Ah ok, I understand your question much better now.
I'd recommend you check out the link here.
This is the excerpt shown a few weeks back about customizing monsters. In particular, check out the Vampire Lord template towards the bottom.
Regeneration 10 (regeneration does not function while the vampire lord is exposed to direct sunlight)
We don't know how Regeneration works in 4E yet, but it seems the concept of "use the monster's weakness to stop its Regeneration" is still a tactic that will be useful.
Mist Form (standard; encounter) PolymorphThe vampire lord becomes insubstantial and gains a fly speed of 12, but cannot make attacks. The vampire lord can remain in mist form for up to 1 hour or end the effect as a minor action.
And it seems Vampires (or at least the Vampire Lords) still possess an ability to change into mist. It's not an automatically activated defensive ability, but turning to mist and fleeing through cracks is still a viable tactic once low.
Hope that helped, cheers! :)
Edit: Skimming over the excerpt again, I noticed Liches get Regeneration now as well (or did they have it already in 3E?)
Regeneration 10. If the lich takes radiant damage, its regeneration doesn’t function on its next turn.
Just food for thought!
|
Given that the impression I have formed thus far of 4E from reports is that 4E PCs are less likely to die and that (unless involved in an excessively over CR'ed encounter) if they keep hacking away at things long enough it is likely that they will win, I would be interested to hear from those playing Keep on the Shadowfell is there any drama and tension provided by the combat mechanics side of the game? What about drama and tension from the combat mechanics compared to earlier editions? How much might any excitement be from the fact that it is a new & unfamiliar game?
If any monsters in the Keep on the Shadowfell set have powers likely to preclude a PC victory scored from simply hacking away at them repeatedly, I would be interested to hear details of that too.
I think you will find that PCs in 4e are just as likely to die as in 3.5 - in general. The big difference is in the early levels. 1st level PCs in 4e seem as likely to die as 3rd or 4th level characters in 3.5.
So yes, there is plenty of tension. I have brutalized the party with nearly every combat we have played. They definitely came right up to the edge a few times.
|
|
I think you will find that PCs in 4e are just as likely to die as in 3.5 - in general. The big difference is in the early levels. 1st level PCs in 4e seem as likely to die as 3rd or 4th level characters in 3.5.
So yes, there is plenty of tension. I have brutalized the party with nearly every combat we have played. They definitely came right up to the edge a few times.
How does that jive with the apparently-low damage dealt by the attacks of high-level creatures we've seen the stat blocks for?
If you look at the 16th level Ice Archon in another thread, their most powerful attack is an AOE for a max of 20 damage. When that's on cooldown, they settle for two ice attacks at a max of 16 apiece (assuming no cold resistances on the PC's part).
It would take that 16th level monster at least 2 rounds to take out even a first-level character. I can't imagine how many millions of hp a 16th-level PC would have...
I think you will find that PCs in 4e are just as likely to die as in 3.5 - in general. The big difference is in the early levels. 1st level PCs in 4e seem as likely to die as 3rd or 4th level characters in 3.5.
So yes, there is plenty of tension. I have brutalized the party with nearly every combat we have played. They definitely came right up to the edge a few times.
How does that jive with the apparently-low damage dealt by the attacks of high-level creatures we've seen the stat blocks for?
If you look at the 16th level Ice Archon in another thread, their most powerful attack is an AOE for a max of 20 damage. When that's on cooldown, they settle for two ice attacks at a max of 16 apiece (assuming no cold resistances on the PC's part).
It would take that 16th level monster at least 2 rounds to take out even a first-level character. I can't imagine how many millions of hp a 16th-level PC would have...
HP grows much, MUCH slower in 4E than it does in 3E. Most characters will only gain 5 or so HP for level. Also, since Con doesn't give you more HP per level, even extremely high Cons will only give a few more HP than more average ones. You can expect a 20th level Fighter with a 20 Con to have maybe ~140ish HP (I could go look up the actual formula, but technically I'm supposed to be working right now ...)
Cheers! :)
Given that the impression I have formed thus far of 4E from reports is that 4E PCs are less likely to die and that (unless involved in an excessively over CR'ed encounter) if they keep hacking away at things long enough it is likely that they will win, I would be interested to hear from those playing Keep on the Shadowfell is there any drama and tension provided by the combat mechanics side of the game? What about drama and tension from the combat mechanics compared to earlier editions? How much might any excitement be from the fact that it is a new & unfamiliar game?
Judging by my players reactions, there was tension, especially when they were surrounded and being gradually beaten to death with shovels (I decided that the Human Rabble would be wielding digging implements but still use club damage).
The players are basically assumed to win every encounter they go through, even if the villain runs away (this is the generally the SOP for every module I've seen). Basically, they succeed in battle when they hew through it in 3E, and its really no different in 4E. The main difference is that characters are sooo much more thematic in what they do.
In 3rd Edition, both the paladin and rogue would have used a move action to get close to the nearest monster and start making attack rolls until they died. If they lasted longer than a round, the rogue might try to move around and flank the target (using Tumble if need be). They otherwise stick to one spot and just trade blows until someone fell down. Now, this is pretty monotonous, especially considering the fact that there would likely be 1-2 monsters in the encounter. Its ALSO possible that they would have had to go home and sleep it off depending on what happened (misses, low healing rolls, low spell damage, critical hits, etc).
In this battle, there were more monsters than players (there were 8 in both the kobold ambush and the burial site), which allowed for more complex tactics and fun to be had as the wizard pegged the bad guys from a distance, the rogue darted in AND out, and the paladin trundled through the minions to try and get to the gnome. The rogue ended up pursuing the gnome as the paladin tried to keep the wizard from getting eaten by a drake and the cleric rolled out healing surges and whatnot.
I'm not sure what you mean by drama from the mechanics, but they do have descriptions of how they work, and that made it easier for me to describe them over the course of battle (the cleric's healing beacon, the paladin challenge, the rogue's trick attack, etc). Since there were more monsters and there was more going on, the battle felt more intense as well. In the first encounter, kobold minions were raining down javelins from atop piles of rocks before charging.
When the dragonshields showed up, they were able to keep the heat on the paladin since they could shift when you shift, and also mark you. This allowed the slinger to pelt whomever with stones while the minions went after the cleric and wizard. They one, but it wasnt easy.
If any monsters in the Keep on the Shadowfell set have powers likely to preclude a PC victory scored from simply hacking away at them repeatedly, I would be interested to hear details of that too.
I'm not sure if I understand the question specifically, but I think that the math behind the game means that if you use a balanced encounter, the party will still succeed, but by how much depends on the tactics and powers used on both sides.
If you are more tactical than your players, you might drop a few guys temporarily, until they roll a nat 20 on their dying roll or the cleric burns a minor action to heal one of them...unless they use their encounter/daily powers. It also depends on their dice rolls, too.
Monsters are more engaging for me, since I get to use more of them (at least one per person, but usually more), and they are more or less specialized in what they do like the party is. This gives the DM more to do and more complicated things to do as well. Mostly, I feel like I can play as hard as I can and not be afraid of an "accidental" character death.
|
|
How does that jive with the apparently-low damage dealt by the attacks of high-level creatures we've seen the stat blocks for?
If you look at the 16th level Ice Archon in another thread, their most powerful attack is an AOE for a max of 20 damage. When that's on cooldown, they settle for two ice attacks at a max of 16 apiece (assuming no cold resistances on the PC's part).
It would take that 16th level monster at least 2 rounds to take out even a first-level character. I can't imagine how many millions of hp a 16th-level PC would have...
Well - that is the artillery. They do two attacks per round at 2D6+4 each. One ranged attack per round is going to get a DR20 thrown at it. The soldier does 3d6+7 with every attack. And both of them have a ton of AC and sizable HP. I would need to see matched PC to understand just how strong they are.
What I can tell you is this - the first time the players encountered Kobolds they laughed at how few of them there were and thought that this was going to be an easy fight. What they found out was that Kobolds can truly kick ass. The next encounter with the Kobolds had the PCs truly worried.
In 3.5, you have to employ unusual techniques to kill a troll because it regenerates much damage.
Vampires in 3.5 have fast healing, and can escape (in gaseous form) from most attacks to coffins in potentially inaccessible locations. (Although grappling a vampire and holding it under water or dragging it out into daylight may achieve its destruction.)
Trolls are vulnerable to two of the most common energy attacks in the game: acid and fire. Both attacks are so common that you can purchase alchemical items that tackle both kinds, and at the level where you would likely fight a troll, its as easy as hitting it with a weapon until its unconscious, and then using a coup de grace with a vial of acid to wrap up the show. That, or have the wizard toast it with a fireball.
Its not really an unusual tactic, but rather an annoyance since it just grinds the game to a halt as you tell the DM in a few sentences what your characters are going to do (light it on fire), and then fast-forward past the point where you execute the plan.
As for vampires, they always return to their coffin at 0 hit points (taking no damage at that point) and are rendered helpless. Since a vampire has a fly speed of 20 in gaseous form, this is as easy as hacking the vampire into smoke, then following it at a casual pace until it reaches its coffin, at which point you take him out. Now, depending on where the coffin is located, you could even run ahead of the vampire and destroy its coffin before it even gets there.
Unless its in a lair filled with monsters, in which case you got a few hours to clean house before you take him out again.
Again, not really an unusual tactic, just a nuisance.
Also, a vampire can turn into gaseous form at will, so unless its already in the sun, you cant hold it underwater. You really cant even grapple it.
These are both monsters where simply repeatedly applying regular damage with swords or spells (in the case of the troll, only with some spells) may be ineffective at finishing them off; unusual techniques and strategies are called for, there is an element of problem solving beyond usual combat.
I dont really think so. To me the players already had the means on hand to take out things with regeneration, since they are often susceptible to common spells. Really, there isnt much in 3rd Edition that cant be killed with brute force.
|
Question for those that have run it already:
How did the monster abilities play out? Did you find them easy/complicated. Did the PC's familiar with 3E go "crap!" when a familiar monster did some new interesting thing?
For example, I noticed in a couple reviews mention the kobold's shifting ability. How well were you able to utilize that? It sounds very interesting both tatically as well as for role playing them as the spastic little dogfacedboys that we all know and love.
-Pete
|
|
Question for those that have run it already:
How did the monster abilities play out? Did you find them easy/complicated. Did the PC's familiar with 3E go "crap!" when a familiar monster did some new interesting thing?
For example, I noticed in a couple reviews mention the kobold's shifting ability. How well were you able to utilize that? It sounds very interesting both tatically as well as for role playing them as the spastic little dogfacedboys that we all know and love.
-Pete
Yep. There have been a couple "HOLY CRAP" moments. I won't go into much detail. The kobold shuffle definitely added some spice to the combat. It allowed the Kobolds to shift 1 square outfrom behind cover (move action), hurl javelin (standard action), then shift back behind cover (shifty - minor action).
My kobold minions caused al manner of distress to the PCs - even with their 1 meager hit point.
There is a tiefling warlord pdf up for download at the Wizards home page, in addition to an extra skill challenge to use in the adventure. Enjoy.
NOTE: Do not read the skill challenge if you are playing in the adventure. It contains spoilers.
Question for those that have run it already:
How did the monster abilities play out? Did you find them easy/complicated. Did the PC's familiar with 3E go "crap!" when a familiar monster did some new interesting thing?
For example, I noticed in a couple reviews mention the kobold's shifting ability. How well were you able to utilize that? It sounds very interesting both tatically as well as for role playing them as the spastic little dogfacedboys that we all know and love.
-Pete
I used their ability to shift in order to move, attack, and then hop back, or maneuver around the paladin. Basically, shifty can really allow them to muck up the works by worming their way into a formerly stable party formation, or to spread themselves out.
If you are more tactical than your players, you might drop a few guys temporarily, until they roll a nat 20 on their dying roll or the cleric burns a minor action to heal one of them...
I noticed in the Quick Start rules and the Adventure Book rules that there's no mention of the "roll natural 20 on dying roll" option anymore. Do you know if that was cut for space (or by accident), or if they've changed that rule? (The last version I saw was that on Natural 20, you go to 1/4 your max hit points.)
If you are more tactical than your players, you might drop a few guys temporarily, until they roll a nat 20 on their dying roll or the cleric burns a minor action to heal one of them...I noticed in the Quick Start rules and the Adventure Book rules that there's no mention of the "roll natural 20 on dying roll" option anymore. Do you know if that was cut for space (or by accident), or if they've changed that rule? (The last version I saw was that on Natural 20, you go to 1/4 your max hit points.)
I believe the rule is actually roll a 20 and stabilize, with the option of using your Second Wind, if it is available. I can't find a source however, so I suppose I'm just spreading hearsay. :(
I'm such a gossip. :P
Cheers! :)
I dont know if it got changed, I just remembered the rule and went with it, not that a natural 20 was rolled. I think that allowing a healing surge to be spent makes sense, however.
If you have a patience to go dregde up the article that gave us the initial death and dying in 4E info, I think the "roll a 20, gain 1/4th your HP" rule actually came from the section about porting the rules over to 4E. What I've heard since is that was because there was no concept of Healing Surges in 3E, and just giving the HP was the best fit. In 4E though, I think you don't get up unless you have a Healing Surge to spare (and haven't used your Second Wind yet that combat!)
Cheers! :)
I don't have a link but a wizard noted on enworld that the death and dying rules in the dm rules part of KotS are correct, no jump up on a 20. In fact there is no way to 'stabilize' permanently without outside help once you are down, which makes things a good deal more fatal than the way I was playing it in my preview games.
I have read through KotS but probably wont be able to run it till next weekend, it looks like some of the encounters will be great fun. A few seem kinda blah for the time it will take to run them so I think I will snip out a few.
I wonder how often some folks play though, this does not look like a short adventure unless you ram straight through to the end which seems unlikely if you are following the plot advice in the mod and are not making major changes to the encounters. How did you finish it in one setting?
I am eagerly awaiting to play this tonight with a group. Picked the dwarf fighter as my PC and after looking over his abilities, I can honestly say I am so excited I barely wait to leave work!
The only downside is that we will probably only get to play for 2-3 hours :(
|
First thing to go on the rules is -bloodied and dead and three failed saves and your dead. Takes away the drama of bleeding to death. Went with-CON and dead and also 10% stabilization chance/round (19+20 on d20) with a fumble meaning -2 HP that round. Makes it more fun and longer life for characters. -bloodied is for a 10th level like -30HP...wtf? Love the maps and module, hate the paper quality and instant smudging. Of course I loved Villag eof Hommlet (way too many similarities). Of and the second of 6 things to change is we are keeping the critical hit and fumble decks. Just too colourful to pass up on. Going to try MAX damage and pull a card on it too see. Thoughts?
Most of the crit and fumble decks can be used I would say, but I think 4e did away with ability damage, so I'd probably just add whatever ability damage to the maxed damage roll, and max it as well.
He said nothing out of they way and nothing worse then others have said giving it glowing reviews.
I'd say there really is a difference. Look if some one that likes 4E gives a 4E product a terrible review then people are informed. They know not to buy the product. What Razz has done is simply told us, for the umpteenth time, that he hates 4E and done so in his trade marked melodramatic way. Reality is no one gets anything from this. Those who don't like 4E still don't like it. Those that like it know perfectly well what Razz's findings were going to be. Its totally a waste of time and can accomplish little but get people angry.
Paizo is trying to make a good RPG with Pathfinder - does it add to the discussion if I interject into a third of the threads with my input that sticking with 3.5 is wrongheaded and go on and on about it in melodramatic tones? My bet is that such input would be seen as disruptive and not at all welcome.
This is essentially the same thing. I got no trouble with Razz hating 4E. I'm just tired of him feeling he has to tell us about his hate. Maybe there was some kind of a point to the viterol prior to Paizo making a decision on which way they were going to go but that point is now past he never really brings anything new to the discussion except when he manages to get his foot in his mouth.
Hence I wish he'd just give up on telling us about his hate and go and contribute positively on the PRPG forums (for one positive example) for a change of pace. There is no balance in his posting. I just clicked his most recent 50 posts. There is one post where he's a little unhappy with Kobold Quarterly's art and 49 posts on 4E. I'll go out on a limb and guess that if I read all 49 posts they'd be generally negative in tone (I read four or so - they were negative in tone).
He's not exactly a Troll (since a troll goes out of his way to start a flame war) but he's long ago ceased to be a beneficial member to this community - you can't make nothing but negative comments as your only contribution and actually contribute to the community in a meaningful way.
First thing to go on the rules is -bloodied and dead and three failed saves and your dead. Takes away the drama of bleeding to death. Went with-CON and dead and also 10% stabilization chance/round (19+20 on d20) with a fumble meaning -2 HP that round. Makes it more fun and longer life for characters. -bloodied is for a 10th level like -30HP...wtf? Love the maps and module, hate the paper quality and instant smudging. Of course I loved Villag eof Hommlet (way too many similarities). Of and the second of 6 things to change is we are keeping the critical hit and fumble decks. Just too colourful to pass up on. Going to try MAX damage and pull a card on it too see. Thoughts?
I actually think that the three-strikes rule is more dramatic, since its not predictable. With the damage slowing ticking off, players are likely to wait until the last few hit points to saunter over to their fallen friend and slap a cure spell on him...or just stabilize him and move on.
The new rule doesnt let you know for certain.
First thing to go on the rules is -bloodied and dead and three failed saves and your dead. Takes away the drama of bleeding to death. Went with-CON and dead and also 10% stabilization chance/round (19+20 on d20) with a fumble meaning -2 HP that round. Makes it more fun and longer life for characters. -bloodied is for a 10th level like -30HP...wtf? Love the maps and module, hate the paper quality and instant smudging. Of course I loved Villag eof Hommlet (way too many similarities). Of and the second of 6 things to change is we are keeping the critical hit and fumble decks. Just too colourful to pass up on. Going to try MAX damage and pull a card on it too see. Thoughts?I actually think that the three-strikes rule is more dramatic, since its not predictable. With the damage slowing ticking off, players are likely to wait until the last few hit points to saunter over to their fallen friend and slap a cure spell on him...or just stabilize him and move on.
The new rule doesnt let you know for certain.
As someone who has played a few games of 4E (and who's current 3E game is using the 4E death and dying rules) I can tell you watching those tick marks accumulate is plenty terrifying. When the first one rolls out you start sweating a little. When the second rolls out you begin biting your nails.
A friend of mine went two or three rounds with two ticks before he got patched up. I don't think I've ever seen anyone more terrified of death (or more frantic to get healed!)
Cheers! :)
|
If you have a patience to go dregde up the article that gave us the initial death and dying in 4E info, I think the "roll a 20, gain 1/4th your HP" rule actually came from the section about porting the rules over to 4E. What I've heard since is that was because there was no concept of Healing Surges in 3E, and just giving the HP was the best fit. In 4E though, I think you don't get up unless you have a Healing Surge to spare (and haven't used your Second Wind yet that combat!)
Cheers! :)
Now THAT makes much more sense!
Despite having misgivings about some of the healing and recovery of powers in 4E, I do like the concept that there is a maximum amount of healing that can be applied to any person, regardless of how many healers are present. The body can simply only take so much punishment.
Now THAT makes much more sense!
Despite having misgivings about some of the healing and recovery of powers in 4E, I do like the concept that there is a maximum amount of healing that can be applied to any person, regardless of how many healers are present. The body can simply only take so much punishment.
Don't get me wrong, Snorter, a healer can still bring you back too. But I've only seen one power that can heal a character that is out of Healing Surges (two if you count a Paladin's Lay on Hands, but of course the Paladin has to spend a Healing Surge for that!)
Healing Surges are going to be an important resource in 4E as they set a pretty hard limit on how much you can be healed in a day. An interesting angle to all this is that some monsters, at least, seem to have replaced their Energy Drain with Healing Surge Drains.
Cheers! :)
Man, we played through the first 2 encounters last night for this adventure, and it was AWESOME!
We had 5 players who chose the dwarf fighter (me), human wizard, halfling rogue, dragonborn paladin, and tiefling warlord. My comments on 4e so far?
I like the dying rules, very dramatic and unpredictable. The melee classes were not really that useful against the kobolds (due to their shifting ability) until we figured out we could charge them and attack before they shifted away. The warlord was not very useful for either of the kobold fights, mostly due to bad rolls. The wizard was of great help until the last fight, again due to bad rolls. Her burst spells were deadly. Dragonborn's breath attack is pretty good. The fighter's daily power was awesome to behold, I took out an armored kobold in a single hit! The group was very impressed. The marking abilities are very handy as well. The rogue was VERY useful for moving the kobolds into melee range of the melee characters. Healing surges were useful, but very low-key as they usually only kept you in the fight for another round or so.
The fights were very dramatic and exciting and constantly moving all around the map, as opposed to the 3rd edition fights where the fights start at range, close to melee, and then never move. The different combat styles were very very evident, and everybody felt they contributed.
The only question that we could not answer was if getting up from a prone position costs an action and provokes an opportunity attack. We ruled it didn't provoke and costed 1 square of movement. That seemed to work fine as it really only came up when people were healed after being in the negatives.
|
|
An interesting angle to all this is that some monsters, at least, seem to have replaced their Energy Drain with Healing Surge Drains.
Ick! That's a scary, scary thought.
The only question that we could not answer was if getting up from a prone position costs an action and provokes an opportunity attack.
I don't know what type of action it's supposed to be, though I plan to call it a Move action until told otherwise.
As for the OA, it shouldn't provoke. The General Rule in play is that OAs only occur when leaving an adjacent space or when using a ranged or area power in an adjacent space. The only non-power Specific Rule we've seen is for Charge, and even that is subject to an unnecessary level of debate. Until and unless we see the Specific Rule for standing up, the General Rule stands.
Keep in mind to check the wizards website for some errata that have posted for the module. You will find it on the module page.
Finally found it. It's apparently an FAQ, not errata. :P
|
|
Did a run of the first two encounters. Crappy die rolls were felt on mostly their side. Nothing like watching a player spend his dailey only to miss horribly. Running it was a breeze. We did have to stop and debate on a few grey areas of the rules for a bit. Did have one in particular. The fighter has a combat challenge that exists until the end of his next round. He chanted it and the creature responded. The next round the fighter missed the attack and challenged again. the debate was can a fighter keep his mark forever since whether he misses or hits, the mark stays forever unless another puts a mark on the creature. for some reason my players kept forgetting about the little pluses here and there. For instance the cleric hit with the lnace of faith and the closest memeber forgot about his +2. would the community here say that it is the player receiving the abilities responsibility to keep track of that, or the DM's? The mage tried a ghost sound spell to distract the slinger to turn his back and try to interrupt. Question is what to do about that? A ST or a bluff type vs skill check. I can say in 2 combats my only critical as a DM were taken away from the Rogue (Second Chance). Oh well. Another question that popped up was the fighter after expending his daily and encounter powers wnet on the one track mindset of Reaping strike. A miss says 3 damage, but he was power attacking all the time. Question is does power attack stack with the 3 auto damage and do a minimum 6/round on a miss? Also found the other players getting aggrevated that the fighter was doing 3 points of damage every round on misses and taking out minions every round while others struggled. They felt it was overpowered for the class. also I ruled as interpreted that a burst 1 is the equivalent to a 15' diameter spread. they thought it was just one square or a 10' spread with the point in the middle of the hexes. So the wizards scorching burst is burst1 with a 10 range which means 1 square on each side from target square, or is it the middle of the square and 1 out from there? Anyway it went fast, was fun, and everyone seemed to enjoy. Not too much problems. Please help on the above questions
As far as I know is that a fighter can basically keep up a mark on a creature for as long as he pleases, so long as he continues to attack it. This isnt a bad thing: it lets the fighter do his job in a much more realistic (and consistent) manner. Now, if he decides to go elsewhere, then the monster no longer has the fighter breathing down his neck, and can likewise safely turn his attention to something else.
Many soldier monsters can do this as well: dont forget that dragonshields have the exact same ability, sans opportunity attack.
As for bonuses and penalties, I think the responsibility goes both ways. First, be honest about it. If the DM realizes that a player is forgetting a bonus, tell them. Players should remind the DM to include a penalty against their saves or whatever if the player thinks about it but the DM forgets (or remind them about a flanking bonus, or that their AC is reduced, or that they have ongoing damage). Yeah, it might suck, but its a game. Be fair and honest. Its not some kind of contest about beating the DM.
Generally, I expect the players to remember their own bonuses and penalties, and to be hoenst about it. I'll try to worry about my own since I have many more things to track now.
For the cleric, she should be the one doling out the bonus since its in her power description. I dont see how you could forget to mention that unless you stop reading right when you hit the part with damage.
For your Power Attack issue, Reaping Strike deals [Strength Modifier] damage on a miss (hence the 3). Since this is the case, I'm inclined to say no, since the formula might not account for other outside bonuses. If you want, be sure to include power bonuses and magic items as well.
Unless I get an outside word about it, I'm keeping it at a flat 3, since its only an at-will attack.
Note that minions never take damage on a miss, so Reaping Strike wont kill them, since its a miss.
|
|
I ruled the same way but the desciption reads about the miss being wicked jabs and cutting blows so their argument was just that. Also if a minion has 1 hp then this attack is worthless against them since the miss cant hurt them, but what about a level 1 warrior with 3 HP left? I ruled no different than you. What about the burst issue and the other questions. P.S. thanks for the suggestions. I told my characters that as DM I have enough to handle and wont make it a habit of keeping track of their characters stuff. I got enough to control, but if I spot something I will remind. Its about fun not me killing the party members. They cant wait until the main rule books come out. Hope they have backs to them! They dont really like pre-gens and want to make their classes themselves
I ruled the same way but the desciption reads about the miss being wicked jabs and cutting blows so their argument was just that. Also if a minion has 1 hp then this attack is worthless against them since the miss cant hurt them, but what about a level 1 warrior with 3 HP left? I ruled no different than you. What about the burst issue and the other questions. P.S. thanks for the suggestions. I told my characters that as DM I have enough to handle and wont make it a habit of keeping track of their characters stuff. I got enough to control, but if I spot something I will remind. Its about fun not me killing the party members. They cant wait until the main rule books come out. Hope they have backs to them! They dont really like pre-gens and want to make their classes themselves
Minions have a specific entry for them that states they cannot be killed via a power that deals damage listed in the "Miss" section of the power. I played the dwarf fighter and this was an easy rule to swallow. The fighter can, however, use his cleave power on minions as the 3 damage is not listed in the "Miss" section, but he has to hit the first target as well to deal 3 damage to the 2nd target.
Standing up from prone is in fact a move action that does not provoke, found it in the rules.
A burst always affects 1 square to begin with, then you expand that square in all 4 directions a number of squares equal to the burst rating. So a burst 1 is a 15 x 15 square, burst 2 is 20 x 20, etc.
You can't use power attack to boost up a miss with flensing strike, power attack specifically says that only if you hit do you deal +3 damage. If you miss with flensing strike, its a flat 3 damage, that's it.
I recommend you get your fighter's player to read the abilities more closely while the other characters are taking their turns.
Standing up from prone is in fact a move action, found it in the rules.Ooo! Ya did? Where's it hiding?
Its actually in the compiled 4e rules PDF available on enworld.org
That is a great PDF to assist in running this adventure, answered a lot of my questions.
Most of your Q's have been answered so I'll just weigh in on two of them:
1) I'd rely on the player granting the bonus to keep it in mind. In my 3E games it is the Bard's job to remind everyone what he offers. I think the same principle applies here.
2) I'd say using Ghost Sound like that is Bluff vs Will, and probably only let it work once or twice. I would definitely say the enemy had caught on if the attack "misses".
Cheers! :)
I ruled the same way but the desciption reads about the miss being wicked jabs and cutting blows so their argument was just that. Also if a minion has 1 hp then this attack is worthless against them since the miss cant hurt them, but what about a level 1 warrior with 3 HP left? I ruled no different than you. What about the burst issue and the other questions. P.S. thanks for the suggestions. I told my characters that as DM I have enough to handle and wont make it a habit of keeping track of their characters stuff. I got enough to control, but if I spot something I will remind. Its about fun not me killing the party members. They cant wait until the main rule books come out. Hope they have backs to them! They dont really like pre-gens and want to make their classes themselves
This is something that I sent in a group email to my players to give them pointers on their characters. During my playtest, the most veteran player had just over a year of experience in 3rd Edition, and one of them hadnt gamed for quite sometime.
I went over powers, challenges, healing surges, and other things to give them a heads up of when and what works best (generally) under various conditions. For the fighter powers, I basically told them that if you are surrounded by lots of things, including minions, to use Cleave. Against one big thing that you are having a hard time hitting (such as soldier-types, elites, and solo monsters) to stick to Reaping Strike. Against single foes, you might as well keep using Reaping Strike, since you get no benefit whatsoever from Cleave in those cases, and on the chance that you miss, you still get something out of the deal.I also made sure to point out the importance of the challenge stuff, since its very helpful for defenders to fulfill their role.
As for the pregens, they work out pretty well, but I told my group that when the books hit the shelves that they can make whatever and I'll just swap out the characters directly without any explanation necessary.
As for the ghost sound bit, it depends on the situation. During combat its possible that the kobold might not even notice it with other things going on (or turn briefly to check, but thats it). I suppose that if the character wanted to scare the kobold away from the spot, or get them to investigate it, it depends heavily on whats going on.
If the kobold is currently engaged with other creatures, I'd say that he ignores it: there are more pressing things happening. If its something loud or dangerous-sounding, the kobold might just shift around the nearest character to get her between him and the sound.
If its a lone kobold, then it depends on how loud/where it is. The kobold might just move away, preferring to keep track of obvious threats. I mean, if its a bear, I just have to outrun everyone else.
Now, out of combat, I would say that the kobold reacts however you think it would react to whatever sound you made. If its a scraping sound, like a boot on stone, give the kobold a Perception check as you would to notice a character sneaking. Now, does the kobold know there are intruders? It might just think that its another kobold. It might call out a password in Draconic.
Basically, pretend that the sound isnt a fake sound. How would the kobold react if it was an actual character doing that sound, or a monster? Unless the kobold can see the character casting the spell, and knows more or less how magic works, its likely to think that its real.
Of course, if the player is trying to make a sound like an animal, you might enforce a Bluff (or Nature) check for the wizard to know how to properly create the sound, though I would only do this in extreme cases against things like fey who might actually be able to tell fact from fiction.
My 2 cents:
Ran the first encounter tonight with three players (still two weeks until one of our regulars returns from NYC and we were impatient), and it was deadly. The entire party died, which I had been led to believe was much less common in 4th. Of course, now that 5 players is apparently the ideal group, I'll have to start recruiting again.
Players were amazed by the toughness of both 1st level characters and 1st level monsters. I believe my friend Pete put it best when he said: "Aren't these kobolds a little boss for a first level fight?"
My group had 5 players, and we handled the first fight relatively well, nobody used any action points or daily powers even.
The second fight, was a much different story however, and we had 2 close calls but no deaths.
I'm interested to know how your group of 3 did, what classes they picked, and how exactly did they die?
|
|
As for bonuses and penalties, I think the responsibility goes both ways. First, be honest about it. If the DM realizes that a player is forgetting a bonus, tell them. Players should remind the DM to include a penalty against their saves or whatever if the player thinks about it but the DM forgets (or remind them about a flanking bonus, or that their AC is reduced, or that they have ongoing damage). Yeah, it might suck, but its a game. Be fair and honest. Its not some kind of contest about beating the DM.
Generally, I expect the players to remember their own bonuses and penalties, and to be hoenst about it. I'll try to worry about my own since I have many more things to track now.
I think bonuses and penalties should be visualised as 'active' and 'passive', ie, some will apply automatically, while others need to be actively triggered by their owner (especially true if these are limited uses/day).
It's fair to say "Hang on, I was flanking", and turn a miss into a hit. Or "Oops; forgot I was blessed/bull strengthed/hasted, etc".
It's an abuse to roll your attack, miss by a few points, then say "I would have used Smite".
For the purposes of playtesting a totally new rules set, I think some leeway is justified, while everyone gets used to it.
|
Trolls are vulnerable to two of the most common energy attacks in the game: acid and fire. Both attacks are so common that you can purchase alchemical items that tackle both kinds, and at the level where you would likely fight a troll, its as easy as hitting it with a weapon until its unconscious, and then using a coup de grace with a vial of acid to wrap up the show. That, or have the wizard toast it with a fireball.
Its not really an unusual tactic, but rather an annoyance since it just grinds the game to a halt as you tell the DM in a few sentences what your characters are going to do (light it on fire), and then fast-forward past the point where you execute the plan.
Granted, Trolls are same old same old. And even for the best roleplayers it is hard not to metagame when a Troll is around.
But you can easily change the damage types a Troll can not regenerate. Give it cold and electricity and enjoy the look on the players faces when acid does not work.As for vampires, they always return to their coffin at 0 hit points (taking no damage at that point) and are rendered helpless. Since a vampire has a fly speed of 20 in gaseous form, this is as easy as hacking the vampire into smoke, then following it at a casual pace until it reaches its coffin, at which point you take him out. Now, depending on where the coffin is located, you could even run ahead of the vampire and destroy its coffin before it even gets there.
Unless its in a lair filled with monsters, in which case you got a few hours to clean house before you take him out again.
Again, not really an unusual tactic, just a nuisance.
Huh? Vampires are normally smart and try to hide their coffin(s). Also in mistform the Vampire can go through small cracks and holes. The archetypical Vampire, lets call him Count S. has his domain in an old castle, full of secret doors and hideways, ratholes and chimneys. How on earth can players follow a gaseous vampire using all these ways?
|
|
Thanks everyone for the feedback. Just goes to show having the short version of the rules makes for many grey areas, but I know there will be grey areas anyway even with the complete rules in place. As far as peoples comments on dying too much, change the 3 failed rolls and your dead to -CON and your dead, and make it possible for any class to heal check another and if it succeeds revert the character back to 0 and have them spend a healing surge instead of just stabilizing them. It worked well for our group.
Granted, Trolls are same old same old. And even for the best roleplayers it is hard not to metagame when a Troll is around.
But you can easily change the damage types a Troll can not regenerate. Give it cold and electricity and enjoy the look on the players faces when acid does not work.
I'd be more inclined to just throw variant trolls, or other regenerating monsters at them, than by swapping energy vulnerability. Without a plausible reason, it would just seem like I'm being a jerk.
Huh? Vampires are normally smart and try to hide their coffin(s). Also in mistform the Vampire can go through small cracks and holes. The archetypical Vampire, lets call him Count S. has his domain in an old castle, full of secret doors and hideways, ratholes and chimneys. How on earth can players follow a gaseous vampire using all these ways?
I would expect most vampires to do so, resources permitting. However, it at least directs them to the location of their overall lair (the castle) or perhaps to a more narrowed area of the lair (section of the castle). The mist is only 20 feet, so its pretty easy to follow. Depending on the level, players could likewise assume gaseous form themselves if he seeps through cracks, have a fighter or warblade bash the wall down that he went through, open the secret doors, etc.
In most cases, I'm sure they can fly, in case he tries to go an indirect route.
In any case, even if the players cannot follow him at a certain point, it is most likely that they will know the general spot where the lair is, and have a few hours to investigate the place.
I picked this up yesterday, and have been browsing through it. It is a pretty typically dungeon crawl/wilderness type adventure. It reminds me a fair amount of Keep on the Borderlands. The encounters are well laid out, and the format of it works a lot better than the format they were using in the final days of 3E.
I hadn't been overly impressed with what I had seen about monsters in the previews. They seemed for the most part too simple and didn't look all that bad-ass to me. However, I do like what I see here. The goblins and kobolds are all pretty straightforward, but they still have some extra little abilities that gives them some umph, and have the hp to take some hits (except for the minions of course).
The solo bad guys are tough (thank god). There is a solo bad guy with 300+ hp, which for an adventure for 1st level characters is crazy (compared to previous editions). However, though the damage it can do is pretty solid, it is not unreasonable for a 1st level adventure, nor are its defences too high for the party to hurt- its just going to take a while to whittle down all those hp.
I look forward to trying to run it or some other 4E adventures.
However, I had been planning on trying to convert some Pathfinder material to 4E, and now that I look at an actual 4E adventure, I'm not sure how easily it's going to translate (ie. it might be more trouble than its worth). I'll have a better sense of the magnitude of the job when the core books come out. Hopefully, the online version of Dungeon will have some decent 4E adventures.
As far as I know, there is a couple people on these forums already looking at converting the first Pathfinder AP to 4e. I agree though that having the DM Guide and PHB/MM will definately be needed. We just don't have enough to go on yet to properly convert the adventures, but it looks like re-statting up the NPC's and monsters will be a breeze. The challenge will lie more in ensuring the encounters add up correctly and advance the PC's at the proper rate. Also, the treasure will definately need to be reduced, which is a good thing IMO.
MMORPG = 4e is a dead issue as far as I am concerned. It played like D&D rounds, HP, AC, sleep spells, flanking, etc. I play WoW and 4e does not feel like WoW at all.
Very odd, considering even WotC have admitted to taking MANY ideas from MMORPGs to create 4th Edition. If it quacks like a duck, it's a duck.
I have to say I have 2 WoW players in my group. And after looking over the sheets ..quote "looks just like f****ng warcraft." No kidding that what they both said.
I have to say I have 2 WoW players in my group. And after looking over the sheets ..quote "looks just like f****ng warcraft." No kidding that what they both said.As someone who actually PLAYS warcraft, 4E most assuredly doesn't play like it. Doesn't have the "stand here and attack" or the "im beating up your friend but the monster won't attack me".
If I was to compare 4E in combat to videogames, the best comparison is NOT the real-time WoW but the japanese turn-based strategy RPGs like Disgaea and La Pucelle Tactics.
I never said it played like it. But the chars to my players looked like WoW pc's and not dnd pc's.
|
|
Very odd, considering even WotC have admitted to taking MANY ideas from MMORPGs to create 4th Edition. If it quacks like a duck, it's a duck.MMORPG = 4e is a dead issue as far as I am concerned. It played like D&D rounds, HP, AC, sleep spells, flanking, etc. I play WoW and 4e does not feel like WoW at all.
Inspiration is not equivalence.