OMG .... WOTC does it again

[NeonKnight]

I think it was a choice of bogging down the game with hard coded rules... or hitting it fast and loose ... which 4e pretty much does... once a DM gets his bearings that is...

Those who loved all the rules of movement and combat and how the mechanics of 3.x covered everything from sneezing to water hockey ... are going to have the hardest transition into 4e (and probably whine the most ... you hide and watch) this time at least they got the part about fast play in ... (not fast character creation... )

As a DM ... I found that Monsters are a bit harder to deal with ... its a lot of info and things changed up .. vastly in some areas... I can't open my MM and find Kuo Toa's to throw at a couple three second level players... cause they level off at 15th .... ?? things like that... I don't care much for their Encounter Generation Method... (confusing at first, buying your creatures like you would buy an army ... for a miniatures game... ) ... still its all mechanics ... just a different way to deal with game functions...

I"m just gonna come up with my own System.... Market that.. lol

I will admit, the game is FAST, way FASTER to play than previous editions. I tried to create a 1st level Paladin PC last night, and I will admit, I scratched my head a few time to try and find correct answers to some internal questions as some things just did not seem very Intuitive.

As to the Monsters and building encounters based on an 'XP Budget' as they called it. It makes an internal sense to the game concept. The game is built around 10 encounters (on average) providing enough experience for a PC to level up. You take the number of players in your group and multiply that number by the XP value for a standard monster of their level to get your encounter budget.

So, if you have 6 1st level players, an average 1st encounter should provide 100 XP to each PC, so each encounter should have 600 XP worth of monsters. I too took a few minutes to digest that, but it became clear when I sat down to adjust the encounters for my players knowing that sometimes not all of them show up, so I needed to figure out how to scale each encounter based on their being anywhere from 4 to 7 players.

I honestly think this new game is at first glance mush more balanced than previous editions. I still have a hard time figuring out the 3.5 Challenge Rating versus Encounter Level concepts to build challenging encounters for my PCs.

[GlennZilla]

I will admit, the game is FAST, way FASTER to play than previous editions.

I agree. We've played the Keep on the Shadowfell and it's certianly a lot faster. We got through about 4 encounters in a session. Before it might be 2. This is after the learning curve, by the way.

I honestly think this new game is at first glance mush more balanced than previous editions. I still have a hard time figuring out the 3.5 Challenge Rating versus Encounter Level concepts to build challenging encounters for my PCs.

Herein lies my concern. It seems like it's one kind of abstract math to balance the encounter versus another, Challenge Rating versus XP Budget. I haven't had a chance to try to make any encounters yet, so I'm witholding judgement until after I've run a few.

I must admit that currently I'm liking 4e. Every character has something they can do. The level progression is steeper but each step has something to offer. First level doesn't feel underpowered at least. We've only played up to 3rd level. So we'll have to wait and see what it's like when we play higher levels.

[NeonKnight]

Herein lies my concern. It seems like it's one kind of abstract math to balance the encounter versus another, Challenge Rating versus XP Budget. I haven't had a chance to try to make any encounters yet, so I'm witholding judgement until after I've run a few.

I must admit that currently I'm liking 4e. Every character has something they can do. The level progression is steeper but each step has something to offer. First level doesn't feel underpowered at least. We've only played up to 3rd level. So we'll have to wait and see what it's like when we play higher levels.

Not really, if you look at a 1st level monster, it is pretty much equal to a 1st level PC in terms of powers/abilities. The PCs have an edge in that they have Healing Surges, second winds etc, but on the whole, a 1st level goblin is pretty equal to a first level fighter, with the edge going to the PC. Ergo, it makes sense that 5 of them is a good challenge for 5 PCs, because the PCs have abilites that give them an edge over the monster (marking, healing surges, action points, etc).

Now, compare a 15th level Monster vs a 15 level PC, again, much the same abilities between the two (keep in mind compare skrimishers/soldiers with Fighter types, Artillery with Rangers/Wizards, etc). No matter what, the edge always goes to the PCs, and a balanced party will have an adequate challenge in each encounter.

Again, I feel this is way more balanced than a 3.5 1st level Fighter vs a 3.5 Orc that scores a critical with it's great-axe!

[Sigurd]

Well almost any speeding up of the game mechanics is welcome. They consume way too much DM time in 3.5.

The big question though is not "are fewer rules an improvement" but are these the right reduced rules.....


Sigurd

[Redrobes]

That post about stealing the dice image is a laugh. Death throws I tell ya...

Had a bit of a giggle about protecting 3D rolling dice too. I mean its been branded as virtual table tops and you don't think anyone should have rolling dice on it.

I'm not sure about this balancing by math either. I just stick monsters in the areas I think they would be and if the PC's think that wading into the jaws of death is a good idea then I would hope they brought some blank character sheets. Problem solved - self balancing. Just give em plenty of opportunity not to fight and a way to back out of it.

[Midgardsormr]

Didn't you know that all the monsters have to do is mouseover the PCs to learn what level they are? If they're too low, the monsters won't bother with them; not enough treasure or xp. Unless they're griefing, of course.

[Sigurd]

I'm not sure about this balancing by math either. I just stick monsters in the areas I think they would be and if the PC's think that wading into the jaws of death is a good idea then I would hope they brought some blank character sheets. Problem solved - self balancing. Just give em plenty of opportunity not to fight and a way to back out of it.

I agree completely. I don't want to gimp all the real dangers in the world just in case my players are too brave or stupid. Discretion and running away are formative experiences .


Sigurd.

[NeonKnight]

I too fully agree that not every encounter a PC faces should be tailored to them. I certainly would not expect that after taking 3 months of Tae Kwan Do that every single person I meet on the street is going to be either a white belt or untrained. So I tell my players: "Beware, there is an Ancient Red Dragon dwelling in this cave" and they insist on going in, so be it.

But with the format of 3.5 and greatly improved in 4e is the ability to ensure that I can trust most encounters my PCs face will be a challenge for them; it won't outright kill them, but at the same time, it isn;t a push over either.

[helium3]

Herein lies my concern. It seems like it's one kind of abstract math to balance the encounter versus another, Challenge Rating versus XP Budget. I haven't had a chance to try to make any encounters yet, so I'm witholding judgement until after I've run a few.

I've found that the real advantage of DM'ing 4E so far is that when you couple the XP budget method of encounter generation with the way they want you to quantize everything into "quests" you sort of innately get a feel for "pacing." It's a lot easier to realize "this dungeon is way too large" right off the bat.

High level encounters (only done one at 10th so far) are SSSSLLLLOOOWWWW if your players haven't figured out how to "optimize" their characters. What's odd is that I don't mean optimize in terms of character builds, I mean in terms of the actions they choose to take in combat.

It seemed like it was harder to do that in 3.5 for some reason.

[GlennZilla]

I've found that the real advantage of DM'ing 4E so far is that when you couple the XP budget method of encounter generation with the way they want you to quantize everything into "quests" you sort of innately get a feel for "pacing." It's a lot easier to realize "this dungeon is way too large" right off the bat.

Well, I've only built and run two adventures with 4e. I'm still wrestling the 3e rules out of my head. Like deciding ahead of time what a magic item is, since there's no random chart to consult mid-game. (I've since added an excell sheet to take care of that for now)

I find that the pacing does work itself out quite nicely in 4e. And I have enjoyed the new thinking in encounter design. Not having to assemble a statblock for a monster also helps greatly. So far as a DM 4e is nice and in practice runs a lot closer to my usual style. So the adjustments are simply breaking old habits. Of course, YMMV

High level encounters (only done one at 10th so far) are SSSSLLLLOOOWWWW if your players haven't figured out how to "optimize" their characters. What's odd is that I don't mean optimize in terms of character builds, I mean in terms of the actions they choose to take in combat.

It seemed like it was harder to do that in 3.5 for some reason.

Well I am waiting until everyone has the difference between "Burst" and "Blast" down before I try running a higher level game.

I have run a couple of encounters myself just to see how a level 19 Great Weapon Fighter goes against a Level 19 Umber Hulk I adjusted up. That was slow and cumbersome since I was trying to read every rules that came up to make sure I had it all figured out. I certianly hope things go faster when I get a chance to run that in the future.

All things considered, the only part I'm not enjoying about 4e is my inner grognard hates the simplification. I have a little masochistic voice in my head that feels that I should grab a pile of d8's when a random monster comes into play and roll his hit dice right there at the table with the players crossing thier fingers for bad rolls. But the rest of me enjoys simply grabbing a monster stat block from the MM and plunking a monster onto the table and proclaiming, "Roll initiative, he's here and he's attacking."