Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="D'karr" data-source="post: 6011269" data-attributes="member: 336">Is the DM running one of the old seasons of encounters because this particular one seems to be at least 3-4 seasons ago (over a year ago), or is this a play report from some time ago?Several things come to mind.  The battlemind is definitely not a class for beginners.  Pregens have always had issues, but the thri-kreen is from season 2 and that is one of the worst seasons that they ever produced, specially the pregens which were atrocious.  Pregens need to be properly updated and explained to the players.  Giving a new player a character and essentially saying, "here figure it out" is a recipe for player frustration.The current season is entirely in the underdark, is narrowly focused in classes and even races and avoids some of these "traps."  That is why I asked about the particular season because some of the problems with pregens have been made less problematic.The DM really needs to "hold" the players hands specially if they are new and make reasonable recommendations so that they get accustomed to the game.  One of the reason for Pregens is to simplify options and providing as many pregens as you mentioned is not a "good service" to new players.  It seems like the DM was not doing a reasonable job of that.  And it's possible that the DM is not too familiar with the base rules, from what you described. On the issue of the "knight's aura", the defender's aura is a minor action to activate so low initiative also affects them.  If it has not been their turn at least once, none of the creatures are marked either.  However, I agree that an aura is a better way to track the mark effect.Once again this seems to be a DM failure.  In D&D Encounters one of the roles for the DM is to guide new players.  This is a program designed specifically to cater to new players.  The DM should be doing a better job of explaining options to the rogue, the wizard, the bard, and particularly the Ardent which is a psionic class, and IME more difficult to use for a beginner.This once again seems like a failure on the part of the DM to explain basic class functions to the players.  A bard is a leader and probably had a minor action "heal" that could have revived his ally. The "not resorting to I attack" claim is a little disingenuous here isn't it?  You are playing 1st level characters, and half the party is not making "effective" attacks.  At some point you will have to use at-will powers, maybe faster than usual, you are 1st level with limited encounter and daily powers, and from your description the rest of the party are playing "keystone cops".The mechanic is sound and does what it advertises without any confusion, the "issue" people have is that it's called "healing".  Rename it, something that can be very easily done by any DM that did not like a particular "terminology".For my game, I ended up renaming healing surges to visceral reserves and all the issues with terminology went away.  I don't like the terminology for AC. I mean armor is supposed to protect you not prevent you from getting "hit".  However, complaining about terminology, when the mechanics work well and as described, seems like a waste of my time.Lots of confusion about how things work will tend to make issues seem bigger than they are.  The DM once again should have had a good grasp of the basics of the game.  The game is hardly complicated.  The needed rules can fit into 2-3 pages.  So it's not the complexity that is causing the issue, it's that no one at that table seemed to understand the very basics of the game, the DM included.I agree simpler, in some respects is better.  A player at first level has 4 options for attacks (2 At-Will, 1 Enc, 1 Daily).  How much simpler can the game get without resorting to "I attack"?  The fact that the pregens are not well explained is something the DM is supposed to be there to correct, specially for new players.The perception that there was confusion is even more pronounced because it seems like the players didn't know what to do, and the DM took no time to even guide them a little, at least from your description.I tend to agree with this, a simpler way of tracking would be beneficial.So you didn't like the effects of an At-Will power on a pregen.  If you had created your character you might have chosen a different power.  What you describe is interesting but obviously a lot more powerful than what an at-will power should probably do.  This can also become a problem with simplifying too much.The lowest level gargoyle I could find in the compendium was a level 5 creature.  I would not expect a 1st level character to drop a 5th level creature with 20 points of damage.  Feeling like a monster should be dead is okay, but there are simply too many factors involved in a combat for me to make a general statement that when a 1st level character does 20 points of damage the creature hit should be dead.I understand some of you "frustration" with this particular game session, but from what you have described you had a lousy experience for 2 reasons.  The inexperience of the players, and a DM that didn't seem to take the time to explain options to the players.4e does have more options for players but at 1st level those options are still very minimal.  Pregens are a problem in various ways, I agree with that.  However, if players choose not to use the options provided, or the options are not explained to them to make "wise decisions", the session might not be as enjoyable.  How can that be a fault of the system?D&D has always been a "different" type of game and requires "administration" by the DM, in all editions.  If the DM is doing a "poor" job, how can that be a fault of the game?I run the encounters program locally, and the problems you've described here seem to have very little to do with 4e, or the encounters program per se.  Now, I might be mistaken and the DM could have been offering options to the players and showing them what would work best, but that did not come across in your description.  If he was, I apologize for making that assumption based on the description.  And if he was making that effort and the players were still not following his advice, how can that be an issue with the game system?</blockquote>

Verification