Finally: DMing 4E

[TerraDave]

After playing it 7 months ago at DDXP I finally DM’d a 4E session.

Quick take aways:

Given the range of things the PCs and monsters could do, it really was easier and faster playing.

And much faster DMing. I did get stuck on one rules bit, if not for that I would not have opened a (core-rule) book (I had monster stats in front of me and the super-good DM screen). For the first time in a while, I found myself more worried about things like role-playing the npcs then rules adjudication.

No shortage of the deadly. Everyone got knocked out more then once (even with a cleric in the party). And we got pretty close to a TPK. Who new a gnome skulk could be so dangerous?

Tracking things was a minor nuisance, but nothing compared to many sessions of previous editions. I may use mini post-its or something to track marks, curses, etc, but it was not “necessary”.

Who said the wizard had been nerfed? I never saw a 1st level wizard (or 3rd or 4th level wizard) quite like this. And is Flaming Sphere the best 1st level daily? (As an aside, is Guardian of Faith the worst?)

Out of combat we sorta did a skill challenge, but it wasn’t really different then any D20 game (which also means it wasn’t somehow ‘dumbed down’). The PCs also did a ritual. I like rituals. Passive insight also came into play. In this early test though, again, not that different. But I see potential.

+1: My big issue going in, on the default world and some flavor things, basically faded away in play. The stuff I didn’t like just wasn’t there. And the mechanics actually do support a lot of flavor I like.

+2: Only issues were some mechanical things. One: reviving the dying once they are stable. This I will take to the rules forum, but it was unclear. And I may do a little house-rule on encounters and daileys, (as many have noted, they can fall a little flat, except the flaming sphere!). Compared to past editions however, these are small complaints.

 

[GoodKingJayIII]

Cool, thanks for the report!

I just DMed my first game of 4e on Saturday as well, all-in-all a positive experience. I only had three players: two Strikers (Ranger, Warlock) and a Defender (Paladin). So not only was a working from a smaller group, but we didn't have a true Leader to provide as much healing support as I would've liked.

- so far the paladin stands in well for a Leader.

- the two combats we ran were pretty straight encounters. The first consisted of two goblin warriors, and four goblin minions. The secound consisted of two guard drakes, a goblin hexer, and six minions. My players dealt with each handily, and I never felt like I seriously threatened them. Not only did they play well, but I did not know my monsters capabilities as well as I thought. Had I not made a major tactical mistake with the Hexer, things would've gone very differently that second battle.

- the Warlock was probably the damage star of the show, rolling well and using his Daily (Flames of Phlegethos) to excellent effect.

- We had a new player to the game, someone who'd never played any edition of DnD before. I was pleased with her ability to pick up the rules. I just have to get her to read the PHB in some of her off time.

- the Skill Challenge didn't work the way I expected. I used the errata DCs, and set it as Easy, with DCs of 5. Using their best skills, there were no failures. Which was ok because I just wanted to see how a Skill Challenge would go. I improved it which was fine, but it could've been done as any kind of roleplaying encounter. Next time I'll spend more prep time on the SC to make it more meaningful.

So next time: fewer minions, more standard monsters, and a better understanding of what the more complex enemies (particularly controllers) can do.

 

[wedgeski]

Given the range of things the PCs and monsters could do, it really was easier and faster playing.

I DM'd probably my 10th or so session at the weekend and this was the thing that finally came into focus for me as well. I asked the new guys whether they liked the game (they did) and then they asked me what I liked about it the most. I didn't really even think about it: running monsters.

It's all right there, everything you can do. Playing them to their max is so simple. Combats, while as long as, or longer, than 3E, run like clockwork. Building them from scratch (I've done a couple of testers) is a piece of cake. Working out synnergies in encounter groups is simple.

All-in-all: the monsters. They rock. Gimme more.

 

[TerraDave]

I also had a small group: cleric, warlock, and wizard (as an aside, the cleric has the warlock initiate feat, so they all have some cleric element). I had an npc join them (a strange dog that could mark with its bite and heal with its bark).

Challenging not a problem, but I was using KotS with only some small modification, which I guess means the encounter were balanced for 5 pcs (btw we didn't get to Irontooth, I knew that one is deadly).

In terms of monster powers, I did have to think a little to remember the Dragonsheilds ability to shift in reaction, I did forget once to have the sneaky gnome hide when hit, and also had to think a little (just a little) for the wyrmpriest. But after doing mid to highish 3E for a while, it was really a piece of cake.

 

[wedgeski]

- the Skill Challenge didn't work the way I expected. I used the errata DCs, and set it as Easy, with DCs of 5. Using their best skills, there were no failures. Which was ok because I just wanted to see how a Skill Challenge would go. I improved it which was fine, but it could've been done as any kind of roleplaying encounter. Next time I'll spend more prep time on the SC to make it more meaningful.

Skill challenges definitely seem to work best with as much thought put into them as any other encounter. (See the latest Dungeon adventure "Sea Reavers of the Shrouded Crags" for good examples of how the skill challenge is evolving from the examples in the DMG. That little adventure is loaded with 'em.)

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Interesting reports - thanks for sharing!

- the Skill Challenge didn't work the way I expected. I used the errata DCs, and set it as Easy, with DCs of 5. Using their best skills, there were no failures. Which was ok because I just wanted to see how a Skill Challenge would go. I improved it which was fine, but it could've been done as any kind of roleplaying encounter. Next time I'll spend more prep time on the SC to make it more meaningful.

You shouldn't use only easy DCs! I think the general approach is:
- Easy DCs gain no success/failure, but a +2 bonus on the next chec
- Moderate DC and Hard DC gain success. My personal preference is to use moderate DC for stuff you can only try once per challenge, and Hard DCs for things that are repeatable. Maybe that's a little "unfair" compared to other examples, and time will tell if I continue using it this way. Basically, my approach makes it more likely that people will try different things, unless they have their skills really maxed out. If you stick to the High DCs, the other party members will try to help with Easy DC options (I am against using the aid another rules in skill challenges, for the record )

[sblock=Homebrew Challenge for KotS - mild spoilers]
My home-brewed challenge was a challenge during the final Keep on the Shadowfell encounter. I decided that the party would literally trigger the ritual to open the rift - because Kalarel needed the blood of good-aligned people that weren't inhibited by fear (so typical sacrifices wouldn't work). But this gave the party (only consisting of 4 characters instead of the expected 5) a chance to disrupt the ritual. Using Hard Arcana and Religion checks, you could use the ritual against Kalarel, dealing damage to him. (Though if you failed, either you or the one that succeeded his Endurance check would take the damage). That worked pretty nicely to compensate for some of the difficulties of the encounter.
[/sblock]

 

[malraux]

I used the errata DCs, and set it as Easy, with DCs of 5.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but shouldn't the easy DC for skills be DC 10, as skills get a +5 to the DC.

 

[GoodKingJayIII]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but shouldn't the easy DC for skills be DC 10, as skills get a +5 to the DC.

I thought that the +5 Skill DC note had been removed by the errata, but I could be mistaken about that.

Skill challenges definitely seem to work best with as much thought put into them as any other encounter.

After Saturday, I completely agree. I'm not too concerned, when I am ready to include one, it'll have a significantly more detail.

You shouldn't use only easy DCs!

Again, it was more of a "let's see how this works!" thing. I think the real problem was not the skill DC issue, but just the fact that I used something pretty generic and ad-libbed the whole thing. Next time that won't be the case.

 

[Jack99]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but shouldn't the easy DC for skills be DC 10, as skills get a +5 to the DC.

That was errata'ed out.

 

[the Jester]

Re: skill challenge DCs- I have found that, for a 1st levelish party, DCs of 10/15/20 lead to challenging skill tests that the pcs are neither guaranteed to succeed nor to fail at. So far my group is about half and half on skill tests- which is okay, since the consequence of failure is typically not total failure for the adventure, but simply added complications of one kind or another.