D&D eXPerience: My Experience

[CharlesRyan]

So is that one saving throw per condition or one saving throw to end all conditions?

Depends on what's causing the conditions. Sometimes one save ends multiple conditions from the same source, and sometimes it doesn't. I think when they're from multiple sources you always need multiple saves. (I think.)

And the save is always "roll a d20; 10 or better saves." You might get a bonus from something that affects that roll, but you never have a base save that changes. Oh, and the save is always at the end of your turn (unless a power gives you an extra chance to save at a different time). So if you're hit by an effect, you're always going to suffer through one round of it, because you don't get to save against it until the end of your next turn.

 

[TerraDave]

Aristotle: glad we could help! I actually liked the fighter a little better from 3rd hand: just so tough, with some good attacks. As for the cleric, also not 100% sure I like as much.

Saving throws: Mr Ryan is right: one save per source. So lets say the black dragon hammers you with the breath weapon, and you are lying there dying (lets say). Dying requires a save to stay stable, or die more. The breath weapon imposes ongoing acid damage and a -4 attack penalty. You make one save for both breath weapon effects, and one save to stay stable.

 

[Ipissimus]

On behalf of all the players currently wearing my underwear---we approve of this shift in focus!

Ditto.

 

[eleran]

Ditto.

Can we infer from that that you are wearing Wormwoods underwear?

 

[Wormwood]

Can we infer from that that you are wearing Wormwoods underwear?

Someone should, if you know what I mean.

 

[fnwc]

But anyways. One trap was a presure plate thing so that if you move, it shoots: at everyone in the range. Charecter 1 moves, gets shot. Chatercter 2, moves, both 1 and 2 gets shot. It could also imobilize. So you could get stuck there, and keep getting shot.

Another was a rock that on a rope that could be thrown and could push your charecter around, including into a slime pit where they where imobilized (I am not doing justice to this: the rock we a real pain).

I really like the idea of traps being interactive and part of the tactical arena rather than static disable checks. Although there were some traps described in 3rd edition that were closer to what you described, most of them were of the garden variety "disable or fail" type.

I wasn't a huge fan of trap splat books before, but I can see wanting one now.

 

[BryonD]

Game Play vs. Simulation: Rob came right and said that people who are into detailed simulation may like the game less then people focused on how it actually plays. His hope/belief was that the audience would like this change in focus.

I'd quibble with the idea that simulation and "how it actually plays" are different ends of a scale. To some of us "how it actually plays" and simulation are more in touch than in contrast.

But that aside, I do find it very refreshing to see this openly stated.
We keep getting these abstract comments one after another that the game isn't leaving anything out, it isn't "simple" its "elegant", etc... But those statements always come in a vacuum and a reading of the actual rules that have been brought out so far don't jive with that position for many of us.

If what you want is a level of simulationist immersion, then 4e is, quite simply, not at all "more elegant". It is just "simple" at the price of reduced simulation. It is a whole lot less elegant.

And if WotC believes that a gamist, hack'n'slash is going to generate more players and more importantly, more cash, then by all means, they get a huge thumbs up from me. I have not even before stated that WotC shouldn't do what they think is best. And I won't start now. But don't do one thing and say it is another.

Of course I'm going to be disappointed for my own interests. But WotC doesn't owe me a thing.

But is it now finally agreed that 4E provides less simulation than 3E?

 

[Wormwood]

But is it now finally agreed that 4E provides less simulation than 3E?

I honestly didn't think anyone disagrees with this point.

 

[BryonD]

I honestly didn't think anyone disagrees with this point.

Well I am thrilled to live in this new day then!!!!!!
Because in the past I've been blasted all over for suggesting that there was anything being given up at all and any claims of less support for simulation were decried as outrageous knee-jerk slams boarding on slander. I won't miss those days.

 

[TerraDave]

They admitted a few things might not be perfect...e.g. the transition of the two magazines, or some of the issues involved in keeping track of powers.

But, I also wan't to note that in play, I did not feel "this was less real" then 3.5 when, say, someone used an exploit (martial power) or because some skill were consolidated. I think with a group that pays attention to detail and is into the role-playing, the "versimultude" (sic) would still be there.