D&D 4E 4e's Equivalent to Pathfinder

[S'mon]

For the way I DM 4E, all I need is some bullet points, some quickly-drawn maps (I draw them out at the table on one of those wet-erase mats, so it HAS to be quickly-drawn), monster stats, and an idea in my head.

In fact, here's an example of my actual notes from a pivotal moment in my current game. I have only removed the monster stat blocks and magic item text. This is an entire level of adventuring.

Encounter 1: Boarding the Fishing Boat
Fisherman Trapper x2 (150xp)
Fisherman Gutter x2 (175xp)
+1 Gutter Party>5

Encounter 2: Sinking the Warship
Fisherman Hunter x3
Fisherman Line Spikers (x6)
Fisherman Butcher x3
+1 Hunter +1 Spiker Party>5

Adventure Gain
+2 Sacrificial Longsword
Blackleaf Gloves
1355 GP

Encounter 3: Beachhead
Twig Blight x4
Twig Blight Swampvine x2
+1 Swampvine Party>5

Encounter 4: Hungry Forest
205 GP mixed amber, pearls, seashells (acting as a lure)

Twig Blight Swarm x1 (200xp)
Twig Blight x4 (500xp)
Twig Blight Seedlings x4 (200xp)
+1 Swampvine Party>5

Encounter 5: Rotweed
Rotweed x1 (350xp)
Twig Blight Swampvine x4 (450xp)
+4 Twig Blight Seedlings Party>5

+2 Sacrificial Longsword

Encounter 6: Orc Patrol/Gathering Party

Battletested Orc x3 (450xp)
Orc Archer x1 (175xp)
Orc Savage x4 (175xp)

+1 Battletested Orc Party>5

On Archer:
50gp Alchemical Reagents (Arcana)
50gp Mystic Salves (Heal)
50gp Rare Herbs (Nature)
50gp Sanctified Incense (Religion)

Encounter 7: Lady Zill and the Nest Guard
Battletested Orc x3 (450xp)
Orc Archer x2 (350xp)
Lady Zill (175xp)
+1 Battletested Orc Party>5
On Lady Zill: Ornate Silver Dagger (755gp), Blackleaf Gloves

Encounter 8: The Shadow Dragon’s Lair
Majestrix (400xp)
Battletested Orc x4 (600)
+4 Savage Orcs Party>5
On Battletested Orcs: Black lacquered battle axe (100gp)


Only book I need to keep on me is the rules compendium, and that almost never gets taken out. I barely even use the GM screen that I keep up.

To me there's not much 'game' there - it just looks like a linear series of fights and treasure parcels!

Was there a map that could be explored, or was it really as linear as that? Reminds me of the big pile of WoTC adventures I have that are literally linear strings of encounters.

 

[Incenjucar]

To me there's not much 'game' there - it just looks like a linear series of fights and treasure parcels!

Was there a map that could be explored, or was it really as linear as that? Reminds me of the big pile of WoTC adventures I have that are literally linear strings of encounters.

Those are the dots in the connect-the-dots of the game. The spark of the story is, at most, a page of bullet points, mostly so I can consistently use names, and I do that a level at a time. The meat of the game is improvised on the spot with some loose ideas floating in my head. I once had the party trying to decipher a path that was determined by five pairs of "Harrow" tarot cards. While I did have some ideas going in, which determined the pairs I set up, it was ultimately five hours of the players telling ME what the fates had in store for them.

Do note that the encounters are not in linear order, and not all required to succeed. They had an opportunity to try and talk it up with two sides of the island's inhabitants, honestly or falsely, and had plenty of resources to set up traps. The party ended up ADOPTING a random twig blight who they tracked down to use as a guide, and the adventure (combined with the shaman/druid hybrid who turns into tree forms) resulted in a meme of enemies screaming "Tree!" in fear, which later led me to develop trees into the greater campaign.

4E is a godsend for improvisation, and doesn't sacrifice complexity to allow it.

 

[Incenjucar]

I'm not entirely sure what your definition of 'game' is. I think you're saying that you value the complexity of 4e combat and don't like simpler combat systems, which to you are 'less game' - less value/less fun? Or 'crunch' = 'game', so the more rules, the better?

A game to me comes down to meaningful decisions. 4E has many decision points in all aspects of the game, and most of them are meaningful. Introducing skill challenges, while clumsily done, made more meaningful decisions available outside of combat. Introducing terrain powers, Page 42 in general, and a host of interesting terrain options opened up possibilities both within combat and with dealing with exploration scenarios. Introducing a host of ways to build things, from characters (some designer talked about getting his kid a Fire Archon PC?), NPC allies (The old sage is high enough level to use that ritual, but he's still a minion!), etc etc etc. 4E contains a number of easily-used tools. It could use more, so many more, but what it has is so quick and easy to apply, and to do so without breaking anything.

While I have no personal experience with 1E (monster books aside), everything I've read about it suggests that, aside from the spellcasters, most of the meaningful decisions are made by the DM, and the dice remove decisions from everyone on a regular basis, just as they did in 2E.

I like 4e combat. It goes on way too long, though. The combat is not the whole 'game', to me. 4e combat IME gets in the way of exploration and in-character interaction - talking to NPCs - two things I regard as just as much part of the game. They were traditionally part of D&D, and should be part of D&D, IMO. I find that after a two hour combat I just want to call it a night, there's no energy left for anything else.

The combats I run go on about an hour, often less. Half of that time is people RPing. When pressed for time, we can make a round go by incredibly quickly, but that's incredibly boring and is about as immersive as a Pokemon battle.

As an aside, I don't know where people got the idea that combat is separate from interaction and exploring, but it kind of makes me sad. It's like when I tried the beta of Everquest and, while grinding skeletons, I started talking in-character, swearing oaths and whatnot, and people were AMAZED and started joining in and suddenly enjoyed the game.

 

[pemerton]

4e D&D takes a big investment, and is only 'low prep' in comparison to 3e D&D, the highest-prep game I've ever run. If anything I'd say 1e AD&D (and other pre-3e D&D) was aimed at a range of gamers, from casual to hobbyist, whereas 3e & 4e were aimed squarely at the hobbyist 'lifestyle gamer' market.

<snip>

With 4e I find it EXTREMELY difficult to accommodate drop-in players, and often have to send them away, to my chagrin.

Prepping a 1e monster is one line, usually takes a couple seconds, couple minutes for a complex NPC. Prepping a 4e monster stat block (new or adapted) takes maybe 20-30* minutes. Hell, just *reading* them takes a minute or two! Nothing like trying to prep (or read) a high level 3e NPC stat block, of course.

<snip>

Then there's creating encounters' terrain, maybe a skill challenge, and other stuff that 1e doesn't worry about.

I don't get burnt out on 4e the way I did with 3e, but it is obviously a game that is higher prep than 1e.

I don't find 4e to have higher GM prep time than AD&D (as best I can recall that prep time - it's been a while!). Maps can be drawn on the fly, for example, just as one might do so on the fly in AD&D. I can level monsters up and down on the fly also, provided I have the relevant monster stat block in front of me.

But for players it is a different matter. I can't imagine players dropping into a 4e game, especially if they were new (or newish) to RPGing. It is very intensive on the player side, in building but particularly in learning how to play your PC.

To me there's not much 'game' there - it just looks like a linear series of fights and treasure parcels!

<snip>

Was there a map that could be explored, or was it really as linear as that? Reminds me of the big pile of WoTC adventures I have that are literally linear strings of encounters.

In my own case, I have notes on the campaign background (about six A4 pages by now). And notes on likely encounters, treasures etc (analagous to a dungeon key, I guess).

Because I do exploration either freeform or via skill challenge, I don't need many mechanical notes for that (because the default DC tables do my work for me).

I use the monster stats for NPCs to extrapolate to "special moves" in a social skill challenge (eg a failed check against a Pact Hag meant that the hag's instruction was obeyed by the PC, meaning that he stepped onto the concealed trap door).

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I'm sure 5e can streamline combat enough to knock 20-30% off the time required without it being a huge big deal. I suspect they can knock 50% off the time required to hand-make a PC as well, though some PCs will probably still require a decent amount of it.

As for drop-ins, I have NPCs that are CC stat blocks, and a Slayer sheet that one of the players created for just this purpose. If someone drops in and has a specific concept they want to play, well they can hit the books or use the CB and do it.

This WAS somewhat simpler in the days of Basic, but I find that most of the time involved is people deciding what to play. It is just inherently going to take around 20 minutes for a person to decide what they need to decide and write up a sheet. If you're really familiar with the rules you CAN do it somewhat faster, but not a lot. Maybe if it is a really simple character you could do it in 5 minutes, but then again if you have CB and just click through making a simple e-martial PC it is about a 5 minute process too.

As for my campaign, yeah, it looks a lot like Incenjucar's. I write up a short 1 page of notes for each week of play, and I have notes on the overall adventure, plus maybe some usually fairly crude maps that I can use to draw up the battle map when needed or to explain things in exploration. If the PCs are in a specific detailed location then I will have a bit more detailed map and maybe some read-aloud text as well. NPCs get some short notes, etc. I do it all on a wiki and print it out, so all that stuff stays there and is mostly organized enough that I can keep going back to it and expand parts as-needed.

 

[S'mon]

A
As an aside, I don't know where people got the idea that combat is separate from interaction and exploring, but it kind of makes me sad. It's like when I tried the beta of Everquest and, while grinding skeletons, I started talking in-character, swearing oaths and whatnot, and people were AMAZED and started joining in and suddenly enjoyed the game.

That's called "adding colour", and I do it all the time, as player & GM. I love it when I delliver a snappy one-liner right before a really high attack roll! But that is only minimally interaction, and it's not exploration at all.

 

[S'mon]

A game to me comes down to meaningful decisions. 4E has many decision points in all aspects of the game, and most of them are meaningful.

OK, thanks - by 'more game' you mean 'more decisions' - I thought you meant 'more rules'!

 

[S'mon]

I don't find 4e to have higher GM prep time than AD&D (as best I can recall that prep time - it's been a while!). Maps can be drawn on the fly, for example, just as one might do so on the fly in AD&D. I can level monsters up and down on the fly also, provided I have the relevant monster stat block in front of me.

Not me - I can improvise maps (nothing very exciting - doesn't do justice to the 4e Encounter system) but changing monster level is too many numbers to fiddle with.

 

[The Halfling]

Those are the dots in the connect-the-dots of the game. The spark of the story is, at most, a page of bullet points, mostly so I can consistently use names, and I do that a level at a time. The meat of the game is improvised on the spot with some loose ideas floating in my head. I once had the party trying to decipher a path that was determined by five pairs of "Harrow" tarot cards. While I did have some ideas going in, which determined the pairs I set up, it was ultimately five hours of the players telling ME what the fates had in store for them.

Do note that the encounters are not in linear order, and not all required to succeed. They had an opportunity to try and talk it up with two sides of the island's inhabitants, honestly or falsely, and had plenty of resources to set up traps. The party ended up ADOPTING a random twig blight who they tracked down to use as a guide, and the adventure (combined with the shaman/druid hybrid who turns into tree forms) resulted in a meme of enemies screaming "Tree!" in fear, which later led me to develop trees into the greater campaign.

4E is a godsend for improvisation, and doesn't sacrifice complexity to allow it.

This is how I run my 4e games too. Too often my detailed adventures ran in the reality that is the herd of cats called PC's. I find it better to run a skeletal game, and feed off the players when it feels like the adventure would improve. It also gives the players a sense accomplishment, when they "figure out" the villain's nefarious plan.

I was also wondering, at what point does changing the math affect someone's perception of a game. In other words, at what point does the system stop being 4e, and become something else.

 

[Incenjucar]

That's called "adding colour", and I do it all the time, as player & GM. I love it when I delliver a snappy one-liner right before a really high attack roll! But that is only minimally interaction, and it's not exploration at all.

Well, you can't do much more than that in Everquest combat. In D&D, the actions of the enemies, their relationship to the environment, and the environment itself can all reveal aspects of the story. A well-dressed scene with enemies (or allies!) that react to protect or completely ignore certain others, who are dressed in an informative way, who are engaged in a certain activity before things begin, who make certain choices during the conflict... A battle can be a tragedy, a comedy, or a history lesson.