I think we're done with 4E

[Anunnaki]

Hiya,

Sorta. The way I understand it, Age of Legends is a 4th edition verison of Earthdawn, but Redbrick is going to continue to publish classic Earthdawn stuff as well.

Nightchilde is correct here.

Age of Legend 4E is simply a port of the Earthdawn setting to D&D4E, with the first products due in 2009.

However, the Earthdawn game is still well-and-truly in production, with new supplements due (and scheduled) throughout 2009 and beyond. Earthdawn is our "core" fantasy RPG and we are absolutely committed to ongoing production and support.

RedBrick has a busy 2009 coming up, with a number of projects across all of our game lines that we "hoped" would reach fruition in 2008, but are hitting finalization in 2009 instead. Only so many hours in the week, alas...

Take kaer,

JAMES FLOWERS
Managing Director

 

[Obryn]

My players and I love 4e, but there can definitely be a grindiness to combat. I'm trying several ways to speed things up, and so far they're working just wonderfully. But yes, if I were to pinpoint an issue my group has with 4e, it would be this.

Mostly, a DM needs to acknowledge that not every fight should be to the last HP.

-O

 

[Kunimatyu]

4e is working for me so far, but combat often makes me grit my teeth.

The roleplaying aspects are *great* -- I love 4e wizard cantrips to death. Some folks may whine that wizard isn't as powerful, but to me, this is the first time I actually feel like my character commands powerful arcane secrets. Annoying NPCs hear malevolent whispers from behind their back, ghostly hands turn the pages of my spellbook and pour my drinks, and that's just two of my cantrips!

Combat, on the other hand, seems like it grinds to a halt at times, and we've petitioned our DM to end combat early several times, when we've clearly got the upper hand and all of the tactical advantage, but the monster's HP still aren't gone. It's happened too many times now for it to be anything other than a major issue with 4e.

I like balance in combat mechanics and such, but when a fight is won, it should be over, not have 15-20 minutes to go.

 

[Rel]

Combat, on the other hand, seems like it grinds to a halt at times, and we've petitioned our DM to end combat early several times, when we've clearly got the upper hand and all of the tactical advantage, but the monster's HP still aren't gone. It's happened too many times now for it to be anything other than a major issue with 4e.

I like balance in combat mechanics and such, but when a fight is won, it should be over, not have 15-20 minutes to go.

I've heard this complaint enough times that I have to give it some credence (I don't think I've run 4e enough - only about 4 sessions worth - to have my own impression). However I am a bit puzzled by how the complaints manifest. Generally people seem to feel that the fight is won but yet it grinds on for several more rounds. These two things seem incongruous to me.

If the fight goes on for several more rounds, aren't those several more rounds of the bad guys having chances to land a lucky crit on the PC's? Heck, given that crits are now just max damage, even a few regular hits with decent damage rolls can be threatening. In the few sessions I've run (all at 1st or 2nd level) just one or two crits against the PC's suddenly had things looking very chancy for them. I'm wondering why, in the complaints I'm hearing, the monsters aren't still a threat for those "several more rounds" of combat that seem to be a grind.

Please be assured, I'm not being snarky at all. I'm just not quite understanding this. Enlighten me.

 

[LostSoul]

My players and I love 4e, but there can definitely be a grindiness to combat. I'm trying several ways to speed things up, and so far they're working just wonderfully. But yes, if I were to pinpoint an issue my group has with 4e, it would be this.

Mostly, a DM needs to acknowledge that not every fight should be to the last HP.

I am the DM in our group, and maybe that's the reason. I try to do as much damage as possible, but when I know I've lost I have the NPCs run away - because that way I can influence future encounters with what is happening now.

 

[D'karr]

I've heard this complaint enough times that I have to give it some credence (I don't think I've run 4e enough - only about 4 sessions worth - to have my own impression). However I am a bit puzzled by how the complaints manifest. Generally people seem to feel that the fight is won but yet it grinds on for several more rounds. These two things seem incongruous to me.

If the fight goes on for several more rounds, aren't those several more rounds of the bad guys having chances to land a lucky crit on the PC's? Heck, given that crits are now just max damage, even a few regular hits with decent damage rolls can be threatening. In the few sessions I've run (all at 1st or 2nd level) just one or two crits against the PC's suddenly had things looking very chancy for them. I'm wondering why, in the complaints I'm hearing, the monsters aren't still a threat for those "several more rounds" of combat that seem to be a grind.

Please be assured, I'm not being snarky at all. I'm just not quite understanding this. Enlighten me.

You are correct that a few more rounds of the bad guys pounding at your characters should still be a threat. But what I think is being exposed here is that a combat feels grindy when it becomes "I hit", "monster hits."

A DM really needs to keep on his toes and make the entirety of the combat exciting, including those last few rounds where the creature and the PCs might be resorting to "At-Will" powers and the flashiness of "Encounter" & "Daily" powers has gone (they've been spent).

In my experience this shows up too often in low-level play because the players don't have enough variety of powers. In addition, they might miss one or two times and then the creatures last longer. This leads to a few rounds towards the end where it seems monotonous.

If you look at a party of 1st level character they can attempt to take on a 3rd-4th level solo monster. The problem is that even though they can take that challenge, if the challenge does not include other excitement, it can become boring. A solo is going to have good AC, and high hit points. So if the party spends most of it's time not hitting, the combat can be boring. Take a look at Scalegloom Hall as an example.

If a DM does not "work" at making the encounters exciting (exciting terrain or use of terrain, additional reinforcements, wild combats, etc.) it might turn out boring if the party has a bad streak of luck and keeps missing. That is when combat feels grindy.

 

[Nebulous]

We dont feel that magic is any different than mundane. Or impressive at all, most of the time. Kinda lessens the game.

I agree. I really dislike how magic has been neutered in the name of balance. I didn't even think magic was out of control in 3.x (or earlier) until 12th level or higher, and i rarely ran games that high anyway.

Oddly enough, I think I like the game alot more as a DM than as a player. I love the monster design philosophy, where the stats underneath the hood are pretty generic but the differences in specials gives flavor. It gives the DM a good base to work from. I never liked 3e's philosophy of trying to make monsters more like PCs. 3e is a very hard game to run.

I'm having the exact same problem. I like RUNNING 4e as a DM, the monsters are cool and encounters are easy to build and easy to wing, but i don't want to really play it. But the players are liking it a lot, so i suppose as long as we're both happy.

We played yesterday and something i've noticed cropped up again. There are so many powers and abilites that the group has that i'm not aware of. They keep pulling these weird abilities out that i haven't seen (we have new characters though, so that's expected) but i still can't keep track of what everyone does. I just can't read the PHB/splatbook powers section for fun because i don't enjoy it. It's boring. Hundreds and hundreds of simililary themed abilities.

I am curious, have many played the game up into epic levels? It looks to me like it would be very grindy, and probably out of whack.

I have not, nor will I. Looking ahead, i think the game becomes too "superhero" by 15th, and i would never run a game past that. If we ever get that high, maybe even by 12th, i'm going to end the campaign and get us to switch to Warhammer for awhile.

 

[Mark]

I've heard this complaint enough times that I have to give it some credence (I don't think I've run 4e enough - only about 4 sessions worth - to have my own impression). However I am a bit puzzled by how the complaints manifest. Generally people seem to feel that the fight is won but yet it grinds on for several more rounds. These two things seem incongruous to me.

Too much time in a combat between tipping point and denouement.

 

[Felon]

I still don't see the hit point grind in my game.

Most encounters that are not very hard (4+ levels above the PCs) end in 5 rounds. Easy encounters are over in 1-3 rounds.

Even the last encounter I ran - 3 4th-level encounter groups coming in waves about 3 rounds apart vs. 5 slightly drained 5th- and 6th-level PCs - ended in about 12 rounds. It included 2 elites and only 1 minion.

Some elaboration is in order. In 4e, you're lucky to see a non-daily attack do 20 points of damage, even at paragon levels. OTOH, hit points often top 100, even at heroic levels. Add into that the rather high whiff factor in 4e, and you've got a recipe for grinding, not brisk three-round battles.

 

[Pseudopsyche]

If the fight goes on for several more rounds, aren't those several more rounds of the bad guys having chances to land a lucky crit on the PC's? Heck, given that crits are now just max damage, even a few regular hits with decent damage rolls can be threatening. In the few sessions I've run (all at 1st or 2nd level) just one or two crits against the PC's suddenly had things looking very chancy for them. I'm wondering why, in the complaints I'm hearing, the monsters aren't still a threat for those "several more rounds" of combat that seem to be a grind.

Crits don't have quite the same impact in 4E as in 3E. Given the numbers, it's unlikely for any one attack to take a PC from positive hp to the negative of their bloodied value. By the time a combat reaches the grind stage, the odds of the monsters critting frequently enough to turn the tide is too low to consider. Playing the combat out only determines the cost of the encounter in healing surges, but in most cases it's probably more fun to end the combat one way or another. Really, the grind is a consequence of (and a price we pay for) the less swingy nature of 4E combat.