Did they playtest the skill system at all?


4th Edition

1 to 50 of 55 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

First they revamp DCs for 4e, now this.

How could this have missed hundreds of playtesters? I'm trying hard to like 4e, but evidence continues to appear that suggests the designers focused only on things that cause damage. What exactly did all those playtesters test? Color me irritated >:|

Liberty's Edge RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16

Can you fill us in on what it is? The Wizard's site seems to be down (go, go DDI!)


Briefly, they've made fairly significant changes in the mechanics of how/when Stealth is used. Beyond this, I think it's better people read the changes themselves.

Honestly, I'm not so upset that I'm walking away from 4e, but these recurring, amateurish foul-ups are maddening and should be profoundly embarrassing to WotC.

This is at least the second significant errata to the skill rules... no, I take that back. Errata correct misprints and oversights -- these were rewrites. I just cannot reconcile the claimed playtesting by hundreds and hundreds of playtesters with immediate changes of this magnitude.

If this were a little company consisting of four or five people operating out of a basement, it would be different.

But they aren't, and it isn't.


It is the shady (get it?!) wording on the Stealth skill in the PHB. Apparently, it has caused some problems so it has been updated in the online compendium to be a bit more clear. Personally, I just figured I'd just make a ruling as the DM and I had already decided to rule it similarly to the update, since it makes sense.

EDIT: D'oh. Scooped!

However, I do have to agree with Tatterdemalion. I really like 4E, but the slip up on skill challenges and now Stealth do seem more like rewrites that should have been done before the books went to the printer. It's a shame that their editors didn't catch these.

Sovereign Court

*Looks like they missed a few things... jotted down here to make a point of seeing what I would call poor quality:* (This is a good illustration of how a company can be large but careless with a product.)

Target DCs (DMG 42)
Level E Easy DC Moderate DC Hard DC
1st–3rd 5 10 15
4th–6th 7 12 17
7th–9th 8 14 19
10th–12th 10 16 21
13th–15th 11 18 23
16th–18th 13 20 25
19th–21st 14 22 27
22nd–24th 16 24 29
25th–27th 17 26 31
28th–30th 19 28 33

Monster Manual
Updated 7/2/08
Update version 2
Effect [Revision]
Monster Manual, page 7
Replace the second sentence of the third paragraph with the following:
“Resistance doesn’t reduce damage unless the target has resistance to each
type of damage from the attack, and then only the weakest of the resistances
applies.”
Angel of Battle [Revision]
Monster Manual, page 14
Replace “HP 296” with “HP 148” and “Bloodied 148” with “Bloodied 74.”
Cave Bear [Revision]
Monster Manual, page 29
Replace the claw damage: “1d8 + 5 damage” with “2d8 + 5 damage.”
Replace the cave bear frenzy damage: “1d8 + 5 damage” with “2d8 + 5 damage.”
Eye of Flame [Revision]
Monster Manual, page 32
Replace “HP 240” with “HP 204.”
Evistro [Revision]
Monster Manual, page 54
Replace the claws damage: “1d8 + 5 damage” with “1d12 + 5 damage.”
Imp [Addition]
Monster Manual, page 63
Add “Reach 0” to both of the creature’s attacks.
Pseudodragon [Revision]
Monster Manual, page 91
Replace “Tiny” with “Small” for the creature’s size.
Drow Warrior [Revision]
Monster Manual, page 94
Replace the rapier attack’s “(X2)” with “and the drow warrior makes a secondary
attack against the same target. Secondary Attack: +13 vs. Fortitude; see drow
poison for the effect.”
Efreet Karadjin [Revision]
Monster Manual, page 100
Replace the attack bonus of scimitar of horrendous flame: “+27” with “+35.”
Death Giant [Revision]
Monster Manual, page 120
Replace the greataxe damage: “2d6 + 9 damage” with “4d6 + 9 damage.”
Hill Giant [Revision]
Monster Manual, page 121
Replace the greatclub damage: “1d10 + 5 damage” with “2d10 + 7 damage.”
Goblin Underboss [Addition]
Monster Manual, page 138
Add “Saving Throws +2”
Add “Actions Points 1”
Ogre Savage [Revision]
Monster Manual, page 199
Replace the greatclub damage: “1d10 + 5 damage” with “2d10 + 5 damage.”
Oni Night Haunter [Revision/Addition]
Monster Manual, page 200
Replace “(no save)” in hypnotic breath with “(save ends).”
Gelatinous Cube [Revision/Addition]
Monster Manual, page 202
Replace the slam damage: “1d6 + 2 damage” with “2d6 + 2 damage.”
Add the melee attack symbol to engulf.
Aspect of Orcus [Revision]
Monster Manual, page 208
Replace skull mace damage: “1d10 + 10 damage” with “2d10 + 5 damage.”
Shadar-kai Gloomblade [Revision]
Monster Manual, page 230
Replace “shadowmail” in the Equipment line with “chainmail.”
Aura [Deletion]
Monster Manual, page 280
Remove “and effects imposed by an aura last until the end of the affected
creatures’ next turn unless otherwise stated.”
Added 7/2/08:
Page 7 Effect [Revision]
Page 14 Angel of Battle [Revision]
Page 32 Eye of Flame [Revision]
Dungeon Master’s Guide
Updated 7/2/08
Update version 2
Actions the Rules Don’t Cover [Revision/Deletion]
Dungeon Master’s Guide, page 42
In the fourth sentence of the Other Checks section, replace “10 (easy), 15
(moderate), or 20 (hard)” with “5 (easy), 10 (moderate), or 15 (hard).”
In the first sentence of the second paragraph of the Example section, replace “an
easy DC” with “a moderate DC” and replace “DC 15” with “DC 14.” Also, remove
“, but it’s a skill check, so make it DC 20” from the same sentence.
Difficulty Class and Damage By Level [Revision/Deletion]
Dungeon Master’s Guide, page 42
In the table, change the Difficulty Class (DC) Values section as follows:
Easy Moderate Hard
5 10 15
7 12 17
8 14 19
10 16 21
11 18 23
13 20 25
14 22 27
16 24 29
17 26 31
19 28 33
Also, below the table, remove both footnotes.
Example Diseases [Revision]
Dungeon Master’s Guide, page 49–50
Under Blinding Sickness, replace the Endurance line with “Endurance improve
DC 20, maintain DC 15, worsen DC 14 or lower.”
Under Mummy Rot, replace the Endurance line with “Endurance improve DC
15 + two-thirds mummy’s level, maintain DC 10 + two-thirds mummy’s level,
worsen DC 9 + two-third’s mummy’s level or lower.”
Under Cackle Fever, replace the Endurance line with “Endurance improve DC
22, maintain DC 17, worsen DC 16 or lower”
Under Shakes, replace the Endurance line with “Endurance improve DC 23,
maintain DC 18, worsen DC 17 or lower”
Under Mindfire, replace the Endurance line with “Endurance improve DC 25,
maintain DC 20, worsen DC 19 or lower”
Under Hellfever, replace the Endurance line with “Endurance improve DC 28,
maintain DC 23, worsen DC 22 or lower”
Under Slimy Doom, replace the Endurance line with “Endurance improve DC
30, maintain DC 25, worsen DC 24 or lower”
Skill Check Difficulty Class [Revision]
Dungeon Master’s Guide, page 61
In the table, change the DCs as follows:
Easy Moderate Hard
5 10 15
7 12 17
8 14 19
10 16 21
11 18 23
13 20 25
14 22 27
16 24 29
17 26 31
19 28 33
Step 2: Level and Complexity [Revision/Deletion]
Dungeon Master’s Guide, page 72–73
In the table, replace all values in the Failures column with “3”
In the second sentence of the third paragraph, remove “, and how many failures
end the challenge.”
Replace the fifth paragraph of the section, which begins “Set a level...,” with the
following text:
“For an easier or a harder challenge, use DCs from the row that corresponds to a
lower or a higher level, and assign the challenge’s level as the midpoint of that
level range. For example, if designing an easier challenge for an 8th-level party,
you could use the DCs from the “Level 4–6” row. That would adjust the
challenge’s level to 5th.”
Remove the seventh paragraph.
Step 3: Skills [Revision]
Dungeon Master’s Guide, page 73
In the first sentence of the fourth paragraph, replace “When a player’s turn
comes up in a skill challenge” with “When a player participates in a skill
challenge.”
In the third sentence of the fourth paragraph, replace “then the DC for using that
secondary skill is hard” with “then the DC for using that secondary skill is usually
moderate or hard.”
Running a Skill Challenge [Deletion]
Dungeon Master’s Guide, page 74
Remove the second and the third paragraphs.
Group Skill Checks [Addition]
Dungeon Master’s Guide, page 75
Add the following paragraph after the existing paragraph:
“On checks that aren’t described as group checks, consider limiting the number
of characters who can assist another character’s skill check to one or two. The
goal of a skill challenge isn’t for the entire party to line up behind one expert but
for the entire group to contribute in different and meaningful ways.”
Reward Clever Ideas [Revision]
Dungeon Master’s Guide, page 75
In the fourth sentence of the first paragraph, replace “let them make a roll using
the skill but at a hard DC” with “let them make a roll using the skill at an
appropriate DC (usually moderate or hard).”
The Negotiation [Revision]
Dungeon Master’s Guide, page 76
On the Complexity line, replace “before 4 failures” with “before 3 failures.”
Example in Play [Deletion]
Dungeon Master’s Guide, page 76–77
Remove the header and the first paragraph.
Remove “Round 1”
Remove the last paragraph, which begins, “At the end of the round....”
Urban Chase [Revision]
Dungeon Master’s Guide, page 78
On the Complexity line, replace “before 6 failures” with “before 3 failures.”
The Interrogation [Revision]
Dungeon Master’s Guide, page 79
On the Complexity line, replace “before 2 failures” with “before 3 failures”
Discovering Secret Lore [Revision]
Dungeon Master’s Guide, page 80
On the Complexity line, replace “before 4 failures” with “before 3 failures”
The “Get a Clue” Check [Revision]
Dungeon Master’s Guide, page 81
In the second sentence of the sidebar, replace “leaning toward the hard DCs”
with “using moderate DCs.”
Doomspore [Revision]
Dungeon Master’s Guide, page 88
Replace “XP 350” with “XP 150” and “Upgrade to Elite (700 XP)” to “Upgrade to
Elite (300 XP)”
The Invulnerable Coat of Arnd [Addition]
Dungeon Master’s Guide, page 170
Add the “Healing” keyword to the item’s encounter power.
Creating New Elites [Deletion]
Dungeon Master’s Guide, page 185
Remove “plus twice its Constitution score” from Adjust Hit Points.
Warlord NPC [Revision]
Dungeon Master’s Guide, page 188
On the Weapon Proficiency line, replace “military ranged” with “simple ranged.”
Added 7/2/08:
Page 42 Actions the Rules Don’t Cover [Revision/Deletion]
Page 42 Difficulty Class and Damage By Level [Revision/Deletion]
Page 49–50 Example Diseases [Revision]
Page 61 Skill Check Difficulty Class [Revision]
Page 72–73 Step 2: Level and Complexity [Revision/Deletion]
Page 73 Step 3: Skills [Revision]
Page 74 Running a Skill Challenge [Deletion]
Page 75 Group Skill Checks [Addition]
Page 75 Reward Clever Ideas [Revision]
Page 76 The Negotiation [Revision]
Page 76–77 Example in Play [Deletion]
Page 78 Urban Chase [Revision]
Page 79 The Interrogation [Revision]
Page 80 Discovering Secret Lore [Revision]
Page 81 The “Get a Clue” Check [Revision]
Page 88 Doomspore [Revision]
Page 188 Warlord NPC [Revision]
Player’s Handbook
Updated 7/2/08
Update version 2
Retraining [Revision]
Player’s Handbook, page 28
In the fourth sentence of the feat section, replace “heroic tier feats” with “heroic
tier feats and paragon tier feats.”
Dilettante [Revision]
Player’s Handbook, page 42
Replace “an at-will power” with “a 1st-level at-will attack power.”
Bonus At-Will Power [Revision]
Player’s Handbook, page 46
Replace “at-will power” with “1st-level at-will attack power.”
Keywords [Revision]
Player’s Handbook, page 55
Replace the second and third sentences of the fourth paragraph with the
following: “Also, resistance doesn’t reduce damage unless the target has
resistance to each type of damage from the attack, and then only the weakest of
the resistances applies. For example, a character who has resist 10 lightning and
resist 5 thunder who takes 15 lightning and thunder damage takes 10 damage
because the resistance value to the combined damage types is limited by the
lesser of the two resistances.”
Reliable [Revision]
Player’s Handbook, page 55
Replace text with “Reliable: If you don’t hit when using a reliable power, you don’t
expend the use of that power.”
Accessories [Revision]
Player’s Handbook, page 55
Replace “If you have a proficiency bonus to attack rolls and damage rolls from
your weapon” with “If you have a proficiency bonus to attack rolls from your
weapon.”
Target [Addition]
Player’s Handbook, page 57
Add the following sentences to the end of the first paragraph: “Some powers
include objects as targets. At the DM’s discretion, a power that targets a creature
can also target an object, whether or not the power lists an object as a potential
target.”
Conjurations [Revision]
Player’s Handbook, page 59
Replace the second paragraph with “Unless a power description says otherwise,
a conjuration cannot be attacked or physically affected, and a conjuration does
not occupy any squares.”
Guardian of Faith [Addition/Revision]
Player’s Handbook, page 64
Add “Creatures can move through the space occupied by the guardian” to the
power’s effect.
Replace “Any creature” in the fourth sentence of the Effect line with “Any enemy.”
Solar Wrath [Addition]
Player’s Handbook, page 74
Add the “Implement” keyword.
Battle Cry [Revision]
Player’s Handbook, page 74
Replace the “Implement” keyword with the “Weapon” keyword.
Combat Challenge [Revision]
Player’s Handbook, page 76
In the second paragraph, replace “a marked enemy that is adjacent to you shifts
or makes an attack” with “an enemy marked by you is adjacent to you and shifts
or makes an attack.”
Cleave [Revision]
Player’s Handbook, page 77
On the Hit line, replace “an enemy adjacent to you” with “an enemy adjacent to
you other than the target.”
No Surrender [Revision]
Player’s Handbook, page 84
Replace the action type “Immediate Reaction” with “No Action.”
Steel Grace [Revision]
Player’s Handbook, page 88
Replace “Containing Strike or Reaping Strike” with “cleave, reaping strike, sure
strike, or tide of iron.”
Hunter’s Quarry [Revision/Addition]
Player’s Handbook, page 104
In the first paragraph, replace “enemy nearest to you” with “nearest enemy to you
that you can see.”
Replace the first sentence of the second paragraph with the following: “Once per
round, when you hit your quarry with an attack, the attack deals extra damage
based on your level.”
Add the following sentence at the end of the second paragraph: “If you have
dealt Hunter’s Quarry damage since the start of your turn, you cannot deal it
again until the start of your next turn.”
Blade Cascade [Revision]
Player’s Handbook, page 109
On the Attack line, replace the second sentence with “Alternate main and offhand
weapon attacks until you miss or until you make five attacks.”
Blade Ward [Revision]
Player’s Handbook, page 112
On the Hit line, replace “[W]” with “2[W].”
Sneak Attack [Revision]
Player’s Handbook, page 117
Replace the first sentence with the following: “Once per round, when you have
combat advantage against an enemy and hit that enemy with an attack that uses
a crossbow, a light blade, or a sling, the attack deals extra damage. If you have
dealt Sneak Attack damage since the start of your turn, you cannot deal it again
until the start of your next turn.”
Instant Escape [Revision]
Player’s Handbook, page 127
Replace “Immediate Interrupt” with “Immediate Reaction.”
Warlock’s Curse [Revision/Addition]
Player’s Handbook, page 131
Replace the third sentence of the first paragraph with the following: “If you hit a
cursed enemy with an attack, you deal extra damage.”
Add the following clause to the end of the last sentence of the first paragraph: “so
if you have dealt Warlock’s Curse damage since the start of your turn, you
cannot deal it again until the start of your next turn.”
Frigid Darkness [Revision/Addition]
Player’s Handbook, page 133
On the Hit line, replace “all of your enemies” with “you and your allies.”
On the Star Pact line, add “until the end of your next turn” to the end of the
sentence.
Banish to the Void [Revision]
Player’s Handbook, page 139
On the Hit line, replace “The target attacks the nearest target on its next turn”
with “The target makes a melee basic attack against the nearest creature on its
next turn.”
Hurl Through Hell [Addition]
Player’s Handbook, page 140
On the Hit line, add “(save ends)” after “stunned.”
Whispers of the Fey [Revision/Addition]
Player’s Handbook, page 141
Replace “Utility 20” with “Attack 20.”
Collect Life Spark [Addition]
Player’s Handbook, page 142
On the Fey line, add “until the end of your next turn” to the end of the sentence.
Chimera Battlestrike [Revision]
Player’s Handbook, page 152
Replace “Minor Action” with “Standard Action.”
Trained Skills [Revision]
Player’s Handbook, page 156
Replace “Nature (Int)” with “Nature (Wis).”
Flaming Sphere [Addition]
Player’s Handbook, page 160
Add the following sentence after the first sentence of the Effect line: “The sphere
occupies 1 square.”
Dispel Magic [Addition]
Player’s Handbook, page 162
Add the “Implement” keyword.
Wall of Ice [Revision]
Player’s Handbook, page 165
Replace “As a standard action, a creature can attack one square of the wall” with
“A creature can attack the wall.”
Cloudkill [Deletion/Revision]
Player’s Handbook, page 166
Add “Attack: Intelligence vs. Fortitude” above the Hit line.
Level of Knowledge [Revision]
Player’s Handbook, page 180
In the table, replace “15” with “10” in the Common entry.
In the table, replace “+10” with “+5” in the Paragon tier entry.
In the table, replace “+15” with “+10” in the Epic tier entry.
Insight [Revision]
Player’s Handbook, page 185
In the table, replace “10 + creature’s level” with “10 + one-half the creature’s
level.”
In the table, replace “25 + effect’s level” with “25 + one-half the effect’s level.”
In the table, replace “15 + effect’s level” with “15 + one-half the effect’s level.”
Thievery [Revision]
Player’s Handbook, page 189
Under Pick Pocket, replace “DC 20 + your target’s level” with “DC 20 + one-half
your target’s level.”
Alertness [Revision]
Player’s Handbook, page 193
Replace the first sentence of the benefit section with “You don’t grant enemies
combat advantage from being surprised.”
Shield Push [Revision]
Player’s Handbook, page 200
Replace the text in the special section with “You must be using a shield to benefit
from this feat.”
Warrior of the Wild [Addition]
Player’s Handbook, page 208
Add the following sentence to the end of the second paragraph of the benefit
section: “The target you designate as your quarry remains your quarry until the
end of your next turn.”
Adventuring Gear [Addition]
Player’s Handbook, page 222
In the Adventuring Gear table, add the following text after Lantern:
Oil (1 pint) 1 sp 1 lb.
Delver’s Armor [Revision]
Player’s Handbook, page 229
Replace “Free Action” with “No Action.”
Prone [Addition]
Player’s Handbook, page 277
Add “You can’t move from your space, although you can teleport, crawl, or be
forced to move by a pull, a push, or a slide.”
Surprised [Deletion]
Player’s Handbook, page 277
Remove “other than free actions.”
Death Saving Throw [Deletion]
Player’s Handbook, page 295
Remove “expressed as a negative number” in the last sentence.
Added 7/2/08:
Page 28 Retraining [Revision]
Page 55 Keywords [Revision]
Page 55 Reliable [Revision]
Page 74 Battle Cry [Revision]
Page 104 Hunter’s Quarry [Revision/Addition]
Page 109 Blade Cascade [Revision]
Page 112 Blade Ward [Revision]
Page 117 Sneak Attack [Revision]
Page 131 Warlock’s Curse [Revision/Addition]
Page 142 Collect Life Spark [Addition]
Page 160 Flaming Sphere [Addition]
Page 180 Level of Knowledge [Revision]
Page 200 Shield Push [Revision]
Page 222 Adventuring Gear [Addition]
Page 277 Prone [Addition


Brian Carpenter wrote:
It is the shady (get it?!) wording on the Stealth skill in the PHB. Apparently, it has caused some problems so it has been updated in the online compendium to be a bit more clear. Personally, I just figured I'd just make a ruling as the DM and I had already decided to rule it similarly to the update, since it makes sense.

I (perhaps rashly) took them to be rewrites rather than clarifications. If that's the case, I'm more than willing to overlook simple misprints or oversights -- even in the quantities that PV has pointed out. I think those just (painfully, and inconveniently) happen.

I'll rethink it when their blasted website will come back online...

Which might lead to another tirade about DDI :/

Dark Archive Bella Sara Charter Superscriber

Can you give a sense of what the changes are? I'm really curious and have a game tomorrow morning.


Kruelman is still planning to buy 4E, but he's glad he put it off until errata starts going through.


Sebastian wrote:
Can you give a sense of what the changes are? I'm really curious and have a game tomorrow morning.

I remember reading about this on ENWorld. I *think* the gist was, you can make a Stealth check at the end of a move to hide if you have superior cover or total concealment. If you attack you become unhidden, if you move and end out of cover/conceal you become unhidden. If you move and end in cover/conceal I *think* you have to check again.

Most posters felt it clarified what (on ENWorld) had become an oft debated skill. One use that is explicitly now not effective is Warlock's hiding within their own Shadow Walk (the conceal it provides isn't good enough to hide in).

Just like in 3E, letting someone hide even when people have direct LoS on them seems ... silly, without any powers granting said ability. I had been interpreting the rules this way already.

Hope that helps (but note that this is simply what I *think*!)

Cheers! :)

Edit: Check the ENWorld thread on the subject here. It seems like I mostly got my characterization right, but make your own opinion. Second post contains roughly the same highlights that I laid out.

One last thing: I don't know where Tat got this info since Wizards is still down :(, but originally this was put up in the Compendium without any announcement I'm aware of, which means this might be internal rules that are not finalized. Just a word of warning (unless they've announced it, in which case ignore the crazy bug-guy).

Dark Archive

This reminds me of the rules from a rather fun, if insanely complex, World War II wargame. The rules were constantly in flux, and new versions were being put out all the time. It got to the point where they were even published in a three-ring binder, with the intent that you could pop the rings open and replace pages as they were changed.

In email discussions on the mailing list, we would refer to "RAW" (with version number), as well as "RAE" (more infrequently, once updates to the RAW were put out). Those acronyms referred to "Rules As Written" and "Rules as Erraticized." Anyway, that listing just reminded me strongly of this one game. It was (and is) a very good game, but this is definitely not something that would be a strong point for a game like D&D.


Tatterdemalion wrote:
Brian Carpenter wrote:
It is the shady (get it?!) wording on the Stealth skill in the PHB. Apparently, it has caused some problems so it has been updated in the online compendium to be a bit more clear. Personally, I just figured I'd just make a ruling as the DM and I had already decided to rule it similarly to the update, since it makes sense.

I (perhaps rashly) took them to be rewrites rather than clarifications. If that's the case, I'm more than willing to overlook simple misprints or oversights -- even in the quantities that PV has pointed out. I think those just (painfully, and inconveniently) happen.

I'll rethink it when their blasted website will come back online...

Which might lead to another tirade about DDI :/

Its clarifications though their kind of sizable from what I can tell by reading the PHB entry and the DDI Compendium.

The gist as far as I can tell is.

- you can move but you take penalties to your checks.
- In combat you need superior cover or total concealment (not just any cover or concealment) if you want to try and hide.
- Outside of combat you can use partial cover or concealment but observers need to be distracted.
- you cease to be hidden if you attack.
- you cease to be hidden if you move out into a space with no cover or concealment and the space is under observation.
- you cease to be hidden if your noisy.
- you can move and remain hidden if you have partial cover or concealment, you just can't become hidden in the first place under these circumstances.
- the enemy is allowed to actively try and find you, for example your not hidden if they move into your square.
- if you do an action that breaks your hidden status you retain the benefits of hidden status until the end of that action.
- hidden is defined as being silent and invisible to the enemy.

here is the DDI write up:

Spoiler:

STEALTH
Stealth: At the end of a move action.

Opposed Check: Stealth vs. passive Perception. If multiple enemies are present, your Stealth check is opposed by each enemy’s passive Perception check. If you move more than 2 squares during the move action, you take a –5 penalty to the Stealth check. If you run, the penalty is –10.

Becoming Hidden: You can make a Stealth check against an enemy only if you have superior cover or total concealment against the enemy or if you’re outside the enemy’s line of sight. Outside combat, the DM can allow you to make a Stealth check against a distracted enemy, even if you don’t have superior cover or total concealment and aren’t outside the enemy’s line of sight. The distracted enemy might be focused on something in a different direction, allowing you to sneak up.

Success: You are hidden, which means you are silent and invisible to the enemy.

Failure: You can try again at the end of another move action.

Remaining Hidden: You remain hidden as long as you meet these requirements.

Keep Out of Sight: If you no longer have any cover or concealment against an enemy, you don’t remain hidden from that enemy. You don’t need superior cover, total concealment, or to stay outside line of sight, but you do need some degree of cover or concealment to remain hidden. You can’t use another creature as cover to remain hidden.

Keep Quiet: If you speak louder than a whisper or otherwise draw attention to yourself, you don’t remain hidden from any enemy that can hear you.

Keep Still: If you move more than 2 squares during an action, you must make a new Stealth check with a –5 penalty. If you run, the penalty is –10. If any enemy’s passive Perception check beats your check result, you don’t remain hidden from that enemy.

Don’t Attack: If you attack, you don’t remain hidden.

Not Remaining Hidden: If you take an action that causes you not to remain hidden, you retain the benefits of being hidden until you resolve the action. You can’t become hidden again as part of that same action.

Enemy Activity: An enemy can try to find you on its turn. If an enemy makes an active Perception check and beats your Stealth check result (don’t make a new check), you don’t remain hidden from that enemy. Also, if an enemy tries to enter your space, you don’t remain hidden from that enemy.


Pax Veritas wrote:

*Looks like they missed a few things... jotted down here to make a point of seeing what I would call poor quality:* (This is a good illustration of how a company can be large but careless with a product.)

I again refer my honourable friend to the amount of errata for 3.0 when it came out. :D


Pax Veritas wrote:

*Looks like they missed a few things... jotted down here to make a point of seeing what I would call poor quality:* (This is a good illustration of how a company can be large but careless with a product.)

Target DCs (DMG 42)
Level E Easy DC Moderate DC Hard DC
1st–3rd 5 10 15
4th–6th 7 12 17
7th–9th 8 14 19
10th–12th 10 16 21
13th–15th 11 18 23
16th–18th 13 20 25
19th–21st 14 22 27
22nd–24th 16 24 29
25th–27th 17 26 31
28th–30th 19 28 33

Monster Manual
Updated 7/2/08
Update version 2
Effect [Revision]
Monster Manual, page 7
Replace the second sentence of the third paragraph with the following:
“Resistance doesn’t reduce damage unless the target has resistance to each
type of damage from the attack, and then only the weakest of the resistances
applies.”
Angel of Battle [Revision]
Monster Manual, page 14
Replace “HP 296” with “HP 148” and “Bloodied 148” with “Bloodied 74.”
Cave Bear [Revision]
Monster Manual, page 29
Replace the claw damage: “1d8 + 5 damage” with “2d8 + 5 damage.”
Replace the cave bear frenzy damage: “1d8 + 5 damage” with “2d8 + 5 damage.”
Eye of Flame [Revision]
Monster Manual, page 32
Replace “HP 240” with “HP 204.”
Evistro [Revision]
Monster Manual, page 54
Replace the claws damage: “1d8 + 5 damage” with “1d12 + 5 damage.”
Imp [Addition]
Monster Manual, page 63
Add “Reach 0” to both of the creature’s attacks.
Pseudodragon [Revision]
Monster Manual, page 91
Replace “Tiny” with “Small” for the creature’s size.
Drow Warrior [Revision]
Monster Manual, page 94
Replace the rapier attack’s “(X2)” with “and the drow warrior makes a secondary
attack against the same target. Secondary Attack: +13 vs. Fortitude; see drow
poison for the effect.”
Efreet Karadjin [Revision]
Monster Manual, page 100
Replace the attack bonus of scimitar of horrendous flame: “+27” with “+35.”
Death Giant [Revision]
Monster Manual, page 120
Replace the greataxe damage: “2d6 + 9 damage” with “4d6 + 9 damage.”
Hill Giant [Revision]
Monster Manual, page 121
Replace...

I love it!


One of my frustrations with the whole concept of the DDI is that it makes 2 classes of customers. You have the DDI customers who get a current set of all rules in a fairly convenient format, and the other people who get a mixed up set of "the third line should read XXX". What are you supposed to cross out the text in your book?

This would frustrate me less if they were going to republish the books in a year or two with all the updates (a 'second edition' in the publishing sense) so a DM could have a book with all the updates. I'm thinking republish the whole page as a PDF so you could glue stick in the replacement page ;)


Dennis da Ogre wrote:

One of my frustrations with the whole concept of the DDI is that it makes 2 classes of customers. You have the DDI customers who get a current set of all rules in a fairly convenient format, and the other people who get a mixed up set of "the third line should read XXX". What are you supposed to cross out the text in your book?

This would frustrate me less if they were going to republish the books in a year or two with all the updates (a 'second edition' in the publishing sense) so a DM could have a book with all the updates. I'm thinking republish the whole page as a PDF so you could glue stick in the replacement page ;)

I assume that future editions of the book will indeed have the errata included. That is how all the books in 3E worked as far as I'm aware, anyway.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Dennis da Ogre wrote:

One of my frustrations with the whole concept of the DDI is that it makes 2 classes of customers. You have the DDI customers who get a current set of all rules in a fairly convenient format, and the other people who get a mixed up set of "the third line should read XXX". What are you supposed to cross out the text in your book?

This would frustrate me less if they were going to republish the books in a year or two with all the updates (a 'second edition' in the publishing sense) so a DM could have a book with all the updates. I'm thinking republish the whole page as a PDF so you could glue stick in the replacement page ;)

In third Edition on the Second Print *Not sure if it was the same for 3.5* They incorporated they Errata Changes...

I would think they would do the same with 4th..

Ofcourse.. then it sucks to buy early!!!

Scarab Sages

Pathfinder Adventure Subscriber
Dennis da Ogre wrote:
This would frustrate me less if they were going to republish the books in a year or two with all the updates (a 'second edition' in the publishing sense) so a DM could have a book with all the updates.

...wouldn't that be 4.5?

Sovereign Court Contributor

I'm curious if the errata and corrections (or at least some of them) will make it into the deluxe editions. Not that I'm planning to buy them, but I was tempted to get the 3.5 ones for that very reason.


SageSTL wrote:
Dennis da Ogre wrote:
This would frustrate me less if they were going to republish the books in a year or two with all the updates (a 'second edition' in the publishing sense) so a DM could have a book with all the updates.
...wouldn't that be 4.5?

Not really. I think what is meant is a second printing. Its pretty much standard procedure to fix up any erratta when you have to go to a 2nd printing of a book. Now certianly this usually applies to stuff like college text books but it certianly could be done with a D&D rules manual.


Rambling Scribe wrote:
I'm curious if the errata and corrections (or at least some of them) will make it into the deluxe editions. Not that I'm planning to buy them, but I was tempted to get the 3.5 ones for that very reason.

I'd be shocked if it did not. Up to the erratta they had at the time when the book was sent to the printers anyway.


Dennis da Ogre wrote:

One of my frustrations with the whole concept of the DDI is that it makes 2 classes of customers. You have the DDI customers who get a current set of all rules in a fairly convenient format, and the other people who get a mixed up set of "the third line should read XXX". What are you supposed to cross out the text in your book?

This would frustrate me less if they were going to republish the books in a year or two with all the updates (a 'second edition' in the publishing sense) so a DM could have a book with all the updates. I'm thinking republish the whole page as a PDF so you could glue stick in the replacement page ;)

Glue sticking won't really work. The erratta is mostly expansions. Really the whole stealth skill additions are basically stuff like adding a line that says you don't remain hidden if you shout at the top of your lungs or stand out in the open were anyone could see you. This means that the pages are actually getting longer.

I suggest you lightly astrix rules that have erratta and put a print out of the rules update in the back of your hard cover.

The Exchange

Pax Veritas wrote:

*Looks like they missed a few things... jotted down here to make a point of seeing what I would call poor quality:* (This is a good illustration of how a company can be large but careless with a product.)

Target DCs (DMG 42)
Level E Easy DC Moderate DC Hard DC
1st–3rd 5 10 15
4th–6th 7 12 17
7th–9th 8 14 19
10th–12th 10 16 21
13th–15th 11 18 23
16th–18th 13 20 25
19th–21st 14 22 27
22nd–24th 16 24 29
25th–27th 17 26 31
28th–30th 19 28 33

Monster Manual
Updated 7/2/08
Update version 2
Effect [Revision]
Monster Manual, page 7
Replace the second sentence of the third paragraph with the following:
“Resistance doesn’t reduce damage unless the target has resistance to each
type of damage from the attack, and then only the weakest of the resistances
applies.”
Angel of Battle [Revision]
Monster Manual, page 14
Replace “HP 296” with “HP 148” and “Bloodied 148” with “Bloodied 74.”
Cave Bear [Revision]
Monster Manual, page 29
Replace the claw damage: “1d8 + 5 damage” with “2d8 + 5 damage.”
Replace the cave bear frenzy damage: “1d8 + 5 damage” with “2d8 + 5 damage.”
Eye of Flame [Revision]
Monster Manual, page 32
Replace “HP 240” with “HP 204.”
Evistro [Revision]
Monster Manual, page 54
Replace the claws damage: “1d8 + 5 damage” with “1d12 + 5 damage.”
Imp [Addition]
Monster Manual, page 63
Add “Reach 0” to both of the creature’s attacks.
Pseudodragon [Revision]
Monster Manual, page 91
Replace “Tiny” with “Small” for the creature’s size.
Drow Warrior [Revision]
Monster Manual, page 94
Replace the rapier attack’s “(X2)” with “and the drow warrior makes a secondary
attack against the same target. Secondary Attack: +13 vs. Fortitude; see drow
poison for the effect.”
Efreet Karadjin [Revision]
Monster Manual, page 100
Replace the attack bonus of scimitar of horrendous flame: “+27” with “+35.”
Death Giant [Revision]
Monster Manual, page 120
Replace the greataxe damage: “2d6 + 9 damage” with “4d6 + 9 damage.”
Hill Giant [Revision]
Monster Manual, page 121
Replace...

Holy crap! Setting the bar high, aren't they?


Fire_Wraith wrote:

This reminds me of the rules from a rather fun, if insanely complex, World War II wargame. The rules were constantly in flux, and new versions were being put out all the time. It got to the point where they were even published in a three-ring binder, with the intent that you could pop the rings open and replace pages as they were changed.

Ah, Advanced Squad Leader. Love the game but it's gotten too expensive for me to pick up the newest edition... :(

Liberty's Edge

Rambling Scribe wrote:
I'm curious if the errata and corrections (or at least some of them) will make it into the deluxe editions. Not that I'm planning to buy them, but I was tempted to get the 3.5 ones for that very reason.

As a note, there is no errata or corrections in any of those WotC documents.

These are updates, which include revisions, additions, and deletions.
That is all very deliberate choice of language.


Jeremy Mac Donald wrote:
Rambling Scribe wrote:
I'm curious if the errata and corrections (or at least some of them) will make it into the deluxe editions. Not that I'm planning to buy them, but I was tempted to get the 3.5 ones for that very reason.
I'd be shocked if it did not. Up to the erratta they had at the time when the book was sent to the printers anyway.

The version of 3.5 that was in retail stores until July contained tons of errors and errata. Now how many times it was sent to the printer and whether they updated it when they had it reprinted I'm not sure. Maybe they had thousands of copies in their warehouse for years and pulled from that stock. I find that unlikely.


SageSTL wrote:
Dennis da Ogre wrote:
This would frustrate me less if they were going to republish the books in a year or two with all the updates (a 'second edition' in the publishing sense) so a DM could have a book with all the updates.
...wouldn't that be 4.5?

No it would be 4e but fixed. I would assume '4.5' would have some significantly different mechanics. These are just tweaks... if you want to use 'versioning' like software it would probably not even be a full point release. 4e service pack 2 or something like that.


Dennis da Ogre wrote:
Jeremy Mac Donald wrote:
Rambling Scribe wrote:
I'm curious if the errata and corrections (or at least some of them) will make it into the deluxe editions. Not that I'm planning to buy them, but I was tempted to get the 3.5 ones for that very reason.
I'd be shocked if it did not. Up to the erratta they had at the time when the book was sent to the printers anyway.
The version of 3.5 that was in retail stores until July contained tons of errors and errata. Now how many times it was sent to the printer and whether they updated it when they had it reprinted I'm not sure. Maybe they had thousands of copies in their warehouse for years and pulled from that stock. I find that unlikely.

Its actually pretty likely - the bigger your print run the cheaper your per unit costs are. Ideally you want to do a print run with so many books that there never is a 2nd printing. Its only fear that your product will bomb and you'll have a warehouse full of product that you can't move that causes anyone to be at all conservative on their print runs.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

The thing about play-testing, is that you only have a small population of people doing the testing, they can miss many things.

Once the product goes into mass production is when you start getting massive feedback, that the small population of players missed.


Aaaaargh. Now that's irritating. I just picked up a 4E PH and started reading through it. So, rather than remain a second class customer who wants his product complete, I say I'm creating a third class. I will write my own errata. Let the houseruling begin!


Dragnmoon wrote:
The thing about play-testing, is that you only have a small population of people doing the testing, they can miss many things.

Check out the playtester credits in the back of the Players Handbook -- there are nearly 700 names (I had a program count them). And given WotC's strident claims about exhaustive playtesting, I think there's little to no excuse for rewriting rules yet.

Fact is, I think they've misrepresented the quality of playtesting to the point of deception. If I'm wrong, apologies all around.

For the record, I'm specifically criticizing revisions, not errata. Typos and similar oversights are inevitable.

Sovereign Court Contributor

Jeremy Mac Donald wrote:
Rambling Scribe wrote:
I'm curious if the errata and corrections (or at least some of them) will make it into the deluxe editions. Not that I'm planning to buy them, but I was tempted to get the 3.5 ones for that very reason.
I'd be shocked if it did not. Up to the erratta they had at the time when the book was sent to the printers anyway.

What I specifically meant (but didn't say) is "I'd like to know how many of these revisions were made in time to make it into the deluxe print run, or if that print run will be outdated before it hits the market."


Dennis da Ogre wrote:

What are you supposed to cross out the text in your book?

That's exactly what I do. It's not such a big deal. It's not like I'm planning to sell the book back to someone.

O


I'm thinking that WOTC left all that dead space in the books so that people could write in the necessary corrections, deletions, additions, eratta, mistakes, foul ups, screw ups, poor editing, whatever you want to go with.


Arcesilaus wrote:
Dennis da Ogre wrote:

What are you supposed to cross out the text in your book?

That's exactly what I do. It's not such a big deal. It's not like I'm planning to sell the book back to someone.

O

More importantly, if they're buying it from you, at least they know they have the correct version of the rules! :P


Um, I've been playing RPGs for a LONG time and not just D&D requires errata.

From GURPS to Palladium to White Wolf to FASA, I have never seen a core rulebook that didn't require errata unless said book was the 3rd or 4th printing.

(Chaosium was the exception but that's because what we call a new printing, for some reason Chaosium would call it a new edition. *LOL*

Seriously, there is almost no difference between 3E CoC mechanics and 6E and I hear even 6E has errata and this is a game that's basically unchanged since 3E and that back in the mid 80s!!!)

RPGs arent math books where there is a one true way (ironically, I remember my engineering courses at UofT, the policy was to try and NEVER use a 1st edition book and if the professor did, EVERY example had to be doublechecked by the class/TAs/professor).

Neither are they novels (finding a typo in say a FR novel is MUCH less common than finding a typo in a FR sourcebook)

Errata is a fact of life in RPG books. Unless the industry goes totally PDF-only (which does allow for relatively painless updates/errata)m one should've been used to it by now.


Yes, however there's minor errata and major errata. This is similar to the AoO diagrams and replacement pages that came out. Stuff that should have been fixed before press.

Liberty's Edge

Tatterdemalion wrote:

Check out the playtester credits in the back of the Players Handbook -- there are nearly 700 names (I had a program count them). And given WotC's strident claims about exhaustive playtesting, I think there's little to no excuse for rewriting rules yet.

Fact is, I think they've misrepresented the quality of playtesting to the point of deception. If I'm wrong, apologies all around.

Perhaps you should ask Mike Mearls who made a point about the materials he provided to playtesters and why in a post on ENWorld. I believe it was linked to here some time back.

Likewise remember that playtesters cannot talk about what materials they received, their content, or any feedback they provided. It is rather unreasonable to expect them to violate the NDA just to answer your charges.


Bleach wrote:

Um, I've been playing RPGs for a LONG time and not just D&D requires errata.

From GURPS to Palladium to White Wolf to FASA, I have never seen a core rulebook that didn't require errata unless said book was the 3rd or 4th printing.

(Chaosium was the exception but that's because what we call a new printing, for some reason Chaosium would call it a new edition. *LOL*

Seriously, there is almost no difference between 3E CoC mechanics and 6E and I hear even 6E has errata and this is a game that's basically unchanged since 3E and that back in the mid 80s!!!)

RPGs arent math books where there is a one true way (ironically, I remember my engineering courses at UofT, the policy was to try and NEVER use a 1st edition book and if the professor did, EVERY example had to be doublechecked by the class/TAs/professor).

Neither are they novels (finding a typo in say a FR novel is MUCH less common than finding a typo in a FR sourcebook)

Errata is a fact of life in RPG books. Unless the industry goes totally PDF-only (which does allow for relatively painless updates/errata)m one should've been used to it by now.

I remember an Ed Greenwood Novel, 'Elminster in Hell' where every time that he used the word 'shell', it came over as 'sHell', with an upper case 'H' in it.

I assume that someone did a computerised 'search and replace' on the word 'hell' to make sure that it began with an upper-case letter (being a proper noun) and words containing the four letters 'hell' in sequence got adjusted as well.....


Tatterdemalion wrote:
Fact is, I think they've misrepresented the quality of playtesting to the point of deception. If I'm wrong, apologies all around.

I don't know about what their claims of playtesting quality of their release. What I recall is the almost universal cry of "We've playtested it and it is awesome!". I don't recall "We've playtested it exhaustively and worked all the kinks out of it. In fact listening to the podcast and reading the posts it sounded to me like they were putting significant changes and additions into the system right up until the final release date. Whether they had 700 testers or not, there is a big chunk of the game which received little or no testing near the drop dead date for publishing.

It's hard for me to comment on the nature and depth of the changes... since I don't play 4e, but I think a 2-3 month feature freeze would have been a good idea and from what I recall of the run up there was none.


Dennis da Ogre wrote:
...there is a big chunk of the game which received little or no testing near the drop dead date for publishing.

Any idea which piece(s)?

The Exchange RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

Charles Evans 25 wrote:


I remember an Ed Greenwood Novel, 'Elminster in Hell' where every time that he used the word 'shell', it came over as 'sHell', with an upper case 'H' in it.
I assume that someone did a computerised 'search and replace' on the word 'hell' to make sure that it began with an upper-case letter (being a proper noun) and words containing the four letters 'hell' in sequence got adjusted as well.....

Oh, the best story is the "global search and replace" TSR did on a couple of rulesbooks in 2nd Edition. They changed "mage" to "wizard", and, wanting the change to apply to words like "mages" and "battle-mage" and such, turned off the "only whole word" feature.

So, for the space of that book, weapons weren't doing damage, they were doing dawizard.


Chris Mortika wrote:


So, for the space of that book, weapons weren't doing damage, they were doing dawizard.

OMG. That might be the best thing I've ever heard!


Yeah, the huge amount of errata is saddening. So much potential... I'm still sticking with 4E, but I'm still disappointed. I wish they'd redo 4E with the clever design guys from WotC and the polish and marketing of Paizo (shiny layout, open playtesting and so on).

Cheers, LT.

Sovereign Court

This is par for the course for WotC, and not just regarding 4E. I think they have gotten worse since 4E was announced, but WotC has a history of slipshod editing, almost non-existant playtesting, and very slow, cumbersome publication of errata. Show me something they have done right. Then I'd be surprised.


Tatterdemalion wrote:
Dennis da Ogre wrote:
...there is a big chunk of the game which received little or no testing near the drop dead date for publishing.
Any idea which piece(s)?

No and to be honest it's mostly conjecture based on what I remember hearing on the podcast at the time.

Liberty's Edge RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16

I can't quote anyone, but I seem to recall that playtesters were given very specific scenarios to test, and the impression I got was that there were mostly testing stand alone combat encounters. It seemed to me at least that the playtesting was all about the combat and balance, and very little was done comparitively for other aspects of the game (skills, the flow of an entire campaign, etc.)


WotC's Nightmare wrote:
This is par for the course for WotC, and not just regarding 4E. I think they have gotten worse since 4E was announced, but WotC has a history of slipshod editing, almost non-existant playtesting, and very slow, cumbersome publication of errata. Show me something they have done right. Then I'd be surprised.

Well the Errata is coming out pretty quickly - Sure all the other problems remain true but they are being faster.

I'm actually pretty happy with a significant chunk of their errata these days. We are seing the guys on the Character Optimization boards just go in and break things and WotC has been taking note and making fixes based on this fairly quickly.

In 3.5 they simply almost never bothered to try and fix the broken builds builds at all. In some ways I'm hoping and expecting the 4E Errata to eventually be significantly larger then the 3.5 version - I want the company to actually fix stuff based on acknowledging that the fan base has been poking holes in it. Thats a better policy then simply pretending that the Frenzied Berserker is a perfectly viable PRC and does not need any tweaking at all.

If I have to put up with more errata to get a policy from WotC where they attempt to actually address their mistakes - well so be it. It beats them having a policy were they pretend that they are not making these kinds of mistakes in the first place.


JoelF847 wrote:
I can't quote anyone, but I seem to recall that playtesters were given very specific scenarios to test, and the impression I got was that there were mostly testing stand alone combat encounters. It seemed to me at least that the playtesting was all about the combat and balance, and very little was done comparitively for other aspects of the game (skills, the flow of an entire campaign, etc.)

Beats me - but considering whats broken that sure sounds plausible.

That said other aspects of the game can be pretty hard to judge - is X broken because of game mechanics? Or is this just not really meshing with your DMs campaign?

That said when the actual mathematics in the Skill Challenges are not working we do have to wonder what they were doing. Probably something particualrly retarded like thinking that a game mechanic like this could be designed by some one that does not have a degree with a very high level of statistics. They let their English majors design crunch - in this case it seems to have come along and bit them on the ass. They should have at least sent this by a guy with real knowledge of statistics before letting it out the door.

The Exchange RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

re: "dawizard." The term appeared in the "Encyclopedia Magica" volumes.

1 to 50 of 55 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Gaming / D&D / 4th Edition / Did they playtest the skill system at all? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.