D&D 4E Forked Thread: Some Thoughts on 4e

[Lacyon]

Even a Warlord would be. One of his first abilities to come into play is the initiative bonus, which one could say was the Warlord ordering the troops into a better formation to prepare them for combat quicker. The enemy would quickly see this and understand that he is in charge, not the guy standing in front with the shield and heavy armor.

Especially since in order to get that init bonus, you have to be able to see and hear the warlord.

 

[Doctor Proctor]

Especially since in order to get that init bonus, you have to be able to see and hear the warlord.

True. So looking at the RAW, it's quite clear that it's intended to be the Warlord giving some sort of order to the party. At the very beginning of combat no less...it would pretty much make him instantly recognizable as a Leader.

 

[Verision]

Deleted

 

[Tony Vargas]

That's uber metagamey.
"Ignore the other 4 monsters that are attacking us and concentrate on the last monster".
Doesn't matter if its the monsters doing it or the PCs doing it, unless there is some specific goal to it (for example: escort mission where the NPCs try to kill the person being escorted or some such thing).

Is it a good strategy? Does it work? Yes and yes. But its super metagamey.

Concentrating fire is a classic tactic, not just in RPGs, but in real life. Maybe not in small unit skirmishes with medieval weapons, but still. It is metagaming in the sense that the system doesn't degrade the effectiveness of a creature until it dropped (in fact, many monsters become /tougher/ when bloodied), but, that's such a basic truth of the system, that ignoring would be as strange as not expecting to fall when when you step off a cliff.

There are ways in which paying attention to rules over what the rules model is metagaming, but, conversely, the rules of a game world are in effect it's 'laws of physics,' and defying them is silly in it's own way.


Concentrating attacks is the single most obvious tactic to adopt in D&D combat. It's uninspired, plodding, and trite, but it works fairly well. It's not the only tactic, though, nor is it always the best.

It's on the level of the simple truism that the shortest distance between two points is always a straight line. It is. But if you insist on travelling through mountains in a straight line, you'll be digging a lot of tunnels.

 

[ExploderWizard]

Swarming the defender so you can spend the whole fight attacking the guy with the best AC (who also gets the most out of his many surges due to a high hp) and be forced to give up OAs which stop your movement on a hit if you try to disengage does not make the most sense usually.

And since you always want to engage the squishier targets first, you should indeed go around the Fighter - if you win initiative and thus aren't already "stuck" to him, and the terrain allows you a long way around that still lets you reach the squishy in one turn.

I am stuck on fighter, cause fighter's stuck on me!!!!!!

 

[KarinsDad]

Considering that most PC's can tell, say, a Blue Dragon from a Green Dragon, or a Bugbear from a Hobgoblin, I don't think it's unreasonable to assume that the NPC's can tell a Cleric from a Fighter. Paladin from a Fighter though? That might be a bit less clear at first...but certain classes are fairly obvious.

Apples and Oranges. Monster Knowledge checks indicate Race. They do not indicate Class. Just because PCs can figure out Race with a Monster Knowledge check does not mean that NPCs can figure out Class. Other knowledge checks might be an indicator to class, but why would this information be given out to all monsters for free?

If a monster made a Monster Knowledge check about a PC, he would know that it is a Dragonborn. How exactly does it know that the Dragonborn is a Paladin or a Fighter?

In 4E, Wizards can wear platemail. In 4E, Rogues can use the same weapons as any other class.

So, how does a monster tell if a Cleric shouts "Get them" or the Rogue shouts "Get them"?


Class is training or profession information. If classes can use the same equipment, how is it that a monster would reasonably know one class from a different one?

Answer: Common Knowledge is DC 15.

How exactly does a monster know that a Wizard cast a spell as opposed to a Cleric casting a prayer as opposed to a Warlock casting a spell if the monster does not make a common knowledge DC 15 Arcana or Religion check? Most monsters do not have these skills.

 

[Hypersmurf]

In 4E, Wizards can wear platemail.

But how many do?

In 4E, Rogues can use the same weapons as any other class.

But how many do?

In 3E, wizards can wear plate armor. In 3E, rogues can wield greatswords. This hasn't changed in 4E.

-Hyp.

 

[KarinsDad]

But how many do?

But how many do?

In 3E, wizards can wear plate armor. In 3E, rogues can wield greatswords. This hasn't changed in 4E.

-Hyp.

The fact remains is that class is not determined by equipment. It should require a knowledge check based on what the PC does that is class unique. If the PC swings a sword, exactly which class is that?

 

[DracoSuave]

When the sword swung happens to exhibit a specific at-will power? Not long at all.

 

[KarinsDad]

When the sword swung happens to exhibit a specific at-will power? Not long at all.

Even if that At Will power is common knowledge, it still takes a DC 15 skill check.