Felon said:
In this case, we don't know how much time or effort went into looking up the awakening rules. We also don't know that they were the reason why the party thrashed their foes so quickly. In general, all-out offense just has a way of overwhelming the opposition.
instead moved the PCs directly into battle.
...
I had intended the encounter to be more threatening and instead
The issue is this. He wanted it to be threatening and then threw out the wakeup rules which probably would have made it threatening. We don't know what those rules are. They may have been that some or most of the PCs would have never woken up (making it a lot more threatening). They may have been condition rules that the PCs were at minuses for being groggy (again, making it potentially more threatening). They may have been both.
However, he went directly to battle, presumably with most of the PCs. This made it more or less a fairly normal battle shy of armor.
What did he expect? Of course the PCs were going to win and win quickly if it was supposed to be a threatening encounter as an ambush, but he removed the ambush portion. What did he expect?
Like I said, he sounds like a good story telling DM.
But as a game designer and playtester, he does not sound experienced. He sounds green. He got the exact result that he set up for and wondered why it happened that way. His expectations of a threatening encounter were off base because he took away rules that presumably made it more threatening. Instead, he allowed the PCs even odds or better because he dropped rules that are there for a reason.
Playtesters can drop rules to re-assure themselves that the rules make sense. But, that does nothing to indicate whether the rules are well designed, useful, and appropriate. He thought they were a bit clunky, so he dropped them. And by dropping them, he should have shifted his expectations that this would be a threatening encounter, but was surprised when that happened.
Playtesters and especially game designers have to understand the mechanics of the game system. Dropping rules for the fun of it in a playtest does not test the system. It tests altering the system.
There were other aspects of that combat that I found suspect. All of the PCs who woke up got actions in the surprise round. As a DM, I don't like that. A sound asleep PC gets to wake up and do a surprise round action, but a wide awake PC who is alert and looking for trouble in a normal dungeon does not get to act in a surprise round. That just sounds wrong mechanically. He got to call out pre-surprise round, they got to wake up, and then they got to do a surprise round action.
As FranktheDM would say: "Not in my game.".
And, why didn't the dopplegangers look like the PCs themselves or like the nobles or something? PCs might be hesitant to outright attack another PC or a noble. But, he played the bad guys who are skilled at confusion and deception as total idiots. "dressed darkly and bore the crest of the Teluvian house". Give me a break. Let's make it easy for the players.
Why were the PCs all sleeping in the same room, or if not, why were their chances good of waking up and rushing to battle from a strange call in the night? None of that is explained (to me, important details for us to judge 4E rules by).
And, wasn't the room dark? Who sleeps in a well lit room? If Shadowy Illumination, was there miss chances? Did he take into account other rules, or was it a normal combat with game rules blown off? We do not know. But, he doesn't mention any special modifiers or rules, so I suspect that he did not take them into account. Sure, a Wizard could have lit up the room on the surprise round, but again, allowing PCs actions (outside of the one who woke up) on the surprise round was suspect in the first place.
If we are going to get playtest reports, they should follow the rules. If they have waking up rules, those should include the ability to act or the ability to not act (my preference) on the surprise round. Personally, I think waking up should be the surprise round action of the players who make the Listen roll. They should get no other actions. But, that's just me and I do not know what the 4E waking up rules are.
Unfortunately, he did not use them and report on them.
Greg has the annoying habit of giving the 30,000 foot version of the story and not giving any good details. Because of that, judging his playtest reports is a waste of time because it doesn't tell us viturally anything about 4E. Maybe that is his intent. To tell us pretty stories instead. So far, I consider his playtest reports to be 0 for 2.
Maybe someday.
