You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
 
December 11, 2016, 06:08:43 AM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Click here if you are having problems.
Default Wide Screen Beige Lilac Rainbow Black & Blue October Send us your theme!

Hark!  The Herald!
Holiday Issue 2016

Wiki Blogs Dicebot

Author Topic: D&D 4th ed  (Read 7264 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline kongming

Re: D&D 4th ed
« Reply #25 on: May 28, 2008, 08:43:51 AM »
True.  But some creatures have a cunning or instinct that makes up for low intelligence.  Consider ants. 

The tactic ants use is "swarm them in a huge mass and try to beat them with numbers." They still don't make use of choke points, carrying stuff to use as shields to form shield walls, cutting foes off from each other so as to surround them better or anything. So yes, some animals may use tactics along the lines of "hide, leap out and try to hamstring them. Then either flee or go for the throat, based on the outcome." But I have yet to see anything that great.

Whereas too often I see GMs treating every foe like a master tactician.

Offline RubySlippers

Re: D&D 4th ed
« Reply #26 on: May 28, 2008, 11:45:25 AM »
True.  But some creatures have a cunning or instinct that makes up for low intelligence.  Consider ants. 

And goblins as an example are likely the weakest of the humanoid creatures but they survive so likely use cunning and their advantages. Plus its not rocket science to send enough goblins in to test the enemy, the guy in robes gestures and fries a group to figure out that is a dangerous enemy. Once they figure that out I would have the goblins use arrows and traps to full effect, a fighters zone of threat effect will be of little use if they pull out a support and collapse the ground under him so he is 3/4 in the ground and they stab away with daggers as he struggles out. For them I tend to think outside the box. And even a mages Protection from Missles sorts of magic can't stop a burning shower of tar. In other words be crude but creative using tactics the enemy might have developed over many years of trial and error passed down to the youngsters. And wouldn't they have veteran fighters and leaders who are above average, I would think a 20 year old Goblin would be a savy bastard leading the others.

It seems to me every tactic they created and added screams a way for goblins or orcs or kobolds to get around the problem. If fighters stands and deliver then they just don't play that game if they can find another option. Like a fighter with a sword is also not moving around so ranged attacks might be a good option if they are using archery as a specialty then charging them in a group might be best. GM's just have to be practical and run them right and the goblin could take down a party of even higher level characters.

Offline Zakharra

Re: D&D 4th ed
« Reply #27 on: May 29, 2008, 12:05:39 AM »
 Goblins and orcs live in caves.. Collapsing tunnels anyone? Or a purposefully caused flood?  Or an avalanch...
 <_<     

 >_>

 Kind of hard to fight when you are buried under several tons of loose rock.

 [Edited for spelling error]

Offline Zakharra

Re: D&D 4th ed
« Reply #28 on: May 29, 2008, 12:07:59 AM »
 Back on topic. The people I've heard talking about it, say it blows chunks. I haven't paid much attention to it myself, since I can't under stand 3E myself. I'm a 2ed girl through and through for PnP.

Offline Far eyes

Re: D&D 4th ed
« Reply #29 on: May 29, 2008, 12:13:49 AM »
I have seen the 4e phb

I have to say its better then I expected. The feel is a lot nicer then what 3e was. Its more stream lined and I feel good improvements have bin made.

Rituals are awesome and it really dos look like magic items have less of an impact. There are no more crap Weapons or Armor. Everything is usable and theasable

Offline RubySlippers

Re: D&D 4th ed
« Reply #30 on: May 29, 2008, 01:29:09 PM »
Well I reserve my comments to say I have played it and its not my cup of tea, but for the core rules set being only around $60 you can do far worst for the game to get it if you do like the system.

Online HairyHereticTopic starter

  • Lei varai barbu - The true bearded one
  • Knight
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Dec 2006
  • Location: Ireland
  • Gender: Male
  • And the Scorpion said "Little frog .. I can swim."
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 1
Re: D&D 4th ed
« Reply #31 on: May 29, 2008, 01:31:32 PM »
I haven't given it a try, and have heard mixed reviews. Given my group already has several ongoing games, and more backlogged we'd like to play, I can't see us trying this any time soon.

Offline kongming

Re: D&D 4th ed
« Reply #32 on: May 29, 2008, 11:43:50 PM »
http://tgdmb.com/viewtopic.php?t=48645&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

Detailed information provided. A few notes:

Traps are more interesting. Now you actually interact with them a bit, rather than a single "it gets you" or "it doesn't". That is good.

The combat is more balanced, by dint of everyone being utterly shit. Remember fighters in mid-high level D&D, and how they can't do anything useful without DM fiat? Yeah, now everyone is playing that game. All abilities are essentially "You deal a little damage and maybe cause a cute effect."

Indeed, the things players can do is sort of limited to levels 1-10 of 3E. Note that 11+ is my favourite region. So if someone really wants me in their 4E game, they're basically going to have to houserule the power and cool stuff back into it, or start it at level 20+. And trust me, everyone wants me in their game :D

Oh, and the rules don't cover/encourage things that aren't related to stabbing people in the face, but let's be honest: neither did any of the previous ones. That stuff is handled by roleplaying without the rules, and everyone is happy about it. But this one doesn't even do much in the way of "spells that aren't used to kill people".

Sounds like it's good for a con game, or some other "We'll play it for a session and not make a campaign out of it."

Offline Jefepato

Re: D&D 4th ed
« Reply #33 on: May 29, 2008, 11:50:49 PM »
But this one doesn't even do much in the way of "spells that aren't used to kill people".

As I understand it, spells that aren't used to kill people are mostly categorized as "rituals" now.  I'm uncertain how well it works in practice, but I like not having to choose between magic missile and comprehend languages in the morning.

Although I agree that the classes look rather bland now, I'd prefer to give it at least a little playtesting before presuming suckage.

Also, fun info: the 4e tarrasque has an aura that drags flying creatures down (finally they learn!), and the core MM has stats for friggin' Orcus.

Offline Vekseid

Re: D&D 4th ed
« Reply #34 on: May 30, 2008, 12:21:03 AM »
My impression: This could have been incredibly awesome. There are a lot of good ideas in 4e.

It's pretty obvious that what they wanted was something that they could very easily translate into a computer game on a level similar to that of World of Warcraft. You have two (three if human) at will attack powers, a few encounter attack powers, a few daily attack powers, and a few 'utility' powers (usually daily or encounter). Less than twenty total at 30th level.

To me, that's a bit on the wtf side. They tried very hard to balance things and it feels like everyone suffers from it.

A lot of the spells got moved into rituals, and wizards have an easier time swapping their utility and daily powers around, of course. But even a 30th level wizard can only know a dozen daily attack spells (with a given feat) of which he has to choose four for a day.

There's no sultans of smack here. Meteor Swarm will do, on average, about 40 damage for a reasonably well-kitted wizard. A typical 3rd level orc will survive that.

Minions having 1 hp is a bit odd. It somewhat reduces the impact of uber area effect spells like that.



It would be a fun exercise to get a small group together and start merging the good ideas in here with the SRD and call it our own.

Offline Jeramiahh

Re: D&D 4th ed
« Reply #35 on: May 30, 2008, 12:44:56 AM »
Quote
Meteor Swarm will do, on average, about 40 damage for a reasonably well-kitted wizard. A typical 3rd level orc will survive that.

Yes, but, at the point you have meteor swarm, if a '3rd level orc' is on the field, he should be a minion. That's the idea behind minions; you throw them at the players at the appropriate levels, and they represent a monster that was powerful when they were weaker, and are now still potentially threatening and damaging, but easily disposed of. It allows for lower level monsters to have a lot of HP, but, when they reappear, their HP is so low, it's not even kept track of, because of the power difference.

4e's really emphasizing the concept of "HP is not wounds, it's ability to fight." They even imply it directly in the stats; you aren't even actually wounded in any way until you reach half HP, and the enemy's drawn first blood, or at least, that's how I interpret bloodied, and how I'll be describing it. That actually makes a duel between equally skilled swordsman a possibility; they're not actually *hurting* each other, every swing that 'hits', they're maybe jarring their opponents sword into their arm, making their arm numb, or forcing them to dodge and land funny, or take a roll and get a minor bruise as they roll over something. Look at the Pirates of the Caribbean movies; you have swordfights that go on for ten minutes or longer; literally over a hundred rounds of D&D combat... yet very little blood is drawn. Why? HP are an abstraction.

And that post was not meant, originally, to be nearly that long.

Offline Vekseid

Re: D&D 4th ed
« Reply #36 on: May 30, 2008, 12:51:22 AM »
That really wasn't the point... That's not even 5% of a 29th level creature's hit points. You're doing 20 damage with magic missile and 40 with meteor swarm...

Offline OldSchoolGamer

Re: D&D 4th ed
« Reply #37 on: May 30, 2008, 01:03:41 AM »
For me, the newer systems of D&D just don't have the appeal the original does.  The game has moved away from the concept of greenhorn, first-level adventurers with few powers testing their wits and steel and beginner's magic against a hostile world, and toward power-gaming, bonus-stacking, and abundant magic on every street corner.

Maybe I'm just waxing nostalgic for those first D&D games I played a quarter of a century ago...

Offline Starr69

Re: D&D 4th ed
« Reply #38 on: May 30, 2008, 01:11:21 AM »
For me, the newer systems of D&D just don't have the appeal the original does.  The game has moved away from the concept of greenhorn, first-level adventurers with few powers testing their wits and steel and beginner's magic against a hostile world, and toward power-gaming, bonus-stacking, and abundant magic on every street corner.

Maybe I'm just waxing nostalgic for those first D&D games I played a quarter of a century ago...

First of all, let me say I agree with you - though I still have the urge to play 4E - simply because I think it will invigorate my players into wanting to play again.

Now that I'm not totally derailing - does your avatar mean you're here on earth to steal our water supply? :)

Offline OldSchoolGamer

Re: D&D 4th ed
« Reply #39 on: May 30, 2008, 01:15:38 AM »
Now that I'm not totally derailing - does your avatar mean you're here on earth to steal our water supply? :)

And your women, yes.   ;)

Actually, I'm going to be starting a V-based game here sometime in the next couple weeks.

Offline kongming

Re: D&D 4th ed
« Reply #40 on: May 30, 2008, 01:49:28 AM »
For me, the newer systems of D&D just don't have the appeal the original does.  The game has moved away from the concept of greenhorn, first-level adventurers with few powers testing their wits and steel and beginner's magic against a hostile world, and toward power-gaming, bonus-stacking, and abundant magic on every street corner.

Maybe I'm just waxing nostalgic for those first D&D games I played a quarter of a century ago...

Yeah, my guess is that you had great games with the older editions, and either Nostalgia-block or outright bad experiences with 3E. I never played a 2E game I liked, and people had to drag me into a 3E game, and I eventually found that I liked it, at certain levels and with certain DMs. Presumably 2E could be fun for me, but I've yet to see it happen, and I'm not going to bother learning the rules for it just so someone can try to awaken the magic of it.

And 4E... well, I just don't know. On the plus side, a glimpse through the PHB seriously taught me how to play the game. It's good when the rules are simple, although from the sound of it, every single monster, ability or "other thing" will have an exception to those rules, and these exceptions won't be standard "It has the Banana quality" (allowing you to read up the Banana quality and understand what that does with everything possessing the Banana quality). But it looks simple.

And it seems the best way to make friends is to clobber people down to "bloodied", then Intimidate them (+15 at first level is the best I managed, with a quick look). They then surrender, so you can take the time to make them into a willing servant and send them off to sacrifice their lives for the greater good. At least the DM doesn't have to say "No, fuck off, you're not talking your way out of everything" - there gets to be half a fight each time.

But a lot of it just seems to be complete balls. Maybe what it really needs is for the cool stuff to be injected back in (or dragged back to proper levels). I mean, regular punks belong at level 1 or less, LotR at level 5, maximum. From there, it's "Romance of the Three Kingdoms" up until 10th, and after that you pick up "Homer" and "The Iliad". THIS IS SPARTAAAAAAAAA!

With the highest levels being Makai Kingdom.

"I couldn't see where I was going, so I accidentally collided with a few planets on my way here. I assume they're destroyed. I do apologise."

Interesting Note: The Gaming Den predicted it would be bad, so we did sort of have low expectations which made us *look* for problems. But there are genuine issues. And really, it was made by Mike Mearls, who hasn't an actual success to his name and who, when having a certain task, decides that's too hard and therefore mustn't be that important.

Offline Starr69

Re: D&D 4th ed
« Reply #41 on: May 30, 2008, 10:36:01 AM »
And your women, yes.   ;)

Actually, I'm going to be starting a V-based game here sometime in the next couple weeks.

Ooh. I'll keep my eyes open. :) I remember when that and the Final Battle first aired. I used to always make my brother laugh because I could imitate the vibratey-speech-patterns of the visitors. :)

As for 4E, I did some more reading last night... the game seems to lend itself towards big, showy "I am so very cool!" maneuvers, but light on anything that promotes RP.

Still - can't wait til my books get here next month.

Offline RubySlippers

Re: D&D 4th ed
« Reply #42 on: May 30, 2008, 11:05:12 AM »
Well I played this again, and I will say this on my end. Its not a very good role-playing system but a great war game. Its all rules I just don't get it everything seems to have a rule and the monsters are well, all monsters. None are really worth talking to and dealing with its bust open door, kill monsters, take treasure then repeat as far as I can tell.

Well there are enough other options out there thankfully such as the Basic Fantasy RPG, Zephr and others and many free to get rules even DND 3.5 and these three are all free online.

I'm cheap.  ;D


Offline gideonblake

Re: D&D 4th ed
« Reply #43 on: May 30, 2008, 11:49:53 AM »
With the highest levels being Makai Kingdom.

"I couldn't see where I was going, so I accidentally collided with a few planets on my way here. I assume they're destroyed. I do apologise."

What is Makai kingdom? Cause I wanna do that :P

Offline Vekseid

Re: D&D 4th ed
« Reply #44 on: May 30, 2008, 12:31:31 PM »
What is Makai kingdom? Cause I wanna do that :P

It's a predecessor to Disgaea, which is made of concentrated win and awesome, and where you can do damage in the millions.

Offline kongming

Re: D&D 4th ed
« Reply #45 on: May 30, 2008, 11:51:53 PM »
Actually, Makai Kingdom was made and released after Disgaea, but before Disgaea 2 and, while set in the same setting, isn't really linked to it.

It's a turn-based tactical game, where stats can get obscenely high, and the story scenes are outright hilarious. Also, weapons range from the katana to the flamethrower to the "UFO-yoink!" to the fishing rod (you can whirl the target around the entire planet with it).

Offline Vekseid

Re: D&D 4th ed
« Reply #46 on: May 31, 2008, 01:16:44 AM »
I stands corrected :x

Still, seems like the same league... Makai and Disgaea, I mean. High level 4th edition D&D has nothing on them >_>

Still want to get a team together and make an erotic SRD <_<

Offline OldSchoolGamer

Re: D&D 4th ed
« Reply #47 on: May 31, 2008, 01:35:39 AM »
That pretty much confirms my suspicions.  3.5 and 4 are tactical games, meant to be played with lead figures, simulating battles.

Nothing wrong with that.  But it's less of a role-playing game than 1 and 2.

I think the 4th Ed. rollout may lead to a revival of Second Edition amongst traditional role-players, which would be good.

Offline kongming

Re: D&D 4th ed
« Reply #48 on: May 31, 2008, 03:51:00 AM »
Mostly it's made everyone create their own version. Seriously, if people didn't like 1 & 2 E before, they won't suddenly like it now just because 4E sucks. They'll either stick to 3.5 or make their own.

It looks like 4E would make a good tactical wargame (except for the bit where a simple 4 players against 1 enemy can last for hours as they slowly chip away at its HP in a big game of padded sumo). 3E, not so much. Yes, most things are based on combat, but it provides the options to not do that, and characters/abilities seem to be a bit more complex and in-depth than a wargame can properly utilise. Aside from the time needed for character creation.

Incidentally, remember this: D&D 1E was born out of a tabletop wargame called chainmail. The idea was to take those wars and turn them into a series of skirmishes in dungeons. That was it, just 100% dungeoncrawl. 2E was seriously designed to continue doing that. They didn't have additional roleplaying options, and the only way they were less suited for wargaming was the fact that (at least in 2E) movement and ranges were very fuzzy - half the things didn't even have those.

Offline kongming

Re: D&D 4th ed
« Reply #49 on: May 31, 2008, 04:07:32 AM »
Oh, and Vek: for which edition?

I mean, 3.X has the Book of Erotic Fantasy (published, makes "having sex" a skill, adds a new stat, makes Charisma even less useful than before - seriously, if they need to have a stat for "I'm pretty", then they can either fold it into Charisma or make it a feat (such a feat already exists), and doesn't touch non-con with a ten foot pole.) and the Guide to Unlawful Carnal Knowledge (free Internet stuff, makes "having sex" a skill but is marginally better in the approach than the BoEF, a bit too complicated when all you want to do is have sex, a lot of the options will never be taken by people who want to have effective characters (when the game is about stabbing people in the face, you probably can't afford to spend a feat on being extra tight or extremely well hung) and the others actually do give serious power).

Then there's the Nymphology, a published book that just has a few magic items, spells, prestige classes and the like for sexual magic. Mostly it's college humour though *sighs* Examples include "Ray of Nipple Hardening", "Bigby's Groping Hand", "Mordenkainen's Magnificent Brothel" and the dreaded enemy, the "Bearded Clam".

Oh, and the fairly large pdf I made for incorporating combat-spanking into the game. Mostly just for the lulz, because I was bored.

---

For 4E, it would be incredibly easy. Step 1: take abilities that already exist. Step 2: rename them and change the flavour. Step 3: Get hired by WotC, because that's exactly what 90% of their abilities are - the same thing written differently.