|
| Dungeons & Dragons Player's Handbook: Roleplaying Game Core Rules, 4th Edition | 
 enlarge | Author: Wizards Rpg Team
Brand: Wizards of the Coast
Category: Book
List Price: $34.95
Buy New: $19.84
You Save: $15.11 (43%)
New (41) Used (10) from $19.84
Avg. Customer Rating:  187 reviews
Sales Rank: 1627
Media: Hardcover
Edition: 4th
Number Of Items: 1
Pages: 320
Shipping Weight (lbs): 2.4
Dimensions (in): 10.9 x 8.4 x 0.9
ISBN: 0786948671
Dewey Decimal Number: 793
EAN: 9780786948673
ASIN: 0786948671
Publication Date: June 6, 2008
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
|
| Similar Items:
|
| Editorial Reviews:
Product Description
The first of three core rulebooks for the 4th Edition Dungeons & Dragons Roleplaying Game. The Dungeons & Dragons Roleplaying Game has defined the medieval fantasy genre and the tabletop RPG industry for more than 30 years. In the D&D game, players create characters that band together to explore dungeons, slay monsters, and find treasure. The 4th Edition D&D rules offer the best possible play experience by presenting exciting character options, an elegant and robust rules system, and handy storytelling tools for the Dungeon Master. The Players Handbook presents the official Dungeons & Dragons Roleplaying Game rules as well as everything a player needs to create D&D characters worthy of song and legend: new character races, base classes, paragon paths, epic destinies, powers, magic items, weapons, armor, and much more.
|
| Customer Reviews: Read 182 more reviews...
 4th Edition: Pulling back from the complexity of 3.5 June 7, 2008
367 out of 411 found this review helpful
4th edition D&D = Different.
That fact alone would have spawned endless teeth gnashing from loyalists of prior versions - but what differences are we talking about? How different is it?
In a word: very.
4th edition is a sea change in the core rules that is easily on par with the change from 2nd Edition to 3rd Edition.
Start with the thematic changes:
The core races have changed. Humans, Halflings, Elves, Half-Elves and Dwarves are back - they've just been supplemented with three new races. Dragonborn (dragonmen), Eladrin (magical fey of the wood) and Tiefling (humanoids with an otherworldly taint).
Classes from 3.0 and 3.5 have been dropped from this volume (There is no druid, monk, bard, or barbarian). These classes are promised in future Player's Handbooks. Not the most auspicious beginning.
Thematic changes like this are easy to spot - but are perhaps the least important changes in the game. I dislike the concept of Dragonborn ("Dragon-anything" is a label I feel makes its subject seem cartoonish and cliched), but as a GM - I can easily fix this. In my world Dragonborn will be lizardmen, with a backstory that I choose. I take the rules and make them my own.
The WotC game designers have clearly tried to shift the game mechanics towards customized character development: (a rules buffet, so to speak) - so anyone who wants to have a druid could achieve a reasonable facsimile of powers and rituals and achieve the rest thematically.
Many will have a problem with this - but I frankly don't. Being able to mix and match classes in 3.5 was a radical shift (and a brilliant one) and the re-thinking of that model that occurs in 4th Edition provides more options, not less.
The artwork (particularly the book's cover) will come in for a large amount of abuse - but again, this is such a minor issue. Quality artwork is important for RPG (imagery is the lifeblood of storytelling), but any one picture will have those who love it/hate it. So long as the majority of the art isn't bad (like the schlock in 2nd edition) any gamer is free to switch to pictures they *do* enjoy.
Again, thematic changes will get a lot of attention, but any GM is free to re-imagine any theme that they have a problem with.
On to Rules:
This is where the true sea change is. Any discussion of what is happening in 4th edition can be boiled down to this:
4th edition wants to simplify things and speed up your gaming sessions.
3rd edition and 3.5 attempted to create flexibility and lots of independent rulesets (feats, prestige classes). This was good - but the complexity inherent in this model caused a lot of problems. When scalable feats collided with spells and class abilities - often the only guidance the GM would have is the precise language in the rulebook. Is a charge an attack action? No, it is a full round action that allows you to attack - and so on.
I sincerely believe that 3rd edition was superior to 2nd edition, but I never had as many rules disputes when I played 2nd edition.
4th Edition was clearly intended to address this issue.
Base attack bonus tables? Gone. You get a bonus of half your level, rounded down, to pretty much anything you do (as well as to many stats, like your AC). The advantage of this is twofold - it's easy to remember and it always scales.
All attacks are now attacks: be they claw, sword or spell - the character will roll a die, add their modifiers up and try to hit a defense number. This streamlines combat spells, since instead of a saving throw, you will have a passive defense number that your opponents will try to beat. One roll, from the attacker - always.
This kind of symmetry will allow players to better remember what to do. I'm a target, I do nothing. I'm attacking, I roll.
The combat round has gotten an overhaul, as well. Characters are now allowed to perform the following in a round: A standard action, a move action, a minor action, and any number of free actions. These labels exist in a hierarchy, so the character can forgo a standard action to take an additional use of a lesser action.
Standard actions are the big actions (attack, use a power, etc). Move actions are exactly what you'd think. Minor actions include readying a weapon or maintaining a spell effect. Free actions are virtually unlimited (drop something, speak, etc).
The groupings are intuitive- and the initial adjustment aside - this structure will add some real clarity to the always problematic question of "what can I do in a round?"
Now the biggest shift of all: Powers
All 3rd edition/3.5 casters get weaker and less useful every time they cast a spell, resulting in the entire party needing to stop and camp just to get their magic back.
If the party had an early morning encounter that was intense enough - the caster would spend the rest of the day "empty" and pretty much useless.
4th edition tackles this issue head on. Character have powers that can be used once per encounter. Meaning: no matter how many encounters your spell caster has in a day, they will have something to contribute.
This is brilliant. A real slap-the-forehead moment, even for gamers who (like me) have been playing for decades. Once per encounter powers are scaled to not be show stoppers - but they scale as you get more powerful.
Powers that refresh for encounters are supplemented with powers that are refreshed after an extended rest (much like old times). The difference is that the rest need only be 6 hours long, which fits better with the model of dungeon crawls and treks in the wilderness.
Spells weren't the only resource PCs needed to hole up and replenish. The other one was Hit Points. The old healing model was: everyone gets a pittance for resting, and then the healers burn magic to *really* fix people. This system exacerbated the previous problem of spellcaster depletion. Caster rests, uses all their spell slots to heal other PCs - and is useless for the rest of the day.
Now - everyone can heal by themselves. Every PC has a healing reserve - a set number of times they can heal 1/4th their total hit points. In combat, most PCs are allowed to do this only once - magic and special abilities can increase this.
This seems weird for lots of reasons, but it will free players to pursue action instead of good places to rest. Clerics can still be healers, without being straitjacketed to the role. This is good, really good news for gamers. Parties will still have to hole up and rest, but healing reserves and encounter based powers will ensure that they will never be completely out of options.
And powers aren't just for spellcasters! This, too seems weird - but warrior types are given abilities called "Exploits." These are essentially special moves that enhance the warriors martial abilities. Call them magic or call them tricks their guild master taught them - they are expended in the same way as powers - and the advancement model ensures they will scale better than 3.5's feats.
The last big change to magic is the creation of Ritual Magic. Rituals are spells that take too long to cast in combat (10 minutes or more) but have long lasting, or purely utilitarian effects: summon mounts, scrying, etc. Moving these abilities out of the realm of combat with casting times decreases the likelihood that their effects will collide with combat rules in unforeseen ways. As a GM - I like this a lot. Players will still get creative, but when combat is ongoing - I hate to stop and figure out if a utility spell like Prestigitation can have an effect on combat.
There are many other changes:
-Three tiers of level advancement, each containing 10 levels - entering any new tier affords you new powers and development paths. Each tier contains powers scaled to that tier - no more feat free-for alls.
-Skills have been (mercifully) simplified so that there is better parity among PCs of the same level (The bonus follows the same format of 1/2 level + bonuses). You either are trained in a skill, or you are not. Training nets you a flat +5 bonus. (Gone is the insanity of 3.5 where a level loss had you searching prior versions of your character to reset your skill levels. Remember what INT drain did to skills? the horror!)
There is a lot to like here. The long suffering DMs of 3.5 will finally get some speed back into their game. It will be an adjustment, but the goals of this system are admirable.
That said, I have three gripes.
One is just a personal bias. 3rd edition required miniatures for combat in all but name. 4th edition codifies miniatures. The idea of a purely "in your head" encounter is a rapidly fading memory for gamers like me. Sometimes, you just want to do a combat on the fly, without figures and without maps. WotC has clearly come down on the side of precise tactics - and I truly wish they'd made more accommodations for DMs who don't like to map every improvised encounter site.
Second - while the 4th edition PH's index is merely lacking; its glossary is non-existent. In books of this size - a one page index is just inadequate. To be fair, the books explain any terminology as it is introduced *very* well, but any player who needs to know what a term means would have an easier time scanning a glossary than the entire rulebook.
(DnD Insider claims to have many features to simplify things - but online access has not been the hallmark of my gaming sessions. This may change - but a good, frequently-updated glossary should be available for download on their website.)
Lastly, the unpardonable yet unavoidable aspect of 4th Edition: It is so near the release of 3.5 - and has so many changes that it cannot help but spawn a 4.5 edition in the near future. I was a playtester for 4th edition, so I know they've gotten a number of kinks out of it. But there is no way playtesters and designers got it all. Like every other edition, players will find the weak spots of the new system and eventually rules will get revised.
There is such a thing as buyer's fatigue. I've bought every ruleset since the Expert Set, and having invested deeply in 3.5, I am being asked (along with every other 3.5 player) to start over - again.
I like the rules - and I obviously love the game - but there is a limit to the number of times a game can switch rulesets. If 4.5 comes out in the near future and we are yet again asked to pitch our (still like new) rulebooks in favor of the latest products - I suspect I will not be the only DM to slam on the brakes.
There, rant over.
Game on!
 Retrogressive from 3.5 June 7, 2008
119 out of 183 found this review helpful
As a preface, I don't hate 4ed D&D. I just think that it is a step backwards from 3rd Edition D&D in a lot of ways:
1) Loses a lot of iconic D&D flavor. Dwarves can no longer see in the dark, Liches can no longer paralyze with a touch (and don't really cast spells), Lycanthropes no longer spread lycanthropy via bites (instead they spread a different and even less balanced disease), Magic Missiles can miss, Vampires are no longer affected by sunlight (they just lose regeneration), Angels are no longer good, Devils and Demons are totally different (and even more confusing to tell apart than ever before), Eladrins are elementals, they messed up a lot of D&D's background -- Pelor is now the God of Agriculture and no longer accepts Lawful Good clerics, there's no more Bytopia or the other cool planes to visit, and elves are now faeries.
2) Simplified - but oversimplified. They thought that having 9 alignments was too complicated. So what did they do? Kept the law/chaos good/evil system, but just disallowed certain combinations. You can play a LawfulGood Paladin (or a Chaotic Evil one now, for that matter), but not a Chaotic Neutral, Lawful Neutral or Lawful Evil character. In my opinion, the alignments they disallowed were the most interesting to roleplay. Ask yourself -- is it really simpler to keep a system and then cut holes in it that you can't play? Likewise, they simplified the skill system (by and large in a good way), but added a penalty to all physical skills if you're wearing armor. This is all well and good, except the system is so oversimplified now, it means that if you're wearing full plate and get bitten by a wererat, you now take a penalty on your "saving throw" against disease, because the "save" is a Constitution based skill.
Simplification = good. Oversimplification = bad.
3) WOTC makes characters now, not you. The best advance from 2ed to 3ed D&D was that people could now build their own characters. No longer were you bound to play a kit or class that WOTC made, players could make their own: you could make a Fighter 1 / Rogue 1 / Wizard 18 if you felt like it. It was a powerful system, and one which WOTC believes was too "scary" for people, so they reverted back to the pre-2ed days. Essentially, they pre-roll some classes for you, and then you get to pick from a limited menu of options at each level. Even still, if you're a "fighter" at 1st level, you're a fighter at 30th, with the "paragon paths" and "epic destinies" providing a certain amount of additional customization.
4) Multiclassing is non-existent. Multiclassing was another area that WOTC felt was too "scary" for players, so they removed it. The 4ed system for multiclassing instead more closely resembles the Arcane Disciple feat from 3ed -- it allows classes to gain a certain number of spells and powers from other classes. However, you never actually can become a member of the other class. When I tried making three character concepts in 4ed D&D I was thrown up against this wall in two of them -- the system just isn't powerful enough to carry out the builds I wanted.
5) 4ed has three elf races but no half-orcs. With only eight core races, did we really need three options for playing elves?
5) Mistakes. 4ed needed more work before publishing. The multiclassing rules allow PCs to take class-specific feats from the class they "multiclass" into. However, if you read through the 20 or so class-specific feats in the PHB, only *two* of them can actually be taken by multiclass players, because the feats nearly all require class abilities from the class which *you can't get -- ever -- from multiclassing*.
From a balance perspective, people have already broken 4ed with Cascade of Blades and Seal of Binding. (The other comment on here is wrong -- they really are that broken.) With either of these abilities, you can essentially kill anything in 4ed D&D. A 30th level 4ed character, using nothing but the PHB can perfectly solo Orcus 1) Without taking a single point of damage, and 2) Kill him dead on the first round of combat. Read WOTC's boards if you want the details, but the point is, 4ed is in many ways less balanced than even the wild-and-wooly 3ed. 3ed's version of Cascade of Blades, Avalanche of Blades, was more balanced and couldn't do that trick.
4ed isn't all bad. The skills and rituals are pretty good, and the system should be fun to play overall. The reason I'm giving it 2 stars is not because it's a bad roleplaying system, but because they're calling this new roleplaying system D&D, when they've 1) Regressed a lot from 3ed, choosing simplicity over the ability for players to have fun making their characters and 2) They've taken out a huge number of the tropes that made D&D D&D. Vampire lords running around in daylight shooting magic missiles that miss at Dwarves who don't mine any more since they can't see in the dark just doesn't seem very D&Dish to me.
Many Mixed Feelings June 8, 2008
91 out of 126 found this review helpful
From the get go, it must be understood that the 4th edition of D&D is a completely different game. Those of you familiar with previous editions of the game may find the new edition more complex and more combat oriented, while those of you completely new to the D&D experience may find the new edition exciting and interesting.
Let's start with the line-by-line.
"Chapter One: How To Play" is pretty standard. It's divided into 4 (or 6) subheadings that answer the fundamental questions like, "What is a roleplaying game?" This is further refined to, "What is a fantasy roleplaying game?" and finally, "What is a D&D game?" After that, there's your usual example of gameplay, along with a description of the Core Mechanic (d20 + modifiers vs. target number) and the "Three Basic Rules". From that description, old-school gamers (I'm including the 3.5 hold-outs in this category) might think very little has changed, but this is just the tip of the iceberg. In reality, 4E is radically different.
"Chapter Two: Making a Character" seems to be intended as a basic overview of the character creation process rather than an actual, in depth, step-by-step guide. The reason I say this is because certain concepts are glossed over (like class and race) only to be examined in more detail by later chapters, but the selection of ability scores, alignment and other basic character traits are still explained in this chapter. Like chapter one, chapter two is divided into several subheadings; some of them with subheadings of their own.
"Chapter Three: Character Races" explores the D&D races in more depth. Old fans of D&D will recognize some old favorites here, like dwarves, elves and halflings, but might be disappointed by the disappearance of gnomes and half-orcs. Likewise, the appearance of dragonborn, eladrin and fan-favorite tiefling will be new. Something else that might tweak the proverbial noses of fans of older editions is the absence of negative modifiers. That's right. Elves no longer have negatives to their constitution, and dwarves no longer suffer a negative modifier to charisma. Players completely new to D&D will find this section fairly easy to navigate assuming they've kept up with the previous chapters.
"Chapter Four: Character Classes" is by far the longest chapter, taking up over 120 pages of text. Once again, fans of previous editions will recognize the "Core Four" (Fighter, Rogue, Wizard, Cleric) as well as the Paladin and Ranger, but may lament the loss of Bards, Monks, Barbarians, Sorcerers and Druids. Two "new" classes, the Warlock and the Warlord, round out the section. The vast majority of text is spent describing various cool options and powers that each of the classes possess.
"Chapter Five: Skills" gives the description of various skills a character might possess based on choices made in the previous chapters and how they might be used. The core mechanic is explained in a little more detail as it specifically applies to skills.
"Chapter Six: Feats" gives a selection of interesting options that characters can choose at various levels. "Feats" (as in "Feat of strength") represent some sort of specialized training that the character has received. Some feats give interesting combat modifiers, while others open up access to specific abilities. Others even allow you to train up abilities of other classes. This last one is the "multiclassing" mechanic of 4E.
"Chapter Seven: Equipment" should be fairly obvious. In this chapter are the various lists and prices of any gear the character might want to buy. Prices are drastically reduced (Plate Armor is a mere 50 gold pieces!), and magic items are included in the PHB (unlike in previous editions where magic items were first introduced in the DMG). A standard "Adventuring Kit" is offered, which provides a bundle of supplies that most adventurers would like to have.
"Chapter Eight: Adventuring" briefly describes the basics of being an adventurer. Quests, encounters, rewards, rest and recovery are all covered in some detail, though much of the actual story is left to the Dungeon Master's Guide.
"Chapter Nine: Combat" is a mere 30 pages but covers a lot of ground. For a game so clearly focused on combat (they even separate encounters into "combat encounters" and "non-combat encounters"), there's certainly very little belaboring the point in this chapter. The combat sequence is explained in an almost "flow chart" style. Actions, turns, attacks, et cetera are all pretty standard, though the changes made in previous chapters will become very clear to fans of older editions. All in all, little has changed in the actual process of combat, though the inclusion of healing surges and action points do make some difference.
"Chapter Ten: Rituals". Now, don't let the name fool you. There are no actual rituals in this book. Chapter 10 contains the descriptions of various rituals your character might want to perform, such as a resurrection in case one of the characters actually dies somehow.
After that there's playtester credits, and index and the all too necessary "Character Sheet".
Fourth Editions seems like a fun game. It's designed to be fast-paced, intense and fun. With so much detail focused on combat, you might think that roleplaying and other non-combat aspects are left behind, but the truth is, because combat encounters go by so much quicker, there's more time left for interaction. The basic mechanic does seem to support power-gaming, though.
Some changes just rub me the wrong way. Elves being just as hardy as humans and dwarves being just as pretty as elves seems to fly in the face of decades of tradition. The introduction of the tiefling and the dragonborn as player races seems like catering to the "it's cool to be evil" crowd. All in all, 4E has a lot of good ideas, but like every edition change before it is bound to leave behind some of it's previous fanbase.
 New roleplaying game, roleplaying not included... June 25, 2008
91 out of 114 found this review helpful
I am sure by now that this review will be a rehash of what others have said, but I have never felt so moved to write a review, so I am just going to go with it. For starters, I have been either a player or a DM for over 15 years. I started in 1st edition and easily made the transition to the 2nd edition. I was really excited about the changes to the game mechanics that came with the 3rd edition. I never bought 3.5 because it seemed like a money-making scheme, but the point I am making is that I have loved this game throughout all of its various incarnations.
Therefore, I was looking forward to 4th Edition. I had heard that there would be more character customization from the ground up (sort of like Skills and Powers) and that it would be structured something like the new Star Wars Saga Edition. I was intrigued at the notion and very excited to see the outcome.
I cannot express to you how disappointed I was at the result. I agree with previous reviewers that this is not DND, and it is not a good system for roleplaying. I'll just give an itemized rundown:
How do I hate thee, 4th Ed? Let me count the ways
1. The book is cheaply made, so cheaply made that the ink comes off the pages if you rub it too hard.
2. Of the limited races available, three are related to elves. That's overdoing it a little bit, no? Also, not only is the "dragonborn" simply a silly idea that panders to power gamers, they look laughable. And the idea that they would have a breath weapon as opposed to a bite or a claw attack is absurd. Since they were adding the tiefling anyway, how about the aasimar? And as for a monster class, they could have done something better than the dragonborn. They already have with the half-orc.
3. The classes lost are not worth the classes gained. Who ever heard of DND without druids and bards? Instead, what did we get, the Warlord? Please! What place does a tactical leader have in a roaming band of adventurers? Frankly, with the people I play with, if somebody "ordered" one of their PC's to attack, I don't think it would be the NPC that would be getting the smackdown. Warlords are for military and tactical units, not loosely confederated treasure hunters.
4. It doesn't matter what you play, the characters end up the same. Your warrior class characters end up having the same armor class and damage potential as your arcane class characters. It's like they are all fighters who just do different types of damage. The classes are sort of like 1% and 2% milk--sure, the composition is slightly different, but they pretty much taste the same. BOOOOORRRRING!
5. The skills have been simplified to an alarming degree, again making characters homogeneous. I've personally never talked to a player who wants LESS options for making their character, so I'm not sure what the purpose was of that.
6. The alignment system desperately needs a revamp and always has (either that or needs to be eliminated entirely), but the revamp they did made the system even more nonsensical. They have removed most of the choices, so once again, the characters are the same.
7. I never really liked prestige classes because you have to spend time at lower levels making choices for skills, feats, etc. that you may not really want to get the prestige class you want, but this game makes a player's choices even more limited because you get shoehorned into a very small number of character paths.
8. Multiclassing is destroyed in this edition. What's the fun in THAT? And again, because of this, characters end up all looking the same.
9. I have no issue with the use of miniatures and maps in games, I use them when I run, but the requirement that they must be used smacks of a marketing ploy to me. I can't wait to see how many "must have" dungeon tile, game mat, and miniature sets come out after this.
10. Finally, my problem with this edition is that it doesn't seem to show any regard for DND players, those of us that have supported and loved this game for over 30 years. It seems to be attempting to attract an audience of video game enthusiasts with a faster pace and a dumbed-down presentation, as if to imply that people who play games like WOW are too stupid to understand anything more detailed(which is incredibly insulting). I think it is a huge mistake. I think that video gamers who don't already play RPG's will continue to play video games, and I think DND lovers will continue to play DND--3rd and 3.5 edition, that is.
I think as a tactical miniatures game this edition is fine. But they already made one of those, so I see this edition having limited appeal. What a shame. But not all that unexpected from a company that is owned by Hasbro.
One Huge Leap Backwards in RPGs June 6, 2008
66 out of 128 found this review helpful
I have been playing DND since good ole first edition and every one since up to nad including 3.5...so there was some excitement about the new system. In terms of pure roleplaying this new edition was going to either rock or blow chunks as it was quite different. I am reviewing the system in the terms of the roleplaying aspect(What DND is supposed to be) and not as any other game type. The end result....yup you guessed it...a huge step backwards.
Gone is the incredible detail of characters that is the trademark of DND and in place is now AT WILL POWERS...or more simply...DND for Dummies. The true flavor of being a character is gone and now there are powers that remind you of playing a video game or an even better comparison...a Miniatures game! The Monster Manual shows the creature(The artwork is the one huge plus in this edition, but I dont buy games just for art) and the stats...which have symbols....very much like the minis game. The feel is hack and slash and the idea that you add half your level to attack...crazy no matter the class. I do like that there are 30 levels now, but to breadk them up into 3 tiers...no need.
All in all our gaming group is staying with 3.5 and we will be fine with that...sad really....this is the first DND system we will not switch to. Different can be good, not just this edition. Too bad WOC listened to the online gamers instead of the true source of money (The Pure PRGers).
As a side note, If I were going to rate this system as part of a minis game with the touch of roleplaying thrown on top of it....I think it is quite good. Similar to Battletech minis and adding the Mechwarrior RPG on top of it. It is simple and has clear and limited choices for advancement...all good for minis games....not RPGs.
Any hope of a real RPG...say 4.5?
|
|
|
Powered by Associate-O-Matic
| |
