http://www.icv2.com/articles/home/11123.html

At this point, I stopped reading in horror.

Presumably at some point in the next eight months we'll get the 3.5 Feat Compendium... right?

*hopes*

Don't be too horrified, apparently the new saga edition plays quite well. It abandons very specific classes and goes with general ones and ability trees rather than class skills, so you can customise characters more. The other book they've apparently tested some stuff out in lets you use stuff on a per encounter basis rather than the per day stuff 3.5 uses.

If that's correct, it would remove one of the main criticisms leveled at D&D, that it encourages the creation of stereotypical characters.

My main initial concern is this new online content. How vital will it be, and how much will it cost ?

Ok, so it did encourage the creation of stereotypical characters, but universe and fantasy elements aside (and I've always thought they've managed that pretty well.) I hope this isn't just going to be D&D version 3.75. There are some annoying problems with the currently, particulary regarding the skill system.
Plus, prestige classes encourage silliness.

I note that hasbro managed to augument this important announcement with a rather spectacular server failure on the main website.

Here is what wizards has to say about it

Not sure how they will make it simpler, almost everything in 3.5 is roll a d20, add something and try to beat a number. I think the main problem going from 3.0 to 3.5 was it gave the impression they were releasing it just to make money. I dont think this will change that view.

D&D has lots of things which identify it, like the spell system, the 6 stats e.t.c. Stereotypical characters is a part of that. It wouldn't be D&D if the paladin was just someone who took a mix of fighting & holy abilities.

Having spent some time on youtube, the general impression I'm getting is a positive one: they've noticed which bits are bad and are trying to change them. If they do it well, 4 could be a rather good game.

They want to make all the levels playable from 1 through to 30 rather than just having a bit in the middle which they somewhat irritatingly call a 'sweet spot' through the presentation. If they can pull that off, I'll be highly impressed.

They talk a lot about simplifying the rules, which seems to be streamlining more than changing the essential mechanic of 'roll d20, add something, beat a number' -- basically, they want more checks to boil down to just that, as opposed to 'attack of opportunity, find this number on your character sheet that you've never used before, add something else that may or may not be relevant, roll d20, get the other guy to do the same, look up what happens when you get the same result...' Again, if they're successful in that, it would be great.

A lot of things seem to be moving towards an encounter-based rather than day-based adventure structure, so you might be able to recharge spells between encounters like the Book of Nine Swords lets you recharge manoeuvres.

Giving options to characters and making the choices they make stay relevant through the levels seems to be a watchword too. Some vague articles on the main site talk about having race choices give abilities at levels other than 1st, so being a dwarf is more than just the bonuses you start with and quickly ignore, and a fighter's choice of weapon becomes more than a compromise between threat range and crit multiplier.

I've got to say, though, it doesn't sound massively different from 3.5. They're saying they're not going to be bringing out a character conversion thing to update 3rd ed. characters, so they clearly think it's a very different thing, but whether or not that's the case remains to be seen. A tagline they're using is 'evolutionary, not revolutionary', which could mean 'we're not changing a lot', but could also mean 'don't panic those of you who're stuck in your ways, it'll still have elves and dragons and stuff'.

Incidentally, here's the teaser video for 4th ed. No, I don't know why they used a French guy, either.

http://www.enworld.org/index.php?page=4e

Confirmed races for 4th ed are: Humans, Dwaves, Elves, Halflings, Eladrins, Tieflings, and Dragonborn.

not too sure about Dragonborn, or Tieflings without Assimar for that matter.

Not sure who is in charge of advertising, but these need an overhaul to be truly grabbing, however they are informative


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJ3J8t2-RVs&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hWZ2WdeTo1M&feature=related

I'd guess those "viseos " are actually powerpoint presentations.

Sounds good to me.

However, I can't say I'm particularly keen on the whole dragon god/mythology thingumie, which has always kind of sucked, so I think making them part of the main pantheon is just designed to annoy me.

While I am enthusiastic and optimistic about 4th ed, I really have to ask, wtf, Wizards?

(Warning, this link may hijack your firefox and stop you looking at other tabs while the horror ensues.)

So, to summarise what we have learned from this:
Tieflings are in because they are popular, and they help fill the "pictures of scantily clad women in the PHB" quota.
Gnomes are out because they are unpopular, and nobody wants to see them naked.

Speculation: Weebl becomes a character template in the monster manual.