D&D 3E/3.5 3e-isms to avoid in KOTS?

[Lizard]

Evidently, memorial day is THIS monday. And it looks like i'm running KOTS for a group of people who've been playing 3e for an average of 8 hours a week for at least four years. Eight, for me.

So I was hoping (and i think this could be useful for a lot of people) for a list of "3e-isms" to avoid -- like what provokes AOOs, changes in action timing (potion drinking is a minor action), etc. Just little pitfalls that are easy to fall into out of deeply ingrained habit. I have the rules and the Proto-PHB PDF, but some hints from experienced 4e'ers as to common "Oops, that's changed!" moments would be good, and probably helpful to a lot of people. (Ours can't be the only gaming group taking advantage of the holiday to run an off-schedule game.)

Also, this will be the first time I've used a pre-written adventure since Queen Of The Demonweb Pits. The original one. When it was the hottest, newest, thing. With bad Star Trek jokes.

We miss you, EGG.

 

[thalmin]

Undead do not seem to be immune to "Sleep" spells.

 

[the Jester]

A shift is a move action. This means you can do it twice in a round.

Smacking someone affected by a sleep spell doesn't wake them up.

 

[Kzach]

I'm still of the conviction that there is also a certain mentality to 3.x play that people used to 3.x need to get past or get over.

The best way to describe this is that in 3.x people tend to have a standard set of tactics, ie. charge into melee, take out spell-casters, keep your ranged on their ranged, etc.

And they just generally sit in the one square the whole battle.

This kind of play will kill your party if the DM is playing the baddies to their full advantage. Combat is far more dynamic and the baddies tend to have really good abilities that promote certain strategies.

The quicker players realise this and adapt by thinking tactically and working together to improvise as a team to the baddies tactics, the better. No more bog-standard tactics for every encounter either. Every encounter will be different so they'll have to continually adapt and think on their toes.

 

[Rechan]

Evidently, memorial day is THIS monday. And it looks like i'm running KOTS for a group of people who've been playing 4e for an average of 8 hours a week for at least four years. Eight, for me.

How'd they manage to get ahold of 4e four years before the rest of us?

Make sure everyone understands their abilities. This isn't 'I hit with my basic attack every round'. I played for the first time last night, and three of the players didn't use their at-wills at all, two didn't bother with their encounter powers.

Glad to see you're coming around, Lizard!

 

[StarFyre]

hmm

A dm could always punish players for not playing tactically...even in 3E. I do this all the time.

4E though, has very artificial tactics (ie. forced moves which can put you into a position for some secondary attack by let's say a warlock, etc).

True tactics, seem to be even less IMHO unless the DM house rules specific things and the players are smart enough to think to use them.

Example, what happens in my games, players will find ways to trick beings to chase them, then bring the roof down on them. Surround them, somehow make the corridor narrower, to '300' them.

Stuff that takes more thinking, some more house rules for effect of course, but in the end, it makes battles even more tactical than say Warhammer...

Sanjay

 

[D'karr]

We miss you, EGG.

You are not kidding. I was reading The Crusader (March Issue) two nights ago, and very unusually, I had tears welling up in my eyes.

Okay, 3isms to avoid.

Charging is a standard action and does not have to happen in a straight line. You can move before the charge or after. It provokes OA if you move through a threatened square. If you are a kobold you could shift, move up to your speed and then charge up to your speed; all in different directions.

Reach weapons do not threaten except the squares adjacent to the wielder.

Shifting is a move action except for kobolds who can shift as a minor action. Also take a look at the kobold dragonshields. They can essentially shift twice (move & minor), into a flank and attack; all in the same round.

Opportunity attacks are limited per opponent, not per turn. So you may take Opportunity attacks against multiple foes that provoke, but only one per opponent.

Immediate actions are limited to one per turn and cannot happen on your turn, except when specifically stated.

Action points are limited to once per encounter for PCs but solo monsters that have more than 1 can use all of them in an encounter.

In 4e movement around the battlefield should be encouraged. Some abilities only kick in when you move. And kobolds love to shift, make sure you use their tactics to their advantage.

Remember to look at the abilities of different monsters in an encounter. Dragonshields can shift when someone moves to engage them. Literally they can avoid being hit by shifting away. But they can do so only once per turn as it is an immediate action.

Hope this all helps. I had a blast running my group through this adventure.

 

[malraux]

Charging is a standard action and does not have to happen in a straight line. You can move before the charge or after. It provokes OA if you move through a threatened square. If you are a kobold you could shift, move up to your speed and then charge up to your speed; all in different directions.

Similarly, run is no longer in a straight line.

 

[Zil]

I'm still of the conviction that there is also a certain mentality to 3.x play that people used to 3.x need to get past or get over.

The best way to describe this is that in 3.x people tend to have a standard set of tactics, ie. charge into melee, take out spell-casters, keep your ranged on their ranged, etc.

And they just generally sit in the one square the whole battle.

Stay in one square for the entire battle? I think people must have been playing a different 3.x game than we've been playing for the past 8 years.

This kind of play will kill your party if the DM is playing the baddies to their full advantage. That type of play really should get you killed Combat is far more dynamic and the baddies tend to have really good abilities that promote certain strategies.

I'd say that type of play should also get people in trouble in a well run game of any version of D&D.

The quicker players realise this and adapt by thinking tactically and working together to improvise as a team to the baddies tactics, the better. No more bog-standard tactics for every encounter either. Every encounter will be different so they'll have to continually adapt and think on their toes.

Yea, I'd have to agree with this. I think the new rules make cooperation more of a necessity. I suspect my players would have a fairly easy time adapting because they already play a very cooperative and tactical game. Lack of coordination is probably going to lead to player characters getting killed. So many of the new mechanics seem to be lifted from a skirmish level tactical game with lots of interactions between the different units, er, characters, so it would be a mistake to play the game without considering those tactical interactions.

I suspect though that the changes to monsters and their capabilities is what is going to throw many people off. If they are expecting kobolds to have 1d4 hp and all be mostly the same, they are in for a rude shock.

 

[Jack99]

Actually, you can not charge and then move. Unless you use an action point. From the Pseudo-PHB:

CHARGE
As a standard action, you can launch yourself forward and
make a melee basic attack. Move your speed as part of the
charge. At the end of your move, you make a melee basic attack
with a +1 bonus to the attack roll. You must move at least 2
squares from your starting position, and you must charge to the
nearest unoccupied square from which you can attack the
enemy. Charging provokes opportunity attacks. After a charge.
you can't take any further actions unless you spend an action
point. (Scalegloom Rules Appendix)