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.

pretre wrote:
I'm thinking of doing something like this for my next game. I'm going to talk to my players and see what they think. It is a joke in our group that no one keeps XP correct and we have to do 'XP checks' at least once a session to make sure everyone has the right total. Maybe making it more dramatic or tied to certain events (and at the beginning / end of a session) will make it easier and more dramatic.

My usual GM has, in the past, allowed players to 'share' XP so everyone gives 100 to level up whomever is behind or similar. Moving to just giving out levels as rewards for major quest goals is probably the next step.

The one neat thing my group does is that extar XP are sometimes given out to individuals as rewards for doing cool stuff, keeping the group focused, etc. If I was running 4th I think I'd want to add or adapt some sort of bennie system (See Savage Worlds for a version) as a way to reward creative play and replace this. I think I read somewhere that this exists, as there's a set of rules for 'boons' that are kind of like 1-time disposable magic boosts. Basically, instead of giving out XP, giving some way to re-roll a bad die, add a small bonus in, or similar would be a nice useful effect, and probably more 'group friendly' than XP bonuses, which are generally meaningless, or if they aren't, lead to 1 character being a higher level than the group.

Did 3.5/PF get rid of the 'Crafting Magic Items costs XP rule? I assume this was to prevent a wizard making hundreds of scrolls, but it ended up making crafting less than useful. A better way to handle it would probably be to make it hard to do and make sure the players are aware that time doesn't stop, and the Evil Overlord is going to do a ton of bad stuff while they are busy making scrolls and potions.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ahtman wrote:It isn't a good idea to start 4e at high level. The combat gets more complicated with all the effects flaying around which isn't a problem with experienced players but for new players it can grind the game to a halt.

Very true. I was at GenCon last year and got into a Tournament game where we were given about 5 minutes to figure out lvl 25 characters. Very difficult.Lots of feats that had interactions with powers and such.

Needless to say, we did not do well. Fun game, but we got stomped. Didn't finish one encounter in the time alloted for four... We also didn't know that the characters were published in advance.

Balance wrote:The one neat thing my group does is that extar XP are sometimes given out to individuals as rewards for doing cool stuff, keeping the group focused, etc. If I was running 4th I think I'd want to add or adapt some sort of bennie system (See Savage Worlds for a version) as a way to reward creative play and replace this. I think I read somewhere that this exists, as there's a set of rules for 'boons' that are kind of like 1-time disposable magic boosts. Basically, instead of giving out XP, giving some way to re-roll a bad die, add a small bonus in, or similar would be a nice useful effect, and probably more 'group friendly' than XP bonuses, which are generally meaningless, or if they aren't, lead to 1 character being a higher level than the group.

I definitely do the XP bonuses, but I love! the idea of non-xp bonuses. I may steal that for our next game. Rerolls is my current favorite out of the list you just made.

pretre wrote:http://4e.writh.net/wiki/Races
http://4e.writh.net/wiki/Classes

A little google turned this up.

Thanks. I guess I should have tried to google first.

Wasn't there a shifter race as well and a goliath?

Yeah, that's probably not an entire list and it isn't 100% up to date. It was just the best one I found in a second or two on google.

To get more info, I would recommend actually going to the books / D&D Online.

boogeyman wrote:

pretre wrote:http://4e.writh.net/wiki/Races
http://4e.writh.net/wiki/Classes

A little google turned this up.

Thanks. I guess I should have tried to google first.

Wasn't there a shifter race as well and a goliath?

Actually there are two shifter types and Goliath.

Shall this just be a generic DnD chat thread as a whole then?

corpsesarefun wrote:Shall this just be a generic DnD chat thread as a whole then?

If you've got more questions, as away.

Balance wrote:

corpsesarefun wrote:Shall this just be a generic DnD chat thread as a whole then?

If you've got more questions, as away.

I haven't yet but I'm sure once things get going I will.

In the mean time it seems that this is providing a useful place for people to discuss the pro's and cons of each version (which was all very helpful for me ) amongst other things.

EDIT: I think i'll give 4th a go after reading the wiki as I'm rather enamoured with the artificer class.

corpsesarefun wrote:

Balance wrote:

corpsesarefun wrote:Shall this just be a generic DnD chat thread as a whole then?

If you've got more questions, as away.

I haven't yet but I'm sure once things get going I will.

In the mean time it seems that this is providing a useful place for people to discuss the pro's and cons of each version (which was all very helpful for me ) amongst other things.

EDIT: I think i'll give 4th a go after reading the wiki as I'm rather enamoured with the artificer class.

Other rules sets have the same class as well.

Are there other roleplay groups in your area, or are you looking to create one? Sometimes the best option is to try to join a game to try it before you buy. Your local gaming store may have monthly gatherings, I know the Pathfinder rpg has something called pathfinder society http://paizo.com/pathfinderSociety and I know there is something for 4th called adventures or something...

corpsesarefun wrote:

Balance wrote:

corpsesarefun wrote:Shall this just be a generic DnD chat thread as a whole then?

If you've got more questions, as away.

I haven't yet but I'm sure once things get going I will.

In the mean time it seems that this is providing a useful place for people to discuss the pro's and cons of each version (which was all very helpful for me ) amongst other things.

EDIT: I think i'll give 4th a go after reading the wiki as I'm rather enamoured with the artificer class.

Yea, I think this has been really helpful. I understand wanting total creative control over character creation, but I think 4e gave me enough options and still lets you keep your imagination (you can play them however you want) for your character. Even though I played a rather generic character this time I still had fun and I really liked how encounters were played. I am looking forward to exploring it further.

Hmm, so, another general query, again hate to be a bother.

So I found the page on choosing powers (27, go figure) But perusing over them as compared to the powers characters get in, say, the Red Box, I wondered why they were different. Should I just give the characters their abilities from the PHB? Or should I stick with Red Box?

It might help if you specified which version of D&D you're talking about.

Cryonicleech wrote:Hmm, so, another general query, again hate to be a bother.

So I found the page on choosing powers (27, go figure) But perusing over them as compared to the powers characters get in, say, the Red Box, I wondered why they were different. Should I just give the characters their abilities from the PHB? Or should I stick with Red Box?

PHB is regular 4E while the Red Box is Essentials. If you are running people through the Red Box adventure just stick with the characters made for that. Do not combine Essentials Classes with 4E when character building. The essentials trade off options for streamlining and some of the stuff isn't meant for 4E classes. If the power doesn't have a level on it and the class name you can't use it elsewhere. For example the At-Will stances just say "Fighter" on them but no level is given. Those stances if given to a regular 4E fighter would be really broken. Essentials characters allow for some choice but in general are pre-built and designed that way with some unique powers. They were designed to be like older iterations of D&D as well as introduce new players to the game.

Ahh, thanks Ahtman.

That's a really dumb move on WotC's part though... so how should I progress the group? Should I just have them generate characters from the PHB and skip the lame Red Box?

Essentials and 4E are wholly compatible from what I've heard.

The classes in the Red Box are separate (Slayer and Knight vs Fighter) from the PHB classes but can be run side by side with them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
That being said, I don't own the red box, so only play with the online material and the original PHB, but know folks who use both Essentials classes and normal classes side-by-side. Also the feats from Essentials and everything else are meant to be updates to the feats in the PHB in many cases (see expertise feats).

pretre wrote:Essentials and 4E are wholly compatible from what I've heard.

The classes in the Red Box are separate (Slayer and Knight vs Fighter) from the PHB classes but can be run side by side with them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
That being said, I don't own the red box, so only play with the online material and the original PHB, but know folks who use both Essentials classes and normal classes side-by-side. Also the feats from Essentials and everything else are meant to be updates to the feats in the PHB in many cases (see expertise feats).

We did it for a one-off adventure without major issues. In some cases the Essentials classes are arguably 'better' than the PHB equivalents, but may be a bit less flexible. The ranger-equivalent Scout that is based around Stances is very interesting, but you've basically got a couple powers you need to spam in addition to the stances. Still, it's a definite option if you want a frontier/wilderness man type hero. I think it's a bit less 'magical' than the PHB ranger, for example.

It may be that I was just looking at the online and not the book, but the essentials classes actually looked more complicated then their PHB counterparts.

Good to hear that they work out pretty well though.

They are compatible in the sense that you can have a Cavalier (Essentials Paladin) in a game with a Brawler Fighter (4e) but they aren't compatible in the sense that you can just swap any powers between the two. There are powers that you can but many of the Essentials are unique to to their class. The Essentials classes seem to be very powerful at lower levels but as time goes on they lose a lot of that power as they scale and lose flexibility.

The Scout can be stupidly over powered. Had one in a game where everyone else was 4E character. He had a Horned Helm (adds a die when charging), a hammer that added a die when charging, and the stance that did something when you charged. He was a Half Orc so he also had the encounter power that adds a weapon die to an attack and Power Attack from the class features that does the same. His basic attack was basically a Daily and he could do it at will. Of course the draw back was that his turn always was this:

charge
charge
charge + furious assault
charge + power attack
charge
charge
charge + power attack

which is sort of dull. At first he loved all the damage but got tired of doing the same thing over and over and over becuase there weren't really any other options. It was charge or melee basic.

Oh yeah, they are effectively different classes for most things.

Yeah, I've seen some good DPR numbers on the Char Opt board for scouts.

I'd rather have more options than OP in most cases though, so I'm with you on the boring part.

juraigamer wrote:

corpsesarefun wrote:

Balance wrote:

corpsesarefun wrote:Shall this just be a generic DnD chat thread as a whole then?

If you've got more questions, as away.

I haven't yet but I'm sure once things get going I will.

In the mean time it seems that this is providing a useful place for people to discuss the pro's and cons of each version (which was all very helpful for me ) amongst other things.

EDIT: I think i'll give 4th a go after reading the wiki as I'm rather enamoured with the artificer class.

Other rules sets have the same class as well.

Are there other roleplay groups in your area, or are you looking to create one? Sometimes the best option is to try to join a game to try it before you buy. Your local gaming store may have monthly gatherings, I know the Pathfinder rpg has something called pathfinder society http://paizo.com/pathfinderSociety and I know there is something for 4th called adventures or something...

There isn't really a local gaming store where I'm from and I'm looking to create a group anyway.

A little google says there is a gamestore and group in your area:

http://community.livejournal.com/gameforce

pretre wrote:A little google says there is a gamestore and group in your area:

http://community.livejournal.com/gameforce

What do you know

Must be a new shop, I'll have a look at it.

3.5/PF pretty reliably will have a class that fits any concept you can think of that isn't ridiculously specific. That's the good side of being open and expandable.

There's no guarantee the classes will be good without being broken, especially once you get past the '1st party' stuff from Wizards or Paizo. That's the bad side.

Essentials was a massive edition to the 4.0 class roster I think. Before that most books were lucky to add 5 or 6, and Essentials added a ton of new classes... And class write-ups in 4.0 are several pages, mostly rules, for each class.

So in this case PHB would be best?

Essentials is based around being for new players. If you are starting D&D, I would start with the Red Box.

I've been around for a while and started a while back, so mainly use PHB.

Another big (if dubious) selling point I've heard for essentials is that it offers the 'scaling' experience some players are used to. I.E. if you want to play a class that requires a lot of choices in combat, they're there (Wizard) but there's also classes for those that don't want as many choices (the aforementioned Scout).

It is a good starting point for new players, I think.

Ahh, fair enough. So I should just run through the Red Box as a stand-alone, then if the players enjoy it then I should restart using the PHB? 'Cause I've written up a nice little campaign setting and I'd love to get to use it.

That sounds like a good plan. Think of the Red Box as a gateway drug and the PHB as something a bit more serious.

What does PHB stand for?
There are way to many versions

Player's Handbook