D&D 4E JamesonCourage Is Starting A 4e Game; Looking For Pointers

[JamesonCourage]

It really depends. Under most circumstances the battles that are insignificant can be done in an 8" x 10" inch location, and some even smaller. If you use smaller you will get some weird dynamics as movement will be hampered and you won't be adding much terrain. You will also lose some of the benefits of having artillery monsters peppering the party.

I assumed that an average space of 12 X 15 ish was built into the value of the different monster roles (like artillery). I don't know why I assumed that; it just seemed like the average space I might be using. So if I have a space that is, say, 10 X 12, artillery I use will be easier?

For some set-piece battles I've done I've used a much larger area of map, but these are for end type encounters, which I want to make memorable, etc. Even in these larger maps the battles will concentrate in smaller areas (8"x10"). I have a large area mapped so it can be exciting.

Here are some examples of ones I've used.

I definitely don't plan / want maps to look like what you have. Way too involved for me (and might even pull me out of my groove when running the game). I think that I can see using up to about 18 on a side, but not past it. It's just too much for me.

I think the most important piece of advice I can give is to get creative with it, and make it fun.

Thanks, I plan on it

Best of luck with your game. I'll try to pop in here later and give some advice, but I see that others have already given you some awesome tricks in this thread.

Yep, lots of nice stuff! Thanks for the advice (XP sent your way)!

 

[JamesonCourage]

So, I think we've landed on the number of players. It looks like 3 people, with 2 more jumping in from time to time when our schedules line up. I'll likely design encounters around a 5-person party, and have two simple fill-in NPCs (manifested somehow... blessing, spirit, ghost, magic item, divine intervention, unconscious psionic manifestation, etc.) for the group to use when we're down to 3 players.

I know a little of what the 3 players want to play so far, but I'll know more tonight, and I'll save my update for when I have those 3 done and I can report it all at once.

 

[Jhaelen]

I'll likely design encounters around a 5-person party, and have two simple fill-in NPCs (manifested somehow... blessing, spirit, ghost, magic item, divine intervention, unconscious psionic manifestation, etc.) for the group to use when we're down to 3 players.

That's one possible solution. I've often been faced with the problem of an unknown number of players for a given session and I'e found it's usually quite easy to adjust encounters up or down, as required: Add/remove a bunch of minions or a regular enemy; replace an elite with a regular enemy or downgrade your solo. I'm sure as you're getting more comfortable with the encounter-building guidelines you'll feel the same!

 

[Balesir]

I assumed that an average space of 12 X 15 ish was built into the value of the different monster roles (like artillery). I don't know why I assumed that; it just seemed like the average space I might be using. So if I have a space that is, say, 10 X 12, artillery I use will be easier?

It's not just artillery and such - a couple of examples:

- A recent encounter for my 7-character Paragon group involved 6 Large (4 square) undead dragons and a few medium (1 square) others. "Turn undead" forced some of the undead dragons back a full move - 8 squares. That brings a need for a 8-square wide "back field" all around the actual combat area, since it was in the open. The base combat area was around 16x16, so the full area was pretty big.

- Most 4E indoor encounters are better done IME as multiple rooms/buildings. When assassins decided to assault an inn the party were staying in, the 'battlefield' was not just the whole inn (around 8" square, and L-shaped, 2 stories) but spilled out into the streets and buildings around. The PCs have pretty good moves (the warlock's best teleport is 10 long, I think, and there are others at 8 and 5; the rogue has a move of 9 in shadows/dim light) and can climb, jump and sometimes teleport or fly around...

 

[JamesonCourage]

That's one possible solution. I've often been faced with the problem of an unknown number of players for a given session and I'e found it's usually quite easy to adjust encounters up or down, as required: Add/remove a bunch of minions or a regular enemy; replace an elite with a regular enemy or downgrade your solo. I'm sure as you're getting more comfortable with the encounter-building guidelines you'll feel the same!

Yup, I imagine that'll be the case. I know at least three of the characters now (more on that in my next post), but I feel pretty good about the encounter building so far. I do look forward to learning more through experience

It's not just artillery and such - a couple of examples:

- A recent encounter for my 7-character Paragon group involved 6 Large (4 square) undead dragons and a few medium (1 square) others. "Turn undead" forced some of the undead dragons back a full move - 8 squares. That brings a need for a 8-square wide "back field" all around the actual combat area, since it was in the open. The base combat area was around 16x16, so the full area was pretty big.

16 X 16 seems manageable, but big.

- Most 4E indoor encounters are better done IME as multiple rooms/buildings. When assassins decided to assault an inn the party were staying in, the 'battlefield' was not just the whole inn (around 8" square, and L-shaped, 2 stories) but spilled out into the streets and buildings around. The PCs have pretty good moves (the warlock's best teleport is 10 long, I think, and there are others at 8 and 5; the rogue has a move of 9 in shadows/dim light) and can climb, jump and sometimes teleport or fly around...

Well, I'm running for level 1, so hopefully I don't need to worry about all of this quite yet. Maybe it'll feel more natural as they go up in level, and I get more used to using the battle map. Thanks for the input, though. I can see why more room would be necessary at a certain point.

 

[D'karr]

I assumed that an average space of 12 X 15 ish was built into the value of the different monster roles (like artillery). I don't know why I assumed that; it just seemed like the average space I might be using. So if I have a space that is, say, 10 X 12, artillery I use will be easier?

You will have 3-5 players, so when you build encounters you will probably have a mix of 3-10 monsters on average. Your players and monsters will occupy 6-15 squares without moving at all. If the monsters are large quadruple their area. So you can see that when combat is joined, if you want to have room to maneuver you will need some space. 8x10 will feel small, 10x12 is okay, but 18x20 is better. You want to have room to move. The artillery/controllers can actually hang out back and not be easily overrun, you can have "defending" monsters up front that will harass the party. And you can make the combat more interesting by letting it spill out the edges to other areas. Like Balesir mentioned I find that combat areas are the best way to approach the "terrain" - a bar brawl that spills out to the streets, a guard room that suddenly gets reinforcements from a secret passage, a trap room that forces movement because the trap forces movement (proximity damage, etc). Another thing, think in three dimensions. Have balconies, rooftops, cliffsides, promontories, etc. A battle in a guard room is okay, it is better if the reinforcements are artillery on a balcony and not easily reached. You'll start getting the hang of it, and it will almost become second nature.

I definitely don't plan / want maps to look like what you have. Way too involved for me (and might even pull me out of my groove when running the game). I think that I can see using up to about 18 on a side, but not past it. It's just too much for me.

Sure, that's understandable. I've been using minis since the 70's with the TSR/Grenadier ones. So this stuff is almost second nature to our group. If you're starting, a simple drawing with tokens will more than suffice. We use these because we like them, not because they are necessary.

Yep, lots of nice stuff! Thanks for the advice (XP sent your way)!

Yep, some very good advice already. Keep your questions coming and I'm sure you will get even more awesome advice from the community here.

 

[JamesonCourage]

So, the question I'll currently be answering:

If you would, could you post each PC's Background, Theme, Class and the general build/archetype the player is going for?

For the three full time players, here's what we got tonight:

(1) Amanda: Amanda has played 4e before, but no other forms of D&D (though she does have some other limited RPG / LARP experience, as far as I know). She will be playing a level 1 Gnome Monk. She has the Infernal Prince theme, and the "Struck By Lightning - Follower of Kord" background. The character came from a wealthy background, and was essentially framed and sentenced to hard labor for 5 years with the other murderers, where she was fully expected to die. While working, she was struck by lightning and survived, taking it as a sign that she was here for a reason. Taking up the offer of a monk who had been protecting her up to this point (as she was rather meek), she used the five years of hard labor and defending against murderers to perfect her body as much as possible, and was released peacefully when her term was up. She has since been tempted by devils to help her control and grow her powers, but she's refused so far. The character has ambitions to start an illegal organization and take over a city (mostly by stealing from the rich, who can afford it).

(2) Daniel: This is the most experienced player, and played in a 3.X game for nine years with his old group, though he likes 4e, and has played before (with Amanda). He will be playing a level 1 Mul Cleric (Warpriest) of the Raven Queen. (In this campaign, the Mul will be a subrace of the dwarves; think "surface dwarves" or the like.) He has the Ordained Priest theme, and the "Pivotal Event - You Die" background. At one point, he died, and the Raven Queen brought him back, telling him that it wasn't his time, or that he was to keep a few others from passing on (the other PCs, for example). He's going to be looking out for those whose time is near an end to help send them along, as well as making sure to keep people alive if it isn't their time yet. He took healing options more often than not, though he has the Death domain. The character has ambitions to pursue what he believes is his mission from the Raven Queen wants: ushering some souls into the afterlife, and stopping others from moving on too soon.

(3) Rick: Rick has not played since 1e, but has played games like World of Warcraft during his time off, and didn't seem put off by any changes I told him about tonight. He will be playing a level 1 Dwarven Fighter (Knight) / multiclass Paladin of Kord. He has the Guardian theme, and the "Dwarf - Outcast" background (his clan exiled him for not having enough loyalty to his clan, and too much for himself). Since being exiled, he's looking for ways to make it on his own, and as a fellow follower of Kord, he has a connection with Amanda's character. He took the Battle Wrath and Poised Assault stances, but strongly considered Cleaving Assault (after I explained minions). I plan to use minions often, so I imagine he'll swap one of his stances at level 2 to Cleaving Assault, though I'm just speculating. The character has ambitions to make a living for himself now that he's separated from his clan, and engage in some battle along the way (while protecting his allies).

As of this point, I'm debating what I want to do for the other two "NPCs" in the party, and I'm open to suggestions. I'm thinking a magic item that can manifest during conflicts might be an option for one, but I'm not sure. Maybe some sort of intelligent Wizard's staff with the intelligence of the Wizard in it? Daniel's Cleric is trained in Arcana, so I might let be the one to summon his essence out (adding a controller to their side). I was also considering letting Amanda's character unconsciously manifest a protector of some sort (maybe a Fighter [Slayer]?) that would protect her and her allies in combat (by going on the offensive), but she made a Monk, so now I'm reconsidering. Maybe something related to the Raven Queen, Kord, or the Monk's Infernal lineage?

Any feedback on the characters / party dynamics / ideas for the two pseudo-NPCs? Any at all? All feedback is welcome!

 

[JamesonCourage]

You will have 3-5 players, so when you build encounters you will probably have a mix of 3-10 monsters on average. Your players and monsters will occupy 6-15 squares without moving at all.

Exactly! Maybe 15 spaces taken up on the high end the majority of the time. 10 X 12 is still 120 squares... the good guys and the bad guys are only taking up about 1/10th of it (before walls, obstacles, and the like). If I go 12 X 15, that's 180 squares, and the good guys and bad guys are only taking up 1/12th of the board (before walls, obstacles, and the like). I didn't think much more would be necessary.

If the monsters are large quadruple their area. So you can see that when combat is joined, if you want to have room to maneuver you will need some space. 8x10 will feel small, 10x12 is okay, but 18x20 is better. You want to have room to move.

I can see 8 X 10 feeling small, but 10 X 12 is decent (to me), 12 X 15 is pretty good, and 18 X 20 just seems huge. Again, to me. But I haven't had anything more than me playing out encounters, so I can't say for sure yet.

The artillery/controllers can actually hang out back and not be easily overrun, you can have "defending" monsters up front that will harass the party. And you can make the combat more interesting by letting it spill out the edges to other areas. Like Balesir mentioned I find that combat areas are the best way to approach the "terrain" - a bar brawl that spills out to the streets, a guard room that suddenly gets reinforcements from a secret passage, a trap room that forces movement because the trap forces movement (proximity damage, etc).

I guess I just see how this can't function at 12 X 15, but you all have more experience. I'm waiting to see for myself, but you're probably right.

Another thing, think in three dimensions. Have balconies, rooftops, cliffsides, promontories, etc. A battle in a guard room is okay, it is better if the reinforcements are artillery on a balcony and not easily reached. You'll start getting the hang of it, and it will almost become second nature.

This is a good point. I'll try to keep this in mind. Thanks

Sure, that's understandable. I've been using minis since the 70's with the TSR/Grenadier ones. So this stuff is almost second nature to our group. If you're starting, a simple drawing with tokens will more than suffice. We use these because we like them, not because they are necessary.

Yeah, I'll be doing simple drawings with dry erase markers on a battle map and using tokens (they ordered minis for just their characters). So, nothing fancy on my end. I don't plan on investing in the battle map / miniatures / tokens all that much at all, so printing pictures out and slapping them to cardboard cutouts (wrapped in tape) is going to do for me.

Yep, some very good advice already. Keep your questions coming and I'm sure you will get even more awesome advice from the community here.

I hope so, it's been a very good thread. Feel free to kick in ideas on my last post, too!

 

[D'karr]

I'll likely design encounters around a 5-person party, and have two simple fill-in NPCs (manifested somehow... blessing, spirit, ghost, magic item, divine intervention, unconscious psionic manifestation, etc.) for the group to use when we're down to 3 players.

I've always run with a large group. My current group is 6-9 players (we've had up to 12). However we play if up to 4 can show up. I've found that my encounters scale much better if I design around a party of 4, with planned scalable "upgrades". Rather than building for a party of 5-6 and scaling down. Because of this, we've found that encounters can run much faster when needed.

One tendency I had at the beginning of 4e was to scale all encounters to be "level appropriate" up to "Level +4". I disregarded that encounters should also play in the opposite direction down to Level-2. So encounters should be from a range of Level-2 up to Level+4.

If you're simply taking out some "insignificant guards", use a few of them (2-3) at Level-2. This makes that encounter play as planned. It is insignificant guards, not super guards, and it should play as such. When the party is taking on the "King under the mountain" and his troops then you can use a Level+4 encounter. But be warned you will have to "play with this", and adjust a bit until you arrive at your and your players comfort level. I recommend hardly ever using single monsters of level+x to arrive at the Level+X "budget". This causes grind because they are usually harder to hit, and at some point can become rather boring. Keep your eye out for that, specially if you will have a small party. IMO, this combat grind more than anything else will be what makes or breaks the game. You don't want your players bored during combat, so make it exciting, but pace it so that it ends at an appropriate point/time. When the foregone conclusion is that the monster is defeated, end the encounter by the monster retreating or dying. Hacking at it for another 3-4 rounds because people are missing, or the creature still has 100hp out of 400Hp is super boring. Avoid at all costs.

My most important discovery was that my job as DM was to carefully gauge and maintain pacing during the game. The rules be damned at that point if they are not helping. I want my players excited, not bored.

 

[D'karr]

Any feedback on the characters / party dynamics / ideas for the two pseudo-NPCs? Any at all? All feedback is welcome!

First of all the background stories of these characters are very good starting points. Definitely use these as the starting points for the campaign. I can already think of meeting other ex-cons, encounters with undead that have to be "saved", and conflicts with dwarves because of having an outcast in their midst. Well done to you and your players, this I like A LOT.

As for party composition I can almost feel that they will have a slow time of combats, unless you adjust. You have a straight defender, a leader/defender, and a striker/controller. All of these are awesome but they will do average damage, which means that combats might take longer. Nothing wrong with that but be prepared. So my first recommendation would be the Slayer NPC. However, I would not tie him/her to the Amanda Character. She already has the Rick character as a "guardian". Tie the NPC to the Rick, or Daniel characters. Maybe it's another dwarf outcast, or a barbarian from the horde that likes nothing better than sending souls to the Raven Queen.

I would play for a bit with those 4 and see how it goes. Though I would recommend you design everything for 3 instead of 4. After you see how it plays adjust to taste. The 4th NPC, if you use a companion character, will be a .5 character and not a full character so the adjustment might work better.

Good luck, and let us know how it goes.

P.S. I've noticed that many here have mentioned the "improv" cards. That, above all recommendations, is one thing that I would definitely do. Specially for the 1e player.

A long time ago, I wrote a piece describing the "why" for the issue. I think it would be rude to simply copy and paste it here. So if you are interested in a good reason for it you can read the article here.