Quote from: Daztur;887922Well it's true that if you play 4ed wrong it won't be much fun and if you play it right it will, the problem was:
-Playing 4ed in a traditional D&D way is wrong.
-Keep on the Shadowfell did a shit job of teaching people how to play 4ed in a fun way.

Well, that definitely identifies the problem.:-)

Quote from: Justin Alexander;887397(2) The length of combats in OD&D and D&D3 were generally comparable. However, when measured across all combats OD&D averaged slightly less time per encounter because OD&D has more spells that instantly end an encounter (compared OD&D's sleep spell to D&D3's, for example). (This was somewhat counteracted at my table because ubiquitous hirelings generally increased the average number of combatants in OD&D compared to D&D3.)

Did you use side-based initiative? That was one of the main things that sped up combat for me in 0ed. At least for me a lot of the combat drag in 3ed comes in more at higher levels when people are juggling a lot of modifiers, 3d runs pretty fast for me at lower levels.

And yeah, it's really important to note that you can have an easy encounter in the older editions (as long as you fix 3ed crafting rules so you don't have fistfuls of CLW wands) since the PCs can still lose a few HPs that'll matter later in the day while that doesn't really work in 4ed, 4ed combats should be balls to the wall or not happen at all.

It matters a lot less if a 4ed fight gets reaaaaaally dragged out if you're only having one fight per session. Of course that means chucking out traditional D&D dungeon crawling completely.

Quote from: Opaopajr;887423First, I didn't like this about 4e:

Mostly on the same page here.

Sorry for so long in responding...

...

Nope, still don't give a shit about 4ed warmind powers...

Quote from: cranebump;887923Well, that definitely identifies the problem.:-)

Indeed. If you're playing 2ed and you drop it and start playing 3ed in exactly the same way and with players using exactly the same tactics it'll work fine (hell, it'll work BETTER than when players figure out how 3ed works and start poking at all of the holes in the system), or at least work fine until you've played for a few months and start getting to higher levels.

If you're played 3ed and you drop it and start playing 4ed in exactly the same way and with players using exactly the same tactics it'll be an utter disaster.

This explains why 4ed was a financial flop. Doesn't mean it can be fun but you have to, well, not use it for D&D for it to be fun. So, yeah pretty damn stupid of WotC.

Quote from: Opaopajr;887440Y'know, this is definitely not my default style of play. BUT!, considering how high D&D 4e goes, 30+ lvls and like 5+ tiers (IIRC), it is a surprisingly robust chassis for such a style of play. This might actually be the best way to pitch the game so as to bring everyone's assumptions onto the same page.

Other games can do the low level grunt or street level crack team, but few could hit the epic tiers without collapse. As much as I hate the scaling, and think bounded accuracy should be returned, this might be one instance where 4e is better. "Wanna start as a mythic hero and scrape demigod status?" is a solid pitch to narrow the scope of play and manage player expectations.

Still not something I am interested in playing. But it would have warned me off of the table earlier, to the benefit of all involved.

Yup, if you reskin things a bit even 1st level in 4ed FEELS like demigods clashing and just feels wrong for representing a few shlubs trying to get a few coins from some goblins.

QuoteI completely agree. If you're going to switch into full Tactics Skirmish mode, do so and drop the legacy material. Less 3e modifier, feats, PrCs, and tactics cruft the better. There's little to salvage from there that won't get in the way of a Good Saga.

Yeah for as much as people complain about 4ed changing too much, a lot of its biggest problems come from not jettisoning 3edisms wholesale.

QuoteThis turns Hero Points into "that second bar below Hit Points" (Mana, Skill, Power, Hero, whatever,) which is fine. Eliminating AEDU cruft also frees up analysis paralysis while also keeping things to quick heroic description. Tying finishing flourishes to battlefield conditions also retires powers to major battle tipping points, instead of front-loaded spam.

Yup, exactly, the front loaded spam was the biggest problem for 4ed as a tactical skirmish game.

QuoteI like this for pacing, tied to major battlefield tipping points. The challenge would be designing them so that they are harder to repeatedly setup — like bouncing in and out of being bloodied with healing. If you standardize the triggers, like the above three used for every class, but with different effects, you could keep consistency while quickly checking power level.

Good points. For the bouncing in and out of bloodied with healing, the idea would be to make that inefficient due to having in-combat healing by a very inefficient use of precious healing surges.

QuoteTriggers like, Sleighted Encounter or Awoke Guardian Curiosity, could be moments to use Hero Points. As long as Hero Points are appropriately powerful to the trigger — essentially mostly a palliative (not a coup de grace) to ameliorate the loss — this could work well. Then it affects your last condition that to succeed you want to use as little Hero Points as possible, and thus bring a strategic element back into the tactics.

Not following you here.

QuoteAnd, returning to my Hero Points during Explore and Social, it seems we are on the same page here. Again, the easiest way would be to tier things to various contextual critical conditions, and then provide Hero Point Powers as a class variable solution. And again, this would similarly tax the same Hero Point pool so as to return a Strategic element along with the Tactical element; you only get so many Boo-Boo Erasers, so try to solve as much as possible without going nova.

Yeah, a lot of 4ed fans call for siloing everything between "can only be used in combat" abilities and "can never be used in combat" abilities which I think is really bad design as it makes everything tactical and erases the strategic angle.

QuoteHow would you like to go from here? I'm thinking of starting with at least 3 Tipping Points per Combat, Explore, Social, and then giving each class its equivalent Heroic Reaponse.

Again not quite following the tipping point bit.

Quote from: Opaopajr;8874443 Prospective Tipping Points per Game Facet

Combat

1. Bloodied
2. Downed Ally/Self
3. Last Stand/Sacrifice

Explore

1. Evidence/Slip Up
2. Exposed
3. Cornered

Social

1. Faux Pas
2. Gross Breach
3. Grave Insult

Hmm... Next to try to fill the four main classes. I'll start with the Fighter.

Fighter

Combat

1. Bloodied. Second Wind.
2. Downed Ally/Self. Vengeance.
3. Last Stand. ... Blade Whirlwind.

Explore

1. Evidence/Slip Up. Olympian Athletics. (STR check Expertise?)
2. Exposed. Olympian Endurance. (CON check Expertise?)
3. Cornered. In the Zone. (As the two above plus Lucky STR & CON saves?)

Social

1. Faux Pas. Forgiveable Brute (let slide due to martial skill; possible attraction by target).
2. Gross Breach. Minor Debt of Honor/Gentleman's Duel.
3. Grave Insult. Appeasement Geas.

Ah, OK, now with these more concrete examples I'm starting to get it.

So just like in combat, out of combat your powerful abilities need a set-back to be triggered. I kind of like how there is some incentive to act like a huge ass socially to trigger some of the social abilities.

What would things like "in the zone" or "appeasement geas" do concretely?

Quote from: Batman;887505I dunno, my group has plenty of time and fun role-playing in 4e. What rules actually make a game force role-play? From my limited D&D experiences (AD&D 2e, 3.PF, 4e and 5e) the amount of role-play put into the system is almost always derived from the people playing, not rules thrust at us. One can, quite simply, play most (if not ALL) editions without any regards to role-play and just focus on the combat side of the system.

For me at least the thing that encourages RP is to have all of the little details of the world matter so that players have to pay attention and engage with them. Too much abstraction turns all of those details into "fluff" that can be ignored as window dressing. For me at least when you've got a game where the distinction between fluff and crunch is clear and meaningful then RP gets impacted negatively.

Also having a big combat focus doesn't hurt RP, RP doesn't mean "stuff you do outside of combat" or "talking to NPCs" some of the best RP in my sessions has been stuff that happened during combat.

Quote from: Spinachcat;887586Agreed. This is where 13th Age's Escalation die is a great addition. Players have to choose whether to burn powers early or wait until they can get a good bonus to increase their chance for success.

Yes, that is clever a nice clear simple way to getting players to think about saving their powers for later.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;887634It made me want to murder my own face. My biggest problem with D&D4 was undoubtedly the pointlessly dissociated mechanics, but it was the bloated and poorly designed combat system that completely killed it for me.

The same thing drove me craaaaaaaazy during the Keep on the Shadowfell bit I played, I had to do goofy stuff like challenge Ironwhatever the super kobold to a one on one duel just to break up the grind that went on and on and on and on.

That said, one way to deal with the gargantuan combats is just have one a session and go all out in it. But that means totally shifting the way your campaign is organized.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;887635This is mostly a random thought and probably beyond the scope of what this thread is trying to accomplish, but I wonder what kind of result you'd get if you ditched the "daily" concept and instead made it so that you needed to set up more powerful abilities before you could use them.

For example, to cast a fireball you might need to expend three Move actions. (So the wizard could stand there slinging magic missile cantrips, but if they can stay in one place long enough -- BOOM!) Or if you wanted to perform some awesome martial arts move, you might have to (a) hit them twice and (b) flank them. Or maybe you need to perform a specific sequence of lesser moves before pulling off the "big combo finisher".

Yup, that's the sort of thing I'd be adding. Much more fun than fireball at the start and then a long slow crawl of magic missile to slowly put the fight out of its misery.

Edit: kids waking up soon, time to start making breakfast. Will hit Opaopajr's newer post in a while. Will need some time to mull over it, as if often this case with this posts, they really set my brain's cogs a-turning...

Good question, those were spitballed ideas how a fighter might respond to such extreme explore and social situations.

In the Zone is about that weird body+mind alignment during high adrenaline fight or flight moments.

So it would have the 5e equivalent of Expertise for STR & DEX checks - the "as above" part of Olympian Athletics & Endurance - and 5e equivalent of Lucky for STR & CON saves.

To convert for 4e, perhaps skill checks that challenge even a mundane professional get waved away. Unless they are mythic! in difficulty, don't roll. And even then those mythic skill checks get a simple +2 bonus to the d20 percentile roll (roll d20 as d100% in 5% increments).

As to 4e the Saves, perhaps roll 3d20 and take the best? Or perhaps continuous Adv on STR & CON saves until escape or dead?

Appeasing Geas would be less mechanical and more a setting tether/restriction. Like a temporary Paladin Oath, it would be the fighter swearing a terrible binding oath to appease the gravely insulted party — or assuage his sense of lost honor. So it would be akin to a knight pledging a quest to a shamed princess, or a divested noble swearing vengeance onto his usurper.

Yes, it essentially means you use a Hero Point as big social boo-boo eraser by turning it into a quest hook.

----------

They are just spitballed ideas for other game facets. They are meant to scoop the Mythic PC out from a mundane mistake, if the player likes. But since each game facet can tap the same point pool, eventually strategy as well as tactics comes into play. So creative and cautious use of everyday equipment, skills, and spells overall helps reserve Hero Points for real big trouble.

(And yes, the "asshole potential" is rather nice. Hubris is a big part of mythic stories. And tapping out one's pool prematurely to be a jerk and reap the rewards can leave a hero exposed for a nasty fall.)

Can someone explain to me what the fuck traditional D&D means?

Quote from: Batman;887944Can someone explain to me what the fuck traditional D&D means?

Something remotely close to resembling the aspects common to the first 35 years of the game?

Just a guess.

Quote from: Batman;887944Can someone explain to me what the fuck traditional D&D means?

Usually somewhere between "D&D as designed/approved by Gygax" and "D&D as I like it."

Quote from: Batman;887944Can someone explain to me what the fuck traditional D&D means?

For me that means: PCs go into a dangerous environment and slowly get their resources get worn down via attrition until they either die or escape back to safety.

Before 4ed this had started to break down both through shifts in play style and rules (people not tracking encumbrance, people not using wandering monsters, 15 minute adventuring days, fistfuls of CLW wands, etc. etc.). Standard dungeon crawling in which the basic attrition model doesn't work isn't much fun.

From my point of 4ed tried to fix the problems that crop up in D&D when the attrition model isn't working by moving beyond it and making each fight be an interesting tactical exercise in and of itself rather than something that's mostly important because even if you win you'll lose a few HPs and some time and both are precious.

Now if you take the 4ed ruleset and try to use it for a traditional D&D attrition-based game it doesn't really work well because it takes soooooooooooooooooo looooooooooooooooong to wear a 4ed party down through gradual attrition. Things like plentiful healing resources, resources that refresh after a "short rest," combat vs. non-combat abilities being siloed so that you're not burning dailies outside of combat in the way that you'd burn spell slots to get around non-combat obstacles in older editions mean that if you took a bog standard TSR-D&D dungeoncrawl, converted everything over to 4ed stats and then ran everything with a bog standard TSR-D&D playstyle it would be an agonizing exercise in tedium.

The way you have fun with 4ed is to approach it in a completely different way and have big massive set-piece battles be the centerpiece, not a running series of Fantasy Fucking Vietnam skirmishes.

For example 4ed would be fun for a campaign centered around arena battles in which each session it capped with one massive gladiatorial battle and the rest of the session is interpersonal drama, assembling teams, trying to purchase monsters that's bring in the crowd, trash talking the opposition, attempting to cheat, attempting to stop the other team from cheating, etc. etc. That'd be fun. A dungeon crawl with five combats in a session with 4ed is not fun.

Quote from: Daztur;887955For example 4ed would be fun for a campaign centered around arena battles in which each session it capped with one massive gladiatorial battle and the rest of the session is interpersonal drama, assembling teams, trying to purchase monsters that's bring in the crowd, trash talking the opposition, attempting to cheat, attempting to stop the other team from cheating, etc. etc.

So the first season of the TV series Spartacus?

Quote from: Bren;887957So the first season of the TV series Spartacus?

That's exactly what I was thinking. The prequel season too. 4ed would be perfect for that.

Quote from: Doom;887872Holy shit, you don't know about action points? Fair enough.

A level 1 warlord has Commander's Strike...again, the Fightbrain is getting an extra attack this way. Any half-elf in the party could have this as well.

We're at level 1, and already have 3 different ways the Battlemind can attack while also being incredibly resistant to damage. Seeing as a "typical" fight in 4e takes 4 rounds, we've got 3 rounds covered with different abilities without even getting to higher level abilities.

Do you even know what a minor action is in 4e?

And this isn't even addressing marking (bit of a big deal with the Fightbrain) and opportunity attacks. A quick example, not that it will do any good:

The second "punishment" a battlemind can use on a marked enemy is mind spike, an at-will immediate reaction. A marked, adjacent enemy that deals damage to an ally with an attack which does not target the battlemind takes force and psychic damage equal to the damage it hit your pal with. So, if Zorbo the Angry Goblin Blackblade crits your combat granting ally for 14 damage and you have him marked and next to you, Zorbo will find himself in a world of hurt when he takes 14 damage.

So, start the round, use the action point, mark 3 guys, become mostly invulnerable to damage...and still become the center of attention and/or deal damage to foes. I'd go into the other Battlemind abilities that keep him close to foes so that this goes on forever, but I suspect it would be pointless.

Enough schooling people that have never even played the game, we're done here.

Oh so now it's Action Points + having a Warlord with Commander's Strike + having a Half Elf using racial ability to pick up Commanders Strike.

Lets just ignore that other pesky concept that they all have to be in melee with the same model in order to use all of this silliness, pah to that peskiness.

Again get the fuck outta here with your stupid asinine bullshit.

Quote from: Batman;887944Can someone explain to me what the fuck traditional D&D means?

Around here, anything besides 4e.