Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Ahtman wrote:I believe that a proper Ravenloft Campaign book for 4th is coming out sometime next year

This could be enough to getr me proactive about 4th!

@Ahtman:

I must admit, I find you bard compelling, though I must say, I can't remember ever seeing Bard in the 4E edition rulebook. Maybe I looked at an early copy or something. I think the other thing that really irritated me was that Gnome was missing too. I really don't think Ravenloft will ever be viable in the 4E world though, but I guess we'll see when they release the books.

@Da Boss:

Excellent! I've got it on my phone now. (Work for silly reasons has problems with Rapidshare, go figure) From what I've read, it looks pretty awesome. I'll have to get it out to my players tonight.

You can already play as 'werewolves', they are called shifters, though it isn't literally a werewolf because you can still be infected with lycanthropy as well. You can also play as Undead, called Revenants.

I like the wide range of races and "base classes" (to use a term from 3.5) that 4th offers.

What do you guys think of the new "essentials" books like the rules compendium?

daedalus wrote:@Ahtman:

I must admit, I find you bard compelling, though I must say, I can't remember ever seeing Bard in the 4E edition rulebook. Maybe I looked at an early copy or something. I think the other thing that really irritated me was that Gnome was missing too. I really don't think Ravenloft will ever be viable in the 4E world though, but I guess we'll see when they release the books.

Bards and Gnomes are in PHB2. It is more difficult to make a Gnome Skillmonkey (or skilltastic™) because of all the extra skill, feat, and At-Will humans get. It isn't impossible, it would just take a little longer to get there. Basically you would be level 6 to get all the same feats, but you would have a better INT score than the Human, as well as the racial powers.

Manchu wrote:What do you guys think of the new "essentials" books like the rules compendium?

The Rules Compendium is basically the 4e rules with all the errata and updates in one book.

Got to look at the new Essentials player guide last night and it is fairly neat. The classes are very different from the standard 4e stuff and a bit like 2nd edition versions of the classes in fourth edition. For example the new Fighter types in Essentials have no Fighters Mark. The Fightrer Slayer's At-Wills are stances: one is +1 to hit, the other is +2 damage. They are basically centered around their melee basic attack so it is a return to "I attack" for them, but they get to modify it a bit. The Fighter Knight has an aura but I haven't had a chance to really look at him yet. A good deal of the class specific stuff doesn't transfer over to the 4e classes, but a lot of the basic stuff does. For example, only the Slayer gets the At-Will stances, you can't give them to a Brawler Fighter from Martial Power 2. Still there are a good amount of new powers and abilities that do transfer, enough to make it worthwhile for a player to take a look at. I have a Wizard I'm getting ready to start and I'm taking a new At-Will from there as well as an awesome (for me, thematically) new Daily power.

Ahtman: I was aware of the shifters, not of the revenants though. I imagine the ravenloft book might make more of the tainted nature of those heroes, perhaps focusing on antiheroes and so on. Could be good, I suppose. I'll probably pick it up out of interest.

I'm excited about Darksun, I keep checking the local shop to see if they have it yet. Played a Darksun campaign in 3.5 that was the balls, would love another crack at it. Sounds like they made defiling even more dramatic and harsh, which is to my mind, all good

The one thing I wouldn't mind seeing come out of the new Dark Sun book is Themes. It is a great idea I would like to see incorporated into the regular game.

@Ahtman: I'm not sure I understand the relationship between the essentials fighter/cleric book you're talking about and 4th ed. I thought the little books were simply 4th ed. supplements?

Manchu wrote:@Ahtman: I'm not sure I understand the relationship between the essentials fighter/cleric book you're talking about and 4th ed. I thought the little books were simply 4th ed. supplements?

They are, but it is adding in new version of classes, some of which have abilities/powers that don't work with other versions of that class. For example Mage is a type of Wizard in Essentials. It can take all the spells that previous Wizards could take but they also pick a school (Evocation, Illusion, and something) and get bonus's to certain things for taking that school. Only Mages can have these, as well as getting Magic Missle as a free extra At-Will. Now, they can not get 'Implement Mastery' that normal Wizard can. Implement Mastery are special abilities depending on what Implement you use. When you create a Wizard you select one mastery, such as Staff of Defense. As an enounter power you can boost all your defense at any time after being hit, even up to after the damage is rolled. It is similiar to the Shield spell but you can only do it while use use a staff. There is a Mastery for orbs, wands, tomes, and staff. Mages (essentials) get Schools, 4e gets IM powers. They both can still pull from the same spell book pool though.

The Fighter is a little more nuanced in the changes but it is sort of like that. I don't own the book, a buddy of mine has it, and I would really need it in front of me to get more specific.

There are also new feats in Essentials. EX: you can now take a bonus to Non-AC defenses at Heroic (1-10) level.

A good deal of the class specific stuff doesn't transfer over to the 4e classes, but a lot of the basic stuff does.

This is the part that was confusing me. Do you just mean that the class subtypes do not cross-intergrate?

Manchu wrote:

A good deal of the class specific stuff doesn't transfer over to the 4e classes, but a lot of the basic stuff does.

This is the part that was confusing me. Do you just mean that the class subtypes do not cross-intergrate?

Sorry, that was kind of worded strangely. Yes, the sub-class stuff doesn't transfer, but they also have new powers that do work for all versions of the class. There are a few Sub-Class specific powers that are Slayer only, but there are some new powers in there that are for any fighter.

I actually find the lack of insanely convoluted rules make RP-ing easier. Combat is more streamlined although still tactial and less clunky than 3.x
At high levels there is more balance (lvl 20 fighter vs lvl 20 wizard = save or die,save or die,save or die,save or die,save or die,save or die,save or die,save or die,*fail*=you die

@Ahtman

And yet I still don't enjoy the system. Odd.

Grimpost wrote:@Ahtman

And yet I still don't enjoy the system. Odd.

And yet I never said you would. Odder still.

I have never argued that 4th is the best system, just that it isn't the worst. I've argued to play what you like without bashing others.

D&D 4.0 is pretty for off the mark in terms of role-playing instead of roll-playing. It prioritizes stat building and min-maxing for the sake of actually trying to play a role. More of the character is centered around what they do, rather than who they are. Thank God Gygax is no longer with us to witness this version of his game.

The D&D ruleset has always been about what characters can do, rather than who they are. The original game was made because some guys playing a fantasy wargame wanted to do more dungeon-running and small group stuff instead of big battles, and included ZERO rules for 'who they are', it was all combat rules. As the game developed, it went on to 1st Edition D&D. 1st Edition played in the Greyhawk setting is the full-on 'Gary Gygax' experience, the rules were almost entirely his baby at the time and Greyhawk was his personal campaign world.

Please tell me where to find any significant rules on the 'who they are' part of an RPG in my 1st edition books, or the Greyhawk setting books. I can't really think of much of anything, the only hings that come to mind is the table for randomly determining your character's social class/starting wealth and the Barbarian and Cavalier special rules, that enforce certain 'you must do this or lose your abilities' restrictions. I can find tons of rules for slight weapon variants (there are around 2 dozen types of polearm), catching diseases, random encounters, and the like, but basically no rules for the non-combat side.

If you're fairly new to D&D and did not start back in the Gygax Golden Days of 1st edition (which was not mid-90s), you might want to review what the game was before telling us how far it's strayed from the original vision.

BearersOfSalvation wrote:The D&D ruleset has always been about what characters can do, rather than who they are.

Great point. The only "who you are" rule I can think of from 3.5 was the optional flaws-for-feats idea smuggled in from other systems but I never saw any of the power gamers I played with even consider it. I'd be interested to hear other examples from D&D if people can think of them and, more especially, some "who you are" rules from other systems. For example, character creation in Traveller is very "who you are" oriented. You roll across a series of connected tables to determine what your characters life was like in the years leading up to the game, creating a narrative as well as an abilities set as you go. The flaws and talents set-up in Savage Worlds is another example. I'd say it's a fair split between "what you can do" and "who you are." Mouse Gaurd and its big brother Burning Wheel have certain "stats" that are just character- and world-building exercises: your character sheet includes spaces for names and descriptions of allies and enemies that the player takes the initiative in creating. Any other examples?

BearersOfSalvation wrote:
If you're fairly new to D&D and did not start back in the Gygax Golden Days of 1st edition (which was not mid-90s), you might want to review what the game was before telling us how far it's strayed from the original vision.

YES!

Back in my day... Seriously though. D&D has never made your role. You have made your role and used the system to cover the combat and crunchy parts.

D&D (any edition) always bugs me somewhat for various reasons. There are loads of cool aspects to all the editions, but give me something simpler any day.

These days (after nearly 3 decades of play, and nearly a decade of professional RPG design) I've boiled it down to one of 3 or 4 games for fantasy RPGing:

Dragon Warriors for atmospheric, low-mid fantasy, folkloric gaming

Amber Diceless Roleplaying for character-driven, high-powered, universe-shaking gaming

Warhammer FRP (1st or 2nd edition) for gaming specifically in the Old World -- again, very atmospheric, and a bit more low-key than D&D (meet a group of skeletons, and your adventurers may well be legging it in terror, rather than -- D&D-style -- muttering, "Oh, it's OK, these guys are only 1 hit die each").

Well, try before you buy! The official Wizards site actually has some free quickstart rules and characters. Also if you have a good FLGS you could try to find a D&D Encounters Wednesday, which is basically a series of vaguely linked one off combats you can drop in on and play.

For myself I find 4th much easier to DM. Overall the system feels less vague and more balanced. I don't agree with the "4th is a video game lolz", I think that's just people hating on the current system. Sure each class can do something neat each turn...but somehow that parallels with video games? Anyways all my players enjoy the new edition. As for combat being the focus, well, that depends on the DM. Nothing in the rules stops you from roleplaying as much or as little as you did before.

Anyways, throwing a few pre-generated characters into an encounter or reading the PHB is probably the best place to start to get a feel for the game.

Just picked up the red box starter set. Looks to be pretty well set up for walking beginners through how everything works.

@Manchu: Mutant Chronicles (the RPG set in the Warzone universe, or vice versa) has a character generation system where, after rolling your abilities, you choose a background/profession to try for, and get to either add skill picks from that profession or, if you failed your roll for the profession, you pick free skills as an Unemployed. They also included rolls for special events in your life before you became a freelancer... these all added up to a good picture of "who you are" as you set out on your new career...

-Vilegrimm

insaniak wrote:Just picked up the red box starter set. Looks to be pretty well set up for walking beginners through how everything works.

Tell us how it works out so we can settle this.

@Insaniak: I second the request for a review. I was a little bummed that there are character counters rather than miniatures. I guess it's a price-point issue (only $14 on Amazon!).

@Vilegrimm: That sounds a lot like Traveller. Well, a bit less complicated.

Manchu wrote:@Insaniak: I second the request for a review. I was a little bummed that there are character counters rather than miniatures. I guess it's a price-point issue (only $14 on Amazon!).

Yeah, I paid AU$16 for it. The counters don't bother me too much. Fantasy minis are easy to come by... what I don't already have sitting around. I did have a largish collection of D&D minis back when I was working in a games store, but got rid of them a while ago to concentrate on Star Wars minis instead.

The books look good so far. Steps you through the character creation process in the form of a 'Choose your own adventure' style story

Whoa, that sounds kind of worth it right there--at least as a template. How cool would it be if you could start a real campaign that way?

Manchu wrote:Whoa, that sounds kind of worth it right there--at least as a template. How cool would it be if you could start a real campaign that way?

Wow. Agreed.

I may have to buy the red box just for that.

On a mini-note-

I am planning to get the Castle Ravenloft game as it does appear to be a "steal" in terms of miniatures and content for the price tag and I loved the old DnD board game back from the mid-90's that does the same thing as the Castle Ravenloft Board game does: introduce the game without shoving decades worth of lore, rules, and history behind it.

Bear in mind the minis in that game are just previously released and now unpainted D&D minis. The Strahd figure is not even the D&D minis Strahd. (Well, that might be a good thing depending on what you thought of that strangely faceless mini.) I, too, thought about purchasing that set but this little tidbit was a dealbreaker. You might hold out for the next game in the series: Wrath of Ashardlon, although it will still just be old D&D minis, I reckon.

Manchu wrote:Bear in mind the minis in that game are just previously released and now unpainted D&D minis. The Strahd figure is not even the D&D minis Strahd. (Well, that might be a good thing depending on what you thought of that strangely faceless mini.) I, too, thought about purchasing that set but this little tidbit was a dealbreaker. You might hold out for the next game in the series: Wrath of Ashardlon, although it will still just be old D&D minis, I reckon.

Yup. Pretty aware of the miniatures being unpainted. However, if you do get the game from the point of buying it for the tiles and miniatures, it is a very good purchase price. Today's miniatures- 6 painted with one being huge comes in at around 22 dollars retail. Tiles are about 12 dollars for a pack. And now that I have done Warhammer painting on my models, I feel more included to paint these critters if the mood struck me to do so.

Personally I love 4th edition: Why?
1. As a GM it makes my life so easy, I only have to spend the time I want to on building adventures.
2. The Company Support: This might not seem like a lot, but with using the “Character Builder” and “Adventure Tools” everything is up-to-date.

I have had a lot of complaints, but a lot are same ones from 25+ year players.
1. It’s not D&D.
2. I miss my 20d6 Fire Ball
3. How come I don’t have my 200 hit points?
4. The system is too fragile; I can’t incorporate all of my house rules without breaking it.

I also think the initial “Change is bad” thing is starting die off. This is the second thread that has not degenerated into an I am right and you are wrong circular augment.


I only have one thing left to say.