You don't HAVE to choose the powers from your pact, but you are better at using them than a Warlock with a different pact.
Interesting.
I'm loving playing a Warlock. We just gained a Wizard and discovered all kinds of amusing ways of slaughtering the foe.
Example. Warlock gal invariably tries to curse all the enemies one at a time. Then she either Eldritch blasts them or uses Dire Radiance.
Wizard casts Cloud of Daggers and Thunderwave, pulling cursed/Dire Radianced enemies into a cloud of daggers. All this is great softening up and it's just rinse and repeat all over the combat area. Since I'd forgotten about Shadow Step, that's going to make this combination even more effective in terms of getting those curses on.
Our Warlord seldom enters combat at all. He uses the fighter as his basic melee attack. "Niall, hit that one", while he casually leans on the huge bastard sword he insists on carrying around.
|
I am having a riot running my kids and their friends through Keep on the Shadowfell. 4E is simple and quick. Shadowfell is pretty bland, but fine as an introduction to the game. My adult players would reject it, however.
I am playing a warlord in another game. It's been a mixed bag. I enjoy it but about half the table doesn't really like the D&D minis feel of it. The big argument has been over Board game vs. Simulation. Some folks see 4.0 as too focused on the Mechanics of the grid and the necessity of the mat. We have had some fun fights and done some great roleplaying, but I spend a lot of game time justifying the design to the other players.
I am running CoCT as a 3.P playtest. This is going well, and is pretty traditional 3.5 in many ways.
As Atlanta has a rock solid Gaming community it is pretty easy to get players for any game. The math right now is going about 60-40 4.0 to other systems.
So, I have had the best time ever playing with my kids. There's a thread about that on the board here. The adults have been so-so.
What I also noticed and should be added to my list is the total lack of fear on the part of the PC's. The HP's and healing surges did seem to instill a sense of bravado.
That one will get somebody killed. Once in an encounter your very short on healing. You can give up a round and take a 2nd wind and the Cleric or Warlord can use an ability to allow 2 people in the party to use a healing surge but thats it.
The boneclaw, though, is a level 14 soldier, WAY out of our league. We could barely touch him, while he could hit on anything but a natural 1.
Regardless of edition, I like this part. It shows that your DM thinks of possibilities for encounters beyond what "should" be encountered.
|
The boneclaw, though, is a level 14 soldier, WAY out of our league. We could barely touch him, while he could hit on anything but a natural 1.Regardless of edition, I like this part. It shows that your DM thinks of possibilities for encounters beyond what "should" be encountered.
That's assuming that the PCs recognize the creature as such. The Religion checks came as a 12 ("I think it's an ogre or something"), and another that recognized it as undead. Sure, it's a big, nasty-looking undead, but at level 7 the PCs are assumed to be heroes (it's the "heroic tier" after all), so they'd be expected to try to take it on.
The GM honestly didn't expect the PCs to attack the boneclaw, but we didn't know until after the game that it was a level 14 creature. We were going on character knowledge, not metagame.
My main problem with the game wasn't the GM. It was that most of the players spent the majority of the time complaining about 4E. Honestly, if they didn't want to play the game, they should have skipped it altogether. I told the GM that I'd be willing to give it another shot, but only if we're there to play. If they don't want to play 4E, then play 3.5 and stop griping. I'm less concerned about which edition I play than I am as to whether the players are there to play.
That's assuming that the PCs recognize the creature as such.
Whether they do or don't recognize the creature for what it is doesn't concern me. What I like is that your DM is open to the possibilities of encounters beyond or beneath the character's station. That, to me, is one of the defining traits of a good DM.
The GM honestly didn't expect the PCs to attack the boneclaw, but we didn't know until after the game that it was a level 14 creature. We were going on character knowledge, not metagame.
That's good. Tell me; when the miniature came out, did you instantly know what it was? If you did, that's why keeping it to yourself was a good thing.
My main problem with the game wasn't the GM. It was that most of the players spent the majority of the time complaining about 4E. Honestly, if they didn't want to play the game, they should have skipped it altogether. I told the GM that I'd be willing to give it another shot, but only if we're there to play. If they don't want to play 4E, then play 3.5 and stop griping. I'm less concerned about which edition I play than I am as to whether the players are there to play.
Was this a playtest session to better gauge what you all think of 4e, or was it a real session? The reason I ask is if it was a playtest session, griping about how new rules play out is how you determine whether you like something or not. If it's a game you've all come to accept using, the griping is a indicator of unhappy players playing an system they hate.
|
Wayfinder, PaizoCon Founder
|
One of the groups I play with made the switch to 4E from 3.5. We had talked of trying to convert my dragon shaman (5th level) to 4E, but after my initial playing during GameDay, I came to accept that 4E was an entirely new game, and trying to make the dragon shaman 'fit' this new game would result in more headaches and difficulties than it was worth. (See, I LOVED the dragon shaman, but given the option of being a dragonborn, I asked "Why would a human suddenly become a dragonborn? He wouldn't get that until Level 20-ish).
I'm soooo glad we started fresh. I'm playing a human ranger (two-blades) with the Rogue multiclassing feat. I call it the Bandit build. Other characters in our party include a human wizard (illusionist build), gnome warlord, tiefling fighter, and Eladrin warlock. Right now, we are playing an adventure cooked up by our DM, involving some goblin war party inhabiting the "Halls of the Dead"...an old evil 'undead factory'.
The gameplay is a bit different, in that it really does require some tactical thinking to make the party efficient and effective. If the party doesn't stick together and WORK together, then things fall apart very quickly. Example: My ranger really needs to stick close to the warlord, who in turn should try to stay close to the fighter. The fighter is the meat shield, and by marking an opponent, locks that opponent down, forcing it to attack only the fighter. This allows more mobility for the other party members, and is perfect for the ranger to manuever through the encounter. The warlord can grant some healing surges to the fighter as she soaks up the attacks, yet the warlord can also grant an extra attack to a party member, which works rather well when paired up with a dual bladed ranger, especially when that ranger has marked a quarry.
So, imagine my ranger, marking an opponent that is locked down by the fighter. The ranger manuevers himself into the flanking position, and uses the power allowing two attacks (main and off hand). If one hits, the Hunting Quarry damage goes into effect (and since I took the feat that makes it a 2d8 instead of 2d6) doing additional damage. And if the warlord is adjacent, she could select her power granting the ranger an additional basic attack. And if the ranger wishes to, then flanking allows the Sneak Attack ability granted by the Rogue multiclass feat (once per encounter).
And this is still 1st level. And, doesn't even factor in the wizard or warlock.
But, none of this happens if the party isn't working together to make it happen.
i have a hard time seeing that a level 30 encounter takes the same amount of time. damage done by PCs doesn't scale at the same rate that monsters get hit points. a fighter power that does 1(W) at levels 1-10 isn't really super powerful if it does 3(W) at 30th level. remember-everyone has more hitpoints in 4e, but weapons & powers haven't been scaled the same.
You're not factoring in all the aspects of higher levels that aren't powers. To give you an idea, a dagger master rogue at 30th level is perfectly capable of dealing around 100 points of damage in a single round, even without resorting to expending daily powers. You need to include class features (sneak attack), powers (making a second attack following a critical hit), weapons (Vicious daggers that grant an extra 6d12 damage on a critical hit) and paragon paths (criticals on 18-20, for instance) and epic destinies (rerolling attack rolls). Please don't make the mistake of looking at a single aspect of something as complex as a role-playing game system and assuming that you can draw conclusions as to how the entire game functions from it.
|
|
That, however, points out a weakness of the game and that's its dependence on battle mats. This isn't an argument about the game being a tabletop wargame or anything, but I found my options limited when it came to combat scenes.For example, if the PCs are approaching a merchant wagon (just to make something up), I could present the merchant as the nicest and most helpless man in the world, but if I put that merchant on a battle map, the players would know something was about to hit the fan. On the other hand, if I didn't pre-place the mat and a battle WAS coming, I'd have to stop everything so I could place or draw the map, killing any tension or energy that might have developed from the surprise attack.
There doesn't seem to be any solution for that.
I ran into this as well. You need to de-train your players regarding the battlemaps.
I leave the tact-tiles out the whole game session. I'll draw quick maps (or throw down a few dungeon tiles over it) regardless if it's a combat/social/skill encounter. And I've specifically told the players this. "I'm leaving the battlemap out, don't assume every encounter is a fight - sometimes it's better/smarter to talk."
Ah, that's exactly the main difference between 3.x and 4E with regard to PCs.
PRe-game (like Constructed in M:TG), you have these LARGE range of options and you can sit down, evaluate it, talk about it with everyone online and then you have EXACTLY what you want for a 3E character.
Heheh, I find it very funny that now magic the gathering needs to be dragged into this discussion.
What is also funny is that the poor old fighter needs to be dragged into the comparison between a 4e warlock and a 3e sorcerer.
I don't think it is fun that my choices have been limited, I also think that overcoming a challenge outside my pre-constructed character specifications is a far greater feat than with your limited build ;>
Anyway, I'll give 4e another shot, but in all fairness I don't think it will last.
|
|
Actual 4E play experiences. I've DM'd it for awhile now and played as well, so I'll give impressions from both sides of the screen as well as in general.
As a DM, putting together encounters has never been easier. I find that preparation has been cut dramatically. I've got the same (or better) story telling possibilities. I don't feel limited by the rules, because I've always been an off-the-cuff DM anyway. I've got far less notes/books to reference at the table, and can focus more on telling the story and making things "fun". In my opinion it is much less tedious.
This goes to the other side of the screen as well. I've got a group of players with varying amounts of free time. One fellow is retired as he's on disability. He has a ton of free time and can go through books outside the game as much as he liked, looking for this or that thing to tweak his character. Another fellow has two toddlers and just had his 3rd baby. He shows up each game with his book and character sheet not having cracked it since the week before. With our 3.5 game after awhile their characters were far different in power because of the "free time available for build optimization" factor. My impression of 4E so far is that this won't have as much impact. As a DM, I *really* like that, because it will make the game more fun for *everyone* at the table. And lord knows the guy with 3 kids under 5 needs to play as often as he can! :-)
It's got the same "feel" as playing previous versions to me, at least as far as RPG elements. I'm playing a Wizard (illusionist build) and I've given him some fun quirks and background story just as I would with any edition. It's somewhat challenging that his options have been cut back. I'm still debating that one, but it does make you want to work together with your other players better. No one is a party unto themselves anymore.
The game requires a battlemat. If you say "I don't want to play with a battlemat" then you should play a different rpg. There's a number out there that don't need it. Once you get your head around that, it's one of the best battlemat rpg's I've ever played. (and I've played *alot*). PC's and monsters are constantly moving, you have to work together to be successful, everyone is much more engaged. You *feel* like you're working together, rather then each person taking their individual turn.
Power cards are really useful. They're a good game table tool and help new players learn their abilities and when to use them. I'd recommend using them.
I thought 4e was supposed to be less complex, or not complex at all... ;-)
It's less complex to both play and run, but attempting to dissect its balance is something that requires a full knowledge of the game. Luckily, as a player and as a DM you don't need to worry about issues of balancing 30th level parties against 30th level encounters. The game designers took care of that balance issue for you already. That's why 4th Edition is so much of a joy to run.
Also, what you described with the Rogue is the exact kind of uber-stacking that 4e designers said was bad with 3/3.5. So, still, in my eyes, the more things change, the more they stay the same.
No it's not. What they disliked was piling unrelated feats, classes and prestige classes on top of one another to create a mish-mash creation that was excellent in one area but awful in the others. The build I described, on the other hand, is the archetypal rogue build, a rogue-daggermaster-epic trickster. All of its choices are thematic and related, and while it excels at dagger fighting it has plenty of other utility to round it out.
I just read the post about the similarities to M:tG, and it has some very good points. Character creation is easier in 4th Edition. This has a little to do with the change in design philosophy and a little to do with there being only three books out so far, but one of the complaints about 3.5 I heard most often was how long it took to create a character at any level but 1st (and for those inexperienced, even 1st level took a while). Once you're done, though, you sit down and start playing and quickly realize that the actual game has more complexity to it than D&D 3.5 ever contained. It's not difficult to keep track of or hard to understand, but you have many different choices each round as to what you can do, and those choices and their usefulness are constantly shifting as the battlefield does. Combat is exciting as hell now. Even skill challenges are fun.
As a DM, putting together encounters has never been easier. I find that preparation has been cut dramatically. I've got the same (or better) story telling possibilities. I don't feel limited by the rules, because I've always been an off-the-cuff DM anyway. I've got far less notes/books to reference at the table, and can focus more on telling the story and making things "fun". In my opinion it is much less tedious.
This goes to the other side of the screen as well. I've got a group of players with varying amounts of free time. One fellow is retired as he's on disability. He has a ton of free time and can go through books outside the game as much as he liked, looking for this or that thing to tweak his character. Another fellow has two toddlers and just had his 3rd baby. He shows up each game with his book and character sheet not having cracked it since the week before. With our 3.5 game after awhile their characters were far different in power because of the "free time available for build optimization" factor. My impression of 4E so far is that this won't have as much impact. As a DM, I *really* like that, because it will make the game more fun for *everyone* at the table. And lord knows the guy with 3 kids under 5 needs to play as often as he can! :-)
As a dm set up is far easier. Heck it wasnt too hard to convert sins of the saviour over. For off the cuff they even give suggested damage charts for level etc. The lack of magic items of intrest bugs me, however as dm they can be added back in.
The major reason my group is switching is as you say out of game. We want to have everyone equal at the table which 4e seems better at. Only a few feats are problematic without preplanning. Since we have had a rise of casual gammers in the group this is very convient. More sessions over gaming instead of leveling up is a nice change of pace.
Personally I can't wait to have a go at the 4th edition( mainly because I bought the books and don't want them to waste them) but there are a lot of things in the books that interest me.
In the group I run there are a couple of people that Power game, one in particular and it'd be interesting to see how that improves that situation as well as improving team-work for the characters. It annoys me to see one player abusing his characters abilities and not helping other PCs to have the spotlight.
I do find a great deal of the system rather un-dungeons & dragons but the final verdict will come out once the PC's reach 30th level.
Personally I can't wait to have a go at the 4th edition( mainly because I bought the books and don't want them to waste them) but there are a lot of things in the books that interest me.
In the group I run there are a couple of people that Power game, one in particular and it'd be interesting to see how that improves that situation as well as improving team-work for the characters. It annoys me to see one player abusing his characters abilities and not helping other PCs to have the spotlight.
I do find a great deal of the system rather un-dungeons & dragons but the final verdict will come out once the PC's reach 30th level.
They are challenging to do and make fun but if you can manage it throw a number of Skill Challenges at the party. The resident power gamer in my group basically freaked out when he realized that making his PC into some kind of a 'toon was not actually making him the best and most important player at the table.
Just made 2nd level with my cleric on Monday night and I'm picking up Skill Focus: Insight with my new feat.
Personally I can't wait to have a go at the 4th edition( mainly because I bought the books and don't want them to waste them) but there are a lot of things in the books that interest me.
In the group I run there are a couple of people that Power game, one in particular and it'd be interesting to see how that improves that situation as well as improving team-work for the characters. It annoys me to see one player abusing his characters abilities and not helping other PCs to have the spotlight.
I do find a great deal of the system rather un-dungeons & dragons but the final verdict will come out once the PC's reach 30th level.They are challenging to do and make fun but if you can manage it throw a number of Skill Challenges at the party. The resident power gamer in my group basically freaked out when he realized that making his PC into some kind of a 'toon was not actually making him the best and most important player at the table.
Just made 2nd level with my cleric on Monday night and I'm picking up Skill Focus: Insight with my new feat.
The basic design of 4e does curb some powergaming and equalize the playing field.
I think the new skill system however does less than the old for getting power gamers to think their character. You autolevel in all skills. A skill focus feat in many ways replaces putting more points in that skill. Of course groups who used skills less and are encouraged by the skill challenge system will see more change from this. Note: I think the skill system is more convient, but I'd say its easier for a powergamer to ignore skills than in 3.5
Personally I can't wait to have a go at the 4th edition( mainly because I bought the books and don't want them to waste them) but there are a lot of things in the books that interest me.
In the group I run there are a couple of people that Power game, one in particular and it'd be interesting to see how that improves that situation as well as improving team-work for the characters. It annoys me to see one player abusing his characters abilities and not helping other PCs to have the spotlight.
I do find a great deal of the system rather un-dungeons & dragons but the final verdict will come out once the PC's reach 30th level.They are challenging to do and make fun but if you can manage it throw a number of Skill Challenges at the party. The resident power gamer in my group basically freaked out when he realized that making his PC into some kind of a 'toon was not actually making him the best and most important player at the table.
Just made 2nd level with my cleric on Monday night and I'm picking up Skill Focus: Insight with my new feat.
The basic design of 4e does curb some powergaming and equalize the playing field.
I think the new skill system however does less than the old for getting power gamers to think their character. You autolevel in all skills. A skill focus feat in many ways replaces putting more points in that skill. Of course groups who used skills less and are encouraged by the skill challenge system will see more change from this. Note: I think the skill system is more convient, but I'd say its easier for a powergamer to ignore skills than in 3.5
In the case of the skills the way it is in the book, you are correct but I've come up with 'a cunning plan'. The Trained skills will only get +2 instead of the top heavy +5 and give the players 5 skill points per level to distribute( 10 points at 1st level). The Skill Rank Maximum will be level+2( so 3 at 1st level). However any untrained skill will only grant basic results, Knowledge skills in Religeon to find out about Skeletons could give info in the area of good weapons but if the skeleton were unusual( modified, enhanced etc) then a successful knowledge check would only tell the player that the Skeleton were not the norm and nothing more indepth than that.
I also plan to have the characters define how much time they spend on life skills ( professions, crafts etc) and grant Ranks based on time rather than level but I've not completed this end of things.I was finding issues when running the Star Wars Saga and came up with this plan. It doesn't work out exact but does allow the PC to personalise the character a bit more.
If you're looking to add some craft style skills back into 4E Steve, I'm fairly certain ENWorld has some pretty good rules crafted up. I'd provide a link if I had one, but just check out their fan-made custom rules section. It was voted one of the better ones, so I'd assume it has some meat to it.
Cheers! :)
If you're looking to add some craft style skills back into 4E Steve, I'm fairly certain ENWorld has some pretty good rules crafted up. I'd provide a link if I had one, but just check out their fan-made custom rules section. It was voted one of the better ones, so I'd assume it has some meat to it.
Cheers! :)
Yeah, I will be so thanks Mark, if you do find anything usefull then I'd like to hear about it. Can't look at the moment, web locked down so ENWORLD unavailable.
Yeah, I will be so thanks Mark, if you do find anything usefull then I'd like to hear about it. Can't look at the moment, web locked down so ENWORLD unavailable.
Since my work doesn't block ENWorld (and because my current project totally sucks) here is a link to ENWorld's Fan Creation Pick of the Every So Often thread.
To make things even easier for you, here is a link to the latest version of their craft skill rules.
Hope they help! :)
The basic design of 4e does curb some powergaming and equalize the playing field.I think the new skill system however does less than the old for getting power gamers to think their character. You autolevel in all skills. A skill focus feat in many ways replaces putting more points in that skill. Of course groups who used skills less and are encouraged by the skill challenge system will see more change from this. Note: I think the skill system is more convient, but I'd say its easier for a powergamer to ignore skills than in 3.5
To some extent I agree but in my experience Power Gamers used what Skill Points they had to pick Skills that helped them be Power Gamers. Whats shifted, IMO, is the onus. In 3.5 if the party did not have a lot of Skills then its the DMs fault if we are having trouble with the adventure because he should have known we did not have a lot of Skills and that was, more often then not, simply due to our characters class.
in 4E everyone has skills so the adventures can have things like Skill Challenges. Its not like we don't have any chance to pass them even if we ignore Skill Feats completely - its just that we only have maybe a 40% chance (as an example) to pass them. We still sometimes win them and otherwise we'll just have to learn to put up with the fact that we fail a lot in this area. However we can raise those odds to more like a 60% win rate by using some feats on Skills. In both cases the DM is in some sense out of the loop - we always had the choice to pick feats to help out our Skills and if we choose not to well then we face the consequences.
We see this philosophy particularly if your like my party and are playing in Dungeon Adventures which clearly are using lots of Skill Challenges. Essentially we've now gotten are heads up that we have skills and that our adventures will force us to use them. We've been warned and now we must deal with the consequences. You could do this in 3.5 as well but the players of characters like Fighters that just don't have many Skill Points would have more cause for complaint as they are being signalled out somewhat. Also forcing people to pick up Skill Feats in 3.5 was often cruel and unusual punishment - you can have some really awesome feat or you can have a Skill Point Feat, its almost mean to make a player take the Skill Feat much of the time. In 4E you can get a feat that helps a little bit in combat or a fair bit outside of it. Since it seems we are going to use the Skills a reasonably often I'm not really unhappy with the choice of taking some skill centred Feats. I'll get to be in the spotlight when I use them.
The basic design of 4e does curb some powergaming and equalize the playing field.I think the new skill system however does less than the old for getting power gamers to think their character. You autolevel in all skills. A skill focus feat in many ways replaces putting more points in that skill. Of course groups who used skills less and are encouraged by the skill challenge system will see more change from this. Note: I think the skill system is more convient, but I'd say its easier for a powergamer to ignore skills than in 3.5
To some extent I agree but in my experience Power Gamers used what Skill Points they had to pick Skills that helped them be Power Gamers. Whats shifted, IMO, is the onus. In 3.5 if the party did not have a lot of Skills then its the DMs fault if we are having trouble with the adventure because he should have known we did not have a lot of Skills and that was, more often then not, simply due to our characters class.
in 4E everyone has skills so the adventures can have things like Skill Challenges. Its not like we don't have any chance to pass them even if we ignore Skill Feats completely - its just that we only have maybe a 40% chance (as an example) to pass them. We still sometimes win them and otherwise we'll just have to learn to put up with the fact that we fail a lot in this area. However we can raise those odds to more like a 60% win rate by using some feats on Skills. In both cases the DM is in some sense out of the loop - we always had the choice to pick feats to help out our Skills and if we choose not to well then we face the consequences.
We see this philosophy particularly if your like my party and are playing in Dungeon Adventures which clearly are using lots of Skill Challenges. Essentially we've now gotten are heads up that we have skills and that our adventures will force us to use them. We've been warned and now we must deal with the consequences. You could do this in 3.5 as well but the players of characters like...
I plan on using a skill point system anyhow but the PC's will get 10 skill points per level regardless of the class. The Trained skill( skills designated by the Feat or at 1st level will get a +2 instead of the wapping +5. The skill ranks Maximum will be level+2. So doing the character will end up with a +5 at 1st level if the PC dedicated a whole +3 to the Trained skill.
As the Player can choose where he puts his points and the class's get all the same point level by level they can develope the character based on the background.I worked out how many points would need to be handed out at each of the class's 1st level and they will get those point(additional +3 for background skills). So a Fighter would get 12, Cleric 15, Rogue 21 etc.
|
|
I ran a 4E game last Saturday at the Meetup with six players (1st level characters). We had a ball, and only one fatality. The players enjoyed the encounter with the shadowhunter bats (I'd purposely made the ceiling too low for the bats to evade the PCs), and the final encounter was fun, though fatal for the Dwarf cleric. Seven goblins looked like a cakewalk, but when the Dwarf fell through the trapdoor into a 30' square room with an ochre jelly, the situation became dangerous.
The PCs worked together, and everyone had a good time, including the Dwarf player. They liked my homemade ochre jellies (you need two because of their split ability), and the players cheered when the halfling rogue shoved the sleep-charmed goblin hexer into the pit with the jelly.
I think this serves to show that the edition is secondary to the game. You can have fun with 4E, 3.5, Pathfinder RPG, GURPS, or whatever.
I’ve been running my group through Keep on the Shadowfell and we’re about one session (maybe two) from finishing it up. Overall, in terms of how 4e plays, I’ve got to agree with everything that Pete Apple said up above (great summary that) as well as many of the other posters. As far as Keep on the Shadowfell goes, it is definitely focused on combat and encounters while skimming over the backstory. There is a skeleton of a story but many will find that it needs fleshing out…I certainly did.
I’ve found the biggest advantage of running Keep is that it has given my group and I an opportunity to play 4e without a great deal of investment. We went into the game with the knowledge that this was a test and would not be our long-term campaign. It has allowed us to get accustomed to the new rules and, at least for some of my players, shake off some of those “3.5 hangovers” that don’t work quite the same way in 4e. There are also a few things that they’re still struggling to adjust to that I don’t think others have mentioned in this thread: keeping track of ongoing damage and effects and making saving throws that need to be made, keeping straight that some effects need a save but others (e.g., Ray of Frost) last a specified “time” (e.g., until the end of the attacker’s next turn), and that low-light vision does not give double the range of sight (the player of the dwarven fighter really dislikes this one). We’ve probably had some sort of “oops” moment (most often on my part) at least every session where we’ve done something “wrong” from a rules perspective. We just try and make sure everyone understands what we did wrong and how it will be handled in the future in such cases.
The players have definitely enjoyed it and, despite the fact that Keep was a “test” of the system, they’ve been fleshing out their characters and roleplaying no differently than they have in any other game. My group of players…being my group of players…have taken every “roleplaying” opportunity and run with them. There is an unrequited love within the party. Another player character has completely cowed Winterhaven’s guards into being concerned with their personal hygiene (thanks to the use of Prestidigitation by the party’s wizard to create something of a less than pleasant smell each time the party passes through the town’s gates). Another PC, a female dwarf, will likely settle down with the town’s dwarven smith for more pragmatic than romantic reasons…assuming she survives. Pretty much business as usual for my group.
My players have decided that they’d like to stick with 4e…at least for now. Although I had originally planned on running Thunderspire Labyrinth after Keep to continue our test, I’ve decided not to. I feel comfortable enough with the 4e rules to go ahead and start a more long-term campaign with more of a focus on story. I’ll be using the plot and story of Hollow’s Last Hope/Crown of the Kobold King and moving on from there. There is a bit of disappointment about not continuing with the current characters but they’re also excited about starting an actual 4e campaign.
I've been running a 4E game for the last 2 months or so now with 4 other players. My players run from experienced tactician to complete and utter newbie.
The experienced players have picked up on the rules very quickly while the new players are still struggling a bit (This is their first RPG EVER!). However, they're getting hang of it and our last session went very smoothly.
They're about to venture into a cave to go after an Oni Soulstealer (Homebrew Solo Monster) who's been feeding off of the nearby town's children while they slept.
Their last combat involved taking on a Feyborn Gray Wolf (Template) and about 8 Wolf Welps (Homebrewed Minions). I purposely had the Feyborn Wolf use an ability to lure the most experienced player into danger in order to see how the new players handled the situation. They did very well, making smart choices with their powers and saving the mage before he was taken out.
4E Combat seems to last about as long 3E combat but the rounds go by much more quickly and everyone always has something they can do. Gone are the days of 30 min. rounds where half the players are reading or rolling dozens of dice over and over again for amusement (that has my own experiences with 3E, I know several people are able to play very quickly, I was never that lucky with my group).
I also like the addition of skill challenges but do not plan to use them as often as 4E would recommend. They are good, I found, for goading the quiet or new players into roleplaying. Ask them what skill they're using, ask them why, and then play out the result for a minute or two. It's only a small amount of roleplaying but it really helped bring my new players out of their shells and start interacting with the world without fear. Skill challenges are also good for moving the story along when your players become stuck with a problem or the game has slowed down too much.
It has still felt just like DnD for me and my players. You can roleplay as much or less as your group ever did before but when there is combat, it can be much smoother and requires less rule lawyering.
|
|
I finally got to play a couple sessions of 4E last weekend, and I was pleasantly surprised. I wasn't setting my expectations too high, especially because the DM described the game as "D&D Basic".
Character creation was a little choppy at first, mostly because it was a new book and the players didn't know where to find all the information they needed. There is a page (p.14?) that breaks character creation down into steps that helped a bit. I played a dragonborn wizard while my friends played a half-elf paladin, an eladrin fighter, a half-elf cleric, and a human rogue. I decided on a dragonborn wizard because I liked dragonborn from 3.5 and I wanted to go against the powergamist builds that a couple of the other players were making.
The simple 1st level adventure provided was adequate and easily comparable to most other first level modules. It was very good for familiarizing the PCs with the combat rules; specifically for things like cover, combat advantage, and lighting conditions. Our whole group enjoyed the adventure with few complaints.
The good:
-The paladin enjoyed the marking ability; it gave her the feel of being able to control our enemies and protect allies.
-The rogue had no shortage of opportunities to use sneak attack damage.
-My wizard's spells (all of them affected areas rather than single targets) did not run out, so missing on attack rolls did not feel like as much of a setback as it might with a 1st level 3.5 wizard. The implements and extra rituals were also fun additions to the class.
-The DM was able to adapt monsters from the monster manual quickly to a level appropriate to the PCs. I did not get to see this process yet, but I did note the time difference from running my own 3.5 games.
-The cleric was very happy with the Lance ability of her class, and other abilities that made it possible to help her allies while still attacking.
-The fighter liked his attack that did damage whether or not the attack roll hit; both the paladin and the fighter made use of Power Attack and never had to halt the game to work out the math for it (although this has never been a problem for us in 3.5 either).
The bad:
-The skill system is far too narrow. There are no professions; there aren't any crafting skills. This was a downer for the paladin PC, who was using a backstory that involved weaponsmithing. I also noticed that there isn't a Perform skill yet, which could make the introduction of Bards difficult later.
-Combat rounds are shorter. Combat overall took longer than in our 3.5 games. This comes from the high number of hit points that enemies have and the lower overall damage that attacks can do. I shudder to think of future combats with mobile, regenerating enemies.
-Combat advantage is a nice general blanket-type modifier, but it likewise is a little too encompassing. When the BBEG is sleeping and 3 out of 5 PCs miss him because the -2 wasn't enough, well let's say we didn't feel like heroic-level adventurers.
Conclusions:
This is a great game to play once in a while with your friends for an easy-to-learn and adaptable fantasy game. However, if you are looking for a weekly game with continuity and an interesting fantasy world to explore/build upon/crush beneath your boot, this probably isn't the best fit. The rules just aren't robust enough to maintain that level of interest(for me).
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16, 2011 Top 32
|
Conclusions:
This is a great game to play once in a while with your friends for an easy-to-learn and adaptable fantasy game. However, if you are looking for a weekly game with continuity and an interesting fantasy world to explore/build upon/crush beneath your boot, this probably isn't the best fit. The rules just aren't robust enough to maintain that level of interest(for me).
I think you've hit the nail on the head for me and my group. I think 4e is going to be our go-to game for one-shots and 3.5 for ongoing campaigns. After playing Keep on the Shadowfells and a couple of the one shot adventures at the Game Days, it seems like a great system for board game style adventure. Just not the sort of dramatic, plot driven epics that my group and I prefer.
I think you've hit the nail on the head for me and my group. I think 4e is going to be our go-to game for one-shots and 3.5 for ongoing campaigns. After playing Keep on the Shadowfells and a couple of the one shot adventures at the Game Days, it seems like a great system for board game style adventure. Just not the sort of dramatic, plot driven epics that my group and I prefer.Conclusions:
This is a great game to play once in a while with your friends for an easy-to-learn and adaptable fantasy game. However, if you are looking for a weekly game with continuity and an interesting fantasy world to explore/build upon/crush beneath your boot, this probably isn't the best fit. The rules just aren't robust enough to maintain that level of interest(for me).
Do you seriously think long term campaigns can be run then using 4E, why do you think that is? I know the biggest complaint I've heard again and again is that the classes have a dull 'I use the Power to attack' round after round but surely it's not that different to the 3.5 'I roll to hit' round after round with the occasional change in pace with a Power Attack being introduced or Combat Expertise. The main stay of the system is continuety, among my DMing items I have the Worlds Largest Dungeon which is exactly that but due to limited resources the PC's would have to stop after going round a few corners to replenish spells, prayers and hit points.
For long term its the role play of the characters that keep it going and as long as a few skills are re-introduced, skill points added to cover backgrounds etc then I reckon it could be a good platform for long term Campaigns.|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16, 2011 Top 32
|
For long term its the role play of the characters that keep it going and as long as a few skills are re-introduced, skill points added to cover backgrounds etc then I reckon it could be a good platform for long term Campaigns.
Exactly so. With modifications I could make 4e into a good long term campaign setting. But I don't need to. 3.x does simulating a living game world much better with no modifications. So we'll keep 4e for the occasional one shot and stick with 3.x for our regular games.
And I am back from another playtest.
2 encounters took us 4-5 hours, which for 5 level 1 characters against 5 level 1 monsters + level 3 boss (cleric) and 1 large dragonlich is way too long in my opinion.
Luckily I got knocked out by a boulder and the dragonlich which gave me time to peruse the PHB ;>
Based on what I read I think that the solution to the lack of options I percieve and have experienced multiclassing is the way to go.
I am thinking about ditching my tiefling warlock and replacing him with an eladrin warlock-wizard with the fey pact + thundwave spell, which I guess gives me more stuff to do instead of just eldritch blast over and over again. Any players who tried that combination?
|
|
I never wanted to play a cleric in 3e. All of the clerics I knew spent their whole time healing and throwing spiritual weapon. I was definitely in the "clerics are boring" camp.
For Living Forgotten Realms I decided to test the whole "but 4e clerics are not boring" hype.
I must say that 4e clerics are definitely very very cool. I rolled a dwarven cleric of Moradin. I wanted to play a battle cleric so I gave him a 16 STR and thanks to the dwarven WIS bonus he also sports a 16 WIS. He is no frontline fighter. He can't mark like a fighter but he sure can dish it out.
The fighters at the tables I played just loved getting the additional +3 to hit that I threw their way almost every round. I used my feats over my first four level to become proficient with plate and I lucked out and grabbed some +2 dwarven plate in the last mod I played.
So at 4th level I can heal the party, I can heal myself, and I can dish out some serious hurt in melee.
I played over 30 hours of 4e at DragonCon and I really really like it.
I am currently running a homebrew campaign that is going smashingly well.
Dwarven Cleric of Moradin
Elf Ranger (with rifle)
Dragonborn Paladin
Shifter Fighter
Eladrin Mage
This is really just a test run campaign
The characters are knocking on the door to fifth level and really into both the haphazard story I've woven and the niftiness of their characters. I will post something more in-depth soon.
I never wanted to play a cleric in 3e. All of the clerics I knew spent their whole time healing and throwing spiritual weapon. I was definitely in the "clerics are boring" camp.
For Living Forgotten Realms I decided to test the whole "but 4e clerics are not boring" hype.
I must say that 4e clerics are definitely very very cool. I rolled a dwarven cleric of Moradin. I wanted to play a battle cleric so I gave him a 16 STR and thanks to the dwarven WIS bonus he also sports a 16 WIS. He is no frontline fighter. He can't mark like a fighter but he sure can dish it out.
The fighters at the tables I played just loved getting the additional +3 to hit that I threw their way almost every round. I used my feats over my first four level to become proficient with plate and I lucked out and grabbed some +2 dwarven plate in the last mod I played.
So at 4th level I can heal the party, I can heal myself, and I can dish out some serious hurt in melee.
I played over 30 hours of 4e at DragonCon and I really really like it.
Your the third person thats stated that they have a cleric they love playing on these boards.
I think they did some major things right with the cleric and Wizards might want to see how they can port some of the things that make the cleric such an awesome class to play to the other classes.
My feelings with the Cleric are that its great for three significant reasons.
One: Lots of powers. I think the Cleric probably has a couple more powers then most of the other classes. So thats a lot of fun. I think this could be addressed in future splat books by allowing each class to pick some kind of an association or some such at the start of the game. Each association or 'kit' gives a character access to one or two powers. Clerics could be kept in line by adding a little more to the Gods and granting something more depending on which God is worshipped.
Two: Your powers do different things. With a cleric your usually looking at the over all tactical situation and making your power choice based on that. I'm either going for a high damage attack, or something less damaging that gives out different bonuses to my fellow players, maybe an extra save roll, or a healing surge, bonus temporary hps etc. This keeps me thinking about which power to use and causes me to mix it up. I think they do this to a degree with all the classes but the Cleric really hits the spot in this regard with lots of interesting choices. That I don't think is so true of the rest of the classes where powers are often more situation but then persist through out the combat. So you might feel that using your ranged power is best for this combat - but the problem is that your then doing that ranged power over and over again. I think this is something that one could address in future splat books by providing some more power options that come with interesting You attack + you do X.
Three: Minor Action Powers, The cleric has a bunch of powers that are useful at helping fellow players and only cost a minor power to activate. Again as the cleric you making interesting choices, should I spend my Healing Word Power now? If so who gets it? This could be addressed in future splat books by giving other classes access to powers that do similar things. Minor actions to push an ally one square or grant an ally your shield bonus for the turn or shove an enemy of the same size or smaller back one square. That sort of thing - not big effects but something to add to the decision making. If such powers were usable multiple times in combat then they'd be a comparable choice for classes like rangers and fighters. This option needs to be particularly considered for play balance however as Clerics have their cool minor action abilities balanced by the fact that they are maybe the least effective damage dealing PC.
I played in my first 4e game tonight and it was a blast. Everyone met on RPG.net, so we were all strangers, which kind of cut down on the role-playing (though we did start to loosen up as the game went on). We only had three players tonight:
Eladrin Artificer multi-classed with Rogue (me)
Dragonborn Fighter
Human Warlock (Star Pact)
I have to say, I love the fey step power and I wish there were some heroic feats that would improve it. That said, I used it quite effectively in all three of the battles we fought tonight:
*In our first battle, which was against a necromancer pirate and his skeletal minions, all of our characters began the encounter grouped together on the forecastle of our airship, allowing the initial pair of skeleton boarders to position themselves in such a way that they could make opportunity attacks whenever I used one of my ranged powers (which was all of them with the exception of my basic melee attack). I used fey step to teleport across the deck of the airship, allowing me to take cover behind one of the masts and plug away at the skeletons with my hand crossbow. I also used my daily power to raise a wall of acid (caustic ramparts) when the pirate airship rose alongside us; it cut off any further boarders and made it difficult for the enemy archers to hit us. It was also fun watching the dragonborn fighter use tide of iron to push the skeletons adjacent to the wall, where they took damage when they started their next turn.
*After the battle, we had a skill challenge to stabilize the heavily damaged airship before it crashed. We crushed the skill challenge; there wasn't one failure (too bad we couldn't role that well during the combat!). However, our drop in altitude attracted the attention of a trio of stirges. Of course, the little bloodsuckers attacked me and two of them managed to hit. I was grabbed and since I couldn't move, I teleported out of there.
*The favorite use of the my fey step ability was in our final battle. We were docked for the night and due to some very poor Perception checks, we were surprised by some human bandits led by a feral halfing and a dwarven bolter. I was trapped below deck in the cramped crew cabin with the dragonborn fighter; the warlock was topside and just getting hammered. I had no room to maneuover and was growing very worried about what I was hearing above me. Since the dragonborn fighter had things under control, I used fey step to teleport through the porthole and onto the dock. I succeeded on my Stealth check, so the distracted dwarf and his remaining human minion were not aware of me.
On my next turn, I had combat advantage so I attacked the dwarf with a ranged power, hitting him and inflicting some sneak attack damage. I then spent my AP to attack the minion, who was standing over the fallen warlock (who had already failed his first death save). I missed, pretty badly actually, but then I used my move action to get back on board and closer to my fallen comrade. Finally, as I tottered on the gangplank, I used my remaining minor action to heal the warlock, who then promptly stabbed the human minion to death with a well-placed dagger thrust. At that moment, the enraged dragonborn had managed to cleave the halfling in half and emerged topside. Now surrounded, the dwarf surrendered, which is where we ended the game for the night.
Good stuff...
I played in my first 4e game tonight and it was a blast. Everyone met on RPG.net, so we were all strangers, which kind of cut down on the role-playing (though we did start to loosen up as the game went on). We only had three players tonight:
Eladrin Artificer multi-classed with Rogue (me)
Dragonborn Fighter
Human Warlock (Star Pact)I have to say, I love the fey step power and I wish there were some heroic feats that would improve it. That said, I used it quite effectively in all three of the battles we fought tonight:
*In our first battle, which was against a necromancer pirate and his skeletal minions, all of our characters began the encounter grouped together on the forecastle of our airship, allowing the initial pair of skeleton boarders to position themselves in such a way that they could make opportunity attacks whenever I used one of my ranged powers (which was all of them with the exception of my basic melee attack). I used fey step to teleport across the deck of the airship, allowing me to take cover behind one of the masts and plug away at the skeletons with my hand crossbow. I also used my daily power to raise a wall of acid (caustic ramparts) when the pirate airship rose alongside us; it cut off any further boarders and made it difficult for the enemy archers to hit us. It was also fun watching the dragonborn fighter use tide of iron to push the skeletons adjacent to the wall, where they took damage when they started their next turn.
*After the battle, we had a skill challenge to stabilize the heavily damaged airship before it crashed. We crushed the skill challenge; there wasn't one failure (too bad we couldn't role that well during the combat!). However, our drop in altitude attracted the attention of a trio of stirges. Of course, the little bloodsuckers attacked me and two of them managed to hit. I was grabbed and since I couldn't move, I teleported out of there.
*The favorite use of the my fey step ability was in our final battle. We...
That sounds totally awesome.
I finally managed to get my group back together last night after a month's hiatus. Tonight was the end of their first small story arc that resulted in them all finally going up to level 2.
Party:
Tiefling Fighter (2nd generation soldier)
Eladrin Wizard (Disturbed child prodigy)
Halfing Rogue (Smart-mouthed gangster)
Eladrin Warlord (Silent type with a mysterious past)
Last night they fought the Oni Soulstealer who had been feeding on the souls of sleeping children in the nearby town. Sneaking around in gaseous form. This Oni was a Lvl 3 solo monster of my own creation as I wanted an Oni, but those in the monster manual seemed too high above my characters' levels and I wanted something that could take more of a pounding. Creating it was rather easy and only took about 15 minutes.
Anyway, the party started off strong, with the Warlord pulling off her daily power right off the bat and dealing 3d10+6 damage. For the rest of the encounter everyone around her received a +3 power bonus to their attack rolls, which made this fight go a LOT faster. However, the tables changed as the Oni caught all but the Wizard in his Hypnotic Breath and dazed them all. The fighter managed to Tide of Iron him up against a cave wall but then failed her saving throw and fell unconcious from the breathe attack. The Oni battered the Warlord then, hitting her with consecutive morningstar blows and laying her out unconcious. The following round he managed to use Devour Soul on her to put her further in the negatives and heal back some hitpoints.
I allowed the rogue to use an action point to "shrug off" the daze momentarily and take two actions that round. He moved over to the Warlord and poured a healing potion into her mouth, immediately taking her back up to 10 hitpoints.
By that point, however, the Oni had already used its gaseous form and an action point to fly across the room, ignoring all the difficult terrain in the room, and solidifying in front of the small Wizard, who had been taunting him and plinking him with magic missles and a very damaging force orb. The Wizard took some terrible damage but used his following turn to help give the rogue flanking and activate his magic item's daily power to gain temporary damage resistance.
The rogue took the opportunity to sneak attack the Oni and use positioning strike to trip him over a table (I gave the oni a save to avoid falling over the table). Sprawling across the table, rubbing his cracked ribs, he was an easy target for the Tiefling Fighter, who had regained consciousness the round before. She stood up, missed with a charge, and then used an action point to follow up with her Comback Strike. With the warlord's power in place, her racial advantage against bloodied foes, and combat advantage, the Oni was easy pickings with her +14 to hit. She dealt enough damage to end the Oni's threat permanently.
Hindsight, I wish I had made the Oni a bit tougher. However, it was mostly defeated by my party's excellent tactics and high dice rolling. I highly recommend building 3D terrain and accessories if you can, as it encouraged my players to use their surroundings more. The halfing rogue actually took out a goblin by launching a chair at it Jackie Chan style. It was one of the most memorable moments of the night. Next week will involve a lot more roleplaying and probably only involve 1 or 2 short combats.
(bump)
Nothing to add unfortunately, but I really hope there are more people out there willing to share some 4e experience with us folk who have not yet had the pleasure.
I'm getting rather tired of threads that only concern outrage and opinion.
I'm looking for some game play! Some action! Some homemade feats or paragon paths or powers or something!
There's got to be some people out there who are actually playing the damn game.
Matthew, very cool and creative.
Good stuff. Thanks for that!