D&D 4th Edition - The positive, constructive thread, Negativism, go post elsewhere! Options

[Bull]

I actually quite dig the Dragonborn. I think they look pretty cool, on the whole, though I think in my games, they'll have tails. (Of course, I also tend to think of them as evolved Draconians as well, so... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) )

Bull

[Wounded Ronin]

Draconians trapping your weapon was the pwnest thing ever. (That's positve, right?)

It's like, SIDEARM BITCH!

Seriously.

[bishop186]

I dunno, when I envision them with tails they instantly become discolored, super-sized kobolds.

[FrankTrollman]

I dunno, when I envision them with tails they instantly become discolored, super-sized kobolds.

I would've preferred kobolds. Or hobgoblins. Or orcs (especially orcs). D&D already suffers tremendously from race bloat, and I truly don't think that we needed people to make new races of any kind for the PHB. Especially as the new races don't really cover any of the newly defined roles super well.

The Draconians are going to be the Bullysaurus in every group. That's the guy who specializes in Intimidate and demands (and receives) the surrenders of bloodied opponents rather than taking the time to beat them up all the way (this saves an increidble amount of time, especially at high levels). But while every group wants a Bullysaurus, the way the designers talk about it, they seem genuinely surprised that such a position exists in parties.

So color me confused. The Dragonborn don't seem to actually do any of the things the designers wanted players to do. They aren't optimized to be a grind paladin or a tron paladin. They aren't optimized to be a hammer fighter or a sword fighter. They aren't optimized to be a laser cleric or a beat cleric. And while they can walk in as a perfectly acceptable Charisma based Feylock, there are literally 4 other races in the PHB alone that could do that job just as well. The only role in the party they really uniquely fill: the Bullysaurus; is a role that wasn't even "supposed" to exist.

Interesting note: They made a patch for the Wizard.

A severe advantage to having all the abilities in the game be very similar is that you can seriously add relatively large swathes of content to the game very easily. Whole new roles every bit as well defined as "Laser Cleric" or "Bowazon" can be added to the game by writing 2 At-wills, 8 Encounters, 7 Dailies, 7 Utilities, and a Paragon path. Since those abilities are all basically collections of keywords drawn off a half-page list, you can write two to three of these character paths while in the bath tub.

While the game didn't give us a fully viable flail Fighter set of moves, one could just spend ten minutes writing the extra abilities required to make that go. One wasn't granted a fully playable Bugbear, but with the introduction of some racial weapons, two minor abilities, 2 Heroic Feats and a Paragon feat, the Bugbear would be good to go.

In less than half an hour you can make a Bugbear Flail Fighter just as playable as anything else in the game from levels 1 to 30.

-Frank

[Aaron]

One wasn't granted a fully playable Bugbear, but with the introduction of some racial weapons, two minor abilities, 2 Heroic Feats and a Paragon feat, the Bugbear would be good to go.
In less than half an hour you can make a Bugbear Flail Fighter just as playable as anything else in the game from levels 1 to 30.

Less, actually.

Bugbear
Average Height: 6' 10" - 7' 2Ë"
Average Weight: 250 - 300 lb.

Ability Scores: +2 Strength, +2 Dexterity
Size: Medium
Speed: 6 squares
Vision: Low-light

Languages: Common, Goblin
Skill Bonuses: +2 Intimidate, +2 Stealth

Oversized: You can use weapons of your size or one size larger than you as if they were your size.

Predatory Eye: You can use predatory eye as an encounter power.

Predatory Eye -- Bugbear Racial Power
You maneuver into an advantageous position and strike your foe with ruthless determination.
Encounter
Minor Action -- Personal
Effect: If you have combat advantage against a target, you deal +1d6 damage on the next attack you make against that target. You must apply this bonus before the end of your next turn.
Increase extra damage to +2d6 at 11th level and +3d6 at 21st level.

[FrankTrollman]

That's incomplete, which was kind of my point. The Bugbear takes very little effort to ring to a playable state.

Creating a viable class path is more difficult, but is still the creation of just a small list of abilities and most of the work is already done for you.

-Frank

[Fuchs]

A house ruler's paradise then?

[FrankTrollman]

A house ruler's paradise then?

Since this is the positive thread, sure. We'll go with that.

-Frank

[Aaron]

That's incomplete, which was kind of my point. The Bugbear takes very little effort to ring to a playable state.

I'll bite. What's it missing?

[FrankTrollman]

I'll bite. What's it missing?

The other abilities. The racial weapons. The racial feats.

It's 3/4 of a playable race. Go ahead and compare it to an Elf. Or a Dwarf. Or a Tiefling. It's not complete. It even says that it isn't complete at the beginning of the section.

-Frank

[Aaron]

Okay, yeah, I can see it.

[deek]

We just played our first 4th edition session last night. My normal SR4 group (where I was GMing) came to the end of our story arc (after 2 years) and the timing was right to keep our game schedule but get into 4th edition DnD. We all got the books last week and had characters ready for last night.

My first impressions from reading the books:

1) A ton of balance. Borrowing from the MMO world, balance is king, and I think they've done a really good job with balancing these initial classes, races and powers. There's a lot to choose from but because of the balance, its best to build a group balance as well. Each class fits into a role and by balancing the party roles, you really can increase the level of fun. Not to mention the monsters are also balanced so you can plug in any combination of monsters that equal, say 500 XP and know that your 1st level group of five players, will have a challenging combat experience.

2) Streamlined. Everything seems very streamlined. Every class has at-will, encounter, daily and utility powers. For spell casters, they take the form of spells, but for martial types, they are tactics and combat powers. Saving Throws are a basic 50/50 chance (with a rare few modifiers) and ongoing effects offer a save to end every turn. Their are four defenses: AC, Fortitude, Reflex and Willpower, and different powers target different defenses. There's just a lot of similarity in format, but a wide array of options available to each class/race.

3) Skill Challenges. This blew me away...in addition to combat encounters, DMs can set up skill challenges. There are some great examples in the book, but basically the DM sets up a scene, chooses some core skills and difficulties and then the players can rollplay or roleplay the encounter, choosing different skills (either that make sense or possibly in creative ways). The difficulty factors in based on the target number to hit and the amount of successes needed before x failures occur. Some skills used can open up other skills. Some are automatic failures when used (like trying to Intimidate a noble could count as one failure no matter what) and some provide a bonus to the next player's skill check. All in all, with a little setup work, the DM can set up an encounter that utilizes your skills instead of combat. And the template can be used from anything like negotiating a better room rate at the inn to pursuing a thief through the woods at night. Its really open to the DM to build these encounter challenges, but there is a huge world of creative roleplaying opened, even for those that have trouble with it.

Now, from last nights session, I must admit, it was a blast! We only had time for one encounter, where while foraging for food, we faced off against a group of goblins carrying a stone chest. Combat ensued shortly (although I did make an attempt to pass by peacefully) and we had a lot of fun with all the options available each round. I play a warlord (which is a "leader", the same role as a cleric) and one of my at-will powers is that I can exchange my standard action, to give any ally a melee attack...and I used it a ton last night. There can be a lot of strategy involved in combat, but you could also simply hack and slash. We found that our two damage classes could get up front, attack and draw the enemy towards them, while my warlord buffed their attacks, healed when necessary and output a little damage as well. Then the casters, one single target the other AoE, handled the rest...

What I found was that each round, for each player, wasn't an "oh duh, I attack" moment. Depending on where everyone was situated, everyone had a couple options, and at least one of them involved enhancing the group strategy.

We didn't stumble on any rules, as everything was straight forward with no vagueness and everyone was engaged in the entire time. It was a lot of fun, even though we didn't get any skill challenges last night!

[Nightwalker450]

I'm definatly liking what I've seen. Some notes from me:

1. No more squishy wizard: 20 hit points at 1st level easily done.

2. Balance makes everyone feel useful, and everyone has options.

3. The wizard spell addition that Frank referred to was very necessary (they had nothing that attacked Will, everything was Ref or Fort)

4. They actually have a tanking system, that isn't as slapped on as it was in 3.x. No more "must attack", but rather if you don't you will take a penalty.

5. Everything is Roll Attack vs. Static Defense. Before you had the DC for spells, that you rolled saves against, while melee was roll attack to hit defense. This new way is much more streamlined.

6. Encounters are easy to put together.

7. Being able to easily put together new classes/races is good, even if they all look extremely similar once you zoom out.

8. The new system has so much more going for it in terms of tactics. The way the classes mesh, and play off one another looks like a real adventuring party, rather then a bunch of adventurers just happening to be going in the same direction.

9. Strict treasure tables, while some would think are constraining, I feel they give you a good idea of how much people should have for each level. You don't have to follow them precisely but you know the range so if you give less, your adventurers will be weaker, if you give more they will be stronger. Again more points for balance.

[imperialus]

So my buddy and I sat down, created a 5 PC party that seemed 'typical'. Fighter, Paladin, Rogue, Warlord, Wizard at 5th level and started grinding them through different fights just to see how the mechanics held up.

We did fights above and below their level, fights against different monster combos, from a huge brawl against 20+ Legion Devil Grunts to a classic battle against a Young Red Dragon and the system didn't break down even though the Red Dragon was a Solo, two levels above the party.

Every fight was a challenge but once we got the hang of the system and had a feel for our powers the combat went lighting fast. The Red Dragon killed the fighter, knocked the Paladin down to 1 healing surge, dropped everyone to 0 HP at least once, and generally made the parties life hell. They still managed to win though.

The Devil Grunts swarmed around the defenders and killed the Wizard and Rogue. The Wizard still managed to take about a dozen of them with him though before he was overwhelmed. Rogue kinda underperformed in this battle, but killing minions isn't what he was designed to do. Hordes of nothing but minions is the one thing that did seem to screw the system up a bit. In an actual game I'd strongly recommend against using encounters that consist of nothing but minions, or if you do make sure it's a lower level encounter. The party was just overwhelmed trying to deal with too many attacks coming from too many different directions. The Warlord got brought down too and although the Fighter and Paladin did win, the fight just wasn't much fun.

As far as more balanced encounters went, we found that things started to break down when we were using encounters more than 3 levels above the party, or more than 3 levels less. It didn't seem to matter what kind of enemies we threw at them, as long as the encounter level was right. We did one fight against a whole mass of low level goblins and it was still a challenge, did one against a pack of level 6 Gnoll soldiers with a level 8 leader but kept the encounter level the same as the partys and it was still fun.

One other thing we noticed, is that when the PC's did end up in over their heads we knew it long before we started edging towards a TPK. We kept fighting until the TPK because they were test games but one of the big problems I found with 3.X is that if the DM screwed up the CR calculation things could go very bad for the party, very quickly. In 4E the DM can throw encounters far above the parties level (as in 5 or 6 levels above) at them and the PC's have at least a couple rounds to realize they've stepped in it deep and can make a retreat.

[Cheops]

As a GM I despised the CR system. It was difficult to use and not very intuitive. The new system is a good mix of AD&D 2nd and 3.X style encounter generation.

Each monster now has an XP value again. They also have a level and a role that tell you how hard they should be and generally how they act/what they're good at. To make an encounter you just grab the XP/Level from a chart, multiply by the number of characters, and then "buy" creatures out of your budget. To adjust encounter difficulty you just alter the XP/level. Easy as pie.

The only negative, as someone pointed out is that the MM doesn't include wandering monster charts or easy reference tables for encounters of a specific level. Each monster enty has at least 1 encounter printed up but no index for said encounters.

[Moon-Hawk]

I've tried several encounters so far. (apart from the obviously broken skill challenges) I have to say I like it better than I did after I'd read the rules but hadn't played. I haven't quite figured out if I'm using stealth in combat correctly yet, but overall, despite all the differences, I still felt like I was playing D&D, and I'm really not sure why.

[Fortune]

I have spent the past week delving the depths of the new system ... and even more perusing the findings of other people's depth-delving ... and have come to the conclusion that I am quite excited about this edition of D&D. That is something that I haven't been able to say since moving from Basic to AD&D way back in the caveman days. I really wish I had some people to play with though. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/frown.gif)

[Fuchs]

I have spent the past week delving the depths of the new system ... and even more perusing the findings of other people's depth-delving ... and have come to the conclusion that I am quite excited about this edition of D&D. That is something that I haven't been able to say since moving from Basic to AD&D way back in the caveman days. I really wish I had some people to play with though. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/frown.gif)

Should WotC get the virtual tabletop working you'll be able to find players or GMs online. (Of course, there are already sites who offer online games.)

[Bull]

I am looking forward to seeing what all their virtual tabletop system will be able to do. Some of the current ones are nice, but they're all, so far as I know, pretty basic and generic. The Virt Tabletop, combined with the 3-D minis, the "create your own avatar" thingy, and all that could rock.

Or, it could suck (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

EIther way, it bears watching, and could have an impact on how game companies develope their games from now on.

[Fortune]

I dunno if I'm willing to fork over $15 US per month for that stuff though.

[Fuchs]

There are other, free sites.

[Bull]

There are other, free sites.

I assume he was replying specifically to my comment (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

And I agree that $15 a month is a bit much, but it all depends on whether or not I'm gonna use it, and exactly how flexible and powerful the site ends up being. If I can get an online D&D group together to play a couple times a month, and the features it promses are simple and quick to use, I'll likely go for it. If not, I'll pass. In either event, I'll check it out, just to see what it's capable of.

[Fuchs]

I don't have the time for D&D online games, so the VTT is of no interest to me.

[kanislatrans]

Tried it out yesterday. Not as bad as expected.

Positives: easy to play, combat goes fast, controled the rabid power gamers in the group well. nice feel over all. will definitly be playing again.

Downside: only complaint was" It plays like a video game." (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wobble.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wobble.gif)

[raphabonelli]

I play a warlord (which is a "leader", the same role as a cleric) and one of my at-will powers is that I can exchange my standard action, to give any ally a melee attack...and I used it a ton last night.

I can't wait to play D&D4ed... but i just can see myself GM'ing it.

I´ve read some powers in the book and i just can't connect then to anything that i could describe, and this Warlord power is one of then. The powers works much more and a Card Effect (on a CCG) than a real power, move or strategy.

- WARLORD: I will use my Commander's Strike on the Fighter.

- GM: All right. Fighter... the Warlord scream "attack" to you, and for some unknown reason you feel the urge to attack your opponent. Not only this, but you magically becames faster, so you can attack now even if you spent all your actions on this turn. And for no apparent reason you use the Warlord Intelligence attack.

Sorry... but it just don't feel right for me.


Ona positive note, i guess that should be easy to anyone that like Final Fantasy games to adapt it to D&D.