Duck and Cover

I always wade in wang out.

popscythe wrote:

Thor Kaufman wrote:That's why he is a moderator

And this is why DAC is the best goddamn place on the internet. We can have "rational" discussions and instead of wading in, wang out and ready for flossing, our mods are plenty prepared to write sentences that run along the lines of "and that's why you're a fucking <blank>".

You're a good moderator, Smiley. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise... even during games of quarterstaff railgun.

Rational ended the second you opened your mouth you shitwad.

Ahahahahaha hahahah ahahaha ahahahaha.

Oh my.

Boom, a death thing.

Shitwad. Have not heard that before.

After a few sessions of 4th edition, I'm ready to give a first-impressions review..

4 players, 1 GM. Rogue, Ranger, Fighter and Cleric.

Like I said before, classes seem a lot more balanced..
Everyone gains something at the same time, attacks are fairly balanced out and the way some classes compliment eachother makes combat a lot more interesting.

Combat:

4th abandons multiple attacks per round system, and embraces a more "action" type of combat.
You don't waste your time rolling 5 attacks, of which the last 3 you know will miss anyway.
You can't meta-cast timestop timestop, gain 7+d4 and throw 5 x horrid wilting and that kind of nonsense, any longer.

When it's your turn, you have one meaningful action, and a variety of abilites to choose from.
Since there's no "full round" actions any longer, it means there's a lot of movement, and that everyone, including opponents, have more tactics to do.

"Healing Surges" and "Second wind", are healing abilities that help balance out those unfortunate moments where someone drops because of a fluke.
I fudge dice rarely, and now I don't have to at all, because players are free to use this "get out of jail card" to help avoid utterly stupid character deaths.
If they die, it'll be their own fault, of course I'll supply ample opportunities for them to kill themselves.

The effects in had on the game:
Everything is more descriptive. Way back we described our actions, with cheesy film moves like "I hoist my axe high above my head and attempt to cleave the bastard", but this died out sometime in the last many years, since having to roll several attacks and have a calculator handy, took so much time that no one bothered.
Gm would make a short description if anything interesting happened, and that was it.

Now that there was one action to do, people got more involved and started describing what they did, with far more interest.

Combat itself, was obviously sluggish in the beginning since we had to interpret the rules and understand what exactly the abilities do.

Overall it progresses a lot faster. I did a mass battle with the 4 characters, 7 elaborate enemies, 4 simple enemies and 8 simple allies.
It took about an hour to resolve, most of it being descriptive and some brief tactics were discussed between the players.
In 3.5 this could've taken maybe only a half hour longer, but then it'd almost be pure statistics and numbers...

The smaller battles we did were funny, because the tactics that their opponents used, worked very well and set them up rather sneakily, making it a challenging fight.
This, only comming from the Monster Manual, and the monsters inherent abilities.
This fight was on the fly, yet it seemed well prepared and well thought out.

The healing surges and action-point system were pretty unfamiliar, and it was difficult for them to remember or use these, even though they'll have them for every encounter. Maybe we'll scrap this all together.
Both things seem far more fit in a modern or future setting, where you can't be magically healed, though...

In conclusion, combat seems worthwhile and 4th inspires at least this old crew, to start roleplaying combat again.

My wish, would be that clever ideas and makeshift tactics would count a lot more than they do, or that the system at least supported it somehow.
This is however, not something the group wishes, because they like to use the system to their advantedge, in combat at least, and let roleplaying be roleplaying at all other times.


Non-combat rules and skills:

Basicly cut down and simplified..

In some ways this makes sense, in some it doesn't.
It's nice that your skills reflect your experience. You're not a completely blind or daft character, your skills grow with experience, so you become better at the basics, than a simple farmer or citizen.

Skills have been put in groups, so moving silently and hiding is under "stealth", while reading lips and reading reactions have been put under insight, etc...

If you want to specialize, you'll have to use a feat, rather than allocate your skill points.

While it's not a part of the rules, you can safely deal out a point here and there, for extraordinary accomplishments or clever uses, to your players, without breaking the game.

Multiclassing seems vague and somewhat limited.
While you can combine most classes, you can't really combine a normal class with a spell-casting class.
Instead of having the best of both worlds but with limited effects, you end up having the worst of both worlds without limitations..

This isn't really that interesting from a roleplaying perspective, and certainly not in combat situations, unless you aim at being a severe underdog.

The effects it had on the game:

Unless anyone wants to do something special(and leave it to lady luck) or can't be bothered to describe their actions, they roll.
The rolls are in general higher though, avoiding the ridiculous results..
Fx. a wizard who after 20 years of adventuring *still* doesn't have the slightest clue of how to stay hidden or sneak past anything, even though he should have some insight by then...

Mind you, it still makes a difference when you want to do something a bit more special, but doesn't screw up the game everytime someone wants to do something mundane or basic.



Roleplaying, GM'ing and the Conclusion:

Being who we are and having the experience we do, the books don't influence our play. They all know how to roleplay, they limit their imagination and skills to their characters (fx the fighter doesn't go suggesting the best spells to the cleric or wizard, and the wizard doesn't tell the rogue how to best apply his skills to the situation.).

There's no influence from the books for now, since I run my own world and some monsters.

I've used monsters from the new system, to get a picture of how it works, and it's much easier to throw in something unexpected than it was before.
The cards that you can use for ini, health and status are fairly handy, and help keeping control of things, but filling them out takes a good while.

Dungeon's Masters Guide is more or less a waste of money if you already know how to run a game. There are some rules to rewards and experience, but if you *really* feel you need them, torrent the PDF, because the rest of the book is useless.


4th seems to be much easier to introduce to people or kids who aren't considered "nerds" or "geeks" in this time.

Fantasy is in general much more accepted now, especially with big movies like LoTR, Narnia, Golden Compass, Harry Potter etc etc.
Broadening your horizons is more encouraged now than it was 20 years ago, and LARP'ing, PnP and pc/console-games are all very normal today in comparison..

So for those kids who aren't the brightest or most imaginative, this is a much easier system to be introduced to, than any previous edition.

In conclusion:
I think 4th edition is a good idea, in the end.
It serves a good purpose, to introduce the game, or roleplaying in general, to new players a lot more easy.

The rules are pretty set, it's hard to deviate from them in combat, and the books are absolutely no help. Implementing your own rules for this takes experience and a good sense of balance.

If you're an old player, and got stuck in the 3.0-3.5 system, this is a fresh turn of things, with interesting classes and a simpler down to earth system.

The simplicity of the game opens up for new types of exploits and powerplaying.
So far the worst one I've seen is abilities that depend on when you're "bloodied"(at half hitpoints).
A clever character can easily figure out that it's just below bloodied through their attack, and heal their enemy(!) to remove the buff or ability, like rage/berserk, giving them the safety of delivering much more planned and heavy attacks when it's at the half-way point.

This is so utterly stupid, and so very simple an exploit that it should've been disclosed in the rules..
Of course, any good GM should disallow this.. =)


3.5 -> 4.0 is not very compatible. You can't use any of the monsters, except stats. Unless you want to spend an eternity making up a system to convert your monsters, you're pretty much doomed to stick with whatever new products they come out with...
A new GM wont stand a chance to do that, a recently introduced GM who started out with 3.0 wont either, and older GM's than that will struggle with the system and have to make up their own monsters.

All in all, we had a good time, and it pretty much confirms that you don't need rules to roleplay, but that combat can be simplified so you can roleplay some more.

As for the gigantic cashcow/money drain it is... get your books via scans or PDF's if you don't wish to support WoTC.



I hope the read was of some interest for those who bothered.
This was as much a review for myself as it was for others

cool man. If I could find anybody 'round here who wasn't so snooty as to look down on 'real-life' RPing I'd definitely check it out. Maybe I can find a play by email or something...

I've played in two different "clubs" or associations, or whatever you want to call them..
You can usually find likeminded people.

I don't mind people who don't understand or look down on roleplaying, but there are some real elitist types who have very strict rules or perceptions on what roleplaying is and is not.. If you can cope or agree with them, there's usually a good game to be had.

Smiley wrote:I don't mind people who don't understand...roleplaying

RPGA AND a pandering board gamer. No wonder you insist on mouth-breathing this "ingenious" review of the latest degradation of the art of running and playing an rpg "for yourself as much as anyone else."

It's extremely easy to become complacent with things that are terrible as long as you're under the impression that you've got something good to add to the steaming pile. If there was a fps map editor with fallout 3, I'm sure you'd have pre-ordered it so you could "run a session" of it as soon as you had the chance.

The worst part about these gamers-turned-console-gamers-in-their-30's-who-put-up-with-absolutely-anything-a-large-company-tries-to-sell-them crowd is that they're exactly what good old Emil from Bethesda was talking about in his "we used to be hardcore gamers but got lazy" speech. Those previously "hardcore" gamers who are literally too lazy to look past the ease of embracing the idiocratic tripe they're actually funding through purchase to the need for them to do their fucking part and inform companies through lack of sales that dumbing down the entire industry is unacceptable. This is why not only Fallout 3 is a travesty, but most of the gaming products in any genre that have been released recently are made for manchildren, and their actual children. Stupid people buy and enjoy oversimplistic products and marketing people need only read some pandering neckbeard get angry when made to face his own complacency to see exactly where the "easy money" lies.

So, from your neighborhood "shitwad", thanks, buddy. You're not only part of the problem, you're actively villifying attempts at the solution on the internet to make yourself feel better.

Edit: Props for suggesting people steal a terrible product and shit up their gaming groups as much as you've shit up yours, though. I forgot to mention that on your mission to convert people from something shitty to something worse, playing the James Dean and suggesting that someone actually take the time to steal something worse than they already have stolen for no better reason than to join you on the downward slide was truly fucking noble.

I continue to laugh, even now.

popscythe is of course, the perfect example of someone who has a very strict view on how roleplaying, or things in general, should be done, and views anyone with a different opinion as lesser, and treats them in a hostile manner.

Notice how he doesn't like to be profiled, but does it himself.

This is exactly the kind of player I'd advise you to stay clear off, because this guy is more likely to piss on your performance than having any fun.

popscythe wrote: RPGA AND a pandering board gamer. No wonder you insist on mouth-breathing this "ingenious" review of the latest degradation of the art of running and playing an rpg "for yourself as much as anyone else."

I'd say it's an fairly objective review.

It's extremely easy to become complacent with things that are terrible as long as you're under the impression that you've got something good to add to the steaming pile. If there was a fps map editor with fallout 3, I'm sure you'd have pre-ordered it so you could "run a session" of it as soon as you had the chance.

I like how you compare pen and paper roleplaying to a computer game.
A computergame developes, since technology does.

Roleplaying itself does not. There's no "better" culture to derive from even if there is new.
There's nothing to grow complacent about, other than the rules that define combat and other actions that are made easier with same.

The worst part about these gamers-turned-console-gamers-in-their-30's-who-put-up-with-absolutely-anything-a-large-company-tries-to-sell-them crowd is that they're exactly what good old Emil from Bethesda was talking about in his "we used to be hardcore gamers but got lazy" speech.

I know you're going to insult me rather than try and explain, but I might as well show others what I mean.

I share a point with you, that supporting a franchise when it's horrible, weakens the competition and quality.
But old players are past that in regards to pen and paper roleplaying.
There's no "hardcore" about it. You learn to roleplay from others, from cultural references, movies, books... whatever...

NOT the system that wizards is selling you. It's merely a tool.
This tool represents a certain quality, yes, but you're free to choose whichever you like the best, if you have access to older material.

What do you want them to do? republish AD&D?

Those previously "hardcore" gamers who are literally too lazy to look past the ease of embracing the idiocratic tripe they're actually funding through purchase to the need for them to do their fucking part and inform companies through lack of sales that dumbing down the entire industry is unacceptable. This is why not only Fallout 3 is a travesty, but most of the gaming products in any genre that have been released recently are made for manchildren, and their actual children. Stupid people buy and enjoy oversimplistic products and marketing people need only read some pandering neckbeard get angry when made to face his own complacency to see exactly where the "easy money" lies.

Well done, you're taking out your pitiful aggressions on me.
If my answer above isn't fine enough for you, too bad.

As for Fallout 3, if you want my opinion, it's not really fallout 3.
It's another company's interpretation of the setting.
If you're set on continuing to complain about it you're more narrowminded and pathetic than I thought possible.

So, from your neighborhood "shitwad", thanks, buddy. You're not only part of the problem, you're actively villifying attempts at the solution on the internet to make yourself feel better.

nah, you just still don't know what you're talking about.
You have a nice theory which you're applying to something that doesn't fit (PnP).
I wholeheartedly support this notion on say, Nintendo games, which never seems to get any new or worthwhile content at all.

As for me feeling better, why do you think I need your approval, over that of my friends or family?
I'm just expressing my opinion and the experiences of my and my group

Edit: Props for suggesting people steal a terrible product and shit up their gaming groups as much as you've shit up yours, though.

Give me one concrete suggestion to do better.
One simple reason for me to get the slightest notion that you might actually have a bit of brains behind your ill-tempered, aggressive and puny avatar.

I forgot to mention that on your mission to convert people from something shitty to something worse, playing the James Dean and suggesting that someone actually take the time to steal something worse than they already have stolen for no better reason than to join you on the downward slide was truly fucking noble.

You haven't given me any worthwhile indication of why you think 3.0 was shitty, or what's bad about 4.0 . I doubt you've even tried it?
In fact I'm fairly convinced that you're just shooting your mouth off at me because you're angry and need to piss on something or someone for whatever reason.
Did your brother touch you when you were little?

I continue to laugh, even now.

Well at least something good came of it?
A small relief in your self-confirmation about how you're better than everyone else?

Of course, if you are, or more likely if you really think you are, why do you even bother posting?

never played D&D , never will.


kicked the shit outta plenty how did though..lol

I'd like to see a new AD&D.

with 100% more pop psychology