This isn't the D&D we're looking for............

In light of some hilarious discussions I've been having with my group during this playtest, I've come to the decision that I probably won't be continuing the Playtesting aspect at this time. Frankly, we're just not having that much fun. Perhaps it's due to our entitled opinions of character abilities, the unfamiliar elements of a un-codified ruleset, the arbitration and Mitigation that is practially required by the DM, and the spamming of one or two spells (see cleric radiant lance, wizard's magic missile), the under-performance of the Fighter (or Guardian theme), the lacking of how healing magic works, and how Reactions aren't really reaction if you have to plan out how to react to someone's decisions. Ignoring the Fighter is going to be a breeze.

Some positive notes:

Personally I liked the Advantage/Disadvantage mechanic, though some ways of codifying it in the game and it's implementation needs to be addressed.

Death Saving throws being added in and cleaned up a little

The streamlined 'math' of how benefits really apply in combat

More ways of using Channel Divinty mechanic

Clerics spontaneously casting spells is pretty nice

Themes and Backgrounds





But, for right now it's just not shaping up to be a game for us. Our group started with 3E, moved onto v3.5 and have had a lot of fun with 4E and Pathfinder as well. So I had hoped that this would be a nice collection to round out our gaming systems but......it's just not the game we're looking for. 

Some specific concerns:

Really, it's too much "DM, May I?" as the sole judge of what can and can't be done. In the playtest, it specifically says "Upon DM approval, you level up." How is that a good thing? I just don't get why a DM needs this to be written down for him to make this ruling.

The Fighter has really nothing going for him. Seriously, nothing but some damage on a near-miss. The rogue has to spend every other turn with the hopes of gaining Advantage.

At one time, the Rogue just sat there and "made a sandwich" because

There's a LOT more stuff that we're not happy with so I hope in the end this game will turn out to be fun with lots of optional rules in the future. Until then, however, I think we're going to stick with 4E and Pathfinder (v3.5 too).

Paladin.jpg
D&D Home Page - What Class Are You? - Build A Character -

At one time, the Rogue just sat there and "made a sandwich" because



Did anyone else really want to read the rest of this?  
I am fairly certain the level up on DM approval was due to a lack of exp release rather than a planned mechanic.

The fighter concerns are very valid.

At will spamming of magic missile is also a valid concern.

I think running it and giving your feedback was what was needed for now.

I suggest reserving judgement on your continued participation until the next packet.

You have good input and seem to have good feedback to give.

I've seen your posts on other threads and would hate to lose your voice in the feedback process.

We need players an DMs who can give solid critiques and that aren't afraid to voice concern.

Edition wars kill players,Dungeons and Dragons needs every player it can get.

At one time, the Rogue just sat there and "made a sandwich" because



Did anyone else really want to read the rest of this?  



It was in battle, we were fighting Kobolds in a choke point. The Kobold Chieftan and the Dwarf Cleric were in a slug fest. Everyone else was spamming spells or lobbing ranged attacks. It was a pretty static and boring combat. The rogue could have participated in the ranged combatant test, but really....why? We like codified rules. We enjoy abilities that enable us to perform maneuvers, stunts, tricks, whatever. Sure, I can attempt something similiar with a Dex vs. ____ Contest but that's not really the same thing AND it requires DM fiat. I DM'ed and I'm even pretty easy-going and I would've let him. But that drive to use and do stuff seems gone. There appears to be little coheision with our group dynamics. The Wizard had 1 spell to use over and over (magic missile). The cleric spammed radiant lance over and over. The Fighter, while doing stuff with Str vs. ____ Contests, still lacked that certain...........something.

I think 5E has some merit and I think some of it's design goals are on par to what I enjoy. But there are a LOT of detractors right now, even going into it knowing it's very bare bones. Hence why I said I'll give it a look when things get going. But right now, as is, it's not a game that we're going to particularly like. Even my wife, who really doesn't like 4E a whole lot said she's rather do that than more Playtest. 

And this thread wasn't meant to be a grudge against DDN. In fact, I've been attempting to come up with solutions that I would implement to make the game better for our group. But the concerns I mentioned earlier are problems we believe are within the system. Perhaps when more options become available, I'll reevaluate the system and try it again. For now, I don't see that happening.  
I am fairly certain the level up on DM approval was due to a lack of exp release rather than a planned mechanic.



I hope so. Which is why I'm not reading a whole lot into the playtest at this point. I've done about 7 encounters so far, with some exploration into the Caves of Chaos but whether it's the adventure itself or something else.....I can't put my finger on it.


The fighter concerns are very valid.



Thanks. I read quite a few options and house-rule soltions to the playtest be we decided to keep it as straight to the rules presented as normal. The whole reason the rogue ate a sandwich was because he could and the Kobold chieftan coudln't really do anything about it (due to no OAs and the Dwarf Cleric's defender feat). I could've ruled that he gets one.....but then that opens up the can of worms as to other characters and monsters get them and when and why.


At will spamming of magic missile is also a valid concern.



I don't think it's magic missile specifically, just that it was the best option for two whole battles. And when, for a dozen or so rounds, all you do is cast magic missile it get's reptitious and stale. Again, more options will come (I'm counting on it) but her other two options....Shocking Grasp and Ray of Frost were practially non-options. Shocking Grasp would require entering melee (something wizards just don't really do) and ray of frost's abilities weren't very good in close, confined spaces where the monsters all had ranged weapons.


I think running it and giving your feedback was what was needed for now. I suggest reserving judgement on your continued participation until the next packet. You have good input and seem to have good feedback to give. I've seen your posts on other threads and would hate to lose your voice in the feedback process. We need players an DMs who can give solid critiques and that aren't afraid to voice concern.



I'm still going to read the playtests and do my best to make the game the best it can be. I just don't think I can get my group to do any more of it. They saw the bare bones. They saw how much required DM approval. They saw the un-codified rules and were just put off by them. Keep in mind that we all practically started with 3E and moved onto v3.5, Pathfinder, and 4th Edition. So 95% of our gaming experiences deal with codified rules. A few of us (myself and the sandwich eating rogue) both remember AD&D and had.........less than pleasureable experiences with it. But I'm doing my best to put the game in a good light with an open-mindedness. But I'll calls them like I sees them, and the problems (IMO) I had mentioned earler were just that.....problems.
I agree they are problems.

I think that falling back on magic missile is far better than falling back on a dagger 3.5 style.

Anyhow, sorry to hear that your group may not continue the play test but I'm glad you will be continuing the feedback process.

Edition wars kill players,Dungeons and Dragons needs every player it can get.

At will spamming of magic missile is also a valid concern.

Why?

The Fighter “spams” sword attacks.

The Wizard “spams” spell attacks.

Should the Wizard instead “spam” crossbow bolts? What do bolts have to do with studying wizardry? Hes a Wizard. He casts spells.
At will spamming of magic missile is also a valid concern.

Why?

The Fighter “spams” sword attacks.

The Wizard “spams” spell attacks.

Should the Wizard instead “spam” crossbow bolts? What do bolts have to do with studying wizardry? Hes a Wizard. He casts spells.



Don't get me wrong, I don't think she minds using Magic Missile when the time warrents it AND having it as a "Go-To" is perfectly fine. But the other two options for at-will magic are.....well rather sucky. I'm not really sure how great a spell Ray of Frost is in DDN, immobilizing a target is fine but that doesn't limit them to using ranged attacks. And how often do monsters not engage in either ranged or melee attacks in a battle? Same with Shocking Grasp, she had an AC of 11 and 16 HP. Wading into combat is not something she felt was a good tactic. So she was left with magic missile. Spamming spells is fine, but when the best option is the same spell over and over because the other spells aren't that great or don't contribute much to the battle at hand, it can get a bit boring.



I agree they are problems. I think that falling back on magic missile is far better than falling back on a dagger 3.5 style. Anyhow, sorry to hear that your group may not continue the play test but I'm glad you will be continuing the feedback process.



I'm a bit of a nut when it comes to D&D (and RPGs in general) so the more I can learn, the better I can compromise and get the game's best aspects to my players. Actually, as the game grows and we start to see more options, I'll either be trying again with my group or even creating whole new combat-maneuvers so they can use in conjunction with the game.

I like Saving Throws being a part of the Ability Scores.
I like HP going up but the DCs, AC, and Attacks remaining pretty static
I like Themes and Backgrounds as ways to quickly make characters
I like At-will magic
I like Higher HP
I like Spells with Ritual options

I don't like things being completely up to DM arbitration
I don't like Fighters (or Guardians) not having mechanics to help them protect their party members
I don't like Monster stat blocks and cross referencing them with the PHB
I don't like the Rogue's mechanics (or pre-gen character at all).
I don't the idea that if you want to use a weapon, you must go through either Strength or Dexterity.
I don't like spells with timelimits (minutes instead of encounters *rolls-eyes*)
I don't like having to mitigate how the Fighter bull rushes his opponents
I don't like making the Rogue wait every other turn to deal Sneak Attack damage
I don't like Healing spells only healing 1d8 + Wis. for a Standard action, full spell slot.

Now, if I can find a way to take the Don't likes into "Meh, don't really care" or "Do likes" then it'll be a great system. But so far, the Donts outweigh the Dos. Plus, my group can only get together for like a few hours a week, so to have them try a game that they really aren't liking is pretty unfair.
I don't like spells with timelimits (minutes instead of encounters *rolls-eyes*)



Regrettably, this seems to be part and parcel of the whole "Don't mention 4th" guideline that the dev team seem to be following.  They're not allowed to use encounters as a measure of time or ability refreshment just like they had to rename "healing surges" to "hit dice".

Personally I think it's insulting to DND players of all persuasians.  Do the devs really believe that players will openly revolt at the inclusion of any 4th ed mechanic?  Or be fooled by including them with a different name? 
At one time, the Rogue just sat there and "made a sandwich" because



Did anyone else really want to read the rest of this?  



The rogue in my game kept rolling around 8, they missed every single time, and hiding every other round (if you ignore some of the hiding rules that makes it once per battle), was just not fun...
"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.
I am fairly certain the level up on DM approval was due to a lack of exp release rather than a planned mechanic.



I hope so. Which is why I'm not reading a whole lot into the playtest at this point. I've done about 7 encounters so far, with some exploration into the Caves of Chaos but whether it's the adventure itself or something else.....I can't put my finger on it.


The fighter concerns are very valid.



Thanks. I read quite a few options and house-rule soltions to the playtest be we decided to keep it as straight to the rules presented as normal. The whole reason the rogue ate a sandwich was because he could and the Kobold chieftan coudln't really do anything about it (due to no OAs and the Dwarf Cleric's defender feat). I could've ruled that he gets one.....but then that opens up the can of worms as to other characters and monsters get them and when and why.


At will spamming of magic missile is also a valid concern.



I don't think it's magic missile specifically, just that it was the best option for two whole battles. And when, for a dozen or so rounds, all you do is cast magic missile it get's reptitious and stale. Again, more options will come (I'm counting on it) but her other two options....Shocking Grasp and Ray of Frost were practially non-options. Shocking Grasp would require entering melee (something wizards just don't really do) and ray of frost's abilities weren't very good in close, confined spaces where the monsters all had ranged weapons.


I think running it and giving your feedback was what was needed for now. I suggest reserving judgement on your continued participation until the next packet. You have good input and seem to have good feedback to give. I've seen your posts on other threads and would hate to lose your voice in the feedback process. We need players an DMs who can give solid critiques and that aren't afraid to voice concern.



I'm still going to read the playtests and do my best to make the game the best it can be. I just don't think I can get my group to do any more of it. They saw the bare bones. They saw how much required DM approval. They saw the un-codified rules and were just put off by them. Keep in mind that we all practically started with 3E and moved onto v3.5, Pathfinder, and 4th Edition. So 95% of our gaming experiences deal with codified rules. A few of us (myself and the sandwich eating rogue) both remember AD&D and had.........less than pleasureable experiences with it. But I'm doing my best to put the game in a good light with an open-mindedness. But I'll calls them like I sees them, and the problems (IMO) I had mentioned earler were just that.....problems.



I found it sad, that the wizard was a better defender than the defender cleric. By their use of ray of frost they actually stop foes from moving for a round. That's way better than 'disadvantage to one attack once per round'...
"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.
At will spamming of magic missile is also a valid concern.

Why?

The Fighter “spams” sword attacks.

The Wizard “spams” spell attacks.

Should the Wizard instead “spam” crossbow bolts? What do bolts have to do with studying wizardry? Hes a Wizard. He casts spells.



Why not give the wizard a 'wand' that deals ranged 'magic' typed damage (attack + dex mod,1d6+int mod damage). It would work just like any weapon, but the wizard would be the only one with the proficiency to use it, so a fighter that picked up the wand would get disadvantage when using it. Same for the staff, but str for attack and 1d8+int mod for damage...

Then they would be using weapons and could switch between them. Then if they wanted to use ray of frost instead of the weapon they could...
"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.
I don't like spells with timelimits (minutes instead of encounters *rolls-eyes*)



Regrettably, this seems to be part and parcel of the whole "Don't mention 4th" guideline that the dev team seem to be following.  They're not allowed to use encounters as a measure of time or ability refreshment just like they had to rename "healing surges" to "hit dice".

Personally I think it's insulting to DND players of all persuasians.  Do the devs really believe that players will openly revolt at the inclusion of any 4th ed mechanic?  Or be fooled by including them with a different name? 



They could easily tie them to how much adrenaline you have running through your system and just say they last until your adrenaline wears off or you take a short rest, so in order to use hit dice you gotta let your spells go...
"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.
to the OP,
how many options would you like for the fighter?
should somthing simular to the essentials slayer/knight be enough or in your opinion are those also too limited ? 
to the OP,
how many options would you like for the fighter?
should somthing simular to the essentials slayer/knight be enough or in your opinion are those also too limited ? 



I'm actually more a fan of the Stances from Essentials than straight up "Powers" for martial classes. A stances or two would do wonders as would a tried and true "Defender's Aura" either tied to the Fighter chassis or the Guardian Theme. But since there isn't an OA mechanic, it sort of defeats the purpose of having one right now.

I don't the idea that if you want to use a weapon, you must go through either Strength or Dexterity.
I don't like spells with timelimits (minutes instead of encounters *rolls-eyes*)


I like Strength or Dex being only attribues connected to physical combat. Nothing else is logical. 
Spells with time limits let you use them in more then one encounter. 

Starcraft Saga Edition: http://sc2se.wikispaces.com/

I don't the idea that if you want to use a weapon, you must go through either Strength or Dexterity.
I don't like spells with timelimits (minutes instead of encounters *rolls-eyes*)


I like Strength or Dex being only attribues connected to physical combat. Nothing else is logical. 
Spells with time limits let you use them in more then one encounter. 




Unless those spells time limit is (1 minute). Which, really just means for the rest of the encounter.

As for the logical aspects of using Strength or Dexterity as the only means of combat prowess.........it's just as illogical to assume that a muscular individual can fight well. For our group, combat can be a little more abstract in terms of how you attack/damage foes with weapons. Longbows, traditionally, require a LOT of strength to pull back yet the attacks are made with Dexterity.  



Unless those spells time limit is (1 minute). Which, really just means for the rest of the encounter.

As for the logical aspects of using Strength or Dexterity as the only means of combat prowess.........it's just as illogical to assume that a muscular individual can fight well. For our group, combat can be a little more abstract in terms of how you attack/damage foes with weapons. Longbows, traditionally, require a LOT of strength to pull back yet the attacks are made with Dexterity.  




Thank you!

Assuming a muscular individual is better at hitting something is just silly!  Sure, when he swings a warhammer and hits, the higher the strength the more damage he does.  However, his muscles do not make it easier for him to hit.

Though I'm reluctant to suggest a "weapon skill" or "toHit" stat... 
I would have been happier if they had just stuck with +1 to attack rolls if your stat is 16+
I don't like Fighters (or Guardians) not having mechanics to help them protect their party members

That's because the fighter is a striker, not a defender.  The Cleric (paladin) of Moradin has the defender feature.  Which is a fairly strong mechanic.

I don't like making the Rogue wait every other turn to deal Sneak Attack damage

I do like this.  The hit and run play style works.

Though the damage probably needs buffed a little.  At least at first level.

I don't like Healing spells only healing 1d8 + Wis. for a Standard action, full spell slot.

I never healed in combat.  The moradin cleric did, but he get's to heal and attack.

guides
List of no-action attacks.
Dynamic vs Static Bonuses
Phalanx tactics and builds
Crivens! A Pictsies Guide Good
Power
s to intentionally miss with
Mr. Cellophane: How to be unnoticed
Way's to fire around corners
Crits: what their really worth
Retroactive bonus vs Static bonus.
Runepriest handbook & discussion thread
Holy Symbols to hang around your neck
Ways to Gain or Downgrade Actions
List of bonuses to saving throws
The Ghost with the Most (revenant handbook)
my builds
F-111 Interdictor Long (200+ squares) distance ally teleporter. With some warlord stuff. Broken in a plot way, not a power way.

Thought Switch Higher level build that grants upto 14 attacks on turn 1. If your allies play along, it's broken.

Elven Critters Crit op with crit generation. 5 of these will end anything. Broken.

King Fisher Optimized net user.  Moderate.

Boominator Fun catch-22 booming blade build with either strong or completely broken damage depending on your reading.

Very Distracting Warlock Lot's of dazing and major penalties to hit. Overpowered.

Pocket Protector Pixie Stealth Knight. Maximizing the defender's aura by being in an ally's/enemy's square.

Yakuza NinjIntimiAdin: Perma-stealth Striker that offers a little protection for ally's, and can intimidate bloodied enemies. Very Strong.

Chargeburgler with cheese Ranged attacks at the end of a charge along with perma-stealth. Solid, could be overpowered if tweaked.

Void Defender Defends giving a penalty to hit anyone but him, then removing himself from play. Can get somewhat broken in epic.

Scry and Die Attacking from around corners, while staying hidden. Moderate to broken, depending on the situation.

Skimisher Fly in, attack, and fly away. Also prevents enemies from coming close. Moderate to Broken depending on the enemy, but shouldn't make the game un-fun, as the rest of your team is at risk, and you have enough weaknesses.

Indestructible Simply won't die, even if you sleep though combat.  One of THE most abusive character in 4e.

Sir Robin (Bravely Charge Away) He automatically slows and pushes an enemy (5 squares), while charging away. Hard to rate it's power level, since it's terrain dependent.

Death's Gatekeeper A fun twist on a healic, making your party "unkillable". Overpowered to Broken, but shouldn't actually make the game un-fun, just TPK proof.

Death's Gatekeeper mk2, (Stealth Edition) Make your party "unkillable", and you hidden, while doing solid damage. Stronger then the above, but also easier for a DM to shut down. Broken, until your DM get's enough of it.

Domination and Death Dominate everything then kill them quickly. Only works @ 30, but is broken multiple ways.

Battlemind Mc Prone-Daze Protecting your allies by keeping enemies away. Quite powerful.

The Retaliator Getting hit deals more damage to the enemy then you receive yourself, and you can take plenty of hits. Heavy item dependency, Broken.

Dead Kobold Transit Teleports 98 squares a turn, and can bring someone along for the ride. Not fully built, so i can't judge the power.

Psilent Guardian Protect your allies, while being invisible. Overpowered, possibly broken.

Rune of Vengance Do lot's of damage while boosting your teams. Strong to slightly overpowered.

Charedent BarrageA charging ardent. Fine in a normal team, overpowered if there are 2 together, and easily broken in teams of 5.

Super Knight A tough, sticky, high damage knight. Strong.

Super Duper Knight Basically the same as super knight with items, making it far more broken.

Mora, the unkillable avenger Solid damage, while being neigh indestuctable. Overpowered, but not broken.

Swordburst Maximus At-Will Close Burst 3 that slide and prones. Protects allies with off actions. Strong, possibly over powered with the right party.

Personally I think it's insulting to DND players of all persuasians.  Do the devs really believe that players will openly revolt at the inclusion of any 4th ed mechanic?  Or be fooled by including them with a different name? 

Yes, and yes.

Heck, you could probably just do 4e all over, with old names and changed presentation (i.e. not "power" blocks) and pathfinder would loose about 1/4 of it's playerbase.

Not saying 4e was perfect (way to much healing for instance, and not everyone likes tactics), but people absolutly judge things by their name and how they look.

guides
List of no-action attacks.
Dynamic vs Static Bonuses
Phalanx tactics and builds
Crivens! A Pictsies Guide Good
Power
s to intentionally miss with
Mr. Cellophane: How to be unnoticed
Way's to fire around corners
Crits: what their really worth
Retroactive bonus vs Static bonus.
Runepriest handbook & discussion thread
Holy Symbols to hang around your neck
Ways to Gain or Downgrade Actions
List of bonuses to saving throws
The Ghost with the Most (revenant handbook)
my builds
F-111 Interdictor Long (200+ squares) distance ally teleporter. With some warlord stuff. Broken in a plot way, not a power way.

Thought Switch Higher level build that grants upto 14 attacks on turn 1. If your allies play along, it's broken.

Elven Critters Crit op with crit generation. 5 of these will end anything. Broken.

King Fisher Optimized net user.  Moderate.

Boominator Fun catch-22 booming blade build with either strong or completely broken damage depending on your reading.

Very Distracting Warlock Lot's of dazing and major penalties to hit. Overpowered.

Pocket Protector Pixie Stealth Knight. Maximizing the defender's aura by being in an ally's/enemy's square.

Yakuza NinjIntimiAdin: Perma-stealth Striker that offers a little protection for ally's, and can intimidate bloodied enemies. Very Strong.

Chargeburgler with cheese Ranged attacks at the end of a charge along with perma-stealth. Solid, could be overpowered if tweaked.

Void Defender Defends giving a penalty to hit anyone but him, then removing himself from play. Can get somewhat broken in epic.

Scry and Die Attacking from around corners, while staying hidden. Moderate to broken, depending on the situation.

Skimisher Fly in, attack, and fly away. Also prevents enemies from coming close. Moderate to Broken depending on the enemy, but shouldn't make the game un-fun, as the rest of your team is at risk, and you have enough weaknesses.

Indestructible Simply won't die, even if you sleep though combat.  One of THE most abusive character in 4e.

Sir Robin (Bravely Charge Away) He automatically slows and pushes an enemy (5 squares), while charging away. Hard to rate it's power level, since it's terrain dependent.

Death's Gatekeeper A fun twist on a healic, making your party "unkillable". Overpowered to Broken, but shouldn't actually make the game un-fun, just TPK proof.

Death's Gatekeeper mk2, (Stealth Edition) Make your party "unkillable", and you hidden, while doing solid damage. Stronger then the above, but also easier for a DM to shut down. Broken, until your DM get's enough of it.

Domination and Death Dominate everything then kill them quickly. Only works @ 30, but is broken multiple ways.

Battlemind Mc Prone-Daze Protecting your allies by keeping enemies away. Quite powerful.

The Retaliator Getting hit deals more damage to the enemy then you receive yourself, and you can take plenty of hits. Heavy item dependency, Broken.

Dead Kobold Transit Teleports 98 squares a turn, and can bring someone along for the ride. Not fully built, so i can't judge the power.

Psilent Guardian Protect your allies, while being invisible. Overpowered, possibly broken.

Rune of Vengance Do lot's of damage while boosting your teams. Strong to slightly overpowered.

Charedent BarrageA charging ardent. Fine in a normal team, overpowered if there are 2 together, and easily broken in teams of 5.

Super Knight A tough, sticky, high damage knight. Strong.

Super Duper Knight Basically the same as super knight with items, making it far more broken.

Mora, the unkillable avenger Solid damage, while being neigh indestuctable. Overpowered, but not broken.

Swordburst Maximus At-Will Close Burst 3 that slide and prones. Protects allies with off actions. Strong, possibly over powered with the right party.


I like Strength or Dex being only attribues connected to physical combat. Nothing else is logical. 



So an inteligent fighter cant exist?  or a charismatic bluffer who's fighting style is based in feints? How about a Wise Ranger?  etc..

Logically any of these work for non magical combat. 

Play whatever the **** you want. Never Point a loaded party at a plot you are not willing to shoot. Arcane Rhetoric. My Blog.

I don't like Fighters (or Guardians) not having mechanics to help them protect their party members

That's because the fighter is a striker, not a defender.  The Cleric (paladin) of Moradin has the defender feature.  Which is a fairly strong mechanic.



Right, I get that hence the Guardian theme in parentheses part. I don't see how it's a fairly strong mechanic seeing as  you can give someone Disadvantage if that target is within 5-ft of you. It doesn't allow any action denial (like stopping a guy from moving if you hit them). I think it needs more IMO.    

I don't like making the Rogue wait every other turn to deal Sneak Attack damage

I do like this.  The hit and run play style works.

Though the damage probably needs buffed a little.  At least at first level.



I got the same hit and run style in 4E. I could move, strike, shift all the time AND there were codified ways to give me Combat Advantage all by myself.  As for the damage, it's rather paltry. Espically compared to the Cleric (1d8 + Wisdom at-will). If they make Rogue gain a more consistant aspect of Advantage, then we'd be happier.

I don't like Healing spells only healing 1d8 + Wis. for a Standard action, full spell slot.

I never healed in combat.  The moradin cleric did, but he get's to heal and attack.



Yea, and it's 1d6. This isn't bad per-se because you can also attack too but when a character (like the Fighter with his AC 15) is getting damaged for 3, 5, 7 damage per round, it's rather insignificant.

I dunno, perhaps 4E spoiled me as a Player. I felt the challenges in 4E were difficult and requried group synergy and team work but I don't get that feeling with DDN. For me, I feel it's back to heavy resource management from spellcasters, everyone else is just sorta.......there.
I don't like Fighters (or Guardians) not having mechanics to help them protect their party members

That's because the fighter is a striker, not a defender.  The Cleric (paladin) of Moradin has the defender feature.  Which is a fairly strong mechanic.



Right, I get that hence the Guardian theme in parentheses part. I don't see how it's a fairly strong mechanic seeing as  you can give someone Disadvantage if that target is within 5-ft of you. It doesn't allow any action denial (like stopping a guy from moving if you hit them). I think it needs more IMO.

Disavantage is a pretty big penalty (-4 or 5).  It actually "protects" an ally, rather then simply treatening an enemy.

I don't like making the Rogue wait every other turn to deal Sneak Attack damage

I do like this.  The hit and run play style works.

Though the damage probably needs buffed a little.  At least at first level.

I got the same hit and run style in 4E. I could move, strike, shift all the time AND there were codified ways to give me Combat Advantage all by myself.  As for the damage, it's rather paltry. Espically compared to the Cleric (1d8 + Wisdom at-will). If they make Rogue gain a more consistant aspect of Advantage, then we'd be happier.

The base damage is the same.  1d8+mod at ranged.  And where the cleric has spells, the rogue has skills.  The rogue also has SA, which let's you land a hard strike at the beginning of a battle.  Think of it more as the executioner's strike encounter power.

If you want a more consistant damage dealer, take the fighter.

I don't like Healing spells only healing 1d8 + Wis. for a Standard action, full spell slot.

I never healed in combat.  The moradin cleric did, but he get's to heal and attack.

Yea, and it's 1d6. This isn't bad per-se because you can also attack too but when a character (like the Fighter with his AC 15) is getting damaged for 3, 5, 7 damage per round, it's rather insignificant.

It's supposed to be.  You're supposed to be getting damage as the turns go by, and not start every battle full.


I dunno, perhaps 4E spoiled me as a Player. I felt the challenges in 4E were difficult and requried group synergy and team work but I don't get that feeling with DDN. For me, I feel it's back to heavy resource management from spellcasters, everyone else is just sorta.......there.

That i agree with.

There's no (or very little) group synergy in DDN.  It doesn't feel like a team at all.

guides
List of no-action attacks.
Dynamic vs Static Bonuses
Phalanx tactics and builds
Crivens! A Pictsies Guide Good
Power
s to intentionally miss with
Mr. Cellophane: How to be unnoticed
Way's to fire around corners
Crits: what their really worth
Retroactive bonus vs Static bonus.
Runepriest handbook & discussion thread
Holy Symbols to hang around your neck
Ways to Gain or Downgrade Actions
List of bonuses to saving throws
The Ghost with the Most (revenant handbook)
my builds
F-111 Interdictor Long (200+ squares) distance ally teleporter. With some warlord stuff. Broken in a plot way, not a power way.

Thought Switch Higher level build that grants upto 14 attacks on turn 1. If your allies play along, it's broken.

Elven Critters Crit op with crit generation. 5 of these will end anything. Broken.

King Fisher Optimized net user.  Moderate.

Boominator Fun catch-22 booming blade build with either strong or completely broken damage depending on your reading.

Very Distracting Warlock Lot's of dazing and major penalties to hit. Overpowered.

Pocket Protector Pixie Stealth Knight. Maximizing the defender's aura by being in an ally's/enemy's square.

Yakuza NinjIntimiAdin: Perma-stealth Striker that offers a little protection for ally's, and can intimidate bloodied enemies. Very Strong.

Chargeburgler with cheese Ranged attacks at the end of a charge along with perma-stealth. Solid, could be overpowered if tweaked.

Void Defender Defends giving a penalty to hit anyone but him, then removing himself from play. Can get somewhat broken in epic.

Scry and Die Attacking from around corners, while staying hidden. Moderate to broken, depending on the situation.

Skimisher Fly in, attack, and fly away. Also prevents enemies from coming close. Moderate to Broken depending on the enemy, but shouldn't make the game un-fun, as the rest of your team is at risk, and you have enough weaknesses.

Indestructible Simply won't die, even if you sleep though combat.  One of THE most abusive character in 4e.

Sir Robin (Bravely Charge Away) He automatically slows and pushes an enemy (5 squares), while charging away. Hard to rate it's power level, since it's terrain dependent.

Death's Gatekeeper A fun twist on a healic, making your party "unkillable". Overpowered to Broken, but shouldn't actually make the game un-fun, just TPK proof.

Death's Gatekeeper mk2, (Stealth Edition) Make your party "unkillable", and you hidden, while doing solid damage. Stronger then the above, but also easier for a DM to shut down. Broken, until your DM get's enough of it.

Domination and Death Dominate everything then kill them quickly. Only works @ 30, but is broken multiple ways.

Battlemind Mc Prone-Daze Protecting your allies by keeping enemies away. Quite powerful.

The Retaliator Getting hit deals more damage to the enemy then you receive yourself, and you can take plenty of hits. Heavy item dependency, Broken.

Dead Kobold Transit Teleports 98 squares a turn, and can bring someone along for the ride. Not fully built, so i can't judge the power.

Psilent Guardian Protect your allies, while being invisible. Overpowered, possibly broken.

Rune of Vengance Do lot's of damage while boosting your teams. Strong to slightly overpowered.

Charedent BarrageA charging ardent. Fine in a normal team, overpowered if there are 2 together, and easily broken in teams of 5.

Super Knight A tough, sticky, high damage knight. Strong.

Super Duper Knight Basically the same as super knight with items, making it far more broken.

Mora, the unkillable avenger Solid damage, while being neigh indestuctable. Overpowered, but not broken.

Swordburst Maximus At-Will Close Burst 3 that slide and prones. Protects allies with off actions. Strong, possibly over powered with the right party.

I am fairly certain the level up on DM approval was due to a lack of exp release rather than a planned mechanic. The fighter concerns are very valid. At will spamming of magic missile is also a valid concern. I think running it and giving your feedback was what was needed for now. I suggest reserving judgement on your continued participation until the next packet. You have good input and seem to have good feedback to give. I've seen your posts on other threads and would hate to lose your voice in the feedback process. We need players an DMs who can give solid critiques and that aren't afraid to voice concern.



Dont often agree so heavily with you... but THIS, and man its aweful early to give up isnt it? 
  Creative Character Build Collection and The Magic of King's and Heros  also Can Martial Characters Fly? 

Improvisation in 4e: Fave 4E Improvisations - also Wrecans Guides to improvisation beyond page 42
The Non-combatant Adventurer (aka Princess build Warlord or LazyLord)
Reality is unrealistic - and even monkeys protest unfairness
Reflavoring the Fighter : The Wizard : The Swordmage - Creative Character Collection: Bloodwright (Darksun Character) 

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

 

At will spamming of magic missile is also a valid concern.

Why?

The Fighter “spams” sword attacks.

The Wizard “spams” spell attacks.

Should the Wizard instead “spam” crossbow bolts? What do bolts have to do with studying wizardry? Hes a Wizard. He casts spells.



Don't get me wrong, I don't think she minds using Magic Missile when the time warrents it AND having it as a "Go-To" is perfectly fine. But the other two options for at-will magic are.....well rather sucky. I'm not really sure how great a spell Ray of Frost is in DDN, immobilizing a target is fine but that doesn't limit them to using ranged attacks. And how often do monsters not engage in either ranged or melee attacks in a battle? Same with Shocking Grasp, she had an AC of 11 and 16 HP. Wading into combat is not something she felt was a good tactic. So she was left with magic missile. Spamming spells is fine, but when the best option is the same spell over and over because the other spells aren't that great or don't contribute much to the battle at hand, it can get a bit boring.




So she was left with magic missile. Spamming spells is fine, but when the best option is the same spell over and over because the other spells aren't that great or don't contribute much to the battle at hand, it can get a bit boring.

That, not the scaling, is the problem I see here too. The answer can be as simple as offering variations and attack options to Magic Missile.

If Magic Missile can do trick shots, go for the legs, be set to explode, and so on, it'll be a bit more interesting. Maybe it can even become a 'carrier wave' for certain spells that boost it.
I don't like spells with timelimits (minutes instead of encounters *rolls-eyes*)



Regrettably, this seems to be part and parcel of the whole "Don't mention 4th" guideline that the dev team seem to be following.  They're not allowed to use encounters as a measure of time or ability refreshment just like they had to rename "healing surges" to "hit dice".

Personally I think it's insulting to DND players of all persuasians.  Do the devs really believe that players will openly revolt at the inclusion of any 4th ed mechanic?  Or be fooled by including them with a different name? 



It's more likely management does not want 4th edition mentioned or, at the very least, minimized. Perhaps they see the brand name of D&D as not invoking what they originally thought it could do, sales could have been way below expectations, or  maybe they didn't expect competition. Is the management section of the equation important? Yes. The business side of D&D is just as important as they development of it.


As per the rogue getting a sandwich. He should have been thinking of a way to break the stalemate. IF you have two sides just shooting arrows, you have a battle of attrition going on. You might kill the goblins but you will take damage as well. The tools are already there, just need to try and use them.  
I don't like Fighters (or Guardians) not having mechanics to help them protect their party members

That's because the fighter is a striker, not a defender.  The Cleric (paladin) of Moradin has the defender feature.  Which is a fairly strong mechanic.



Right, I get that hence the Guardian theme in parentheses part. I don't see how it's a fairly strong mechanic seeing as  you can give someone Disadvantage if that target is within 5-ft of you. It doesn't allow any action denial (like stopping a guy from moving if you hit them). I think it needs more IMO.

Disavantage is a pretty big penalty (-4 or 5).  It actually "protects" an ally, rather then simply treatening an enemy.



Ok, but that -3 to -5 penalty applies to one guy that might attack a guy your adjacent to with a Reaction. A Defender aura imposes a -2 penalty to anyone who's next to you (no action) and you can punch that guy in the face if he tries to disengage you or attack a buddy of yours. THAT is defending, not just Disadvantage on a swing as a Reaction. Within the context of this particular playtest, yes Disadvantage is nice. But when one looks at what was the purview of the Defender in 4E, it feels lacking. I want a game that either keeps the status quo or makes things better. This, IMO, was a detraction.  

I don't like making the Rogue wait every other turn to deal Sneak Attack damage

I do like this.  The hit and run play style works.

Though the damage probably needs buffed a little.  At least at first level.

I got the same hit and run style in 4E. I could move, strike, shift all the time AND there were codified ways to give me Combat Advantage all by myself.  As for the damage, it's rather paltry. Espically compared to the Cleric (1d8 + Wisdom at-will). If they make Rogue gain a more consistant aspect of Advantage, then we'd be happier.

The base damage is the same.  1d8+mod at ranged.  And where the cleric has spells, the rogue has skills.  The rogue also has SA, which let's you land a hard strike at the beginning of a battle.  Think of it more as the executioner's strike encounter power.

If you want a more consistant damage dealer, take the fighter.



This is basically a fundamental principal of where character classes lie within the roles of D&D. I don't think Fighters (in general) should be doing the most damage on the battlefield (I know, back to 4E mechanics). I think their job is to be big, intimidating, and keep foes rooted to the spot. Rogues, OTOH, I rely on to be the consistant source of damage. My ability to keep the foes targeted on me allows the Rogue to be great at stabbing that guy in the back. The fact that the Rogue now has to rely on Hiding every other turn to deal his SA damage, I think is really skimping out on one of their most iconic abilities. Since we don't know how it scales, maybe this is a low-level problem that simply gets much better as they level? We don't know yet.

I don't like Healing spells only healing 1d8 + Wis. for a Standard action, full spell slot.

I never healed in combat.  The moradin cleric did, but he get's to heal and attack.

Yea, and it's 1d6. This isn't bad per-se because you can also attack too but when a character (like the Fighter with his AC 15) is getting damaged for 3, 5, 7 damage per round, it's rather insignificant.

It's supposed to be.  You're supposed to be getting damage as the turns go by, and not start every battle full.



Which puts us right back to the 15-minute work day, only now it's exacerbated on two fronts. But, again, we're told HP goes up pretty quickly in DDN and perhaps the healing won't be the spells cast 90% of the time (like it is currently). Besides, going into evey battle with 3, 4, 5 HP is really just asking to die to 1 attack. Perhaps that a lot of exceitement for some and that's cool. For me, getting dropped the first round in because I didn't have any more healing, no HP, and no options besides leaving back to camp/base/town to "refuel" isn't something I'm fond of. YMMV on this but it's a core prinicpal that I feel needs addressing.   

I dunno, perhaps 4E spoiled me as a Player. I felt the challenges in 4E were difficult and requried group synergy and team work but I don't get that feeling with DDN. For me, I feel it's back to heavy resource management from spellcasters, everyone else is just sorta.......there.

That i agree with.

There's no (or very little) group synergy in DDN.  It doesn't feel like a team at all.



Well at least we can agree on something Tongue Out

As per the rogue getting a sandwich. He should have been thinking of a way to break the stalemate. IF you have two sides just shooting arrows, you have a battle of attrition going on. You might kill the goblins but you will take damage as well. The tools are already there, just need to try and use them.  



Right, he could've attacked with his sling too. And it might have had a bit of difference. What I mean by stalemate was that the Cleric of Moradin and the Kobold Chieftan were in the doorway. Neither could let their troops in to help the battle. Sure, with some heavy doeses of improvisation, things might have been different, but that's just not something my group likes doing. And that's really the crux of the matter, they're not fans of making up stuff on the fly. Some people love this, allowing them the free-form to do practially whatever they can imagine and by asking the DM if it's possible, they do it. Others like a more subset of skills, rules, and mechanics that helps further their inspirations. Both are fine ways of playing, yet neither really have a place at the other's table. 

Why I don't personally like Improv style games is that it's just too reliant on DM moods. That and the rules can change based on each individual's perception of the situation. Lets take something simple for an example; Bull Rushing a Kobold off a cliff.

DM 1 to Player: "I see your Strength score is twice that of the Kobolds. You can Bull Rush him off the cliff with no roll" = Auto-success.

DM 2 to Player: "Move into the monsters square and make a Strength vs. Strength Contest. If you win, you push him 5-ft." = Simple mechanic involving the same score.

DM 3 to Player: "Move into the monsters square but if you Charge (ie. move 10 feet), you gain Advantage with your Roll. Make a Strength vs. either the Kobolds' Strength or Dexterity score (which ever's higher). If you win, you push him. If you loose, you remain in the spot adjacent to the Kobold. A win of 5 or more pushes the Kobold an additional 5-ft. If you win by 10 or more, you knock him prone. If you fail by 5 or more, you fall prone. If you fail by 10 or more, you miss and go over the ledge". = Difficlut yet precise mechanics

DM 4 to Player: "Move and attack the Kobold. If you hit, make a Strength vs. Strength Contest with Advantage. If you succeed, he is knocked off the ledge." = varied mechanics based on attack.

DM 5 to Player: "Move and attack the Kobold. If you hit, he makes a Strength saving throw DC = 5 + damage done or is knocked off." = Uses a Saving Throw mechanic.

This is just ONE situation that can have huge degrees of complexity and variables. And I'd say that these are all within the options presented in DDN. Perhaps you like one but HATE the others. Or maybe you hate all of them. It doesn't matter because what the DM rules is absolute. There is no basis except "Use your imagination, hope to have a understanding and clear-headed DM, and make sure it meets very simple parameters". I just don't like this free-form style of gaming.              

Ok, but that -3 to -5 penalty applies to one guy that might attack a guy your adjacent to with a Reaction. A Defender aura imposes a -2 penalty to anyone who's next to you (no action) and you can punch that guy in the face if he tries to disengage you or attack a buddy of yours.

You protect the ally who's adjacent.  So if your standing next to the wizard, and someone shoots him with a bow, you cover him with your shield (-4/5).

Honestly, i wouldn't mind a 4e defender(s) with that schtick.  Probably a psion of some kind.

Present Warning.
At-Will
Immediate Interupt
Trigger: An adjacent ally get's hit by a creature it does not have marked, or is not in it's defender's aura.
Effect: The ally gains +5 to all defenses.
Augment 3:  Use this as a free action.

Which puts us right back to the 15-minute work day, only now it's exacerbated on two fronts.

True.

This is basically a fundamental principal of where character classes lie within the roles of D&D. I don't think Fighters (in general) should be doing the most damage on the battlefield (I know, back to 4E mechanics). I think their job is to be big, intimidating, and keep foes rooted to the spot. Rogues, OTOH, I rely on to be the consistant source of damage. My ability to keep the foes targeted on me allows the Rogue to be great at stabbing that guy in the back. The fact that the Rogue now has to rely on Hiding every other turn to deal his SA damage, I think is really skimping out on one of their most iconic abilities. Since we don't know how it scales, maybe this is a low-level problem that simply gets much better as they level? We don't know yet.

They have a fighter-as-striker (slayer) in 4e, and any class can take the defender theme, which i think is pretty cool.  Imagine a rogue who hides behind someone, then defends him :-)

The rogue seems to scale +1d6 per level.  Which seems to outpace alot of other classes.  But it's probably best to think of him as a lurker now.

Also, hopefully we'll see more teamwork in the future.  So a wizard might cast greese or a fighter might trip the guy for the rogue to stab.

guides
List of no-action attacks.
Dynamic vs Static Bonuses
Phalanx tactics and builds
Crivens! A Pictsies Guide Good
Power
s to intentionally miss with
Mr. Cellophane: How to be unnoticed
Way's to fire around corners
Crits: what their really worth
Retroactive bonus vs Static bonus.
Runepriest handbook & discussion thread
Holy Symbols to hang around your neck
Ways to Gain or Downgrade Actions
List of bonuses to saving throws
The Ghost with the Most (revenant handbook)
my builds
F-111 Interdictor Long (200+ squares) distance ally teleporter. With some warlord stuff. Broken in a plot way, not a power way.

Thought Switch Higher level build that grants upto 14 attacks on turn 1. If your allies play along, it's broken.

Elven Critters Crit op with crit generation. 5 of these will end anything. Broken.

King Fisher Optimized net user.  Moderate.

Boominator Fun catch-22 booming blade build with either strong or completely broken damage depending on your reading.

Very Distracting Warlock Lot's of dazing and major penalties to hit. Overpowered.

Pocket Protector Pixie Stealth Knight. Maximizing the defender's aura by being in an ally's/enemy's square.

Yakuza NinjIntimiAdin: Perma-stealth Striker that offers a little protection for ally's, and can intimidate bloodied enemies. Very Strong.

Chargeburgler with cheese Ranged attacks at the end of a charge along with perma-stealth. Solid, could be overpowered if tweaked.

Void Defender Defends giving a penalty to hit anyone but him, then removing himself from play. Can get somewhat broken in epic.

Scry and Die Attacking from around corners, while staying hidden. Moderate to broken, depending on the situation.

Skimisher Fly in, attack, and fly away. Also prevents enemies from coming close. Moderate to Broken depending on the enemy, but shouldn't make the game un-fun, as the rest of your team is at risk, and you have enough weaknesses.

Indestructible Simply won't die, even if you sleep though combat.  One of THE most abusive character in 4e.

Sir Robin (Bravely Charge Away) He automatically slows and pushes an enemy (5 squares), while charging away. Hard to rate it's power level, since it's terrain dependent.

Death's Gatekeeper A fun twist on a healic, making your party "unkillable". Overpowered to Broken, but shouldn't actually make the game un-fun, just TPK proof.

Death's Gatekeeper mk2, (Stealth Edition) Make your party "unkillable", and you hidden, while doing solid damage. Stronger then the above, but also easier for a DM to shut down. Broken, until your DM get's enough of it.

Domination and Death Dominate everything then kill them quickly. Only works @ 30, but is broken multiple ways.

Battlemind Mc Prone-Daze Protecting your allies by keeping enemies away. Quite powerful.

The Retaliator Getting hit deals more damage to the enemy then you receive yourself, and you can take plenty of hits. Heavy item dependency, Broken.

Dead Kobold Transit Teleports 98 squares a turn, and can bring someone along for the ride. Not fully built, so i can't judge the power.

Psilent Guardian Protect your allies, while being invisible. Overpowered, possibly broken.

Rune of Vengance Do lot's of damage while boosting your teams. Strong to slightly overpowered.

Charedent BarrageA charging ardent. Fine in a normal team, overpowered if there are 2 together, and easily broken in teams of 5.

Super Knight A tough, sticky, high damage knight. Strong.

Super Duper Knight Basically the same as super knight with items, making it far more broken.

Mora, the unkillable avenger Solid damage, while being neigh indestuctable. Overpowered, but not broken.

Swordburst Maximus At-Will Close Burst 3 that slide and prones. Protects allies with off actions. Strong, possibly over powered with the right party.

Personally I think it's insulting to DND players of all persuasians.  Do the devs really believe that players will openly revolt at the inclusion of any 4th ed mechanic?  Or be fooled by including them with a different name? 


Arguments over martial daily powers seem to suggest that the answer is yes.
Owner and Proprietor of the House of Trolls. God of ownership and possession.
Personally I think it's insulting to DND players of all persuasians.  Do the devs really believe that players will openly revolt at the inclusion of any 4th ed mechanic?  Or be fooled by including them with a different name? 


Arguments over martial daily powers seem to suggest that the answer is yes.



Flavor and presentation makes huge differences. The power of naming something is that you get control of it that is a magical and psychological truth. 

It goes both directions you know, a thread on here presented what was almost 99 percent the same as healing surges and called them wounds and surgeless healing as wound removal and some fans of healing surges were annoyed. Primarily because the fact that Clerics were presented as nearly the only ones able to perform it.
 
  Creative Character Build Collection and The Magic of King's and Heros  also Can Martial Characters Fly? 

Improvisation in 4e: Fave 4E Improvisations - also Wrecans Guides to improvisation beyond page 42
The Non-combatant Adventurer (aka Princess build Warlord or LazyLord)
Reality is unrealistic - and even monkeys protest unfairness
Reflavoring the Fighter : The Wizard : The Swordmage - Creative Character Collection: Bloodwright (Darksun Character) 

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

 

Personally I think it's insulting to DND players of all persuasians.  Do the devs really believe that players will openly revolt at the inclusion of any 4th ed mechanic?  Or be fooled by including them with a different name? 


Arguments over martial daily powers seem to suggest that the answer is yes.



Yet the idea is only reinforced by the "oh, cool!" sayings when referencing the Fighter's 2nd level feature to make two actions in a round 2/day. Really? An ability that's not called a "daily power" is regarded with a little fan-fare and/or a "meh" reaction because it's so common in the game. An ability that's actually called a "daily power" breaks people's immersion or verisimilitude or whatever BS they claim it breaks. It's pretty ridiculous if you ask me.

The difference between the 2x per day and the majority of daily powers is that this one just allows you to take extra attacks when you feel the need.

What I mean by this is that when you chose to use it you aren't losing your basic attack for the round if the second attack misses.

Having daily powers that replace your attack with a single higher damage attack or effect were a part of your balance in the fight an in the 10-12 sessions I played 4th I never landed a single daily attack.

That is why 4th is not for me and why just tacking on an extra attack like previous editions is seen as different.

Edition wars kill players,Dungeons and Dragons needs every player it can get.

Personally I think it's insulting to DND players of all persuasians.  Do the devs really believe that players will openly revolt at the inclusion of any 4th ed mechanic?  Or be fooled by including them with a different name? 


Arguments over martial daily powers seem to suggest that the answer is yes.


Yet the idea is only reinforced by the "oh, cool!" sayings when referencing the Fighter's 2nd level feature to make two actions in a round 2/day. Really? An ability that's not called a "daily power" is regarded with a little fan-fare and/or a "meh" reaction because it's so common in the game. An ability that's actually called a "daily power" breaks people's immersion or verisimilitude or whatever BS they claim it breaks. It's pretty ridiculous if you ask me.


My point exactly.
Owner and Proprietor of the House of Trolls. God of ownership and possession.
The difference between the 2x per day and the majority of daily powers is that this one just allows you to take extra attacks when you feel the need. What I mean by this is that when you chose to use it you aren't losing your basic attack for the round if the second attack misses. Having daily powers that replace your attack with a single higher damage attack or effect were a part of your balance in the fight an in the 10-12 sessions I played 4th I never landed a single daily attack. That is why 4th is not for me and why just tacking on an extra attack like previous editions is seen as different.




What?

Seriously, what are you trying to say?  you dont' like Martial Dailies because your dice hated them?

Am I reading this right?
Ahh, so THIS is where I can add a sig. Remember: Killing an ancient God inside of a pyramid IS a Special Occasion, and thus, ladies should be dipping into their Special Occasions underwear drawer.
No I'm saying that the game balance was designed in such a way that hinged the bulk of your power in a single roll.

Edition wars kill players,Dungeons and Dragons needs every player it can get.

I prefer a system where the odds of you dealing extra damage increase rather than one where you get a single chance a dealing more damage.

The 2x can be an opportunity to get a second chance of hitting when I miss or deciding to press for a second round of damage when I want to press an advantage whereas the daily forces me to take a chance for greater damage before I start my press.

The idea of only being able to exert myself so much works for either one but the 2x functions differently.

Its a playstyle preference and this assumption that anything that functions remotely similar to something in 4th somehow being a covert attempt to integrate 4th under our noses is frankly counter to the design I see in next and assuming that 4th was the first to implement powers that functioned x number of times per day.

Smite from pre 4th paladins is a good example.

I don't want to war with you over one edition being better than the other. I understand you prefer that system and you know that I don't.

This doesn't mean there aren't good things to be transferred.

My personal reasons for not continuing with 4th are much more than the function of dailies.
They are no more or less valid than your reason for choosing it.

I for one missed my simple damage output fighter and prefer to only need a grid for larger combats.

I prefer theatre of the mind if you will.

I think a system that allows for both would go a long way toward healing the divide between 4th and pre 4th mindsets.

Edition wars kill players,Dungeons and Dragons needs every player it can get.

I cant say i'm totally sold on the you don't get better to hit roles. If you always need a 15 or higher to hit some one in scale mail where is the joy in gaining a new level. A few more hit points and a daily ability that lets me take a basic attack with the same crummy bonus to hit.. Again I ask where is the fun.
 

As per the rogue getting a sandwich. He should have been thinking of a way to break the stalemate. IF you have two sides just shooting arrows, you have a battle of attrition going on. You might kill the goblins but you will take damage as well. The tools are already there, just need to try and use them.  



Right, he could've attacked with his sling too. And it might have had a bit of difference. What I mean by stalemate was that the Cleric of Moradin and the Kobold Chieftan were in the doorway. Neither could let their troops in to help the battle. Sure, with some heavy doeses of improvisation, things might have been different, but that's just not something my group likes doing. And that's really the crux of the matter, they're not fans of making up stuff on the fly. Some people love this, allowing them the free-form to do practially whatever they can imagine and by asking the DM if it's possible, they do it. Others like a more subset of skills, rules, and mechanics that helps further their inspirations. Both are fine ways of playing, yet neither really have a place at the other's table. 

Why I don't personally like Improv style games is that it's just too reliant on DM moods. That and the rules can change based on each individual's perception of the situation. Lets take something simple for an example; Bull Rushing a Kobold off a cliff.

DM 1 to Player: "I see your Strength score is twice that of the Kobolds. You can Bull Rush him off the cliff with no roll" = Auto-success.

DM 2 to Player: "Move into the monsters square and make a Strength vs. Strength Contest. If you win, you push him 5-ft." = Simple mechanic involving the same score.

DM 3 to Player: "Move into the monsters square but if you Charge (ie. move 10 feet), you gain Advantage with your Roll. Make a Strength vs. either the Kobolds' Strength or Dexterity score (which ever's higher). If you win, you push him. If you loose, you remain in the spot adjacent to the Kobold. A win of 5 or more pushes the Kobold an additional 5-ft. If you win by 10 or more, you knock him prone. If you fail by 5 or more, you fall prone. If you fail by 10 or more, you miss and go over the ledge". = Difficlut yet precise mechanics

DM 4 to Player: "Move and attack the Kobold. If you hit, make a Strength vs. Strength Contest with Advantage. If you succeed, he is knocked off the ledge." = varied mechanics based on attack.

DM 5 to Player: "Move and attack the Kobold. If you hit, he makes a Strength saving throw DC = 5 + damage done or is knocked off." = Uses a Saving Throw mechanic.

This is just ONE situation that can have huge degrees of complexity and variables. And I'd say that these are all within the options presented in DDN. Perhaps you like one but HATE the others. Or maybe you hate all of them. It doesn't matter because what the DM rules is absolute. There is no basis except "Use your imagination, hope to have a understanding and clear-headed DM, and make sure it meets very simple parameters". I just don't like this free-form style of gaming.              




Doing something is far better than doing nothing. I'm interested in why the DM is telling the players the DC of the checks. That seems a bit odd. Maybe you did not mean to included. There's alot of hand holding in the options. I'd rather the players think it out but I would have asked periodically "what would your character do?"

I will agree that DND Next is much more free-form than 4e. By much more, I mean by more than a factor of 10x. I personally think it is a huge improvement over 4e. I was surprised after the release of some of the board games, Wizards didn't take the DM out of 4e and replaced him/her with monster reaction tables and cards.

It ties into the 4e mentality of everything given to the player. It's quite clear that it will not be the option here; players will have to work at solving problems. There was a recent article by Rodney Thompson (I think about Bounded Acc). The most interesting thing was about a lvl1 character versus a dragon. Alone he wouldn't have been able to kill it but getting a whole town together with bows, there might be a chance.    

Here's a good analogy. Yet's say a DM gave the players the title of hero at level 1. Heroism is something that is earned through action. Just giving the word 'hero' away ultimately cheapens it. I, for one, do not want to see the word 'hero' changed into a shallow representation of its former self.