6 players, 5 hours, 4th edition

[Dragonblade]

Finally a balanced review that I can respect. Great stuff Rodrigo.

Despite, Rodrigo's qualifier that he is still on the fence, the review was almost entirely negative with the exception of a little comment at the end about how he had a good time.

So Rodrigo, since you are still on the fence about 4e and since you said you had a good time, what was actually good about the game? What did you actually like about 4e?

 

[Henry]

The last time I ran a fantasy game was at GenCon last year, and with 6 players, 8th level Grim Tales characters, and some roleplay and story and exploration, we had 4 decent sized combats in four hours.

One thing to remember though is that Grim Tales has almost no supernatural or area effect type spells, and very few stackable effects that aren't prefigured on a character sheet, so a D&D 3 comparison is fairer in this regard.

However, I hope to see that kind of customization in 4e, but Andy Collins' statements on multiclassing aren't making me hopeful in that direction.

 

[Dragonblade]

Indeed. Nice balanced sounding review.

I'm entirely sick of the propaganda reviews and 4E can do wrong mentality posters, as well as the wholesale bashing occuring elsewhere (other sites/messageboards) of the new system. This was quite refreshing to read. Thanks.

Rodrigo's review was almost entirely negative, yet that's "balanced" whereas a review that is entirely positive like Massawyrm's, or Mouseferatu's is not?

Hmm, seems like a bit of a double standard there.

 

[Bishmon]

Rodrigo's review was almost entirely negative, yet that's "balanced" whereas a review that is entirely positive like Massawyrm's, or Mouseferatu's is not?

Hmm, seems like a bit of a double standard there.

Just let it go. It's not worth starting an argument about.

 

[Belorin]

Do you think if you had the full ruleset and had created your own character the play experience would have been different?

Bel

 

[Piratecat]

Just let it go. It's not worth starting an argument about.

Agreed. Let's not hijack the thread, please.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

An encounter an hour is essentially what I expect for 3.5, so that isn't much faster. How many rounds per combat? if you got more actual play time in that one encounter per hour, that might be good.

And I'm not quite following how all the saves come about. Is this right: you get hit with an effect, and your next turn, you roll a save (d20 + possible modifiers against DC 10). make the save and the effect ends, don't make it and it continues? So were characters getting hit with multiple overlapping effects?

 

[Rodrigo Istalindir]

Despite, Rodrigo's qualifier that he is still on the fence, the review was almost entirely negative with the exception of a little comment at the end about how he had a good time.

So Rodrigo, since you are still on the fence about 4e and since you said you had a good time, what was actually good about the game? What did you actually like about 4e?

The battlefield seems more mobile. I like the forced movement rules. I like the increased reliance on different stats -- my concern of a dump-stat was just that, a concern. I think for the casual player it'll be a good thing. Some of the character options I really like -- the ranger's Fox's Cunning, for example (shift 1 square and shoot when someone tries to attack) is a great once-per-encounter option, and far preferable to the old two-step of ready-action, 5' step, shoot. Even some of the abilities I'm iffy on it's more because I think they're a little over the top for 1st level characters; Fey Step is fun and cool, but I think it would be better served at a higher level.

I really like that some of the per-X abilities are "You can do X, Y, or Z, but only one'. That's resource management and players having to make decisions, and I *love* that part of the game. My beef isn't with per-X abilities or even at-will (most of the time), it's the way they minimize the resource management and decsion-making aspects of the game. A question of degree, not their existence.

I really like that they seem to have taken a closer look at the monsters (although I only saw kobolds and a dragon) and given them abilities that differentiate them. I think that kobolds will now play out far differently that goblins or orcs or what have you, whereas before they've largely been interchangeable.

I'm even happy with the mechanics of the healing system. Again, what reservations I have a largely a matter of degree; I like how it works, I just feel for the kinds of games I like it's a little too easy. But the great thing is that would be an easy tweak; just cut down on the number of healing surges a character gets.

 

[Dragonblade]

The battlefield seems more mobile. I like the forced movement rules. I like the increased reliance on different stats -- my concern of a dump-stat was just that, a concern. I think for the casual player it'll be a good thing. Some of the character options I really like -- the ranger's Fox's Cunning, for example (shift 1 square and shoot when someone tries to attack) is a great once-per-encounter option, and far preferable to the old two-step of ready-action, 5' step, shoot. Even some of the abilities I'm iffy on it's more because I think they're a little over the top for 1st level characters; Fey Step is fun and cool, but I think it would be better served at a higher level.

I really like that some of the per-X abilities are "You can do X, Y, or Z, but only one'. That's resource management and players having to make decisions, and I *love* that part of the game. My beef isn't with per-X abilities or even at-will (most of the time), it's the way they minimize the resource management and decsion-making aspects of the game. A question of degree, not their existence.

I really like that they seem to have taken a closer look at the monsters (although I only saw kobolds and a dragon) and given them abilities that differentiate them. I think that kobolds will now play out far differently that goblins or orcs or what have you, whereas before they've largely been interchangeable.

I'm even happy with the mechanics of the healing system. Again, what reservations I have a largely a matter of degree; I like how it works, I just feel for the kinds of games I like it's a little too easy. But the great thing is that would be an easy tweak; just cut down on the number of healing surges a character gets.

Cool! And thank you for your comments both positive and negative.

 

[Shroomy]

Rodrigo, do you think that the combats would have gone faster or more smoothly if your group was more familiar with the system?