6 players, 5 hours, 4th edition
- Thread starter Rodrigo Istalindir
- Start date
Blue
Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal
Kraydak said:
Bah. 1st level fighters are 3e's flagship at-will ability based characters, not 1st level warlocks. Warlocks are johnny-come-lately members of the "just got one things to do" crowd.
Round 1: I swing my sword*.
Round 2: I swing my sword*.
...
The point is that having ONE choice reduces tactical variety. Having multiple at-will options (say, a mid-level 3e fighter with feats or a mid-level 3ed warlock with multiple invocations and blast shapes) gives more variety. This seems to give variety (in terms of multiple at-will as well as a seasoning of less-frequent per-encounter and per-day) even at first level.
I like options for what I do. I do like to keep it to a reasonable number of options thought, just to keep things moving. I love 3.5, but I do get bored with high level combats because it's an hour between actions, and you'll only get 3-5 or so for the entire combat so you need each one to be vastly effective to hold up your part of it.
What I want is enough choices to do interesting things, but not too many choices that everyone takes 5 minutes for one action and the DM takes 20-30 between all the different foes on the table.
I'm hoping that 4e provides that. Right now I'm hopeful.
Cheers,
=Blue(23)
* For reasonable large varieties of sword - i.e. whatever your weapon of choice is.
ObsidianCrane
First Post
Wow it seems to me that a lot of the issues with this report rest on the shoulders of the DM, and a conflict in playstyles. Describing a room or object in terms of squares is just plain lazy imo on the DM's behalf. The modules purpose being at odds with Rodrigo's expectations then further compounds the problem.
It sounds like a hack and slash fest of the worst kick the doors in kind, and that isn't the fault of the system at all - but the module writter and DM. Isn't the Delve there for that style of gaming? Because this sounds like the delve and not a real module at all gah.
One hopes that Rodrigo and others get to have a decent experience with a module more to their style before they give up on the game entirely.
It sounds like a hack and slash fest of the worst kick the doors in kind, and that isn't the fault of the system at all - but the module writter and DM. Isn't the Delve there for that style of gaming? Because this sounds like the delve and not a real module at all gah.
One hopes that Rodrigo and others get to have a decent experience with a module more to their style before they give up on the game entirely.
Rodrigo Istalindir
Explorer
Yeah, but 1st level fighters aren't like that forever. Warlocks kinda are. I could never see playing a warlock for more than a one-off. And first level fighters still probably had power attack or cleave, and could charge or bullrush or grapple or disarm or trip. They could pick up a bench in the tavern and smack someone with it.
But there's 'at will' for mundane stuff, and 'at will' for amazing stuff. My ranger didn't take a single normal attack with his bow. Every single time, it was 'I designate that kobold as the Hunter's Quarry and use Careful Attack'. (Well, except when I forgot to designate the quarry
)
The hard part is balancing these various abilities so that they all have sufficient utility to come up on a reasonably equal basis. There's no doubt in 3e that wasn't the case, as witnessed by how often Power Attack was taken and how rarely Toughness. We'll have to wait and see how it plays out with the full gamut of abilities in 4e.
But there's 'at will' for mundane stuff, and 'at will' for amazing stuff. My ranger didn't take a single normal attack with his bow. Every single time, it was 'I designate that kobold as the Hunter's Quarry and use Careful Attack'. (Well, except when I forgot to designate the quarry
)The hard part is balancing these various abilities so that they all have sufficient utility to come up on a reasonably equal basis. There's no doubt in 3e that wasn't the case, as witnessed by how often Power Attack was taken and how rarely Toughness. We'll have to wait and see how it plays out with the full gamut of abilities in 4e.
Henry
Autoexreginated
Cailte said:
Well, that's kind of the point.
Apparently everything IS described in terms of squares, not feet and inches/meters.And this was a Delve-style event, near as what Rodrigo was reporting. However, it seems some of his frustrations (don't mean to put words in your mouth, R) stemmed from the idea that the group he was playing with weren't interested at all in kicking the tires on the system, and it kind of went downhill from there.
Rodrigo Istalindir
Explorer
Cailte said:
I've played enough one-shots to know what to expect. I certainly enjoyed myself and the game. A little non-combat stuff would have been nice, but I'll get to see that sometime. Like I said, I'm certainly more a tactical RPGer than not. I don't think there was any conflict of playstyles. As a group, we got along pretty well, and no one I hope felt like they weren't getting to contribute.
The point about describing the rooms in terms of squares (and that's my description, by the way -- there were nice dungeon tiles for every room, so the DM didn't have to describe anything, really) was to express my dissatisfaction with the use of an abstract unit of measurement when I never thought that using real units was a problem.
Fallen Seraph
First Post
I believe they said somewhere that a square = 5 feet. So it is basically the same as 3.5 just reversed.
Rodrigo Istalindir
Explorer
Henry said:
I wouldn't say 'frustrations' or 'downhill'. I just think that I might have been in more of a 'let's take this puppy for a test drive' mood, whereas the others were more into playing the game to 'win'. And the fact that most of them had played the first game, and were playing the third, might have been a factor. I knew this was going to be my only experience until June, so I wanted to get as much of a taste as I could.
Similar Threads
