D&D 4E 4e Playtesters revealed!

[Crashy75]

It isn't quite that simple. We still want to map all the humanoid types to the different roles, but we'd like to express that flavor in those roles. Here's an example:

Gnoll Controller: This guy throws bolas to bring down the pack's prey. He's good at tripping people with ranged attacks, and he can also throw nets that restrict movement. These tactics work well with the rest of the gnolls who want to crowd around a target. He might also have an encounter power that lets gnolls shift 2 or 3 squares as an immediate action, to help pile on a downed foe.

Orc Artillery: This guy carries a huge crossbow, heavy throwing hammers, or maybe those orc shot puts from Sword & First, a weapon that's inaccurate but delivers a devastating shot, maybe with a push 1 to allow the orcs room for manuever. The captures the brute feel of orcs. He carries a two-handed weapon and, compared to typical artillery monster, is pretty good in melee and has more HP but a lower AC.

The concept is that we want every role to exist within a creature type, but we want to flavor those roles to match that type. The danger of the role system is that it could lead to bland design, with all artillery looking alike, and so on. To push monsters apart, we create "tent pole" mechanics and flavor and then design around that.

With respect to devils and demons, the succubus's MO fits devils better. A similar creature cast as a demon might use more brutal, direct methods to achieve a similar end. For example, a demon that uses illusions to appear beautiful or horrid, depending on its goals. In beauty mode, it can prevent others from attacking it, and use mind control to turn enemies into its puppets. In horrid mode, it creates an aura that drives enemies away and causes them to attack creatures at random.

We have to accept that sometimes people won't like our classifications, but I think they're important for creating a design blueprint going forward. The game is a lot more fun if gnolls, orcs, demons, devils, and goblins all have significant differences, especially since the design structure could facilitate lazy design that lets monsters blur into each other. You could plug in baseline numbers by role and level and the game functions fine, but fine isn't good enough. We want something evocative and flavorful.

You did that with class design as well, didn't you (with divine defenders having a leader bent and arcane strikers with a controller aspect)? You sneaky devil. *goes back to thinking about what a martial controller would look like*

 

[pogre]

I know we cannot comment on particulars, but playtesting moved me from "maybe" to I have to try at least a full campaign under these rules. I'm running a 16th/17th level 3.5 ed. campaign right now and at least one of the players comments "this will go a lot faster under 4e" - and we're pretty darn quick at high level combats.

 

[Kahoots]

No, I don't care if the succubus is demon, devil or a member of Team Carebear.

Simply awesome.

 

[Kahoots]

The game is a lot more fun if gnolls, orcs, demons, devils, and goblins all have significant differences, especially since the design structure could facilitate lazy design that lets monsters blur into each other. You could plug in baseline numbers by role and level and the game functions fine, but fine isn't good enough. We want something evocative and flavorful.

I completely agree with this. Maybe it was my 3e DM, but a lot of humanoid baddies kind of all blended together, so if we were fighting orcs, goblins, or the aforementioned Team Carebear, the feel was very similar.

I'm looking forward to actually playing 4e and seeing how the feel actually pans out.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

The game is a lot more fun if gnolls, orcs, demons, devils, and goblins all have significant differences, especially since the design structure could facilitate lazy design that lets monsters blur into each other. You could plug in baseline numbers by role and level and the game functions fine, but fine isn't good enough. We want something evocative and flavorful.

100% agreed-- and... interesting...

If the baseline numbers are "easy design" that you can plug in and they "just work," then that frees up the Monster Makers to turn their focus onto the unique, evocative, flavorful differences between monsters.

Great for capital-D Designers; let's hope you haven't Developed yourself out of a job.

 

[LEHaskell]

We have to accept that sometimes people won't like our classifications, but I think they're important for creating a design blueprint going forward. The game is a lot more fun if gnolls, orcs, demons, devils, and goblins all have significant differences, especially since the design structure could facilitate lazy design that lets monsters blur into each other. You could plug in baseline numbers by role and level and the game functions fine, but fine isn't good enough. We want something evocative and flavorful.

And you succeeded! Our playtest group just loved the flavor mechanics for all the humanoids we encountered. I think it's best summarized by a comment from our first get-together: "Now THAT'S what fighting hobgoblins should feel like!" Kobolds, goblins, hobbos -- all felt different and RIGHT!

Rather than just another fight against vaguely human creatures, each combat became unique -- even without introducing terrain features or traps. As our opponents changed, we were forced to adapt our tactics -- what worked against the hobgoblins didn't work (as well) against kobolds. Each type of humanoid seemed to have its own niche and offered a different challenge.

Based on the previews I've seen since our playtesting I know that many rules details have come and gone (so much so that I'm beginning to think you guys expected us to crack and we were part of some sinister disinformation program!) but the essential design tenets have remained the same throughout. I think this is going to be my favorite D&D, yet.

 

[cdrcjsn]

I know we cannot comment on particulars, but playtesting moved me from "maybe" to I have to try at least a full campaign under these rules. I'm running a 16th/17th level 3.5 ed. campaign right now and at least one of the players comments "this will go a lot faster under 4e" - and we're pretty darn quick at high level combats.

Yeah. This was one of the major factors that sold me on 4e. I was well prepared to hate the game based on principles ("Darn you 4e! You killed my favorite living campaign and made my $2000 collection of 3e books useless!").

But after trying the game and seeing 18th level combat resolve as fast as 13th level which is as fast as 6th level...well, it made me realize that at least the game managed to deliver on that promise, so made me more open minded about other things.

Now I can't wait to start the new campaign and play with my other friends that have yet to see the rules.

One thing I'm definitely NOT doing though is reading the MM from cover to cover. So far I've managed to avoid reading the group's copy so it's neat encountering new monsters and seeing what they can do. It's like I'm playing basic D&D all over again ("The gelatinous cube does what?").

 

[Sebastrd]

While game design isn't programming, there are some parallels. I mean WoW went into closed beta 9 months before release, roughly the same timeline for 4E.

...and there it is. You can't have a 4E thread without someone comparing it to WoW.

 

[AZRogue]

For example, a demon that uses illusions to appear beautiful or horrid, depending on its goals. In beauty mode, it can prevent others from attacking it, and use mind control to turn enemies into its puppets.

So, mearls, while you're here ......


Does the Succubus actually Charm someone with her Kiss ability, or do they only block her from attacks while adjacent to her and are fully able to run screaming from her otherwise? Please? :innocent:

 

[The_Baldman]

So, mearls, while you're here ......


Does the Succubus actually Charm someone with her Kiss ability, or do they only block her from attacks while adjacent to her and are fully able to run screaming from her otherwise? Please? :innocent:

and that's what sucks about being a playtester. I know the answer. Most probably know I know the answer but I cannot answer it. Mike can. He's probably laughing that evil laugh of his while adjusting that Mariners baseball cap (that hides his horns). If it makes you feel better though I have half a shelf of 4th edition stuff already and more space allocated for this summer.

So while I'm thinking of it (cuz we're all geeks and it's funny). My wife is taking my daughter (4) to preschool last week. It was show-n-tell day and she forgot to grab something and was upset. My wife told her 'Dad's backseat is full of stuff. Just find something back there to take for show-n-tell". My daughters response was 'MOM . .it's just all nerd stuff back here!!!' and I guess my wife almost ran off the road from laughing. In retrospect I guess I'm glad she did not grab say the 4th monster manual for show-n-tell. I can just imagine that parent-teacher conference right now. 'So Mr. Christ . .what exactly is this thing on page 213 and what's it doing to that small sheep?'

Gaming and kids don't always mix. More stores require beer at Gencon LOL

Dave C