| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Kilvan |
Posted - 13 Aug 2012 : 16:51:51
Hello fellow scribes
We just finished yet another 4 years old campaign using 3.5 edition. We made several changes to the mechanics, mainly on balance issues, but also integrated some 2e elements (no THAC0 though... good riddance for that). We all agreed on 2 things after the last quest was done;
1- The edition is solid, and the customization possibilities are amazing. We all had multiclass characters, and nobody wishes to start a plain ranger or fighter now.
2- High level encounters took way too much game time. Some fights were ridiculous, lasting for more than 2 hours. We completely removed random encounters after level 10, since such fights took so long without providing that much fun. We all preferred to focus on story and RP, but still, encounters are a major part of the game (obviously).
So the question was raised; What about 4e? Now that the edition has been fleshed with many crunch books, does it lived up to the promises of ultimate balance for all classes at all levels? And do high level encounters take as much time as it did in 3.5?
We had 6 characters in last campaign, but we just started one with only 5.
Thanks! |
| 7 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Erik Scott de Bie |
Posted - 14 Aug 2012 : 05:22:14
I think the Essentials classes aren't simplified, necessarily, but rather the scope of options is narrowed. But by all means, if you want to dive into the options, go for it. I highly recommend the character builder for that purpose--that'll list every option you could possibly want. 
If you'd like my recommendations, Kilvan, here are my favorite classes, which I think make a pretty powerful party. Some of them lean toward a secondary role as well:
Eladrin Tactical Warlord (PHB1) (Leader)
Artful Dodger Rogue (PHB1) (Striker)
Battlerager Fighter (Martial Power) ([Striker] Defender)
Assault or Shielding Swordmage (FRPG) ([Striker] Defender or [Controller/Leader] Defender)
Bladesinger (Neverwinter) ([Striker] Controller)
My favorite current PC is a 22nd level shadar-kai shielding swordmage--chiseled out of granite (CON in the 20s and toughness), basically untouchable in melee (AC 44), and amazingly good at frustrating the DM's best efforts to kill the party with interrupt damage mitigation.
Cheers |
| Kilvan |
Posted - 13 Aug 2012 : 21:41:35
Very interesting stuff Diffan, it seems like a solid system. I'll let my fellow gamers know, and we'll see how much we want to invest into it. I'm gonna be in favor of at least trying it with the base sourcebooks, but I think we will skip the Essential products depsite your good reviews.
Thanks again! |
| Diffan |
Posted - 13 Aug 2012 : 19:27:09
Essentials products are pretty good, but the martial characters (scout, knight, slayer, thief, hunter) have a very basic principal attached to the class design, a power structure that focuses around their melee/ranged basic attacks. Augmenting this feature is great and all, but it is a bit....stale for someone who really enjoyed the PHB stuff from the get-go.
As for supplements and character options, about 100% MORE than initial release to be frank. The fighter sports 4 distinct styles that all play different. The Weapon talent fighter (either one or two-handed) is probably the most basic but theres also the Tempest Fighter (two-weapons), Brawler fighter (uses one or two hands free for grappling), the Battleragers (who use intimidating and gain Temp. HP for specific attacks), Arena fighters who uses multiple style weapons, etc. Then you look at the difference in weapons and they tend to vary greatly with the maneuvers you choose. Certain exploits allow you do deal more damage = to your Constitution modifier if you use Axes or Maces or allow you to push back a target if your wielding a spear or give you an extra attack if your wielding a heavy blade. Really, I've build quite a few Fighters over the years and I don't think any of them have come close to being the same.
You also say you enjoy multiclassing and while 4E's style is certainly more limited to v3.5 (no more level-by-level), the power-swaps can give you a little extra difference with your character. And then there is Hybrid rules that allow you to splice two different classes together AND you can take Multiclass feats on top of that. So you could create a hybrid Fighter|Warlord that focuses on Strength and Charisma and then take the Barbarian multiclass feat for some additional damage dealing powers or an attack that hits multiple targets (think Whirlwind attack for v3.5) or maybe get a cool Rage power that lasts for the whole battle.
And don't think this all has an only combat focus going for it. There are lots of "skill" powers that help facilitate stuff you might want to do. For example, taking a skill power that gives you a considerate boots to your Athletic checks to jump or the ability to get up from prone as a minor action (instead of a move action) or a bonus to Diplomacy or Intimidate.
I'm pretty certain that most classes have 3-4 different styles going for it, depending on what other role you might want to consider. For example Fighters do great as secondary damage dealers and with feats and powers, can come close to other Strikers for a short time. Paladins, in contrast, do great as secondary leaders with protective spells and the ability to heal their allies. What they lack are powers that grant bonuses to their allies except for maybe on some Saving Throws or defenses.
What I find this does is allow groups to have a strong mix of classes/races and still contribute well to any adventure. You don't specifically need a Cleric where a Warlord can heal or even a paladin can heal too. Same for Rogue, as someone with the right Background can take Thievery as a trained skill and be decent at the role of unlocking traps. And vise-versa, Clerics and Warlords do a decent job of playing a stand-in Fighter because they can take a punch and wear armor. They might not have the stop-action ability of a Fighter, but they'll do in a pinch.
|
| Kilvan |
Posted - 13 Aug 2012 : 19:04:44
We are very used to being drowned in options, we actually like that. What I've heard from the Essentials product is that they are too much simplified for veteran D&D gamers. You want a stealthy rogue? There you go, your character with optimal stats and feats, just fill in your name and hair color. That would be taking away what we liked most about 3.5.
Balance is not an issue so much for us, we play smart but we don't optimize, and the cool-factor is always stronger than the power-factor. If theres a rule we don't like, we change it, simple as that, we have enough game experience to do that IMHO.
I was mostly curious about character options from sourcebooks that came out since the release. Is it still possible to make 2 fighter that will not be exactly the same but with different backstories and personalities?
And too bad for the encounter length, that was our biggest problem with 3.5. Thanks you for the tips both of you, I'll look into it!
|
| Diffan |
Posted - 13 Aug 2012 : 18:48:44
I'd have to second Erik's advice for using Essentials products first. When I read them as they came out, my first thought was that this is what they should've promoted first in the edition change and THEN moved to the AEDU system (at-will, encounter, Daily, utility powers for classes). The transition is much smoother and it gives a more basic understanding of how the mechanics work within the overall system. AND they work great along side the other PHB classes. |
| Erik Scott de Bie |
Posted - 13 Aug 2012 : 18:36:02
What Diffan said, mostly.
Speaking of mechanical goals, 4e is the edition of balance. It is less "swingy" than any other edition of the game--characters are generally expected to hit 55% of the time (monster 45% of the time) and have a balanced damage output level, based on class, etc. Like in 3.5, you can certainly blow all your best powers and overwhelm a monster with massive force (this is called "going Nova"), but odds are you're going to play a conservation game, just like in earlier editions, and save the big punches for the big bad guy.
The classes are (in theory) very balanced against each other, and no character (regardless of class) can "do it all." You are encouraged to specialize into four distinct character roles: defender (lots of defense and high hit points--iconic fighter), striker (lots of damage output--iconic rogue), controller (destroy lots of weak enemies and hamper powerful ones--iconic wizard), and leader (healing and support effects--iconic cleric).
I recommend, if you have the choice, that you start with the D&D Essentials books--Heroes of the Fallen Lands and Heroes of the Forgotten Kingdoms--in building characters. The classes there are simpler, more like what you're accustomed to (from 3.5), and don't drown you with options the way the original PHB classes do (now that they've been hyper developed). This is not to say you shouldn't look at other classes--you definitely should!--only that the Essentials books might be a smoother transition and starting place. If you follow the advice presented there about building characters, it will also be tough to create characters that are just incompetent (the way you could in 3.5)--every character you build will be at least playable.
Combat encounters, alas, often take a long time in 4e. IMO mostly this is due to having lots of options, and having "immediate" actions (which 3.5 started to get toward the end). These are off-turn actions that you can and should use in order to fulfill your combat role--particularly defenders, who have immediate actions that let them punish enemies that attack their friends. If you're finding that combat takes too long, my suggestion is to lower monster hit points (75% or as low as 50%--or just rule that standard monsters die in 2-3 hits or a single crit) and just let monsters die off quickly. It doesn't really help anyone for encounters to drag on, and this way the game rolls along faster.
On the other hand, RP encounters often take much less time, and skills are a great deal more fluid than in 3.5. You don't need to look up exhaustive rules for what a particular skill can do in a particular situation (i.e. "What's the DC to climb this cliff? What's the DC to talk someone into being my friend?")--simply whip out the table of DCs (on the 4e DM's screen or in the Rules Compendium--the original PHB1 table is out of date), determine if the task is "easy," "moderate," or "hard," and look at the DC for the appropriate level. Any PC has a chance to accomplish an easy task, moderate tasks will be tough for dilletantes in that skill but moderately easy for experienced heroes in that field, and hard tasks will favor only specialists.
There are a few mechanical things that are wonky (healing surges represent your body's capacity to heal, and you can get completely exhausted when you run out of surges), but generally the mechanics are fundamentally similar. You still roll a d20 and add an attack modifier, which you compare against an enemy's AC (or other defense). Fort/Ref/Will are reversed from how they were in 3.5: instead of dynamic they are static (just as though you were taking 10 on your saving throw), and the onus falls on the attacker to overcome your defense, rather than you to defend against it. Ability scores still provide bonuses at the same scale. Hit points go up based on level (there's no rolling for HP--it's like you always get the average roll for your class--and your CON affects it in a big way).
One big thing about 4e is that you basically add half your level to every roll you make. This is to reflect getting better over the course of your career, so your attacks and defenses go up. Don't worry--this doesn't typically lead to wizards suddenly being as good as fighters with melee attacks. The main differences are the type of weapons people use and the ability scores they have. Most melee attackers are looking at Strength or in some cases Dexterity to aid in their attacks--something wizards and druids etc don't usually have in abundance. Your defenses scale up with level as well.
Ultimately, I suggest you approach 4e with an open mind and look for those connections to 3.5. That's how I came to it, and though there are cosmetic differences and a little mechanical retooling, it's really a very similar experience to me. Try it out, see where you find the fun, and role with it.
Cheers |
| Diffan |
Posted - 13 Aug 2012 : 18:01:00
quote:
Originally posted by Kilvan
Hello fellow scribes
We just finished yet another 4 years old campaign using 3.5 edition. We made several changes to the mechanics, mainly on balance issues, but also integrated some 2e elements (no THAC0 though... good riddance for that). We all agreed on 2 things after the last quest was done;
That is awesome. It's rare that I hear campaigns last so long and hope to one day actually go 1-20 (or 30) level with my group. For us, we usually go 5 to 10 levels and then change it up. Hopefully we'll revisit another campaign soon. So congrats to you and your group!
quote:
Originally posted by Kilvan
So the question was raised; What about 4e? Now that the edition has been fleshed with many crunch books, does it lived up to the promises of ultimate balance for all classes at all levels? And do high level encounters take as much time as it did in 3.5?
We had 6 characters in last campaign, but we just started one with only 5.
Thanks!
As far as balance goes, it's a hard question to answer. I think this depends on the group, how strong their ability is to make mechanically powerful characters, and what resources they have available. In an average group where people don't attempt Chararacter Optimzation builds and care more about their role within the story instead of their role in dealing the most DPR then it's fairly balanced. And by balance, I mean classes generally rely on eachother to accomplish specific goals and no One character can do it all. Wizards need Fighters so they don't get punched in the face regardless of level, the party needs rogues (or someone who's trained in Thivery) to open locks and disarm traps, and the party needs someone who can heal be it the cleric, warlord, bard, etc..
Now, obviously there are classes that can do something extreamly well or perhaps a little better due to supplemental options. For example, not too many classes come close to reaching the amout of damage a Ranger can produce mainly because of their ability to use minor attacks and out-of-turn attacks. And the wizard is probably the best Controller in the game with the Invoker and Druid coming close. As for Defenders, most people love the Fighter but I'm very partial to the Paladin and Swordmage but because I like their flavor and more versatility.
As for the length of encounters, sadly I've found them to be approx to 3.5 encounters due to the number of options people face. This should get better as people become more invested in their characters and knowledgeable about the mechanics and thus, don't agonize over their choices. But I must admit I've only got players up til about mid paragon tier (15th or so) and didn't go into the Epic levels where players have 20 or so options to do in any given day.
Additionally WotC admitted to messing up with the math for monsters in the MM 1 and 2, making their attacks pitiful while giving them far more HP than they deserve. There are links you can find for a math fix or do what I did and drop the monster's HP by 1/4 and increase their damage by 5 or 10 points per attack. Seemed to work out well. The Monsters in the MM 3 and the book Threats to Nenthr Vale are solid products though and work beautifully.
And having 5 character is the preferred number of character to have for 4E but I've run it with as little as 3 (2 players, 1 DMPC) and it worked well. Adjusting encounters or situations is relatively easy as are adjusting monsters if you have a DDI subscription.
|
|
|
