|
I played several 4E games during Gamex 2008 this holiday weekend, most ran by WotC and one based on the unofficial rules found over at ENworld. I'm writing a review of the experience, and I'm wondering who else here on the Paizo messageboards* has actually participated in a game. DMs are especially welcomed to post.
*I'm not talking about the Paizo staff, who are on a gag order for practical reasons (i.e., to keep from getting distracted answering a surge of question from Paizo readers on their opinions). And yes, I've read Jason's post on his experience. No, I'm talking about other readers on the boards.
I've played in two sessions of Escape from Sembia, and DM'd one of ENWorld's player made modules. Was a lot of fun!
Cheers! :)
Aside from Keep on the Shadowfell, a tiny combat-test that I ran after we got all the pregens from DDXP and monster blocks.
I played the Delve and Scalegloom Hall at DDXP (they were more than enough to let me know that 4E is not the game for me).
I have run 8-10 4e games based (Raiders of Oakhurst, Second Son, Return of the Burning Plague) on the PHB-lite and other information available.
Running Keep on the Shadowfell, played through both Escape from Sembia and Scalegloom Halls, and soon to be running a converted 3.5 campaign.
DM'ed the first third of H1. It's ok, but I'm not about to throw away my third edition stuff.
How is Keep on the Shadowfell running? I must say that it did not impress me while I was reading it, but it seems like something that plays better than it reads.
Like many of the other posters I am about 1/3 of the way through. I still prefer 3rd (although I DM'd a 1-2e game with a whole bunch of old friends about a month ago). I will continue to steal rules from anyone who lets me know of them and develop my own.
I am underimpressed with H1 considering it should be what is trying to get me to sell or burn all my 3.5 stuff and move on to 4e. With that said, I will almost definitely buy the core books and might move to a 4eish game.
Contributor
|
I played 3 combat encounters and some info gathering from H1 last night (as a player, not DM).
It was fun. There wasn't a whole lot of story yet, but enough to get us to the encounters. I'm okay with that for an intro adventure.
The encounters were interesting. I find the dynamic very different than 3E. Fun, but a very different feel. The combat does not run any faster at this level of play.
My overall impression of 4E so far (based on this playtest) is:
1) It is as different from 3E as 3E is from 1E.
2) It looks like a fun pick-up game or convention game, and will probably work well for organized play. Maybe better than 3E for those things.
3) I don't think it will be as good for my tastes for an ongoing home campaign.
4) It is very cinematic, which is good if that's what you want. Sometimes I do, and sometimes I want gritty. It doesn't look like it can do gritty very well.
I'll hold off on any more detail analysis until I have the chance to play more.
EDIT: One more thing; as many reviewers have said, the production quality is lacking. The quickplay rules got smudged really easily, and the battlemap was damaged by having dice rolled on it. I was really not impressed from that standpoint.
|
|
Hey, I played 4E at Gamex too! I played a rogue in Escape from Sembia - a short adventure set in the new Forgotten Realms. Three or Four big combats and one of those complex skill encounter thingies. Overall impression - not bad, I actually had fun, but probably not what I'd want to play at home. Some specific thoughts...
Bloodied
When you are at half you HPs, you are 'Bloodied.' This is an actual condition and it's even listed on your character sheet. Several monsters had things triggered when they were Bloodied. This one undead thing were were fighting let off a blast of necrotic energy. Some barbarians went wild. I think some PC classes also have abilities tied to being Bloodied. It was fun to have the monster change or do something special halfway through. It was also nice to get a little indicator that you were about halfway there (even if it made my skin rot). A couple of creatures also had "Upon Death' effects as well. Exciting.
Marking
Okay, I liked this too. The fighter had the ability to 'Mark' an opponent just by attacking it (he didn't even have to hit, just engage it). Once he'd marked it, the creature too a penalty (-2 I think) if it attacked anyone else. It makes sense. If I'm fighting you and you take a swing at someone else, I'm going to pop you. The penalty represents you having to keep an eye on me no matter what. [For idea thieves, it could also provoke an AoO.] I got marked at one point by a bad guy and prevented me (my choice) from backstabbing another opponent. Nice mechanic.
Critical Hits
Critical hits don't require confirms anymore and don't do double/triple damage. Instead they do max damage. I can't say I like this better, but I did like it. Waaaay faster. One roll, hurray!, done. I'm not sure of the full probabilities or anything but it seems to me with 3.5 double damage, where you still have to roll damage, half the time you're going to end up with less-than-max damage and half the time your going to end up with more-than-max damage (max damage for a regular hit), and that's assuming you crit. So it seems to me that the 4E way should result in slightly more damage overall. Still trying to make up my mind, but not bad at all.
Complex Skill Challenges
I had read the description of these the Wizard's site but it didn't really sink in until I played. When it says something like "8 successes before 4 failures," it means as a party. We were trying to get out of town quickly. The DM gave a few seconds to talk about what we were going to do, then he went around the table and asked each of us. He matched what we said to a list of possibilities he had written down and matched it to a particular skill check. For example, one player said he just started running toward the bad part of town. Athletics check. I said I climbed a wall and ran along the rooftops. Acrobatics check. And so on. In at least one case the DM had to make up/figure out which skill check would be appropriate because the player thought of something that wasn't written in the adventure. Success, success, success, failure, success, success, success, failure, failure, success. That 7 and 3. We needed 8 before 4. Last one: failure. No immediate effect because it wasn't catastrophic or anything (not like 4 in a row), but it did alter an encounter later in the session. This part of the adventure was very heavy on story and interpretation and not a lot of die rolling, only about 2 times each in the end. Interesting. A nice change of pace.
At-Will Powers
I had two at-will combat powers, one that allowed me to move a little extra before an attack and one that did a little extra damage. They each had their own attack to hit number to use rather than my regular attach number. At first I would do regular attacks and occasionally one of the at-wills, then I realized that both the attack and damage for my at-wills was the same or better than my regular attack, so I started using my special at-wills all the time. That annoyed me at first. It seemed lame, why would I ever use a regular attack if these are just plain better? Then it hit me. I was supposed to use my at-wills all the time, they represent the way my character fights. My regular attack numbers were just a base that my at-wills were built off of. And there were certain situations where I couldn't use my at-will - AoOs and sneak attacks - so I had to just use my regular attacks there. Once it made sense to me I was alright with it. Yes, it was a little video gamey with my two special moves, but it was fun and combat had a lot of action as everyone learned to use their at-wills.
Moving Others in Combat
I got shoved out of my square a couple of times. It was fun. I had two powers where I could move my opponents as well (one once per encounter and the other once per day). I pushed a guy off a cliff and pulled another into a flank. Very dynamic.
Static Saves
In 4E some of your attacks are versus your opponent's will or fort or reflex save. You roll, not him; his save is a static number like AC. As the attacker it's fun to roll. When it's against you, it's just like being told that a sword hit or missed you. Honestly, I didn't really notice the difference so I guess it was okay.
Damage and Healing
You start with a lot more HP but a lot of damage goes around too. And there is plenty of healing available. You have a certain number of healing surges per day and each one heals a certain number of HP. In combat, you can take one by just going full defense for one round (called Second Wind). Out of combat you can use the rest on yourself as well, but when they're gone, they're gone. When a cleric heals you, she is also activating your healing surges (if you have any left). I didn't play a cleric, but she seemed to have plenty of healing to go around, like it was an at-will power or something. Being able to heal all your own damage seems a bit much, but I like the idea of getting a second wing in combat. You don't die until you get to negative your Bloodied amount, so half your HP. Our fighter would get healed up to his full HP and be deep into negatives and back several times in each combat. Okay, but a little too much fluctuation for me.
Odds and Ends
* Rogues get a bonus with daggers
* Movement is in squares not feet
* There's a hierarchy of actions - standard (including attacking), move (including 5' step) and minor. You can substitute actions for something lower, so instead of a standard action you can take another move, instead of another move you can take a minor, or you could do three minors. This seemed to clear up a lot of the questions about what we could and couldn't do.
* Action points (1 +1 every other encounter; can use 1 per encounter) give you an extra standard action, although you can use it to move or for a minor action.
* Run no longer = x4, just +2 squares and leaves you vulnerable to AoOs and sneak attacks, etc.
* Thieves' Tool give you a +2 bonus, rather than a penalty for not having them.
* "Ongoing damage" seems to bring together all the different types of continuing damages into one rule. Saves every round to end it in most cases.
* Having "Combat Advantage" replaces your opponent being "denied Dex" or "Flatfooted" for things like sneak attacks.
* Some skills have passive versions. Passive Perception is your Perception +10 and the DM used it when he wants to surprise you. Great idea. No need to alert players anymore.
* Tumble is a rogue ability.
I have no idea what character creation is like :(
But overall, it was fun. Some neat ideas. Combat seemed quicker, more actiony, more dynamic. Looking at my character sheet I don't feel I had as many choices as in 3.5, but we'll see. Seems like a fun game to play at conventions. Maybe not at home though, at least not for me.
How is Keep on the Shadowfell running? I must say that it did not impress me while I was reading it, but it seems like something that plays better than it reads.
The story and backdrop is basic, I suppose, but about what I'd expect from an intro adventure. Its simple enough that I think even a DM who had never run before could do the job proper, as long as they read it ahead of time. As it stands, I was able to read the entire thing pretty quickly and leave it at that. Navigation during play was easy enough that if I forgot something, it didnt take long to figure it out.
It plays fairly straightfoward. The players get some minor decisions to make (which dungeon site to you hit up first), but they havent gotten into Shadowfell Keep yet. They havent even got to the kobold lair, but thats next on the agenda.
Mainly, its fast and intuitive. I recall my table during a typical Age of Worms adventure, laden as it was with stacks of books that contained necessary rules data for combat, whatever monster was being used, various combat moves, and the slew of spells that the bard, cleric, or monster would be using.
For KotS, I had the adventure module, and everyone else had their sheets. That was it. Even after 4E officially hits, since everything is self-contained, I dont expect it to get much worse than that.
If anything slowed it down, it was the players figuring what did what, what they should use, and how the rules worked. As an intro adventure, I'm willing to let that slide.