D&D 4E Thoughts on 4E after Nine Sessions

[joela]

dead on

I know what you're talking about. The first session we saw the wizard's player being bored, confused, using dailies on minions, etc... It didn't help the party, he didn't have fun, and there was an all-around lack of energy.

The second session, after the player had read up on 4e for a week and was more comfortable at the table, we saw the wizard laying waste to minions, utilizing a back to back scorching burst crit attack (seriously, rolled a crit, used an action point, and rolled another crit) against Irontooth landing a nice 20 damage, and hitting the dragonshields for 8 & 6, respectively. He was excited, energetic, and definitely grasping the kewl of the wizard..

It's a game that takes some getting used to and looks really bad if you're not comfortable playing it.

You pegged it dead on.

 

[joela]

solo

Still, it would have been nice to see more options for Solo play like in some of the other MMORPGS.

I have never played an MMORPG and have no desire to do so. Thus, could you explain your remark?

 

[joela]

misread

I read that as corporate or die D&D.

LOL. NICE.

 

[Avant Guard]

The very tactical build on the game makes for group support key.

A lot of people are talking about the "tactical" nature of 4E, but playing the demo adventure, I saw very little need for the sort of tactical considerations necessary to survive in a 3.x game.

Example: I played the Paladin, who had a Daily ability called "Justice Strike" or something, that allowed him to deal 3d8 + 4 damage, AND heal a nearby ally (on a success; otherwise, only the heal happened).

It seems like in a "tactical" game, the fun comes from the decision to either heal OR attack--not having the ability to do both at once. A lot of the powers available were like that: do damage AND give a bonus to allies; do damage AND increase speed; do damage AND whatever.

I'm not some strategy nut--I discovered RPGs because I sucked at war games. But the simplistic resource management of Encounter/Daily powers in 4e really pales in comparison to the complex decisions and sacrifices (spells and charges especially) necessary in a 3.x game. That was our group's experience, anyway.

 

[SSquirrel]

Yeah, I think we are going to have to invent a brand new meta-rule for playing 4e Dungeons and Dragons:

"Never split the party."

This was the guiding principle of the Call of Cthulhu group I was in in college. Holds true in most games really, esp if you have a sneaky bastage DM

 

[AtomicPope]

I confirmed my view that 4E is a different game than 3.x. Interestingly, this is not based on the new rules so much as the reaction of the various players, including myself. I saw far greater interactivity when PCs were in combat, both in melee as well as the new skill challenge system. The main example was in the use of healing. Because various PCs could heal from a distance without losing their combat effectiveness, players were constantly keeping tabs of who was hurt, who needed healing, and who needed protection. Other examples include the ability to give increased protection to allies, extra attacks, movement, etc., all without taking precious actions and resources from one's PC.

I don't want to hijack your thread but I have experience the same things at Kubla Con last weekend. We got to use the online Tiefling Warlord and combine that with the Cleric - whoa! That's some serious synergy. I immediately noticed that we worked much better as a team. Our cleric moved up to do his healing burst ability to save the party and got targeted by a Boneshard. A crit came up that would have dropped him but I intercepted with the Paladin. We all cheered. Most of the gamers at the table had gray hair but we were giddy as middle schoolers.

Fourth Edition definitely creates a greater camaraderie through active cooperation than previous editions. We did the same thing - who's hurt? How many surges do you have left? Did everyone spend their Daily Powers? Fallback, I'll take it from here. Boost me Cleric, I'm going to use a Daily Smite. And so on. It was strangely rewarding.

On the other hand, the game's emphasis on active cooperation from players and their PCs could prove to be a detriment to spotlight hogs, optimizers, and non-tactically inclined players. I saw this twice in game: my warlord, whose role as leader provided powers maximizing other PCs movement, strengths, etc., was a simple "I go up and try to hit him" PC when asked to corral NPCs to safety while the rest of the party fought the bad guys. And in another game, the party's striker/warlock took on undead by herself and was quickly killed in close combat.

In one game the same thing nearly happened to both out Wizard and Rogue but we managed to save them by expending all of our resources. I think it's because long ranged classes (Roguse throwing daggers) tend to get cocky and solo.



Thanks for posting this. I've heard so many people say - "I could just play WoW at home on my PC" it felt like I was taking CRAZY PILLS!

 

[joela]

WoW

Thanks for posting this. I've heard so many people say - "I could just play WoW at home on my PC" it felt like I was taking CRAZY PILLS!

I've never played MMOs which throws folks arguing the merits between the two editions.

 

[Knightlord]

This is what first level used to be.

Hilarious, my friend, simply hilarious.