Picked up the Red Box today!

[Aegeri]

Some comments on things you wrote, thanks for the general go over of what is in the red box! I am definitely not very excited about it anymore, but I will get it so I can show my other players and have a look through.

There's a backstab encounter ability which grants a paltry +3 to hit against an opponent you have combat advantage against.

In 4E a +3 bonus is never "Paltry" period. That's a substantial bonus to hit practically anything and is excellent. A +3 bonus at 1st level is as good at 30th level with how attacks/defenses in 4E scale. You don't need to hand out very high bonuses to be effective - in this case that power will definitely do the trick.

First, the wizard feels like a controller from 1st level - unlike in the PHB1. Everything effects conditions on the battlefield, with the exception of Magic Missile (which in hindsight doesn't seem to fit with the new 4E concept of arcane controller, but oh well, nostalgia wins here.)

From direct play experience with a very "mage like" build of the Wizard in my current IRL game I can say Magic Missile has been immensely useful (as a bonus at-will, as the mage gets it). It is very effective for getting rid of annoying minions and finishing off chronically damaged monsters. As it's a free at-will power for the mage in essentials it's very handy in general.

There's a very complicated trap/puzzle room involving a chess puzzle. (Complicated for me because I know nothing about chess - and I would guess to your average new gamer as well.)

I've seen chess puzzles used in numerous modules and similar. The basic rules for chess are easily found online and a lot of people who don't play DnD do know how to play chess. The actual encounter itself though sounds awfully written, especially if it just assumes people know the rules.

A lot of the encounters include fights with soldiers and brutes of 4th level. This will lead to long, grindy combats.

IIRC, rogues can now use sneak attack once per turn (though the Red Box looks to be inconsistent with the rest of essentials, lol wizards etc). 4th level brutes are not terribly bad actually, because they are hit very easily due to their low defenses and won't hang around. You have a point with soldiers though.

What is worthwhile about it: diehard 4E fans can preview new builds and powers a couple of weeks before the other Essentials books are released; a handful of okay combat encounters; a set of polyhedral dice; counters and tokens; an awesome box with Larry Elmore's nostalgiac art. If this is worth $20 to you, then by all means pick this up.

Sadly this is how I am beginning to feel about it as well. I was thinking of recommending it to my fiancee, but I might not given the general opinions I've been reading on the redbox. This is a bit of a shame, especially considering what I've heard of Hero's of the Fallen Lands has been positive.

 

[Dausuul]

If the Red Box is really as badly edited and put together as you say, that's a very sad thing. You'd think WotC would make a special effort to put their best foot forward in a product aimed at expanding the player base.

 

[Retreater]

In 4E a +3 bonus is never "Paltry" period.

Sorry if I'm wrong. I come from a 3.x mindset on that one. I can count on one hand the number of 4E sessions I've played. Highest level: 2. Thanks for the clarification.

From direct play experience with a very "mage like" build of the Wizard in my current IRL game I can say Magic Missile has been immensely useful (as a bonus at-will, as the mage gets it). It is very effective for getting rid of annoying minions and finishing off chronically damaged monsters. As it's a free at-will power for the mage in essentials it's very handy in general.

No doubt it is useful in those cases. It just doesn't seem very controller-ish (to make up a word).

I've seen chess puzzles used in numerous modules and similar. The basic rules for chess are easily found online and a lot of people who don't play DnD do know how to play chess. The actual encounter itself though sounds awfully written, especially if it just assumes people know the rules.

You're right that I could research the rules of chess, but when everything you need to run an encounter is supposed to be on a 2-page spread in a module, it seems like unnecessary research to have to go to the Internet to look up the rules for a different game. (Not to mention that you can be playing somewhere where there's no Internet handy.)

For someone who is familiar with chess, the puzzle might be a cakewalk encounter. For me and my group (with the exception of possibly one guy), it would be frustrating death.

My biggest beef with it is that it is not clearly written and that the module designer seems to use the names "Rook" and "Bishop" and "Knight" and "King" interchangably. Unless I don't know anything at all about chess, this is a major problem.

 

[Aegeri]

Sorry if I'm wrong. I come from a 3.x mindset on that one. I can count on one hand the number of 4E sessions I've played. Highest level: 2. Thanks for the clarification.

I sometimes come off with a harsher tone than intended, I'm not trying to jump all over you (though the "period" I realize may have been excessive) it's just a fairly common misunderstanding. A +3 bonus is really significant. Also IIRC it does extra damage too on the attack, on top of sneak attack.

No doubt it is useful in those cases. It just doesn't seem very controller-ish (to make up a word).

I agree but bear in mind it won't eat your normal controller at-wills, you still have those and where it's useful it's amazing. You don't use it often, but when you do it really helps out and you appreciate it sitting there on your character sheet.

You're right that I could research the rules of chess, but when everything you need to run an encounter is supposed to be on a 2-page spread in a module

Absolutely 100% fully agreed. I came off as being way too defensive on something I do agree with you on. It is unfortunately a flaw in these kind of "game within a game" puzzles that the module writer assumes the DM has knowledge of that game as well (so does not describe it). While it is something you can do, it should be clear enough how it works in the module that anyone should be able to figure it out. I can't really comment on your other points, but I will certainly want to have a read of this when I get my own red box soon to figure out what the intention was.

 

[Reynard]

Out of curiosity, how much "play" does the box contain? An session's worth like the 3.x intro sets, or a dozen sessions like the original red box*? Something in between?

* That's a quick guesstimate. One could probably play the red box for a few months before "needing" the Expert Set.

 

[Retreater]

Out of curiosity, how much "play" does the box contain? An session's worth like the 3.x intro sets, or a dozen sessions like the original red box*? Something in between?

I'd say in-between. I played the solo adventure last night (which I was impressed with for teaching the fundamentals of character generation). It took me about 30 minutes, and I created a halfling rogue. If you wanted to create a character of each class presented, figure about 2 hours total.

The DM group adventure contains about 7 encounters. Depending on how you run your game, that should take about 2 complete 4 hour sessions (giving some time for roleplaying and exploration).

The rules present enough information to level up to Level 2. So you can consider that you can play through all of Level 2 until you reach Level 3. If you average around 1 hour per encounter (and roleplaying and exploration) and there are 13 encounters per level (just a rough guesstimate), you should have about 13 hours worth of play total.

So I would guess that if you made every character class presented in the solo adventure and played to the cusp of 3rd level, you probably would have about 15 hours' worth of gameplay time, or enough for 3 sessions of play.

Now, another question attached to that is: Is there enough variety to make different types of characters? Well, at least for the rogue I created, there were two different paths I could have followed (Brawny or Dextrous - my own terms not the ones in the books). So even if your rogue died halfway through the adventure, you could come in as a slightly different build. That adds some replay value.

One thing I would've liked to have seen is a small equipment chart so the characters can try out different armors, shields, and weapon combinations. (This is one of the aspects of the orginial Red Box that made it feel like a complete game instead of a demo.) While this was beyond the scope of this product, I think it would've been nice (and the information is out there for free with the Character Builder demo for players interested in pursuing it.)

Retreater

 

[Fiery James]

I haven't got the Red Box yet, but I've got it on pre-order and hope to see it soon.

BUT, I did come back from lunch to find Heroes of the Fallen Lands sitting on my desk, so that's a bonus! Now I can "Create and Play Clerics, Fighters, Rogues, and Wizards!"

No opinions or impressions or review until I get home, sadly.

 

[Dragonhelm]

One thing I'm confused on...where do you redeem the code for the free adventure? I put in the URL and it takes me to the main D&D page. Not seeing anywhere to enter the code.

Am I missing something?

 

[Retreater]

One thing I'm confused on...where do you redeem the code for the free adventure? I put in the URL and it takes me to the main D&D page. Not seeing anywhere to enter the code.

Am I missing something?

I think the coupon says that it is not valid until 9/7. I would wait until that day for the code to activate.

Retreater

 

[Dragonhelm]

I think the coupon says that it is not valid until 9/7. I would wait until that day for the code to activate.

Retreater

Ah, you're right. It's in the teeny tiny print. I'll just have to wait impatiently, then.

Thanks!