Rodney Thompson's Playtest Report on Gleemax

[Simia Saturnalia]

I can speculate here a little bit.

Possibilities:

1: Copper dragons are in, but they aren't appropriate to 2nd level. The DM wanted to use one, so he made one.
2: Copper dragons are in, but not appropriate to 2nd level. We've been told that there are benchmarks for advancing or regressing monsters, and the DM wanted to playtest them by regressing a dragon back to 2nd level.
3: Copper dragons are out, because WOTC thinks that having dozens of dragon types based on multiple color wheels, and the DM wanted them in.

4: No metallics in MM1.

Kind of spun off from 3, because it says we'll be getting them someday.

 

[Rechan]

4: No metallics in MM1.

Kind of spun off from 3, because it says we'll be getting them someday.

I, personally, have no problem with that.

Maybe I'm odd, but I just don't care for stats of monsters that the PCs will never fight, and/or are basically NPCs. I'm looking at you, Dryad/Nymph/Mermaid.

 

[med stud]

I can speculate here a little bit.

Possibilities:

1: Copper dragons are in, but they aren't appropriate to 2nd level. The DM wanted to use one, so he made one.
2: Copper dragons are in, but not appropriate to 2nd level. We've been told that there are benchmarks for advancing or regressing monsters, and the DM wanted to playtest them by regressing a dragon back to 2nd level.
3: Copper dragons are out, because WOTC thinks that having dozens of dragon types based on multiple color wheels, and the DM wanted them in.

I think it is 1 or 2. I think I read in a preview that metallic dragons aren't always good in 4e and to me that looks like a strange comment to make if they aren't going to make it into the first MM.

 

[Intrope]

I can speculate here a little bit.

Possibilities:

1: Copper dragons are in, but they aren't appropriate to 2nd level. The DM wanted to use one, so he made one.
2: Copper dragons are in, but not appropriate to 2nd level. We've been told that there are benchmarks for advancing or regressing monsters, and the DM wanted to playtest them by regressing a dragon back to 2nd level.
3: Copper dragons are out, because WOTC thinks that having dozens of dragon types based on multiple color wheels, and the DM wanted them in.

It's worth noting that the Wyrmling Copper Dragon in 3.5 is just CR 3 (advancing to 5, 7, 9, 11, etc.). A 2nd level party beating a CR3 isn't terribly remarkable; a 5 would be tough, but feasible. And supposedly the level range of acceptable encounters is wider in 4e, too.

 

[Singing Smurf]

Fully keeping in mind that mine is a biased opinion, yeah, I like it. <snip>

I dunno, maybe it's just me (and I'll fully accept that as fact if it's true) but I really feel like the experience I'm having at the table is what I've come to expect from D&D over the last 8 years. .

That's good to hear - thank you for taking the time to answer our questions!

 

[Shieldhaven]

While I'm really very happy with the whole thing (and am pro-4e with few reservations), my favorite part by far was the mention of tracking down more rituals. I'm with Simia Saturnalia - if I don't have to research and negotiate for and track down something related to spellcasting, then I'm not a wizard. It is sometimes a PITA, depending on how the GM approaches it, but this research is at the core of what I want from the class.

Many thanks to Moridin for writing up the playtest report and then stopping by to clarify things from it.

Haven

 

[Dogreboy]

quicker battles????

"So a 20+ round battle involving 5 (or 6?) PCs, 15 goblins (including spellcasters), a ship exploding, attempts at diplomacy, and a copper dragon took only two hours, even though they just went through a rule adjustment. Considering that it takes D&D groups I have played with about four hours to do a third of that, it sounds rather impressive to me."


So a party took some 6-8 rounds to kill the goblins, and the rest on the dragon/ship exploding(and the goblins were not even done as they had to assist the party in killing the dragon.

Don't know about your groups but mine tend to be a little quicker than this. Most normal battles last 3-4 rounds which takes us all of 30 mins and the dragon battle may take another 30-60 tops. Taking 4 hours to do combat where there was little to no roleplay involved seems excessive to me. I thought the purpose was to increase simplicity of the system and speed it up.

I did like that the rogue got breathed to death as with evasion most of the rogues I know take little to no damage a lot. Maybe the defensive settings were poor in this particular case.

 

[TwinBahamut]

So a party took some 6-8 rounds to kill the goblins, and the rest on the dragon/ship exploding(and the goblins were not even done as they had to assist the party in killing the dragon.

Don't know about your groups but mine tend to be a little quicker than this. Most normal battles last 3-4 rounds which takes us all of 30 mins and the dragon battle may take another 30-60 tops. Taking 4 hours to do combat where there was little to no roleplay involved seems excessive to me. I thought the purpose was to increase simplicity of the system and speed it up.

I did like that the rogue got breathed to death as with evasion most of the rogues I know take little to no damage a lot. Maybe the defensive settings were poor in this particular case.

Since you are quoting me...

First, are normal battles for 2nd level usually against 15 goblins? Also, do you have a large number of player in your group, or a smaller group? I know my experience is with a group of 5-7 people, against fairly steep odds in each fight (the kind of fight being portrayed in this playtest).

Second, he said that the battle took two hours, not four. The session was four hours, half of which was spent out of combat.

Third, he said quite specifically that it was 20 rounds of combat for the 2 hours, not the lower numbers of rounds you are citing.

As such, it averages out to 6 minutes for each round, for a group of 5 or 6 PCs, against a large number of opponents and relatively complex terrain. Since you think averaging out to 10-12 minutes per round is pretty good, I don't see why you think this battle went slowly.

 

[Raven Crowking]

The bit about rituals is very welcome....I wonder if this is similar to ritual feats in Arcana Evolved? Or is it more like incantations? "Some powers you choose, some you must earn" is a good method of dealing with the magic guys. Definite point of approval.

20 rounds of combat = 2 hours means that each round of combat took approximately 6 minutes to complete. That seems faster than 3e to me. Another point of approval.

RC

 

[Intrope]

The bit about rituals is very welcome....I wonder if this is similar to ritual feats in Arcana Evolved? Or is it more like incantations? "Some powers you choose, some you must earn" is a good method of dealing with the magic guys. Definite point of approval.

20 rounds of combat = 2 hours means that each round of combat took approximately 6 minutes to complete. That seems faster than 3e to me. Another point of approval.

RC

It also means that the players and the DM were all averaging 1 minute/round of actions. That amazes me, mostly because many of those rounds the DM would have been dealing with 15 gobs!

In fact, I wonder if part of the minion rules isn't a 'gang fire' rule, like batteries of weapon in Saga edition: rather than several separate rolls, it makes one roll with a big bonus (from the assist action). If each little cluster of minions just makes one roll, that could be a big speed-up.