|
The show opens with Mearls and Noonan speaking on Gygax.
17:10: Brian asks: With all their powers, what will stop PCs from becoming unstoppable killing machines that never need to rest?
The monsters. Since monsters don't advance as characters, they can do things PCs can't. With them being able to use more speciial abilites they're more dangerous.
19:50: Marcus asks: What role will my favorite race, the drow, play in 4E?
With more room on the MM there will be several different drow (Warrior, brute, etc.) described. Also there will be information on playing a Drow PC.
21:25: Mysterious player #1 asks: Will 4E’s ease of DMing leave players feel cheated?
No, there's plenty of complexity left in the game for players to track (ex., how long a spell or ability affects a creature).
"Drink from the firehouse": thanks UHF.
23:25: Gary asks: How will the new cosmology affect pantheons in current campaigns?
It will not affect current games. There will not be alot of Diety info in PH though.
The comsology is similar in many ways. The places that you go are still there, it's the way they're connected. "Imagine your nearby shopping mall has been turned into a shopping plaza. Your favorite gaming store is still there. The Electronic Boutique is still there, but you don't have to walk across the food court to get there".
If you like the Great Wheel, all those realms are still there. It's just connected into a giant wheel. We're just trying to make it less structured.
"Look on my mailbag, o ye mighty, and despair!" -Dave Noonan
Yah... I almost feel bad for the guys who have to read all the mail this podcast must get. If you printed them all out, there would probably be enough to choke a whole herd of horses to death.
|
|
25:50: Samuel asks: Beyond characters, what else is/is not convertible between 3.5 and 4th Edition?
There will be alot of things that will not be able to convert (ex., Dexterity damage). There's no longer ability score damage in 4e, but certain mechanics that may give you a -4 to dex checks or -2 AC.
If theres classes, PRCs you want to convert, look over the class and find 4/5 things you find the most interesting and rewrite them into Pargon paths, powers, or feats.
29:15: Ryan asks: Will future books introduce new paragon paths, and destinies? And are there plans for race-specific paragon paths?
Yes, and Yes.
29:45: Sean asks: What sets humans apart from other races?
Humans gain abilites boosts and no penalties. With the powers and abilites given to all the races the new edition, the characters could be considered +1 LA creatures in 3.5 terms.
Lake Wobegon, where "all the women are strong, all the men are good looking, and all the children are above average."
32:00: Scott asks: What’s happening with holy symbols in 4th Edition?
Holy symbols are now like a wizards wand or staff. They are magical. When you use a divine spell it channels through the holy symbol, and may give you an attack bonus and damage bonus at higher levels. They will come with magical abilites built into them, kust like all magic items.
|
|
32:50: Chris asks: Can the system handle non-battle gridded encounters?
Yes. Not anymore assuming than 3e.
35:00: David asks: What can you say about 4E’s magic level system?
There are 30 levels of spells. The spells level equals the level you get it (ex., 29th level wiz casts 29th level spells). Most spells are encounter spells, spells you can get back after a short rest. Spells that last longer are more like rituals, and take much longer to cast.
The physics of D&D are the longer something lasts, the longer and harder it is to cast.
36:50: Elestrium asks: Will the mechanic of random hit points gained per level continue, or will this sacred cow finally be sacrificed?
"It has been steak-a-fied, and it was tasty". Alot of people didn't like rolling up their hit points, but if you still want to roll them you can figure out how yourself. Also by getting rid of random hit points it helps prevent power creep issues in the game.
38:45: Mysterious player #2 asks: Will extra bonuses to hit be factored in by class, so that melee-based classes remain the combat experts?
Not all character use str for melee attacks, or dex for ranged attacks.
The problem in 3e was that the attack bonus progression started of small, the 6th level fighter at +6 and the cleric at +4. But if follow that trend to level 17 the diffence is getting bigger, and the fighter is taking feats that exacerbate that gap. At that point the game becomes untenable.
|
|
41:30: Thomas asks: How will 4E monsters be adaptable?
It depends. There is not a rigorous advancement of hit dice and gaing spells like in 3e, it much or artistic. They give us a base line on of what damage looks like based on the creatures level. And we can take take the base line and create what we need based on that (ex., giving a troll a fire breath weapon).
It's more giving you an explanation on how the system works, than allowing you to use the explanation, your understanding of how damaage works(how it scales) to use to build a new ability.
44:30: Dave asks: Will there be a 4.5?
Everything we've heard is no.
|
You don't roll Saves, ability scores, Hit points......
Yeah, this is something I wanna play. 5E- "We decided that rolling skill checks and attacks were too random, so we decided to take out the remaining random aspects, people don't like the random chance thing.....also it makes it easier to make Collectible Cards out of the system...."
|
|
Maybe its just me, but I like to roll to my hit points. Sure, I've rolled a 1 on more that one occasion, but that's the fun the randomness.
And as for having 3 or 4 diffent types of drow, eh. That's one thing I didn't like about the MM4/5 you had pages dedicated to drow or hobgoblins saying how the ones presented are diffent from your standard MM hobgoblins.
How knows maybe it won't be as it sounds. Maybe I'll like the monster entries, but till than I'm not sold.
You don't roll Saves ...
You are aware that, rather than you rolling a save against a fixed DC, instead the person attacking you rolls against your fixed defense. It's mechanically identical to 3.5. Just as random.
As for HP and ability scores, I don't believe I've even played a campaign in the last 10 years that randomly rolled for them.
|
You don't roll Saves, ability scores, Hit points......
Yeah, this is something I wanna play. 5E- "We decided that rolling skill checks and attacks were too random, so we decided to take out the remaining random aspects, people don't like the random chance thing.....also it makes it easier to make Collectible Cards out of the system...."
No bullcrap! I'm almost right there with you Fakey. Some of us like to roll.
|
|
As for HP and ability scores, I don't believe I've even played a campaign in the last 10 years that randomly rolled for them.
They obviously had people just like you in mind when they designed 4e then. I am happy for you. :)
As for me and mine - rolling hit points is fun and helps distinguish on Pc from another.
And I notice that there will not be notes on how to roll for hit points in the PHB despite the assurances from some on these boards. They are going to make people figure it out for themselves because they don't see the point in it.
As for HP and ability scores, I don't believe I've even played a campaign in the last 10 years that randomly rolled for them.They obviously had people just like you in mind when they designed 4e then. I am happy for you. :)
As for me and mine - rolling hit points is fun and helps distinguish on Pc from another.
And I notice that there will not be notes on how to roll for hit points in the PHB despite the assurances from some on these boards. They are going to make people figure it out for themselves because they don't see the point in it.
Yeah, I think they should have included that. For the group I DM, I've always allowed (in the past) players to choose to roll or to choose 1/2 HD +1, and they almost always just choose to get their average +1 hit points. So it shouldn't affect me.
The other DM of the group is a die hard roller and he already has the hit dice selected for each Class and will have us roll for hit points in his game. It should be all good either way. Still should have added it as an option. 3E had multiple options for rolling ability scores and hit points.
My favorite part of D&D when I first started playing was rolling up ability scores for my character.
Sad times these are. :(
|
My favorite part of D&D when I first started playing was rolling up ability scores for my character.
Sad times these are. :(
"We roll ability scores in my campaign"
There, fixed that one too. :-)
PS: For 3E I actually prefer point buy. You can control the power level and people don't feel gyped if they roll bad.
-Pete
Keep it up, Pete, you'll get us back to 3.5 eventually. ;)
|
You don't roll Saves ...You are aware that, rather than you rolling a save against a fixed DC, instead the person attacking you rolls against your fixed defense. It's mechanically identical to 3.5. Just as random.
As for HP and ability scores, I don't believe I've even played a campaign in the last 10 years that randomly rolled for them.
JUST AS RANDOM?!!
It sounds like the DM does everything and the player does nothing.When a player rolls a save it's FUN. Like those times when you roll that nat 20 for success.
Can this edition possibly get any worse?
JUST AS RANDOM?!!
It sounds like the DM does everything and the player does nothing.
When a player rolls a save it's FUN. Like those times when you roll that nat 20 for success.Can this edition possibly get any worse?
Well just to be clear, when you make an attack on the NPCs, you roll the attack. Basically what it means is you don't get to do any rolls when it is not your turn.
Well just to be clear, when you make an attack on the NPCs, you roll the attack. Basically what it means is you don't get to do any rolls when it is not your turn.
Yes. Unless you get an AoO. Or an ally grants you a save. Or you get an immediate reaction.
|
|
Well just to be clear, when you make an attack on the NPCs, you roll the attack. Basically what it means is you don't get to do any rolls when it is not your turn.
And they decided after much debate to still allow 4e players to roll for weapon damage too. Though I understand it was a close thing in the R&D department where they were pushing for a fixed damage for every attack.
Well just to be clear, when you make an attack on the NPCs, you roll the attack. Basically what it means is you don't get to do any rolls when it is not your turn.And they decided after much debate to still allow 4e players to roll for weapon damage too. Though I understand it was a close thing in the R&D department where they were pushing for a fixed damage for every attack.
LOL, I was just wondering why 4th didn't have fixed damage about an hour ago.
EDIT: I also was wondering why they didn't just get rid off all the stats. Why not just have 2 stats: Mental and Physical. Everything related to physically activities is based on your physical stat, and everything related to mental activities is based on your mental stat. It seems like that would be much simplier.
Well just to be clear, when you make an attack on the NPCs, you roll the attack. Basically what it means is you don't get to do any rolls when it is not your turn.Yes. Unless you get an AoO. Or an ally grants you a save. Or you get an immediate reaction.
I'm confused, what's a save? I thought 4th wasn't doing saves, you just attack the person's defense.
Though I understand it was a close thing in the R&D department where they were pushing for a fixed damage for every attack.
What they said was they tried to push the envelope of design as far as it could go, and one of those experiments involved not rolling for damage. But it just didn't feel like D&D, so they put it back.
That's a pretty far cry from your characterization.
EDIT: I also was wondering why they didn't just get rid off all the stats. Why not just have 2 stats: Mental and Physical. Everything related to physically activities is based on your physical stat, and everything related to mental activities is based on your mental stat. It seems like that would be much simplier.
The designers don't have the overriding goal of "make everything simpler". They have the goal of "make a better version of D&D" where "better" means a range of things, including easier to learn, faster to play, easier to develop for, involves more roleplaying and less bookkeeping, and a bunch of other things.
Clearly, the developers thought keeping the stats made for a better system.
I'm confused, what's a save? I thought 4th wasn't doing saves, you just attack the person's defense.
When you get hit with an ongoing effect, you suffer the effect at the beginning of the round (such as taking 5 damage from poison) and at the end of your round you make a save, which really properly should be called a "duration" roll. You roll d20, and on a 10 or higher, you are no longer affected by the ongoing condition. As people have noted, your "save" isn't affected by your stats, but your initial defense was, so effects still take your abilities into account.
One of the things the 4e cleric can do is grant an immediate save to an ally if they hit.
I'm confused, what's a save? I thought 4th wasn't doing saves, you just attack the person's defense.Well just to be clear, when you make an attack on the NPCs, you roll the attack. Basically what it means is you don't get to do any rolls when it is not your turn.Yes. Unless you get an AoO. Or an ally grants you a save. Or you get an immediate reaction.
What we would consider Saves in prior editions (magic, for instance, breaking through a target's defense) are now just attacks, no matter what the means of the attack are.
Saves, now, are really Duration, since they only determine if an effect is removed or not. So, when an ally grants you a Save during his turn, he allows you to make a roll to end the effect's duration again. Basically, you can shake off the effect out of turn with your ally's help.
|
|
Keep it up, Pete, you'll get us back to 3.5 eventually. ;)
I draw the line at adding back in grapple rules. Sorry. :-)
I guess my point (in case you missed it) is I'm fully planning on modifying things as appropriate to my way of doing things, just like we do now with 3.5 houserules. These aren't some sort of sandscript tablets we're talking about here. :-)
In fact, the term "3.75" has been bandied about here. If it makes sense I'll poach the good stuff out of 3.5 and the good stuff out of 4.0 and make my own 3.75. It's a game, the idea is to have fun the way you like it. I keep failing to see the gun being held to my head on this.
I'm sure WotC will have plenty of "optional rules" in the books or online. And there will be plenty here and on other sites as well.
-Pete
Well just to be clear, when you make an attack on the NPCs, you roll the attack. Basically what it means is you don't get to do any rolls when it is not your turn.JUST AS RANDOM?!!
It sounds like the DM does everything and the player does nothing.
When a player rolls a save it's FUN. Like those times when you roll that nat 20 for success.Can this edition possibly get any worse?
That sounds weak.
|
|
Well just to be clear, when you make an attack on the NPCs, you roll the attack. Basically what it means is you don't get to do any rolls when it is not your turn.JUST AS RANDOM?!!
It sounds like the DM does everything and the player does nothing.
When a player rolls a save it's FUN. Like those times when you roll that nat 20 for success.Can this edition possibly get any worse?
That sounds weak.
I agree, the save mechanics seem strange, I'm going to wait and see on that one, although I am looking forward to making attack rolls when my wizard throws a fireball.
Well just to be clear, when you make an attack on the NPCs, you roll the attack. Basically what it means is you don't get to do any rolls when it is not your turn.JUST AS RANDOM?!!
It sounds like the DM does everything and the player does nothing.
When a player rolls a save it's FUN. Like those times when you roll that nat 20 for success.Can this edition possibly get any worse?
That sounds weak.
I agree, the save mechanics seem strange, I'm going to wait and see on that one, although I am looking forward to making attack rolls when my wizard throws a fireball.
An attack roll for a Fireball? That's like making an attack roll for throwing a hand grenade! Trust me, It's not nessessary.
An attack roll for a Fireball? That's like making an attack roll for throwing a hand grenade! Trust me, It's not nessessary.
You can either roll to see how well the fireball hits, or you can roll to see how well you dodge. 3.5 did the latter, 4e does the former.
Arguing you shouldn't get an attack roll for Fireball in 4e is arguing you shouldn't get a save against Fireball in 3.5. Which is a reasonable argument to make, but not what you intended, I think.
|
Do all the classes use the same attack roll progression? Are all attack rolls modified by the class best abilty score? For example fighter 3rd level str 16, wizard 3rd level int 16: so both attack rolls would be the same, just named differently? Am I making sense?
Do you like movies about gladiators?
|
|
Though I understand it was a close thing in the R&D department where they were pushing for a fixed damage for every attack.What they said was they tried to push the envelope of design as far as it could go, and one of those experiments involved not rolling for damage. But it just didn't feel like D&D, so they put it back.
That's a pretty far cry from your characterization.
Every now and then you come across a study which makes you wonder why anybody would waste the money doing the research - things like, "Do children prefer candy over brussel sprouts?"
Trying to decide whether or not rolling for damage was integral to the game seems to me like one of those areas where they could have sent me the money and I could have given them an answer in about thirty seconds. But of course I prefer rolling for hitpoints so what do I know? :/
EDIT: Oh, and CNB, my first post, the one you were responding to, was an attempt at humor using hyperbole. Sorry. I'll stick in a [humor] tag or something next time.
Every now and then you come across a study which makes you wonder why anybody would waste the money doing the research - things like, "Do children prefer candy over brussel sprouts?"
And, of course, you'll know the reason it's important to run those studies is because, occasionally, you get back the answer you weren't expecting.
|
|
Every now and then you come across a study which makes you wonder why anybody would waste the money doing the research - things like, "Do children prefer candy over brussel sprouts?"And, of course, you'll know the reason it's important to run those studies is because, occasionally, you get back the answer you weren't expecting.
Have you never been a child?
Almost anyone who has ever, as a child, been given brussel sprouts, has no need to run the survey. Some things are just self evident.
But I suppose every doctoral dissertations has to be written about something. Which is, IMHO, the real reason for some of these studies.
Have you never been a child?
Sadly, no. I sprang fully grown from my father's head, after he split it open with an axe to cure a headache. True story!
Almost anyone who has ever, as a child, been given brussel sprouts, has no need to run the survey. Some things are just self evident.
In a world that can produce both this and this, I wouldn't say anything was "self evident".
D&D Miniatures doesn't roll damage and people appear to really enjoy that game.
As a DM, I'd be fine if monsters didn't usually roll damage (just for crits and when they had specials, for instance).
There are still rules for rolling up ability scores; the default is just point buy. In 3.x rolling is the norm and point buy is the option. Frankly, this makes sense. The default is the safe and balanced one where the DM can trust everyone. The option is for people who understand the ramifications of random rolling.
I would be willing to quite seriously make the following statement: Random rolling for hit points is never good for a long standing campaign.
If you're playing a one shot or very short campaign, then sure, it's fine, moving on.
If you are not, then random rolling hit points does the following:
1) Creates imbalances when there are outliers. If a group of 5 has A with 30% more hp (85%) and E with 30% less hp (25%), that causes serious problems for the DM. It may also cause problems for the players (Someone may be jealous of A, E may be upset about falling down so much)
2) Creates hp creep as people die. People with low hp die more often than those without, so the average hp of the party grow over time, making the party stronger than usual - but not in a way the DM can necessarily plan around. Some groups even put the power creep directly in - if you roll below X, make it Y. You can roll twice and take the better. All 1s are rerolls. Etc.
3) Encourages people to cheat. Of course, we all know that people in D&D never cheat, but sometimes that die bounces or someone was just making a practice roll. Etc.
In addition to the more obvious effects at the table, no rolls involved with character creation means that you can (mostly) trust all characters that show up without having to watch them being made. You can move characters between tables without as much fear - see 'Living' games for where this is particularly common. You don't need to worry as much that random rolling for creation will imbalance the group.
There's plenty of rolling in the game itself for someone's bad luck to kick in there, that I don't need it to drag their character down the entire campaign.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Gods...
Ok, I hate to point this out, but in the interest of full disclosure... The old tournament modules did have fixed damamge for the bad guys, to try to balance out the 'bad die rolls wipe out party' vs, 'bad tactics wipe out party'.
That being said, if I want to roll how accurate my area effect attacks are, or have fixed damage, or all my characters look alike except for equipment, well, that's why I have Battletech and Megamek ;-)
Almost anyone who has ever, as a child, been given brussel sprouts, has no need to run the survey. Some things are just self evident.
This, more than any reason, is why studies of the "obvious" are needed. Earth as a flat disk was very much self-evident. So was the rotation of the sun around the earth- the sun was the one moving, after all!
I'm not disagreeing with your specific example, but there are plenty of "self-evident" things in science that are worth questioning, but our hubris prevents us from seeing the possibility of a different answer. I really doubt that there are too many truly worthless studies- I'm sure there are a few here and there, but by and large asking questions, even apparently simple questions, is a good thing.
That sounds weak.Well just to be clear, when you make an attack on the NPCs, you roll the attack. Basically what it means is you don't get to do any rolls when it is not your turn.JUST AS RANDOM?!!
It sounds like the DM does everything and the player does nothing.
When a player rolls a save it's FUN. Like those times when you roll that nat 20 for success.Can this edition possibly get any worse?
Why?
I would be willing to quite seriously make the following statement: Random rolling for hit points is never good for a long standing campaign.It has never been a problem in any campaign I've ever run. But YMMV I suppose.
It doesn't always cause problems.
It's just never _good_.
You convinced me. All this time I thought we were having fun, which is a _good_ thing. Obviously I was mistaken and rolling for hitpoints was all this time ruining our fun without our even knowing it.It doesn't always cause problems.
It's just never _good_.
You know, you say that... but you didn't say a single thing that rolling hit points did that was good.
I mean, I can say all kinds of things that having character backgrounds did for games I was in. Having luck points for cool roleplay. Allowing players to improvise surroundings and have a hand in the plot. Tying in subplots and recurring villains. I can think of _tons_ of things that add to play experience. Random hp never have in a long term campaign.
I can actually point to campaigns that were helped by _changing_ from using random hp, of course.
But, seriously - you can have a great game and it has -nothing- to do with rolling random hit points. Would you suddenly have _not_ had fun in those games if you'd used static hp? That's probably a fair test.
|
|
You know, you say that... but you didn't say a single thing that rolling hit points did that was good.
1) Rolling dice is fun.
2) Playing with sub-optimal characters can be challenging and therefore fun because challenges are fun.
3) Random hit-points help to make one character different from another. Sure maybe two fighters have exactly the same feats, but one has a glass jaw and knows it. He has to be more defensive. Differences like random hit points can help define a character.
For what it is worth, I asked my ten year old son which he would rather do and he said, without hesitation, "roll". When I asked why, he said, "Because rolling is more fun."
But, seriously - you can have a great game and it has -nothing- to do with rolling random hit points. Would you suddenly have _not_ had fun in those games if you'd used static hp? That's probably a fair test.
I played Canasta tonight and did not roll for random hit points once and had fun. So the answer is probably yes. But not rolling dice for hit points would be a game that does not feel like Dungeons and Dragons to me.
You know, you say that... but you didn't say a single thing that rolling hit points did that was good.1) Rolling dice is fun.
2) Playing with sub-optimal characters can be challenging and therefore fun because challenges are fun.
3) Random hit-points help to make one character different from another. Sure maybe two fighters have exactly the same feats, but one has a glass jaw and knows it. He has to be more defensive. Differences like random hit points can help define a character.
For what it is worth, I asked my ten year old son which he would rather do and he said, without hesitation, "roll". When I asked why, he said, "Because rolling is more fun."
Yep, rolling is fun. For a few seconds every level, at least!
And _if it creates problems_, it's potentially not fun for the life of the campaign.
Hence why I specifically excluded short campaigns from my criteria.
Curious: Do you roll characters 'as they were meant to', 3d6 for each stat, in order? If you don't... why not?
|
|
Yep, rolling is fun. For a few seconds every level, at least!And _if it creates problems_, it's potentially not fun for the life of the campaign.
Hence why I specifically excluded short campaigns from my criteria.
Curious: Do you roll characters 'as they were meant to', 3d6 for each stat, in order? If you don't... why not?
For the record, it has never created any problems in any of my campaigns, short or long.
As for rolling for stats, you're argument is a weak comparison. Rolling is rolling. Point buy would be a better comparison. And I don't like point buy though I have used it for PbP. When given the option, however, I always roll.
As for rolling in order, I was actually planning on rolling our stats in order for Curse of the Crimson Throne, though I'll still probably let them use 4d6, drop the lowest.