D&D 4E Is It Time to Look at 4E Again?

[Retreater]

First, a little bit of history with me and 4E.

Played through most of Keep on the Shadowfell when it was first released in May 2008. (Well, more specifically, I DMed it for a few sessions, ran into a TPK; another DM took over, I played for a few sessions, then we went back to 3.5.)

From Summer 2008 to Winter 2009, it was 3.5/Pathfinder/or other systems. In Winter 2009 I started a new group (players completely new to tabletop RPGs) with PHB 2 and a DDI subscription in addition to the Core Rules.

That went okay for a month or so. Then it ended in a TPK amidst lagging player interest and personal issues amongst the players. (At that time we were playing through the Chaos Scar encounters with some of the Adventure Path.)

Since Winter 2009 it's been PF all the way.

I've been running it, and it's okay. I haven't run into any TPKs, which happened about every other session in 4e. But I'm looking ahead to my next campaign, and I'd like to put some new flair and house rules into it. All of the house rules I'm looking at are inspired by 4e.

So, I'm wondering if I should 3.5-ize 4e or 4e-ize 3.5. Or if I should just leave well enough alone.

Has anyone else had a smiliar experience? Has anyone gone back and forth on 4E and finally discovered that they can make it work?

(I think more than anything else, I just can't run combats right in 4E or develop good encounters - which is a major problem.)

Retreater

 

[Dice4Hire]

If you feel the urge to retry a system, you should go for it. Same for trying a new system.

 

[Aegeri]

How did you get so many TPKs in 4E? It's not like I am disputing you did, but normally I see people who dislike the system claim 4E PCs are invulnerable and they can't kill them generally.

 

[mach1.9pants]

LOL I typed a (longer but) similar reply... TPKs? 4E? I played with 4 PCs and up-powered the monsters in the WotC modules to make it threatening...

but the internet ate my post.

 

[giant.robot]

If you think you and your players will enjoy it by all means give 4E another shot. Keep in mind though it is not going to play like previous editions. If you're playing 4E like you'd play Pathfinder or 3.5E you're going to have a really hard time.

For starters healing and staying conscious in general is a bit different in 4E. Judicious use of your second wind will help you stay alive even when the party healer can't help you immediately. Players need to be aware of how many monster attacks will happen between their subsequent turns. If the number of potential monster attacks times the average attack damage is higher than a character's HP or they're surrounded they really should use their second wind.

Players should also be aware of and be willing to play their character's combat role. The leader shouldn't be ignoring hurt characters to get in an extra swipe of their sword. The controller should be helping to wrangle the monsters that the defenders can't/aren't handling. As the DM know monster roles and classifications.

Also as the DM you should also be ready and willing to scale encounters to your party's skill level. If the players are having a hard time and not having fun scale back encounters. Switch out some soldiers for minions or throw some combat advantage at the characters.

 

[Gort]

How did you get so many TPKs in 4E? It's not like I am disputing you did, but normally I see people who dislike the system claim 4E PCs are invulnerable and they can't kill them generally.

Yeah, and it's as untrue now as it was when people said it about 3e.

 

[vagabundo]

We need more information on how you design such killer combats. It is quiet hard to be so lethal using the encounter guidelines from the DMG.

 

[pemerton]

All of the house rules I'm looking at are inspired by 4e.

So, I'm wondering if I should 3.5-ize 4e or 4e-ize 3.5. Or if I should just leave well enough alone.

Has anyone else had a smiliar experience? Has anyone gone back and forth on 4E and finally discovered that they can make it work?

(I think more than anything else, I just can't run combats right in 4E or develop good encounters - which is a major problem.)

I haven't had the experience you describe - me and my group shifted from Rolemaster (which is closer to 3E/PF than it is to 4e) to 4e and so far haven't looked back.

But if I were you I would be a little hesitant about shifting to 4e if you have trouble with building and running encounters in that system. These are such a big part of the 4e system that if they're not working for you, it may be that the system as a whole is not for you.

What sort of 4e-style houserules are you looking at? Maybe you could incorporate some of them into a 3E/PF game via Monte Cook's Experimental Might ideas.

 

[WhatGravitas]

(I think more than anything else, I just can't run combats right in 4E or develop good encounters - which is a major problem.)

Did you take a look at the DMG2? I found it to be better than the already excellent DMG1. Better crunch and better advice, especially with designing interesting encounters. The MMs also keep getting better. If you have enough disposable income, grab the DMG2 and look for MM3 monsters in DDI... or borrow the DMG2, at least.

And if in doubt, post encounters here, people tend to offer pretty good advice here.

So, yeah, retry it - in the worst case it's just a nice change of pace, in the best case, you get a new RPG you like to play.

Cheers, LT.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I started a new group (players completely new to tabletop RPGs) with PHB 2 and a DDI subscription in addition to the Core Rules.

That went okay for a month or so. Then it ended in a TPK amidst lagging player interest and personal issues amongst the players. ... TPKs, which happened about every other session in 4e.

(I think more than anything else, I just can't run combats right in 4E or develop good encounters - which is a major problem.)

Has anyone else had a smiliar experience? Has anyone gone back and forth on 4E and finally discovered that they can make it work?

I can't imagine many DMs have had that experience. The first two modules did have encounters that badly violated the 4e encounter guidelines, and could hand you a TPK: Irontooth, Kallarel, & Paldomar. Though, really, Irontooth wasn't /that/ bad. Aside from that 4e is definitely not tending towards the TPK. It tends towards rather long combats, some of the time, that's the worst complaint I've heard.

The 4e encounter system is very simple and pretty robust. A 'standard' encounter isn't going to kill anyone. A 'hard' one is generally quite survivable. They just upgrades the monsters in MM3 because MM1 & 2 monsters weren't nasty enough.


I find I'm thinking of "is the computer plugged in?" type tech support questions here. Like, did you calculate level 1 hps using CON /score/ or CON /mod/? That could explain some TPKs if you had PCs running around at aproximately half the hps they should have.


What seems to be causing the TPKs? Can the PCs not hit the monsters? Do the monsters always hit the PCs? Do the PCs each attack a different monsters while the monsters focus on one PC at a time? Are players adding everything to their attacks /and/ defenses: 1/2 level? stat? enhancement bonuses?


I mean, the patient is dying, OK, but, apart from death, what are the symptoms?