Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 5317149" data-attributes="member: 996">I had resolved to give Essentials a fair shake at Game Day, but I'm going to have to renew that resolution and give it a fair shake at Encounters, instead.&nbsp;&nbsp; Our FLGS had just enough players for two tables at game day (we run three or four for Encounters).&nbsp; One of the DMs was a regular DM, the other was trying out DMing 4e for the first time.&nbsp; Luck of the draw, I got the newbie.&nbsp; The game was a fiasco.&nbsp; I can't blame it on the system, though, so I'm willing to give it another chance.Things I did notice.&nbsp; The Slayers (I got to play one of them) felt a /lot/ like 1e Fighters, which is kinda cool nostalgia in a small dose like this, though it was wearing thin by the fourth encounter.&nbsp; The player who got the Theif never used any of his 'move' Tricks, which was disapointing, and thus didn't get CA much - he'd played 4e before, but never a rogue, so maybe he just wasn't sure what to do with it.&nbsp; The Warpriest proved pretty effective, not the healer a conventional 4e Cleric is, but adequate, and his attacks seemed to target Will pretty heavily and to do good damage.&nbsp; The Mage was a surprise, on paper, it looked truely pathetic, with very low attack bonuses, even for a 2nd-level implement user, and doing very little damage.&nbsp; The player used him well, though.&nbsp; Beguiling Strands re-arranged the battlefield at will, the Red Box Magic Missle (auto-damage to two targets) was pretty effective, there was an encounter burst 1 that dazed, and the Fireball-ish power turned out to create an encounter-long zone.&nbsp; &nbsp; The adventure, like I said, didn't get a fair shake from the inexperienced DM, so it's hard to draw any strong conclusions about Essentials.&nbsp; That the Red Box seems to deviate a bit from the rest of Essentials also makes me think I should reserve judgement.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 5317149, member: 996"] I had resolved to give Essentials a fair shake at Game Day, but I'm going to have to renew that resolution and give it a fair shake at Encounters, instead. Our FLGS had just enough players for two tables at game day (we run three or four for Encounters). One of the DMs was a regular DM, the other was trying out DMing 4e for the first time. Luck of the draw, I got the newbie. The game was a fiasco. I can't blame it on the system, though, so I'm willing to give it another chance. Things I did notice. The Slayers (I got to play one of them) felt a /lot/ like 1e Fighters, which is kinda cool nostalgia in a small dose like this, though it was wearing thin by the fourth encounter. The player who got the Theif never used any of his 'move' Tricks, which was disapointing, and thus didn't get CA much - he'd played 4e before, but never a rogue, so maybe he just wasn't sure what to do with it. The Warpriest proved pretty effective, not the healer a conventional 4e Cleric is, but adequate, and his attacks seemed to target Will pretty heavily and to do good damage. The Mage was a surprise, on paper, it looked truely pathetic, with very low attack bonuses, even for a 2nd-level implement user, and doing very little damage. The player used him well, though. Beguiling Strands re-arranged the battlefield at will, the Red Box Magic Missle (auto-damage to two targets) was pretty effective, there was an encounter burst 1 that dazed, and the Fireball-ish power turned out to create an encounter-long zone. The adventure, like I said, didn't get a fair shake from the inexperienced DM, so it's hard to draw any strong conclusions about Essentials. That the Red Box seems to deviate a bit from the rest of Essentials also makes me think I should reserve judgement. [/QUOTE]

Verification