My 3 quibbles with 4e

[Ulrick]

Update:

After applying most of the suggestions given, combat has run a little smoother. It's still an annoyance of keeping track of the conditions.

Overall, I feel that 4e is just a thinly disguised miniature battle game, given the extreme emphasis on combat (even more so that 3.5e). Yeah, I know. Its a typical response. But hey, I gave 4e a chance by running it weekly for about 3 months now. I started out strongly supporting 4e and I really wanted to give it a chance because I was tired of 3.5e (mainly because of high-level play).

Out of my 5 players, two are indifferent. They can give or take. But the remaining do not like 4e because of its complete emphasis on battle. The PC wizard is, of course, miffed at the toning down of his powers (Magic Missile requires at attack roll? and Invisibilty lasts only on round?)

I understand that a lot of "sacred cows" were slaughtered when 4e was designed. And I still do like much of what 4e has accomplished--a fresh perspective, perhaps luring new players to the hobby, and creating adventures from scratch is easier.

However, I don't think 4e is meant for roleplaying and an ongoing campaign. Judging from the core books and the 4e adventures that I've read and run, 4e is very "beer and pretzels" meant to be tailored to run in specific time-slots (1 encounter per hour of real time, etc). My players and I want more than just a bunch of cool powers for combat.

As one of my players put it: "Oh, I have powers to kill more people. Ooo, my utility powers give me a chance to kill more people!"

So, I'm ending my 4e campaign, partly because of my quibbles but mainly because my players and I are not having fun. I plan on going back to 3.5e or something else according to mine, and my player's tastes.

For all its worth, I tried. I really tried.

 

[Jack99]

However, I don't think 4e is meant for roleplaying and an ongoing campaign.

*blink*

Doh! I knew I was doing something wrong.

 

[DaveMage]

I plan on going back to 3.5e or something else according to mine, and my player's tastes.

Pathfinder's coming out in August. Maybe the changes they are making will help ease some of the pain you experienced with high level play in standard 3.5.

 

[The Little Raven]

However, I don't think 4e is meant for roleplaying and an ongoing campaign.

Sounds like a personal problem. The three groups that I personally play with have no problems with either roleplaying or maintaining a continuing storyline.

As I learned while in tech support, 80% of all problems stem from user error.

 

[cignus_pfaccari]

Sounds like a personal problem. The three groups that I personally play with have no problems with either roleplaying or maintaining a continuing storyline.

As I learned while in tech support, 80% of all problems stem from user error.

Indeed.

The powergamer bard was heard yesterday complaining that his Words of Friendship power didn't help him kick butt.

Brad

 

[Remathilis]

For all its worth, I tried. I really tried.

Can't blame you for that. No edition of D&D is perfect*, so go out and find something you like. Good luck and good gaming.


* Except the D&D Rules Cyclopedia. This is non-debatable.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

However, I don't think 4e is meant for roleplaying and an ongoing campaign. Judging from the core books and the 4e adventures that I've read and run, 4e is very "beer and pretzels" meant to be tailored to run in specific time-slots (1 encounter per hour of real time, etc). My players and I want more than just a bunch of cool powers for combat.

There IS a lot more than cool powers for combat Take my last game:

We were onboard a ship that got caught in a storm and the lighthouse that was supposed to be nearby was out. We had a skill challenge where we all watched for rocks, helped the crew with the ropes, and used our knowledge skills to help avoid the rocks. When we got to shore, the ship was damaged but repairable. The captain told us that he was concerned about the lighthouse and that it would cause problems for many ships if it wasn't lit. He suggested we go investigate.

We started heading towards the lighthouse and ran into an old man who offered us food and drink since we'd just been in a storm. We agreed and headed to the inn of a town that was near the lighthouse. We suddenly felt ill and the people in the inn attacked us. We defeated them and found out that they were part of a nearby country's efforts to destabilize the region by causing shipwrecks and that their master was at the lighthouse. We went there, defeated him and saved the day.

All of that was done using 4e. Most of the non-combat sections were done without looking at our character sheets, however. The character sheet is what you use in combat or when you need to roll a skill check. The rest of the time, it should be up to the players to role play their characters and come up with interesting ideas.

If anything, 4e is better suited to running an ongoing campaign and for out of combat stuff. It encourages players to stop thinking of their characters sheet as a list of the only options they have. 3e had this effect on players, and it's why I see a lot of people complaining about 4e. It always comes down to "In 3e, I would have cast a charm spell on the man as soon as we saw him, we would have made sure he wasn't leading us into a trap. We would have then asked him for a way around town in order to avoid the trap. We would have used invisibility in order to sneak into the town and steal their stuff for daring to plan a trap for us, then we would have teleported to the lighthouse and taken out the bad guys in their sleep. In 4e, I can't do any of that. My only option is to fight the bad guys, since nothing else is written on my character sheet."

Of course, I played 3e the same way I play 4e. I would have used some skills to help the ship, met up with the guy, ran into the trap, beat the bad guys, headed to the lighthouse, beat the bad guys. Only I would have had less fun during the combats due to the imbalance between classes, overwhelming ability of the spellcasters to overshadow me, and the fact that it was likely I'd die to a save or die in the final encounter against the powerful wizard.

I ran and assisted in LG in 3.5e and I run and assist LFR now. I know that 3e runs the same in limited time slots as a beer and pretzels game as 4e does.

 

[Festivus]

Many? Only those belonging to the Leader characters, because that's what they do. Leaders are like bards, they help everyone else.



First of all, I have the official DM screen which lists all the conditions and what they do. It's one of the most useful bits of information I have.

Second, I keep track of monster HPs on a bit of scratch paper. When they suffer a condition, I write that next to their hp. A little M indicates that they're marked, and it's generally very obvious by whom.

The players keep track of their own conditions on scratchpaper. So, "o5 poison, slow (save)" or something similar. They check that at the beginning of their action and remember what is going on.

Cheers!

I take this a bit further. I write a "Mn" where n is the player number I designate for marks. For ongoing effects, if they end on a given persons turn I just annotate their number. If it's save ends I draw a circle around it to remind me to roll for it at the end of the turn and look for it when their turn begins. When the effect is saved or gone, I strike it out.

For players, I require them to keep track of their own marks. Eveyone is honest, not a problem. For ongoing effects with the players given by monsters, I use an index card. When the effect is gone they hand it back to me.

 

[Mercule]

#1) Yeah, this bugged me quite a bit, too. My main gripe was that everyone had the same progression, number, and general mechanics (in a rather generic sense) for their powers. I complained rather recently about this, even. But, I've come to realize that it really doesn't play out that way, in practice. That isn't to say I wouldn't prefer 5e to have variable advancement, but 4e doesn't actually bother me.

As to everyone having "special powers", you're quite right. Then again, I really think everyone should have special powers. Not magic, but the fighter should have something in his fighting ability that differentiates him from a wizard besides his attack roll.

#2) Not seeing this. During our first 4e module (12-16 hrs), we had one real death and three characters drop below 0 hps and stay there untill the end of the encounter. 4e is darn harsh.

#3) We switched relatively recently (had a 3.5 to finish), so I had forewarning about the grind. I've only seen it once, though, at least, in a negative way. I've found the 4e combats really can take longer than 3e combats. But, they do so in a way that addresses an issue I had with 3e -- fight to the death. In 3e, I found myself often running combats past the point I knew the outcome. Sometimes, this was because the NPCs had a choice of dying running or dying fighting; other times, it was to give the PCs a chance to actually use some of their powers or just to threaten them with actual harm.

4e lasts just enough longer that I feel fine having NPCs flee at a certain point. I couldn't tell you the exact point at which I flip the switch, but I often do change NPC tactics when they're bloodied. If the battle is going poorly for them, they actually break morale and run. Of course, true fanatics or cornered enemies continue to fight, but everyone else prefers survival. It shortens fights to just the interesting parts, feels more "realistic", extends the adventuring day, and gives me an excuse to have more encounters in a dungeon than even the otherwise glossed over ecology would support.

4e only grinds if you make every NPC some sort of extremist or rabid beast. Let the PCs rout their foes on occasion.

 

[DragoonLance]

...so I've changed the varieties monsters come in. Instead of Minion, Normal, Elite and Solo I have Weak, Normal, Tough, Elite and Solo.

Minions are gone (replaced with 'Weak'). Elite and Solo are the same as before.

Weak is just like the MM listed Normal entry but with 1/4 the HP total; my Normal has 1/2 HP of the MM listed Normal, and my 'Tough' is equivalent to the MM listed Normal. Most fights are with the "new Normal" monsters, which reduces grind considerably. It's also easier to add a couple more monsters to the ranks without endangering the PCs too much, but the extra few monsters on the board open up a lot of tactical options that keep things interesting.

Excellent! (Thievery roll passed)