|
It was not posted here before, so here are 6 Character Sheets (zipped PDF) for 4th edition.
We have:
Tiefling Wizard
Half-Elf Warlock
Human Cleric
Halfling Paladin
Dwarf Fighter
Eladrin Ranger
I am currently sifting through the information and will post my thoughts as soon as I am finished.
|
It was not posted here before, so here are 5 Character Sheets (zipped PDF) for 4th edition.
We have:
Tiefling Wizard
Half-Elf Warlock
Human Cleric
Halfling Paladin
Dwarf FighterI am currently sifting through the information and will post my thoughts as soon as I am finished.
I just downloaded it, and haven't opened it, but I would assume that between the five classes, all new skills should be accounted for. (Except psionics naturally.) Sound right?
You're missing the Eladrin Ranger.
LOL I see errata already. That Divine Challenge ability is going to be spammed oh so much.
LOL I see errata already. That Divine Challenge ability is going to be spammed oh so much.
The rules on those sheets are about 1.5 months old, and it has already been confirmed that the Divine Challenge IS changed in the most up to date version. Just FYI, cheers! :)
|
Well, my reactions, so far:
Glad to see that the modifier is still (x-5)/2, and not (x-2)/2 like it is for monsters. While I find that great, I'm somewhat disappointed that PCs and Monsters don't use the same ability stat system. Oh well, on to the next point.
Paladin: Lay on Hands. First thoughts? Don't really like that you give away your second winds, as it somewhat seems like a defender might rely on those. But I haven't seen it in play, so it may work differently.
Paladin and Cleric: Channel Divinity. Don't know if I like... wait, pretty sure I don't like having to choose between two or three abilities per encounter (if I use this one, I can't use the others). Yet again, will have to see it in play.
Also, didn't they say that all feats were passive or racial passive? Why does the Cleric have a feat that gives him an ability? Is this a typo, or perhaps something that has been fixed?
Hmmm.... Human still seems to get a bonus feat. Odd, thought that Massawyrm stated that was changed. Guess I read his post wrong.
Dwarven Fighter: Wow, use second wind as a minor action. I'll have to say that given that ability and what some have said about second wind (as it's needed quite a bit), I'll always play a dwarf. Forever + 1. Wait, saving throw from going prone. Forever + 2.
Brutal Strike: Cool. Granted, I'm still not that big of a fan of powers, but the fact that it isn't expended until it hits is pretty sweet.
Speaking of powers, why would one ever attack? I mean, the AT will powers don't seem to have a limit, and always are better than an attack. Am I missing something?
Ranger: Also a bonus feat... or two feats, if you will. Given with the class, who knows.
Fey Origin...I wonder what this does, if anything. Time will tell, here's hoping.
Fox's cunning looks like a fun ability. Cudos on that one. Still don't know if I like powers.
Wizard: Tieflings seem to be somewhat blah to me. Might be just me. Wizard is same old, granted with smaller assortment of powers. Almost feel like I'm reading about a sorcerer.
Yet again with the choosing between daily powers. Granted, in 3.5 this was normal, but now since there are 2, it feels magnified to me.
Warlock: The curse rubs me the wrong way. I don't like that it only benefits the warlock. I wish that perhaps +1d3 but for everyone.
The warlock seems quite weaker than the other characters, at least to me. His abilities all have +4 vs. Whatever, while others had +6 and whatnot... granted, it's +5 vs. Ref if no one is close to the target and he's using his eldrich blast, so perhaps that helps. Perhaps not.
Overall, nothing too angering, but not really anything that really blows me away other than I'm pretty sure Dwarves kick a lot of butt now. The sheets are clean, though writing down everything on them might be hard with pencil, due to the lack of space and lines in some areas (feats).
Unaligned seems to be the new Chaotic Neutral.
Monsters and PCs still use the same ability system (x-5/2), what might have confused you, however, is that everyone (PCs and monsters) get 1/2 their level added to most rolls.
As for Dwarves, using your Second Wind as a minor action doesn't seem to affect the once per encounter limit. So it just means you get to attack (or run away!) that round while healing (not a bad ability, mind you, just not crazy strong, at least IMO)
Edit: Humans still get a bonus feat as far as I'm aware, but other races get more stuff to bring them more in line.
Also, unaligned really means just what it says. I believe the new idea is that only beings of supernatural goodness/evilness have alignments now.
Speaking of powers, why would one ever attack? I mean, the AT will powers don't seem to have a limit, and always are better than an attack. Am I missing something?
I believe the regular attacks are for AoO's, and for use when you're doing something else that round. If I'm right, let's say you have an attack power that's beefy, and another power that allows you to regain hp as a move action (or whatever). In a round where you opt to heal, you could still attack but it'd be with the standard rather than beefy power. Then you go back to the beefy attack.
In theory it'd be like iterative attacks are now, where you can move and hit once, or make three iterative attacks. Except now no iterative attacks.so you can attempt an attack even when your primary powers are focused elsewhere. Or, if you use the main power, and AoO. Or maybe move that round.
Monsters and PCs still use the same ability system (x-5/2), what might have confused you, however, is that everyone (PCs and monsters) get 1/2 their level added to most rolls.
Um... Just a sticky point with me: Isn't the system (x-10)/2 or x/2-5?
There is pretty much no reason to make a "basic attack". Some things will require you to make one, such as opportunity attacks, some powers, and charge attacks. Otherwise, no reason for you NOT to use your at-will attacks.
This makes sense, since some classes like the warlock and the wizard will likewise almost NEVER make normal attacks, either.
|
|
LOL I see errata already. That Divine Challenge ability is going to be spammed oh so much.
The rules on those sheets are about 1.5 months old, and it has already been confirmed that the Divine Challenge IS changed in the most up to date version. Just FYI, cheers! :)
I wonder if it got changed after my comments (re Paladins who mark a foe with a challenge, then run away, should lose hp themselves and give their opponent a boost)?
If so; GO SNORTER! THE KING OF SPOTTING SHODDY LOOPHOLES!
Um... Just a sticky point with me: Isn't the system (x-10)/2 or x/2-5?
Oh man do I have egg on my face! Sorry about that, was just mindlessly copying from the original post without stopping to think what I was copying. My point still stands, though, that the ability modifier is determined the same way for PCs as for monsters. Sorry for any confusion (it really was unintended!)
|
|
Monsters and PCs still use the same ability system (x-5/2), what might have confused you, however, is that everyone (PCs and monsters) get 1/2 their level added to most rolls.
As for Dwarves, using your Second Wind as a minor action doesn't seem to affect the once per encounter limit. So it just means you get to attack (or run away!) that round while healing (not a bad ability, mind you, just not crazy strong, at least IMO)
Edit: Humans still get a bonus feat as far as I'm aware, but other races get more stuff to bring them more in line.
Also, unaligned really means just what it says. I believe the new idea is that only beings of supernatural goodness/evilness have alignments now.
I'm a little confused about the ability scores. This makes it seem as though there are different ability modifiers, though upon closer inspection the numbers beside the ability score being something else (my guess is that they are the numbers added to the original scores). Though now that I looked at the kobold, I can see now that they are the same. My bad. I was also confused based on the new way the miniatures do the stats, as they use the [x-4]/2 method.
Though thank you for telling me about adding 1/2 level, didn't know that.
From what I stated, I didn't mean to infer using second wind multiple times. More so I mean that you didn't have to give up a move action. From the reviews I've read, using second wind is required to save your life but decreases your actions. Therefore being to move, attack or shift and gain back life as opposed to choosing between running and gaining back hit points or attacking/shifting and gaining hit point is quite the boost. Not to mention what other racial abilities might be added.
As for Unaligned, not my cup of tea, but oh well. When I said it was just like the new Chaotic Neutral, I meant more so it'll be used by most players (I thought choosing Good was still an option, but if that's only for supernatural beings, then it doesn't really matter) since basically you can do what you want and have the excuse "I'm unaligned. I can save the commoners from the dragons and then stab their grandma to steal her savings!" Granted, this act disgusts me and has bugged me since I started playing, I still understand that it'll keep happening non the less.
|
|
Fey Origin...I wonder what this does, if anything. Time will tell, here's hoping.Fey Step!
Per encounter Teleport.And that is a damn cool ability!
I hope there are solid rules for Teleport in place or that ability (?) that will see more abuse than 3.0 Haste!
But it already says Fey Step in another part. My question was more so Fey Origin(considered a Fey creature).... what does it do? I mean, if it said
Fey Origin (1/encounter, can teleport 5 squares, move action)
then I'd understand. But it doesn't. It says
Fey Origin (considered a fey creature)
....
Fey Step (see back)
so I'm wondering if the Fey Origin part will come into play, and how much or little it will. That's what I found interesting.
It's somewhat like the Orc Blood or elf blood "abilities" in 3.0 and 3.5, which were used sometimes (I can count 1 time, in dragon magazine)... which is something that if changed would be put in the good column of 4.0 updates.
I'm a little confused about the ability scores. This makes it seem as though there are different ability modifiers, though upon closer inspection the numbers beside the ability score being something else (my guess is that they are the numbers added to the original scores). Though now that I looked at the kobold, I can see now that they are the same. My bad. I was also confused based on the new way the miniatures do the stats, as they use the [x-4]/2 method.
Though thank you for telling me about adding 1/2 level, didn't know that.
From what I stated, I didn't mean to infer using second wind multiple times. More so I mean that you didn't have to give up a move action. From the reviews I've read, using second wind is required to save your life but decreases your actions. Therefore being to move, attack or shift and gain back life as opposed to choosing between running and gaining back hit points or attacking/shifting and gaining hit point is quite the boost. Not to mention what other racial abilities might be added.
As for Unaligned, not my cup of tea, but oh well. When I said it was just like the new Chaotic Neutral, I meant more so it'll be used by most players (I thought choosing Good was still an option, but if that's only for supernatural beings, then it doesn't really matter) since basically you can do what you want and have the excuse "I'm unaligned. I can save the commoners from the dragons and then stab their grandma to steal her savings!" Granted, this act disgusts me and has bugged me since I started playing, I still understand that it'll keep happening non the less.
I'm pretty sure the mini's stats are, again, the same but with 1/2 your level added in. :)
As for the alignment=supernatural bit, I don't think having an alignment is totally exclusive to supernatural beings, but only true exemplars of a belief will have one. Paladins, for example, will likely be packing an alignment, I'd think, as might Clerics. Joe Rogue and Bob Fighter probably aren't, but Jill (Epic) Fighter maybe has dedicated herself enough to Good (or Evil) that she'll have one? Honestly, this is an area where we only have snippets and vague rumors on how it'll work.
Still, even in 3E, the NG character can decide to go on a spree of whoring and grandma-acide, and aside from the loss of his NG status, there isn't much to stop him.
Sorry for any confusion (it really was unintended!)
No, no. Nothing to apologize for. It was more for clarification. It seemed that people (not just you) were claiming 4th Edition stat mods were like 3rd. But weren't using the same formula.
I just wanted to make sure I was reading it right.
|
|
I'm pretty sure the mini's stats are, again, the same but with 1/2 your level added in. :)
As for the alignment=supernatural bit, I don't think having an alignment is totally exclusive to supernatural beings, but only true exemplars of a belief will have one. Paladins, for example, will likely be packing an alignment, I'd think, as might Clerics. Joe Rogue and Bob Fighter probably aren't, but Jill (Epic) Fighter maybe has dedicated herself enough to Good (or Evil) that she'll have one? Honestly, this is an area where we only have snippets and vague rumors on how it'll work.
Still, even in 3E, the NG character can decide to go on a spree of whoring and grandma-acide, and aside from the loss of his NG status, there isn't much to stop him.
Oops on the minis. My bad. Yet again, read the card wrong. Moving on, I was wrong, nothing to see here.
As for there being no downsides to not RPing your alignment, I have to stop you right there. If he was using a holy sword, if he didn't want to take XP penalties (for spontaneously not acting his alignment. One could argue he's having a breakdown or is dehydrated, which wouldn't be so severe, but that would only be from really really good RP session) or if his DM doesn't allow evil characters, then yes, all those things will stop him.
As well, in game penalties, such as no longer being able to work for the church (though whoring isn't all that bad. I mean, it's just sex, and the lack of lust based evils in DnD religions usually means the adventurers can get some happy endings and not lose jobs).
Being unaligned the whole game means that you can do all that stuff, and never lose the respect of paladins or clerics or anything else I mentioned. I mean, if it takes you 20 levels to hit that point, and the Paladin and Cleric get it in 1, how do they trust you? Do they see one evil time and leave, because you have no morals? Do they have a forgiveness chart, such as the severity of the crime versus the good you have done?
How do Paladins and Clerics adventure in this world, where only other Paladins and Clerics are intuitively good people and everyone else is a moral quandary, waiting to be the 1% who are forged into actually have altruism?
I don't really mean to grill you at all Dave, but this is something that has come up in my games. Without in game downsides to doing bad things, characters will do whatever they want morally and then state that it's okay because they aren't good. They're "Chaotic Neutral". And then the game falls apart, with others telling me to just "find new players," because that's so easy. By changing this (and yes, I know we don't know if this is for sure), I think that I'll have to reduce RP, just to stop the one players who is unaligned and does whatever he wants because he hasn't dedicated 20 levels to being evil and I can't make him change.
Oops on the minis. My bad. Yet again, read the card wrong. Moving on, I was wrong, nothing to see here.
As for there being no downsides to not RPing your alignment, I have to stop you right there. If he was using a holy sword, if he didn't want to take XP penalties (for spontaneously not acting his alignment. One could argue he's having a breakdown or is dehydrated, which wouldn't be so severe, but that would only be from really really good RP session) or if his DM doesn't allow evil characters, then yes, all those things will stop him.
As well, in game penalties, such as no longer being able to work for the church (though whoring isn't all that bad. I mean, it's just sex, and the lack of lust based evils in DnD religions usually means the adventurers can get some happy endings and not lose jobs).
Being unaligned the whole game means that you can do all that stuff, and never lose the respect of paladins or clerics or anything else I mentioned. I mean, if it takes you 20 levels to hit that point, and the Paladin and Cleric get it in 1, how do they trust you? Do they see one evil time and leave, because you have no morals? Do they have a forgiveness chart, such as the severity of the crime versus the good you have done?
How do Paladins and Clerics adventure in this world, where only other Paladins and Clerics are intuitively good people and everyone else is a moral quandary, waiting to be the 1% who are forged into actually have altruism?
I don't really mean to grill you at all Dave, but this is something that has come up in my games. Without in game downsides to doing bad things, characters will do whatever they want morally and then state that it's okay because they aren't good. They're "Chaotic Neutral". And then the game falls apart, with others telling me to just "find new players," because that's so easy. By changing this (and yes, I know we don't know if this is for sure), I think that I'll have to reduce RP, just to stop the one players who is unaligned and does whatever he wants because he hasn't dedicated 20 levels to being evil and I can't make him change.
Don't sweat it, no offense taken. I think we just use alignment differently in our games. I'll try to respond to your queries as best I can, but this will likely be disorganized and slightly rambling (I'm about to head off to class).
In 3E, the majority of characters don't wear their alignments on their sleeves. Check out Detect Magic. Even a dyed in the wool stone cold killer is going to detect as only faintly evil (if he isn't supernaturally aligned with Evil, like a Cleric or Paladin) until he's above 10th, and at most he'll only be "moderately" evil, excepting epic play. On the Detect Evil this mindless sociopath will detect as evil as the petty theif who would sell his mother for the right price, but is mostly ok with stealing from random people and getting drunk.
The point is that in 3E, the Paladin still doesn't know who to trust, which I admit will be furthered in 4E (and to me, this is a good thing, but tastes vary!)
I've never used alignment to constrain my player's activities, nor punished them for deviating from it (and I've had a number of players over the years whose characters HAVE, indeed, changed alignment throughout play, some from Good to Evil, some from Law to Chaos, and some in the other direction as well).
Based on personal experience, I would say trying to constrain a player determined to be destructive/evil in game by forcing them to RP a good alignment doesn't work and always results in debates about exactly what is good and what is evil, but that (again) is just IME. If you do want to pursue that angle though, I guess 4E may make it tougher for you. Still though, alignment seems like something easy to add back in (although without the rules, that is just speculation!)
Cheers! :)
So the dwarf fighter can self-heal 104 Hit Points a day(8 per healing surge, 13 surges a day)? and starts with 33 hit points? At first level?
Is this a correct interpretation?
Yes, with the following caveat: He can only heal himself once in an encounter, excepting aid from some outside source.
|
Yes, with the following caveat: He can only heal himself once in an encounter, excepting aid from some outside source.So the dwarf fighter can self-heal 104 Hit Points a day(8 per healing surge, 13 surges a day)? and starts with 33 hit points? At first level?
Is this a correct interpretation?
Can the surges be used out of combat?
|
|
So the dwarf fighter can self-heal 104 Hit Points a day(8 per healing surge, 13 surges a day)? and starts with 33 hit points? At first level?
Is this a correct interpretation?
From what I gleaned from the rules I would say you are correct.
But remember that "day" is the time from one extended rest to the next extended rest of 6 hours!
So with 2 x extended rest (heal, rest,heal, rest,heal) I guess he could heal up to 312 Hit points in a 24 hour period.
I believe you are only allowed to gain the benefits of an extended rest once per day.
So the dwarf fighter can self-heal 104 Hit Points a day(8 per healing surge, 13 surges a day)? and starts with 33 hit points? At first level?
Is this a correct interpretation?
That is my interpretation (not counting bonuses from a leader type).
So the dwarf fighter can self-heal 104 Hit Points a day(8 per healing surge, 13 surges a day)? and starts with 33 hit points? At first level?
Is this a correct interpretation?
This is correct from what I've read also. It sounds like a lot, but it certainly appears that the 4e fighter is going to get wailed on a lot! I also think you can use healing surges outside of combat, but I'm not a 100% certain (information overload this weekend).
This is correct from what I've read also. It sounds like a lot, but it certainly appears that the 4e fighter is going to get wailed on a lot! I also think you can use healing surges outside of combat, but I'm not a 100% certain (information overload this weekend).So the dwarf fighter can self-heal 104 Hit Points a day(8 per healing surge, 13 surges a day)? and starts with 33 hit points? At first level?
Is this a correct interpretation?
My interpretation from the basic rules outline (it was posted on one of these threads) you can only use one healing surge per encounter, unless a leader type such as a cleric uses a power to give you another use. I know a poster above already said this. If I recall correctly, as long as you have five minutes between encounters, you can use as many healing surges as you want, so long as you have some left. Extended 6 hour rests give you all of your surges back and puts you back at maximum hit points.
Meanie has it right. If you spend 5 minutes resting you are allowed to spend as many healing surges as you want to, bringing yourself up to max if you are so able. I'm not sure what the rules state re: letting your Cleric friend help you heal faster during your short rest, but as a DM I'd let that fly as well.
|
|
My interpretation from the basic rules outline (it was posted on one of these threads) you can only use one healing surge per encounter, unless a leader type such as a cleric uses a power to give you another use. I know a poster above already said this. If I recall correctly, as long as you have five minutes between encounters, you can use as many healing surges as you want, so long as you have some left. Extended 6 hour rests give you all of your surges back and puts you back at maximum hit points.
Hey all. I played the dwarf fighter at DDXP this weekend in the first preview adventure "Escape from Sembia." You guys pretty much have it nailed down.
- You can use healing surge 1/encounter unless another "leader" character triggers you to use another (the cleric could do this as a minor action).-There are two types of rest. Short 5 minute breathers and extended 6 hour rests.
-During the 5 minute rests you could burn as many of your daily surges as you wanted.
-All your daily abilities (including healing surges) refresh after an extended rest.
-It never came up in our game, but I don't think there was anything preventing you from taking more than 1 extended (6 hour) rest in a single day. I could be wrong on this one though.
-J
Just another series of reasons why 4E won't be gracing my shelves....
My problem is this... with everyone healing and healing and getting surges and healing... what good is a cleric now?
|
|
Just another series of reasons why 4E won't be gracing my shelves....My problem is this... with everyone healing and healing and getting surges and healing... what good is a cleric now?
Apparently a cleric is still critical. The healing surges are not frequent enough to compensate for the damage taken in a particular encounter. I read a bunch of reports from D&D XP that said the cleric kept the party alive. There were plenty of deaths and a couple TPKs so it seems the healing surge is not as powerful it seems to be.
|
|
Apparently a cleric is still critical. The healing surges are not frequent enough to compensate for the damage taken in a particular encounter. I read a bunch of reports from D&D XP that said the cleric kept the party alive. There were plenty of deaths and a couple TPKs so it seems the healing surge is not as powerful it seems to be.
CWM is exactly right. Even as the dwarf, the 13hp surge I could use 1/encounter (as a swift... err... minor action due to dwarven resilience) was no where near enough to keep me from eating dirt 3 times during the adventure. You have to remember that, yes, the dwarven fighter had 33 hp at first level, but we were consistently getting smacked for 10-20 pts of damage per hit. It did NOT take long to drop a character.
The cleric's healing was still very useful.-J
|
|
on't sweat it, no offense taken. I think we just use alignment differently in our games. I'll try to respond to your queries as best I can, but this will likely be disorganized and slightly rambling (I'm about to head off to class).
In 3E, the majority of characters don't wear their alignments on their sleeves. Check out Detect Magic. Even a dyed in the wool stone cold killer is going to detect as only faintly evil (if he isn't supernaturally aligned with Evil, like a Cleric or Paladin) until he's above 10th, and at most he'll only be "moderately" evil, excepting epic play. On the Detect Evil this mindless sociopath will detect as evil as the petty theif who would sell his mother for the right price, but is mostly ok with stealing from random people and getting drunk.
The point is that in 3E, the Paladin still doesn't know who to trust, which I admit will be furthered in 4E (and to me, this is a good thing, but tastes vary!)
I've never used alignment to constrain my player's activities, nor punished them for deviating from it (and I've had a number of players over the years whose characters HAVE, indeed, changed alignment throughout play, some from Good to Evil, some from Law to Chaos, and some in the other direction as well).
Based on personal experience, I would say trying to constrain a player determined to be destructive/evil in game by forcing them to RP a good alignment doesn't work and always results in debates about exactly what is good and what is evil, but that (again) is just IME. If you do want to pursue that angle though, I guess 4E may make it tougher for you. Still though, alignment seems like something easy to add back in (although without the rules, that is just speculation!)
Cheers! :)
Hope class went well. I had a telephone interview myself. Here's hoping I get the job.
Understandable statements, even though they were rushed. I think I need to elaborate, and hopefully don't ramble myself.
Mostly, I have to say congrats on your players over mine. They were able to accept that yes, they had changed alignments based on their personality and yes, they will take the in game affects (if any) based on their RP. Mine would instead (before I even started DMing, as was just a fellow player) would choose CN because it was a moral loophole. Without the in game affects, they were able to do whatever they wanted, including very evil acts. This is fine from an RP point of view (not to harp on them about RP and then get into debates) but didn't help when someone actually RPed NG and was screwed over because he wasn't rich from killing the poor district or selling illegal goods. He was RPing his character just as much as the others, it's just that being Good didn't give him the chance to gain loot or use his abilities as much as the others (who could always, if bored, just go kill someone, steal their stuff, RP for hours selling everything off and then going out and buying more loot to upgrade their character). The bonus eventually came through when he was the only one who could use a holy weapon. With encounters with Demon's increasing, where a good weapon does more damage (because DR X/good), he finally gained an in-game bonus for his RP, like the others.
From an RP standpoint, the problem usually came into place when the person did bad things in front of the Paladin rather than away from him. You are completely correct: Acts done far away from the Paladin mostly didn't pick up. Detect Evil and Magic are made quite open ended to be used differently by different people (something that I enjoy).
But the guy wanting to be evil all the time will eventually do so in a fight with the aforementioned Paladin, which was more so my original point. How do they adventure with anyone other than other Clerics, Paladins and those Evil people who are more subtle?
Given that everyone except Paladin's and Clerics have to be Unaligned, I worry that you will see more and more characters who don't feel they need to be good in front of the Paladin, if ever, and that it's the detriment to the Paladin and the Cleric for being good. See, they can't do anything evil (or perhaps even be around anyone evil) because of their classes. But the others are unaligned and can never become evil until 20th level (still a rumour people, let's remember that I'm speaking as if it was true and it might now be), so they can do whatever they want to and have no downsides (that we've seen so far). The cleric and the Paladin then have to stand there, realizing that they may lose class abilities if they continue to play their character around the other unaligned characters or merely have to deal with the RP of being a champion of Good teamed up with the scum of the earth. While this may interest some people who would see themselves as the moral compass and trying to convert the others, this style for play isn't for everyone, and from a mechanical point of view, being the only character who can't do whatever they want may lead to a severe decrease in these classes seeing use.
Meaning 5e won't have Clerics or Paladins or the concept of Good (That wasn't meant to say that 5e is right around the corner, more so to say that popular demand usually changes the rules more so than anything else. It's meant to be somewhat funny and not really serious, so don't freak out.)
Hope class went well. I had a telephone interview myself. Here's hoping I get the job.
Understandable statements, even though they were rushed. I think I need to elaborate, and hopefully don't ramble myself.
Mostly, I have to say congrats on your players over mine. They were able to accept that yes, they had changed alignments based on their personality and yes, they will take the in game affects (if any) based on their RP. Mine would instead (before I even started DMing, as was just a fellow player) would choose CN because it was a moral loophole. Without the in game affects, they were able to do whatever they wanted, including very evil acts. This is fine from an RP point of view (not to harp on them about RP and then get into debates) but didn't help when someone actually RPed NG and was screwed over because he wasn't rich from killing the poor district or selling illegal goods. He was RPing his character just as much as the others, it's just that being Good didn't give him the chance to gain loot or use his abilities as much as the others (who could always, if bored, just go kill someone, steal their stuff, RP for hours selling everything off and then going out and buying more loot to upgrade their character). The bonus eventually came through when he was the only one who could use a holy weapon. With encounters with Demon's increasing, where a good weapon does more damage (because DR X/good), he finally gained an in-game bonus for his RP, like the others.
From an RP standpoint, the problem usually came into place when the person did bad things in front of the Paladin rather than away from him. You are completely correct: Acts done far away from the Paladin mostly didn't pick up. Detect Evil and Magic are made quite open ended to be used differently by different people (something that I enjoy).
But the guy wanting to be evil all the time will eventually do so in a fight with the aforementioned Paladin, which was more so my original point. How do they adventure with anyone other than other Clerics, Paladins and those Evil people who are more subtle?
Given that everyone except Paladin's and Clerics have to be Unaligned, I worry that you will see more and more characters who don't feel they need to be good in front of the Paladin, if ever, and that it's the detriment to the Paladin and the Cleric for being good. See, they can't do anything evil (or perhaps even be around anyone evil) because of their classes. But the others are unaligned and can never become evil until 20th level (still a rumour people, let's remember that I'm speaking as if it was true and it might now be), so they can do whatever they want to and have no downsides (that we've seen so far). The cleric and the Paladin then have to stand there, realizing that they may lose class abilities if they continue to play their character around the other unaligned characters or merely have to deal with the RP of being a champion of Good teamed up with the scum of the earth. While this may interest some people who would see themselves as the moral compass and trying to convert the others, this style for play isn't for everyone, and from a mechanical point of view, being the only character who can't do whatever they want may lead to a severe decrease in these classes seeing use.
Meaning 5e won't have Clerics or Paladins or the concept of Good (That wasn't meant to say that 5e is right around the corner, more so to say that popular demand usually changes the rules more so than anything else. It's meant to be somewhat funny and not really serious, so don't freak out.)
Class went well, although boring. If only this stupid thesis would write itself so I could play more DnD! :grumble mumble: (Thanks for asking!)
Its funny, the example you use, because in my game a NG at the time (I think) Fighter teamed up with the something-Evil Assassin to go kill a helpless old grandma and steal her stuff. In this instance, the grandma ended up being an NPC who would have helped the PCs against the town's evil government, except that ... uh ... they killed her. Whoops!
I'd say a character's RP should have RP detriments. Sure they CAN go burn down the orphanage and sell the bones to the local Necromancer. But surely there is a town guard or some such to smack them down. The Paladin/Cleric who is always wondering why he adventures with such heathens has to have some kind of organization somewhere that theoretically burns such heretics at the stake (or whatever).
Likewise, I'd say the Good character could just as easily be rewarded for being Good. A few "good samiritan" encounters where he helps out someone in need (who ends up giving a reward/service in thanks) could certainly tip the balance over.
As a final (although still disorganized) note, using the CN alignment to excuse blatantly CE acts is one of the oldest tricks in the book. Remember that a CN character is NOT evil. They shouldn't be out there raping old widows and burning orphanages. They shouldn't be mercilessly cutting down unarmed opponents and sadistically torturing captured enemies. They should be fickle, and always question (and mostly defy!) authority. CN != murderous psycho. If your players act up with their CN-ness, just remember ... No one expects the Spanish Inquisition! (hehe, ok the last bit is a joke, but could be useful if needed!)
Cheers! :)
Can I wait until I get home, so's I can open these pdf's? Somebody tell me.
No you can't wait. You must opens now! (At least, if you're low on willpower like me!)
Cheers! :)