine sources


----------



## jaldaen

thalmin said:
			
		

> 2-weapon fighting is a feat, but just gives a damage bonus, not an extra attack. The ranger can take an at-will that gives him an extra attack.




Do you remember the trade off for the at-will granting an extra attack? Was their a penalty to the attack? Did you lose your Dexterity mod to damage for both attacks? Something else?

Also was it limited to melee or could you use it for extra ranged attacks?

Thanks!


----------



## Stalker0

jaldaen said:
			
		

> I just had a thought... what if Int determines how many times per day you can activate magical items? It's not much, but if it was the only way to get more power uses from magical items... then it might be worth it in the long run.




Currently, all magic items we've seen are 1/encounter or 1/daily abilities, int doesn't seem to factor into that.


----------



## jaldaen

Stalker0 said:
			
		

> Currently, all magic items we've seen are 1/encounter or 1/daily abilities, int doesn't seem to factor into that.




According to the Magical Items Excerpt:



> In addition, each character can only activate a few different magic item powers in a given day, so the guy who brings a loaded pack full of flashy items doesn’t get as much bang for his buck.




One way of increasing the activations per day would be to have Int affect this... not certain how likely that is, but its a possibility.


----------



## Kitirat

*Half-Elves*

Get a chance to look at the full stats for half-elves?  Just wondering.

We know:
+2 Chr, and possibly +something to another stat?
+2 insight and diplomacy

And specials:
+1 to diplomacy to everyone within 10ft.
Gain one at-will from another class.

Most races get at least 3 cool things, and the DDXP pregen half-elf had prime shot, a ranger ability but also had ray of frost for his encounter power from another class.

Any word on the other abilities?


----------



## Bestopheles

A few more things after talking to my friend who also went with last night:

There is an ability that lets a rogue run past his enemies, provoking AoO. The trick is, that they don't hit him...they HAVE to hit themselves! 

There is an ability that allows the rogue to jump on the enemies back, and begin to garrote them as a grapple. If they can hold the grapple for 3 rounds, the target falls over unconscious. Additionally, enemies trying to knock him off, have a solid chance of hitting their comrade.

There is an ability that if the rogue hits you when you're bloodied, it does 7[w] damage and crits on a 17+.

All of the above were 15th level abilities.


Humans - Broken again, (they get a bonus at will power from their class, a bonus feat and a bonus skill). 
Half elves can take an at will ability from *any* class, and make it an encounter power for them. 
Dragon Born's breath weapon scales as they level, capping at like 3d6 or so (again, not bad for a minor action...and not sure how feats could affect this).
.


----------



## unknown25mil

thalmin said:
			
		

> Either DEX or INT can affect REFLEX. Each of the "Saves" is modified by the better of 2 stats. Also, Stat mods affect skills.



Also I think that when you wear light armor you get to add either your dex or int modifier to your AC, which ever is highest.  That itself makes int really nice for non-dexterous characters like spell casters and such.


----------



## LostInTheMists

Everyone seems to be forgetting the most important question...

Any sign of "Feather Me Yon Oaf"?


----------



## Family

HARK! I have heard the words!

<------[draws crossbow and lets a bolt loose at nearest Oaf]


----------



## Wolfspider

Family said:
			
		

> HARK! I have heard the words!
> 
> <------[draws crossbow and lets a bolt loose at nearest Oaf]




Ouch!  

Hey, watch it with that thing!


----------



## portermj

pukunui said:
			
		

> Yes, that's what I had been thinking too considering that WotC started out saying that "all but one" of the _Dungeons of Dread_ minis would be in the first MM but then changed that statement after the new year to say that "all of them" would be. Looks like someone screwed up somewhere. Either that or the metallics yo-yoed in and out of the MM until they were finally left out for good.




What annoys me is that they made such a big deal about how the Capricous Copper Dragon's design was based on work being done in 4th edition.  Then they highlighted Mettalics in World and Monsters.  They even went on about how Brass and Bronze dragons were getting replaced by Iron and Adamantite.  

Then we got hit with the Young Silver Dragon in Dungeons of Dread, the second large silver in the DDM line.  Apparently there is going to be a Huge Silver Dragon in Against the Giants, which would be the second Huge Silver in a row (of the Huge sets).  Why did they waste so much space on the Metallics when they could have included minis from the 4th edition MM?

The 4th edition Draconomicon is supposed to be focused on chromatics.  When is WOTC going to include Metallics?  Even further, if we have to wait till next years MM II for Metallics, when will we see the off shoot dragons like the Gem Dragons, Fang, Shadow, or Deep?


----------



## Irda Ranger

Maybe we already knew this, but does AC advance +1/2 level?


----------



## hailstop

So anyone get a glance at the Healing Surge rules for NPCs or Monsters?  Can certain skills be used unskilled?  (ie we noticed in our playtest that Heal was only on half of the character sheets).


----------



## Rechan

Bestopheles said:
			
		

> Green is pretty nasty too. They have a poison attack, and if you get two poison counters you're out of the fight (can not attack) until you get unpoisoned.



That's odd. "out of the fight" is supposed to be something that 4e is against as a design principle. No save or dies, or save and "you're out for the fight".


----------



## A'koss

Rechan said:
			
		

> That's odd. "out of the fight" is supposed to be something that 4e is against as a design principle. No save or dies, or save and "you're out for the fight".



I think the principle was no "one-shot" wonders, but we already knew you could be turned to stone for example (from the beholder interview) - just that it wasn't immediate and so someone has a chance to intervene before you're out of the fight. I'm guessing that in the green dragon's case, epic level characters probably have strong countermeausures to being poisoned...


----------



## Sojorn

Irda Ranger said:
			
		

> Maybe we already knew this, but does AC advance +1/2 level?



It does. All defenses do along with attack bonuses, skills and initiative. Not damage though.


----------



## Fanaelialae

Rechan said:
			
		

> That's odd. "out of the fight" is supposed to be something that 4e is against as a design principle. No save or dies, or save and "you're out for the fight".




I believe it is actually against instant and irrevocable out of fight effects (3.x death spells, petrification, and to a lesser extent Hold spells, for example).  I'm fairly certain I read in one of the designer blogs that he set his players up against some petrification traps that, over the course of a few rounds, almost petrified one of the characters.


----------



## Kaodi

I would be interested to know if there are any options for a cleric based on charisma. When we restart our game at the end of the summer when the DM gets back from doing some graduate work at the far end of the country, we are going to be looking at if we can rebuild our Age of Worms game for 4th Edition. I have a lawful evil cleric of Vathris (probably unaligned now, I guess) with good intelligence (14), wisdom(15+1) and charisma(16) who might make more sense as a lower wisdom character. Hell, depending on if there are no paragon paths that make sense for him, he might even multiclass as a paladin.


----------



## Ydobon

thalmin said:
			
		

> I must admit to not looking at the abilities chapter other than Generation.



In that case, how are ability scores generated?


----------



## Cirex

Ydobon said:
			
		

> In that case, how are ability scores generated?




Some array is default, point-buy and 4d6 roll are alternatives. There's more information in either this thread or the other one.


----------



## Mouseferatu

Bestopheles said:
			
		

> Humans - Broken again, (they get a bonus at will power from their class, a bonus feat and a bonus skill).




Humans... "broken"?

*looks at his human character in his ongoing playtest campaign, looks at the other characters, laughs hysterically*

Sorry, but, uh... No. No, not even close. Humans are a _solid_ choice, but they're _hardly_ broken as compared to the other races.


----------



## malraux

Rechan said:
			
		

> That's odd. "out of the fight" is supposed to be something that 4e is against as a design principle. No save or dies, or save and "you're out for the fight".



As others have mentioned, its no instant effects such that your character never even gets to roll initiative.  And even being out of the fight with poison, you're still going to be doing something to get back in, rolling saves.  And as we've seen, other classes can use abilities to give you extra saving throws.


----------



## bielmic

portermj said:
			
		

> Then we got hit with the Young Silver Dragon in Dungeons of Dread, the second large silver in the DDM line.  Apparently there is going to be a Huge Silver Dragon in Against the Giants, which would be the second Huge Silver in a row (of the Huge sets).  Why did they waste so much space on the Metallics when they could have included minis from the 4th edition MM?





do you mean the aspect of bahamut?  it's not technically a huge silver but obviously similar enough to be used as one (i use it that way!).   i agree that they should focus on the chromatics.  for all their talk about "no more only pro-PC monsters", they've apparently only included the chromatics (the traditional encounter dragons) in the MM and should support them as such.  that being said, i'm glad they're making a huge white.  in case we don't switch over to 4th edition, i'd still like all the chromotics from small or medium (whatever they start at in 3/3.5) to huge.


----------



## catsclaw227

Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> Humans... "broken"?
> 
> *looks at his human character in his ongoing playtest campaign, looks at the other characters, laughs hysterically*
> 
> Sorry, but, uh... No. No, not even close. Humans are a _solid_ choice, but they're _hardly_ broken as compared to the other races.



He must've meant that humans were broken in the same way that monks were broken for 3e -- at least according to the previews.


----------



## GoodKingJayIII

Great information guys.  Thanks so much for the thread!


----------



## Bestopheles

Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> Humans... "broken"?
> 
> *looks at his human character in his ongoing playtest campaign, looks at the other characters, laughs hysterically*
> 
> Sorry, but, uh... No. No, not even close. Humans are a _solid_ choice, but they're _hardly_ broken as compared to the other races.




Yeah, I was just kidding with the broken comment. Honestly, humans may be a better *specialist* in certain scenarios now...possibly a better specialist then a jack of all trades, actually, as the extra at will makes them even more impressive in that role.


----------



## Arbanax

GoodKingJayIII said:
			
		

> Great information guys.  Thanks so much for the thread!




As someone who lives miles from a game shop and has to rely on the internet for info, the opportunity this is my only opportunity to preview anything...so a big thanks to all who put in this solid effort.

Ab.


----------



## jeffhartsell

I'm curious to find out if there is a feat that lets a rogue use "light blade" powers with heavy blades, axes, polearms?


----------



## mach1.9pants

> There is an ability that allows the rogue to jump on the enemies back, and begin to garrote them as a grapple. If they can hold the grapple for 3 rounds, the target falls over unconscious. Additionally, enemies trying to knock him off, have a solid chance of hitting their comrade.



Legolas was a Rogue!?!


----------



## Ginnel

Good stuff 

I don't suppose you noticed if they had an example of how play works and if they used the old classic of adventurers go into dungeon have an encounter with some spiders, then with a map which was in a pool and finally they find a secret door in the ceiling and the gnome (maybe halfing in the latest version) gets paralyzed and dragged off by Ghouls, ah tis a classic example    *reminisces some*


----------



## _sheepy_

Arbanax said:
			
		

> As someone who lives miles from a game shop and has to rely on the internet for info, the opportunity this is my only opportunity to preview anything...so a big thanks to all who put in this solid effort.




Me too.  Thanks.  Especially now that I am working on an online character generator, I need all the specific rules I can get... The info Thalmin and others confirmed in this thread helps a lot in completing unfinished parts with confident, particularly the multi-class system, now that simpler stuffs are in place. (And, of course, helps my current 4e campaign too  )

I was very eager when 4e was it was first announced.  Until DDXP comes.  Now with all the excerpts and rules I am getting to like it again.

Can't wait to flip open the final books.  Amazon says I have to wait until mid-June. *sigh*


----------



## RefinedBean

Yes, yes, this is all well and good, but how BIG are the female Dragonborn's breasts?  The people have a right to know!

In all seriousness, any info available on some of the mundane or semi-magical items out there, updates from 3.X?  Does Alchemist's fire do a d4 Fire, then 2 Fire/round (Save ends)?

Probably didn't spend much of your time perusing the "Adventuring Tools" section...but I figured I'd ask anyway.


----------



## ArmoredSaint

Can anyone give us further details on the armour chapter?  Actual confirmed game statistics, costs, etc?


----------



## Kitirat

Bestopheles said:
			
		

> Yeah, I was just kidding with the broken comment. Honestly, humans may be a better *specialist* in certain scenarios now...possibly a better specialist then a jack of all trades, actually, as the extra at will makes them even more impressive in that role.




Best, can you throw out the complete half-elf stats?

+1 to allies diplo,
1 at will becomes encounter,
The standard stat and skill bumps,
is that it?  Seems way under the other races.  For example the human can get the same bonus, plus an extra at-will, extra skill, and extra +1 to all defenses by taking a multi-class feat as his extra.

See ya,
Ken


----------



## Victim

Kitirat said:
			
		

> Best, can you throw out the complete half-elf stats?
> 
> +1 to allies diplo,
> 1 at will becomes encounter,
> The standard stat and skill bumps,
> is that it?  Seems way under the other races.  For example the human can get the same bonus, plus an extra at-will, extra skill, and extra +1 to all defenses by taking a multi-class feat as his extra.
> 
> See ya,
> Ken




Half Elves get two stat bonuses, humans get one.


----------



## Dire Bare

pukunui said:
			
		

> Yes, that's what I had been thinking too considering that WotC started out saying that "all but one" of the _Dungeons of Dread_ minis would be in the first MM but then changed that statement after the new year to say that "all of them" would be. Looks like someone screwed up somewhere. Either that or the metallics yo-yoed in and out of the MM until they were finally left out for good.



Oh good lord!  No one "screwed up", sheesh.  WotC clearly stated that one mini from Dungeons of Dread would not appear in MMI based on the information they had at that time.  I could frakking care less if that has changed or not since then, or if someone from WotC later "misspoke" and said all minis from DoD would be in the MMI.  I doubt you are trying to slam WotC here Puki, but the tone of your post brings to mind all the overblown claims of "WotC lied to us again!" or "WotC, those incompetent fools!".  Or maybe I'm just oversensitive.


----------



## Dire Bare

portermj said:
			
		

> What annoys me is that they made such a big deal about how the Capricous Copper Dragon's design was based on work being done in 4th edition.  Then they highlighted Mettalics in World and Monsters.  They even went on about how Brass and Bronze dragons were getting replaced by Iron and Adamantite.
> 
> Then we got hit with the Young Silver Dragon in Dungeons of Dread, the second large silver in the DDM line.  Apparently there is going to be a Huge Silver Dragon in Against the Giants, which would be the second Huge Silver in a row (of the Huge sets).  Why did they waste so much space on the Metallics when they could have included minis from the 4th edition MM?
> 
> The 4th edition Draconomicon is supposed to be focused on chromatics.  When is WOTC going to include Metallics?  Even further, if we have to wait till next years MM II for Metallics, when will we see the off shoot dragons like the Gem Dragons, Fang, Shadow, or Deep?



Soooooo . . .

How dare WotC not include Metallic Dragons in MMI . . . and how dare they then supply Metallic Dragon miniatures in 4e format to us?!?!?!  And how dare they preview material that won't be released soon!?!?!  Those animals!!!

You're a glass half-empty kind of guy, right?  Look at it this way, we won't see the complete write-up on the metallics until next years' MMII . . . but the metallic dragon minis they release between now and then are freaking PREVIEWS to satisfy a portion of our geeky need for metallic dragons.  We'll probably see some stuff on D&D Insider also.  Oh, but wait, we've got to PAY for D&D Insider (unlike the hardcover books . . . wait . . .)

Besides, as should be obvious, WotC can't give us ALL the dragons at once.  They'd fill the entire Monster Manual, and then some!  While I'd also prefer to see the core metallics in MMI, I am neither annoyed or angered (or any other silly emotion regarding a game) that I'll have to wait a while.


----------



## ZetaStriker

He made a valid complaint, Dire Bare, so there's no reason to use sarcasm as a way to insult him. WotC stopped saying 'all but one' at one point, which lead people to hope that metallics might be in. And even if that weren't the case, Metallics are iconic to the game in ways that 90% of the rest of the Monster Manual can't compare to. The 10 'standard' types of dragons were expected of the Monster Manual, and I think it's fair that someone isn't exactly ecstatic about half of them being excluded. If he's upset, he's allowed to be, but he isn't running around bashing the game, so lay off.

Anyway, I expect that we'll see Metallics on DnDi at some point before the Draconomicon or MM2 will include them. Like gnomes, they're just a little too popular to leave out of the game for too long, in my opinion.


----------



## pukunui

Dire Bare said:
			
		

> Oh good lord!  No one "screwed up", sheesh.  WotC clearly stated that one mini from Dungeons of Dread would not appear in MMI based on the information they had at that time.  I could frakking care less if that has changed or not since then, or if someone from WotC later "misspoke" and said all minis from DoD would be in the MMI.  I doubt you are trying to slam WotC here Puki, but the tone of your post brings to mind all the overblown claims of "WotC lied to us again!" or "WotC, those incompetent fools!".  Or maybe I'm just oversensitive.



 Definitely being oversensitive there, Dirb. I'm not out to slam WotC at all. I'm very much a 4e fanboy. So much so it hurts. 

All I want to know is why WotC said "all but one" mini (the copper dragon presumably being the excluded one) but then started saying that all of them, including the copper dragon, would be in the MM when that's clearly not the case. Is it because the metallics weren't going to be in then they were and now they're not again? Or is it because someone misunderstood? Or what? I'm just curious really.

There's also the fact that they've been teasing us with all this metallic stuff, like others have pointed out (references in W&M, references to fights with metallics in playtest reports, metallic dragon minis, etc.). Also, they've said that they're trying to make all monsters "fightable" so the metallics aren't going to be goody-two-shoes dragons anymore. What's so special about kruthiks?

If I'm upset about anything, it's the fact that at least 7 out of 10 of my posts here at ENWorld go ignored. Most of them just get lost in the shuffle, I'm sure, but I find that I sometimes have to repeat myself in order to get anyone to notice, and so if you're actually reading the entire thread, you might see me belaboring a point and it'll look like I'm really upset about it when I'm not. I'm just trying not to be ignored.


----------



## ZetaStriker

I hear you there, Puk. I still haven't gotten a response from Pawsplay in our argument over the use of minions, which I've decided to take as a win.


----------



## Gargazon

Bestopheles said:
			
		

> Oh, and before I forget...Storm giants are crazy as well. They have a sphere around them (3 squares I think) where the "elemental storms" are going crazy constantly....in that effect take 20 dmg, it's considered difficult terrain, and they get cover from outside.




Oh god, Storm Giants sound epic   

Can you remember what level the Storm Giants were, and how many stat blocks there were with their entry? Was there a Storm Titan, by any chance?


----------



## Hambot

Storm Giants sound like Thundercloud Shaman, a cool MTG card that comes into play and zaps everthing.  Its got a cool picture of a giant walking along with his own personal storm following him.


----------



## thalmin

I can appreciate not covering all 10 dragons in the MMI. With each dragon taking up about 4 (or was it more) pages in the MM, each one removes 2 other monsters. Leaving some dragons out gives more variety to what is presented.


----------



## Rechan

thalmin said:
			
		

> I can appreciate not covering all 10 dragons in the MMI. With each dragon taking up about 4 (or was it more) pages in the MM, each one removes 2 other monsters. Leaving some dragons out gives more variety to what is presented.



Not to mention how much Use they get. Compare how many times people have fought metallics vs. chromatics, and the answer is pretty obvious.


----------



## Fallen Seraph

thalmin said:
			
		

> I can appreciate not covering all 10 dragons in the MMI. With each dragon taking up about 4 (or was it more) pages in the MM, each one removes 2 other monsters. Leaving some dragons out gives more variety to what is presented.



I agree, it also I don't think be too difficult to simply turn the Chromatics into Metallics. Change the appearance, mannerisms, etc. 

Since it is a new game, the players won't know, that a Metallic Dragon doesn't have that attack.


----------



## thalmin

Don't get me wrong. The different dragons are VERY different from each other, with different types of attacks besides different breath weapons, different tactics, different habitats, different personalities and motivations. (Sorry I can't provide any examples. The above was gleaned from overhearing two customers as they discussed what they were reading.) Still, you want to fight small creatures, swarms, undead, humanoids, undeads, giants, aquatics, mundanes, etherials, demons, and gnomes some of the time, too.


----------



## Fallen Seraph

Oh I know, but that shows how it would be easy to make a Metallic, you take one Chromatic and use it for a Metallic and use a completely different kind for the role of the Chromatic and it will be hard for players to go "hey... wasn't that Metallic just like that Chromatic" if you get my drift.


----------



## Sojorn

thalmin said:
			
		

> I can appreciate not covering all 10 dragons in the MMI. With each dragon taking up about 4 (or was it more) pages in the MM, each one removes 2 other monsters. Leaving some dragons out gives more variety to what is presented.



Whoa. Nice.

So instead of 10 dragons at a page each plus two other misc. pages that boil down to "all dragons are big, fly and breath stuff", we get 5 dragons at 4 pages each, all unique in what they do


----------



## pukunui

Fallen Seraph said:
			
		

> I agree, it also I don't think be too difficult to simply turn the Chromatics into Metallics. Change the appearance, mannerisms, etc.
> 
> Since it is a new game, the players won't know, that a Metallic Dragon doesn't have that attack.



 Oh sure. Don't get me wrong. I don't _really_ mind that they've left out various things like metallic dragons and frost giants and such. I think it's more the principle of the thing. They've spent a bit of time and money talking up metallic dragons and yet they're not going to deliver on the hype for another year. Seems a bit odd, that's all.



			
				Rechan said:
			
		

> Not to mention how much Use they get. Compare how many times people have fought metallics vs. chromatics, and the answer is pretty obvious.



Yes but see that's the thing. They've been hyping up this whole "every monster is there to be fought" thing. That's why angels aren't just "good" anymore. That's part of the aforementioned metallic dragon hype. They're not the "goody two shoes" dragons that no one fights anymore. You're supposed to be able to come into conflict with them just as easily as you can with the chromatics, and there was that early playtest report where the PCs fought a copper dragon on a ship to demonstrate this fact.

All I'm trying to get at is why spend all this time hyping up something you're saving for at least a year later?


----------



## thalmin

pukunui said:
			
		

> All I'm trying to get at is why spend all this time hyping up something you're saving for at least a year later?



So we will have plenty to argue about discuss during the coming year.


----------



## LordArchaon

thalmin said:
			
		

> So we will have plenty to argue about discuss during the coming year.




Yep... If you think about it, doing marketing for D&D is not for economists, it's something any of us disciples could do it, we know what we want, we know what teases us... And they being basically like us, even more into it, know that even better, and we're seeing it...


----------



## tecnowraith

Did you get to see what the class progression is like? Are there any dead levels for class features, not powers? Like what do the classes get per level in features?


----------



## pukunui

LordArchaon said:
			
		

> Yep... If you think about it, doing marketing for D&D is not for economists, it's something any of us disciples could do it, we know what we want, we know what teases us... And they being basically like us, even more into it, know that even better, and we're seeing it...



 On the one hand, I'm glad that I'm finally not being ignored! 

On the other hand, though, I think we're making a mountain out of a molehill here. I'm not actually upset about the metallics being left out. I can deal with it. Just like I can deal with the druid and the bard not being in the first PHB either.

The stuff I really want right now is the stuff related to building my campaign world so I can have at least the bare bones of a homebrew campaign ready for when I finally get the books (my group is playing SWSE at the moment and the GM is struggling with the amount of prep time and coming up with enough material for a weekly game and he keeps asking me when I can pick up the reins again ... at this point it probably won't be till late June since I have to wait for the books to be shipped all the way out here and then I have to read through them and then I have to build at least part of a world [I'll mostly be using the default PoL concept but personalized, of course]).


EDIT: I'd really love to know more about the section on religion in the PHB. Thalmin, I know you said you didn't get to look at it closely, but maybe somebody else did? You said there were no evil gods. Does that mean that gods like Bane and Tiamat aren't in the PHB? Or does it mean that they're not evil? Are there any good gods or are they all self-serving Greco-Roman style deities? I'm thinking of doing something like that for my world. I really like the way they've done religion in Eberron. Hopefully there will be something about them on DDI in the coming months (that is, hopefully I won't have to wait until 2009 to see how the 4e mechanics work with the Eberron religion system).


----------



## thalmin

tecnowraith said:
			
		

> Did you get to see what the class progression is like? Are there any dead levels for class features, not powers? Like what do the classes get per level in features?



I didn't get particulars, but most levels each class gets either a new feat or an additional power of some sort. (This was off a big chart covering character levels. It also showed stat bonuses, BAB, and defense adjustments, I think)


----------



## pweent

tecnowraith said:
			
		

> Did you get to see what the class progression is like? Are there any dead levels for class features, not powers? Like what do the classes get per level in features?




I'll be surprised if there are any class features after first level. I expect class features are all received at first level, and subsequent levels are taken care of solely by powers. I'd throw in a disclaimer that you might get new class features at the start of Paragon and Epic tiers, but on thinking about it for a bit, I think not - at Paragon tier, you get features from your chosen paragon path. And at Epic tier, who knows?

(Hey, the books are almost out - this might be my last chance to go out on a limb and then be proven wrong!)


----------



## Xeviat

We know that Rogue's sneak attack gets better at 11th and 21st level, so you might be right about getting some new toys at paragon and epic. I see other things scaling too (I'm under the assumption the paladin gets more Lay on Hands each day, since the power says it is at will but then has a special note saying it can only be used once per day ... I think it's 1/day/level).

And thank you for these tidbits. As my friends will tell you, I've been talking about nothing but 4E for the last couple of months and it needs to end.

PS: I like that            and  are symbols for us here now. Sweet.

PPS: First post!


----------



## Valdrax

pukunui said:
			
		

> EDIT: I'd really love to know more about the section on religion in the PHB. Thalmin, I know you said you didn't get to look at it closely, but maybe somebody else did? You said there were no evil gods. Does that mean that gods like Bane and Tiamat aren't in the PHB? Or does it mean that they're not evil? Are there any good gods or are they all self-serving Greco-Roman style deities?



Seconded.  I'm kind of confused by this.  Does that mean that neither Lloth or Gruumsh are in the books?  I can't imagine either deity as Unaligned.

Also, anything you remember on Warlock pact fluff / stylistic differences.  (The Doomsayer Paragon Path hints that fear will be a major theme of the Star Pact, and the powers of the DDXP Warlock make me conjecture that movement and charm are primary abilities ot the Fey Pact, but any more info you can share would be nice.


----------



## hong

mach1.9pants said:
			
		

> Legolas was a Rogue!?!



 What? The Man in Black was a rogue!


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

Valdrax said:
			
		

> Seconded.  I'm kind of confused by this.  Does that mean that neither Lloth or Gruumsh are in the books?  I can't imagine either deity as Unaligned.
> 
> Also, anything you remember on Warlock pact fluff / stylistic differences.  (The Doomsayer Paragon Path hints that fear will be a major theme of the Star Pact, and the powers of the DDXP Warlock make me conjecture that movement and charm are primary abilities ot the Fey Pact, but any more info you can share would be nice.



I wouldn't be surprised if 4E assumes good (or unaligned at worst) PCs, and they presented only non-evil deities in the PHB, leaving the evil ones to the DMG or MM.


----------



## Fiendish Dire Weasel

Xeviat said:
			
		

> I see other things scaling too (I'm under the assumption the paladin gets more Lay on Hands each day, since the power says it is at will but then has a special note saying it can only be used once per day ... I think it's 1/day/level).




Lay Hands is Wisdom Bonus / Day.


----------



## Bestopheles

Yeah, honestly people have posted everything I noticed about the half elf powers. When I first looked at their description my thought was "wow, that's too short"...but they do seem to have roughly the same number of abilities. And don't forget...there are some cool at will abilities too, even if it's only once an encounter.

Re: storm giant...no more specifi info at the moment unfortunately...I was really flipping through the MM fast, and mainly spent the time on the PC monster races.


----------



## DonAdam

I hope Lolth and Gruumsh are demons, not gods.

Edit: Nevermind, says Gruumsh is a god in the orc MM entry.


----------



## Cirex

Bestopheles said:
			
		

> Yeah, honestly people have posted everything I noticed about the half elf powers. When I first looked at their description my thought was "wow, that's too short"...but they do seem to have roughly the same number of abilities. And don't forget...there are some cool at will abilities too, even if it's only once an encounter.
> 
> Re: storm giant...no more specifi info at the moment unfortunately...I was really flipping through the MM fast, and mainly spent the time on the PC monster races.




I'll be burned for this, but any idea what is Drow's special power?


----------



## Just Another User

Andor said:
			
		

> Yeah! 'cause God forbid that a class associated with wisdom, lore and learning might actually, y'know, know stuff....




not in 4e, in 4e being a wizard mean blasting enemies with magical energies.

(Yes, it is an actual quote, even if not word by word, it was one of the very first thing I've read about 4e, but I can't find it anymore.)


----------



## Just Another User

Kaodi said:
			
		

> I would be interested to know if there are any options for a cleric based on charisma. When we restart our game at the end of the summer when the DM gets back from doing some graduate work at the far end of the country, we are going to be looking at if we can rebuild our Age of Worms game for 4th Edition. I have a lawful evil cleric of Vathris (probably unaligned now, I guess) with good intelligence (14), wisdom(15+1) and charisma(16) who might make more sense as a lower wisdom character. Hell, depending on if there are no paragon paths that make sense for him, he might even multiclass as a paladin.




Just a guess, but... just create a cleric and in the rules swap "charisma" with "wisdom" everywhere, if a power say it ue wisdom make it use charisma and vice versa. it should work fine.


----------



## ShinRyuuBR

I wonder, can the half-elf pick up a power from any other class, or must it be from another class with the same power source? Is it a coincidence that Tira the warlock chose a wizard power and the cleric from KotS chose a paladin power, or is it a restriction?


----------



## Rechan

It was posted that Half-elves get an ability of any class.


----------



## Kitirat

Rechan said:
			
		

> It was posted that Half-elves get an ability of any class.




OK so half-elves get:
Baseline stuff:
+2 Chr, +2 any other stat
+2 to insight and diplomacy

Special Stuff
1) +1 to allies diplomacy in 10ft.
2) Choose an encounter power from any class other then your starting class and gain that  
    power as an encounter power.
3) (specultative) gain access to human and elven feats (this would help a good bit if true).

That is it.  Wow, and here I thought every race was going to be close to equal. Oh well, looks like a house rule to give them something else to make them equal to all the other classes (or perhaps two things).

Lets see all other races but humans get:
+2 to two stats (equal but half-elf gets to move one around).
+2 to two skills
1) encounter ability (equals out, though most races encounter ability is better then an at-will)
2) another boon of some kind (+1 to perception to allies, trance, stomach, bold, bonus to surges, fire resistance.
3) a move or attack based bonus (move in difficult, teleport, stand ground, nimble, blood hunt, bonus when bloodied)
4) some gain an extra boon (elven weapon training, etc).

So the half-elf is missing a combat ability to even itself out.


----------



## Rechan

The half-elf gets an at-will ability from another class and treats it as an encounter power.


----------



## Twiggly the Gnome

Kitirat said:
			
		

> OK so half-elves get:
> Baseline stuff:
> +2 Chr, +2 any other stat




Both of the pre-gens we've seen have had a apparent bonus to CHA and CON. It could be a coincidence, but I tend to doubt it.


----------



## RigaMortus2

Are Rangers just archers now, or can they choose Two-Weapon Fighting over archery?  Or can t hey pick both?

If it is true, that TWF doesn't add an additional attack, just additional damage (which means no splitting attacks between multiple foes), how does that compare to an archery-based Ranger?  Is it weaker, or are they balanced?


----------



## Rechan

RigaMortus2 said:
			
		

> Are Rangers just archers now, or can they choose Two-Weapon Fighting over archery?  Or can t hey pick both?
> 
> If it is true, that TWF doesn't add an additional attack, just additional damage (which means no splitting attacks between multiple foes), how does that compare to an archery-based Ranger?  Is it weaker, or are they balanced?



An at-will ability that let rangers make two attacks was mentioned. But Thalmin didn't see any more.


----------



## MyISPHatesENWorld

RigaMortus2 said:
			
		

> Are Rangers just archers now, or can they choose Two-Weapon Fighting over archery?  Or can t hey pick both?
> 
> If it is true, that TWF doesn't add an additional attack, just additional damage (which means no splitting attacks between multiple foes), how does that compare to an archery-based Ranger?  Is it weaker, or are they balanced?




From what we were told by people that got to preview the PHB, fighting with two-weapons as a feat adds damage, but there is a Ranger at-will power that allows you to get an extra attack fighting with two weapons.

The fighter powers cleave and passing attack allow hitting separate targets, so a ranger power letting you do the same thing doesn't seem out of the realm of possibility.

[/START CONJECTURE]If things follow the path of how the rogue abilities work, your Fighter Style will grant you bonuses to one or the other (archery or two-weapon fighting) but you could pick powers from either. And following how the rogue is laid out, you would get bonuses on certain powers and/or Hunter's Quarry/Prime Shot based on which path you choose between archery and two-weapon fighting. [/END CONJECTURE]


----------



## Kesh

Bestopheles said:
			
		

> Gnomes. GNOMES. Gnomes are insane. Gnomes can *turn invis* once per encounter after they've taken dmg. They can also choose to roll "hide" instead of intialtive at the start of an encounter. Hello Gnome Rogue. And by "hello" I mean, "Please, for the love of god, stop stabbing me in the back." My friends quote was "Man, I hate gnomes! They're stupid! But now I can't stop picturing a pack of gnomes sitting in the trees doing the clicking noise that the Predators make in the alien movies. Stupid stealth gnomes. I'm going to have to play one."




You are so .sigged for this bit.


----------



## Fanaelialae

With regard to the half-elf, I think that they may have one of the strongest racial powers that currently exist.  

To begin with, it's the only power "slot" that offers 29 options straight out of the PHB (most "slots" offer 4 options).  It will only get better with time, as more classes and at-will powers are introduced to the game.  It allows a half-elf to steal a power that complements their own quite nicely, without having to compromise their multiclass choice (or multiclass at all).

One example would be to take eye bite.  A rogue could then eye bite an enemy, move in, use an action point, and use a powerful attack that receives the invisibility as well as sneak attack bonuses.  And still multiclass fighter, assuming he was looking to be a bit more defender-ish overall.  

Moreover, assuming that you can take seperate classes for the multiclassing feats and the paragon multiclassing option, a half-elf is the only one that could take powers from 4 different classes (if what you're going for is a jack-of-all-trades).

The rest of what they get is somewhat "eh", but I'm not all that certain that you could give them much more without potentially overpowering them.  Versatility does not directly equate to power, but I have little doubt that there will be certain combinations of powers that do.


----------



## rhm001

I think the half-elf looks good, especially if the "human and elf for feats" is correct. That said, I agree with the earlier posts suggesting it might come up a little short. What seems to be missing is a defensive bonus. Most of the other races either get a bonus to one or more defenses, defenses to specific types of attacks, or both. 

Humans gain a bonus against everything, eladrin on will and more against charm, halflings on reflex and against attacks of opportunity, tieflings fire resistance, dwarves a bonus on poison saves and the minor action second wind, and dragonborn get draconic heritage and dragonborn fury. Elves have the terrain bonus, which might be a tighter fit in the category, but they get an extra square of movement, too.

I think there's a good argument that the cross-class extra attack option is pretty powerful, but I would hope we might see a bonus to one type of defense or against one type of attack for the half-elf. For example, we know they're charismatic; the eladrin bonus against charm sounds like it might not be a bad fit.


----------



## Zelgadas

We also know, from the excerpt on racial abilities and feats, that half-elves get their own suite of racial feats (even if they do wind up getting access to both human and elf feats).  We also know that racial feats are designed to make races better at what they do, and a large part of what the half-elf does well is multiclassing.  Thus, I don't think it's outside of the realm of possibility that half-elves gain access to racial feats that make them better at multiclassing than the other races.  Maybe they get to poach other powers at higher levels, or even make that at-will as an encounter into a true at-will eventually.  Personally, I think that, for a certain kind of character, the half-elf makes a lot of sense based just on what we know about it now.  But we have to remember that we're not seeing the whole picture.  We're seeing the helf-elf at level 1, and personally I think it's pretty well balanced as is.  But it might get even better as the campaign progresses.


----------



## Cadfan

I'm cool with the half elf the way he is, I think.  If he's got a +2 Cha and a floating +2, he's in a very good position.  Any class that uses Cha as a primary or secondary stat will be great for them, because he can ensure perfect efficiency on his racial ability score bonuses.  That's a pretty big benefit.


----------



## Zelgadas

Very true.  And of the 8 classes in the PH, 5 (that we know of) use Charisma as a primary or secondary stat: Rogue, Warlock, Warlord, Cleric, and Paladin.  So there you go.


----------



## tecnowraith

Is there any rules for crafting mundane items from the either PHB or DMG? We have not seen anything on this or a complete skill list to see if there is a skill still.


----------



## Caliber

Thalmin or anyone else, did you happen to check out the various "builds" each class gets? Like, what are the Warlock's pacts? Do Wizard's specialize in an implement? What about Clerics or Paladins? Anything analogous to Rogue's or Warlord's focus on a secondary stat?

Is the Fighter sword-and-board or two-handed?

Thanks so much for posting this info!


----------



## FitzTheRuke

Just Another User said:
			
		

> not in 4e, in 4e being a wizard mean blasting enemies with magical energies.




Actually that's being a 4E **PC** wizard. A wizard who has chosen the career of an adventurer.  They are to regular scholarly wizards what Indiana Jones is to regular archeologists. 

Fitz


----------



## tuffnoogies

hong said:
			
		

> IMO the best way to make raising the dead rare and mysterious is to ban death. It works very well!




Yes, but it would make adventuring rather boring if the characters weren't risking death.

Or did you mean ban _raise_ dead?


----------



## Hammerhead

tuffnoogies said:
			
		

> Yes, but it would make adventuring rather boring if the characters weren't risking death.
> 
> Or did you mean ban _raise_ dead?




Not so. My longest running game (1st-18th) had a party who couldn't die. Well, they could die, they would return to life after an hour or so with a tiny XP penalty. That game certainly wasn't boring. Just because you can't die doesn't mean that other people you care about won't die, or you won't lose all your precious magic items, or because losing SUCKS, or the bank won't get robbed, etc. As long as their is anything else at stake in the adventure (even pride), people won't take suicidal risks.


----------



## andarilhor

Anyone know if the roles and the power sources has any significance besides as a game design instrument?
If the fighter and the paladin has any features in common because both are defenders?
Or the paladin and the cleric has anything in common because both has divine power sources?


----------



## thalmin

*Best Guess*



			
				andarilhor said:
			
		

> Anyone know if the roles and the power sources has any significance besides as a game design instrument?
> If the fighter and the paladin has any features in common because both are defenders?
> Or the paladin and the cleric has anything in common because both has divine power sources?



The roles, probably just game design. But I could see magic items keying on power sources instead of just classes.


----------



## Timlagor

How often do you get Feats?

In the preview characters, both the Fighter and Paladin get to "mark" an enemy (giving it penalties for attacking others) but each enemy can only have one Mark at a time.


----------



## Spatula

tuffnoogies said:
			
		

> Yes, but it would make adventuring rather boring if the characters weren't risking death.
> 
> Or did you mean ban _raise_ dead?



Your first mistake was taking something hong said seriously...


----------



## thalmin

Timlagor said:
			
		

> How often do you get Feats?



I think it was about every 4 levels, but not sure on that.

edit: That seems to be incorrect, every other level is more likely, as the characters in KotS gain a feat at 2nd level.


> In the preview characters, both the Fighter and Paladin get to "mark" an enemy (giving it penalties for attacking others) but each enemy can only have one Mark at a time.



True, and I think there are other marks available, but each is different, some in how you mark, some in effects of the mark.


----------



## WhatGravitas

tuffnoogies said:
			
		

> Yes, but it would make adventuring rather boring if the characters weren't risking death.



There are things worse than death, especially in a fantasy world. Don't forget: Since it's only the death of the character, not the player, you'll never "fear" the death. You fear losing. You still lose, even without death.

Getting rid of accidental death in combat, replacing it with "being knocked-out" - perhaps with a penalty attached - allows the players to get more invested into their characters (since they're not dying to bad luck any more), hence they feel the consequences of losing more than before.

Because now it's not about surviving, but about saving the world/friend/whatever.

Cheers, LT.


----------



## Dragonblade

thalmin said:
			
		

> I think it was about every 4 levels, but not sure on that.




I thought it was already established that you get a feat at level 1 and at every even level? I'm 99% positive that was already confirmed.


----------



## Wormwood

tuffnoogies said:
			
		

> Yes, but it would make adventuring rather boring if the characters weren't risking death.



In my final (and I daresay most successful) D&D campaign, no PCs could die unless their player expressly consented---effectively removing the "threat" of death from the campaign. 

So I would definitely disagree that removing such an element resulted in a boring game.


----------



## thalmin

Dragonblade said:
			
		

> I thought it was already established that you get a feat at level 1 and at every even level? I'm 99% positive that was already confirmed.



Could be, I didn't make a note at the time and was trying to remember the chart. 
I want to take another look at the books!


----------



## Family

thalmin said:
			
		

> I want to take another look at the books!




Captain Obvious thank heavens you've arrived.   

I picture you viewing them for the first time: "so beautiful; full...of...stars...they should have sent a poet, they should have sent a poet."

/BTW thanks for the awesome scout reports.


----------



## thalmin

Actually, if I can fit it into my schedule, I will try to visit my distributor and see the books again, this time at his place and without the crowd. 

But it is a 3 hour round trip, and the books will be out in less than 3 weeks...

Who am I kidding. I'll go if I can fit it in. (to my car when no one is looking. Hehehe)


----------



## GoodKingJayIII

A feat every four levels?  I don't think that's correct.

From this:



> For example, a 14th-level character can’t have more than seven paragon feats (those gained at 11th, 12th, and 14th level, as well as up to four retrained feats).




That's basically a feat every other level, and seems to imply a 14th level character has more than seven feats.


----------



## Rechan

thalmin said:
			
		

> Actually, if I can fit it into my schedule, I will try to visit my distributor and see the books again, this time at his place and without the crowd.
> 
> But it is a 3 hour round trip, and the books will be out in less than 3 weeks...
> 
> Who am I kidding. I'll go if I can fit it in. (to my car when no one is looking. Hehehe)



Is it time for another checklist of what we'd like to see again?


----------



## thalmin

GoodKingJayIII said:
			
		

> A feat every four levels?  I don't think that's correct.
> 
> From this:
> 
> 
> 
> That's basically a feat every other level, and seems to imply a 14th level character has more than seven feats.



I changed my response. The pregens in KotS each gained a feat at level 2.


----------



## Family

New thread for future rulebook questions? I'll post one, see if it flies.


----------



## GoodKingJayIII

thalmin said:
			
		

> I changed my response. The pregens in KotS each gained a feat at level 2.




Gotcha.  Missed that!


----------



## Heahengel

tuffnoogies said:
			
		

> Yes, but it would make adventuring rather boring if the characters weren't risking death.
> 
> Or did you mean ban _raise_ dead?



I'm in a campaign right now where death has basically been removed (after finishing another campaign without death with the same group).  I'm sure its not for every game, but it works great for us.


----------



## jeffhartsell

*Requirement: You must be wielding a light blade.*

Most rogue power requirements are "You must be wielding a light blade."

So, if you are wield two weapons and one is light and the other is not, to me this seems to meet the requirement and you can use the power with either weapon.

Is that the intent of the wording or was the intent that the attack be made with the light blade? Will we ever know in time?!


----------



## Family

jeffhartsell said:
			
		

> Most rogue power requirements are "You must be wielding a light blade."
> 
> So, if you are wield two weapons and one is light and the other is not, to me this seems to meet the requirement and you can use the power with either weapon.
> 
> Is that the intent of the wording or was the intent that the attack be made with the light blade? Will we ever know in time?!




Now THAT'S rule lawyering. I am so going to use that.


----------



## jeffhartsell

Family said:
			
		

> Now THAT'S rule lawyering. I am so going to use that.




I've had years of both practice and adjudicating hardcore rules lawyers and munchkins.    I try to rule to the spirit of the rules. This one is hard to tell.


----------



## LightPhoenix

jeffhartsell said:
			
		

> I've had years of both practice and adjudicating hardcore rules lawyers and munchkins.    I try to rule to the spirit of the rules. This one is hard to tell.




I disagree.  It's readily obvious the intent is that the power can only be used with a light blade.


----------



## Ravingdork

I was under the impression that 4E characters got a feat at 1st, and every 3 levels thereafter, and then got class bonus feats at every even level (like in Star Wars Saga). Was I wrong in this assumption?


----------



## tombowings

raven_dark64 said:
			
		

> I was under the impression that 4E characters got a feat at 1st, and every 3 levels thereafter, and then got class bonus feats at every even level (like in Star Wars Saga). Was I wrong in this assumption?




I don't think so, but you never know.


----------



## Lurker37

From the tiers preview, we know that a 14th level character has more than 7 feats.

So 1,3,5,7,9,11,13 isn't enough (it's only 7). That leaves 1,2,4,6,8,10,12,14 as the most likely progression.


----------



## Campbell

Lurker37 said:
			
		

> From the tiers preview, we know that a 14th level character has more than 7 feats.
> 
> So 1,3,5,7,9,11,13 isn't enough (it's only 7). That leaves 1,2,4,6,8,10,12,14 as the most likely progression.




I think you're off by one feat there. The tiers excerpt mentioned receiving a feat at 11th level. I think you receive a feat on the first level of each tier and on even levels.



			
				 Tiers Excerpt said:
			
		

> 5. Select Feats. You generally don’t have to worry about the level at which you gained a particular feat, since retraining allows you to have the feats you want at any given level. Do watch out for paragon and epic feats, though. For example, a 14th-level character can’t have more than seven paragon feats (*those gained at 11th, 12th, and 14th level*, as well as up to four retrained feats).


----------



## Mathew_Freeman

Thanks for all the info, Thalmin!

I don't have any requests, other than KEEP POSTING!


----------



## Kaffis

invokethehojo said:
			
		

> At this point it looks like wizards (a to a much lesser extent the Warlord) are the only ones who benefit from intelligence.  Hopefully as time passes more classes will use it.
> 
> Last edition intelligence got front chair (of the mentals), this edition I think that title now goes to Charisma.




Well, when half the classes released are martial power sourced, I don't think it's upsetting that a physical stat is more widely useful than a mental one (dex vs. int).

As more arcane classes come out, not to mention the psionics power source, int will see its day. As things stand, it looks like warlords and wizards will favor int, clerics will be indifferent between int and dex (leaving it up to a roleplay preference on a per-character basis, rather than a mechanical preference -- smart clerics aren't a bad thing), fighters will probably be somewhat indifferent (I'm assuming that heavy armor will hinder the use of dex based skills, so that dex's skill advantage will be mitigated rather than having sneaky, acrobatic fighters in plate), allowing for thoughtful, cunning warriors and mercenaries. Likewise for paladins.

Heck, even rogues may find some value in doubling up their "reflex stats" -- while I'm sure they'll be grabbing dex for the skills, I've never met a thief worth mentioning who couldn't appraise. I also wonder if perhaps dungeoneering might be an int-based skill this time around, given that some uses of things like decipher script and various knowledge skills might have gotten rolled into it.


----------



## Steely Dan

Campbell said:
			
		

> I think you're off by one feat there. The tiers excerpt mentioned receiving a feat at 11th level. I think you receive a feat on the first level of each tier and on even levels.





Yeah, I think you gain feats at levels:

1, 2, 4, 6, 10, 11, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 21, 22, 24, 26, 28, 30



I think you gain bonuses at:

4th (+1 to two different scores), 8th (+1 to two different scores), 11th (+1 to all scores) 14th (+1 to two different scores), 18th (+1 to two different scores), 21st (+1 to all scores), 24th (+1 to two different scores), 28th (+1 to two different scores).


----------



## Wolfwood2

tuffnoogies said:
			
		

> Yes, but it would make adventuring rather boring if the characters weren't risking death.
> 
> Or did you mean ban _raise_ dead?




I am going to be running Keep on the Shadowfell in the homebrew world of a DM whose world does not have Raise Dead.  In order to keep all pre-gens alive for the duration of the adventure, I am going to announce that I am banning death.  Any PC who would ordinarily have died will instead be horribly injured and have to be taken back to town for a special healing ritual.  Afterwards they will recieve a permanent impairment (like losing an eye or having a limp) and possibly suffer a -1 for three milestones.


----------



## KidSnide

Steely Dan said:
			
		

> Yeah, I think you gain feats at levels:
> 1, 2, 4, 6, 10, 11, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 21, 22, 24, 26, 28, 30



This is almost certainly correct.



			
				Steely Dan said:
			
		

> I think you gain bonuses at:
> 4th (+1 to two different scores), 8th (+1 to two different scores), 11th (+1 to all scores) 14th (+1 to two different scores), 18th (+1 to two different scores), 21st (+1 to all scores), 24th (+1 to two different scores), 28th (+1 to two different scores).



This is interesting.  Do you have a source?


----------



## cdrcjsn

Wolfwood2 said:
			
		

> I am going to be running Keep on the Shadowfell in the homebrew world of a DM whose world does not have Raise Dead.  In order to keep all pre-gens alive for the duration of the adventure, I am going to announce that I am banning death.  Any PC who would ordinarily have died will instead be horribly injured and have to be taken back to town for a special healing ritual.  Afterwards they will recieve a permanent impairment (like losing an eye or having a limp) and possibly suffer a -1 for three milestones.




So except for the flavor, in terms of mechanics, it's identical to death and raising the dead rules?


----------



## pweent

KidSnide said:
			
		

> This is interesting.  Do you have a source?




He does: post number 17 in this very thread.   

See here.


----------



## Wolfwood2

cdrcjsn said:
			
		

> So except for the flavor, in terms of mechanics, it's identical to death and raising the dead rules?




Yes.  Given the players involved, some of them may well be hoping for the chance to end up with memorable scars/losses.


----------



## ThirdWizard

KidSnide said:
			
		

> This is almost certainly correct.




_Or is it??_ DUN DUN DUNNNNNNNNNN


----------



## Counterspin

So you could have a rogue, with or without the 4e dual wielding feat, with a light blade in one hand for attacks that require it and a sturdier weapon in the other.  Sounds good.


----------



## franzel

pweent said:
			
		

> He does: post number 17 in this very thread.
> 
> See here.




Except that Thalmin's post:

+1 to each of two different stats at about every 4th level, but there are a few levels (I think 11 and 21) where every stat gets a +1 bonus.

Could also mean

4th (+1 to two different scores), 8th (+1 to two different scores), 11th (+1 to all scores), 12th (+1 to two different scores), 16th (+1 to two different scores), 20th (+1 to two different scores), 21st (+1 to all scores), 24th (+1 to two different scores), 28th (+1 to two different scores).

This results in one extra set of ability bonus increases to two of the player's choice.


----------



## pweent

franzel said:
			
		

> Except that Thalmin's post:
> 
> +1 to each of two different stats at about every 4th level, but there are a few levels (I think 11 and 21) where every stat gets a +1 bonus.
> 
> Could also mean
> 
> 4th (+1 to two different scores), 8th (+1 to two different scores), 11th (+1 to all scores), 12th (+1 to two different scores), 16th (+1 to two different scores), 20th (+1 to two different scores), 21st (+1 to all scores), 24th (+1 to two different scores), 28th (+1 to two different scores).
> 
> This results in one extra set of ability bonus increases to two of the player's choice.




Ah, that's true. It's just a matter of triangulation. From WotC's Tiers excerpt, we know which levels you get advances at:



			
				Tiers of Play said:
			
		

> *Determine Ability Scores.* Generate scores as for a 1st-level character, applying racial modifiers. Then increase those scores as shown on the Character Advancement table in the Player’s Handbook, with increases at 4th level, 8th level, 11th, 14th, and so on.




So from the excerpt we can extrapolate at which levels the increases take place (no hedging bets with "about every 4th level"), and from thalmin's post we can determine how much those attributes advance at each increase.

I wouldn't say its proved beyond a shadow of a doubt, but the "4 8 *11* 14 18 *21* 24 28" theory seems pretty solid.


----------



## hong

Wolfwood2 said:
			
		

> I am going to be running Keep on the Shadowfell in the homebrew world of a DM whose world does not have Raise Dead.  In order to keep all pre-gens alive for the duration of the adventure, I am going to announce that I am banning death.  Any PC who would ordinarily have died will instead be horribly injured and have to be taken back to town for a special healing ritual.  Afterwards they will recieve a permanent impairment (like losing an eye or having a limp) and possibly suffer a -1 for three milestones.



 Great, you let it slip just once that you've banned death, and suddenly EVERYONE STEALS YOUR SCHTICK.


----------



## jaldaen

So did anyone notice what the balancing mechanic was for the ranger's at-will dual attack mentioned earlier (penalty to attack, lower damage, something else)? I asked a few pages ago, but I think it got lost in the crowd of questions. Thanks


----------



## thalmin

jaldaen said:
			
		

> So did anyone notice what the balancing mechanic was for the ranger's at-will dual attack mentioned earlier (penalty to attack, lower damage, something else)? I asked a few pages ago, but I think it got lost in the crowd of questions. Thanks



I saw the question, but I don't have an answer for you.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

hong said:
			
		

> Great, you let it slip just once that you've banned death, and suddenly EVERYONE STEALS YOUR SCHTICK.



If by "slipping once" you mean posting it in every discussion related to that topic, and by "stealing", you mean copying (good?) ideas, yes, that can happen.


----------



## jaldaen

thalmin said:
			
		

> I saw the question, but I don't have an answer for you.




Oh well... I was hoping... 

Anyway thanks for taking the time to answer all our questions... it is much appreciated.


----------



## Stormtalon

Random items from browsing the PHB last night (local FLGS has an in-stock preview set):  I saw questions about the potions from the KotS descriptions, so I looked at those specifically.  Looks like 4 healing potions out there (and I can't remember their exact names, so I'll just go with effect); from weakest to strongest:

Cure 10 HP
Cure 25 HP, allow save vs 1 effect
Cure 50 HP, allow save vs all effects
Same as above BUT can also restore a VERY recently deceased person to life.

The last potion is also crazy expensive: 125,000 gp, so it's definitely an Epic Tier sorta item.


----------



## pweent

Stormtalon said:
			
		

> Looks like 4 healing potions out there (and I can't remember their exact names, so I'll just go with effect); from weakest to strongest:
> 
> Cure 10 HP
> Cure 25 HP, allow save vs 1 effect
> Cure 50 HP, allow save vs all effects
> Same as above BUT can also restore a VERY recently deceased person to life.
> 
> The last potion is also crazy expensive: 125,000 gp, so it's definitely an Epic Tier sorta item.




Huh! I'm quite surprised to see that potions aren't based around healing surges metrics, e.g., "Regain hit points as though you had expended two healing surges, allow save vs 1 effect."


----------



## Stormtalon

They do expend a healing surge, but yeah, they've got set amounts of healing.


----------



## Scalding

What kind of action is required to quaff a potion?  Do you heal your healing surge value in addition to the potion value?


----------



## Protagonist

Scalding said:
			
		

> What kind of action is required to quaff a potion?  Do you heal your healing surge value in addition to the potion value?




1: minor (as clarified by - i think - WotC_Logan in a KotS thread)
2: dunno


----------



## Fiendish Dire Weasel

Potions are like this specificly to prevent scaling so the potion you got at 1st level isn't as handy when you're at 30th. This way you have to keep updating your potions and be less afraid to use them.


----------



## Byronic

Scalding said:
			
		

> What kind of action is required to quaff a potion?  Do you heal your healing surge value in addition to the potion value?




It takes a minor action to use them and I don't think you get your healing surge on top of it.


----------



## Engilbrand

If I understand correctly, the weakest uses a Surge and only gives you 10 points, no bonus from the Surge. The reason that you would use this is that it allows you to heal in combat without using your Second Wind.


----------



## glass

hong said:
			
		

> What? The Man in Black was a rogue!



Well, he walked the line... 


glass.


----------

