A dark and stormy night playtest recap.

My friend Plaguescarred converted the 3rd edition module to next for a one shot as seen in this thread community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/758...

While he ran the session with his trademark skill, I was once again dissatisfied with my character's mechanical performance (everyone else seems to remember my critical roll on a whirlwind attack on the Hobgoblin Leader and one of his warriors, I remember how much I missed and missed and missed). The issue is that DDN does not allow me to make choices in regard to what is most important to me in regards to combat (I'm not even going to go into the exploration/interaction disparities right now) and that is Accuracy.

Off the top of my head, my choices in that regard are:
1) play a barbarian (for the option of advantage [a mechanic I still find distasteful] on every attack
2) play a human (for the stat bonus)
3) play a monk (for the option to make 2 attacks all the time with flurry of blows).

I find this infuriating.
Sorry bro.  I'm not sure the goals of this edition and the changes the designers think are important compared to 4E are going to reward your playstyle, at least not yet.

Vampire Class/Feat in 2013!

I prefer Next because 4E players and CharOpers can't find their ass without a grid and a power called "Find Ass."

I'm sorry you feel that way, Jonathan. I wonder if the missing has been part of the online dice? I'm on the fence regarding this, myself. I prefer rolling, and do while playing with my regular group. Most of us are at the table, but use roll20.net to play with remote players, and for mapping.

A major factor in missing is die rolling. Every game that I've played in has seen most of the players hitting more often than not. They do miss, but it hasn't been a negative thing thus far. It seems like the number for them to roll has been in the 11-13 range on the actual d20.

I'm not sure what else that could be. Do you know what the actual Dice were rolling? Could it be bad luck? It's just that, again, all of the playtests I've seen have had more hits than misses, on a per player basis.
 
I was pretty consistently rolling between 3 and 8 with the one 20. I have had that happen so often in my roleplaying life that I tend to try to mitigate as much as possible. Like I said somewhere else, I think that if I could buy a 16-18 with point buy, I'd be around my comfort zone with the published monsters.
I see your frustration. I don't like having a bad session, let alone career. In 4e, how is your hit-miss ratio? It seems to me that the rolls needed are around the 11-12 mark, by default. If so, do you find that you are able to squeak out a couple extra numbers through customization?

You mentioned that you wanted to point buy an 18. Did plague only allow the array? So far, to me at least, the options are pretty solid for the characters.

If you go to gen con this year, we should find each other, and I would like to gift you my best d20.
I appreciate the offer but Gencon is out of my price range right now, I do do some local cons (going to be running Next at Emerald City Comic Con next month).

In 4th, my hit ratio is a lot better but I do stuff like take Bravo on an 18-20 strength Half-Orc Slayer wielding a great (or bastard) sword with expertise and the CA power at second level (Come and Get It? Single Out.) with the Beserker's Charge and Poised Assault Stances. Even rolling between 3 and 6 I can hit most at level foes and many higher level ones (can't do anything about ones except get elven accuracy or play an avenger and I don't play Avengers due to my keeping making book keeping errors (needing to re oath primarily).
I only go to Gencon once every four or so years. It's something I like to do periodically, as I'm the only DnD player in my family, and it's the main reason I go. My wife doesn't enjoy playing, though she does sometimes like to watch our antics at the table once in a while. She gets a kick out of our nerdiness, I supppose, lol. Our kids seem to have a luke warm interest in table top rpgs. It's all about the PS3. I keep trying though.

As to 4e, I'm glad it allows you to increase your chances, though, I feel that, hitting on a 3-6 is a bit too easy, and if you can make mods to accomplish that, then everyone can. For me, it becomes non trivial for the players. They will always win, never run away, and have no fear of anything. We've had such a hard time challenging the players, that it is less fun. We don't roleplay as much, and it has become a board game, where fights take FOREVER. 

I certainly hope you are able to get what you want out of the new version, maybe through modules or whatever they end up being called, so that we can all enjoy it, and even play different styles at the same table.

Have fun at  Comic Con. See you at a table soon, hopefully. 
My friend Plaguescarred converted the 3rd edition module to next for a one shot as seen in this thread community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/758...

While he ran the session with his trademark skill, I was once again dissatisfied with my character's mechanical performance (everyone else seems to remember my critical roll on a whirlwind attack on the Hobgoblin Leader and one of his warriors, I remember how much I missed and missed and missed). The issue is that DDN does not allow me to make choices in regard to what is most important to me in regards to combat (I'm not even going to go into the exploration/interaction disparities right now) and that is Accuracy.

Off the top of my head, my choices in that regard are:
1) play a barbarian (for the option of advantage [a mechanic I still find distasteful] on every attack
2) play a human (for the stat bonus)
3) play a monk (for the option to make 2 attacks all the time with flurry of blows).

I find this infuriating.



I completely agree that the search for accuracy in the game is maddening.  The only thing the game supports is advantage, which is completely overblown and overused.  I mean, once you have advantage, it doesn't do any good to get more advantage.  That means there is a hard cap on how much you can improve your accuracy.  At best advantage can give you a +5 to hit, and usually is less.  That removes a ton of strategic decisions when building and playing a character.  The game seems like it devolves into a repetitive "find one of 30 different ways to get advantage, and it doesn't matter which - done."

I would like to see some options to get bonuses to hit.  One idea off the top of my head is the option to use martial dice on the to-hit roll.

Advantage is a neat mechanic, but I agree they seem to over-emphasize its use while acting unnecessarily spooked by the idea of reintroducing +2 / -2 modifiers. I also don't see what would be so bad stacking advantage to make double- or triple-advantage (3-4 dice). Each increase has diminishing returns.

As a DM, I notice it's strange that nearly every monster I've used has +5 or +6 to hit. The only variation comes through damage.
Sign In to post comments