My take after one session as a player

Hello, I got to play the playtest as a player for about 5 hours. It was enough time to decimate the kobolds and get our buts kicked by the orcs. I would just like to say that I have been playing DnD since Adnd. Keep on the Borderlands was always my favorate mod. 

I played the Dwarven Cleric Knight/Guardian  

What I liked:

1) Class/background/them combination. It looked like a great way to bypass the need for several different builds of each class. In fourth some of the builds are redundant to builds other class' have. Such as the Rageblood Barbarian and the Battlerager Fighter. With this method you can give the build to the class you want to play. You can have a Barbarian theme that you can add to the fighter, cleric or even the wizard for a unique and customized character. I felt the Healing cleric and the guardian cleric were two totally different classes. I thought that was very well done.

2)  At-wills. I'm glad  they stayed in the game. That was a good choice. At-wills were a significant improvement from 3.5 to 4th edition. Pathfinder even adopted them in their version of 3.5.

3)  It was quick. No one sat around twittling their thumbs while others were taking their turn. Everyone like that. 

4) It was dangerous. We actually had to run from a fight. That almost never happens in 4e. I'm glad the sense of danger is back.

What I didn't like    

1)  Healing - Not enough. We were able to decimate the kobolds because they never hit us, but one fight with the orcs and we were out of healing and hit dice. We had to run back to camp for an extended rest. There should be some way to self heal during combat like a Second Wind. Second Wind was a great mechanic, and I feel it should say in the game.  

My reconmendation - each character should get a number of hit dice equal to #HD = Class HD + level. this means that a 3rd level Wizard gets 10 HD. This allows for the character to survive more than one fight, and when he spends HD he can get a significant amount of HPs back. 

2) Attacks of Oportunity - This rule was a significant improvement from 2nd edition to 3.0. It should not have left. Lets not forget what we have already learned in previous editions please. 

3) The rogues always take ten - Why would he ever roll? This feature just makes it too easy for the rogue. He should either take ten "Yeah I got this", or have to roll to make the DC "I don't know, let me see what I can do" 

4) No flanking - Once again, this is a mechanic that was a significant improvement. It should never have been taken away.          

5) Armor - I really didn't understand the armor. why would anyone take heavy armor?



Thats all for now. I be DMing pretty soon and have some more feedback then 

  
  
I was wondering about the take 10 for the rogue as well.

Do you think the battles would  have been slower to play out with flanking and AoO being there?
Some input as to how things break down in the DM guidelines about DCs and how that changes what the Skill Mastery "minimum 10" rule does for a Rogue:

locks are tricky to pick. To pick a "typical lock" without needing to roll (read: to have a modifier which would meet the DC of a "typical lock" as defined in the DM guidelines DC examples) the Rogue would have to be adding from +9 to +12 to his roll... as the "typical lock" is DC 19-22.

The playtest rogue gets a 16 if he uses his minimum of 10 for the roll.

Other skills the rogue possesses end up with similar results when looking at the skill uses... getting someone that doesn't like you to agree to something is an example for a DC 15-18 check, and the rogue's best social skill is a total +3 modifier.

In short, the Skill Mastery rule only lets the rogue manage to auto-succeed at tasks for each skill he has that are so simple you probably wouldn't think to roll for them anyways (pick a cheap lock, tell a dog to go away with animal handling, use folk lore to tell a well known story, and so on).

ATTENTION:  If while reading my post you find yourself thinking "Either this guy is being sarcastic, or he is an idiot," do please assume that I am an idiot. It makes reading your replies more entertaining. If, however, you find yourself hoping that I am not being even remotely serious then you are very likely correct as I find irreverence and being ridiculous to be relaxing.

Sign In to post comments