|
12 months ago ::
Jul 28, 2012 - 2:31PM
#1
|
|
|
A little exaggeration in the thread title. I've been playing OD&D for decades. Mostly DM'ing, actually, and not playing much. It was my first time to play Next, however.
In all fairness, I should note that most of my gaming experience is with OD&D and AD&D and 2E and C&C and other "early edition" games. I enjoy that style of gaming. I've DM'ed and played some 3E and DM'ed some 4E but didn't have as much fun with those editions.
I always tend to look at a game from the perspective of the DM, since I run the games for our group 98% of the time. So, this post is different for me because I got to play for the first time in years, and wanted to report according to a player's perspective instead of the DM's.
I had a good time.
The playtest character sheets were pretty well organized. I could find my stats and bonuses very easily. The overall organization of the sheets was nice, and the special powers that my character had were mostly detailed pretty well right there where I could find them.
I played the Dwarven Fighter. I keep hearing about how boring fighters are, but I felt like it was pretty cool. Maybe not as many options as the elven wizard, for example, but I got to roll lots of dice and inflict some pretty decent damage and didn't get hurt much during the adventure. I was able to shoot kobolds with my crossbow and cut kobolds in half with my axe. I was able to wade into battle to kill stuff, yet could protect the wizard when he started to get in trouble. Seems like that's exactly the kinds of things that I want a fighter to be able to do.
They guy who played the elf wizard had to consult the spell information several times, but I think this is a feature of almost every RPG I've ever played. As the game progressed it became faster and he didn't have to look things up as often. He got to cast a lot more spells than he would have in OD&D/AD&D, but this was a good thing because he seemed to be more active than under the older rules sets where he might have only had a couple of spells all day.
I thought the advantage/disadvantage mechanic worked really well. Grabbing two d20's and rolling them together didn't slow down anything from my end, and it was easy to figure out if I succeeded or not. The overall dice mechanic just felt smooth and I didn't feel like the rules really got "in the way" at all.
I really had a good time, and am hoping that the rules will continue to follow such a streamlined format for those of us who like that kind of thing.
Marv (Finarvyn)Master of Mutants (MA and GW) Playtesting D&D Next and liking it! OD&D player since 1975
|
|
|
|
12 months ago ::
Jul 29, 2012 - 6:33AM
#2
|
Date Joined:
Sep 20, 2004
|
I was able to wade into battle to kill stuff, yet could protect the wizard when he started to get in trouble.
Just a quick nit-pick: how did you protect the wizard? There is not a single mechanic in the game which forces monsters to pay attention to a fighter instead of the wizard. What ability did you use to stop the monsters from wading past you and taking down the wizard? While I really like what I have seen of the playtest, one of the things I really miss is a mark/defender mechanic for the fighter... though, this fighter was more of a "slayer" than a "guardian," so whatever. I guess when building your own fighter you can always choose the guardian theme and gain a defender ability.
|
|
|
|
12 months ago ::
Jul 29, 2012 - 7:25AM
#3
|
|
|
I was able to wade into battle to kill stuff, yet could protect the wizard when he started to get in trouble.
Just a quick nit-pick: how did you protect the wizard? There is not a single mechanic in the game which forces monsters to pay attention to a fighter instead of the wizard. What ability did you use to stop the monsters from wading past you and taking down the wizard?
Well, we just sort of played it out, and I don't know if it was 100% BTB or not. The wizard backed into a hallway and I moved in front of the door and fought the critters.
I'm not sure how the DM decided this, but when I play OD&D I often house rule a die roll to see which PC gets attacked by which monster, modified by who is in the front ranks and who isn't. My gut feel for the playtest rules is that you are intended to do things like that rather than look for a specific rule or mechanic to make it so. I know that the DM had mentioned that if you tried to move past a monster or withdraw from combat the opponent got a free attack, but this might have been a house rule as well.
Marv (Finarvyn)Master of Mutants (MA and GW) Playtesting D&D Next and liking it! OD&D player since 1975
|
|
|
|
12 months ago ::
Jul 29, 2012 - 8:29AM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Sep 20, 2004
|
It was a house rule. The RAW for the playtest do not include attacks of opportunity (one of the big complaints so far). The other suggestion amounts to GM fiat. This was one of my big complaints and problems with the playtest so far. Characters designed to defend other characters need to have some mechanic by which they can actually do so. Of course, as I noted, there is such a mechanic... there is a theme which forces an enemy adjacent to a character with the theme to attack with disadvantage unless they are attacking the character with the theme. I, however, found it slightly annoying that the fighter in the playtest was not given that theme. I am glad they can take the slayer option as well, but I would rather have seen them play with a guardian theme to start. I want to make sure that fighters with that theme make for potent character builds, because they really should.
|
|
|
|
12 months ago ::
Jul 29, 2012 - 10:10AM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Aug 22, 2007
|
I'm finding the lack of attack of opportunity has freed up movement in DND. I like the dynamic movement we are seeing in combat without AoO. It has changed tactics, there is more reserving action, "if some moves here or here I strike." The pcs have done this as well as npcs. After some playtesting, I am glad to see AoO gone.
The Cleric Knight Guardian has been very effective. The defender ability works pretty good at defending an ally from harm, but its a gamble. It also works only once, so the second and third kobold attacks are going to have advantage, at least in the first round. I think the fighter/ guardian combo is going to very effective, with a d12 hit die. I would like to see that combo in future playtests as well.
|
|
|
|
12 months ago ::
Jul 29, 2012 - 10:28AM
#6
|
Date Joined:
Sep 20, 2004
|
What I would really like to see is attacks of opportunity return as a fighter specific class feature. IE: Fighters should be able to make attacks of opportunity, but attacks of opportunity are not something that any class can make automatically. That both frees up movement, but gives the fighter an additional edge when it comes to defending allies.
|
|
|
|
12 months ago ::
Jul 29, 2012 - 10:42AM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Nov 15, 2008
|
It's a houserule that the Designer, Mike Mearls, has said is a good one on twitter.
Viva La "what ever version of D&D you are playing right now!"
|
|
|
|
12 months ago ::
Jul 29, 2012 - 11:35AM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Aug 22, 2007
|
If the goal is the ability to stop an enemy from advancing beyond a character, that feature is already available to the Guardian.., at third level; hold the line: You can use your shield to stop an oncoming enemy in their tracks. If the goal is to make the fighter, the defender in combat, then making AoO a fighter class feature kind of works. AoO does not stop movement in itself. The ability to stop an enemy in its track with a AoO is a 4e fighter class feature. But that negates a need for a guardian themed fighter in DnDnext, right. If the goal is to allow the fighter class more choice as to theme i.e. fighter/ slayer, fighter/ guardian then AoO that stops enemy movement as a fighter class stymies that choice. I think the goal with with DnDnext is to free the classes to the built in roles of 4e. An approach seen with the various sub classes of 4e, specifically the Slayer fighter class.
|
|
|
|
12 months ago ::
Jul 29, 2012 - 3:12PM
#9
|
Date Joined:
Sep 20, 2004
|
The goal is to make sure that fighters have the ability to lock down foes, to some degree. Sure, people can just move away from a fighter, but if they do they are likely to get hurt. Meanwhile, fighters could choose slayer (and really focus on laying down hurt) or guardian (and make use of their AoO ability to help them defend their allies). Basically, I like not having AoO rules as a standard "everyone can" rule. I do, however, think it would make for a good fighter class ability (no matter what your theme).
|
|
|
|
12 months ago ::
Jul 29, 2012 - 3:40PM
#10
|
Date Joined:
Aug 22, 2007
|
Well we have different goals. I want a fighter who is really good at fighting with weapons, whether that fighter is protecting allies, locking down foes, or slaying them I am fine being defined by "theme". I guess for me the core of being a fighter is fighting mainly with weapons, not locking down foes.
|
|
|
