+- Drunkard's Walk Forums (http://www.accessdenied-rms.net/forums)
+-- Forum: General (http://www.accessdenied-rms.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: General Chatter (http://www.accessdenied-rms.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=2)
+--- Thread: Well, I've Got It (/showthread.php?tid=9274)
Pages:
1
2
Well, I've Got It - NotDavies - 06-05-2008
Part of it, anyway. The Player's Handbook for the fourth edition of a certain fantasy role-playing game.
While there are some quite good parts, I'm honestly not sure if they outweigh the really ungood parts. I've submitted a review to RPG.net that goes
over my feelings on the matter in a lot more detail; if they don't publish it, I'll post it here.
Chris Davies.
- Bob Schroeck - 06-05-2008
I'm looking forward to seeing your opinion, Chris. The scuttlebutt I've heard hasn't been good, overall, but I'm interested in your take.
-- Bob
---------
Then the horns kicked in...
...and my shoes began to squeak.
- Evil Midnight Lurker - 06-05-2008
Second edition was a cleanup and revision of first, and was badly needed. Third edition was a brilliant elaboration on the first two,
3.5 cleaned up some problems with it, and by this point it has an unparalleled richness to it.
4.0? It doesn't actually follow on from any previous version of the game; it's something completely different, and many of the most basic options from
the previous games are suddenly unavailable (monks, barbarians, sorcerers, bards... even specialist wizards!).
That, and for some bizarre reason they felt it necessary to gut the Forgotten Realms setting, subjecting it to a DC-Crisis-level century of disaster in order
to make the world AND its cosmology conform to that presented in the new core books. I can't read that as anything but a studied insult to the fanbase.
I would be a lot less pissed off by this if they weren't calling it Dungeons & Dragons. Or if they advertised it as a new "Basic
set" and kept 3.5 going. If it was a separate game, it'd be a nice little change, a simplistic tactical board game for the younger set.
As it is? I am frothing in rage here.
Fortunately we've got Paizo Publishing and their Pathfinder RPG, an ongoing experiment in "3.75th edition" to keep me sane.
--Sam
"I'm very mad now. I may even be tingling."
- NotDavies - 06-06-2008
You've pretty much summed up my feelings on many of the issues involved, Evil, though I don't know whether I'd go so far as to say that it
doesn't actually follow on from any previous version of the game. The skill system is somewhat related, at least, to that of 3.0 and 3.5.
Chris Davies.
- NotDavies - 06-07-2008
Well, the lunatics at RPG.net posted my review:
http://www.rpg.net/reviews/archive/13/13813.phtml
Some additional things that would have been in it if I'd thought of them while writing:
* Hit points are no longer randomly determined at each level -- you get a fixed number instead. The last element of randomness in character generation and improvement has been done away with. Now, given that I generally work with GURPS or M&M, neither of which has any randomness in character generation or improvement, I realize that this is an odd attitude to take. But the randomness was a part of what made D&D into D&D for me.
* A basic potion of healing (a 5th level magic item, which can only be made by 5th level characters and up) allows the person who drinks it to use one of their own healing surges to heal 10 hit points, rather than the character's normal healing surge value (set at one-quarter of the character's max hit points.) What's wrong with that? Well, by the time that a character with an average or better Constitution score reaches 5th level, s/he will already have over 40 hit points, and so get at least 10 hit points with every healing surge. Since you can use up as many of your healing surges as you like simply by taking a short rest, the only advantage to drinking a potion is that it takes only a minor action, restricting its usage for times when you don't have five minutes to take a short rest. In other words, by the time that characters are able to make this item for themselves, it isn't nearly as useful as it was when they had to find it.
* Cleric/fighter/magic-users and fighter/magic-user/thieves have retreated further into oblivion. Despite the more free-form multiclassing system of 3e, it was actually much harder to build characters like this under that system (due to experience penalties and so forth.) But it's now impossible, since the rules for the feats that allow you take some of the abilities of another class specifically state that "[y]ou can dabble in a second class but not a third". Now, you might think that triple-classed characters are munchkiny, and you might be right. But it's an option that was available, and now isn't, so claims that the new system allows for more options than ever before start to sound a bit hollow.
* This one is just plain disturbing. One of the armor qualities for magical hide armor is "trollskin", which means exactly what you think it means. While this isn't unprecedented in gaming -- Earthdawn let characters run around if they so chose in the skin of an obsidiman, a PC race of all things, as long as they didn't mind getting horrified looks from most beings and attacked on sight by other obsidimen -- but in this ruleset, wearing the skin of another sentient being as armor is presented as a morally neutral act.
- Evil Midnight Lurker - 06-08-2008
Well, it's not as if trolls even have much of a problem with having their skin peeled off. I can easily see troll
armorsmiths doing this to themselves. (In Paizo's new campaign world, Golarion, troll augurers regularly read the future in their own entrails.)
--Sam
"Well that guy's nekkid."
Can I exchange this for a better new edition? - Merior - 06-08-2008
Looking through the new edition, and focusing more on being a Wizard as that was the class I enjoyed playing most, all that comes to mind is the
thought that they seem to have decided that you don't need certain former spells which aren't about doing damage. Which may fit in with the role of a
Controller (supposedly focused on deal with groups of opponents), but makes me twitch a little.
Really, the Wizard as portrayed in this edition doesn't seem to be like it has previously at all unless you were used to playing a specialised invoker.
It's the lack of Grease, Mage Armor, Wall of Force/Fire/Ice/Stone, Rope Trick, Protection from Evil/Good/Whatever, Polymorph, illusions usable in combat,
any form of lasting Invisibility (both Invisibility and Greater Invisibility in the book only last until your next action), Suggestion, Geas, Bestow Curse, and
similar which I am a little upset at.
Especially as these haven't been shifted over to another class as far as I can tell.
To be honest, if someone removed the words 'Dungeons & Dragons' from the books I'd hardly have believed that it was related to D&D in more
than the 'Oh, it has a fantasy setting and uses a d20 like D&D' way.
- Bluemage - 06-11-2008
What about the fact that a Wizard can never throw the same high-level spell twice a day, much less two or more times in an encounter? It doesn't seem
right to make Stoneskin or Invisibility usable only once daily. Even worse, Fireball is only a daily power. Fireball!
Wizards used to be the specialist class, able to prepare themselves to fight whatever they had to fight with all of their strength. Facing a horde of trolls?
Use all of your L3 spell slots for Fireballs, and you'll hit all of them at once with fire damage. Fire elementals? Stock up on Cone of Cold. Mages?
Fill your memory with anti-buffing, anti-protection spells, and throw some summons, instant death, or single-target damage spells into the mix.
Now, a level 30 Wizard that has every single spell available can throw about 13 different fire spells, about half of which can be used daily. The rest can be
used once per encounter. Once those are used, they're stuck with the relatively pathetic Scorching Burst. A Wizard in 3.5 could load every slot from 3rd
level up- many more than 13- with Fireball, which does more damage at high levels than many of the 4e powers.
The whole point of the Wizard used to be specialization and preparation for whatever was ahead. 80% of good play was planning a good load of spells. Now, all
you have to do is burn all your encounter powers right off, spam the at-will powers, and pull a daily when it's absolutely necessary.
Wizards were ruined, plain and simple. They're MMO spellcasters now
My Unitarian Jihad Name is: Brother Atom Bomb of Courteous Debate. Get yours.
I've been writing a bit.
- Drenivian - 06-12-2008
To be completely honest. I'm glad that my GM has decided to NEVER take our cream game to 4th ed. I have stated, repeatedly to my gaming group, that I
would NEVER play 4e until I see what happened to bards.
*********************
In the epic rage of furious thunder
legends create their tales
when the twilight calls and the dark lord falls
our glory will prevail
![[Image: strikersetcfinal9_th.jpg]](http://www.accessdenied-rms.net/forums/uploads/strikersetcfinal9_th.jpg)
- robkelk - 06-12-2008
Quote:What about the fact that a Wizard can never throw the same high-level spell twice a day, much less two or more times in an encounter? It doesn't seem right to make Stoneskin or Invisibility usable only once daily. Even worse, Fireball is only a daily power. Fireball!So, the list of characters that cannot be statted out in D&D now incluces Tim the Enchanter? Bummer...
--
Rob Kelk
"Governments have no right to question the loyalty of those who oppose
them. Adversaries remain citizens of the same state, common subjects of
the same sovereign, servants of the same law."
- Michael Ignatieff, addressing Stanford University in 2012
- Bob Schroeck - 06-12-2008
I have come to the conclusion that this is clearly a Do Not Want for me. I'll stick to my 3.x for newer campaigns, and original 1st ed for Narth.
-- Bob
---------
Then the horns kicked in...
...and my shoes began to squeak.
- NotDavies - 06-13-2008
It's a shame, really. There's some good stuff in there, but it's almost drowned out by the not-so good. Having taken a look at the DMG and the MM,
I can say that while the former is rather good at explaining how to be a DM, the latter ... well. Having gotten used to the easily tweakable monsters of the
last edition, it's a real let-down.
If the speculation that's been going around that this was an attempt to bring the online RPG experience to the table-top is correct, then I think the
designers are in for a very unpleasant surprise. There've been previous attempts at that, and they didn't work out nearly as well as those involved
hoped ...
- Bob Schroeck - 06-14-2008
It does seem to be the refrain that everyone who's seen it is echoing...
-- Bob
---------
Then the horns kicked in...
...and my shoes began to squeak.
- Sirrocco - 06-14-2008
First thought: they actually brutalized Forgotten Realms pretty savagely on the changeover from 1st to 2nd ed as well. Cataclysms, magic not working right, all
of the Gods forced to earth as avatars and some of them dying - good stuff like that.
Second thought: Wizards: first, a lot of the spells that you are missing would take the form of Rituals now - which can be cast any time you want if you have
the levels, time, and (potentially quite expensive) material components. Most of them aren't written up yet, but there's nothing to stop you from
adding more. Second, the "wizard can do anything" thing was actually one of the things that 4th ed was trying to fix. Is a bit sad, perhaps, for
those who like Wizards and loved being pillars of arcane might, but....
Third thought: the 4th ed really is a totally different game. Really. it's basically a really well-built, fast, easy-to-learn cross between an RPG and
those RPG-like Warhammer small-group-tactics games (Necromunda, Mordheim, whatever they were doing with the inquisitors - those). It is an excellent game for
first-time players, first-time GMs, and (especially) a group of kids who gets together to try this whole roleplaying thing for the first time all at once. I
don't think *anybody* should try to convert an ongoing 3.x game into 4.0, unless it's only been a few sessions, and the new stuff better fits their
playstyle. On the other hand, if you can get over the fact that it's got the words "Dungeons & Dragons" on the cover, it may well be worth
picking up to read through a time or two, and perhaps play with a lighter game.
Oh, and another big part of the newbie-friendly - It's a game that doesn't really respond all that strongly to optimization. A first-time player who
walks in with the idea that he wants a dwarf with an axe (and a willingness to follow the simple, clear advice on character creation laid out in the book) and
a seasoned vet who walks in having pored over the books for a week and planned everything out beforehand will wind up with characters who are close enough in
power level to be contributing members of the same party, and who will remain that way all the way to 30.
- Foxboy - 06-15-2008
My response: It seems to work for my gaming group. The Streamlined combat options help a lot when you have a 7-player party. The funny thing is, we have a
party with all of the classes in the new PHB except Paladin.
''We don't just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat
them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary.''
-- James Nicoll
- CrimsonKMR - 06-15-2008
Quote: Foxboy wrote:
My response: It seems to work for my gaming group. The Streamlined combat options help a lot when you have a 7-player party. The funny thing is, we have a
party with all of the classes in the new PHB except Paladin.
And as the DM running that group, 4th ed is a hell of a lot easier to run, combat wise. I found it to be quite an enjoyable system, and can't wait
until I get to PLAY in a game instead of running it
![[Image: wink.gif]](http://www.ezboard.com/intl/aenglish/images/emoticons/wink.gif)
I notice the only complaints are 'wizards suck now' and 'where is my (insert class
X)?" They're going to be releasing new PHBs and MMs every year with new classes, new powers for old classes, new items, etc. There has been 8 years of
3rd edition material (and iirc, there was no druid or monk in 2nd ed, and no one bitched about them being in 3rd...) so it'll take a while to get stuff
changed over. I'll admit wizards are different, but do I think they suck? I dont know yet, our wizzy is only
level 1.
Personally, I just think people who are bitching are usually in the 'Zomg I's can't be bahroken anymorez?! Oh noes!" camp.
Quote:Honestly, when I heard that, I cheered with glee. It might actually get me interested in Realms again. Any campaign
That, and for some bizarre reason they felt it necessary to gut the Forgotten Realms setting, subjecting it to a DC-Crisis-level
century of disaster in order to make the world AND its cosmology conform to that presented in the new core books. I can't read that as anything but a
studied insult to the fanbase.
setting where the PCs aren't the focal point failed imo. Realms may have been that way before, but not with the 3rd ed setting. You never had that feeling
of if you didnt do (insert task) the first time, you were screwed. There was always someone higher level NPC who could come in and save the day....
Quote: * A basic potion of healing (a 5th level magic item, which can only be made by 5th level characters and up) allows the person who drinks it to use one ofCan Be Used In Combat. Thats the reason they exist.
their own healing surges to heal 10 hit points, rather than the character's normal healing surge value (set at one-quarter of the character's max hit
points.) What's wrong with that? Well, by the time that a character with an average or better Constitution score reaches 5th level, s/he will already
have over 40 hit points, and so get at least 10 hit points with every healing surge. Since you can use up as many of your healing surges as you like simply
by taking a short rest, the only advantage to drinking a potion is that it takes only a minor action, restricting its usage for times when you don't have
five minutes to take a short rest. In other words, by the time that characters are able to make this item for themselves, it isn't nearly as useful as it
was when they had to find it.
There is no coincidence, only necessity....
- Clow Reed
- NotDavies - 06-19-2008
Honestly, when I heard that, I cheered with glee. It might actually get me interested in Realms again. Any campaign setting where the PCs aren't the
focal point failed imo.
Forgive me, but that is incredibly self-centered. "It's not interesting unless the PCs are the only heroes"? Why not broaden
it a little -- "It's not interesting unless the PCs always win, and defeat is never a real possibility?"
Can Be Used In Combat. Thats the reason they exist.
Um ... so?
The book even states that healing potions "are not as effective as the healing powers of a cleric or warlord". This represents a major gutting of
their abilities from 3rd edition levels, where a potion of cure light wounds was that spell in a bottle, literally.
Furthermore, the fact that drinking a potion requires you to use up one of your own healing surges more than balances the fact that drinking it is a minor
action. (The fact that it's only a minor action makes me think that these potions are about the size of shot glasses, but that's a separate complaint.)
Consider the following scenario.
Wounded in combat, you decide to have your fighter drink a healing potion, and in so doing you use up your last healing surge.
Across the table, Ted, the guy playing the party's cleric, drops his jaw on hearing this. "Oh, nice going, ," Ted says.
"I was gonna heal you as my action this round, but since you don't have any healing surges left, I can't do that, now can I? You've messed up
my whole plan of action. Nice going."
"Wait a minute," says the warlock Ken, who's sitting beside you. "You were going to heal him? What about me?"
"You're a striker, he's the tank, figure it out," replies Ted.
"Did that night mean nothing to you?" cries Ken.
"It's kind of annoying hearing you explicitly using metagame thinking like that," mutters Chris the DM.
"I gave you my innocence! I gave you my childhood!" Ken says through muffled sobs. "And you don't care!"
"He's the taaaaank," Ted says, exasperated that he has to explain this again.
Ken draws a gun and shoots Ted in the head, before drinking poison. Your poor strategic decision-making has resulted in two deaths, and the DM will probably be
sued for wrongful death. I hope you're satisfied with yourself, .
Chris Davies.
- Shepherd - 06-19-2008
Quote: NotDavies wrote:
Honestly, when I heard that, I cheered with glee. It might actually get me interested in Realms again. Any campaign setting where the PCs aren't
the focal point failed imo.
Forgive me, but that is incredibly self-centered. "It's not interesting unless the PCs are the only heroes"? Why not broaden
it a little -- "It's not interesting unless the PCs always win, and defeat is never a real possibility?"
Can Be Used In Combat. Thats the reason they exist.
Um ... so?
The book even states that healing potions "are not as effective as the healing powers of a cleric or warlord". This represents a major gutting of
their abilities from 3rd edition levels, where a potion of cure light wounds was that spell in a bottle, literally.
Furthermore, the fact that drinking a potion requires you to use up one of your own healing surges more than balances the fact that drinking it is a minor
action.
I don't feel that allowing PCs to contribute to the setting in a meaningful way is self-centered. The problem with the Forgotten Realms is that there
are so many high level NPCs wandering around that the actions of the PCs often feels superfluous. There was a similar problem with the original Dragonlance
setting; the Heroes of the Lance were the ones that saved the world while the PCs felt like a bunch of third wheels.
As for the new edition's healing
potions, I think that the weakness of the potions is balanced by the fact that healing is now much easier than in previous editions. Everybody seems to have
multiple methods by which they can heal themselves, and many can heal others as well. Given how freely healing is available, the potions were doubtlessly made
into a suboptimal choice so that they would be saved for emergencies rather than churned out cheaply and gulped by the case.
----------------------------------------------------
"Anyone can be a winner if their definition of victory is flexible enough." - The DM of the Rings XXXV
- Epsilon - 06-20-2008
http://www.wired.com/culture/lifestyle/ ... text_0618/
---------------
Epsilon
potions... - Sirrocco - 06-20-2008
First point: most days, you won't use all of your healing surges. If you are slogging through encounter after encounter without rest, or if you are taking
huge amounts of damage and have healing support, you might find yourself running low, but a healing surge gives you back 1/4th of your hit points. even a
wizard gets 6+con mod healing surges every day, and with fort saves like they are, he's not likely to take his con mod negative - and without items or a
friendly buff class character, you've generally got in-combat use of one of those per encounter. Admittedly, there may be campaigns where the GM rides you
close enough to the edge that you *do* use up all of your healing surges every day, and collapse thankfully into the "sleep for full heal" rule every
night, and in those, healing potions would be largely useless, but most campaigns will not likely be that way.
Second point: The vast majority of ways to use healing surges require someone's standard action. Taking your second wind, having the priest/warlord heal
you, having a friend use the healing skill on you - all of them require that someone take the time out of their day to heal you. In the serious, climactic
battles, every round not spent whaling on the big guy is that much more breathing room for the bug guy to whale on you. Even more, again, you get one second
wind per fight, which means that once you use that, it requires the standard action of a healing character - and if you've got one priest, and two
characters severely wounded....
The healing potion is not what it was. It's not a strategic reserve, for days when the priest is running low on healing (or unconscious, or lost) because,
for the most part, HP are not a strategic resource in 4th ed. When you're in a situation where hp are a strategic resource (encounter after encounter,
when you cannot afford to rest very long in between), they're a generally poor choice - contrast with 3rd ed, where that was the time they were most
precious. On the other hand, it is a tactical reserve - it lets you cram more of your strategic healing resource (healing surges) into your system at a lower
tactical price (minor action and does not expend your second wind.) Much like 4th ed itself - It's nothing like what it once was - but that doesn't
mean that it's useless or bad.
--Edit: though... I do have to acknowledge that Epsilon's response has significantly more win than my own.
- CrimsonKMR - 06-21-2008
Quote: Epsilon wrote:
http://www.wired.com/culture/lifestyle/ ... text_0618/
---------------
Epsilon
I find this very amusing, and supports my arguments quite well IMO...
I admit, 4th may not be for everyone, but I know I like it.
There is no coincidence, only necessity....
- Clow Reed
- NotDavies - 06-22-2008
Admittedly, there may be campaigns where the GM rides you close enough to the edge that you *do* use up all of your healing surges every day, and collapse
thankfully into the "sleep for full heal" rule every night, and in those, healing potions would be largely useless, but most campaigns will not
likely be that way.
Except that the system incentivizes the "slogging through encounter after encounter without rest" model, through its "milestones" system,
where you get benefits for going through two or more encounters without rest.
And as for your second point, dwarves can use their second wind action as a minor action. That's the same required to use a potion, so after their healing
surge value exceeds 10 hp, they have no reason to use a potion of healing.
Edit: And both the Paladin's and the Cleric's basic "per encounter" healing powers are also minor actions.
- Sirrocco - 06-25-2008
Actually, I would see it the other way around. Getting a milestone (ie, taking two encounters back-to-back) gives you one action point (a nice, full rest would
also do this, if you'd spent one already, but a milestone will let you accumulate them), will refresh the daily powers of your items, and will buff up
certain rings until the next time you rest. (or, to put it a bit more accurately, there are a number of rings that aren't up to full power for the first
two encounters in a day.)
Resting, on the other hand, refreshes all daily powers (item and personal), restores all hit points, and gives you back all of your healing surges, along with
restoring that action point. If the first few encounters you run into are on the weak side (you didn't feel the need to use your own daily powers, you
didn't need to use your action points, and no one got seriously hurt) then you get a bit charged up for your next few fights. If they were of medium
difficulty, you get a bit of a charge back. If they were significantly difficult, and involved you throwing around some of your bigger mojo, then hitting that
milestone is more like a tax refund than anything else. In any case, if you've been hitting stuff tough enough to get you low on healing surges, and you
don't have to keep going, milestones probably aren't going to be enough to make you want to.
Yes, it's true, dwarves are nifty, and can use their once-per-fight healing surge as a minor action. Also, you are correct. I had not read closely enough
(and, indeed, we played it wrong on Game Day). Priests (and warlords) get their healing powers twice per encounter as minor actions (and can choose other
encounter powers/daily powers that also enable use of a healing surge). Paladins can use up to the wis modifier every day in their own healing surges on the
behalf of other people as a minor action (if they're close enough to touch). (They get a spare daily healing surge for just this reason) Indeed, the more
haling support you have in a party, the less useful one of these potions is - and if you get *enough*, it's pretty much useless - but wasn't that
always the case? ...and with this system, where you don't actually have to have a cleric, paladin, *or* warlord in the party, there are some groups for
whom that bit of minor-action healing could come in handy in a pinch.
but... honestly, if it bugs you, change it. It wouldn't even be a *big* house rule - though you'd have to be wary of the players walking into the
dungeon wiht a cartfull of healing potions, given that pretty much any caster in the game can make the things now, just by throwing some gold at them.
Personally, even back when I was playing 2nd ed, I was modifying the heck out of it ("so, talk to me about what kind of character you want, and we'll
design his class together.") I don't think that 4th requires nearly as *much* modification, but some of it kinda gets to me. The act that if
you're above average intelligence, it just doesn't *matter* how clumsy you are for getting out of the way of that fireball? That feels just a little
silly. Likewise with str, con, and fort saves. The fact that half-elves have stat bonuses that are entirely disjoint from elves (either kind) is a bit odd, as
is the fact that the race of angsting/bitter, largely distrusted demon-warped folks have a charisma bonus - and that their statline encourages prospective
warlocks of their race to specifically avoid the pact that was crafted specifically for them.
It's one of the things that's very clear to me about this version. The D&D 4th ed rulebooks were written for the people who need them. Have a bunch
of painfully rules-lawyery players? You can run a solid, balanced game off of the core rules, and their ability to abuse is limited. Missing the ability to
play solid chaotic good, lawful evil, or old-school True Neutral? If your tastes are sophisticated enough that you find yourself craving things like that,
you're almost certainly competent to job any necessary house rules together yourself.
---------
Also, none of this matters, because quiches are just plain better than every other food anyway, so anyone who is even thinking about cooking anything that is
not a quiche has already gimped themselves, and isn't worth listening to, unless you want to take pity on them and show them the error of their ways.
- Foxboy - 06-25-2008
In re: Intelligence for Reflexes... If you're smart, you're more likely to realize: "hey, that dragon just breathed in... oh CRAP! *Dodge*"
''We don't just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat
them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary.''
-- James Nicoll
- CrimsonKMR - 06-25-2008
Quote: Foxboy wrote:
In re: Intelligence for Reflexes... If you're smart, you're more likely to realize: "hey, that dragon can breath fire... I should be ready to
move when I see it getting ready to do that!"
Fixed that for ya Fox
There is no coincidence, only necessity....
- Clow Reed