Crash Course in 4th ed.

[WSmith]

To make a long story short, I might be running D&D Encounters at the FLGS. Those of you that know me know I am a staunch AD&D / OD&D guy with lots of experience in those game. Needless to say, I have not DM'ed (or really played of that matter) 4e. So...

I have skimmed through the rule books and after I cut away a lot of fluff, I find that the rules are not that difficult. But, does anyone have any tips or website links or know of posts for a old school DM that has never played 4e to get a decent hold on the game?

 

[Henry]

Hey, man! Long time no read.

I've seen this blog post mentioned before (Giving 4e an Old School Feel | Sly Flourish) and there are a few good ideas in there, with one exception: I certainly don't recall old-school encounters being about "fewer monsters" -- I remember gary's mods like Keep on the Borderlands and Temple of Tharizdun being about LOTS of monsters, albeit most of them smaller but more effective critters back in those days. Minions these days are PERFECT for things like those mass critter battles in WG4 and S4, and making them enough of a challenge where those mere "minons" STILL have a better chance than a nat 20 of hitting the PCs.

I would recommend looking at some of the "cheat sheets" that people have made - one by ENworld's own Kiznit, I believe, as one example: http://www.dragonavenue.com/downloads/kiznit_4eCribSheet_v1.1.pdf

I would also recommend some kind of initiative card to keep track of both PC inits as well as critical stats and skills (like defenses and frequently used skill scores).

The thing to remember is that several (not all) of the design goals do hearken back to older D&D prinicipals -- in particular, reducing the amount of monster stats and just dealing with the basic monster's "shtick"; also, trying to reinforce archetypes and roles through the classes and their powers, and giving a lot of on-the-fly power to the DM. At the height of the 4E days,I used to be able to use the charts of the DMG1 page 184 and 185, season my monsters/npcs with just enough tricks to make them distinct, and not even crack a monster manual. Especially at the heroic tier (levels 1-10), and mostly still at the higher levels, the PCs powers are well enough balanced with the monster stats that you won't have to memorize every little thing a PC can do (though that never hurt anyone), and the DM mainly just has to concentrate on getting his story going, and not have to go through tons of stat creations to make it happen.

Hopefully some of this helped. PCs wil be DEFINITELY stronger and more resilient than 1st or 2nd level OD&D newbie PCs, most because of defenses and higher hit points, so that's something to watch out for when trying to get the right tone you're used to.

Good luck!

 

[Kzach]

When you begin a post with, "...staunch AD&D/OD&D guy..." you're immediately setting yourself up as opposed to 4e and somewhat closed-minded.

So my first recommendation would be to try and be a bit more open-minded about the system you're going to DM. If you're immediately opposed to even the concept of it, then how do you expect to run it objectively?

From experience, people who I've gamed with who were reticent about trying 4e have universally ended up hating it. Those games were never fun for anyone, player or DM.

If you're adamant that you don't like 4e, there's nothing wrong with that, everyone has their preferences and that's their prerogative, but that's going to come through in your game whether you try to conceal it or not. So if you're not going to try and embrace the system and give it an objective go, I'd recommend not running it at all.

Admin here, and no he's not -- he accurately describes his experience, not any prejudices. You're taking a completely neutral thread and turning it edition-riffic. Don't do that. ~ PCat

 

[UngeheuerLich]

couldn´t read that out of the OP...

what purpose had your post Kzach?

 

[fba827]

the rules -are- fairly simple (though you'll get some cases where you scratch your head when things interact -- stuff like forced movement (pushes/pulls/slides) in relation to zones seems to be a common question, as does people trying to stack various feats/effects). But given that D&D Encounters is starting level, you shouldn't have any/many of the strange "fly (hover)" and what not questions....

This is a non-edition specific comment, but I would suggest that every once in a while you go out of your way to describe how an attack/effect looks visually. Otherwise it becomes a series of rolls back and forth. As said, this is a nonedition specific question, but I bring it up since this will be your first time DMing a session of a new rules set, so it can be something overlooked if you get caught up trying to remember rules.

Having said that, 4e has a lot of focus on movement and tactics - i'm saying this based on how many of the powers involve moving yourself or others as side effects - so whenever possible keep the enemies moving into flank positions (+2 to hit), or the ranged enemies behind cover (-2 to be hit), etc. the pcs will be doing the same. Since (I think) D&D encounters is about a single encounter just study the layout for a moment and htink about the enemies involved and where those particular enemies and their given tactics might make most sense for them to make their stand if their starting position isn't good to begin with.

 

[Piratecat]

I would suggest that every once in a while you go out of your way to describe how an attack/effect looks visually.

I think it's even more effective to ask the player what their attack looks like. Gets them more involved.

 

[crash_beedo]

Keep an open mind, and approach it like a totally different game from old school D&D.

I am not trying to imply anything edition-war related... I run a weekly game of Classic D&D with kids and dad's (we're rolling through StoneHell using the Moldvay/Cook rules and Labyrinth Lord). About 8:30pm, kids go home (my son goes to bed), the other dads show up, and we start our (dad-only) 4E game. So I love/DM both systems weekly.

But the pace, approach, tone, and combat options in old-school have little or no resemblance to how 4E plays... I wouldn't try to relate them. Approach 4E as it's own version of the game, with skills, feats, tactical combat, and rich combat options, and enjoy it for it's own strengths.

If you were purely homebrewing, you could introduce more old-schoolisms (ie, follow the primer on old school games and all) but since you're going to be running D&D encounters, it'll probably cleave closely to how 4E delves have been presented - intricate set-piece encounters with lots of tactics.

 

[Kzach]

Read and then removed by Admin; please don't discuss moderation in-thread. Drop me a PM if something needs to be talked about further. Thanks! ~ PCat

 

[WSmith]

Well, let me put something to bed. I have no idea how anyone saw anything negative in my original post. I was just saying that I am very familiar with older editions and very comfortable with those. While I will admit there are some things that don't appeal to me about the presentation of 4e, the whole reason I said I would run D&D Encounters is cause I want to try a game of something different. If I thought I wasn't going to like it from the get go or the game was predestine to fail, I would have never bothered volunteering to run it. This game will succeed cause regardless of edition, I will rock the dungeon . I was just painting the picture of a guy that has been doing something one way for so long that he needs a little advice on how an old dog can learn new tricks. That's all.

Crash Breedo, that is exactly how I view it. A different game with different feel and rules.

I love describing combat, but that is still good advice for all editions and games... especially in Hackmaster when critical hits are so brutal.

Henry, good to hear from you again. Thanks for the links. I will check them out.

I have been reading the rules. I am not a fan of the presentation, but when I extract the rules, they don't seem complicated at all. Saying that I can see how keeping track of conditions could get messy fast. I have seen a lot of tips on how to keep track.

The one thing that I think I will enjoy (can't confirm until I actually play it) is that a lot of the onus has been put on the players. You don't need to know all the rules all the time as a DM. If a player wants to use a power, you can refer to the card and make a decision. Years ago I would have scoffed at cards for RPGs but over time I have read about guys making them for magic items and spells and warmed up to the idea. Now, I think it's a good addition. With the power cards, and a little trust of course, I can let the players do a lot of the calculations.

I got the DM screen yesterday. The impression I got is that I could run this game with only the screen handy cause it looks like it has all the rules needed. Is that a good assumption?

 

[diaglo]

I think it's even more effective to ask the player what their attack looks like. Gets them more involved.

as we have been doing it for years. ay, WSmith?

welcome back, mang.

good luck with your new screen.