Stalker0 said:Delgar, let me compliment you on the level of detail you put in your post. You clearly described each move and how all the numbers were obtained, which I'm sure will be a big help to those reading who haven't gotten to try the game yet.
srn said:Good point, I just reread the description. I'd been assuming it was a one-target-at-a-time deal.
It seems odd that a mobile warlock could have most of the monsters on the battlefield cursed after a few rounds, though.
For "beer and pretzels" game - does it _really_ matter if you forget something? If that's the only way you play, I suppose a simple system is enough, but if you alternate between "D&D - serious business" and "beer and pretzels" games, a system probably should be able to provide both.Spinachcat said:I run OD&D at cons and I get lots of people who feel 3e is too complicated for them to remember and play. 4e appears somewhat less complicated, but I am quite sure its is too much for them. 4e is a very tactically exciting board focussed game that is going to require a level of focus and attention that demands too much from the beers and pretzels set.
Delgar said:Wow, thank you all for all your kind words. I didn't think that it would be all that exciting. Now all I need is for some WotC guy to show up and tell me what I ran incorrectly.
So do you guys want another example then?
Gargazon said:If it's not too much bother
Just one gripe I had was that the Fighter seemed to have two enemies marked at once at one point (I think the Dragonshield and Skirmisher). I can't remember exactly, but wasn't it said you can only have one target marked? Or was it that one target can only have one mark?
This also reminds me of how horrible my first 4E game was in terms of constantly forgetting the Paladin was stink-potted and that there was ongoing damage and conditions in effect. But we do that in our 3.5 games, so it's not that surprising.
Delgar said:As far as we know the fighter is not limited to just one mark. So, as it stands the fighter is better at marking multiple enemies and the paladin is better at marking just one. I think you're thinking that a target can only have one mark.
Xorn said:This is bandwagony, but I could post the round by round of the Nightscale fight in Raiders of Oakhurst when they got the dragon down to 18 hit points...
We did it over Fantasy Grounds, so I've still got the chatlog.
D'karr said:The mark is one mark per opponent but everytime you mark a new opponent the old opponent is not marked. There are multiple powers that mark and you may mark multiple opponents if you have multiple powers that can be used to mark.
The Divine Challenge from the paladin has the most comprehensive explanation on marking. If you mark with the same power, the old marked opponent is no longer marked. If you use different powers to mark, you may mark multiple opponents. Only one mark per opponent.
Stephen Radney-MacFarland said:Ignoring the paladin (and taking a healthy dose of radiant damage), the formerly right-hand ghost moves adjacent to the fighter. The fighter retorts with a thicket of blades attack, marking both of the ghosts. When the dwarf paladin's turn in the initiative comes up, he'll no doubt challenge the same ghosts with a minor action. It's doubtful the ghost can afford to ignore his challenge 2 rounds in a row.
Knight Otu said:How marking works, and any extra effects beyond the attack penalty from marks, differs between the classes. The paladin loses his old mark when he issues a new Divine Challenge. The fighter can mark multiple enemies, however, from what has been released. For example, from the Marking Marked article:
Trainz said:Round 4: Combat Slinger. You say "He also uses his standard action to shift an additional square.". I'm sure you meant minor action instead. I'm surprised I'm the first to notice this. Did you guys actually read the damn thing?
It was a very nice read. I was sure I was reading an excerpt from a developper's blog until it was made clear to me you're just one of us lowly nerds.