D&D 4E Two-on-Two 4e Brawl

[BASHMAN]

So I finally used the preview materials & played me some 4e w/ a friend. We took turns picking guys for a 2 on 2 skirmish. I had the dwarf fighter & Eladrin Ranger, and he had the Halfling Paladin & Tiefling warlock. The fight took place in a 12 by 12 square room.

Some observations: we both noticed how the powers definately had a Magic the Gathering feel to them (the way the descriptions were written etc, it just seemed that way to us).

We used the same powers almost every round. As the figher I used my Daily every round until I finally hit (ending the combat). Because I never had a chance to hit both guys (they were never close enough) the ranger only ever used his +4 to hit At will ability.

I don't understnad why that +4 to hit thing is an "at will ability"-- why do they even bother writing on the character sheet that the ranger could instead get a +6 to hit if he wanted to instead of a +10? The default "regular" attack should just ASSUME you are using that-- which is what he did every round.

the MVP of this fight was the Ranger, followed by the Paladin. The Paladin was able to lay on hands to the warlock & bought him another round and also marked my fighter so that he couldn't leave & used his "on pain of death" to try and stop my from cutting him down (I attacked him anyway, but the fighter made his save vs. the continuing damage). He wanted to move over & use the lay on hands again, but the fighter's opportunity attack prevented him from shifting away (he'd been marked by me as well). The Halfling's "second chance" also bought him an extra round when my Ranger rolled a 20 (but then followed it w/ a 18, so he hit anyway). The Ranger was MVP though b/c he could almost never miss (+10 to hit) did an extra d8 to his "quarry" and could sidestep an enemy melee attack (w/ an encounter immediate action).

From what we gatherred, we found the game fun-- but more of a skirmish miniatures game kind of way than a role-plaaying game kind of way. And I am not saying it is a bad game--- I will definately play it again-- but it just isn't "D&D" for me-- AD&DM for sure, but not D&D. All the stuff that your character can do is listed there-- which is another way of listing the things that other people can't. So the Fighter can bash someone with her shield, but the Paladin cannot... weird. We found ourselves taking the same actions over & over since there was no "need" or apparant ability to get creative w/ things in combat. Just use up your best abilities till they are gone, then use your best at-will over & over again...

Something I liked about Bo9S that they did not seem to reflect here was the need to use more than one "trick" each fight, because they were all encounter powers. Once they were used up, you either did somethign to get them back or switched to regular attacks-- but you couldn't use the same maneuver over & over again the way the Ranger kept getting his +4 to hit or the Fighter kept using his Daily till it finally hit... If the ranger could not use his +4 to hit till he had used up a couple of his other moves, I think that would have mad ethere be more variety... Oh well. It was fun.

 

[Naathez]

I'll have to get up the patience to try and do the same thing myself one of these days, I'm just too curious.

Anyway, there's one thing I don't very well understand in your analysis. Since you test-played a SKIRMISH, essentially a combat, i'm not sure why you find it strange that there was no role-playing - you tested a combat, with no background, and no reason to be. Of course it's a perfect way to test battle mechanics (and I understand what you mean, for example, when you say that if one has an at will +4 to hit it shouldn't even be considered an ability, just the default), but it doesn't surprise me that you didn't feel like you were "roleplaying". The set-up, seems to me, kinda prevented that... am I missing something, though?

 

[Frostmarrow]

I don't understnad why that +4 to hit thing is an "at will ability"-- why do they even bother writing on the character sheet that the ranger could instead get a +6 to hit if he wanted to instead of a +10? The default "regular" attack should just ASSUME you are using that-- which is what he did every round. .

I think the difference between an at ability and a regular attack is that you are active when using your at will ability. Sometimes you are handed an extra action or attack and that is when you use your regular attack. Maybe the warlord and higher levels will take advantage of this?

 

[Victim]

Certain actions only allow regular attacks, which is why Careful Shot wasn't included in the normal attack bonus.

Some of your findings seem to follow naturally from your set up. You have 2 on 2 (with 1 ranged and 1 melee each) in a fairly wide open space. Since there's little reason for teammates to be near each other , multitarget powers become much less significant - all of the fighter's abilities except the daily become pretty much the same under these conditions for instance. You're only testing 1 fight, so there's no reason to hold back on the daily. Plus with only two enemies, landing a big hit on anyone would be pretty significant - there's not so much need for ideal target selection with it.

You already selected what the best options would be for each character would be ahead of time basically, so it doesn't seem surprising that people used that options repeatedly.

 

[FourthBear]

I would be interested in knowing how this would compare with doing the same thing with 1st level PCs in previous editions. How many options would the PCs have in that case in each round?

 

[Stalker0]

I think the most important thing to consider when talking about the variability of combat is we are talking about 1st level characters. As you level, you'll gain a wider breath of at will powers, you'll have several encounter powers to use, etc.

Also, I would swap the teams and try it again. See how the ranger does when the fighter is in his face.

 

[Mentat55]

I coulda sworn that one of the WotC guys/gals said that the Careful Shot at-will power for the ranger had an error of some sort, and that there should be some sort of trade-off for the increased accuracy. However, I cannot recall which thread I read it in.

 

[Jack99]

Thanks to the OP, you have just won the prize of having the worst argument against 4e.

2vs2 pvp makes it feel like a skirmish game? LOL. Please, what game wouldn't?

 

[Plane Sailing]

We used the same powers almost every round. As the figher I used my Daily every round until I finally hit (ending the combat). Because I never had a chance to hit both guys (they were never close enough) the ranger only ever used his +4 to hit At will ability.

I can see plenty of situations when the ranger would want to use his other 'at will' power rather than the careful attack - because it allows him to move out of cover, fire, and then shift back behind cover again... ideal for sniping at foes with missile weapons that are as potent as yours.

I ran a game using pregens and the ranger did a straight archery duel with hobgoblin archers and came off pretty badly because he was fixated on the +4 from careful shot and didn't realise that he had the opportunity to shoot at them without giving them the chance to fire back by taking nimlbe shots (or whatever it is called).

Cheers

 

[BASHMAN]

Thanks to the OP, you have just won the prize of having the worst argument against 4e.

2vs2 pvp makes it feel like a skirmish game? LOL. Please, what game wouldn't?

I also said that I liked it, so I wouldn't call it an argument against 4e. I said I'd play it again, too. The 2 on 2 scenario was a skirmish, but the reason the game seemed like a minis game & not an rpg wasn't because of that-- it was the writeups of the powers (which reminded us both of MtG) and the repetition of their use. I suggested that the bo9s model would have worked better for this I think-- force people to "prepare" a certain number from a pool of available powers & then cycle through them before they can bee used again. Then you wouldn't have mages using Magic Missile all day long... As for the powers seeming like the description of an effect of a CCG card, I cannot say what would have made that better.

As to the "what other edition didn''t have you do the same stuff over & over again at 1st level" that's easy: BD&D. The Wizard would use his sleep spell, then throw flaming oil in the next encounter, then throw his dagger in the next one, then use his staff till the party decided to go back to the keep. They could have fixed the 15 mins then camp problem by giving you a larger suite of /encounter powers, from which you could prepare a certain number during a short rest. You can choose your dailies after an extended rest. The at will stuff should just be the cantrips I think-- abilities that have no combat effects.

If they made Magic Missile be an encounter power (which they then would be able to not require a hit roll since it has become limited) you wouldn''t see wizards casting it all day long. Same goes w/ rangers +4 to hit thing. Essentially have more /encounters & weaken the at will abilities is my take on it.