D&D 4E 4e - Is it really D&D Yet?

[Majoru Oakheart]

I'm fine with encounter-long durations. It's the application of the "saved ends" stuff that's rather lousy. When I throw sleep on a bunch of kobolds, I want them to actually sleep for more than a round or two.

I prefer M&M's approach to powers like these.

And this is one of those "feel" vs "playability" issues.

Being able to put a creature to sleep is a VERY powerful effect. You are removing all of its attacks from the combat for as long as it stays asleep and it helpless allowing you to Coup de Gras it.

If you allow the spell to work on any creature and to last a set amount of time it becomes even more powerful. You can cast it, have the BBEG fail his save and fall asleep. And since you know he'll be asleep in a minute, you don't have to worry about killing him now. You can deal with his minions first. Then kill him at your leisure. Plus, even if you didn't want to kill him you've removed him from the entire fight.

You can either deal with that in 2 ways: the 3e way or the 4e way.

The 3e way is to restrict it to only low level creatures so you can never just wipe out the powerful leader in one attack. Unfortunately, this creates a problem where the spell is EXTREMELY useful at first level and completely useless after a certain level.

The 4e way is to recognize that the effect, when it works, is save or die. So, you make it so that it has an effect even if it doesn't kill people, so they have a reason to use it. Then you make it so that 45% of the that you hit with it, it actually turns into a save or large amounts of damage spell(CDG is not nearly as deadly in 4e). Plus, it has the second effect of essentially preventing all damage and abilities of the creature as long as he is asleep. That is close to equally powerful. If it lasts longer than a round or two, you've gained a huge advantage. So, make it possibly end after each round.

 

[Hussar]

Originally Posted by Felon
I'm fine with encounter-long durations. It's the application of the "saved ends" stuff that's rather lousy. When I throw sleep on a bunch of kobolds, I want them to actually sleep for more than a round or two.

I prefer M&M's approach to powers like these.

Sleep is maybe a bad example since 1st level save or die spells are SO problematic. In 1e and 2e, as a DM you simply couldn't use it at low levels because you'd automatically tpk your party. In 3e it was a bit better, but, still, extremely lethal at 1st or 2nd level then utterly useless beyond that.

What I see happening is a much smoother gradient being applied to most elements of the game. Attacks do less damage, spells are often less binary, death rules are more forgiving (somewhat), the PC's gain a bit more healing and hit points. That sort of thing.

I believe it was Mike Mearls who talked about combat being "swingy". You'd have one combat that was a complete pushover and the next combat, possibly with exactly the same monster, leading to multiple PC deaths.

What I think they're trying to do is take out the extremes, neither of which is a whole lot of fun (AARRRGGGHH I used the F word), and stick to a more middle approach. Whether this is a good or bad thing remains to be seen.

 

[Felon]

And this is one of those "feel" vs "playability" issues.

Being able to put a creature to sleep is a VERY powerful effect. You are removing all of its attacks from the combat for as long as it stays asleep and it helpless allowing you to Coup de Gras it.

Sleep is maybe a bad example since 1st level save or die spells are SO problematic.

Sleep is a good example exactly because it tests how 4e adjudicates a powerful effect, not just some mild zot that's just one out of three or four mediocre attacks you have to make before it's "acceptable" to take a foe down. Unfortunately, it adjudicates it by copping out of actually being a sleep spell. It's not even a catnap spell. Instead, it's a weak, extremely short-term mez.

If they wanted to reign it in, they could have tried other methods, like making it require multiple successive attack rolls from the caster in order to knock someone out (thus giving you the requisite multiple zots).

Personally, thought, I think that if it's acceptable to pop a kobold minion with a single weapon hit, it's not that big of a deal to take multiple kobolds out with the casting of a daily-slot spell.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I've DM'd seven games of 4E now and I've found it far easier to track durations. (In fact it doesn't really qualify as tracking. You simply mark that it's there and then roll every turn until you make the save, then scratch it out.)

I've found it "feels" just like every D&D game I've played for 22 years, only I get the spit-eating-grin that I used to get back in the good ol' days, because I simply find it more FUN.

I find because of the nature of the rules simplification, you have more time to spend on the story details, making the role-playing richer.

Sure, some things take a bit to figure out, it's NEW, and there will be an adjustment period that some people will not make it through. But I guarantee you that many, many people who aren't so sure right now will come around.

Who knows - maybe the OP will find it more to his liking when he gets to make his own character and pick abilities that suit him better, and have his home DM run a game that is more familiar in style.

No offense to anyone who DM'd a game at DDXP - but from all the reports, I'm not sure all of them did a very good job. (Especially whoever thought that cleave couldn't kill minions - what an amazingly bad call!)

Fitz

Edit: PS... maybe I'm weird, but I've found sleep to be great fun in 4e... the victim actually gets sleepy before falling asleep! It's a case where a few bad rolls are actually fun rather than the other way around. I know Mike Mearls was saddened when his dragon got put to sleep but I bet he was thrilled that it was possible.

 

[eleran]

Personally, thought, I think that if it's acceptable to pop a kobold minion with a single weapon hit, it's not that big of a deal to take multiple kobolds out with the casting of a daily-slot spell.

I find your argument to be completely specious and without merit. But, this last sentence really befuddles me. How does it not have the potential to take out multiple foes with a single casting? Or ar you complaining that it isnt an auto-win button? If thats the answer then your argument lacks even more merit.