Quote from: SettembriniIf there´s people who warrant it, like AM, we can be nice.

AM, can you say anything against the tactical hollowness argument?
How is it different from my Ruby Knight/Crusader, who´s powerful, but could be played by a Javascript?

It's not tactically hollow! I don't know about your Ruby Knight.

I will tell you about how one group beat the dragon in Scalegloom Hall.

The paladin has a power that causes a single enemy to focus on him, or take radiant damage. It's a divine challenge. So as long as the enemy focuses on him,  he's fine. I've heard you guys complaining about it already

Well this was really cool! Because when they got to the dragon, (and after they got blasted by an initial breath weapon from the dragon) the paladin used this power. She didn't want to let the dragon attack everyone again, and she had a decent armor class. So she challenged the dragon, and got it turned around, so that other characters could pick up the flank.

At this point, the other characters moved around the other side, with wizard, warlock and ranger backing up and spreading out of the breath weapon radius they had just taken, and started using their attacks.

Now here's the deal: there's AC, there's Fort, there's Reflex, and there's Will. depending on the power used, it could attack different things. Most 'melee' type attacks are against AC, for example. But some spells are against Will, and some are Reflex, and so on.

What they found out was that the dragon had an extremely high AC--hard to hit (although the ranger critted it three times, and the dwarf picked up the flank). But it's will save was lower, and hittable.

They had to figure this out through trial and error. The warlock had an ability  that could be used to attack Will, and switched over to that once he got his hit in.

Flanking still works, so the dwarf took his position on the far side of the dragon. The cleric picked up a position behind the paladin. Flanking still gives you +2.

What the dwarf found out was he still couldn't really hit. All of his available abilities were against AC. So instead he switched to aid other (which still exists). Now this worked: all he has to do is hit an AC of 10, and he grants an additional +2.

So the dwarf had figured out how to grant +4 to the paladin who was locked in combat with the dragon. Meanwhile the ranger, warlock, and wizard are peppering it with arrows, magic missile, force orb, and warlock curses.

So now the paladin is hitting, and wearing the dragon down.

Well, then the dwarf at one point decided to move. And by doing so, he provided an opportunity attack to the dragon. The dragon tail-slapped the dwarf and pushed him a square away.

Which set off the paladins divine challenge.. Which spun up more damage. So then the CLERIC decides to do the same thing, basically taunting the dragon into attacking him. Which I went ahead and did.

THEN they started trading off, with the paladin doing the aid other while the dwarf used his per-day ability. The dwarf's per-day ability was a really powerful strike, so they were able to get that one off, and took another nice chunk of hit points off.

When the ranger critted it, I got the dragons breath to reset, and most of the group was clustered on the opposite side of the dragon. This meant I (as the DM) had to decide between making an attack against most of the party and maybe hitting (but also taking more radiant damage), or using the entire breath weapon on just the paladin.

These are good meaty fights with a lot of action and a lot of tactical play. 1st level characters went up against a dragon with 280 hit points. And people were yelling and cheering and having a great time. You know what this says to me? No more milk runs while we get a campaign started. You just dive right into action from 1st level.

(I eventually killed both the cleric and the paladin, but the party won that battle and killed the dragon...)

Now by comparison, I was also running a D&D 3.5 Xendrik Mod for 10th level characters at that convention. That Mod (Chamber Made CDX-10) ALSO features a black dragon. It's for 10th level characters. It has 253 hit points. That battle was also tactical as hell (I had the dragon grapple a druid and drag it underwater.. the druid cast 'Freedom of Movement' and then shapechanged into a fish to escape.. that kind of battle. )

  These are both tactical games, but I admit we had to look up whether you could cast while grappled (it's a concentration check) or whatever. But we're used to that, because we've been doing it for a while.  

So I dunno. I had a great experience with both games.

Quote from: StuartI was just posting this in another thread -- 4e looks like it's intended for fantasy action hero gaming.  If you don't want to play an action hero, it might not be the best fit.

Thats totally my impression. And we did occasionally make "goof" characters in 3.0 and 3.5. My roommates and I spent Saturday night talking about that: at last years Gen Con we sort of invented a morbidly obese fat cleric who was too lazy to heal. My friend Joel had a 20th level expert who could make shoes like a mofo. My friend Joe invented a character called "Toothless Jim" (seriously, not a reference to our many Jims) who had all the stacked feats that would let you carry large size weapons. So he had this gigantic axe called the "Tremendaxe" and he was totally ignorant. One campaign prominently featured an orcish chef named Francois, and a goblin henchman called "Pinchy" who was sort of there for comedy relief. One time we even had a "special" adventure where we ran the comedy relief guys as PCs who steal the players ship and accidentally set it on fire, and then have to get it repaired before the PCs find out. And it was just one joke encounter after the next.

Is 4th Edition going to be as useful for that sort of thing? I don't know. I dont think so right off. I guess I could give Francois the ability to bash people with a frying pan or whatever.. but the whole point of that adventure is Francois uses his cooking skill to adventure with...

But then again, that was a joke one-shot.

Quote from: Abyssal MawWhen the ranger critted it, I got the dragons breath to reset, and most of the group was clustered on the opposite side of the dragon. This meant I (as the DM) had to decide between making an attack against most of the party and maybe hitting (but also taking more radiant damage), or using the entire breath weapon on just the paladin.

How does reset work? I've seen a bunch of abilities with something along the lines of "Reset 5,6" beside them.

Quote from: James McMurrayHow does reset work? I've seen a bunch of abilities with something along the lines of "Reset 5,6" beside them.

THAT I wasn't sure of, and it was unclear. So when i asked I was told, "you roll a d6, and on a 1, that ability resets."

So if the dragon used it's breath attack, every round after that, I was rolling to recharge.  When it recharged you could use it again on the following round. I hope I did that part right.

It made the dragon breath unpredictable--players never knew when i was going to use my breath weapon again. I thought that was pretty cool.

There are a lot of the minor rules in 4e that are really good stuff.  I can see a lot of things, like the breath weapon reset, being used in earlier editions.

Quote from: Abyssal MawHonestly, I think the pig farmer, and the mage who can't cast, and the incompetent rogue won't fit in  with 4th edition. I can't apologize for that, though. They hardly fit in with 3rd edition. Maybe True 20?

My group ran a couple of all-Commoner campaigns with 3.x and they were fun as Hell. Then again, the gamers I usually play with are more into role-playing with combat as a possibility then combat adventuring with role-playing as a possibility.

Doesn't mean you've lost my respect, but my RPG style is different that what 4E seems to offer.

Quote from: jeff37923My group ran a couple of all-Commoner campaigns with 3.x and they were fun as Hell. Then again, the gamers I usually play with are more into role-playing with combat as a possibility then combat adventuring with role-playing as a possibility.

Doesn't mean you've lost my respect, but my RPG style is different that what 4E seems to offer.

I never wanted your respect! :haw:

But I really think you can have 100% action and 100% roleplaying simultaneously. The real question is whether you want 100% action.

Yes, it is stylistically different from previous editions. That said, it isn't stylistically different at all from my 3e home campaigns (and the Earthdawn campaigns that preceeded them), which are full of things like tactical encounters in three-dimensions, cascade encounters with multiple layers of combatants, terrain effects, swarm style encounters with minions (we had a minions-esque rule in our 3e campaign). And like so.

Quote from: Abyssal MawThat said, it isn't stylistically different at all from my 3e home campaigns (and the Earthdawn campaigns that preceeded them), which are full of things like tactical encounters in three-dimensions, cascade encounters with multiple layers of combatants, terrain effects, swarm style encounters with minions (we had a minions-esque rule in our 3e campaign). And like so.

Yeah, combat adventuring with role-playing as a possibility.

It sounds like you had fun and all, I don't deny that you did, but here's the thing: If you hadn't specified that the game you were playing was D&D, I would have assumed you weren't playing an RPG at all.  Read your post forgetting any specific detail that its a D&D RPG you are playing, and it sounds like you are describing some kind of miniatures wargame.

I mean, is it still an RPG at all? Do you roleplay in it? Or is the roleplaying just meaningless fluff meant to cover up and provide transition from one "tactical encounter" to the next?

RPGPundit

Quote from: Abyssal MawHonestly, I think the pig farmer, and the mage who can't cast, and the incompetent rogue won't fit in  with 4th edition. I can't apologize for that, though. They hardly fit in with 3rd edition. Maybe True 20?

Well, that's fine.  I mean, it does sound like its more action hero-style, and that's a way to go.  But I do think you could do sustainable low-level play in 3e--after all, say I'm wanting to be some poor schlub of a novice conscript (lvl 1 Fighter)--I set out in the world with my longsword, chain shirt, and +1 BAB.  Hardly a DBZ knockoff.  Yeah, I might have a few things I'm better at than some (perhaps a quick draw with my weapon, or faster reaction in combat, but for the most part, I don't have a myriad of special combat moves and amazing powers to draw on.  I suppose that might be another thread--low-level play in 3e or something.


I have woken up in a world where it seems a group of level 1 characters I make using just the core Rifts Ultimate Edition will be less relatively powerful and have fewer powers than a group of level 1 adventurers from core D&D 4e.  And that's scary.

(My Headhunter, Rogue Scholar, Vagabond, Burster, and Body Fixer think so, too).

Quote from: RPGPunditI mean, is it still an RPG at all? Do you roleplay in it? Or is the roleplaying just meaningless fluff meant to cover up and provide transition from one "tactical encounter" to the next?

You, of all people, pulling the rollplay vs. roleplay argument? I roll to disbelieve. :eek:

roleplay or rollplay =/= roleplay or miniatures wargame

Pundit has a very good question, and I'd like to hear 4M's 4nswer.

I'm reading AM's post, and I barely recognize D&D in it. It's great he had fun, but when 1st-level characters in D&D are bitch-slapping dragons with 280 hit points, it gets too weird for me.

I read on another site that six 1st-level PCs were beating the holy Hell out of dozens of zombies in one encounter. In 3e, we'd never see that happen.

Is there something wrong with me if games like C&C, Warhammer, and Rifts feel more like D&D to me? I want to be excited about 4e....but I'm not.

Quote from: Zachary The FirstLet me ask you this:  is there still room in the game for me to run a low-powered, low-level campaign consisting of a pig farmer conscript?

Easy!

Just give your players black dragon characters. After they have a couple levels under their belts black dragons will be powerful enough to manage two or three pigs -- each! :keke:

It's a sample adventure using pregenerated characters meant to be run in slots at tournaments to preview a system. Those are not exactly notorious for their roleplaying opportunities.