D&D 4E Review of 4E from a Playtester

[Hussar]

Or, on the whole severed head thing:

"He beat him to death with his own severed head!"

"That doesn't seem physically possible."

"That's what he kept saying!"



And, Mouse, yup, that's pretty much as complete geek as it gets.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

I suspect it would be more proper to say "once per day when you would otherwise die."

Depends. Perhaps the text following is "you explode, and your bone fragments cut through everyone within 5 squares. +20 vs. Ref for 20d6 damage. Miss: half damage."

 

[Fallen Seraph]

I'm about to out myself as a complete dork--not that, you know, writing for D&D hadn't already done that --but I've actually got the "Message for you, Sir!" sound clip, complete with "arrow thunk," as my "new e-mail" sound file on my computer.

Well, dorkness then in all its greatest magnitudes

As for the whole death thing, well there was the one report talking about how a Halfling luck-ability made the DM re-roll a critical on him. So perhaps things like that, where a killing blow can be re-rolled.

I would really like to see some Boromir stuff though, have like say 3-4 rounds before collapsing.

 

[Hussar]

And Epic is just plain silly. I honestly see a lot of folks stopping at paragon – but for those that want to get into truly EPIC level, mythologically powerful gaming, epic will do the trick. With class abilities that begin with phrases like Once per day, when you die… it allows for a whole, bizarre new type of play that actually manages to maintain its consistency. But more about all this in later.

Umm, for those who say that he doesn't criticise, how about this? He pretty much states that he doesn'T like Epic and thinks very few people will play it.

 

[Jhulae]

Umm, for those who say that he doesn't criticise, how about this? He pretty much states that he doesn'T like Epic and thinks very few people will play it.

I agree. Probably as many people will play with Epic as played with the I in BECMI. The rules were fun to read and all, but we never really used them, although I'm sure there were groups who did. And, if I recall, they weren't in RC when it was released, so it must not have been a great seller.

 

[Li Shenron]

Over on AICN one of their writers Massawyrm has been a playtester and wrote a review on his experiences

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/35776

It's not a review, it's a marketing commercial

There's interesting bits here and there, and the overall message is clear: according to the "reviewer" the game is really really good. One line would have been enough to summarize that...

But I hate to read a commentary which is only a long rave/rant of emotions (good or bad) and personal stuff ("my wife is finally so happy about X and Y..." who cares?). This is the kind of article that only serves to increase the ego of those who already agree with the writer and piss off more those who disagree.

 

[Ahglock]

Umm, for those who say that he doesn't criticise, how about this? He pretty much states that he doesn'T like Epic and thinks very few people will play it.

Maybe I read it differently, but that did not look like a complaint.

I don't like epic, but they do it so awesome it actually works isn't really a complaint.

That is like saying I am complaining about someones cooking when i say something like I don't really like broccoli, but this broccoli surprise is really awesome. If anything its a larger compliment than before, its saying you have done the impossible you have made something I don't like good.

 

[Fallen Seraph]

OH! OH! Just thought of an idea for one of those death-oriented Epic Abilities.

This is specifically for the Warlock:

"Once dead, the Warlock's pact maker may overwhelm the Warlock's body. Reanimating and controlling the body.

This is till either:

-The Warlock does not roll above 10, 3 times and loses his body to the new host.
-Or rolls successfully and overpowers the host, regaining his now reinvigorated body."

This could lead to a neat, sub-plot, where if the Warlock does lose his body the party must deal with the new-Warlock somehow subdue him and travel to the Shadowfell to re-unite the Warlock's soul to his body.

Just a idea

 

[Wormwood]

It's not a review, it's a marketing commercial

There's interesting bits here and there, and the overall message is clear: according to the "reviewer" the game is really really good. One line would have been enough to summarize that...

I disagree. A single-line review would be absolutely useless. Whether or not you dislike his tone (or his conclusions), the reviewer points out *what* in 4e he believes is an improvement over the current game.

This is the kind of article that only serves to increase the ego of those who already agree with the writer and piss off more those who disagree.

Massawyrm is an unbiased, objective reviewer, having no vested interest in the success or failure of 4e. Why should he care whether his review "pisses off" those who are predisposed to hate all over 4e anyway? His enthusiasm is borne from 4 months of direct play experience with the game. I can't remember the last time I was as enthusiastic after playing a system for a third of the year!

As for my ego? The review doesn't inflate my ego---it is just another data point that 4e is closer to the D&D I want to play.

 

[Grimstaff]

It's not a review, it's a marketing commercial

There's interesting bits here and there, and the overall message is clear: according to the "reviewer" the game is really really good. One line would have been enough to summarize that...

But I hate to read a commentary which is only a long rave/rant of emotions (good or bad) and personal stuff ("my wife is finally so happy about X and Y..." who cares?). This is the kind of article that only serves to increase the ego of those who already agree with the writer and piss off more those who disagree.

Why do I get the feeling that anyone who gives the new edition a good review is going to be accused of making a "marketing commercial" by you?

I bet you'll call the first negative review "refreshingly honest".