Playtest Reports

28 posts / 0 new
Last post
The newest playtest report finally delivers! I love both the descriptive nature
of this one, and the fact that it drops some clear hints without giving everything away!! YESSSSSSS!

Anyway, it would seem that the warlord is, indeed, an actual class, and has probably killed the bard and taken its stuff. Also was able to make tactical maneuvers to open enemies up to other allies. Not too much more from this PTR on that.

The wizard, it would seem, can now channel magical energy through her staff, a definite nod to the Tolkienesque wizards.

The ranger was able to launch a counterattack, but the language here was a little unclear. Was it just his turn, or was it a class feature? Also, is eladrin the new aasimar, or are eladrin now a playable race?

Not too much info on the fighter or the rogue, unfortunately.

It does appear that second winds have made it into 4E, a mechanic I was very impressed with from SWSE.

So, any further thoughts?
friggin awesome. If you read carefully, the counterattack happened before the start of the regular round. So clearly it was a class/race/feat ability, not his next turn. ;) Don't forget, the warlord I am guessing is a nonmagical bard. Me likey!
Warlord is looking suspiciously like a revamped Marshal to me, though it may fill the bard "slot" in the party. Looks like the "tactical acumen" lets them give an ally bonus attacks of opportunity.
I suspect they've gotten rid of "confirmation rolls" too- most of the examples have crits left, right and centre. Jibes with other stuff I've heard. The ranger making 3 arrow attacks on their turn is a bit suss as well, a 1st level character can't do that currently.

Sandulax

As for you, is the fact that the wizard pushes the enemy away twice with his staff a magical effect?

k.
I am not liking the whole warforged an eladrin thing, its make me dread that they might actually put them in the PHB.
Shouldn't they be playtesting with the races and classes available in the new edition? Please tell me that warforged aren't core.
An oddball like the Warforged might be given quasi-core status -- not in the PHB, but featured prominently in the DMG section as an example of another race you might add to your game. So if you want him, there he is. But he's not in the PHB so he doesn't offend the traditionalists/anti-robot racists.

I really don't think a warforged should be core given the fact that such a being only occurs in a specific sort of clockwork-technology magitech world. A fine world to play in, I'm sure, but it's not the more common sort of fantasy world, and making it pure core would tend to force it upon DMs who might just be looking to do Tolkeinesque fantasy.
Warlord is looking suspiciously like a revamped Marshal to me, though it may fill the bard "slot" in the party. Looks like the "tactical acumen" lets them give an ally bonus attacks of opportunity.
I suspect they've gotten rid of "confirmation rolls" too- most of the examples have crits left, right and centre. Jibes with other stuff I've heard. The ranger making 3 arrow attacks on their turn is a bit suss as well, a 1st level character can't do that currently.

Warlord: Yeah, it's a Marshal with more stuff that it can do. I don't see this as being a bad thing though, as I liked the Marshal anyway.

Critical Hits: He didn't mention how many dice were rolled for damage and how much damage was done and take also, so there's no way to know what the dice system is like at the moment.

Ranger: Well, Ranger apparently has a new ability that replaces the AoO (Which as far as I can tell, have been removed from the game and replaced with unique abilities dependent on class and monster), allowing them a return fire when fired upon, so there's one. Rapid Shot is easily attainable by a human at first level, so there's 3.

So.. there's my statement on that.
IMAGE(http://images.community.wizards.com/community.wizards.com/user/blitzschnell/0a90721d221e50e5755af156c179fe51.jpg?v=90000)
AoO (Which as far as I can tell, have been removed from the game and replaced with unique abilities dependent on class and monster),

Do you have a source for this Kensan? Intriguing if it's true, and it might be true given that it dovetails nicely with the "dragon taking an immediate action as the rogue approaches" in the sample dragon combat...

Of course, that doesn't explain why the ranger would get an AoO from being fired upon in the first place...

The wizard, it would seem, can now channel magical energy through her staff, a definite nod to the Tolkienesque wizards.

Agreed, and I'm not sure I like the idea of D&D mages being the telekinetic breakdance-inducing freaks that Gandalf and Saruman were in FotR. But Wizard Strike gives me the impression of being an at-will ability, and an at-will ability that causes damage and pushes enemies back certainly does strongly suggest that a mage will never need to pull out his crossbow again.
Anyway, it would seem that the warlord is, indeed, an actual class, and has probably killed the bard and taken its stuff. Also was able to make tactical maneuvers to open enemies up to other allies. Not too much more from this PTR on that.

Probably a strike manoeuver like found in ToB.

I think it was probably something like that :

Strike (partial action) :

Make a melee attack on enemy. If the attack hits, any adjacent ally can make an attack of opportunity on the target.

About the ranger, it might have been a "counter" manoeuver :

"counterfire"
Counter (immediate action)
need ranged weapon

make an ranger attack with equiped weapon against a foe that has just attacked you or an ally. (there might be some other requirement for this counterattack)

I wouldn't be suprised if standard attack of opportunities were replaced with counter manoeuvers.

Wizards could also have (at last!) spell counters, or other magical reactions/defenses.

Of course a standard "attack of oppotunity" counter might still exists and made available for all classes and monster types.

Seems also like critical strikes now happens on any natural 20.

I understand that some players dislike confirmation rolls, but myself i rather like them as it helps to prevent one shot kills at low level (as the gobelin that just hit will a natural 20 will often need a 15 or worse to hit again on the confirmation roll), and me and my players don't mind the additional dice rolling, as confirmation rolls are always something that add to the tension in a fight.

However it's true that critical multiplier could sometimes allow for extreme situations and crazy mix-maxing.

I had a player recently do more than 150 damage with a critical :

1d10 base damage of wepon
+2d6 (bane weapon)
+2d6 (vicious)

+6 (18 str x1.5 for 2 handed weapon)
+5 (+3 weapon, with a bane enhancement that made it a +5)
+10 (power attack at 5, x2 for 2-handed)
+5 (collision special ability)

x4 multiplier (x3 weapon, with a prestige class ability upgrading to x4 some times per day)

Total : 4d10 + 4d6 + 104 , with the dice rolled to an almost perfect score.

It was the hightest damage made with a single action in my campaign, the previous hightest being another critical made with a disintegrate ray ;)

I wouldn't be suprised if they changed criticals to give a standard damage bonus, whatever wepon is used (such as +5 or +10 damage, or maybe a level-dependent value ?)

If they do that, i will probably apply the changes, but keep using a confirmation roll for a while to see if I will keep it or not over the long term.
Rapid Shot is easily attainable by a human at first level, so there's 3.

Yes, but during the surprise round? There's no way to make a full attack during the surprise round, since you only get a standard action.

So the ranger fired two arrows as a standard action. Manyshot?
Yes, but during the surprise round? There's no way to make a full attack during the surprise round, since you only get a standard action.

So the ranger fired two arrows as a standard action. Manyshot?

How do you know there is still a difference between standard and full-round actions in 4th ed.? It's very likely that this will be gone.
Yes, but during the surprise round? There's no way to make a full attack during the surprise round, since you only get a standard action.

In SWSE, Rapid Shot is still a standard action. -2 to attack, plus some amount of damage. I still think it's rapid shot, and the DM just noted that the extra damage wasn't needed to kill the goblin.

"Nice assumptions. Completely wrong assumptions, but by jove if being incorrect stopped people from making idiotic statements, we wouldn't have modern internet subculture." Kerrus
Practical gameplay runs by neither RAW or RAI, but rather "A Compromise Between The Gist Of The Rule As I Recall Getting The Impression Of It That One Time I Read It And What Jerry Says He Remembers, Whatever, We'll Look It Up Later If Any Of Us Still Give A Damn." Erachima

In SWSE, Rapid Shot is still a standard action. -2 to attack, plus some amount of damage. I still think it's rapid shot, and the DM just noted that the extra damage wasn't needed to kill the goblin.

That is true. It could have been Rapid Shot in Saga style.
How do you know there is still a difference between standard and full-round actions in 4th ed.?

I don't, of course.

It's very likely that this will be gone.

How is it likely? I could take "possible", but "likely"? Or even "very likely"?
How is it likely? I could take "possible", but "likely"? Or even "very likely"?

I'd say it's pretty likely given that 'free, immediate, move and standard actions' have been mentioned thus far but full-round has not. Certainly it isn't confirmation but it still weighs quite heavy IMO.

The Piazza A renaissance of the Old Worlds. Where any setting can be explored, any rules system discussed, and any combination of the two brought to life.

Reading this report really makes me want 4th edition even more. I really like where things are going.
Do you have a source for this Kensan? Intriguing if it's true, and it might be true given that it dovetails nicely with the "dragon taking an immediate action as the rogue approaches" in the sample dragon combat...

Of course, that doesn't explain why the ranger would get an AoO from being fired upon in the first place...

I have no source. This is just an educated guess from reading the Dragon and the Goblin combat, and noticing that when you normally would expect an AOO, there was a special move happening, instead. So, as an educated guess, I say AoO have been removed.
IMAGE(http://images.community.wizards.com/community.wizards.com/user/blitzschnell/0a90721d221e50e5755af156c179fe51.jpg?v=90000)
Yes, but during the surprise round? There's no way to make a full attack during the surprise round, since you only get a standard action.

So the ranger fired two arrows as a standard action. Manyshot?

Saga offers an explanation, I believe. However, as I don't own Saga, I can't quote how it's irritative attack feat worked. As all attacks under Saga are standard actions (I assume), and not full round actions, I am sure that it's some variation of feats introduced in that book.
IMAGE(http://images.community.wizards.com/community.wizards.com/user/blitzschnell/0a90721d221e50e5755af156c179fe51.jpg?v=90000)
Saga offers an explanation, I believe. However, as I don't own Saga, I can't quote how it's irritative attack feat worked. As all attacks under Saga are standard actions (I assume), and not full round actions, I am sure that it's some variation of feats introduced in that book.

Well, sort of. The Double Attack feat in Saga requires a full-round action to work. But it could have been the Saga feat Rapid Shot (gives your attack an extra die of damage) and some artistic freedom.
I'd say it's pretty likely given that 'free, immediate, move and standard actions' have been mentioned thus far but full-round has not. Certainly it isn't confirmation but it still weighs quite heavy IMO.

I'm not sure about that. There hasn't been much mention of swift actions either, but it would be strange to not find them in 4e (after reading the Star Wars Saga rules).

All in all, most of the articles from WotC have been rather devoid of the gritty mechanics of things. We're just guessing mechanics from the stories they tell us. They must have sooo much fun reading all this speculation. :D
I'd say it's pretty likely given that 'free, immediate, move and standard actions' have been mentioned thus far but full-round has not.

I hope you are wrong, my friend. I don't see full-round actions as being particulary in need of a fix, of unbalanced, or slowing game-pace. I like them. They must get rid of the distinction between full-round and one-round actions, though.

You know what I'd like to see? Interruptions. Counters make game seem like a poor basketball game: I score, then you score, then I score, then you score, and this comes to an end only when one part makes a mistake.
I want to be able to interrupt the action of my adversary without resorting to that horror which is "Ready an action".

k.
This "wizard strike" thing intruiges me. Sasha seemed to be throwing that out with abondon, so at her level (1st), it's likely not a prepared spell. Could be a reserve feat, or perhaps wizards get a number of martial-maneuver-like abilities they can use from round to round without depleting their spell list.

The important part is, Sasha had something useful to do every turn, which is a big improvement for a 1st-level wizard. I approve.

And it's good to be able to look at lower-level combat; I think that says more about what the core mechanics will be than that article about the dragon battle.
I hope you are wrong, my friend. I don't see full-round actions as being particulary in need of a fix, of unbalanced, or slowing game-pace. I like them. They must get rid of the distinction between full-round and one-round actions, though.

Of course, I may be very wrong, but the impression I get is that creatures will be capable of performing x number of standard actions in a round; thus a 'full round action' will vary.

You know what I'd like to see? Interruptions. Counters make game seem like a poor basketball game: I score, then you score, then I score, then you score, and this comes to an end only when one part makes a mistake.
I want to be able to interrupt the action of my adversary without resorting to that horror which is "Ready an action".

k.

This seems to be the direction that AoOs are heading - i.e. more action/reaction type of possibilities depending on abilities. AoOs have been confirmed in the new rules though they have been streamlined/altered.

The Piazza A renaissance of the Old Worlds. Where any setting can be explored, any rules system discussed, and any combination of the two brought to life.

Yes, but during the surprise round? There's no way to make a full attack during the surprise round, since you only get a standard action.

So the ranger fired two arrows as a standard action. Manyshot?

I think you presume too much. You're applying 3.5 rules to 4E - a system that virtually no-one knows ANYTHING about.

At this point in time it's simply not possible to have any meaningfull 4e rules discussions.
This "wizard strike" thing intruiges me. Sasha seemed to be throwing that out with abondon, so at her level (1st), it's likely not a prepared spell. Could be a reserve feat, or perhaps wizards get a number of martial-maneuver-like abilities they can use from round to round without depleting their spell list.

Well, apparently they said at one of the seminars at Gen Con that Vancian spellcasting (where you prepare spells and then lose them once cast) is going away, so I'd imagine spells are going to be like most abilities in that they will be limited to "at-will" "per-encounter" and "per-day" depending on how powerful they are.
I think you presume too much. You're applying 3.5 rules to 4E - a system that virtually no-one knows ANYTHING about.

I would think that I'm comparing the narrative given with the current ruleset in attempt to learn something.

At this point in time it's simply not possible to have any meaningfull 4e rules discussions.

And still we try...
AoO's aren't gone, but they're definitely more narrowly defined. They said that AoO's would only be triggered by a small set of actions unlike currently.
Sign In to post comments