The first descent into Maddness: 4e
Posted 17th November 2008 at 10:32 PM by Crothian
This was first posted on Livejournal late Saturday since that is were I do my blogging even gameing related. This is an experiment to see if I should cross post blog posts about gaming here.
It needed a nice dramatic title and I think that works.
Today I ran my first 4e one shot and my first 4e game ever. I played once before and that was not that good but I learned some of the things needed to improve the game and was able to fix some of them. Others can be fixed I just didn't this time.
The first was to make it fun. One of the problems with the other 4e experiences I and some of my friends have had was the games were with strangers and people that did not help the game out. For this game everyone basically knew or knew of everyone else. They were all from my extended gaming family. This makes a huge difference in a game, any game. The other general thing I did and again this works for any game is we made it a pot luck lunch. Everyone brought some food and we had some great items to enjoy.
Everyone made characters there and it went mostly smoothy. We did have seven players and that slowed things down some and made the encounters easier then they were. But even with that many characters everyone had something to do each and every round. This is a very good sign for the game.
I used the D&D RPG Starter Set. I bought it specifically for this. We used the full rules of the game and every created characters using just the PHB. I used the starter set more for the dungeon tiles, the chits, and the simple adventure they have in there. We were not going to get through anything big and we didn't even get through the three planned encounters of the starter set.
The players commented on it being a little much with all the marking and keeping track of things. We did not use special token or anything and that would have helped them. I had no issue with it because I was keeping track of everything on a sheet of paper. The players didn't seem to have an issue with their own marks and knowing what they had done and that was really the important part. It was not as important for them to know who the other characters had marked. There was strategy in marking and communicating marks that they didn't do being most people's first real experience.
We ran a little short on time so I didn't have a chance to use the one skill challenge I had planned. A the beginning the players explored a barn first and had I been better with the system I would have come up with a Skill challenge for them there. My DM inexperience with the system was a factor like it would be in any game.
Over all I like the game. It is not better or worse then 3e, it is different. It is more focused on what it does and trying to play a game that goes against that will either end in frustration or a lot of house rules.
The aspect I like least about the game so far is the lack of skill points. I like the condensed number of skills. But I liked the flexibility of skill points and now the only way it seems to get a trained skill is with feats. Feats were always too few in 3e and in 4e making feats also cover improving skills with make it that much worse.
I haven't tried out multi classing yet but it looks like in 4e the developers gave people exactly what they wanted from 3e. In 3e it seemed most multi class was a dip, a level or two in one class but the character would remain focused on the original class. This is what 4e seems to do.
I know some people say it feels like a minis game or a computer game but I didn't see that. The players role played. It was non serous make jokes in the role playing but for a one shot with these people that is to be expected. The game though did not seem to lessen anyone ability to role play it.
I haven't been paying a lot of attention to the many many 4e hatred and love fest threads so I'm not sure what people feel are the biggest problems or best areas of the game. I'm curious as to what they are to see if they how they fared in this game.
It needed a nice dramatic title and I think that works.
Today I ran my first 4e one shot and my first 4e game ever. I played once before and that was not that good but I learned some of the things needed to improve the game and was able to fix some of them. Others can be fixed I just didn't this time.
The first was to make it fun. One of the problems with the other 4e experiences I and some of my friends have had was the games were with strangers and people that did not help the game out. For this game everyone basically knew or knew of everyone else. They were all from my extended gaming family. This makes a huge difference in a game, any game. The other general thing I did and again this works for any game is we made it a pot luck lunch. Everyone brought some food and we had some great items to enjoy.
Everyone made characters there and it went mostly smoothy. We did have seven players and that slowed things down some and made the encounters easier then they were. But even with that many characters everyone had something to do each and every round. This is a very good sign for the game.
I used the D&D RPG Starter Set. I bought it specifically for this. We used the full rules of the game and every created characters using just the PHB. I used the starter set more for the dungeon tiles, the chits, and the simple adventure they have in there. We were not going to get through anything big and we didn't even get through the three planned encounters of the starter set.
The players commented on it being a little much with all the marking and keeping track of things. We did not use special token or anything and that would have helped them. I had no issue with it because I was keeping track of everything on a sheet of paper. The players didn't seem to have an issue with their own marks and knowing what they had done and that was really the important part. It was not as important for them to know who the other characters had marked. There was strategy in marking and communicating marks that they didn't do being most people's first real experience.
We ran a little short on time so I didn't have a chance to use the one skill challenge I had planned. A the beginning the players explored a barn first and had I been better with the system I would have come up with a Skill challenge for them there. My DM inexperience with the system was a factor like it would be in any game.
Over all I like the game. It is not better or worse then 3e, it is different. It is more focused on what it does and trying to play a game that goes against that will either end in frustration or a lot of house rules.
The aspect I like least about the game so far is the lack of skill points. I like the condensed number of skills. But I liked the flexibility of skill points and now the only way it seems to get a trained skill is with feats. Feats were always too few in 3e and in 4e making feats also cover improving skills with make it that much worse.
I haven't tried out multi classing yet but it looks like in 4e the developers gave people exactly what they wanted from 3e. In 3e it seemed most multi class was a dip, a level or two in one class but the character would remain focused on the original class. This is what 4e seems to do.
I know some people say it feels like a minis game or a computer game but I didn't see that. The players role played. It was non serous make jokes in the role playing but for a one shot with these people that is to be expected. The game though did not seem to lessen anyone ability to role play it.
I haven't been paying a lot of attention to the many many 4e hatred and love fest threads so I'm not sure what people feel are the biggest problems or best areas of the game. I'm curious as to what they are to see if they how they fared in this game.
Total Comments 8
Comments
-
I actually find the lack of skill points to be a benefit to the game. The mix of point-based skill system and level-based class system never worked out as well for me in practice in 3e as I thought it would, so I'm interested to see where 4e takes things. As far as the feats thing goes - characters get more feats now and the feats are less powerful overall, so using one to get skill training doesn't seem too bad. The only place where I think it might hurt is with folks who are multi-classing (though I don't have anyone in my party doing that yet). The feat based multi-classing is a good solution to a lot of problems in my mind, but I think most of the multi-classing problems will be dealt with by using new classes and by giving new options for class features to old classes (like the ability for a Ranger to select a Beast Mastery as a fighting style by trading the Prime Shot class feature).
My players' biggest complaint is that there's still too much to keep track of at the table. Too many bonuses that only occur in certain circumstances so they forget about them until the end of the combat. Marking hasn't been a big issue so far, though as I'm using more monsters that mark players I feel like I should be using something on the battlemat to show it rather than just saying "you're marked" to the player (I don't have a problem keeing track of which players have marked my creatures since only one player has a marking ability right now).
As far as the minis game goes - we still get good roleplaying in, but the focus of the group has shifted to being combat monsters rather than roleplaying. I don't think that's 4e's fault - the shift had started towards the end of our 3e campaign because we don't play that often anymore (about once a month). We've shifted to a more episodic approach where folks don't have to remember plot points from months back. That's a good thing for us overall, but when I'm not careful it does turn our games into segmented episodes of miniature combat instead of role playing. So I can't really tell how much the game itself is encouraging that and how much of it is just the way our group wants to play at the moment.Posted 18th November 2008 at 03:54 PM by Jer
-
I agree. And while feats now include training in skills, there are also more feats now. My biggest problem with the old skill points system is that it was too specific. Which makes more sense...
I gain a level, and have spent all of that level crawling through dungeons. My skill increases in Alchemy and Proffesion (Boatswain). Although I would like to put it in something that would both benefit me and make sense, I have to justify my RPing in skill points (instead of allowing RP to exist outside the rules, which makes the most sense). Not only that, but I did a lot of climbing in the dungeon, but that becomes no higher, since I don't really care about the climb skill.
Or...
I gain a level, spending most of that time in crawling through dungeons. It's an even level, so my skills all go up slightly to represent an overall gain in athleticism, physical prowess, and intelectual experience.
I just like the new system because it does two things: It acurately represents natural progression of skills, and it takes all of the roleplaying-oriented skills out. You might say, "But I'm a roleplayer, I want them in!". Well, I'm a roleplayer too, but if you have a point-buy system with roleplaying skills, you have to sacrifice combat efficiency to justify your character, which is no fun. I like the rules to aid roleplay without me having to choose one or the other.
Glad you like the new system!Posted 18th November 2008 at 06:23 PM by JackSmithIV -
When you said ...It is more focused on what it does and trying to play a game that goes against that will either end in frustration or a lot of house rules. ... that pretty much summed up my opinion of and experience with 4E.
In my experience, 4E really shines during actual combat. But the laser-tight focus on combat balance (a cornerstone of 4E design) is a two edged sword. On the one hand, everyone can do an appropriate amount of damage, based on their role, every round. So there is no class that can be said to be "left out" when it comes to a fight.
But that balance comes with various costs. Such as a lack of class uniqueness (with the same role) and challenges when you want to play in a style of game that is not in the vein of high fantasy, heroic combat. House rules that don't impact combat are easy to incorporate, but in my experience any changes to combat results in more & more changes as you try and get back to that balance the game is built for.
Frustration or lots of house rules. I share the same opinion.Posted 18th November 2008 at 08:11 PM by Khairn -
Nice write-up Croth. Glad you had fun! It is fun, and I suppose - at the end of the day - that's the measurement that matters.Posted 18th November 2008 at 08:21 PM by Wisdom Penalty -
Don't let my saying it was fun fool you. We've played some really crappy games and they were fun, but not because of the game. When I play with my friends we have fun no matter what. If we don't have fun playing the game we have fun making fun of the game and continue playing it. We don't give up in the middle of a one shot.
What I don't like about the skills is that characters will seem a lot more the same. I like it when the 12th level character runs into that situation they need athletics and have zero ranks in it. Now, they will have at least 6. I like characters that have a greater difference between what they are good at and what they are bad at. All my characters in 3e had a few ranks in useful skills they tried but but never improved greatly.
I have no problem losing craft, profession, and many skills like those. I used the heck out of them in 3e but I don't need mechanics to define them for me. Just like I don't need mechanics for the so called role playing skills like diplomacy. I liked having no combat options and never felt they were a waste. But I'm fine not having them in 4e since as I've stated the game focuses on what it does and it doesn't want to do those.
I like the mix of skills and level gains as it gives more options for character building. I adhore min maxing but I like characters that aren't cliches or cookie cutters of other characters. That is a lot harder to do in 4e.Posted 18th November 2008 at 11:11 PM by Crothian 
-
Crothian - I think the number of comments you've got here is an indication that people are interested in what you have to say.
Posted 19th November 2008 at 10:56 AM by Mathew_Freeman - When Crothian Speaks, People Listen.
(apologies to E.F. Hutton)
...and we're exhausted, because that guy's had a few things to say!Posted 22nd November 2008 at 07:47 PM by ashockney -
I Don't know
my 4E experience wasnt that great
partly on the DM and partly because I just wanted to kill something, not doink around picking powers for an hour, and even then, in a party of nine, you really only get ONE hit in a fight, if your lucky
surePosted 24th November 2008 at 06:55 AM by Summer-Knight925
Total Trackbacks 0
Sidebar