I got to play a 2 hour 4E thing. I did not hate it (though I found combat mostly boring... If I wanted to number crunch and cross my fingers I'd play a JRPG). My favorite parts were expository, like the party exploring the room and formulating plans and so on.
oh rad!
there are some pretty numbers-lite games you might really like, then. including some set in the real world if fantasy ain't your thing.
I guess I mostly felt like my character didn't "matter" in combat beyond damage and defense. Like, I was the last noble warrior of some dwarf clan... but when I came across an encounter against a drow and two former clansmen who'd sold out, it didn't matter. It was like, oh, combat mode. I was thinking like, my dude flies into a righteous fury and charges ahead of the party. Maybe loses combat advantage but gains damage or some shit. I dunno. But it seemed like the DM was just "ok this is the fighting part not the talking part".
I don't know if that's the system being lame or my DM being lame.
From the very limited description here, about 50% DM being lame and 50% you not understanding what your character can do. Which is no big thing. It sounds like you guys were well above first level (if you are fighting Drow) so you probably had a ton of powers and such that you didn't have time to understand in the time available.
I got to play a 2 hour 4E thing. I did not hate it (though I found combat mostly boring... If I wanted to number crunch and cross my fingers I'd play a JRPG). My favorite parts were expository, like the party exploring the room and formulating plans and so on.
oh rad!
there are some pretty numbers-lite games you might really like, then. including some set in the real world if fantasy ain't your thing.
I guess I mostly felt like my character didn't "matter" in combat beyond damage and defense. Like, I was the last noble warrior of some dwarf clan... but when I came across an encounter against a drow and two former clansmen who'd sold out, it didn't matter. It was like, oh, combat mode. I was thinking like, my dude flies into a righteous fury and charges ahead of the party. Maybe loses combat advantage but gains damage or some shit. I dunno. But it seemed like the DM was just "ok this is the fighting part not the talking part".
I don't know if that's the system being lame or my DM being lame.
From the very limited description here, about 50% DM being lame and 50% you not understanding what your character can do. Which is no big thing. It sounds like you guys were well above first level (if you are fighting Drow) so you probably had a ton of powers and such that you didn't have time to understand in the time available.
Well, there are rules to what actions you can take and how fast you can move in combat. They're pretty ironclad, so the DM was in the right. The DM could wave the rules (if he wanted) in favor of the story, but he doesn't have any obligation to do so. Besides, he might have saved your character's life.
You fly into the group, alone, get surrounded and instagibbed next turn. Is that what you want? There are impressive flanking bonuses and sneak attacks, etc.
Steam and CFN: Enexemander
0
Options
ElldrenIs a woman dammitceterum censeoRegistered Userregular
Hey kids
fuck gendered marketing
0
Options
Nova_CI have the needThe need for speedRegistered Userregular
I got to play a 2 hour 4E thing. I did not hate it (though I found combat mostly boring... If I wanted to number crunch and cross my fingers I'd play a JRPG). My favorite parts were expository, like the party exploring the room and formulating plans and so on.
oh rad!
there are some pretty numbers-lite games you might really like, then. including some set in the real world if fantasy ain't your thing.
I guess I mostly felt like my character didn't "matter" in combat beyond damage and defense. Like, I was the last noble warrior of some dwarf clan... but when I came across an encounter against a drow and two former clansmen who'd sold out, it didn't matter. It was like, oh, combat mode. I was thinking like, my dude flies into a righteous fury and charges ahead of the party. Maybe loses combat advantage but gains damage or some shit. I dunno. But it seemed like the DM was just "ok this is the fighting part not the talking part".
I don't know if that's the system being lame or my DM being lame.
From the very limited description here, about 50% DM being lame and 50% you not understanding what your character can do. Which is no big thing. It sounds like you guys were well above first level (if you are fighting Drow) so you probably had a ton of powers and such that you didn't have time to understand in the time available.
I really didn't have a lot of junk. It was like, standard melee, standard ranged, a once-per-encounter free damage boost to my standard melee, a once per encounter minor resilience power that regen'd and improved my defense, and two minor stances. My character info displayed no crazy ancillary effects or modifiers.
I got to play a 2 hour 4E thing. I did not hate it (though I found combat mostly boring... If I wanted to number crunch and cross my fingers I'd play a JRPG). My favorite parts were expository, like the party exploring the room and formulating plans and so on.
oh rad!
there are some pretty numbers-lite games you might really like, then. including some set in the real world if fantasy ain't your thing.
I guess I mostly felt like my character didn't "matter" in combat beyond damage and defense. Like, I was the last noble warrior of some dwarf clan... but when I came across an encounter against a drow and two former clansmen who'd sold out, it didn't matter. It was like, oh, combat mode. I was thinking like, my dude flies into a righteous fury and charges ahead of the party. Maybe loses combat advantage but gains damage or some shit. I dunno. But it seemed like the DM was just "ok this is the fighting part not the talking part".
I don't know if that's the system being lame or my DM being lame.
From the very limited description here, about 50% DM being lame and 50% you not understanding what your character can do. Which is no big thing. It sounds like you guys were well above first level (if you are fighting Drow) so you probably had a ton of powers and such that you didn't have time to understand in the time available.
I really didn't have a lot of junk. It was like, standard melee, standard ranged, a once-per-encounter free damage boost to my standard melee, a once per encounter minor resilience power that regen'd and improved my defense, and two minor stances. My character info displayed no crazy ancillary effects or modifiers.
oooh yea. ok. Essentials version of the Fighter.
So you were playing a character specificially designed to present you with as few options as possible (because some grognards got all bitchy about the 4e Fighter having more options than "I attack").
edit: and what that character is good at is being the Stalwart Protector type who protects his comrades rather than rushes in.
The issue then would be that you had a character with abilities chosen to work one way while your conception of the character was something else. It's no different, though a less obvious case, than someone who had in mind wanting to play a spell slinging wizard and got handed a character sheet for a meatheaded warrior.
I assure you that in a situation where you have the time to create your own character it would be possible to come up with a character more fitting with your concept.
I got to play a 2 hour 4E thing. I did not hate it (though I found combat mostly boring... If I wanted to number crunch and cross my fingers I'd play a JRPG). My favorite parts were expository, like the party exploring the room and formulating plans and so on.
oh rad!
there are some pretty numbers-lite games you might really like, then. including some set in the real world if fantasy ain't your thing.
I guess I mostly felt like my character didn't "matter" in combat beyond damage and defense. Like, I was the last noble warrior of some dwarf clan... but when I came across an encounter against a drow and two former clansmen who'd sold out, it didn't matter. It was like, oh, combat mode. I was thinking like, my dude flies into a righteous fury and charges ahead of the party. Maybe loses combat advantage but gains damage or some shit. I dunno. But it seemed like the DM was just "ok this is the fighting part not the talking part".
I don't know if that's the system being lame or my DM being lame.
What Riemann said, with the addendum that because the 4e D&D rules are the first D&D rules that are kind of complete and workable in and of themselves as a fun little combat game, some DMs are weirdly reluctant to mesh them in with the story, turning it into "the talking game" and "the fighting game." That's not how it's supposed to be, though. That guy should have taken your idea and run with it.
0
Options
TL DRNot at all confident in his reflexive opinions of thingsRegistered Userregular
It's times like this, when I wish I was more multilingual.
The English language doesn't have a word to accurately convey "too sad to masturbate"
0
Options
ElldrenIs a woman dammitceterum censeoRegistered Userregular
Want to see me stick Nine Inch Nails through each one of my eyelids?
This'll be stuck in my head, now!
Arrgh!
Rear Admiral Choco on
0
Options
Podlyyou unzipped me! it's all coming back! i don't like it!Registered Userregular
Elldren, I linked a really good thread from another forum to sarksus earlier today. One of Trent's keyboard guys (forum handle = charlieclouser) nerds out about all the gear for most of the studio sessions and tours.
Damnit I turned my wife on to ME2 and now she's taken over the TV. I can't play ME3!
This is what amuses me when guys are talking about how they wish they had a gamer girlfriend.
No you don't, you wish you had a girlfriend who understand games. When they play them it's bad because then you're competing for access.
And she is a girl, so she always wins.
I married a gamer girl, but she's been a pc snob so I had free Xbox... I have two xboxen but only one large tv! The other is a pc monitor.
Argh!
The optimal solution to having an SO who's into video games is to have two of whatever you'll be playing so no one has to compete
Agreed. As soon as she's done with ME2 I'll probably get a second copy.... Assuming I can find one on sale. Then hopefully I can banish her to the office and the smaller monitor.......
I'm gonna disagree here and say that Chu has the right impression of the combat in 4th edition D&D.
In combat any real roleplaying or character flavor goes right out the window and is replaced with raw mechanical crunch.
There are systems that are much more about stating whatever it is you want to do and then rolling dice to see what happens, but in 4th edition D&D when you are in combat you can do combat actions X, Y and Z (your powers) and nothing else.
0
Options
Powerpuppiesdrinking coffee in themountain cabinRegistered Userregular
I'm gonna disagree here and say that Chu has the right impression of the combat in 4th edition D&D.
In combat any real roleplaying or character flavor goes right out the window and is replaced with raw mechanical crunch.
There are systems that are much more about stating whatever it is you want to do and then rolling dice to see what happens, but in 4th edition D&D when you are in combat you can do combat actions X, Y and Z (your powers) and nothing else.
Yeah, I agree with this. 4th edition was excellent at minimizing the damage a bad (socially, that is) player can do to the group, and making combat in DnD tolerable for me for the first time. The combat still isn't fun for me, and I've moved on to other systems. The systems I play now I think would be much less fun if you had even one socially marginal player, but can be much more fun when everyone is scrupulously careful to keep the story cooperative and not make their character the star of the show.
0
Options
JacobkoshGamble a stamp.I can show you how to be a real man!Moderatormod
I'm gonna disagree here and say that Chu has the right impression of the combat in 4th edition D&D.
In combat any real roleplaying or character flavor goes right out the window and is replaced with raw mechanical crunch.
There are systems that are much more about stating whatever it is you want to do and then rolling dice to see what happens, but in 4th edition D&D when you are in combat you can do combat actions X, Y and Z (your powers) and nothing else.
this is not true at all
0
Options
Apothe0sisHave you ever questioned the nature of your reality?Registered Userregular
The best RPG system is... First edition GURPs...
No. Big Eges, Small Mouth!
0
Options
Apothe0sisHave you ever questioned the nature of your reality?Registered Userregular
I'm gonna disagree here and say that Chu has the right impression of the combat in 4th edition D&D.
In combat any real roleplaying or character flavor goes right out the window and is replaced with raw mechanical crunch.
There are systems that are much more about stating whatever it is you want to do and then rolling dice to see what happens, but in 4th edition D&D when you are in combat you can do combat actions X, Y and Z (your powers) and nothing else.
I have one huge disagreement with that. It would be accurate to say that "when you are in combat you can do combat actions X, Y and Z (your powers) as well as whatever actions seem situationally appropriate". Now some DMs are less comfortable "winging it" and so discourage taking actions beyond those delineated by the book and some players don't like improvising either. But that is true of every RPG I have played.
The difference between 4th ed and other RPGs I have played is that the explicit options spelled out for you (eg: the powers) are actually tacticially interesting. Most RPGs I have played (previous editions of D&D, Earthdawn, Rolemaster / MERP, Palladium, Warhammer Fantasy) have somewhere a list of standard things you can do. (often not even character specific. and sometimes no longer than "I attack").
So where 4th ed differs is in providing a system interesting enough that you don't have to improvise every action on the fly. But you certainly can.
I'm gonna disagree here and say that Chu has the right impression of the combat in 4th edition D&D.
In combat any real roleplaying or character flavor goes right out the window and is replaced with raw mechanical crunch.
There are systems that are much more about stating whatever it is you want to do and then rolling dice to see what happens, but in 4th edition D&D when you are in combat you can do combat actions X, Y and Z (your powers) and nothing else.
this is not true at all
I guess if you house rule things? I mean, in 4th edition you can't say "oh, well, I'm a pretty dexterous duelist, I'm going to try to disarm my opponent of his weapon" unless you took the disarm encounter power at level 4 or whatever.
I'm gonna disagree here and say that Chu has the right impression of the combat in 4th edition D&D.
In combat any real roleplaying or character flavor goes right out the window and is replaced with raw mechanical crunch.
There are systems that are much more about stating whatever it is you want to do and then rolling dice to see what happens, but in 4th edition D&D when you are in combat you can do combat actions X, Y and Z (your powers) and nothing else.
this is not true at all
I guess if you house rule things? I mean, in 4th edition you can't say "oh, well, I'm a pretty dexterous duelist, I'm going to try to disarm my opponent of his weapon" unless you took the disarm encounter power at level 4 or whatever.
uhh, yes you can. Like every other RPG it will then be up to the GM to decide if this is possible and the two of you to hash out what kind of rolls are needed (a laborious process that can really slow down the game).
I'm gonna disagree here and say that Chu has the right impression of the combat in 4th edition D&D.
In combat any real roleplaying or character flavor goes right out the window and is replaced with raw mechanical crunch.
There are systems that are much more about stating whatever it is you want to do and then rolling dice to see what happens, but in 4th edition D&D when you are in combat you can do combat actions X, Y and Z (your powers) and nothing else.
Basically what I am saying are some systems are set up so you go:
I want to disarm the enemy with my rapier. And the DM says "Okay, that will be your rapier skill versus their whatever skill." Like, the rule system is set up so you make up what you want to do and then you find the appropriate stats to compare after the fact for most every action.
4th edition is set up so you pick what you want to be able to do in advance from a pool of powers and then in combat select which powers to use when. It's very different.
Posts
That sounds like an awesome Monday night.
Only switch "coloring" with "drinking screwdrivers" and "switched at birth" with "90s' X-Men" for me.
From the very limited description here, about 50% DM being lame and 50% you not understanding what your character can do. Which is no big thing. It sounds like you guys were well above first level (if you are fighting Drow) so you probably had a ton of powers and such that you didn't have time to understand in the time available.
Well, there are rules to what actions you can take and how fast you can move in combat. They're pretty ironclad, so the DM was in the right. The DM could wave the rules (if he wanted) in favor of the story, but he doesn't have any obligation to do so. Besides, he might have saved your character's life.
You fly into the group, alone, get surrounded and instagibbed next turn. Is that what you want? There are impressive flanking bonuses and sneak attacks, etc.
I really didn't have a lot of junk. It was like, standard melee, standard ranged, a once-per-encounter free damage boost to my standard melee, a once per encounter minor resilience power that regen'd and improved my defense, and two minor stances. My character info displayed no crazy ancillary effects or modifiers.
Hello, mother
oooh yea. ok. Essentials version of the Fighter.
So you were playing a character specificially designed to present you with as few options as possible (because some grognards got all bitchy about the 4e Fighter having more options than "I attack").
edit: and what that character is good at is being the Stalwart Protector type who protects his comrades rather than rushes in.
The issue then would be that you had a character with abilities chosen to work one way while your conception of the character was something else. It's no different, though a less obvious case, than someone who had in mind wanting to play a spell slinging wizard and got handed a character sheet for a meatheaded warrior.
I assure you that in a situation where you have the time to create your own character it would be possible to come up with a character more fitting with your concept.
Do you like violence?
Want to see me stick Nine Inch Nails through each one of my eyelids?
Hahaha, yes!
the...the band?!
This is getting sexier by the minute.
Well really it's just Trent Reznor
but that would still be an impressive feat
Truly, 1999 was a confusing time for us all.
I married a gamer girl, but she's been a pc snob so I had free Xbox... I have two xboxen but only one large tv! The other is a pc monitor.
Argh!
What about Tweaker? He is a person who is good at stuff who was in NIN for a bit.
What Riemann said, with the addendum that because the 4e D&D rules are the first D&D rules that are kind of complete and workable in and of themselves as a fun little combat game, some DMs are weirdly reluctant to mesh them in with the story, turning it into "the talking game" and "the fighting game." That's not how it's supposed to be, though. That guy should have taken your idea and run with it.
The English language doesn't have a word to accurately convey "too sad to masturbate"
He played drums on tour with them
If you listen to the albums, however, you are listening to one person only
This'll be stuck in my head, now!
Arrgh!
http://www.gearslutz.com/board/electronic-music-instruments-electronic-music-production/605445-nine-inch-nails-synths.html
Elldren, what did you think of my photo? : o
The optimal solution to having an SO who's into video games is to have two of whatever you'll be playing so no one has to compete
P sure Tweaker played keyboards.
Dave Grohl played drums on With Teeth though.
p cool, could use more gore
Agreed. As soon as she's done with ME2 I'll probably get a second copy.... Assuming I can find one on sale. Then hopefully I can banish her to the office and the smaller monitor.......
In combat any real roleplaying or character flavor goes right out the window and is replaced with raw mechanical crunch.
There are systems that are much more about stating whatever it is you want to do and then rolling dice to see what happens, but in 4th edition D&D when you are in combat you can do combat actions X, Y and Z (your powers) and nothing else.
Yeah, I agree with this. 4th edition was excellent at minimizing the damage a bad (socially, that is) player can do to the group, and making combat in DnD tolerable for me for the first time. The combat still isn't fun for me, and I've moved on to other systems. The systems I play now I think would be much less fun if you had even one socially marginal player, but can be much more fun when everyone is scrupulously careful to keep the story cooperative and not make their character the star of the show.
this is not true at all
No. Big Eges, Small Mouth!
I have one huge disagreement with that. It would be accurate to say that "when you are in combat you can do combat actions X, Y and Z (your powers) as well as whatever actions seem situationally appropriate". Now some DMs are less comfortable "winging it" and so discourage taking actions beyond those delineated by the book and some players don't like improvising either. But that is true of every RPG I have played.
The difference between 4th ed and other RPGs I have played is that the explicit options spelled out for you (eg: the powers) are actually tacticially interesting. Most RPGs I have played (previous editions of D&D, Earthdawn, Rolemaster / MERP, Palladium, Warhammer Fantasy) have somewhere a list of standard things you can do. (often not even character specific. and sometimes no longer than "I attack").
So where 4th ed differs is in providing a system interesting enough that you don't have to improvise every action on the fly. But you certainly can.
I guess if you house rule things? I mean, in 4th edition you can't say "oh, well, I'm a pretty dexterous duelist, I'm going to try to disarm my opponent of his weapon" unless you took the disarm encounter power at level 4 or whatever.
this time I have pretty much all of the plot planned out (except the end), and only part of one actual scene written up
not exactly
lots of atticus ross's stuff found it's way in there, and tons of the modular stuff on later records is straight up allessandro cortini
obviously everything gets on there only by trent's decision, though
uhh, yes you can. Like every other RPG it will then be up to the GM to decide if this is possible and the two of you to hash out what kind of rolls are needed (a laborious process that can really slow down the game).
I want to disarm the enemy with my rapier. And the DM says "Okay, that will be your rapier skill versus their whatever skill." Like, the rule system is set up so you make up what you want to do and then you find the appropriate stats to compare after the fact for most every action.
4th edition is set up so you pick what you want to be able to do in advance from a pool of powers and then in combat select which powers to use when. It's very different.