How do we actually play the game?

[Stalker0]

To throw a little history, to me the biggest thing I saw in 3e games was that no one ever seemed to play by the recommend point buy. In 3e, the standard point buy was 22 points, with 25 being high. My group almost always played 28-32...and I think that makes a difference in gameplay.


So far, I think higher level combats are not working as people initially expected. Facing a high level opponent in 4e is often winnable, but has large possibility for grind.

Skill Challenges seemed to be played differently in nearly every group. There are definitely the loosest mechanics in 4e, and people are still figuring out how to use them. Even though I designed my own system, I have been using SC less and less. There are certain things I love a SC for, but I have found especially for social situations...my players roleplay better when they are talking to me more and rolling less.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

To throw a little history, to me the biggest thing I saw in 3e games was that no one ever seemed to play by the recommend point buy. In 3e, the standard point buy was 22 points, with 25 being high. My group almost always played 28-32...and I think that makes a difference in gameplay.


So far, I think higher level combats are not working as people initially expected. Facing a high level opponent in 4e is often winnable, but has large possibility for grind.

Skill Challenges seemed to be played differently in nearly every group. There are definitely the loosest mechanics in 4e, and people are still figuring out how to use them. Even though I designed my own system, I have been using SC less and less. There are certain things I love a SC for, but I have found especially for social situations...my players roleplay better when they are talking to me more and rolling less.

25 point buy was the standard in 3E. And I think my group was the only one in the world that used that, until we finally broke down and picked 28 or 30 point buy. Those adventure paths just were impossible without some extra tricks.

 

[Thanlis]

I'm running fairly by the book, although that's partially because I wanted to do that to get the feel of the game. And because I also run LFR, and you gotta stick to the book there sort of.

I still drift away from skill challenges as written. I think using skill challenges for social interactions is absolutely awful. The original rules, it's sort of interesting although too hard. The current rules, it's painfully simple. If skill challenges aren't set up such that the situation evolves (and requires different rolls) during the challenge, they're dull.

For a while I tried allowing people to use APs to reroll attacks, but it became the only thing people used APs for and we didn't like that so we dropped that rule.

For my next campaign I'm going to think hard about the milestone/extended rest rules. I need a way to challenge PCs even on the first encounter of the day. Maybe start everyone with three healing surges and give them an additional two every short rest, up to their max surge value?

 

[Vegepygmy]

25 point buy was the standard in 3E. And I think my group was the only one in the world that used that, until we finally broke down and picked 28 or 30 point buy.

My 3.5 campaign still uses 25-point buy, actually. I guess we're just manlier than most.

 

[Hussar]

Off topic a bit, but IMO, the point buy value (whether arrived at by actual point buy or through random die roll) probably colors people's perception of every edition far more than any single factor.

I know my group cheated like crap in 1e and 2e when we rolled characters. You always had 18's in your prime stat and probably a 15 or a 16 floating around too. 3e at the beginning frequently saw 32+ value characters.

Switching over to 27 point buy in my current campaign has been a HUGE eye opener.

 

[Mallus]

What do you think is not working as intended by the designers? What are you ignoring in practice despite the rules or guidelines suggesting otherwise.

The first thing that comes to mind is magic items. The system is more-or-less sound --except for the wild price inflation at the upper end-- but it's somewhat unsatisfying. One of our DM's is working on replacing multiple level-appropriate items with direct character bonuses and artifacts. PC's will end up with one or two significant items (that scale).

For example - do you notice that the roles are meaningless in actual play?

Not at all.

Do you find yourself ignoring the monster creation guidelines and make your own stat blocks?

No. But our DM's re-skin like fiends.

Do you not use skill challenges at all, pre- or after errata or replaced them with a house rule system?

We've used the original, errata'd, and Stalker0's system. We've had success w/all three, but we found that we got the most enjoyment out of using Skill Challenges on-the-fly (ie, not pre-designed), to resolve kooky player plans.

Do you find you ignore skills or class skills? Have you removed certain restrictions?

Starting PC's get to select one skill to add to their class list.

Do you ever use the infamous p.42 in the DMG, or have you heavily house ruled it?

Occasionally. My PC once Stunted Diplomacy in combat, imploring the small god in the box in his codpiece to Turn a passel of undead.

Do you use different point buy values (or a different dice roll method?).

Default point buy.

Or do you only house rule very selectively, like changing a specific power?

We have few, mainly selective house rules (ie, no Bloodclaw weapons over +2).

We play --surprisingly-- by the book when it comes to mechanics. We use the game to create and tell each other adventure stories. Brutal, inventive, hilarious, frequently transgressive adventure stories. From that perspective, we play 4e precisely how we played 3e (and any number of other games).