I'm not completely sure I understand the point of Essentials. The fighter at least seems to involve more steps to get to the same end. You still have to choose your power via stances, but now it's just easier to forget you're in a stance and keep spamming MBA without doing any of your modifiers. Switching to another attack involves a standard and a minor instead of just whipping out the at-will. Marking + a mark-like aura that isn't an actual mark but doesn't stack with marks is kinda wonky too.
I'm really not sure how people can not use their powers tho, this is alien to me. My problem when I first started playing was I would blow my encounters and dailies too early because I was excited to use them, not that i forgot they existed.
Do you play at conventions?
I've probably played with several hundred different people in the 10 years I've been attending conventions and I can assure you that this happens quite often.
When 4e first came out, I was a playtester and my group immediately understood that at-will attacks are preferred to simple basic attacks if at all possible.
But when I was DMing at the first con when a partial 4e rule set was available (Escape From Sembia), there were at least one or two people per table that kept sticking to basic melee or ranged attacks despite me reminding them that they had other options available.
So for that type of player, having a default of "unless I say otherwise, this stance is active" will help a lot in keeping up with other, more skilled players.
Apologies if I've missed it, but is there a write-up of any sort that is basically "This explains Essentials and this is what we're doing"? (I see DDI has a podcast about it, but I'm not able to listen currently)
The more I watch people here talk about it the less I feel like I'm getting the gist of it.
From everything I've seen in podcasts and posts from WotC folks, it seems that in terms of rules, Essentials is basically 4e with all the errata.
So if you're playing with all the errata, then you're already playing the Essentials rules.
They just reconfigured everything into easier to read tables, better explanation, more examples, etc.
In terms of classes, they've basically come up with alternate builds for the classes, and placed each of them in easy to read tables rather than requiring you to look up different sections of the book to figure out when you get new feats/powers/etc. They also took away some powers at certain levels and replaced them with equivalent class features instead.
So this means that there are fewer tables to look up when creating a character, fewer choices to confuse new players, and making each class distinct from one another.
But in terms of effectiveness in actual play, it'll be almost indistinguishable from a core only character.
They just need to release an article that says in plain English what the fuck Essentials is. Right now it feels like a lot of things but not at all like the game isn't changing in some sudden way. It could just be all the talk but I want to know if I can still play a Swordmage in two years without looking like an outdated jackass. I play with all the errata and this sounds different from the game I play.
I'm all for making the game more approachable, but I figure actually making character design intuitive would be a better route rather than half-creating new classes with limited options. The Essential line will be bloated in a year and we'll need the Ultimate line.
I like the game being alive and growing and adapting, I just don't want them scrapping everything whenever they get an idea that they like more. Psionics are great, they fit into the game! We don't all need to play that way!
smeej on
IT'S A SAD THING THAT YOUR ADVENTURES HAVE ENDED HERE!!
I think it's a game that comes in a red box that is more or less like D&D but supposedly easier to play and thus the classes are a bit different.
Come on now, it's The Red Box given the cover art. I'm fairly certain I can get a friend of mine to actually look at 4e based on that alone since he started with the original Red Box.
That would be frustrating to me. One thing I like in 4e is that there is no randomness in character generation; I can play whatever character I like.
Actually it's just a random 2E call back to the wild talent psionic table. It just adds a talent to your character, representing the general proclivity in athas to have a psionic wild talent. I wouldn't make anyone take it, but if someone wanted it we'd do it the old fashioned way and do it at random.
Because that's how I roll.
I'm pretty sure there isn't an option that makes you explode.
That would be frustrating to me. One thing I like in 4e is that there is no randomness in character generation; I can play whatever character I like.
Actually it's just a random 2E call back to the wild talent psionic table. It just adds a talent to your character, representing the general proclivity in athas to have a psionic wild talent. I wouldn't make anyone take it, but if someone wanted it we'd do it the old fashioned way and do it at random.
Because that's how I roll.
I'm pretty sure there isn't an option that makes you explode.
Yeah, it's definitely a feel thing and the random bit is important.
It's akin to the sorcerer having to roll a die to see what element he's attuned to that day.
Infidel on
0
Options
Powerpuppiesdrinking coffee in themountain cabinRegistered Userregular
edited July 2010
What if TSI rolled awesome mind bullets and i rolled the ability to make smell illusions
Powerpuppies on
0
Options
AegeriTiny wee bacteriumsPlateau of LengRegistered Userregular
I like to fit everything into my own Points of Light world (which I've yet to make a name for; I thought "Polsei" would be good, but then I thought it seemed too similar to Nancy Pelosi). As such, I'm trying to figure an origin for the Sorcerer Kings Warlock Pact. Right now I'm thinking that it might be connected to the power of the Six Kings of the Akaraot (mentioned in Adventurer's Vault 2). I might also set it up as the power of the kings of Mira (a mortal empire mentioned in Manual of the Planes that colonized the Elemental Chaos).
That format looks cool but wouldn't be practical for anything but a low-level pc without magic items. It would quickly get unwieldy. The Monsters format works because they have less powers and options.
The only times you should be using basic attacks are:
Charges, when you have no powers that can be used as an MBA on a charge.
OAs, when you have no powers that can be used as an MBA on a charge.
When someone else grants you an MBA/RBA and you have no powers that can be used as an MBA/RBA.
- If you're a fighter with Pinning Challenge.
This has been so hard for me to explain to people who start playing that have played any other version, that I essentially give them 3 cards with their at wills, and say "pick from these when you make an attack".
I think there used to having to save anything that does more then basic damage for "special" fights.
Will the August Character Builder update include Dark Sun info or will we have to wait for next month?
EDIT: Ooohhh, Arena Fighter is a secondary controller. Interesting! An arena fighter built around reach weapon, maybe?
Assuming they stick with releasing the updates in the beginning of the month, I can't imagine they would include the Dark Sun info until the September update. Hopefully I'm wrong though. I plan on picking up at least the main book right away, but it'd be nice to have the character builder updated for everything it'll include.
So, I know I'm late to the party with the discussion about New-Old-School Magic Missile, but kind of a rules question (interested to hear opinions before I try to go look for the "real" answer):
New Old-School Magic Missile's special line (and Arcane Bolt's effect line) indicates that you can add your implement's enhancement bonus to the damage you do as part of the effect of the spell. Dual Implement Spellcaster tells you that you add the off-hand implement enhancement bonus to your damage rolls. There is no roll here. Does that mean that DIS offers no benefit to Magic Missile?
Also, should it? I feel like if you put some effort into your character's stats and got to use 2 wands or orbs or whatever magic token to throw your unerring silvery bolt of force at your opponent, you deserve to get the beef from both items. Maybe that's out of line. Then again, we're talking about free, guaranteed damage. Should they get any more? It's meant as a minion-popper, not a dragon-spanker, right, so why would you need to get more free damage?
So, I know I'm late to the party with the discussion about New-Old-School Magic Missile, but kind of a rules question (interested to hear opinions before I try to go look for the "real" answer):
New Old-School Magic Missile's special line (and Arcane Bolt's effect line) indicates that you can add your implement's enhancement bonus to the damage you do as part of the effect of the spell. Dual Implement Spellcaster tells you that you add the off-hand implement enhancement bonus to your damage rolls. There is no roll here. Does that mean that DIS offers no benefit to Magic Missile?
Also, should it? I feel like if you put some effort into your character's stats and got to use 2 wands or orbs or whatever magic token to throw your unerring silvery bolt of force at your opponent, you deserve to get the beef from both items. Maybe that's out of line. Then again, we're talking about free, guaranteed damage. Should they get any more? It's meant as a minion-popper, not a dragon-spanker, right, so why would you need to get more free damage?
Curious about thoughts.
As written, any bonuses that refer to a damage roll would not affect the new Magic Missile. And yes, that's the trade off for having a power that will auto-hit, which seems like a perfectly fair trade to me. If it still got all the same bonuses it did before on top of being auto-hit, it would be a pretty overpowered ability.
abotkin on
3DS: 0963-0539-4405
0
Options
Mostlyjoe13Evil, Evil, Jump for joy!Registered Userregular
Actually it's just a random 2E call back to the wild talent psionic table. It just adds a talent to your character, representing the general proclivity in athas to have a psionic wild talent. I wouldn't make anyone take it, but if someone wanted it we'd do it the old fashioned way and do it at random.
Because that's how I roll.
I'm pretty sure there isn't an option that makes you explode.
The only thing I remember is from AD&D was where you could get a mishap with Disintegrate the Psionic power. You could with some really bad rolls, off yourself in a spectacular fashion. Then again the odds of it happening were pretty low.
Mostlyjoe13 on
PSN ID - Mostlyjoe Steam ID -TheNotoriusRNG
0
Options
KayWhat we need...Is a little bit of PANIC.Registered Userregular
edited August 2010
Actually, New 'Old-School' magic missile could be pretty damned useful in tandem with that wizard daily that allows you to use Magic Missile as a minor until the end of the encounter.
Actually, New 'Old-School' magic missile could be pretty damned useful in tandem with that wizard daily that allows you to use Magic Missile as a minor until the end of the encounter.
what one is that?
streever on
0
Options
AegeriTiny wee bacteriumsPlateau of LengRegistered Userregular
Actually, New 'Old-School' magic missile could be pretty damned useful in tandem with that wizard daily that allows you to use Magic Missile as a minor until the end of the encounter.
I'd like your opinion on something: our rogue went and basically did a skill challenge by himself to get information in a seedy part of town. The DM granted him all of the XP for that SC, rather than divide it amongst the party.
I understand that the rogue is being rewarded for role-playing, but, looking at it from a numbers/game balance angle, isn't having an XP imbalance between party members a big issue in 4e? The DMG is no help; the only relevant thing I've found is the section of giving XP to absent players, and even that just says that it's the DM's call on awarding XP.
My issue with the awarding XP to individuals is at some point, it's going to cause a level disparity in the party. From my limited understanding of 4E, that's something that's going to screw over the lower level players and the party in general, since they'll be behind in attacks, defenses, and abilities/feats/powers.
It doesn't occur when the players are within 1-2 levels of each other. Math-wise it'd only be a +1 deviation in base attk/def in most cases. If your levels skew too far ahead though, it could be a problem. But that also depends on how your DM designs his encounters and so forth.
tastydonuts on
“I used to draw, hard to admit that I used to draw...”
0
Options
ChanusHarbinger of the Spicy Rooster ApocalypseThe Flames of a Thousand Collapsed StarsRegistered Userregular
edited August 2010
I don't think it's going to cause a huge problem mechanics-wise as long as it's not the same player getting the rewards every time and he or she ends up several levels ahead.
I think you do run into the possibility of resentment when some characters get rewarded while others don't, and you also incentivize the players to go off on their own to get all the XP for themselves.
I don't think it's going to cause a huge problem mechanics-wise as long as it's not the same player getting the rewards every time and he or she ends up several levels ahead.
I think you do run into the possibility of resentment when some characters get rewarded while others don't, and you also incentivize the players to go off on their own to get all the XP for themselves.
Edit: By 'you', I'm referring to your DM :P
It's a slippery slope. I really try to avoid it, unless we're talking about small, token amounts of EXP, sort of like a pat on the back for great playing. And if I do this, I try to spread it around so that everyone has a shot.
At its heart, D&D is a team game, so when you start rewarding individuals, then things can (not saying it happens every time, but) get ugly.
I don't think it's going to cause a huge problem mechanics-wise as long as it's not the same player getting the rewards every time and he or she ends up several levels ahead.
I think you do run into the possibility of resentment when some characters get rewarded while others don't, and you also incentivize the players to go off on their own to get all the XP for themselves.
Edit: By 'you', I'm referring to your DM :P
It's a slippery slope. I really try to avoid it, unless we're talking about small, token amounts of EXP, sort of like a pat on the back for great playing. And if I do this, I try to spread it around so that everyone has a shot.
At its heart, D&D is a team game, so when you start rewarding individuals, then things can (not saying it happens every time, but) get ugly.
I prefer the idea of keeping everyone at the same XP and handing out those "drama cards" instead. A one-time, consumable ability seems like a fair reward for role-playing.
also, I mean, that sort of punishes certain players in a round about way.
example- in the game I was playing that recently ended in divorce, I was the leader, and smeej was the tank. tank's skills were athletics, endurance and I think intimidate.
my skills were athletics, history, and character interaction skills- diplomacy, bluff, intimidate.
we basically got to sit on our butts during most skill challenges within a dungeon, because it'd end up being religion or thievery or stealth or something else we didn't have. Which is fine, everyone needs time to let their character shine, so to speak.
but the simple fact is that we were rarely going to be involved in the skill challenges, so it would have been a recurring source of xp for other characters, not us.
I really like some of these mechanics that Dark Sun is introducing. I think I am going to shoehorn most of the mechanics into Birth, my tabletop game and Legends of Novus, my PbP game. Themes are awesome and the defiler can be expanded on to give someone a great necromancers sort of feel.
Posts
Do you play at conventions?
I've probably played with several hundred different people in the 10 years I've been attending conventions and I can assure you that this happens quite often.
When 4e first came out, I was a playtester and my group immediately understood that at-will attacks are preferred to simple basic attacks if at all possible.
But when I was DMing at the first con when a partial 4e rule set was available (Escape From Sembia), there were at least one or two people per table that kept sticking to basic melee or ranged attacks despite me reminding them that they had other options available.
So for that type of player, having a default of "unless I say otherwise, this stance is active" will help a lot in keeping up with other, more skilled players.
www.familiar-ground.com
Epic Fantasy Comedy. Familiar Point of View.
From everything I've seen in podcasts and posts from WotC folks, it seems that in terms of rules, Essentials is basically 4e with all the errata.
So if you're playing with all the errata, then you're already playing the Essentials rules.
They just reconfigured everything into easier to read tables, better explanation, more examples, etc.
In terms of classes, they've basically come up with alternate builds for the classes, and placed each of them in easy to read tables rather than requiring you to look up different sections of the book to figure out when you get new feats/powers/etc. They also took away some powers at certain levels and replaced them with equivalent class features instead.
So this means that there are fewer tables to look up when creating a character, fewer choices to confuse new players, and making each class distinct from one another.
But in terms of effectiveness in actual play, it'll be almost indistinguishable from a core only character.
www.familiar-ground.com
Epic Fantasy Comedy. Familiar Point of View.
d12s and d4s are for chumps
also fighters are still better than everyone else
eat it, other defenders
I'm all for making the game more approachable, but I figure actually making character design intuitive would be a better route rather than half-creating new classes with limited options. The Essential line will be bloated in a year and we'll need the Ultimate line.
I like the game being alive and growing and adapting, I just don't want them scrapping everything whenever they get an idea that they like more. Psionics are great, they fit into the game! We don't all need to play that way!
Come on now, it's The Red Box given the cover art. I'm fairly certain I can get a friend of mine to actually look at 4e based on that alone since he started with the original Red Box.
Have we heard anything about that anyway?
edit: also Amazon is showing the Dark Sun monster manual as not coming out til august 30th now
Like Spider-Man.
I mean how many do we need?
Amazing... Astonishing... Spectacular... Sensational... Ultimate...
D&D has a lot of catching up to do to get to Spider-Man or X-Men levels of bloated product line.
Guy got some review copies of the Dark Sun books and is answering questions.
Oh dear lord.
And by lord I mean slithering SOMETHING from the far realm.
Actually it's just a random 2E call back to the wild talent psionic table. It just adds a talent to your character, representing the general proclivity in athas to have a psionic wild talent. I wouldn't make anyone take it, but if someone wanted it we'd do it the old fashioned way and do it at random.
Because that's how I roll.
I'm pretty sure there isn't an option that makes you explode.
Yeah, it's definitely a feel thing and the random bit is important.
It's akin to the sorcerer having to roll a die to see what element he's attuned to that day.
I'm not sure they are that dramatic in power actually from what I understand. They are mostly minor things like a bit of telekinesis.
Also, I'm not using that in my Eberron game so you shouldn't have to fear :P
This has been so hard for me to explain to people who start playing that have played any other version, that I essentially give them 3 cards with their at wills, and say "pick from these when you make an attack".
I think there used to having to save anything that does more then basic damage for "special" fights.
EDIT: Ooohhh, Arena Fighter is a secondary controller. Interesting! An arena fighter built around reach weapon, maybe?
Assuming they stick with releasing the updates in the beginning of the month, I can't imagine they would include the Dark Sun info until the September update. Hopefully I'm wrong though. I plan on picking up at least the main book right away, but it'd be nice to have the character builder updated for everything it'll include.
3DS: 0963-0539-4405
Updated the first of many monsters to the new MM3 format and upgraded damage. Uh... my players in Heaven's Gate prolly shouldn't look at these!
New Old-School Magic Missile's special line (and Arcane Bolt's effect line) indicates that you can add your implement's enhancement bonus to the damage you do as part of the effect of the spell. Dual Implement Spellcaster tells you that you add the off-hand implement enhancement bonus to your damage rolls. There is no roll here. Does that mean that DIS offers no benefit to Magic Missile?
Also, should it? I feel like if you put some effort into your character's stats and got to use 2 wands or orbs or whatever magic token to throw your unerring silvery bolt of force at your opponent, you deserve to get the beef from both items. Maybe that's out of line. Then again, we're talking about free, guaranteed damage. Should they get any more? It's meant as a minion-popper, not a dragon-spanker, right, so why would you need to get more free damage?
Curious about thoughts.
As written, any bonuses that refer to a damage roll would not affect the new Magic Missile. And yes, that's the trade off for having a power that will auto-hit, which seems like a perfectly fair trade to me. If it still got all the same bonuses it did before on top of being auto-hit, it would be a pretty overpowered ability.
3DS: 0963-0539-4405
The only thing I remember is from AD&D was where you could get a mishap with Disintegrate the Psionic power. You could with some really bad rolls, off yourself in a spectacular fashion. Then again the odds of it happening were pretty low.
3DS FCode: 1993-7512-8991
what one is that?
Wizards fury.
I understand that the rogue is being rewarded for role-playing, but, looking at it from a numbers/game balance angle, isn't having an XP imbalance between party members a big issue in 4e? The DMG is no help; the only relevant thing I've found is the section of giving XP to absent players, and even that just says that it's the DM's call on awarding XP.
My issue with the awarding XP to individuals is at some point, it's going to cause a level disparity in the party. From my limited understanding of 4E, that's something that's going to screw over the lower level players and the party in general, since they'll be behind in attacks, defenses, and abilities/feats/powers.
I think you do run into the possibility of resentment when some characters get rewarded while others don't, and you also incentivize the players to go off on their own to get all the XP for themselves.
Edit: By 'you', I'm referring to your DM :P
It's a slippery slope. I really try to avoid it, unless we're talking about small, token amounts of EXP, sort of like a pat on the back for great playing. And if I do this, I try to spread it around so that everyone has a shot.
At its heart, D&D is a team game, so when you start rewarding individuals, then things can (not saying it happens every time, but) get ugly.
I prefer the idea of keeping everyone at the same XP and handing out those "drama cards" instead. A one-time, consumable ability seems like a fair reward for role-playing.
example- in the game I was playing that recently ended in divorce, I was the leader, and smeej was the tank. tank's skills were athletics, endurance and I think intimidate.
my skills were athletics, history, and character interaction skills- diplomacy, bluff, intimidate.
we basically got to sit on our butts during most skill challenges within a dungeon, because it'd end up being religion or thievery or stealth or something else we didn't have. Which is fine, everyone needs time to let their character shine, so to speak.
but the simple fact is that we were rarely going to be involved in the skill challenges, so it would have been a recurring source of xp for other characters, not us.
...
It's awesome fun playing at a tabletop again though so I'll keep my eye rolling behind doors and on the internet :P