Playtesting questions

Jack99 said:
They do, just like area of effect spells from past editions.

Yes of course they do if your friends are in the area, no doubt!

What we had some doubts about is spells that have secondary targets (for instance, the Acid daily spell of Wizard, and the Force Orb). It wasn't clear to us if you HAVE to make those secondary attacks to all your allies adjacent to your target, or if you can choose not to.

We ruled that you cannot avoid hitting secondary targets, but that has almost nullified the Wizard who was then limited to just shooting Magic Missile over and over.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


BTW, in case you were wondering, the results of the playtest were a bit so-and-so. Of couse it was severely limited, because we just used the 6 pregen characters, 3 vs 3.

Generally speaking, the battle worked ok. Nearly everyone had something nice to do all the time with some exception.

Things that left a rather bitter aftertaste:

- It wasn't faster than 3e; of course, we know how to play 3e while we don't know yet 4e so we wasted a lot of time discussing the rules, trying to look for a way to use all our action, choosing which power to use etc, so it's our fault. It took about 2.5-3 hours just for 1 battle :uhoh: It was a long battle anyway, perhaps around 8-10 rounds (multiplied by 6 characters it's a lot of turns). I think however that perhaps the number of special abilities at 1st level is too many.

- Diagonals were slightly frustrating. Clearly, again our fault that we're used to the old way, because the frustration came from the fact that often we didn't notice how close we were from an opponent's charge/move. Lesson learned: when running away from someone, you must always run diagonally :confused:

- "Marking" abilities were hard to track. When casting a curse-type spell in 3e you normally have to remember only what is the effect, while in 4e these abilities require to keep track of WHO did the marking. Soon almost everyone was marked, someone multiple times, and that was a little mess.

- The Ranger's quarry seemed a little bit too good, coupled with Accurate Strike it almost always hit and the PC was definitely the best of the bunch, and the last man standing. Perhaps it just got the best player... but anyway it seemed by far the best at-will power.
 


You can't mark a target multiple times. A new mark supersedes and old one.

Also, Keterys forgot to mention that you can't get line-of-sight to invisible targets. (Basically, you can't target them with direct range attacks)

The other benefit of concealment is that you can use it to hide with a stealth check. I believe if they can't perceive your stealth check while you're hidden, you are effectively invisible. (Presumably modified by what you do.)

Fitz
 

I'm pretty sure invisibility gives concealment 11, which means that after you make your attack, you roll another d20 and on an 11 or higher, you hit. This is the same as 50% miss chance, worded differently. Partial concealment is concealment 5, meaning you need a 5 or higher to hit.
 

That is the rule for the D&D Minis game, but wasn't what we used at the table at D&D Experience (which isn't conclusive)

While you don't have line of sight to an invisible target, you still have line of effect and we were allowed to use ranged attacks just fine (such as magic missile, eldritch blast, etc)

DM might have run it wrong, of course.
 


does invisible actually make you invisible? As in, creatures don't see you and cant locate your square without an ability or some sort of skill check? and then when they know what square to attack, then you get the +5 to all defenses?
 

Far as I know, yep. Don't know the exact rules behind perception and stealth, though. I'd imagine a warlock with stealth who eyebited then moved at least 3 would be in very good shape (invisibility to one, concealment to rest, stealthy goodness, etc)
 

Remove ads

Top