[X] My Assistant

[Gawdzilla]

Not really. I designed two completely different warlords, both functioned identically.

Party had two wizards, both choosing everything the other didn't. Played nearly identically.

I guess if by "functioned identically" you mean "did their job", then yeah, I suppose.
But your tactics and abilities if you're a wizard who took Ray of Frost vs. Magic Missile are going to be a bit different, just as Warlords have some powers geared towards battlefield control, and some for attack/damage enhancement.

Rogue: not really. All of the rogues powers were very very circumstantial (we had a guy who enjoys playing games and enjoys figuring out how to use the rules to his advantage--not Rules Lawyer, but figuring out how the game SHOULD be played--and even he was very disappointed with 4E)

Clearly I can't speak to your experience, but all I know is that the rogue in our party is almost constantly sliding people or maneuvering around them. He has combat advantage almost all the time, grants the fighter a flanking bonus, and reduces the monsters chances to hit, aside from high damage output. So far his powers have been really rather effective.

Warlord: no. not really. The warlord "hey you, hit that guy" is so poorly worded I don't know where I have to be relative to the guy I'm shouting commands at! The power has a range of "melee weapon." Does that mean I need to be next to the guy I'm shouting at? Next to the enemy I want him to hit (in which case, why don't I do it?), next to both of them? The only time it was any good was if the rogue missed his attack and could still deal Sneak Attack damage if he made another attack before his turn. And in any case, I have to give up my attack to do it, which seems counter productive for a fighter-ish class.

Well I can't say we've had too much trouble deciphering the powers, although I will certainly say that the book is poorly organized, and specifics of a few of the powers are certainly open to interpretation. Targets and proximity, however, are usually pretty straightforward. If your power has a range of "melee", it means you can use your power if the target is within reach of your weapon. The target is explicitly stated in the power, usually "One monster". If your power is allowing an ally to make a melee attack against the target of the power, it doesn't matter where your ally is in relation to you as long as he is able to make a melee attack against the monster, because he is not the target of the power.

As for giving up your attack -- yes, in some cases you do. But it isn't counter-productive, because Warlords aren't a fighter-ish class, despite the fact that they look like one. They are a leader class, just as a cleric is. Their main abilities are healing, "buffing", and battlefield manipulation. Not damage. That's why it isn't bad to swap one of your attacks for another teammates -- because two attacks a round from the fighter, rogue, or ranger is better than one from the fighter and one from the healer. Not that you don't get any damage-dealing powers, but they tend to focus on helping your teammates rather than buffing your own attacks, because that just really isn't their schtick.

AND NO, a warlord can't grant an attack bonus to damn anything. That power needs to HIT SOMETHING first. If the problem is hitting, then you SOL.

Well, like I said, we haven't had that problem too terribly. We seem to have a hit rate of between 50-75% depending on the difficulty of the monster, which isn't terrible, and hit rates go up dramatically when the Warlord and Rogue get in on the action, because they grant attack bonuses and easy flanking. Of course I haven't played any modules, so I can't speak to their quality, but it sounds like maybe the DM should tone down the encounters a bit, though.

[Draco18s]

I guess if by "functioned identically" you mean "did their job", then yeah, I suppose.

No, they did the same thing. Admitted the one warlord was situated at the "far right" of the build and the other tried to sit on the fence.

Clearly I can't speak to your experience, but all I know is that the rogue in our party is almost constantly sliding people or maneuvering around them. He has combat advantage almost all the time, grants the fighter a flanking bonus, and reduces the monsters chances to hit, aside from high damage output. So far his powers have been really rather effective.

I haven't played since...April? May? of last year (we had the PDFs of the books sometime prior to the official release--and yes, we had them on pre-order).

Well I can't say we've had too much trouble deciphering the powers, although I will certainly say that the book is poorly organized, and specifics of a few of the powers are certainly open to interpretation. Targets and proximity, however, are usually pretty straightforward. If your power has a range of "melee", it means you can use your power if the target is within reach of your weapon. The target is explicitly stated in the power, usually "One monster". If your power is allowing an ally to make a melee attack against the target of the power, it doesn't matter where your ally is in relation to you as long as he is able to make a melee attack against the monster, because he is not the target of the power.

Looking it up now.
Blast. I've done something with my PDF.
*Grumbles and downloads anew*
Ok, based on that interpretation, then I need to be adjactent to a creature and tell and ally to make a basic attack on it (doing an extra INT damage). Which is complete bollocks. I can yell at a guy 25 feet away to heal himself, but can't tell him to hit anything.

Warlords can not lead from the rear.

And should not be in front.

W
T
F
?

As for giving up your attack -- yes, in some cases you do. But it isn't counter-productive, because Warlords aren't a fighter-ish class, despite the fact that they look like one. They are a leader class, just as a cleric is. Their main abilities are healing, "buffing", and battlefield manipulation. Not damage. That's why it isn't bad to swap one of your attacks for another teammates -- because two attacks a round from the fighter, rogue, or ranger is better than one from the fighter and one from the healer. Not that you don't get any damage-dealing powers, but they tend to focus on helping your teammates rather than buffing your own attacks, because that just really isn't their schtick.

You know that the power gives them a basic attack, right? Not a simple action?

Of course I haven't played any modules, so I can't speak to their quality, but it sounds like maybe the DM should tone down the encounters a bit, though.

He was actually toning them up (in terms of numbers, not stats) because we were an 8 character party, not a 4 (recommended number).

[hobgoblin]

I call it that because they removed Gnomes and replaced them with some stupid dragon-born race.

removed? not so much. its right there in the "monster" book (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

in the same way that the monster book have always held stats for the generic races.

i think they just removed some of the less "interesting" stuff from the PHB, as its most often the one book people start out with.

so the more stuff thats in there that could make someone go "hey that looks awesome", the more likely they are to get a sale.

worry about the day when catalyst puts playable infected in the BBB (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

[Gawdzilla]

Ok, based on that interpretation, then I need to be adjactent to a creature and tell and ally to make a basic attack on it (doing an extra INT damage). Which is complete bollocks. I can yell at a guy 25 feet away to heal himself, but can't tell him to hit anything.

I don't really see the trouble. Clearly the power itself is an abstraction; I imagine in actuality that you would be teaming up to create an opening for him to attack, not just yelling at him. Adding your +INT to their attack isn't exactly beans, either. Assuming that the fighter is up there tanking the creature, that means you probably have someone with a high STR hitting with a big weapon who can take the swing. So he makes a melee basic for 1[W] + His STR + Your INT. Adding two high stats to one attack is going to be a pretty hefty hit, even if is only a melee basic, and this is an at-will power. Even at low levels that is going to be a good +5 or +6.

Warlords can not lead from the rear.

And should not be in front.

W
T
F
?

I don't know, our Warlord does alright on the front lines. They come with chainmail proficiency, or if you spend a proficiency on scale armor or better and pick up a shield, your AC will be very decent. Plus, the tank (Fighter or Paladin) should be there helping keep stuff off you. Or you could use a reach weapon like a polearm and do all this stuff from one square behind the fighter. You couldn't flank then, but you'd be out of reach and you'd still be able to use your At-Wills.

You know that the power gives them a basic attack, right? Not a simple action?

Well yeah, but what difference does that make? So they can't use an At-Will, but they still get their +STR on a melee basic, and adding the extra damage from your +INT makes it more damaging than most At-Wills anyway; it just doesn't have any other special effects.

He was actually toning them up (in terms of numbers, not stats) because we were an 8 character party, not a 4 (recommended number).

Hmm, well, like I said, we don't play modules. I guess maybe they aren't very well designed.
But if you guys were needing 17's to hit, then something was clearly wrong in the level scaling.

[KCKitsune]

worry about the day when catalyst puts playable infected in the BBB (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

That is the day that we take up torches and pitchforks and storm the castle.

[AllTheNothing]

worry about the day when catalyst puts playable infected in the BBB (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

I've read the BBB, resulting in being infected by the Shadowrun strain of the RPGfun virus; should I worry?

[Dashifen]

The last two posts are back on SR, but keep in mind that we don't have an off-topic area around here so discussions of that other 4th edition are frowned upon.

[Speed Wraith]

My bad, didn't mean to set off a shit storm (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif) My point still remains, who will be stepping up to the challenge of creating some truly great character sheets for SR4? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

[Draco18s]

I apologize for deviating again, it is however brief and does not initiate more replies.

Hmm, well, like I said, we don't play modules. I guess maybe they aren't very well designed.
But if you guys were needing 17's to hit, then something was clearly wrong in the level scaling.

Our observation was that Shadowfell Keep was written by the awesome story department (with no communication from the rules balance department) and the sequel (Minotaur Labyrinth) was written by the rules balance department with no input from the story department: things were balanced right (no "roll a 17"s), but it was incredibly dry.

who will be stepping up to the challenge of creating some truly great character sheets for SR4? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif)

DamienKnight?

In any case I'll be slogging through ripping apart the graphical elements and building my own sheet from scratch for my character. Got too little space in the important stuff and too much space in things I don't have/need.

[Speed Wraith]

I love that app for character and Prime Runner generation, but I hadn't actually played with the sheet itself. Also, thanks for reminding me to get the latest version (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

[hobgoblin]

My bad, didn't mean to set off a shit storm (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif) My point still remains, who will be stepping up to the challenge of creating some truly great character sheets for SR4? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

there is the 20 page monstrosity known as a dossier floating around in the community projects section.
(err, make that 10 pages)

oh, and i just noticed that it was set to hide anything but the threads from the last 30 days, so if what one is looking for is "old" it may be worth altering that setting.

also, the image linked to in the original post (i wish that the forum could turn img links into url ones automatically, as people seems to assume they can just dump image links everywhere these days) reminds me of the mintcar sheet i have here...

[Wanderneko]

Resolution!

So we've had a scan of the sheet listed with the OP floating around for a little bit, and my rather artistically-inclined girlfriend took a whack at recreating a higher-resolution version using the original as a template!
So no more scan-of-a-printout-of-a-scan sheet~ Nice happy hi-res PDF, free for download!
The sheet is amazing for teaching new players, with the full skill list and page references, and I highly recommend it for your casual and newbie shadowrunners!
I have looked everywhere for the creator of this sheet. If you made the original, let me know! I want to credit you on this excellent sheet.

Custom Shadowrun 4th Edition Character Sheet:
http://www.mediafire.com/?x9in91tbcxtwn1l

[Method]

Thanks for sharing! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Neraph]

@ all the D&D 4th:

I'm quite familiar with 4e, and I completely agree with that assessment. 4e is a mediocre Superhero skirmish game system, thinly masked as a shitty fantasy roleplaying game.

@ the Character Sheet: I like it. I want to make my own, styled after this one.