D&D 4E Raiders of Oakhurst: A 4E Fan Playtest Adventure

[Xorn]

50 dpi battlemaps

I'm planning to run this adventure for my virtual tabletop group (we're scattered all over the country) and fired up Dundjinni to make some battlemaps. Here's the battlemap for Area 1 if anyone would like to use it. Typically a virtual tabletop map is 50 pixels/inch, but if you want to print it, print at 50 dpi and it will be proper scale for miniatures.

Raiders of Oakhurst Area 1
Raiders of Oakhurst Area 2
Raiders of Oakhurst Area 3
Raiders of Oakhurst Area 4

Raiders of Oakhurst (Full Map)

Would anyone be interested in the rest of the battlemaps as I make them?

EDIT - Added Area 2 before I go off to work. I dunno how you do a secret door on a tabletop battlemap, on a VTT you just don't reveal that part of the map as you unmask it. Just cover it with your dice bag/DM screen?

EDIT 06-March-2008: Finished the maps and posted the battlemap sections as well as the full map. This map is already adjusted to print at 50 dpi (so it will print 1 inch per square) and the battlemaps are made in multiples of 8x10. Map 1 is designed for 4 landscape pages, as is Map 4. Map 2 & 3 will fit on a single portrait page. If you want to crop your own battlemap sizes, or want to use the map in a VTT, I included the full-size map as well, since it barely fits in a Dundjinni map. I tried to stay somewhat true to the room desciptions, but I didn't go too crazy with it.

 

[Wystan]

Yes Xorn,

Make more please....

 

[howandwhy99]

Cool adventure Olgar. Another tale for Meepo.

 

[Xorn]

I have added the Dundjinni maps to my first post, enjoy!

(Running this on Saturday, I'm pretty excited!)

What is horribly ironic is that my group just finished doing The Sunless Citadel (we started a new campaign not too long ago) and were it not for the side adventure I drug them on, they were HEADING to Stone Tooth to do Forge of Fury!

 

[Wormwood]

Ran it for my group through v2 last night, here's a [not so brief] summary:

Parameters: We only had about an hour to play (yes, touring on Rock Band is more important), so I just ran the initial room
with the minions, skirmishers and warcaster.

Group: Me and 5 other players. We've been gaming together for almost 20 years, and have been playing 3e since 2000 (a game
with which we have a love/hate relationship). Their attitudes toward 4e ranged from skeptical to enthusiastic.

Classes played: All but the fighter.

Monsters encountered: 8 minions, 2 skirmishers, 1 slinger, 1 warcaster

Impressions:
As these guys are all heavy WoW players, I found that MMO terminology really helped in communicating some of 4e's concepts.
Instant cast (at-will), 5-minute cooldown (per encounter), 1 hour cooldown (daily), hunter's mark (quarry/warlock's curse), etc. All I know is, they grokked the game and their character's abilities in about 10 minutes, so I'm not complaining.

Powers were *definitely* the bit that excited the players the most.

Ranger: Hunter's quarry ftw. He was definitely the primary damage dealer, so I surrounded him with minions (I *love* the Kobold shifty ability) before brining on some skirmisher pain with combat advantage. But I just couldn't keep the Ranger pinned down---his ability to maneuver out of my scrums was fun to watch, if frustrating. The warcaster eventually nailed him with a force pulse, knocking him into negative hps. Didn't last too long, however.

Cleric: He thought his at-wills were a little anemic, but he loved the fact that he could toss off a Healing Word without having to stop kicking kobold ass. The most fun I had was when the Warcaster critted with a Force Lance and shoved him into the fire pit for some extra damage. The cleric got his revenge, however (see below)

Warlock: Honestly, this was just as fun to watch as it was to play. He enjoyed spamming eldritch blast---until he figured out how much fun Eyebite was. His use of Curse of the Dark Dream on the fleeing warcaster was hilarious---it reminded me of Mortal Kombat ("Get Over Here!") as he dragged the warcaster screaming back into the room, setting him up for the cleric to send him to Hobgoblin Valhalla with a Cascade of Light.

Wizard: Low rolls suck---and both the Wizard and the Warlock were plagued by them for most of the night (whereas I critted twice). It was only after the game that I discovered that the wizard player had forgotten to add both his Wand of Accuracy and his Bloodhunt abilities (net +3 to hit). The Wizard player didn't seem impressed by the array of spells he had---essentially spamming Magic Missile. I'm pretty sure he just wasn't into the game as much as the rest of the group---I'll ask him for more detailed impressions today.

Paladin: He had fun---healing people and marking baddies. He ended up spending three rounds on fire (thanks to the slinger), but he also killed just as many enemies as the Ranger. He really seemed to enjoy 4e's emphasis on battlefield mobility---because even at 5 squares of movement, he was charging and sliding all over the place. Memorable moment: he got to negate a 24-point Shock Staff crit using his Second Chance ability. And I thought I hated halflings before...

DM: Okay, I love minions. And kobold minions with a free move every round? Yeah, I really love minions---and the players actually started to take them seriously after I set them up with some sweet flanks and Mob Attacks.

The warcaster was a bad-ass. If I'd been able to set him up with a tank, I'm fairly certain I could have killed two of the PCs without a problem. As it was, he performed admirably against three PCs.

A little more fiddling with conditions than I would prefer, but leagues ahead of 3e in that regard. I thought I would *hate* the simplified saving throws---but we all ended up liking them. Really liking them in some cases (ironically, the Paladin who blew three saves in a row is their most vocal proponent).

By the time the encounter ended, all action points were spent, as were four second winds and two or three daily powers. I don't know how they would have fared had they pressed on.

Okay, this is getting a little longer than I wanted it to. Bottom line is, the combat balanced the fun of tactical play without being bogged down in minutiae. On the other hand, it took longer in real-time than I would have liked---but I'm hoping that with proficiency comes speed (7 combat rounds, a little over an hour and a half real time).

Thanks for the adventure---I'm still waiting for feeback from some players, but I'll definitely post 'em here if they are noteworthy.

 

[mhensley]

I would not go so far as to say that the game is too difficult for 12 year olds. I would say, however, that the learning curve for inexperienced 12 year olds is steeper than I had anticipated. Given that my kids are as inexperienced as they are, and as disinterested as a few of them were, I would not say that this episode is going to be standard for all kids in their age ranges.

I will say, in case the topic comes up, that three of the four kids are solid "A" students in school who demonstrate excellent creativity and are generally well read and have excellent writing skills. The concept of Role-Playing for them is not completely foreign, just something they don't often participate in.

Again, I probably expected too much, but I found them to be quickly confused and, eventually, somewhat bored.

Yep, it depends on the 12 yo. I'm pretty sure I was playing Squad Leader when I was that age. With games like this, you either have an interest and grok it or you don't. This is why I try not to push my wife and kids into my weird hobbies too much. Although I do admit to playing a lot of video games with my 6 yo. My older daughter (12) just doesn't have an interest in such boyish pursuits.

 

[Wormwood]

Player Feedback #1, from Simon (Paladin):

I liked it and would like to see more of it.
VERY interested in racial abilities and such. I think that is very cool and added with the "trees" really can give someone the opportunity to very different than others at the same level and class.

I think combat was slow, BUT I think prob 25% of that was due to us not knowing our characters capabilities. I think, not unlike my limited xp with WoW, even as you level and have more combos, most combat would be you using your favorite "slice and dice" maneuvers, and so would likely be a little faster/smoother even though you have more to choose from. It was interesting to see how strategies will come into play. Things you'd think about in a LARP (like a shield wall) will actually be REALLY effective to provide cover for the "clothies". The surges and encounter abilities...VERY nice!

The adjustment to movement squares is very cool, much simpler and the reach rule change (though we didn't see that in action) is good. No more "I come in from the diagonal cuz this rule is broke" stuff.
Also the thought that monsters have different abilities than characters is pretty neat. Makes me think about running a module to dust off the rust. If they do convert Greyhawk to 4E, I'd be VERY interested in running that mid-long term...loved to read about it, never gotten a chance to play in the world.

The new Defense scores are different, but I think I like it. I do like the new Saving Throw rule, though I did get burned for 3 rounds...damn 20 sider.
I like the thought of putting more on the players. I think this would make GMing more fun and less "bogged down". I also enjoyed the discussion regarding the skills and escaping the city...very cool!

Lastly, I thought my 20 sided sucked...but hey, its gotta have a bad day every once in awhile. I'll just sacrifice a chicken, bathe it in baby oil and let the cat shew on it....should be right as rain next week.

 

[FunkBGR]

Xorn - Awesome maps

Wormwood -

I had similar reservations about the saving throw defenses, but after playing with it, I loved it.

My group is a mix of some people who have played WoW, and some who have never touched an MMO, and the learning curve was almost exactly the same for both of them, although the rationalization on how it worked was different between them.

Regardless, they loved the tactical situations that presented themselves from the get-go, where the Fighter does more than "just attacks".

 

[HeapThaumaturgist]

Similar reactions. Ran this last night.

Only four players and my wife was the only person that played WoW. She really took to the class roles. One guy took a while to "get" it, but after playing it seemed to dawn on him what it was about. He played the cleric and thought the powers were a little meh, especially with his dice playing cold, but enjoyed being able to use Healing Word as a swift, er, minor action.

It played like a 4th-5th level adventure, instead of a 1st level adventure, and I think everybody agreed that being able to have options and longevity at the outset was nice.

I honestly did not expect to enjoy the game, but did so in spite of myself. We dedicated the evening to E. Gary Gygax and had pizza and beer and "played D&D for the first time, again". We renamed Aumanator to "The Great Gary", which will probably stick.

I'm still out on my feeling for the game. I think the essential rules are good, but some of the taste didn't settle well. One player disliked the simplifying of weapons and armor. One player loved the powers while another wasn't particularly wowed. We've been playing in a 20th level D&D 3.5 game and I think everyone was refreshed to work without an hour of buff math before any encounter. But that would be true of playing 1st level anything.

--fje

 

[Wormwood]

(man, I can just feel the Ignores clicking as I paste this)

Player reaction #2, this time from Mark (Ranger). [edited slightly for Grandma]

I would *much* rather be involved in an interactive story/campaign with a quick yet elegant conflict resolution system and I think 4th edition is far better than its predecessors in that regard and here is why:

• Character creation is role driven (parties are teams who each have a role they can excel at that doesn’t come at the expense of an ally) as opposed to efficiency driven (min/max powergaming/brinksmanship)

• Race is actually relevant now! Racial abilities that continue to accrue as you level are a fantastic upgrade…

• Abilities are clearly defined as regards to timing and effect without being dependant upon other material and new options can be added continuously with out disrupting the whole of the rules or requiring multiple books. You can still be effective without needing supplements to keep up with the “Joneses” . . .

• Speed of combat has improved over previous incarnations of the rules. Our slow pace in combat is a reflection of us as individuals . . . not the newer rules. They simplified things w/o dumbing down combat or over-focusing on realism at the expense of playability… (I am much more interested in playability than realism after all these years… realism is rarely *fun*)

• I like the additions to the game that were born of the online gaming experience. Good game design is not worried about stubbornly maintaining tradition, it is measured by elegance (smoothly functional simplicity) in my book…

• From what [Wormwood] described of the skill resolution system I find myself *loving* it. The focus is on interacting with the environment (which enhances roleplaying) as opposed to being focused on raw character capability at the expense of playability (e.g. tumbling)…

• *LOVE* the healing rules, characters are not as dependant upon a support character (read: boring) as they formerly were and healers have other means to be useful without doing so at the expense of healing…

• High level play looks more accessible in the new format (tiered difficulty) than it used to be (a broken pipedream)

Overall I think it is a tremendous improvement and I give WotC high marks for having the [guts] to move the game in this direction!