Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Palladion" data-source="post: 4311628" data-attributes="member: 12373">(Normally I would not post a rant, but with the for and against for 4th edition flying around, leaving this unspoken is bad.  Forgive the somewhat harsh tone for this post, but something about the podcast irked me greatly.)I want to point out some really fundamental shortfalls in the video podcast combat.  The paladin did not challenge/mark (PHB 91) (minor action to do so, which she had plenty of).  The warlock forgot to curse (again, minor action) enemies until about the third round of combat, I believe.  The fighter did not enter melee until later in the combat, nor did he challenge/mark (not even an action, you just have to remember it) when he used his wizard powers.  The rogue, while having a good first round, was neither backed up by his party nor did he use his mobility once he was in trouble (this was mostly bad luck on his part).(Next, I apologize, but again, going to be harsh here.  A bit of a rant.)These people are gamers, game designers, playtesters, and they freaking work for Wizards!  The part that scares me the most is "playtesters".  If these are the people who tested 4th edition, it makes me want to cry.  These people missed fundamental abilities of their classes and their class roles.  Two defenders who did not defend (go ahead and swing away like it was 3e), a warlock (striker) who tried very hard to be a controller, a fighter who did not enter into melee (see about 5:12 in the podcast to hear him talk about wizard powers in melee and to supplement the role he is playing).  Poor wizard was the only one close to doing his role, but he could not roll above 8 to save the rogue's life.  These are not novice players who are learning the game, these are game designers!  I would be ashamed to show my face if I played that badly.Yes, I said it, badly.The video was a horrible showcase of 4th edition combat.  While bore into brain is amusing, the flawed approach the players took to combat (individualism instead of team play) might just ruin any fence sitters out there.  Oh, the rogue did not inform his own party of his hit point status either, not that he was bloodied or about to die.  What was he waiting for?  That his party would feel guilty for letting him die?  Not very gamerly attitude... and he would still be dead (or a thrall)!(I apologize for the "personal attack" nature of this post.  While not completely constructive, I wanted to point out the faults.)For those still deciding about 4th edition, I want to say that the game should be played more like "tell me about your party" rather than "tell me about your character".  Showboating will probably get everyone killed, cooperation will get you around the fun encounters your DM designs.(I hope no one flames me too bad for this, very sorry again.  This was all strong opinion, but when I saw the combat, I was shaking my head in shame.)Oh yeah, when played properly, 4th edition combat rounds are faster and more mobile than previous editions.  They can swing back and forth, so people have to keep their heads in the game.  Combat overall is about the same length of time, but no one is left sitting around being bored (too much).</blockquote>

Verification