As he hears some commotion from outside, Fr. Bartok rises from the most uncomfortable bedding he had ever napped on. All the noisy fighting wasn't making it any easier to get comfortable, but considering he had been sleeping on the ground a lot recently, this bedding was still awful. The priest was almost relieved he was forced to get up. When this was all done, he'd do the owners a favor and set fire to the bedding. That should drive the bugs away from a few days. MechanicsShow
Accurate Staff Ranged: 10 Target: One creature Attack: +9 vs Reflex Hit: 1d8+6 Radiant damage and you slide the target 1 square. Special: You can use this power as a ranged basic attack.
Accurate Staff Close Blast 3 Target: Creatures in blast Attack: +9 vs Will Hit:1d6+6 Psychic damage and the target takes a -1 penalty to all defenses until the start of your next turn.
Accurate Staff Area Burst: 1 within 10 Target: Each enemy in burst Attack: +9 vs Reflex Hit: 1d6+6 Radiant damage. Effect: Each ally in the burst gains a +3 power bonus to AC until the end of your next turn.
Free Action Close Burst 1 Target: You and each ally in the burst. Trigger: You drop a non-minion enemy to 0 hit points with an invoker attack power. Effect: The targets gains temporary hit points equal to your Wisdom modifier (5).
Channel Divinity: You can only use one channel divinity power per encounter. Immediate Reaction (personal) Trigger: An enemy within 10 squares of you hits your ally Effect: Before the end of your next turn, you gain a +2 bonus to your next attack roll against the triggering enemy. Effect: You may slide one ally
Accurate Staff Channel Divinity: You can only use one channel divinity power per encounter. Close Blast: 5 Target: Each undead creature in blast Attack: +9 vs Will Hit: 1d10+6 Radiant damage, you push the creature 2 squares and it is dazed until the end of your next turn. Miss: Half damage.
Accurate Staff Close Blast: 5 Target: Each creature in blast Attack: +9 vs Reflex Hit: 2d6+6 cold and fire damage Effect: The blast creates a zone of flaming hail that lasts until the end of your next turn. Any creature that starts its turn within the zone takes 5 cold and fire damage. Sustain Minor: The zone persists.
+1d6 damage against enemies at full hit points (Challenge Seeking Accurate Staff) You do not provoke OA from making ranged or area attacks with a staff (Staff Expertise Feat) When Bartok hits an enemy within 3 squares with an invoker power, he gains a +2 feat bonus to AC until the start of his next turn. (Invoker Defense)
Triggered Actions (ignore this for this combat)Show
If an enemy is within 10 squares and hits an ally, Bartok will use Fr. Bartok's Righteous Indignation At Someone Laying Hands On His Servant [Preserver's Rebuke] Preserver's RebukeShow
Channel Divinity: You can only use one channel divinity power per encounter. Immediate Reaction (personal) Trigger: An enemy within 10 squares of you hits your ally Effect: Before the end of your next turn, you gain a +2 bonus to your next attack roll against the triggering enemy.
Senna grips her axe handle in anticipation. It had been too long since she had been in a real fight, even riling up the Eladrin didn't help anymore, and she had left off for the time being. She strides up into the yard as the Iron Circle approaches, taking a central position and resting her axe over her shoulder.
With the warcry, the Iron Circle unit begins a charge. Their leader rushes forward straight for Senna, he orders barely comprehendable. She vaults over the wall, then sidesteps at the last moment, swinging her heavy flail, using the inertia of the charge to slam into Senna's chestplate, almost knocking the wind out of her lungs.
Map Notes: • Illumination: Bright Light • Doors: Doors to the cottage & outbuildings are sturdy wood (Strength:16 to break down; or, AC5, Fort10, Ref5, 20hp) • Embankment: This steep, dirt road embankment is Difficult Terrain • Furnishings: The furniture is lightly built & offers no impediment to movement - a moving character simply kicks the furnishings aside. Furnishings can be used as improvised weapons. A bed or table flipped on its side (standard action) becomes a low wall, providing cover against attacks across it. • Tree: The square occupied by the tree's trunk is impassable but provides cover. Climbing the tree requires an Athletics:10 check, and a creature up a tree gains concealment. • Wall: The fieldstone wall stands 4 feet high and provides cover against attacks that cross it. It costs 2 squares of movement to cross the wall. • Well: This 15-foot-deep well is surrounded by a low stone wall (+2 bonus to saving throw to catch yourself). Climbing out of the well is difficult (Athletics:20). • Windows: Creatures firing through the windows of the cottage have cover against attacks from the outside.
(16) Iron Circle Enforcer is a human who looks to be an elite fighter, one who focuses on inflicting pain. She's carrying a heavy flail and wearing a suit of chainmail along with a black surcoat embroidered with a red-trimmed gray circle.
(16) Spitting Drake is a reptilian beast which, as the name indicates, seems to be capable of spitting.
(16) Iron Circle Rabble are humans who look to be dime-a-dozen toughs. They're each wielding a mace and otherwise appear to be wearing normal clothing, plus a black cloack embroidered with a gray circle.
• Ad Hominem— Attacking the person's circumstances, not addressing the argument. • Ad Hominem Abusive (Personal Attack)— Insulting the person, not addressing the argument. • Ad Hominem Tu Quoque— Saying the person's inconsistent, not addressing the argument. • Appeal to Authority/Belief/Common Practice/Consequence of a Belief/Emotion/Fear/Flattery/Novelty/Pity/Popularity/Ridicule/Spite/Tradition— Using emotion instead of Fact. • Bandwagon— Use of peer pressure. • Begging the Question— Assuming premises which haven't necessarily been agreed to. • Biased Sample— Using a sampling which may not properly represent the whole. • Burden of Proof— Shifting it to the wrong side. • Circumstantial Ad Hominem— Attacking the person's interests in supporting their argument. • Composition— Assuming that the whole has the same qualities as individual parts. • Confusing Cause & Effect— Assuming that one thing causes another because they appear in conjunction. • Division— Assuming that the individual parts have the same qualities as the whole. • False Dilemma— Assuming that only two options exist. • Gambler's Fallacy— Assuming the odds have changed because of past occurances • Genetic— Assuming a perceived defect in the origin of a claim is proof of a defect in the claim. • Guilt by Association— Attacking others who agree with the claim. • Hasty Generalization— Assuming a quality based on too small a sample size. • Ignoring the Common Cause— Assuming there is no outside cause of two connected things. • Middle Ground— Assuming the midpoint of two extremes must be correct. • Misleading Vividness— Assuming a colorful anecdote outweighs statistical evidence. • Poisoning the Well— Using unprovable claims about the person instead of addressing the argument. • Post Hoc— Assuming that something caused something else simply because it happened first. • Questionable Cause— Assuming that one thing causes another. • Red Herring— Using irrelevant evidence to divert a discussion. • Relativist Fallacy— Asserting that a claim may be true for some but not for the speaker. • Slippery Slope— Assuming the inevitability of one event based on another. • Special Pleading— Claiming exemption without justification. • Spotlight— Assuming individuals that get the most attention to be indicative of the whole. • Straw Man— Misrepresenting the opposing argument. • Two Wrongs Make a Right— Justifying something unethical/immoral as response or pre-emption to something else unethical/immoral.
Response to those who like to compare 4e to a Video GameShow
Also, I find that the "D&D 4e is like an MMO" argument is often a sign of someone who is deliberately being obtuse and/or is potentially ignorant of actual MMO play. As someone who only ended a 6-year World of Warcraft addiction a year ago, I can say that most of your bullet points actually don't match up to the truth of it.
In D&D 4e, you can choose a hybrid, you can choose to play one class as though it were another (people played Warlords as Bards frequently, when the edition first came out, and Rangers were refluffed to Monks), you can focus your class on its secondary role (a Warlock who is more controller than striker, for instance), you can multiclass, and you can create a particular concept (a mounted lancer, a charger, etc.) within the mechanics via feats, choice of powers, and choice of skills. You decide which set of stats you use--are you a Chaladin, Straladin, or Baladin?--and you have ultimate influence on how your character turns out in the end. Yes, powers require you to be using a particular weapon within your class's available selection, but the powers are not themselves tied to the gear. Powers tied to weapons or armor are typically powers that belong to the item, not to the character class that's most likely to use it.
Yes, there are only so many powers available, and these will be what you do in battle; this is all that the designers created. Yes, there is a time-frame in which they can be used; this has always been the case, even in the days of Vancian casting. Yes, there are suggested builds, but you can routinely ignore those if it pleases you; the only parts of a class you have to take are the class features, and even those have options at this point. But the only way that this can be considered at all conflatable with MMO character building/playing is if you are deliberately ignoring all of that.
In WoW, you choose a class and you're done. No multiclassing or hybridization, no way to mimic one class with careful building of a different one. There is a firm dividing line on what is a WoW class. No secondary roles or creative concepts, either; you're going to be what the class sets out to be, and that's it. You'll always have the same stat allocation as another of your class, because you get set numbers as you level up, and you've got at best four options--and that's only the Druid class--to build, and if you plan on running dungeons, particularly heroic level ones, or raiding, you'd better not even think of deviating from the single defined best build on the talent tree for what you want to do. It was only recently, with the complete tear-down and recreation of talent trees for Mists of Pandaria, that there was a concept of there being anything but the one best build that people who calculated such mechanical advantages (the folks on Elitist Jerks, for example), and the people who did things like achieve "World First" at various top-tier raids set precedent for.
Also, no class will ever not have a specific set of powers; all Priests in WoW have the same baseline, with deviation only based upon their talent tree specialization, where a D&D4e player could take whatever power in their class pleases them. Any Retribution Paladin will be the same as any other in terms of powers, because that is what a RetPally is. Any Assassination Rogue will always have the same powers as another, etc. All powers are always on specific cool-downs, but will always be there when they start a battle, where a 4e PC might enter an encounter with only At-Wills, or without their Daily powers due to what plot has done up until that point. Furthermore, no power that is not already specifically tied to an item will ever "require" you have that item, to my recollection. Classes get all their powers based on class; gear only gives bonuses to stats, possibly cuts down cast times for abilities or cooldowns, grants temporary extra bonuses to stats (the latter two most often on the raid tier equipment), and on rare occassions an extra power that may or may not be valuable, as some are only special effects instead of valuable abilities.
Most honest/open response on why DDN needs to be InclusiveShow
I've always felt it is in the best interests of D&D to be as inclusive across the playerbase as they can be and still have a game. I've never felt though that making a game that was inclusive within a group was very useful or even desirable. DM's and players can decide amongst themselves what options or restrictions they want for their games. I tend to lean to the DM to make most of those decisions but again that is a group specific thing.
Having said that. I get the distinct impression that there are a lot of players on these boards who come from groups that generally ruled against their own desires. It's almost like they are an oppressed minority from a gaming perspective. I also get the impression that they tend to advocate against things that if available their fellow group members might like and vote them down on.
Do a lot of you feel this way?
Just for clarification...here are some examples... 1. Alignment restrictions as an option. 2. Alignment Mechanics 3. Martial healing 4. Races being included or not.
I know my perspective is not that I often play at tables where my likes are not represented. Instead, my perspective comes from the many years I spent being a bad DM. I was a bad DM because my guidance came from the books, and the books gave bad advice. The books told me that alignment was a useful approach to roleplaying, so I went with it even though it felt kind of weird to me. Now I know that, at least in my style of running games, alignment destroys rp. I trusted the books to give good advice, and it messed up my game. Now I'm much more mature as a DM, so I know how to take advice with a grain of salt. And I still learn new stuff every session I run.
I don't want future DMs to go through my problems again. There's a big enough DM shortage as it is. DMing well is hard.
The biggest thing I had to unlearn in my process of becoming a good DM was the idea that the game is a simulation of a world. I understand many DMs prefer a more simulationist approach, although I am always skeptical simply because I would have said the same thing until I learned and grew as a DM. This doesn't mean their approach is completely invalid, but it still gives me a personal twinge when I see a regression back to 3e era sim style gaming.
I also have noticed many groups where one or two old-school players run a whole group's playstyle because the newer players aren't even aware there are other ways of doing things. The newer players tell me stories of things they hated in the session, and I end up explaining to them how those things they hate are very fixable, and in fact are fixed in the newer edition of the game their older players have told them is terrible.
In regard to things like martial healing, I don't think it's necessary for it to be in the game for the game to be fun. However, the attitude that says martial healing is terrible and shouldn't exist is an attitude that, to me, reveals a wrongheaded approach to the game. Therefore, my fight for it to be an option is to help legitimize the more narrative approach that I think is what most players want, but many don't know is possible, because they've never been exposed to it.
Adrian rushes to Senna's aid, focusing his assault on the enemy leader as he has done so many times in the past. The thrill of battle is something he hasn't felt in decades, at least not the thrill of a real battle like this one. He welcomes the feeling, and as he approaches the Iron Circle troops' leader he swipes with one of his newer techniques, striking true against his flail-wileding foe. As she turns to face the new attacker, Adrian sidesteps, and before she knows it the woman is directly between Adrian and Senna, cut off from her allies and lacking any good opening should she try to escape.
Minor Action: Oath of Enmity on Enforcer Move Action: Move to K-9 Standard Action: Overwhelming Strike on Enforcer Attack: 15 vs AC Hit? (I doubt it) (Only on a miss) No Action: Heroic Effort, making it 19 vs AC. Hit: 11 damage. I shift to L-9 and Enforcer slides to K-9.
Male Good Human Hybrid Avenger|Swordmage, 3rd Lvl Theme: Sohei Deity: Corellon
Vitals: Medium, 6' tall, 175 lbs. 66 years old, hails from Harken Languages: Common, Primordial
Senses: 19 Insight, 19 Perception, Normal Vision
Encounter Powers [_] Second Wind [_] Sohei Flurry [?] Heroic Effort [X]* Oath of Enmity [_]* Aegis of Ensnarement [_] Falcon's Mark [_] Avenger's Resolve [_] Fury's Advance [_] Southern Star Ring the Bell [_] Five Stars Arrow Deflection
Daily Powers [_] Action Point [_] Aspect of Might
HP: HS: AC: Fort: Ref: Will:
Core 39 8 21 14 16 16
RndX 39 8
0 THP Surge: 9hp Init: +2 Speed: 6
Resist: none Saves: none
*In-effect* Oath of Enmity: Against enemies subject to this oath, when I make a melee attack against the target using an Avenger power or an Avenger paragon path power and the target is the only enemy adjacent to me, I make two attack rolls and use either result. Acrobat's Boots:Can stand up from prone as a minor action.
Fr. Bartok strides forward as Senna is accosted. "Here now! That is no way to treat a lady!" A bolt of energy lances out, jolting the ruffian with raw divine power. He looks over at the tough warrior, holding her own against the enforcer. "I know, I know, it's hard to tell sometimes."
He then looks over the wall at all the rabble aligned there. "Disperse! Go back to your hovels where you belong. And take your dog, too!" A couple more bolts of Pelor's Might are flung about, trying to scare the mass away. The dog reacts to a slap across the rump and one of the grunts seriously reconsiders his career choice.
Enforcer's turn: Would have used Preserver's Rebuke at the first attack. Move: Walk to J,12
Minor: Master's Eye
Standard: Hand of Radiance vs Enforcer, Drake, Rabble 7 Enforcer (w/Preserver's Rebuke and Master's Eye): 27 vs Reflex; 14 radiant damage and Bartok gains a +2 feat bonus to AC until the start of his next turn.
Drake (+1d6 at full points): 24 vs Reflex; 14 radiant damage (cover not accounted for)
Rabble 7: 21 vs Reflex; non-zero damage (cover not accounted for); non-lethal damage
Accurate Staff Ranged: 10 Target: One creature Attack: +9 vs Reflex Hit: 1d8+6 Radiant damage and you slide the target 1 square. Special: You can use this power as a ranged basic attack.
Accurate Staff Close Blast 3 Target: Creatures in blast Attack: +9 vs Will Hit:1d6+6 Psychic damage and the target takes a -1 penalty to all defenses until the start of your next turn.
Accurate Staff Area Burst: 1 within 10 Target: Each enemy in burst Attack: +9 vs Reflex Hit: 1d6+6 Radiant damage. Effect: Each ally in the burst gains a +3 power bonus to AC until the end of your next turn.
Accurate Staff Ranged 10 Target: One creature Effect: If the target attacks you or your allies before the end of your next turn, it takes 2d10+6 radiant damage at the end of that turn. If the target doesn't attack you or your allies before the end of its next turn, the target instead gains 5 temporary hit points at the end of that turn.
Accurate Staff Area Burst: 1 within 10 Target: Each enemy in burst Attack: +9 vs Reflex Hit: 1d6+6 Radiant damage. Effect: Each ally in the burst gains a +3 power bonus to AC until the end of your next turn.
Free Action Close Burst 1 Target: You and each ally in the burst. Trigger: You drop a non-minion enemy to 0 hit points with an invoker attack power. Effect: The targets gains temporary hit points equal to your Wisdom modifier (5).
Channel Divinity: You can only use one channel divinity power per encounter. Immediate Reaction (personal) Trigger: An enemy within 10 squares of you hits your ally Effect: Before the end of your next turn, you gain a +2 bonus to your next attack roll against the triggering enemy. Effect: You may slide one ally
Accurate Staff Channel Divinity: You can only use one channel divinity power per encounter. Close Blast: 5 Target: Each undead creature in blast Attack: +9 vs Will Hit: 1d10+6 Radiant damage, you push the creature 2 squares and it is dazed until the end of your next turn. Miss: Half damage.
Accurate Staff Close Blast: 3 Target: Each creature in blast Attack: +9 vs Fortitude Hit: 2d6+6 thunder damage and the target is stunned (save ends) Miss: Half damage, and the target is dazed until the end of your next turn. Effect: You are dazed until the end of your next turn.
+1d6 damage against enemies at full hit points (Challenge Seeking Accurate Staff) You do not provoke OA from making ranged or area attacks with a staff (Staff Expertise Feat) When Bartok hits an enemy within 3 squares with an invoker power, he gains a +2 feat bonus to AC until the start of his next turn. (Invoker Defense)
If an enemy is within 10 squares and hits an ally, Bartok will use Fr. Bartok's Righteous Indignation At Someone Laying Hands On His Servant [Preserver's Rebuke] Preserver's RebukeShow
Channel Divinity: You can only use one channel divinity power per encounter. Immediate Reaction (personal) Trigger: An enemy within 10 squares of you hits your ally Effect: Before the end of your next turn, you gain a +2 bonus to your next attack roll against the triggering enemy.
The drake scuttles forward, between the wall and the embankment, and returns fire at Bartok, a huge globule of acidic saliva hitting the man of Pelor where it hurts.
Adrian: 15 vs AC hits, so no Heroic Effort. Movement done. Triggers an Immediate Reaction. • Iron Circle Enforcer: Immediate: Smash Back @ Adrian — 18 vs AC misses
Bartok: Hits all three targets in spite of the penalty for crossing the wall.
Spitting Drake: Move: Walk to (P,12) Standard: Caustic Spit @ Bartok — 25 vs Reflex hits for 13 acid damage (5 off from THP, 8 regular).
Map Notes: • Illumination: Bright Light • Doors: Doors to the cottage & outbuildings are sturdy wood (Strength:16 to break down; or, AC5, Fort10, Ref5, 20hp) • Embankment: This steep, dirt road embankment is Difficult Terrain • Furnishings: The furniture is lightly built & offers no impediment to movement - a moving character simply kicks the furnishings aside. Furnishings can be used as improvised weapons. A bed or table flipped on its side (standard action) becomes a low wall, providing cover against attacks across it. • Tree: The square occupied by the tree's trunk is impassable but provides cover. Climbing the tree requires an Athletics:10 check, and a creature up a tree gains concealment. • Wall: The fieldstone wall stands 4 feet high and provides cover against attacks that cross it. It costs 2 squares of movement to cross the wall. • Well: This 15-foot-deep well is surrounded by a low stone wall (+2 bonus to saving throw to catch yourself). Climbing out of the well is difficult (Athletics:20). • Windows: Creatures firing through the windows of the cottage have cover against attacks from the outside.
(16) Iron Circle Enforcer is a human who looks to be an elite fighter, one who focuses on inflicting pain. She's carrying a heavy flail and wearing a suit of chainmail along with a black surcoat embroidered with a red-trimmed gray circle.
(16) Spitting Drake is a reptilian beast which, as the name indicates, seems to be capable of spitting.
(16) Iron Circle Rabble are humans who look to be dime-a-dozen toughs. They're each wielding a mace and otherwise appear to be wearing normal clothing, plus a black cloack embroidered with a gray circle.
• Ad Hominem— Attacking the person's circumstances, not addressing the argument. • Ad Hominem Abusive (Personal Attack)— Insulting the person, not addressing the argument. • Ad Hominem Tu Quoque— Saying the person's inconsistent, not addressing the argument. • Appeal to Authority/Belief/Common Practice/Consequence of a Belief/Emotion/Fear/Flattery/Novelty/Pity/Popularity/Ridicule/Spite/Tradition— Using emotion instead of Fact. • Bandwagon— Use of peer pressure. • Begging the Question— Assuming premises which haven't necessarily been agreed to. • Biased Sample— Using a sampling which may not properly represent the whole. • Burden of Proof— Shifting it to the wrong side. • Circumstantial Ad Hominem— Attacking the person's interests in supporting their argument. • Composition— Assuming that the whole has the same qualities as individual parts. • Confusing Cause & Effect— Assuming that one thing causes another because they appear in conjunction. • Division— Assuming that the individual parts have the same qualities as the whole. • False Dilemma— Assuming that only two options exist. • Gambler's Fallacy— Assuming the odds have changed because of past occurances • Genetic— Assuming a perceived defect in the origin of a claim is proof of a defect in the claim. • Guilt by Association— Attacking others who agree with the claim. • Hasty Generalization— Assuming a quality based on too small a sample size. • Ignoring the Common Cause— Assuming there is no outside cause of two connected things. • Middle Ground— Assuming the midpoint of two extremes must be correct. • Misleading Vividness— Assuming a colorful anecdote outweighs statistical evidence. • Poisoning the Well— Using unprovable claims about the person instead of addressing the argument. • Post Hoc— Assuming that something caused something else simply because it happened first. • Questionable Cause— Assuming that one thing causes another. • Red Herring— Using irrelevant evidence to divert a discussion. • Relativist Fallacy— Asserting that a claim may be true for some but not for the speaker. • Slippery Slope— Assuming the inevitability of one event based on another. • Special Pleading— Claiming exemption without justification. • Spotlight— Assuming individuals that get the most attention to be indicative of the whole. • Straw Man— Misrepresenting the opposing argument. • Two Wrongs Make a Right— Justifying something unethical/immoral as response or pre-emption to something else unethical/immoral.
Response to those who like to compare 4e to a Video GameShow
Also, I find that the "D&D 4e is like an MMO" argument is often a sign of someone who is deliberately being obtuse and/or is potentially ignorant of actual MMO play. As someone who only ended a 6-year World of Warcraft addiction a year ago, I can say that most of your bullet points actually don't match up to the truth of it.
In D&D 4e, you can choose a hybrid, you can choose to play one class as though it were another (people played Warlords as Bards frequently, when the edition first came out, and Rangers were refluffed to Monks), you can focus your class on its secondary role (a Warlock who is more controller than striker, for instance), you can multiclass, and you can create a particular concept (a mounted lancer, a charger, etc.) within the mechanics via feats, choice of powers, and choice of skills. You decide which set of stats you use--are you a Chaladin, Straladin, or Baladin?--and you have ultimate influence on how your character turns out in the end. Yes, powers require you to be using a particular weapon within your class's available selection, but the powers are not themselves tied to the gear. Powers tied to weapons or armor are typically powers that belong to the item, not to the character class that's most likely to use it.
Yes, there are only so many powers available, and these will be what you do in battle; this is all that the designers created. Yes, there is a time-frame in which they can be used; this has always been the case, even in the days of Vancian casting. Yes, there are suggested builds, but you can routinely ignore those if it pleases you; the only parts of a class you have to take are the class features, and even those have options at this point. But the only way that this can be considered at all conflatable with MMO character building/playing is if you are deliberately ignoring all of that.
In WoW, you choose a class and you're done. No multiclassing or hybridization, no way to mimic one class with careful building of a different one. There is a firm dividing line on what is a WoW class. No secondary roles or creative concepts, either; you're going to be what the class sets out to be, and that's it. You'll always have the same stat allocation as another of your class, because you get set numbers as you level up, and you've got at best four options--and that's only the Druid class--to build, and if you plan on running dungeons, particularly heroic level ones, or raiding, you'd better not even think of deviating from the single defined best build on the talent tree for what you want to do. It was only recently, with the complete tear-down and recreation of talent trees for Mists of Pandaria, that there was a concept of there being anything but the one best build that people who calculated such mechanical advantages (the folks on Elitist Jerks, for example), and the people who did things like achieve "World First" at various top-tier raids set precedent for.
Also, no class will ever not have a specific set of powers; all Priests in WoW have the same baseline, with deviation only based upon their talent tree specialization, where a D&D4e player could take whatever power in their class pleases them. Any Retribution Paladin will be the same as any other in terms of powers, because that is what a RetPally is. Any Assassination Rogue will always have the same powers as another, etc. All powers are always on specific cool-downs, but will always be there when they start a battle, where a 4e PC might enter an encounter with only At-Wills, or without their Daily powers due to what plot has done up until that point. Furthermore, no power that is not already specifically tied to an item will ever "require" you have that item, to my recollection. Classes get all their powers based on class; gear only gives bonuses to stats, possibly cuts down cast times for abilities or cooldowns, grants temporary extra bonuses to stats (the latter two most often on the raid tier equipment), and on rare occassions an extra power that may or may not be valuable, as some are only special effects instead of valuable abilities.
Most honest/open response on why DDN needs to be InclusiveShow
I've always felt it is in the best interests of D&D to be as inclusive across the playerbase as they can be and still have a game. I've never felt though that making a game that was inclusive within a group was very useful or even desirable. DM's and players can decide amongst themselves what options or restrictions they want for their games. I tend to lean to the DM to make most of those decisions but again that is a group specific thing.
Having said that. I get the distinct impression that there are a lot of players on these boards who come from groups that generally ruled against their own desires. It's almost like they are an oppressed minority from a gaming perspective. I also get the impression that they tend to advocate against things that if available their fellow group members might like and vote them down on.
Do a lot of you feel this way?
Just for clarification...here are some examples... 1. Alignment restrictions as an option. 2. Alignment Mechanics 3. Martial healing 4. Races being included or not.
I know my perspective is not that I often play at tables where my likes are not represented. Instead, my perspective comes from the many years I spent being a bad DM. I was a bad DM because my guidance came from the books, and the books gave bad advice. The books told me that alignment was a useful approach to roleplaying, so I went with it even though it felt kind of weird to me. Now I know that, at least in my style of running games, alignment destroys rp. I trusted the books to give good advice, and it messed up my game. Now I'm much more mature as a DM, so I know how to take advice with a grain of salt. And I still learn new stuff every session I run.
I don't want future DMs to go through my problems again. There's a big enough DM shortage as it is. DMing well is hard.
The biggest thing I had to unlearn in my process of becoming a good DM was the idea that the game is a simulation of a world. I understand many DMs prefer a more simulationist approach, although I am always skeptical simply because I would have said the same thing until I learned and grew as a DM. This doesn't mean their approach is completely invalid, but it still gives me a personal twinge when I see a regression back to 3e era sim style gaming.
I also have noticed many groups where one or two old-school players run a whole group's playstyle because the newer players aren't even aware there are other ways of doing things. The newer players tell me stories of things they hated in the session, and I end up explaining to them how those things they hate are very fixable, and in fact are fixed in the newer edition of the game their older players have told them is terrible.
In regard to things like martial healing, I don't think it's necessary for it to be in the game for the game to be fun. However, the attitude that says martial healing is terrible and shouldn't exist is an attitude that, to me, reveals a wrongheaded approach to the game. Therefore, my fight for it to be an option is to help legitimize the more narrative approach that I think is what most players want, but many don't know is possible, because they've never been exposed to it.
As the sounds of battle draw near, the entity begins to laugh menacingly in Breelana's skull. The old familar burning of adrenaline coursing through her veins brings a gasp of pain from her as she releases a burst of energy from her rod. She aims at the drake that seems to be after the holy man, but the shot goes wide.
Senna smiles as the enforcer lands a blow on her. With a wordless cry, she whirls her axe in a wide arc, and sends the blade right toward the enforcer's chest, mirroring the blow she received.
The rest of the unit comes charging up over the embankment, some vaulting the wall and some simply attacking across it. Senna and Bartok each get their share of attacks, but the brunt of the assault is on Adrian — whose defensive stance manages to keep him from taking much significant damage.
Map Notes: • Illumination: Bright Light • Doors: Doors to the cottage & outbuildings are sturdy wood (Strength:16 to break down; or, AC5, Fort10, Ref5, 20hp) • Embankment: This steep, dirt road embankment is Difficult Terrain • Furnishings: The furniture is lightly built & offers no impediment to movement - a moving character simply kicks the furnishings aside. Furnishings can be used as improvised weapons. A bed or table flipped on its side (standard action) becomes a low wall, providing cover against attacks across it. • Tree: The square occupied by the tree's trunk is impassable but provides cover. Climbing the tree requires an Athletics:10 check, and a creature up a tree gains concealment. • Wall: The fieldstone wall stands 4 feet high and provides cover against attacks that cross it. It costs 2 squares of movement to cross the wall. • Well: This 15-foot-deep well is surrounded by a low stone wall (+2 bonus to saving throw to catch yourself). Climbing out of the well is difficult (Athletics:20). • Windows: Creatures firing through the windows of the cottage have cover against attacks from the outside.
(16) Iron Circle Enforcer is a human who looks to be an elite fighter, one who focuses on inflicting pain. She's carrying a heavy flail and wearing a suit of chainmail along with a black surcoat embroidered with a red-trimmed gray circle.
(16) Spitting Drake is a reptilian beast which, as the name indicates, seems to be capable of spitting.
(16) Iron Circle Rabble are humans who look to be dime-a-dozen toughs. They're each wielding a mace and otherwise appear to be wearing normal clothing, plus a black cloack embroidered with a gray circle.
• Ad Hominem— Attacking the person's circumstances, not addressing the argument. • Ad Hominem Abusive (Personal Attack)— Insulting the person, not addressing the argument. • Ad Hominem Tu Quoque— Saying the person's inconsistent, not addressing the argument. • Appeal to Authority/Belief/Common Practice/Consequence of a Belief/Emotion/Fear/Flattery/Novelty/Pity/Popularity/Ridicule/Spite/Tradition— Using emotion instead of Fact. • Bandwagon— Use of peer pressure. • Begging the Question— Assuming premises which haven't necessarily been agreed to. • Biased Sample— Using a sampling which may not properly represent the whole. • Burden of Proof— Shifting it to the wrong side. • Circumstantial Ad Hominem— Attacking the person's interests in supporting their argument. • Composition— Assuming that the whole has the same qualities as individual parts. • Confusing Cause & Effect— Assuming that one thing causes another because they appear in conjunction. • Division— Assuming that the individual parts have the same qualities as the whole. • False Dilemma— Assuming that only two options exist. • Gambler's Fallacy— Assuming the odds have changed because of past occurances • Genetic— Assuming a perceived defect in the origin of a claim is proof of a defect in the claim. • Guilt by Association— Attacking others who agree with the claim. • Hasty Generalization— Assuming a quality based on too small a sample size. • Ignoring the Common Cause— Assuming there is no outside cause of two connected things. • Middle Ground— Assuming the midpoint of two extremes must be correct. • Misleading Vividness— Assuming a colorful anecdote outweighs statistical evidence. • Poisoning the Well— Using unprovable claims about the person instead of addressing the argument. • Post Hoc— Assuming that something caused something else simply because it happened first. • Questionable Cause— Assuming that one thing causes another. • Red Herring— Using irrelevant evidence to divert a discussion. • Relativist Fallacy— Asserting that a claim may be true for some but not for the speaker. • Slippery Slope— Assuming the inevitability of one event based on another. • Special Pleading— Claiming exemption without justification. • Spotlight— Assuming individuals that get the most attention to be indicative of the whole. • Straw Man— Misrepresenting the opposing argument. • Two Wrongs Make a Right— Justifying something unethical/immoral as response or pre-emption to something else unethical/immoral.
Response to those who like to compare 4e to a Video GameShow
Also, I find that the "D&D 4e is like an MMO" argument is often a sign of someone who is deliberately being obtuse and/or is potentially ignorant of actual MMO play. As someone who only ended a 6-year World of Warcraft addiction a year ago, I can say that most of your bullet points actually don't match up to the truth of it.
In D&D 4e, you can choose a hybrid, you can choose to play one class as though it were another (people played Warlords as Bards frequently, when the edition first came out, and Rangers were refluffed to Monks), you can focus your class on its secondary role (a Warlock who is more controller than striker, for instance), you can multiclass, and you can create a particular concept (a mounted lancer, a charger, etc.) within the mechanics via feats, choice of powers, and choice of skills. You decide which set of stats you use--are you a Chaladin, Straladin, or Baladin?--and you have ultimate influence on how your character turns out in the end. Yes, powers require you to be using a particular weapon within your class's available selection, but the powers are not themselves tied to the gear. Powers tied to weapons or armor are typically powers that belong to the item, not to the character class that's most likely to use it.
Yes, there are only so many powers available, and these will be what you do in battle; this is all that the designers created. Yes, there is a time-frame in which they can be used; this has always been the case, even in the days of Vancian casting. Yes, there are suggested builds, but you can routinely ignore those if it pleases you; the only parts of a class you have to take are the class features, and even those have options at this point. But the only way that this can be considered at all conflatable with MMO character building/playing is if you are deliberately ignoring all of that.
In WoW, you choose a class and you're done. No multiclassing or hybridization, no way to mimic one class with careful building of a different one. There is a firm dividing line on what is a WoW class. No secondary roles or creative concepts, either; you're going to be what the class sets out to be, and that's it. You'll always have the same stat allocation as another of your class, because you get set numbers as you level up, and you've got at best four options--and that's only the Druid class--to build, and if you plan on running dungeons, particularly heroic level ones, or raiding, you'd better not even think of deviating from the single defined best build on the talent tree for what you want to do. It was only recently, with the complete tear-down and recreation of talent trees for Mists of Pandaria, that there was a concept of there being anything but the one best build that people who calculated such mechanical advantages (the folks on Elitist Jerks, for example), and the people who did things like achieve "World First" at various top-tier raids set precedent for.
Also, no class will ever not have a specific set of powers; all Priests in WoW have the same baseline, with deviation only based upon their talent tree specialization, where a D&D4e player could take whatever power in their class pleases them. Any Retribution Paladin will be the same as any other in terms of powers, because that is what a RetPally is. Any Assassination Rogue will always have the same powers as another, etc. All powers are always on specific cool-downs, but will always be there when they start a battle, where a 4e PC might enter an encounter with only At-Wills, or without their Daily powers due to what plot has done up until that point. Furthermore, no power that is not already specifically tied to an item will ever "require" you have that item, to my recollection. Classes get all their powers based on class; gear only gives bonuses to stats, possibly cuts down cast times for abilities or cooldowns, grants temporary extra bonuses to stats (the latter two most often on the raid tier equipment), and on rare occassions an extra power that may or may not be valuable, as some are only special effects instead of valuable abilities.
Most honest/open response on why DDN needs to be InclusiveShow
I've always felt it is in the best interests of D&D to be as inclusive across the playerbase as they can be and still have a game. I've never felt though that making a game that was inclusive within a group was very useful or even desirable. DM's and players can decide amongst themselves what options or restrictions they want for their games. I tend to lean to the DM to make most of those decisions but again that is a group specific thing.
Having said that. I get the distinct impression that there are a lot of players on these boards who come from groups that generally ruled against their own desires. It's almost like they are an oppressed minority from a gaming perspective. I also get the impression that they tend to advocate against things that if available their fellow group members might like and vote them down on.
Do a lot of you feel this way?
Just for clarification...here are some examples... 1. Alignment restrictions as an option. 2. Alignment Mechanics 3. Martial healing 4. Races being included or not.
I know my perspective is not that I often play at tables where my likes are not represented. Instead, my perspective comes from the many years I spent being a bad DM. I was a bad DM because my guidance came from the books, and the books gave bad advice. The books told me that alignment was a useful approach to roleplaying, so I went with it even though it felt kind of weird to me. Now I know that, at least in my style of running games, alignment destroys rp. I trusted the books to give good advice, and it messed up my game. Now I'm much more mature as a DM, so I know how to take advice with a grain of salt. And I still learn new stuff every session I run.
I don't want future DMs to go through my problems again. There's a big enough DM shortage as it is. DMing well is hard.
The biggest thing I had to unlearn in my process of becoming a good DM was the idea that the game is a simulation of a world. I understand many DMs prefer a more simulationist approach, although I am always skeptical simply because I would have said the same thing until I learned and grew as a DM. This doesn't mean their approach is completely invalid, but it still gives me a personal twinge when I see a regression back to 3e era sim style gaming.
I also have noticed many groups where one or two old-school players run a whole group's playstyle because the newer players aren't even aware there are other ways of doing things. The newer players tell me stories of things they hated in the session, and I end up explaining to them how those things they hate are very fixable, and in fact are fixed in the newer edition of the game their older players have told them is terrible.
In regard to things like martial healing, I don't think it's necessary for it to be in the game for the game to be fun. However, the attitude that says martial healing is terrible and shouldn't exist is an attitude that, to me, reveals a wrongheaded approach to the game. Therefore, my fight for it to be an option is to help legitimize the more narrative approach that I think is what most players want, but many don't know is possible, because they've never been exposed to it.
Tovar moves up to where the fighting is and looks the enforcer in the eye. "You are in the wrong here. Your group has no right to subjugate these people. We are in the right and together we will repel your forces." He then swings his hammer with a devine force that causes the ground to rise up and strike at those surrounding Adrian, knocking all but the enforcer to the ground.
Those members of the group close Tovar feel a wave of divine energy engulf them, fortifying them against thier foes.
My fluff was written like I hit... if I didn't I may adjust slightly
Also, I'm for taking prisoners (drake not included). We could possibly learn more from them and showing them mercy may help us (though it could be more trouble than it's worth )
Standard Action: Earthen Hall vs Iron Circle Enforcer Attack: Earthen Hall vs Iron Circle Enforcer (Fort Attack) (1d20+8=15) possible hit? Damage:Earthen Hall Damage (1d10+5=13) On Hit Effect: Enemies, including the Iron Circle Enforcer in a blast 3 (K-M, 8-10, 0-2) take 4 points of damage (Iron CIrcle Rabble 1-6 and 8 each go "unconcious", Iron Circle Enforcer takes 4 extra damage) Effect: Tovar, Bartok, Adrian, and Senna each gain a +3 power bonus ot AC and Fortitude EonT(Tovar)
AC: 20+3 Fort: 17+3 Reflex: 14 Will: 17 HP:40/40 Bloodied Value: 20 Healing Surges Used: 0/11 Surge Value: 10 Initiative Modifier: +1 Status: * + 3 power bonus to AC / Fort EonT (Tovar) Other Relevant Information: * Earth Domain Feature: You and each ally within 5 squares gain +2 power bonus to saves vs Ongoing Damage. * +1 healing done with powers that allow an ally to spend a surge (healer's broach +1) * +5 save vs Poison * Save vs knock prone * Reduce forced movement by 1 square * Whenever Tovar hit with his hammer each ally he can see may stand up as a free action. Action Points Used: 0/1
[] Dwarven Resiliance / Second Wind [] Subterranean Survivor [][] Healing Word [] Channel Divinity [] Stone Speak [X] Earthen Hall [] Granite Shield [] Nimbus of Holy Shielding [] Shield of Faith
