D&D 4E 4e in an hour -- a playtest review (with pie)

Kunimatyu

First Post
A few nights ago some buddies and I tried out 4th edition at a small party we were having. 3 of the guys have played 3.5 from 1-20, and one guy was new. We just wanted to try out the basic system and run a few combat encounters, so there wasn't a "scenario" so much as me throwing monsters and rooms at them. (a slight change of pace, since most prefer elaborate roleplaying stuff)

The paladin, fighter, ranger, and cleric were selected -- nobody played the warlock or wizard.

First encounter: Pie kitchen, four ovens, two angry orcs.

The orcs had axes, and a 1/encounter pie (range 5, Dex vs. Ref, blinded 1 rd). Pies could be eaten as a standard action for a healing surge.

The orcs threw pies (with one successful hit) and then moved to engage, but poor rolls on my part (repeated 3s) caused the orcs to miss and get clobbered. The players liked the fact that the orcs could counterattack on failed attack rolls, and they found out how much damage a Bloodied orc could do nearer to the end of the fight (18 in one hit!). An orc got pushed on top of a hot oven by the dwarf's shield bash and took some fire damage.

After that encounter, the players fought some human bandits led by a mage, and then capped things off with a black dragon, which they managed to bloody before being TPK'd.

Afterwards, the players were really enthusiastic about the game, and wished it was out already. They loved the streamlining, especially the massive reduction in "lose your turn" effects and criticals as max damage. They felt that combat was much more intense, since you didn't have to wait very long for your turn.

The game also elicited a "WoW" response, but in a good way. All of the players had played or still play WoW, and there was a general feeling that WotC had learned the right lessons from WoW(balance + interesting things to do) without making things not feel like D&D.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

Wormwood

Adventurer
Kunimatyu said:
The game also elicited a "WoW" response, but in a good way. All of the players had played or still play WoW, and there was a general feeling that WotC had learned the right lessons from WoW(balance + interesting things to do) without making things not feel like D&D.
This was *precisely* my groups post-playtest opinion as well.
 


cdrcjsn

First Post
Kunimatyu said:
The game also elicited a "WoW" response, but in a good way. All of the players had played or still play WoW, and there was a general feeling that WotC had learned the right lessons from WoW(balance + interesting things to do) without making things not feel like D&D.

I don't really get the WoW feeling at all and I play a lot of WoW.

True, the classes are more balanced, but not much else than that. The game play is too different.

Lord of the Rings Online on the other hand...I don't know of any other game system where the primary healer buffs their party by attacking the enemy.

Not necessarily a bad thing, but I wouldn't be surprised if one or more of the developers plays LotRO.
 

Wormwood

Adventurer
cdrcjsn said:
Not necessarily a bad thing, but I wouldn't be surprised if one or more of the developers plays LotRO.
Not a bad thing at all, IMO.

Good ideas don't happen in a vacuum, and I'd be disappointed if the 4e dev team didn't look to very diverse media for inspirado.
 

Remove ads

Top