D&D 4E Got to play 4E today

I had the opportunity to play in a demo game of 4E today at Ubercon here in beautiful New Jersey. (Beforehand, I was able to observe portions of other demos, but you don't really get the full effect without a handful of dice in your hand.)

Bear in mind that I'm coming at this from a slightly different perspective from most of the other folks here; I've never played 3.x. I've played 0E, 1E, and 2E, and have been playing 1E for the last decade or so. I've also never played WoW (although my wife plays, so I have an idea of what's involved.) I'm also almost exclusively a DM, for whatever insight that might give.

First, a couple of housekeeping notes. No, the GMs did not have any news about the poison pill in the GSL (at least one was a real WotC employee, not just a volunteer). No, they had not seen an actual PH or DMG; they were working off some sort of notes provided to them. No, they had no idea how rituals worked. (My character sheet had rituals as a skill, so I asked-- since many people here seemed to be interested-- but no luck.)

The game was played on a battlemat, with figures, and I was told that "you really can't play it without a battlemat." Looking at how some of the mechanics are expressed, that makes sense; your movement rate is x squares (1 square = 5'), spell ranges are in squares, etc. I play with neither battlemat nor figures, so I was somewhat disheartened at the prospect. You 3.x'ers might find that puzzling, but I'm sure most of my fellow grognards are nodding sagely in agreement.

We were also told, soon into our first combat, that we would be much better off using our special skills than actually trying to use our normal weapons. This is where my grognard-sense started to tingle. The cleric was better off using "divine shield" (or whatever it was called) rather than just clunking someone with his mace, because the special power could be used at-will. Ditto the wizard's lower-level spells like magic missile and scorching burst (which I, playing said wizard, used to great effect many a time). In the particular case of magic missile, you have to roll to hit, so I suppose that makes up for being able to use it every time you're able to do an action.

Everything seemed rather out-of-scale to me, but I attribute that to an overall inflation of numbers. Several players at the table asked about this, and we were told it was done because 1st level characters died too easily.* I wondered about that, since my 20 h.p. 1st-level wizard was taking 10-15 points of damage in an average round. If you increase damage taken at the same time you increase damage takable, isn't that a wash? But it's a minor point.

There seemed to be a lot more for the DM to keep track of. But again, I'm coming from a 1E point of view, where all I need to keep track of are h.p. and initiative. The monster and foe composition might be easier than it was in 3.x, but all those special powers, even for the most mundane city guardsman, seems a trifle excessive to me. When I mentioned that particular aspect (the fact that everyone has powers that inflict more damage than normal attacks) to my wife, she made the connection to WoW right away.

We also did a sort of very abstract skill-based activity (there was a name for it, and I apologize for not remembering). We were faced with the task of escaping the town with the town guards searching for us, and we had to pick a way to elude them, roll against the appropriate skill, and if the party racked up enough successes, we got away. I must say I found this rather too abstract for my taste. One character succeeded in his roll and the DM merely said "okay, you get a lead on a safe way out of town." In my own game, that would have been a golden role-playing opportunity that might have taken half an hour or more. But here it was done with a single die-roll. Was that a function of the system or the fact that it was an admittedly combat-oriented demo game? I don't know, and won't until I get a PH and DMG in my hands. If that's the sort of thing that's at the DM's discretion, I'll certainly not be using it too often.

Don't get the idea that I hated my first 4E experience. I didn't. I've got to say that there were some really good ideas here. Divvying up powers that can be used anytime, after 5 mins rest, and after a nights' sleep could have a lot of promise. But from the perspective of a DM, I don't really see how I can "wing it" as easily as I can with 1E. Maybe that'll change once I see the actual books. I'm keeping an open mind.

Bottom line; not a game I would likely choose to DM myself. But I enjoyed this as a player, and if I had a DM who was adept at picking up the mechanics as the demo DM was, I wouldn't mind playing this at conventions. Maybe as a short-term campaign. I just get the feeling that the opportunities for role-playing are going to be overcome by the fact that the game mechanics seem very much oriented towards combat. The abstract "escape from town" challenge seemed a way for lazy DM's to roll their way out of such situations.

Joe

* Compare to the original Traveller, where your character can actually die during the process of character generation.

It's not WoW that you have missed to understand something like 4E skill challenges, but all the modern (post AD&D 1E era) RPGs development.

Don't assume that the AD&D 1E definition of what is a Role-Playing game is the end of all thing.

Playing a "Guess what the DM wants" game to handle a "let's get out of here before the guards show up" situation for instance, is not the most exciting thing I can do as a RPG player.

One of the most important in an RPG, like in any game in fact, is to give some interesting choices to player.

D&D 4E gives a lot of them, but they are mostly tactical in nature. IMHO that suits D&D pretty well when I look at its fundamenal concepts (classes, HP, level, XP for killing stuff, etc), but it is not what I'm looking for in a RPG currently.

Thanks for your postin'.

The game was played on a battlemat, with figures, and I was told that "you really can't play it without a battlemat." Looking at how some of the mechanics are expressed, that makes sense; your movement rate is x squares (1 square = 5'), spell ranges are in squares, etc. I play with neither battlemat nor figures, so I was somewhat disheartened at the prospect. You 3.x'ers might find that puzzling, but I'm sure most of my fellow grognards are nodding sagely in agreement.

Click to expand...

As someone who's played 3.x without a mat (because I played it on line), let me tell you it's a real headache.

We also did a sort of very abstract skill-based activity (there was a name for it, and I apologize for not remembering). We were faced with the task of escaping the town with the town guards searching for us, and we had to pick a way to elude them, roll against the appropriate skill, and if the party racked up enough successes, we got away. I must say I found this rather too abstract for my taste. One character succeeded in his roll and the DM merely said "okay, you get a lead on a safe way out of town." In my own game, that would have been a golden role-playing opportunity that might have taken half an hour or more. But here it was done with a single die-roll. Was that a function of the system or the fact that it was an admittedly combat-oriented demo game?

Click to expand...

First things first: A PLAYER roleplaying what his character says to an NPC isn't always automatically going to succeed or fail depending on what the player says. You have to roll to succeed. It's the same reason why you don't have to roleplay a fight to see if you succeed at a hit; your character is doing it, not the player.

A lot of RPGs have roleplaying skills (Intimidate/Diplomacy/Lieing), and no computer game I've ever seen has one (except say, a skill that helps you haggle for better prices on equipment). And the skill challenge thing is a new thing in this edition.

It was a quick chase scene; spending thirty minutes to an hour on a foot race really doesn't play up the tension. But the lack of detail was probably due to the fact it was a Demo (and for expedience).

When we were doing that, for instance, the party ran into a crowd of drunks pouring out of a tavern and one of the PCs used some skill to try and blend in among the revelers. However he failed; the drunks noticed us and started asking stupid questions, being loud, and drawing attention.

Another player used Streetwise to get merchants to cause a distraction. But the DM glanced over the distraction, the conversation, etc.

The lead-up To, and the aftermath of the die-roll would have been fun to play out in roleplaying, correct. But whether you succeed at blending in, or not being noticed by the drunks or the guards, hinged on the die roll.

The purpose of the skill challenge (which is what this was) is just an out-of-combat sort of challenge that you use your skills to overcome. If you Succeed, you win; if you fail, you get a setback.

A good situation for a skill challenge would be... say, climbing down a cliff face, in a thunderstorm, while very big birds nest in crags on the cliff. If this wasn't a skill challenge, all the PCs would individually have to roll athletics rolls - and if they failed, they'd fall to their death. But in a skill challenge, one player is using athletics to help everyone get up the cliff. Another player is using acrobatics to say, make sure everyone stays on the cliff. A third player is using his Nature skill to keep the birds from attacking the party. But in this situation, a failured roll could mean "Someone sprains their leg; you take a negative to your athletics rolls, and this slows down the climb." Failure at the climbing of the cliff could mean "You were spotted by some enemies, who know a short cut to get up on the cliff; you're going to get ambushed soon."

Part of the skill challenge, at least that I got, was that a player has to come up with a creative use of his skills. If this weren't a demo, I'd look at my DM and say "I want to roll a history roll; I want to know if I remember anything about sewer construction in the era this town was built, so we can find a sewer to hide in." I'm sure that I could have used my Scorching Burst to set a few houses on fire, to cause a distraction. Or

I played in a makeshift 4th edition game last night for the first time myself, and was quirked by the function of powers. At-Will powers seem rather too much at-will, and the effects they can generate seem a little random. Encounter powers seem too randomly used up and you might as well unload them as soon as possible, and Daily powers you have to hang onto wondering when you should attempt to use them (and then why you can't again use that ability for a day).
Perhaps if the DM was to craft a story behind why these powers can only be used at certain times and have these specific effects, it would have made more sense.

Of course, this was with 1st level characters designed from the pre-release PHB, so I can't legitimately judge. =P

muffin_of_chaos said:

Perhaps if the DM was to craft a story behind why these powers can only be used at certain times and have these specific effects, it would have made more sense.

Click to expand...

I would hope DMs (and players at that) would narrate the effects and outcomes of powers.

The important stuff that is happening in the shared imagined universe should be narrated by the players and the DM, that stuff being combat or diplomacy or clue finding is irrelevant.

That narration can occur before and/or after the roll is made, describing what is attempted and the result*.

There is no roll-play vs role-play dilemma, it doesn't exists.

Only players/DM that don't like to narrate stuff and that should go for a boardgame instead.


*Well, in RPG with a task resolution system like D&D.

Doublepost on my part.

Rechan said:

As someone who's played 3.x without a mat (because I played it on line), let me tell you it's a real headache.

Click to expand...

As someone who has played 3.x without a mat let me tell you it is not a problem at all. However, unlike Rechan, I play am able to play face-to-face. I use the same things I have used since DnD Red Box, imagination and occasional grid paper & pencil.
Admittedly, I have invested a lot of money since 4E info started coming out to get minis. IMO 4E will play better with a mat (and minis). But also because I have always wanted to use minis (cos I think they look great) but only now have the money and storage space to use them.

Thulcondar said:

No, they had not seen an actual PH or DMG; they were working off some sort of notes provided to them.

Click to expand...

Hmm, at my demo game today someone was passing around a PHB. I almost *&^% my pants when that dropped into my lap.

We were also told, soon into our first combat, that we would be much better off using our special skills than actually trying to use our normal weapons. This is where my grognard-sense started to tingle. The cleric was better off using "divine shield" (or whatever it was called) rather than just clunking someone with his mace, because the special power could be used at-will. Ditto the wizard's lower-level spells like magic missile and scorching burst (which I, playing said wizard, used to great effect many a time). In the particular case of magic missile, you have to roll to hit, so I suppose that makes up for being able to use it every time you're able to do an action.

Click to expand...

While you might not agree with the reasoning, the idea that heros should do their iconic heroic thing is consistent within itself. Also, even though the at-will powers have special names, really they are just ways of adding flavor to the "I swing my sword at it."

Everything seemed rather out-of-scale to me, but I attribute that to an overall inflation of numbers. Several players at the table asked about this, and we were told it was done because 1st level characters died too easily.* I wondered about that, since my 20 h.p. 1st-level wizard was taking 10-15 points of damage in an average round. If you increase damage taken at the same time you increase damage takable, isn't that a wash? But it's a minor point.

Click to expand...

Surviving even a single hit is better than what a 3e wizard can do. Also, while the numbers are higher early on, they seem to be lower (compared to 3e) at higher levels.

There seemed to be a lot more for the DM to keep track of. But again, I'm coming from a 1E point of view, where all I need to keep track of are h.p. and initiative. The monster and foe composition might be easier than it was in 3.x, but all those special powers, even for the most mundane city guardsman, seems a trifle excessive to me. When I mentioned that particular aspect (the fact that everyone has powers that inflict more damage than normal attacks) to my wife, she made the connection to WoW right away.

Click to expand...

I don't know if its WoW in specific. And if the powers inflict more damage than "normal" attacks, aren't the powers really the normal attacks. But I'll agree that tracking conditions and "tapped/untapped" powers for larger numbers of monsters looks daunting to me.

We also did a sort of very abstract skill-based activity (there was a name for it, and I apologize for not remembering). We were faced with the task of escaping the town with the town guards searching for us, and we had to pick a way to elude them, roll against the appropriate skill, and if the party racked up enough successes, we got away. I must say I found this rather too abstract for my taste. One character succeeded in his roll and the DM merely said "okay, you get a lead on a safe way out of town." In my own game, that would have been a golden role-playing opportunity that might have taken half an hour or more. But here it was done with a single die-roll. Was that a function of the system or the fact that it was an admittedly combat-oriented demo game? I don't know, and won't until I get a PH and DMG in my hands. If that's the sort of thing that's at the DM's discretion, I'll certainly not be using it too often.

Click to expand...

In fairness, this was a demo, rather than a weekly game. In my demo that I played today, there were 8 players, so the DM was rather forthright that he was not going through the challenge in the normal way, but being expeditious for time's sake. The other thing to consider about skills with RP is that is backs up the claim of the PC when he says "I blend into the crowd" if he can mechanically back his statement up.

Don't get the idea that I hated my first 4E experience. I didn't. I've got to say that there were some really good ideas here. Divvying up powers that can be used anytime, after 5 mins rest, and after a nights' sleep could have a lot of promise. But from the perspective of a DM, I don't really see how I can "wing it" as easily as I can with 1E. Maybe that'll change once I see the actual books. I'm keeping an open mind.

Bottom line; not a game I would likely choose to DM myself. But I enjoyed this as a player, and if I had a DM who was adept at picking up the mechanics as the demo DM was, I wouldn't mind playing this at conventions. Maybe as a short-term campaign. I just get the feeling that the opportunities for role-playing are going to be overcome by the fact that the game mechanics seem very much oriented towards combat. The abstract "escape from town" challenge seemed a way for lazy DM's to roll their way out of such situations.

Joe

* Compare to the original Traveller, where your character can actually die during the process of character generation.

Click to expand...

While it might not work for you, I think the other point with moving some RP events to a mechanical basis is not to force those who have been RPGers for decades to give that up, but to give scaffolding to new DMs/less skilled DMs.


<stabs self in the foot for fisking>

Rechan said:

A lot of RPGs have roleplaying skills (Intimidate/Diplomacy/Lieing), and no computer game I've ever seen has one (except say, a skill that helps you haggle for better prices on equipment). And the skill challenge thing is a new thing in this edition.

Click to expand...

Not overly important to the argument, but I thought I'd point out that are actually a ton of computer RPGs that have "roleplaying skills" like intimidate, diplomacy etc. which can be used to negotiate with NPCs, resolves conflicts, and sometimes navigate an entire "dungeon" without a single combat.