How many times do you quote the original three vs. the newer three?
Hold me like you did on Naboo!
Search Posts
Is anyone else a little sick of the escalating power sources? I mean, first Martial, Divine, Arcane, then "Primal" now "Ki", "Psionic", and probably "Shadow". Why do we even need these things? They don't really make much impact on the game.
As it stands, the only official advice I've so far seen on this is to "goggle it up" in MM, i.e. to find a "similar" monster and try to start from there. I just can't believe that the designers wouldn't have a table with all listed monster powers and , so I think that's a bit condescending. The annoying thing is that they certainly do have such a table, along with rules for monster design. You just can't get them. I've heard a few interviews with designers at WotC where they talk about the various 'rules' they use in-house when designing powers and monsters. For example, 'an encounter power which deals damage can't have an effect that lasts past one round' is one that I heard mentioned in an interview on the Tome Show. That would be good information for anyone trying to write homebrew classes or 3rd party books, which is precisely why WotC doesn't want you to have it. Now, I doubt such lists are 'hard-and-fast' - they probably evolve based on player feedback, etc. I'm sure they're not using the same rules to write PHB2 that they used for PHB1, because they know what works and what doesn't a bit better. Case in point are 'accuracy' powers such as Sure Strike, vs. 'sure thing' powers such as Reaping Strike. The latter are far more popular, so I expect we'll see them nerfed a bit, or see accuracy powers get a bit of a boost. I think we've already started to see this in some of the new stuff from Martial Power.
As far as changelings, the fact that doppelgangers are now playable from level 1 would remove some of the need for a 'lesser doppelganger' - simply have the ones in proper society called changelings, and the job is basically done. Yes, my current campaign has a changeling wizard and a shifter ranger, and we're just using the appropriate rules from the MM. I'm concerned that the dopplegangers are not quite balanced with the core races. They get bonuses to Int and Cha, which are both "mental" stats, whereas it seems with the PHB races, an effort was made for each race to have one good physical stat and one good mental stat. Also, the dopplegangers power is not useful in combat, and sometimes a bit too good outside of combat or for setting up surprise attacks.
The new NPC rules are great. They let you make a bad guy who is very good in combat and "feels" like an NPC, without having to do all the work of actually creating a character. I'd suggest if you want to do the "boss & minions" style fight, that you make the guy a solo, and then throw in a few lackeys. I've found that elites can go down very quickly, especially if they get the defender lockdown early in the fight.
Can you give us some more information. What is the setting? Who are the characters? What are their hooks?
As someone who's currently running a 4e Eberron game, I can't wait to see the new material. I've heard from a few sources that there will be few changes to the Eberron canon. The default year will still be 998, and that everything you know about Eberron will remain largely the same. That said, it'll be interesting to see how they handle dragonmarks. I expect to see something similar to the "channel divinity" feats from the PHB, but that still leaves the "non-combat" marks, such as Making, Scribing, etc. with little in the way of new options. I'll be interested to see how they overcome this obstacle. I'm also looking forward to seeing how the new races fit in. I've heard that Dragonborn are going to be a dragonic servant race from the interior of Argonnesson and that Teiflings are from the Demon Wastes. Both of those make sense to me. Eladrin I'm not so sure about, although it's possible that they represent elves who fled to Thelanis to escape the giants. I'm hoping that they make an actual racial distinction between the Valanar elves and the Areneal elves this time. Of course, we'll also need full rules for gnomes, warforged, shifters and half-orcs for an Eberron setting, but I think they've all been announced for PHB2. I haven't heard anything about changelings or kalashtar yet. One nice thing about the new setting book is that much of the races & classes stuff will be handled in the PHBs, which should free a lot of space in the setting guide for more fluffy stuff.
Hmmm, I curious as to how the Sorceror will differ from the Warlock. Well, if we go by what's here, the sorcerer is a controller, not a striker. So, perhaps the question should be: how will the Sorcerer differ from the Wizard? The wizard already covers all the key "controller" aspects of the game, and what's more, Wizards are almost solely depended on one stat: Intelligence. It's difficult to imagine another arcane controller who can beat the wizard. I suppose they'll have to introduce some new mechanics that will make the sorcerer better at one aspect of magic.
On Friday, we had two encounters, both of which fell into some grind. Encounter 1: 2 Ghouls, 2 Specters (normal)
Encounter 2: 3 Ghouls, 1 Mad Wraith, 1 Flameskull (hard)
Potential Causes of Grind:
Kobold Hall isn't a real adventure. It's a "Learn to play" that teaches you the ins and outs of 4e combat. It shouldn't be compared to any sort of adventure product.
Interesting... would you use burst and blast templates a la Warhammer? Yeah, I'm a big Warhammer player, so I've already got a few sets of blast templates.
Here's a few house rules I'm thinking of tossing around for my next campaign. Feel free to comment, or toss out your own rules for review! 1. Going Gridless - that's right, no battle mat. Instead, I'll just convert everything from 1 square to 1 inch and play on an open table, wargames style. Bring your own tape measure! I think this idea is made of win. 2. Players do not keep track of their own HP - the DM tracks the HP of all the characters. Players know when they are at full, and when they are bloodied, and that's it. Cuts down on metagaming (hopefully.)
But if fight hard fights, you have to rest earlier than with easy fights to reagin HP and powers. Remember that at higher levels, you'll have more encounter powers to work with. At Paragon tier, you can spend the first 3-4 rounds of each fight using nothing but encounter attack powers. In Heroic tier play, encounter powers are still 'special' - you want to save them for the right moment.
Encounter 1: a Gnoll Huntmaster and a pack of 5 Hyenas.Interesting. This is actually the kind of fight I would think would have a high probability of going 'grindy'.... Why did you players concentrate on the Hyena's and not the Gnoll? Because the Hyenas were up in their grill from the beginning of the fight. The groups started about 20 squares apart, and the hyenas covered that ground really quickly. The warlord and paladin had to stay and help the ranged guys deal with them, otherwise the mage and warlock were going to be hyena food. After the hyenas were (mostly) taken care of, the warlord and pally moved up to engage the gnoll.
I ran 5 encounters last session. Of them, 3 ended up a bit "grindy" Encounter 1: a Gnoll Huntmaster and a pack of 5 Hyenas.
Encounter 2: 10 Goblin Cutters (minions), 2 Orc Drudges (minions) and a Human Mage
Encounter 3: 3 Gnoll Marauders, 2 Gnoll Huntmasters
Encounter 4: 1 Gelatinous Cube
Encounter 5: 1 Ogre Savage, 1 Gnoll Claw Fighter, 2 Goblin Blackblades
The big problems that lead to grindy battles as far as I can tell are:
I'm running a 4e Eberron game at the moment, with the players as detectives in Sharn's Redcloak Battalion. The current plotline has focused around a gang war between the Halfling Mafia and a smuggling group made up of monsterous humanoids. Both of these groups are trying to monopolize the import and manufacture of dreamlily, a potent narcotic. Innocent civilians are getting caught in the violence between the groups, thus, the party has been called in. There's also a subplot (which might become the main plot one day) involving several character's backstories and a group of black-skinned tieflings from the demon wastes working for the Lords of Dust. I've tried to work every character's backstory into the campaign somewhere, even if it's just a few minor NPCs or a minor story goal here or there.
Mine is in as well. Good Luck!
Had we gone with 4E, I suspect we would have done entirely different products. Products that play to 4E's strengths and don't rely on the large amounts of the game that are missing. Out of curiousity, James, what do you feel that the strengths of 4e are? What sort of things would you focus on in a 4e adventure that you might not focus on in a Pathfinder adventure? Or, how would you go about altering a Pathfinder adventure to make it work better for 4e? There are many of us on the boards that are diligently working on conversions of Pathfinder adventure paths to 4e, and you might have some good insights for us. Edit: The edition wars are never going to die. Hell, there's huge numbers of websites out there devoted to OD&D and 2nd edition that spew all kinds of bile about "those kids who play 3rd edition." Some people just can't let stuff go.
One problem I've had with 4e is the following: it seems like in every battle there's one or two monsters who get left to the end, and they just won't die. It turns into a bit of a tedious slog: the party defender already has the critter locked down, the strikers keep attacking, the leader makes sure that the defender says healed, and they just have to wear the creature's HP to zero. This isn't a big problem, but it is an annoyance, and it seems to happen very often (last session, it happened in three of the four battles we ran.) I'm starting to think that the "last creature" should just surrender or run away, or if it's a creature that wouldn't do that, I could just have a "cut scene" where the party beats the thing to death. I'm wondering, is this just an aspect of 4e, or is it bad encounter design on my part? Has anyone else experienced this? If so, what did you do to solve it?
for the record I don't know if PHB2 has psionics or not It doesn't. They've already announced that PHB2 deals with the divine, arcane and primal power sources. I heard an interview with Rob Heinsoo (maybe?) where he said that the psionic power source was going to be handled in a future product. It seems like the PHB line is the place where they will be introducing new power sources, so I expect we'll be waiting until PHB3. My hope was that they'd have psionics out before Eberron, so that we could have fully realized rules for the Kalashtar and Inspired, but I don't think it's going to happen. They might just be re-releasing the old novels because they own the rights and just want to put them back out there again to make some money. It's been quite a while since Dark Sun was in print, and there might be some people out there who haven't read them.
The Difference with Defilers and Preservers in 2nd Ed was that a defiler cast spells with the standard casting time but destroyed the area around them whilst preserver took longer to cast spells but didn't defile. Yeah, that's what I said, "better." Also, if I'm remembering correctly, defilers levelled up twice as fast as preservers in the low levels.
Likewise the whole Defiler and preserver thing never got resolved in 3rd ed. It never got resolved in 2nd edition, either. Defilers were always "better" than Preservers. Wow, I didn't realize people had such issues with the 3rd edition conversion of Dark Sun. I thought it did a very good job capturing the flavor of the setting in the short number of pages that were available.
The 3rd edition Dark Sun converstion that was featured in Dungeon & Dragon magazines a few years back was very good. If you're not interested in changing editions and you already own all the fluff material, I'd suggest you give that a try.
Out of curiosity, why do you enjoy complexity? I think many people enjoy the "simulationist" feel of the older editions. The earlier rules had a fairly strong basing in reality, and a consistency with the game's internal reality overrode game balance throughout the rules. Some people are looking for that, because they like that style of play. 4e doesn't provide that experience - the rules are geared for gameplay and not to provide a simulation of reality, but rather provide quick and simple game mechanics.
Scott, you're doing some great work with the conversion blog. I almost want to can my current campaign and start running Rise of the Runelords. If only I could find a way to play D&D more often...
Mostly because you'd need to write in several new classes worth of powers, and you'd need to make those new classes innovative, yet balanced. It's a lot of work, compared to just writing a few new races and equipment choices.
This problem pretty much goes away after the heroic tier. Once you hit paragon, you have 4 encounter powers and 4 daily powers in addition to your at-wills. You're going to be relying on those much more than your weak at will attacks. Also, paragon paths add a further layer of complexity to the game, allowing you to further customize your character.
Two-Weapons basically works as follows A non-ranger with a weapon in his off hand does not get a separate attack with that weapon. Instead he adds a bit of damage to his normal attack. A ranger can use powers like Twin Strike to get separate attacks with his primary weapon and his off hand weapon. A ranger with two weapon style can count any one handed weapon as his off hand weapon, not just weapons with the "off-handed" property. For example, the ranger in the group I DM uses bastard swords as his primary and off-hand weapons.
I've had almost the exact opposite reaction from the OP. By the end of my last 3.5 campaign, at around 15th level, I was so tired of guys with laundry lists of spells, crazy numbers of attacks each round and immeasurable numbers of magic items. We had a monk/sorcerer in the group who could reliably drop 280-300 damage a round with touch attacks. The game had really gotten dull for me. 4e is quick, lively and much easier to adjudicate on the fly. The players are much more limited in their number of actions, which means that they take their turns faster. Plus, converting things to 4e is a breeze. Want to make a new monster or NPC - 15 minutes, tops, regardless of what level you're shooting for. Try making an Epic NPC or monster for 3.5 in that time!
Geez, I thought this was going to be a thread about 4e Dark Sun... Anyway, here's hoping we'll see 4e Psionics rules when Dark Sun comes out! Remember when Dark Sun came out in 2nd edition? It was billed as a land so harsh that PCs had to start at 3rd level - a place where everyone had psionic powers. I loved it. I don't think they'll have to change much to make it a 4e setting, either. The desert and the city states are already a 'points of light' style setting. I think we'll need to see some new cleric powers to reflect the Templars and the elemenatal clerics, and maybe some new stuff for the nonmetal weapons and armor. All of that is fairly easy to write. The psionics are probably the most difficult thing to add in.
With the exception of one or two groups, everyone I know has switched to 4e. From what I've seen on local store shelves both at the big bookstores and at the FLGS, it's now the premier roleplaying product. I don't think our FLGS carries Pathfinder, and they've been clearing out their 3rd edition stuff for a few months now. That said, I'm not sure local store shelves are really a good way to measure how well a game is doing. Most of the guys in my group (including me) got their stuff from Amazon. My prediction is that 4e isn't going away. It's a very solid ruleset that does what it's supposed to do very well. It's a different kind of game than 3.5/Pathfinder, and so I think there's a place in the market for both of them.
The sweet spot was probably Archfiends - Giants of Legends - Angelfire - Underdark. I agree. The initial sets were really terrible (take a look at some of the Harbinger figures.) Then the quality got really nice for a few sets. After that, the quality didn't drop so much, but the figures got to be really odd stuff. I have a boatload of figures that are bizarro monsters that I'm never going to use (Frost Giant riding a wooly mammoth!) As someone who never played the minis game, but bought enourmous amounts of minis for RPG use, I'm very excited about the changes that WotC is bringing to the minis line. I especially like the idea that you're going to be able to buy packs with non-random, high quality minis for your PCs. Under the previous system, high quality minis were rares, which meant that you never seemed to get enough of them for people's PCs, and you had to go scrounging for them on ebay. Now, if only they'd do the same thing for monster minis - sell you a "goblin tribe" box set or an "undead hoard" - I'd be much more inclined to buy them as a DM. Until then, I'll probably just keep buying them off ebay.
Even with the decision to not publish under the GSL for now, Paizo remains my favorite adventure publisher for 4th Edition. I just have to do a little more work than usual to make use of them. I think Mr. Betts sums up my feelings exactly. I've made the switch to 4e - somewhat reluctantly at first - but now that I've run 4e for a few months, I doubt I'm ever going back to 3.5. I just like the feel of 4e. It's easy to play, easy to run, and I really enjoy how simple it is to create new stuff or convert material from other systems. However, WotC doesn't want to tell the kind of stories my group wants to play. We're not interested in 'random plotless dungeon crawl #57' - or 'rehash of some dungeon that came out when you were a kid.' Paizo has done a really fantastic job keeping a good stable of authors around and writing engaging plotlines and an immersive world. I might not be interested in buying their system, but I'm sure willing to convert their stories and world to the system of my choice. Also, as others mentioned. I think it would have been a huge mistake for Paizo to publish material under the GSL. You need to keep ownership of your material, and the GSL seems to basically make you a lesser partner in a deal with WotC. I think that's a bad business decision on WotC's part, but only time will tell.
Great Post - this is what we need to see more of. I'm curious how you chose the various encounters? Were they just things you thought would be interesting?
What about increasing the level of some of the more abusive battlefield control spells?
I think rage would work better if it was shorter and could be used more times per day. Here's why: a shorter duration on Rage would add a "sudden death" feeling to fights, adding tension and drama. Under the current rules, rage lasts a long time, typically the entire battle. Most battles are fairly short - only a few rounds. Secondly, I'd like to see barbarians have more rages/day right from the start. If there's one thing I hate, it's seeing the barbarian hold onto his rage all day long, because he's worried that he'll need it for the last fight of the day.
I think it's a really good idea. It gives fighters a valid reason to have a high intelligence. As things stand in the 3.5 ruleset, fighters really only require two stats - strength and constitution. Making combat feats that require other abilities will make players have to choose their stats more carefully, and you should see a wider range of builds come out.
Thank you, Paizo! I'd been hoping that you guys would be continuing to support 3.5, but the Pathfinder system looks better than I could have hoped.
Hey guys, here's my contribution. I had a soft spot for this fella because he was in the original Isle of Dread Adventure and took out his fair share of PCs over the years. Hopefully this version will score a few kills of his own. Chakaranka – the bull ankylosaur (CR 11)
AC: 24 (-2 Size, +16 Natural)
Speed: 20 ft.
Abilities: Str: 36, Dex: 10, Con: 30, Int: 1, Wis: 10, Cha: 6
Trample (Ex): Reflex Half (DC 32), The Save DC is strength based
PC: Monterey Jack Babcock, Warblade
Description: As Lavinia freed herself from her bonds and tumbled towards the party, Tizok the barbarian and Monty the warblade dashed forward to intercept the burly half-orc pirate who had been keeping her hostage. One critical hit later, Tizok was on the floor, bleeding heavily from a slash wound. Monty fought bravely against Drevoraz, but was clearly outmatched, and two rounds later he was slain by the brutal pirate. He was raised from the dead after the adventure at the temple of Kord. PC: Jake Finnegan, Monk/Sorcerer
Description: The party gained initiative on the bullywugs in the dining room and Bartholomew Fizzlehiggins, the party wizard, used a Web spell to lock down the frog-men. The Huntress, however, was able to break free of the spell, and climb out a nearby window. Seeing her attempting to escape, Jake dashed out the nearest door and caught up with her in the courtyard. Unfortunately, he was no match for her in melee and was cut down just before the party was able to catch up. He was raised from the dead after the adventure at the temple of Kord PC: Arson, Goblin Ninja
Description: "Something is going on down there in the hold" Arson thought, "It's the only place we haven't checked - I'd better go stake it out." And so he did, setting a solitary watch in the hold. Unfortunately, he was spotted by Rowyn, who gained initiative on him, and paralyzed him with a Hold Person spell. She then walked up behind him, and ended his life with a coup de gras. He was later raised by a travelling priest of Pelor. PC: Paris St. Mary, Rogue/Cleric of Olidammara
Description: Paris was the first to approach the pool of stagnant water. "What's that?" she said curiously as she failed her spot check. Moments later black pseudopods shot out from below the surface of the water, slamming her and dissolving her armor, then pulling her onto the pudding and dissolving her cloak. She fell unconscious and was dissolved completely by the pudding the next round.
I gotta say, I loved the less realistic style of artwork. Shaelulu, Bruthazmus, and Orik were especially cool. Actually, I really liked the images of Aldern and Tsuto, too. I think they go a long way towards establishing a pathfinder "feel" to the campaign that makes it really distinct, and the exaggerated features serve too highlight some of the cosmetic changes between the core rules and the Pathfinder campaign setting.
We don't use a level loss system for Raise Dead and similar spells. Instead, the character gains a negative level which cannot be removed through magical means. Each time the character levels up, he can additionally remove one negative level. I've also been letting them remove negative levels for completing character-development trials (such as when the warblade faced down his nemesis, leading to a brief flashback of the warblade's training.) As far as XP loss from spells and item creation, I'm considering giving each caster a small pool of XP which they could spend at each level, similar to the artificer's creation pool in Eberron. We also keep all the players at the same level, regardless of whether they show up or not. I know this probably won't work for many groups, but we've been playing together for a long time, and we know that if someone is missing a session, they've got a good reason. This was something we voted on as a group at the beginning of the campaign.
I'm considering switching my game to an XP-less system of D&D. Under these rules, players will gain levels by completing certain story-appropriate goals, thus rewarding my players for staying on task. I've set the following level benchmarks after reading through the campaign. I'm wondering if they look about right to you out there. Level - Goal
I too would like to have a look at these sheets. Thanks! asmodean66@hotmail.com
The pearls are artifact level items. It would be simplest to rule that the spell doesn't work on them. Another option, which I find to be more flavorful, is to say that since the pearl is an artifact, using such divination spells on the pearl draws the eye of Demogorgon. Tell the players that the more they use the spell on pearl, the more likely it is that they will draw the wrath of "a powerful outsider" or something along those lines. If they do use the spell, allow them to get some background info, but if they try to use it repeatedly, I'd have tough demons gate in to attack them. During the fight, have the demons grab the pearl and teleport away.
I'm glad to read this thread. I was starting to think that my group was advancing too quickly. They hit 4th level at the end of TiNH, and will likely see 5th halfway through Bullywug gambit. I've been using the "Scaling the Adventure" guidelines, but I was starting to get concerned that they were going to outpace the adventures. I'm thinking that I might boost some of the encounters to make them more challenging, but award the normal XP for them. For example, I'm planning on adding levels of rogue to Brissa Santos, but only awarding XP for her base CR. Has anyone tried this? Does it work in reining in XP awards, or should I just let them level quickly? We use a houserule for level loss that doesn't actually involve losing XP, so death isn't an XP issue in my game.
I assume that such a recovery is not possible from the savage fever, and only magical means of recovery (i.e. remove disease) are possible? That's how it works in my campaign. Supernatural diseases are tough stuff! For an even better supernatural disease, give the disease Spell Resistance, so only a high-level priest has a good chance of curing it. I didn't do that with the Savage Fever, but it works really well and the players will (rightly!) fear disease.
Orlath Duskblade, anyone?
warlocks can write scrolls for it.. Can evil warlocks write scrolls of Hallow? That doesn't make much sense.
There's a lot of guys in the last few adventures who throw down with vile damage. The party I'm DMing for consists largly of CN characters, with a few leaning strongly towards evil. How are they supposed to heal the vile damage? They won't be able to cast Hallow, and it's doubtful that anyone capable of casting it will want to associate with them.
|