D&D 4E In Defense of 4E - a New Campaign Perspective

[MoutonRustique]

One thing that would probably have been an immense boon to 4e would have been differently "statused" monsters as a more "standard approach".

We get some of that with some creatures having a regular (standard) version, and then a higher-level minion version, but it could have been so much better.

Imagine a Monster Manual with this approach to many creatures. This could have been the ogre entry
Ogre level 2 Solo
Ogre level 4 Elite
Ogre level 8 standard, Ogre-variant level 10 (better armour and weapons)
Ogre level 14 minion

It would have really explained the idea behind the [solo/elite/standard/minion] tags. It could also, very easily have come with some sidebars for special case monsters such as dragons or beholders explaining that using them as [standard] creatures, while possible, is probably going to result in a disservice to the fiction - unless thought has been put into it.

It also has the added benefit of allowing the used model of different versions for many creatures - at various power-levels : no need to stat all 4 states for each version. Just a few sidebars with designer intent and suggestions : don't create minions with super strong action-denial. Give the Elite version cooler powers than a standard version, how to preserve the identity of a creature when changing it's status, etc, etc.

 

[MwaO]

Right, and I'll accept that the game probably works better if you buy into that line of thinking. I just don't know how the writers expected anyone with a background in D&D to figure that out.

There were a variety of monsters where that was the clear intent in MM. Ogre Bludgeoneer/Savage, Angel of Valor Veteran/Angel of Valor, Horde Ghoul/Ghoul each being worth the same XP, just one is a minion, the other a standard.

Suggested encounters had the standards as the primary threat of the encounter and minions as the side part that would make the encounter work. Ogre Savages leading a group of Orc Minions and then in Paragon, Ogre Bludgeoneers being led by Earth Giants.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Or convert them to a swarm in this scenario.

It's been a while since I've read it, but I don't recall the DMG being particularly clear on the concept of re-statting monsters. I know it's a common example in this thread, but I don't think the DMG actually says that you should re-implement a level 8 elite as a level 18 minion (or whatever). Nor is it particularly clear on the idea that stats only exist for the sake of the players, with NPC interaction falling to narration.

I can't fault the DM for giving the game a shot, and filling in the gaps with what they understood from previous editions, even if (in retrospect) the game would work better if you filled those gaps with ideas from other games.

Right, and I'll accept that the game probably works better if you buy into that line of thinking. I just don't know how the writers expected anyone with a background in D&D to figure that out.

TBH I don't think they DID think of it. I mean, it was certainly implicit in the ethos of the game, and the possibility was latent in the way there are many variations of stat block for any given type of monster, as well as the division into minion/standard/elite/solo. Still, 4e NEVER EVER comes right out and has even a paragraph where it actually spells out a stand on this. It could be that the designers literally never made the mental leap all the way to "one narrative character, many statblocks" or it could be they thought it was a 'bridge too far' to actually spell it out. Or maybe they just didn't think it needed spelling out.

Given that WotC largely issued standard location-based type adventure modules it seems to me they never really grappled with the implications of 4e as a story-centered narrative RPG. So they simply weren't thinking in the terms we do now. More is the shame, I think they could have done a lot more with the game if they'd understood it well.

 

[Jacob Lewis]

I just want to point out, there is a lot of useful advice and information on a lot of these topics contained in one book that many of us have failed to even mention:

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Combats Take Forever
I only found this when we started playing 4E. As we got to know the rules, and players got to know what their characters can do, things sped up. I'd add that , as a DM you have know how to finish combat early to avoid grind.

You Can't Roleplay
I found that the combat is too sugary to resist. Your character sheet is covered in awesome thing you can do in combat, but no awesome thing s you can do out of combat. It doesn't mean you can't can't.

I think that is something to consider.

Personally, I love fiddling with game mechanics, and making tactical decisions in combat and so on. D&D 4 devliered almost perfectly in that regard. I have no fundamental problems here.
But I also like the story part, and others in my group also do it (and they might not be so onto tactical decisions and game mechanics as I am), and they feel somethnig is missing in that regard.

For my group, I made my own Star Wars game loosely based on 4E D&D rules. New classes, new power sets, different multiclassing rules. But one of the most important differences might be that I gave every class also "talents" that are purely non-combat stuff. You can have things like titles, wealth, anti-grav training, equipment modifactions, cover identiies, trailblazing abiltiies and what not. Simply stuff that gives your character a role outside of combat as well. It is not super-elaborate or complex, really.
A lot of the talents are bascially a title for the ability to gain rerolls for certain skills under certain circumstances. A real game design team could probably achieve more here. But I feel it added just more on the roleplaying side. If you're a Padawan, you might have a Jedi Master contact that you can call in for advice or aid. If you're a Scout, you might be better at finding faster hyperspace routes. If you're a Scoundrel, you might develop a better talent for hacking.

 

[Garthanos]

One thing that would probably have been an immense boon to 4e would have been differently "statused" monsters as a more "standard approach".

We get some of that with some creatures having a regular (standard) version, and then a higher-level minion version, but it could have been so much better.

Imagine a Monster Manual with this approach to many creatures. This could have been the ogre entry
Ogre level 2 Solo
Ogre level 4 Elite
Ogre level 8 standard, Ogre-variant level 10 (better armour and weapons)
Ogre level 14 minion

It would have really explained the idea behind the [solo/elite/standard/minion] tags. It could also, very easily have come with some sidebars for special case monsters such as dragons or beholders explaining that using them as [standard] creatures, while possible, is probably going to result in a disservice to the fiction - unless thought has been put into it.

It also has the added benefit of allowing the used model of different versions for many creatures - at various power-levels : no need to stat all 4 states for each version. Just a few sidebars with designer intent and suggestions : don't create minions with super strong action-denial. Give the Elite version cooler powers than a standard version, how to preserve the identity of a creature when changing it's status, etc, etc.

I had that thought with minions and swarms

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I had that thought with minions and swarms

Hill Giant swarm?

 

[pemerton]

Hill Giant swarm?

I've used flights (swarms) of vrocks, and swarms of ground-based demons.

 

[Garthanos]

Hill Giant swarm?

Aka a phalanx of Jotun

 

[Retreater]

On Sunday I was running the second session of my "new 4E" campaign, and one of the players commented that "we finally got the Skill Challenge right." This brought a smile to my face, as he has always been a critic of Skill Challenges.

Basically, the party was needing to sneak from one district of town to the next. One player had to use a Charisma skill to find a guide, the party had to succeed on a group Stealth to avoid the guards, and each had to make a physical check (Endurance, Acrobatics, or Athletics) to cross the gulf on a rope (with several failures risking breaking the rope and alerting the guards). It flowed very naturally and avoided a nasty fight.

So the session had roleplaying, 3 skill challenges, a puzzle, and 2 combats. Not a bad mix for those who argue 4E is "all about fighting."