http://gamingtrend.com
September 16, 2014, 07:43:35 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: [4th Edition D&D] H1 - Keep on the Shadowfell  (Read 36817 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
faide
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 445


View Profile
« Reply #160 on: June 11, 2008, 09:49:37 PM »

I would love to play as well if there is room in the group.  Although amazon isn't shipping my books until mid-july now  crybaby
Logged

Lockdown
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 5587


LD


View Profile
« Reply #161 on: June 11, 2008, 10:11:07 PM »

Quote from: Autistic Angel on June 11, 2008, 09:26:13 PM

Okay, that's three players so far, and I bet we can get Lockdown to join up if we ask.

Yep, I'd play.  A Halfling of course.  I love those little guys. 
Logged

LD

"Let your enemies fear, for a harlequin of the Laughing God dances at your side."
Destructor
Special Project Group
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Online Online

Posts: 15933


▲▲▼▼◄►◄►B A Start


View Profile WWW
« Reply #162 on: June 11, 2008, 10:13:35 PM »

Quote from: Autistic Angel on June 11, 2008, 09:26:13 PM

Okay, that's three players so far, and I bet we can get Lockdown to join up if we ask.  How many people are we supposed to have in a group?

4 is the standard. I'd like to say that most adventures can scale upwards to 6 or 7 people pretty easily, but I frankly don't know.

And out of the weekend, Saturday is my best day - I work Sundays.
Logged

"All opinions posted are my own, and not those of my employers, who are appalled."
IceBear
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 210


View Profile
« Reply #163 on: June 11, 2008, 10:59:27 PM »

Actually, with 4E 5 is the default party size, but it's REALLY easy to scale for more or less players now.
Logged
Doopri
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2853


View Profile
« Reply #164 on: June 12, 2008, 12:18:14 AM »

would it be impossible for me to play without a phb?  if i could manage without id love to get in! dibs on a warlock (though maybe i could be convinced to play a wizard / mage)

if theres room, keep me in mind!
Logged
Autistic Angel
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3619


View Profile
« Reply #165 on: June 12, 2008, 12:37:49 AM »

Quote from: Doopri
would it be impossible for me to play without a phb?

It would be tough to create a character from scratch without the PHB because, even with a race and class in mind, you'd still want to look through the available powers to choose.  However, if YellowKing or Icebear take us through the "Shadowfell" module, I think there are several different pre-made characters you can use that have all their powers explicitly laid out on their character sheets.

Quote from: Icebear
Actually, with 4E 5 is the default party size, but it's REALLY easy to scale for more or less players now.

So far we have seven people interested so far: me, Destructor, Arnir, faide, Lockdown, Doopri, and Rich.  Can the "Shadowfell" module scale up to that many people without too much trouble?

Also, what characters are you all planning to use?  I'm still interested in playing a cleric, but I really am willing to try anything. smile

-Autistic Angel
Logged
Arnir
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 973


View Profile
« Reply #166 on: June 12, 2008, 12:54:30 AM »

I'm pretty willing to try almost anything with the new 4E system.  Fighters seem to be, according to what I've read, a decent choice again.  I'll be getting a copy of the PHB tomorrow.
Logged

If the road home crosses any landscape features that include words like "forgotten," "void," "razorthorn," "shadowmist," or "doom," then I vote that we take a nap first.
Lockdown
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 5587


LD


View Profile
« Reply #167 on: June 12, 2008, 01:29:17 AM »

If you actually get someone to DM this thing, I'll play a Halfling Wizard or Ranger.  I really want to stand in the back and shout encouragement to the fighters while I peg the monsters with annoying little halfling missiles of some sort.


               ((We're under ur legz stabbing ur toes!))

Logged

LD

"Let your enemies fear, for a harlequin of the Laughing God dances at your side."
kadnod
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1258



View Profile
« Reply #168 on: June 12, 2008, 01:50:28 AM »

Some corrections to the core books can be found here:

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/updates
Logged

Can five murderous vagabonds heroes save their world from a roman empire knockoff the forces of evil?  Apparently so! Find out how they did it in the only best D&D game in General Analog Gaming!
Destructor
Special Project Group
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Online Online

Posts: 15933


▲▲▼▼◄►◄►B A Start


View Profile WWW
« Reply #169 on: June 12, 2008, 02:04:38 AM »

Quote from: IceBear on June 11, 2008, 10:59:27 PM

Actually, with 4E 5 is the default party size, but it's REALLY easy to scale for more or less players now.

5? What happened to the 4 standard? Weird.

And on that note - by scaling the encounter, you just change how much exp worth of mobs the encounter is built out of, right?

Quote from: Autistic Angel on June 12, 2008, 12:37:49 AM

Also, what characters are you all planning to use?  I'm still interested in playing a cleric, but I really am willing to try anything. smile

Well, since you asked, I'd like to try either a fighter or paladin. More than likely fighter. I'd love to see how the class has changed since the hack-and-slash fighter of 3.5.
« Last Edit: June 12, 2008, 02:06:17 AM by Destructor » Logged

"All opinions posted are my own, and not those of my employers, who are appalled."
Arnir
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 973


View Profile
« Reply #170 on: June 12, 2008, 02:08:19 AM »

I like Paladins and Rangers as well, but I'm more than happy to experiment for party balance.
Logged

If the road home crosses any landscape features that include words like "forgotten," "void," "razorthorn," "shadowmist," or "doom," then I vote that we take a nap first.
faide
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 445


View Profile
« Reply #171 on: June 12, 2008, 03:04:26 AM »

Don't mind playing whatever the party ends up needing.  I usually like a druid or monk. 
Logged

CrayolaSmoker
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3614

Sponge Bath Slut


View Profile WWW
« Reply #172 on: June 12, 2008, 04:04:36 AM »

Ack! Stupid working 12 hour days. I miss all the good conversation.  icon_wink

I'd be in for an adventure. I'll be taking the Player's Handbook with me on our "Anniversary Retreat" this weekend and perusing the classes carefully. From the brief descriptions I've read, I tend towards the "leader" type of character. Can do okay on his own, but does his best aiding others.

If nobody else'll volunteer, I'd possibly run a group through Shadowfell. Granted, I'd have to get a few more books for that, so it may take some time...
Logged

Wii: 1429 3414 0674 4114 | 360: CrayolaSmokerGT
smokingcrayolas.net | surrogacy blog
IceBear
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 210


View Profile
« Reply #173 on: June 12, 2008, 10:36:24 AM »

Quote from: Destructor on June 12, 2008, 02:04:38 AM

Quote from: IceBear on June 11, 2008, 10:59:27 PM

Actually, with 4E 5 is the default party size, but it's REALLY easy to scale for more or less players now.

5? What happened to the 4 standard? Weird.

And on that note - by scaling the encounter, you just change how much exp worth of mobs the encounter is built out of, right?

I'm not sure.  Apparently their research has lead to the belief that the average group consists of 5 players and 1 DM.  I know that's true in my case.  And yeah, all you have to do to scale is decrease or increase the XP of the encounter.  A standard encounter for a 1st level party is worth 500XP, so that would be 400XP for a group of 4.  Since first level monsters are 100XP each, that just means all you have to do is remove the 5th monster.
Logged
IceBear
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 210


View Profile
« Reply #174 on: June 12, 2008, 10:37:39 AM »

Quote from: faide on June 12, 2008, 03:04:26 AM

Don't mind playing whatever the party ends up needing.  I usually like a druid or monk. 

Unfortunately you picked the two classes that aren't in PHB1.  I'm pretty sure the druid is slated for PHB2 but not sure about the monk.
Logged
IceBear
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 210


View Profile
« Reply #175 on: June 12, 2008, 10:42:27 AM »

Quote from: kadnod on June 12, 2008, 01:50:28 AM

Some corrections to the core books can be found here:

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/updates

Cool, and the latest Dragon article is up too - The Ashen Covenant (Orcus' cult).

http://www.wizards.com/dnd/files/364_AshenCovenant.pdf

Oh, and in case anyone was looking for character sheets, the official one (there are others made by other people that might be better) is here:
http://www.wizards.com/dnd/files/DnD_4Echaractersheet.zip
Logged
YellowKing
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3098



View Profile
« Reply #176 on: June 12, 2008, 12:02:57 PM »

Just a heads up, if you guys decide to do Shadowfell - it's a big adventure. We've put about 15 hours into it and are less than halfway to the end. That's not to discourage anyone, as it's really fun - just an FYI that it probably won't be something you run through in a couple of weeks.
Logged
hentzau
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 404


View Profile
« Reply #177 on: June 12, 2008, 02:51:11 PM »

For those of us screwed over by Amazon...

Logged
Destructor
Special Project Group
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Online Online

Posts: 15933


▲▲▼▼◄►◄►B A Start


View Profile WWW
« Reply #178 on: June 12, 2008, 03:29:22 PM »

Quote from: IceBear on June 12, 2008, 10:42:27 AM

Oh, and in case anyone was looking for character sheets, the official one (there are others made by other people that might be better) is here:
http://www.wizards.com/dnd/files/DnD_4Echaractersheet.zip

Nice sheet. Too bad it's not PDF editable. Maybe I'll just go write one up in Excel, like I did with one I modified from somebody else's for use in 3.5.

Here's another question - I was digging through the MM, and I didn't see any way to increase a single mob's level. Like a template that'll turn it into an Elite, or just raise its level to a higher one (thus adjusting its experience numbers). Was I just missing it?
Logged

"All opinions posted are my own, and not those of my employers, who are appalled."
Autistic Angel
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3619


View Profile
« Reply #179 on: June 12, 2008, 03:53:28 PM »

Quote from: IceBear on June 12, 2008, 10:37:39 AM

Quote from: faide on June 12, 2008, 03:04:26 AM

Don't mind playing whatever the party ends up needing.  I usually like a druid or monk. 

Unfortunately you picked the two classes that aren't in PHB1.  I'm pretty sure the druid is slated for PHB2 but not sure about the monk.

How would you feel about being a ranger, faide?  They aren't quite druids or monks, but thematically, they're probably the closest of the available classes.

Then, if Destructor took his second choice of paladin, the group would look like this:

Lockdown - Wizard / Rogue
Destructor - Paladin
Arnir - Fighter
Me - Cleric
Doopri - Warlock
faide - Ranger(?)
Rich - ??

If Rich chooses either a Warlord or whichever class Lockdown doesn't take, we'll practically have one of everything.  That seems like a pretty balanced group so far!

The only person I didn't list yet was CrayolaSmoker -- unless either Icebear or YellowKing volunteer to run our group, he's the only other person who's mentioned being our DM smile

What do you guys want to do for ability scores?  Should we just the the "standard array" listed in the PHB: 16, 14, 13, 12, 11, and 10 assigned however we like?

-Autistic Angel
Logged
YellowKing
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3098



View Profile
« Reply #180 on: June 12, 2008, 04:04:30 PM »

Quote
Like a template that'll turn it into an Elite, or just raise its level to a higher one (thus adjusting its experience numbers). Was I just missing it?

It's in the Dungeon Master's Guide, page. 185.

As far as DMing goes, I'll have to sadly decline. Not that I wouldn't love to, but between Age of Conan and running my local group, I don't think I'd have the time.
Logged
IceBear
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 210


View Profile
« Reply #181 on: June 12, 2008, 04:34:02 PM »

Quote from: Destructor on June 12, 2008, 03:29:22 PM

Quote from: IceBear on June 12, 2008, 10:42:27 AM

Oh, and in case anyone was looking for character sheets, the official one (there are others made by other people that might be better) is here:
http://www.wizards.com/dnd/files/DnD_4Echaractersheet.zip

Nice sheet. Too bad it's not PDF editable. Maybe I'll just go write one up in Excel, like I did with one I modified from somebody else's for use in 3.5.

Here's another question - I was digging through the MM, and I didn't see any way to increase a single mob's level. Like a template that'll turn it into an Elite, or just raise its level to a higher one (thus adjusting its experience numbers). Was I just missing it?

Someone has made a PDF editable one - just don't have the link here with me.  I know Necros and Mad Irishman has made their own sheets, not sure if they are PDF editable or not.

Information on modifying monsters (except minions, that was left out for some reason) is in the DM Toolbox section of the DMG

As for DMing, I'm not sure if I'll be able to do so at this point in time.  My divorce is kind of sucky right now so I'm not actually home much.

Edit: Mad Irishman's sheet http://www.mad-irishman.net/pubs/MI_DnD4eCharSheet10b2.pdf (unfortunately, not editable)
« Last Edit: June 12, 2008, 04:38:27 PM by IceBear » Logged
Lockdown
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 5587


LD


View Profile
« Reply #182 on: June 12, 2008, 04:46:13 PM »

I like that character sheet he made.  Pretty cool.

(and I'll make my Halfling a Wizard.  I want to see what all the controversy is about]
Logged

LD

"Let your enemies fear, for a harlequin of the Laughing God dances at your side."
IceBear
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 210


View Profile
« Reply #183 on: June 12, 2008, 05:08:03 PM »

Quote from: Lockdown on June 12, 2008, 04:46:13 PM

I like that character sheet he made.  Pretty cool.

(and I'll make my Halfling a Wizard.  I want to see what all the controversy is about]

I must have missed that controversy.  I know that Wizards aren't as good at dealing damage as they were in prior editions, but I'm ok with that
Logged
Destructor
Special Project Group
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Online Online

Posts: 15933


▲▲▼▼◄►◄►B A Start


View Profile WWW
« Reply #184 on: June 12, 2008, 05:47:18 PM »

Quote from: Autistic Angel on June 12, 2008, 03:53:28 PM

What do you guys want to do for ability scores?  Should we just the the "standard array" listed in the PHB: 16, 14, 13, 12, 11, and 10 assigned however we like?

I was always a fan of the point-buy method, mainly because odd stat scores were worthless in 3.5. Yeah, you still had to have one somewhere in the end, but it's better than two.

Quote from: YellowKing on June 12, 2008, 04:04:30 PM

Quote
Like a template that'll turn it into an Elite, or just raise its level to a higher one (thus adjusting its experience numbers). Was I just missing it?
It's in the Dungeon Master's Guide, page. 185.

So I did miss it then. Thanks!
Logged

"All opinions posted are my own, and not those of my employers, who are appalled."
Lockdown
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 5587


LD


View Profile
« Reply #185 on: June 12, 2008, 06:16:16 PM »

Quote from: IceBear on June 12, 2008, 05:08:03 PM

I must have missed that controversy.  I know that Wizards aren't as good at dealing damage as they were in prior editions, but I'm ok with that

So am I.  I kind of like the idea of them being "controllers" and having Warlocks being the damage dealers.  I think it'll be fun to see how it plays out.
Logged

LD

"Let your enemies fear, for a harlequin of the Laughing God dances at your side."
ScubaV
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 941



View Profile
« Reply #186 on: June 13, 2008, 02:25:52 AM »

I don't have the 4e books, but I plan to get them eventually.  Unfortunately, I don't know anyone around here to play with.  It sounds like the combat is much more exciting than 3e, but character creation is much more restricted.  I enjoy a little powergaming from time to time (I probably learned that out of necessity from a DM in college who liked to powergame his monsters/encounters), but even putting that aside it appears that there's really a finite number of options for a class.  Much like how in WoW there's only 3-5 talent setups that 95% of the population uses for a given class.  Half the fun of D&D for me was dreaming up different character builds; with 4e it seems like all you get to do is choose a class and then pick from x number of pre-assigned abilities every level.  That's lame.
Logged

I have absolute faith in the power of people to be stupid.

My vision is augmented.
YellowKing
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3098



View Profile
« Reply #187 on: June 13, 2008, 12:12:19 PM »

Well, they're abilities above and beyond what you got in 3e, so in the end you're actually getting *more* choice and more "stuff" than you did in 3e. However, I agree it's still a bit of a tradeoff. You're sacrificing a little flexibility for more powers.

I think as the game matures, there's going to be a lot of rules variances out there to loosen things up a bit. You can tell the core books are providing a very basic foundation that is just ripe to be built upon. This is less an evolution of 3.5, and more a complete reboot of the game system. So in many areas they're starting from scratch. A lot of people are seeing that as a step backwards, rather than as a new foundation for which to build a really good system.
Logged
DArtagnan
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 251


View Profile
« Reply #188 on: June 13, 2008, 12:51:36 PM »

Quote from: YellowKing on June 13, 2008, 12:12:19 PM

Well, they're abilities above and beyond what you got in 3e, so in the end you're actually getting *more* choice and more "stuff" than you did in 3e. However, I agree it's still a bit of a tradeoff. You're sacrificing a little flexibility for more powers.

I think as the game matures, there's going to be a lot of rules variances out there to loosen things up a bit. You can tell the core books are providing a very basic foundation that is just ripe to be built upon. This is less an evolution of 3.5, and more a complete reboot of the game system. So in many areas they're starting from scratch. A lot of people are seeing that as a step backwards, rather than as a new foundation for which to build a really good system.

I'm not sure how I can see a complete and published pen and paper system as anything but a completed system, instead of a foundation. Then again, I've never been one of those players who enjoyed customizing the rules others have made, or one who likes to wait for the "upgraded and revised" version. It's not like in the gaming industry where they can just release a shell and patch it as they go along - AoC style.

No, I think what we see in those books is pretty much what we'll be playing if we choose to use them. Naturally, there will be revisions and the inevitable 4.5 - but I can't see it as something to build from as if it was a ground lot.

Also, I think it's pretty obvious that this role-assignment is a foundation of the entire system, and not likely to be changed significantly - as it would do away with the basic premise of having those roles in the first place.

As such, I think it's pretty much a case of either liking or disliking the idea of assigning roles to classes.

I dislike the idea of class roles, as much as I dislike the idea of classes.

If you don't mind the idea, cool, but let's not pretend it's not an integral part of the design.
Logged
YellowKing
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3098



View Profile
« Reply #189 on: June 13, 2008, 01:11:41 PM »

I'm not saying they're going to do away with class roles, just that we will likely see greater variety as time goes on, and more ways to personalize characters. It is a complete system as it stands, but it's a very basic core system. The developers have already announced several new classes which are in the works, and they've already released a new race on the Wizards site. Just as 3e had tons of class variances, new feats, new spells, etc. issued after release, I don't see why 4e won't have the same content trickling out over time.

People are acting like these core books are all that's it for 4e, take it or leave it. They seem to forget that 3e has had 10 years to mature.
Logged
DArtagnan
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 251


View Profile
« Reply #190 on: June 13, 2008, 01:50:46 PM »

Hmm, I'm not sure what I have to say to make you see that it's not a case of missing content that I have a problem with.

It's the core design I have a problem with - and a hundred more books with feats and classes can't really change that they've decided to assign roles to classes - in effect restricting you by design.

It's not a complaint, really, it's just an opinion and a reason I don't really like it. No one is forcing me to play, afterall.

I'm not sure why I have to be forgetting something or that I'm not realising something - maybe I'm able to see things and make a decision that I don't like them? slywink

Should be doable - i'd say smile
Logged
IceBear
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 210


View Profile
« Reply #191 on: June 13, 2008, 02:38:10 PM »

I agree with DArtagnan ( eek ) in that I don't think 4E is going to get rid of the roles because it is used for game balance.  That said, I heard a podcast with some of the designers and they felt that a party could function without some of the roles being in the party.  No leader (cleric warlord) would be harder, but they felt it was still doable as long as the DM realized that.  The whole reason 3E was as free with the multiclassing and character building as it was, was because just before 3E came out the movement in the RPG industry was one away from classes.  People disliked being pigeonholed by what they could do by picking a class.  WotC tried to address that with 3E and I feel that they succeeded (to a degree, it still had classes afterall).  However, it caused all sorts of balancing issues which could lead to game breakdown.

I also agree with YK, that there will be more customization of classes as more powers come out.  One of the first sourcebooks being released is the Martial one so I'm sure we'll see a lot more fighter customization in that book, but I don't think it'll ever move the fighter out of the defender role to the striker role, for example, but it might allow someone to build a fighter character more in line with a character concept they might have now that they can't make with the core books.  That will help with the problem right now of the fighter builds being similar to each other that everyone is complaining about.  I still think that's a little untrue as people are just looking at the two suggested builds and thinking that's it, two kinds of fighters.  Choosing different powers and feats will help make them different.

But, many people don't like class systems and 4E is moving D&D more back to that type of system which will turn off people that came back to D&D in 3E because it was sort of moving away from classes.  Hopefully, if they put out a lot of classes (which it looks like they will be with Dragon magazine - Artifacter next month) everyone will be able to find a class that fits their concept.
Logged
YellowKing
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3098



View Profile
« Reply #192 on: June 13, 2008, 02:47:52 PM »

Nah, I'm not picking on you in particular D'Art, just from what I've read on the forums a lot of people have this misconception that whatever is in the rulebooks now is all they're ever going to get.

If you don't like class roles, that's fine. Personally, I've never been a part of any D&D game where people didn't take on class roles naturally. D&D practically invented the concept of a class-based party of tank/mage/healer/rogue, so to me this is more about getting back to basics. I didn't particularly like the more "open" concept of 3e, because as IceBear said it led to all kinds of balance issues. If anything, I think 4e is closer to true old-school D&D than 3e ever was.

Logged
IceBear
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 210


View Profile
« Reply #193 on: June 13, 2008, 04:53:13 PM »

Quote from: YellowKing on June 13, 2008, 02:47:52 PM

If anything, I think 4e is closer to true old-school D&D than 3e ever was.

This is true, but keep in mind, prior to 3E coming out TRS went bankrupt because D&D wasn't selling as well anymore (well, that's simplistic - how they were running the business had a lot to do with that) and people wanted to move away from classes.  While I (especially as a DM - I bet if they did a poll of DMs if they prefer 4E to 3E the numbers would be a lot more skewed to 4E) appreciate the simplicity of 4E so we can focus on the roleplay aspect, it's not going to be for the more sophisticated people
Logged
DArtagnan
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 251


View Profile
« Reply #194 on: June 13, 2008, 05:13:42 PM »

Quote from: YellowKing on June 13, 2008, 02:47:52 PM

Nah, I'm not picking on you in particular D'Art, just from what I've read on the forums a lot of people have this misconception that whatever is in the rulebooks now is all they're ever going to get.

If you don't like class roles, that's fine. Personally, I've never been a part of any D&D game where people didn't take on class roles naturally. D&D practically invented the concept of a class-based party of tank/mage/healer/rogue, so to me this is more about getting back to basics. I didn't particularly like the more "open" concept of 3e, because as IceBear said it led to all kinds of balance issues. If anything, I think 4e is closer to true old-school D&D than 3e ever was.



At the top level - I simply don't like what I consider unnecessary restrictions of any kind - but I DO like game balance. Sounds odd, but there it is.

I've gotten used to classes - not because I like them - but because that was always how it was and everyone played D&D so...

The thing is I don't recall the original classes ever had "roles" as such. I certainly don't remember playing a fighter as a tank, or a rogue as a "striker". Those concepts originate from somewhere else - and I first encountered them in MMOs.

Sure, they had elements of that and were most definitely playable as such - but with 3E they opened it all op a lot more and allowed so much freedom with the multiclassing that classes were almost entirely irrelevant except for a little starting platform. That was why I loved 3E from the very beginning, and no amount of upgrades, books, or revisions changed it at the core.

In any case, tastes differ and this is but one more such case smile
Logged
DArtagnan
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 251


View Profile
« Reply #195 on: June 13, 2008, 05:16:32 PM »

Quote from: IceBear on June 13, 2008, 04:53:13 PM

Quote from: YellowKing on June 13, 2008, 02:47:52 PM

If anything, I think 4e is closer to true old-school D&D than 3e ever was.

This is true, but keep in mind, prior to 3E coming out TRS went bankrupt because D&D wasn't selling as well anymore (well, that's simplistic - how they were running the business had a lot to do with that) and people wanted to move away from classes.  While I (especially as a DM - I bet if they did a poll of DMs if they prefer 4E to 3E the numbers would be a lot more skewed to 4E) appreciate the simplicity of 4E so we can focus on the roleplay aspect, it's not going to be for the more sophisticated people

I agree with most of what you said, but I would also add that while you're less bogged down in complex rules - you're also somewhat less free in terms of character development which in many cases WILL restrict how you think of your role and, in effect you'll be seeing people who take their class role into their character personality, which is another aspect of the whole thing I don't appreciate.

I'm not saying everyone will do that - but I can pretty much guarentee it will be the case for a few of our players.
Logged
IceBear
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 210


View Profile
« Reply #196 on: June 13, 2008, 05:32:49 PM »

I agree this could be true - my comments about leaving things open to roleplaying had a personal slant on it as I was thinking about my group which is filled with players how have been playing for over 20 years each.  I don't expect that the limit on "crunchy" character options will impact my players much, but you're right it could prevent newer players from making the character fit their concept and rather let the character become their concept.
Logged
YellowKing
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3098



View Profile
« Reply #197 on: June 13, 2008, 06:03:29 PM »

Yeah, I tried to head this off at the pass with my group by asking all of them to develop a brief synopsis of their character's history, personality quirks, how they met each other, etc. I was pretty much met with blank stares and subsequently ignored.

I'll definitely have to work on getting them to start defining their characters more by their "character" rather than the list of powers they have. I've sort of let it slide up until now because we were all just trying to settle in and learn the rules. But now that we've got a pretty good grasp on it, I think it's time to shift further into the roleplaying side.

My next session with KotS pretty much leads directly into another combat encounter, but I decided to throw in a totally non-combat session to shake them up a bit and refocus them on story. I basically killed off one of the major NPCs they've been interacting with, and plan to run a session (hopefully with some skill challenges thrown in) where they have to find out who killed their friend and why. Hopefully by the end of it I'll have accomplished two things: 1) helped them establish their identities as characters through their social interactions, and 2) got them more motivated about the rest of the adventure. Up until now they've had a great time, but it's been one encounter after another and they've grown a little complacent about winning. Killing off a friend and sort of hammering home the seriousness of the situation they're in might light a fire under their butts and make them realize this isn't "ha ha evil" but "we might very well die evil."  icon_twisted

Logged
IceBear
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 210


View Profile
« Reply #198 on: June 13, 2008, 06:23:22 PM »

That's cool.  Let us know how it goes, especially the skill challenge
Logged
ScubaV
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 941



View Profile
« Reply #199 on: June 13, 2008, 10:57:34 PM »

It will be interesting to see if in the future they add supplemental rules that loosen up the class roles.  I'm thinking of WoW here.  In vanilla WoW, warriors only tanked, priests and druids only healed, etc.  In BC, with the talent and skill revamps, warriors can tank or dps, priests can heal or dps, druids can do all 3, and they can all be effective in their chosen roles.  If 4e is going to emulate MMO's, hopefully they can follow this idea as well.  Have the suggested class roles in place to help newbies, but also allow experienced players to specialize and mold their classes into whatever niche they want.
Logged

I have absolute faith in the power of people to be stupid.

My vision is augmented.
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.163 seconds with 103 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0.063s, 2q)