/4eg/ Fourth Edition Dungeons and Dragons General

So I've always wondered:
What's the story behind the offline compendium?
It's not an official wotc program so how did it come into existence?
Did some anon scrape the entire compendium and build a graphical interface for it?

>>53040077
It used to be official but, much like PDFs, was pirated more often than sold so it was canned for the online one. The modern day one is the last update for the old offline one with a fan patch for the missing info.

>>53040077
Yepp, just scraped it. IIRC, the funin.space one is the same thing, only online.

Does anyone here have experience with the alternative rewards from DMG2?
Grandmaster Training, Divine Boons and whatever else they are called.
I love the idea behind that but I feel like there never was enough support for the idea and I'm not even sure how to get these things in the builder in the first place.

>>53041108
They are in the shop.

They work pretty well in campaigns with inherent bonuses.

I've always wondered other settings using the 4e AEDU tactical combat design.

I've thought of Starcraft, the Marine as Defender, Ghost as Striker, Firebat as Controller and Medic as Leader.

Or Mechwarrior. Maybe Shadowrun.

>>53039990

The character builder link in these OPs doesn't work properly. It only has one of the two fan patches and fails to load.

I have a different version I got from elsewhere that seems to work better, if uploading it would be helpful?

>>53041108

Sadly, like many of the more interesting parts of 4e, they were never fully developed, but they provide a framework to make use of. I certainly like the idea.

Why is our game so bad, lads?

>>53041152
Modern XCOM works too (AFAIK, it was literally based on 4e).

>>53041206
The memes, Jack. People fell for them.

>>53041140
Oh yeah you're right. No clue how I've missed them.

Now I wonder if I can manage to make a couple new ones by adding them to the .part files.

4e is my favorite one shot game edition

character creation is fast
combat is explosive and balanced
the mechanics are tight

I always start in media res because that's the best way to start one shots.

"Oh shit you're 3 floors deep in a dungeon and the halfling porter fell into an acid trap with the bag containing the food, the map, and most of your treasure into an acid trap. What will you do?"

Then you just roll with it.

But I can't see myself ever running an actual 4e campaign.

>>53041230
You should find the XML files it uses and edit those.

It's a pretty simple layout. from what I remember.

So I've recently started an IRL 4e game. The players just hit level 4 but one of them couldn't find any items that really interested them. After talking things through with the player, we had the idea of them finding a blessed book full of rituals. I gave them the choice of either picking themselves up to the total gold value of a level 4 item, or of me picking them and giving them more bang for their buck, but not a hand picked selection.

Now I'm trying to figure out some fun and interesting rituals to give them access to.

I'm also giving extra support to the rituals system by having the PCs find ritual components/reagents, a GP value specifically for using with rituals and such.

>>53040348
spaceguy here, you're correct

>>53041304
Good!

Rituals are great, but you need to support them to really shine.

Don't be afraid of making up your own rituals as well.

And maybe have some rituals that are just way too powerful to use, but for way too high cost and/or unique reagents. Item creation rituals are pretty good for this.

>>53039990
Even with the 2010 update, this charactere builder seems to be missing MANY character options. I never subscribed to it myself, but I had a friend who did during 4e's heyday, and it was much more expansive than this. It doesn't even seem to have player's handbook II or III content, let alone more esoteric stuff like Heroes of Shadow.

>>53041272
Yeah. I found them in 03-base-items.part
I'm assuming those are the files you mean, they're XML and they have all of the boons from what I've seen.
I'm not so sure about the value of the internal-id field but I'd imagine that just has to be some unique identifier.
Or are there other files / other ways to edit those besides just doing it in a text editor of your choice?

>>53041161
If it has all the stuff, sure but I think the one in OP works just fine, you just have to run CBLoader and let the index file work its magic.

>>53041395
On a second look, it does have SOME phb II content, but only classes, no races. It's still severely lacking. What a disappointment.

>>53041446
>>53041395

This is the version I've been using with two patches instead of one. I tried the OP version with my IRL group but it didn't work on some and didn't have things like dark sun themes on others.

http://www.mediafire.com/file/38pt0j437xwz8gl/4e+LCB+Complete+Setup.zip

>>53041506
I followed the installation instructions in the readme, and it's telling me that errors were encountered while loading. Should I put my log into a pastebin?

>>53041506
>>53041730
The CharacterBuilder.exe also encounters an error and fails to launch.

>>53041797

You want to launch with cbloader.exe, not the character builder.

>>53041807
"Errors Encountered While Loading"
Want me to copy the log file into a pastebin for you?

>>53041807
>>53041830
https://pastebin.com/k7Hem4tg

>>53041934
Oh well. Guess I just won't play 4e.

If I wanted to create a phantom thief styled character, what would I want to do to set that up?

>>53042073

Rogue and pick a lot of Stealth/Thievery skill powers?

>>53041987
Anon, you don't need to do use the character builder to make a pc.
Use funin.space and some google, it's outrageously easy to find whatever info you want, unless what you actually want to do is theorycraft pcs.

>>53042073
>phantom thief styled character
Er, I do not know that reference, anon.
Help me out?

>>53042113
>unless what you actually want to do is theorycraft pcs
yes.

>>53041934
Gimme a minute, I think you're missing a patch or two. Currently uploading a complete package.

>>53041934
>>53041987
>>53042273
https://mega.nz/#!IclTgDrS!ZvoRfm1yIjWTrcQHgNDLIPocd6cEO1a8B5oHjs4FV3E

Here, try it with this and have another go. This one comes with all the updates and even some instructions.

>>53042273
Anon, one of the reasons 4e never really took off on /tg/ is because it doesn't serve the pseudo-intellectual/autistic needs of posters here to simply invent wacky, rules hair splitting shit that will never see play.
4e is very much a "you make your dude to play the game, not think about playing the game" kinda game.

>>53042491

Being fair, 4e does have its own fair share of theorycrafting, broken builds and optimised play which looks very different from normal play.

Then again, it's also super easy to ignore all that, and even at mid to low optimisation the system works fine.

>>53042191
Always have entertained the idea of a mostly skill based character with less emphasis on fighting, plus have been playing a lot of persona 5 recently

>>53042583

Will not work in 4e.

A core part of how 4e works is that everyone can fight. They might fight in different ways, less direct or more subtle, but 4e puts combat squarely at the center of the game and gives everyone tools to capable combatants.

>>53042623
This.
You will, and the game expects you to be able to, contribute to a fight on your own terms.
You can have a lot of skills and such, but if you can't add to combat, you are effectively damning the party.

>>53042623
>>53042651
Yea, thinking about this now, I feel it would work better in 3E or something, maybe I'll try making one in that edition instead

Sorry for sounding like a moron, I don't know much about 4E

>>53042703

It's cool, it's a fair question to ask.

4e is a system with a very specific, focused design. It does one thing- Action focused high fantasy- but it does it very well.

For something within that speciality, it's amazing. For anything else, you're better off going elsewhere.

>>53042703
What you can play in 4e is a pacifist cleric or a no-attack warlord but those are pretty specific cases.
Those characters still contribute greatly in combat just not by attacking / dealing damage.

>>53042738

Lazylords still deal a fuckton of damage, they just do so indirectly.

>>53039990
So I know I'm about three hours out of date, but on the people talking about half-level skill gain:

I agree that there should be skill influence from stuff like half level, but take this into account when considering the fact that there has not been explicit instruction.

In discussing the evolution of language, some anthropologists once conducted a study trying to determine how much education it takes to pick up flintknapping (stone tool production). They separated test subjects into three groups, and had them be instructed in the production of Oldowan (the simplest) stone tools by people who were already experts in flintknapping.

One group was instructed using english, as the control; another through gesture; and a third just watched with no instruction.

After a bunch of watching and imitating, they had the students of stone tool production go off and try to make Oldowan tools on their own. Of the people who only watched, and were not instructed in stool tool production at all, basically none of them were able to make their own tools. Of those few who did, they were unable to teach it to a new generation of people. (The people who were instructed in english were nearly perfect at passing it on and producing themselves; the gestural people got about 75%)

I'm not saying that it's impossible to pick anything up by osmosis - but Oldowan tools can be effectively learned in the first few weeks of a semester of a flintknapping class. Lockpicking is a lot more complex than that, and having receieved no instruction, it seems like the barbarian isn't gonna be able to do it.

>>53042073
Literally Thief of Legend.

http://funin.space/compendium/epicdestiny/Thief-of-Legend.html

Why are there two threads BTW?

>>53042411
It seems to be working perfectly now.
Thank you, my good sir!
You are a gentleman and a scholar!

>>53043303
Glad it works for you now. I'm guessing the one you tried initially was missing a patch or something. It's a bit hard to diagnose from the logfiles so it's usually easier to start all over again with something that I know to work.

(posting here too)

>>53034806
That was me.

I have sorta started. Going to the movies, will probably not post about it today, but gonna post tomorrow maybe, if interested.

>>53042517
Another thing - optimised 4e play generally revolved around the game as it was played. The notions of alpha-striking and the basics of defending basically made sense and were incorporated for anyone that played 4e for a while - bust out your strongest powers at the beginning of a fight and it's basically won; the Defender has to make people not want to attack him or his allies, you want to reach the frontlines as fast as possible if you're anything but a ranged dude like a controller or similar...

Ultimately 4e's optimisation guys were people that actually played the game a bunch and understood the game rather than just reading the rules.

>>53043886
The only issue I had with a lot of the charop for 4e is that it very much treated every class in a bubble and if you had more than a 30% chance of failure, you were doing it wrong.
The core math of the game is based on a 55/45% chance of success on your own, but you aren't on your own, you have an entire party that is supposed to be working with you, giving you bonuses, providing CA, supporting your success as you support theirs.
Imo, 4e is one of the few games where white room theorizing ill serves the game due to how party focused it is.

>>53044496
Most 4e optimization is based around the idea of being good regardless of the rest of your party

The strongest 4e optimization is full-party optimization, stuff like the radiant mafia, but that sort of thing relies on everyone intentionally building characters to accomplish the same goal, and while asking people to fill out the standard party roles is easy, asking everyone to play exactly the right build in the right class in that role is generally not a nice thing to do

>>53039990
Hey /4eg/ im fifth edition guy and think that while 4e isnt for me alot of the mechanics seem interesting and id like to implement them, anyone care to elaborate on the 1-hp minions?

>>53044868
Minions are lesser foes designed to speed along the game by providing enemies that while threatening, are also easily dispatched. It lends a heroic air to the game, bolsters the enemy forces, and allows you to have more heads on field with less book keeping.
I know a few guys who run 5e who use minions in their own games.

So, who here likes 4e for the refreshing new "generic D&D" lore it used? Replacing the Great Wheel with the World Axis, creating a not!Greyhawk default pantheon, Arkhosia, Bael Turath, the Eladrin-Elf-Drow split, and all that?

>>53044868
You familiar with the concept of easily dispatched foes who come in hordes but fall swiftly to the heroes? Orcs against Legolas and Gimli in Lord of the Rings, most nameless swordsmen in Conan, characters like that? The minions role is a way to more easily replicate those kinds of mooks in your games.

>>53045291
>So, who here likes 4e for the refreshing new "generic D&D" lore it used? Replacing the Great Wheel with the World Axis, creating a not!Greyhawk default pantheon, Arkhosia, Bael Turath, the Eladrin-Elf-Drow split, and all that?

Yeah, man. The great wheel can suck my dick.

>>53045291
I really like the Eladrin-Elf-Drow split and the new default pantheon but I don't care (or know much) about the other things you mentioned.

>>53045291
4e's lore is generally pretty high quality, but more important than that I think it's basically never outright stupid.

There's lots of great setting details, like the bowl-shaped city at the bottom of the Astral Sea said to have been thrown there by Moradin.

Got into 4e about a year ago with my friends, any advice for a druid summoner? About to hit level 9.

>>53042583
>>53042623
I made a bard that had a +4 bonus to every untrained skill, and additional skill bonuses that made her exceptionally skilled at most things but athletics
The only really big benefit from this beyond the rare skill challenge was for rituals, because I could do stupid combinations of things
The best thing I ever did that subverted the rules never actually required a skill challenge beyond a diplomacy check.

>>53042959
I agree 100%, but one could argue that the DC to unlock a lock should be a level-based challenge
But then why artificially inflate both the skill roll AND the DC, when you could just not have the half-level at all?

>>53047423
This false growth (you attack with +1 against a monster with +1 AC) is because players love big numbers. Seeing your hero go from +6 attack to +30 is cool, even if the enemy AC grew from 16 to 40.

The bad part is what I call the jRPG slime effect: at first level you fight green slimes, at 10th you fight red slimes and at 20th you fight blue slimes, all identical, only different in raw numbers. Leads to a bloat on the Monsters Manual.

5e did this away with the bounded accuracy, but the theme of the game is other. 4e is about heroes that become gods. 5e is about hobos becoming heroes.

>>53042959
>>53047423
The way I look at it, the half-level to skill just exemplifies how getting more powerful in general makes you just better at everything.

A 10th level barbarian didn't "pick up training" from the 1st level rogue, when he uses the same bonus the rogue used 9 levels ago (lets say he's a DEX-barian, I remember that being a path), it's because he's high on spirits.

His hand is guided by spirits. Prankster spirits whisper into his ears, and he can hear them ever more clearly. A thousand dead thieves scream at him from beyond the veil as he triggers the poison dart trap, then laughs off the poison because he is an STR primary class with a good con save.

>>53048193
Whirling Barbarians are the Dexterity Barbarians, didn't have a really good Con save but who the fuck didn't take Endurance as a Barbarian.

Speaking of which, Barbarian|Rogue isn't that bad of a Hybrid.

My favorite meme build

Bugbear
Barbarian
Avalanche Strike
Mordencrad

lol, 6d8 first level encounter power

File: 1474040691069.png (2MB, 2923x2479px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2923x2479px

You ever try to run polearm shinnanigans with a fighter build?

I had one set up that was designed to shut monsters down with an immobilize standard attack at level 11.

They are basically just stuck there twiddling their thumbs while you've got reach.

>>53044868

They're basically like >>53045291
said, enemies that are in big hordes, can do enough damage to be potentially a threat in giant waves but go down in big waves as well.

Played 5e , 3e and OSR, i am reading 4th edition ph and the first thing i notice is how it haves small amount of fluff, do 4th editions takes away classes rp stuff for combat stuff?

>>53053283
No?

>>53041271

Character creation is only fast at level 1, and combat is only explosive with the MM3 maths. 4e had great promise, but shonky math out the outset, inconsistent vision, and the haters all contributed to killing it.

>>53044496
>The core math of the game is based on a 55/45% chance of success on your own
That was a horrible mistake.

>>53053283
It just separates the "RP stuff" (fluff" from the "Rules stuff" (crunch) much more cleanly than other editions.

>>53054656
And why is that?
Success is weighted in an 11+ dice roll, and only goes up with group support. I don't believe that success should be automatic, and that the drive to have every attack land on a 5+ with at least a +3/1d12 weapon is misguided at best, actively working against the grain of the game at worst.

>>53056996
Misses suck. They make the game stagnate, for both sides. They should not happen more than a quarter of the time imo.

Pegging the success at 5+ also means that you are allowed to have enemies with a bigger range of AC, with it mattering less (having an enemy with expected AC +/-5 means you hit only 1/3rd more/less, instead of half as with a success on 10+),

File: wugxfX5.gif (899KB, 500x220px) Image search: [Google]

899KB, 500x220px

4e has piqued my interest, but the memes...
>it's too much like a video game
>it's too different
>just play Pathfinder, or 5e

They dissuade my philistine friends. Nonetheless, I sense there could be things worth taking inspiration from in this edition, that may be imported to others. What do you think? What 4e content is worth sneaking into other editions, namely 5e?

>>53057123
>Misses suck. They make the game stagnate, for the players
Get it right, anon, the only ones who actually care about "failure" are players, especially those who want to win at the game.

>>53057137
Monster and encounter design in general.

Although I've heard that monster design got a lot better in Volo.

Aside from that, skill challenges and maybe some version of the improvised action table.

>>53057144
Enemies also miss, doofus. It sucks when my custom monster can't land a goddamn hit because dice hate me.

>>53057156
As the DM, your misses are an unavoidable situation because you will roll more dice than the players.
It is countered by you getting more crits than all the players put together.

>>53057195
Aye, but with 50% hit chance as the "average" I can have a monster miss all their attacks before they even get to move, even in a not alpha-striking setup.

It's likely to happen a lot, in fact.

With 5+ it's a lot less likely, and trading blows is more fun than missing. All that nice terrain (mostly) goes to waste if everyone misses their repositioning powers.

Of course, I guess you could counter that by just putting a miss effect (non damaging) on fucking everything that monsters do. That could work.

>>53057227
PCs are the ones with the 50/50, not monsters.
That actually depends on the monsters role and type.

failure is good. it builds character.
Warhammer RPG's have you succeed about a 1/3 of the time, and it just makes the game more challenging.

Also many powers still have effects that occur even if you miss.

>>53057245
PCs are 50/50? For skill DCs in PHB 1 maaaybe, but for attacks I feel like its more like 75/25.

>>53057269
75/25 is what the game ended up settling on, but unfortunately it did this via feat taxes and assumed optimization.

55% hit rate is what you will probably have with a starting 18 in your main stat, no expertise, and either implement attacks or a +2 proficiency weapon, falling to an average 50% in paragon and an average 45% in epic

Assuming a starting 20 in your main stat, expertise, and either accurate implement proficiency or a +3 proficiency weapon your hit rate will be pretty consistently 70%, rising up to 80% or higher with good party support

>>53057137
Personally? I say fluff. 4e had a lot of awesome fluff to it, sometimes laid bare, sometimes tucked away like a gem. The divide between Gods and Primal Spirits finally made druids actually feel worthy of being a separate class and not just a Captain Ethnic version of a nature priest. The World Axis was built from the grounds up to make sense and actually be fun to play in. Really, you could do a hell of a lot worse rather than bring over stuff from 4e in terms of fluff.

>>53058094
But anon! MUH BLOOD WAR! ;_;

>>53058116
You mean the same Blood War that's STILL present in 4th edition and which even got its own 4e Dragon Magazine articles talking about it? The war between Devil and Demon that is stated in books as early as the Manual of Planes that it exists and is right about ready to kick back into momentum?

The *only* grounds Planescapefags have to whinge about that stupid Blood War is that it's not the be-all, end-all revolving point of the cosmology anymore - it's one aspect of the setting to explore IF you want to, not dominating everything about planehopping. And if that's what they're complaining about, then fuck 'em.

>>53058094
>Captain Ethnic
kek

>>53057123
Go the jRPG route, with 95% hit chance. Work on damage and HP to keep the durability of monsters in 4 rounds in average as intended by design.

>>53059567
That's also not ideal, cause it removes the need for positioning for flank and other actually interesting stuff like that.

I'm pretty sure 65-75% as baseline works out best in practice.

>>53059567
yes, cause why account for probability when you can assume inevitability?

>>53059717
IRL, most attacks miss.

>>53059772
>>53059567
For the record, I'd be totally fine with a no-roll system where you could, say, spend dodge and precision tokens as a double blind to decide if you hit, miss, or graze instead of rolling a d20.

It's just not how 4e is built.

>>53059787
Not sure what that has to do wit ha game about larger than life heroes who take 6 seconds for every attack, but sure.

>>53059813
>Not sure what that has to do wit ha game about larger than life heroes who take 6 seconds for every attack, but sure.

Why are you such a little shit?

>>53059867
Because you make it easy :^)

>>53059892
I don't understand why you engage people if your only interest is in driving them away. There are better ways of getting attention.

>>53059787
4e is explicitly gamist, IRL matters less than what is fun

And besides, moreso than any other D&D edition, 4e runs with the idea that HP is an arbitrary representation, so maybe most attacks are missing, just not by enough to count as a "miss"

>>53059717
65% for the absolute worst you can do works out just fine. The assumption of 55% hit rate is one of the factors that made release 4E such a piece of shit.

>>53056996
Because I actually played the game when it came out. A whiff-fest is not fun and neither is the leader constantly missing the attacks he's supposed to be buffing the party's hit chance with. It also made +2 weapons a pain in the fucking ass to use.

>>53061591
>>53061826

This is actually useful to hear. A group of friends and I are working on a 4e successor game of sorts, and as part of our core math we've set a 65% hit chance as a baseline, along with tuning HP and damage to ensure an ordinary combat is over in 3-5 rounds, averaging out at 4. I'm currently doing some tests with arbitrary numbers, but it seems to work okay.

>>53061861
As long as it's still highly tactical I'm fine with that length. I only get pissy if it's brainless combat that lasts that long.

>>53061591
From what I understand the assumed hit rate was 65-70%, they just didn't realize they fucked up the math at later levels

>>53063093
They fucked up the math at a lot of levels.

>>53063116
Not that many, they fucked up hit rates and HP numbers. It's just that the maths they fucked up are super important

>>53063216
Don't forget Solo and Elite defenses.

And there's something about the AC math that's also fucked up and is fixed with masterwork armors IIRC.

>>53063241
Like I said "Hit rates and HP numbers"

Solo and Elite defenses, and PC AC math are both "hit rates"

>>53063216
It was 50% in testing so they bumped it up to 55% by release, which still didn't work.

>>53047361
I can't remember, do you need training in a skill to be able to use its rituals? Also, Acrobatics has that trained only use in falling. I suppose there's skill powers too, where it actually matters if you're trained or now.

>>53061861
For the love of god don't use 1/2 level bonuses

>>53065086

Why not? (We're actually thinking of halving the total number of levels, having 5 per tier, and just using full level bonuses)

>>53061826

The other way they tackled that late in the line, which I liked, is with stuff like the Skald, where encounter powers were things you activated *after* you hit (no more unloading your big guns and whiffing).

I'm also homebrewing something similar, and that's the direction I went for powers.

>>53065156

Because +1 to hit/+1 target AC is meaningless number bloat. It makes absolutely no difference to the game, it just means you need to change every number on your sheet every second level.

It also makes over-levelled enemies a whiff-fest, even if they're balanced in terms of difficulty. Balancing around HP instead of defences means it's still difficult, but players tend to make progress with every swing.

>>53065344

It also gives a sense of tangible progression. You can dismiss it, but that sort of direct increase in capability is something a lot of people find satisfying and the lack of it in, for example, 5e is something a lot of people complain about.

It might just be a style/preference thing, but some people like there being mechanical weight to the idea that they're utterly beyond the people they were fighting five or ten levels ago.

Although I feel like your last point doesn't make sense. If you're balancing enemies, you can't consider hp or defences in a vacuum, you need to consider both together, otherwise it's meaningless.

>>53065344
Balancing around HP means that fighting higher level enemies is a supreme padfest. This is a thread about 4E, why the FUCK would you want to inflict the exact same horseshit most of us dealt with again?

>>53065445

Sure, but you can scale up damage to give a sense of progression - you don't need to do both defences and HP.

Just math through a sample fight. Assume we're sticking with a 4-round encounter, and facing, say, a level + 3 dragon as a solo (yes I know he should have lackeys, but just having one bad dude simplifies the math). Start with scaling HP and defences.

Assume your base rate is 75% accuracy, and you gain 5% per level, and you have a party of 4. That means you have a 60% hit rate, and over 4 rounds, 4 party members will hit 9.5 times. Average hit is, say 10 damage, dragon should have 95hp, and you'll be whiffing 40% of the time.

Now assume static defences, scaling HP/damage. Base hit rate of 75% (because it doesn't change with level) Party will hit 12 times in 4 rounds, average damage is 10, dragon should have 120 HP.

Now say Party A has gone up 3 levels. Accuracy is now 75%, damage is now 15. It now takes them 8 attacks, or 2 rounds to kill their dragon. Party B does the same. Their accuracy is 75%, same as first level, but their damage is scaled harder, so they're doing 20 damage a swing. They'll kill their dragon in 2 rounds too.

You see, you can balance both models, it just changes the nature of the encounter. One is balanced by whiffing, making it swingy - every attack is all or nothing. If you have a system where risers are applied by hitting, this swinginess is exaggerated. The other is balanced by steady progress in smaller increments.

>monsters only get 1/2 level bonuses to attack and defense instead of +level

Is this a bad idea?

>>53065897

And balancing around defences makes it an extreme whiff-fest. The problem with (early) 4e was that *every* encounter was a pad-fest, and high-level encounters were both.

>>53065984

It changes the math. Whether it's a good idea or not depends on how you want the game to play, and whether the change in maths reinforces or undermines your intended play experience.

>>53065984
Yes, that'll immediately turn into a 95% hit rate scenario.

>>53063644
You need training in Religion or Arcana to use rituals at all, otherwise it's free game.
If you don't need to roll a check for the ritual result the skills may as well not even be listed.

>>53065445
>You can dismiss it, but that sort of direct increase in capability is something a lot of people find satisfying

Those people are wrong and bad

>>53066209
>>53066413
Well, PC bonus gains would have to be adjusted too.

"Bounded accuracy" seems like it could be a good idea IF it's limited to a relative tier of gameplay.

Has anyone got a good player cheatsheet with various actions anyone can take (Aid another, Charge, Run, etc) and/or a good DM screen?

>>53073827
google is your friend anon, but here you go.

https://www.kassoon.com/dnd/crib-sheet/

Genuinely curious why people play this game, not trying to be rude.

Anyone sum up their pros/cons for me?

>>53074669
>tactical combat
>wealth of character options
>easily reflavored

>numbers/material bloat
>some clearly experimental/clunky design choices
>ded gaem

>>53074669
Pros:

I run 4e because I like the heroic fantasy that sits at the core of it. It also allows my players to play what they want without having to worry about picking something that leaves them completly useless (when I first played 3.5 my first character was a monk, followed by a paladin).
4e mechanics are not directly connected to fluff, this means you're free to change the flavour of your character to fit whatever theme you're going for.
I also like how, in general, every character can contribute in a meaningful way both in and out of combat without sacrificing one for the other.
Lastly I really enjoy the tactical combat.


Cons:
4e really only does heroic fantasy, if you want it to do something else I recommend you look elsewhere.
There's a handful of really interesting ideas in 4e (alternative rewards, martial practices and others) that didn't get much love past their initial introduction.
No new material and the game is rather hard to homebrew for.

>>53074669
Clear rules, character variety, lots of content, fun fights, easy to DM. Also CBLoader and funin.space.

And, just on a philosophical level, I massively prefer games that are designed with intent in mind at every step, instead of a hodgepodge of mechanics an subsystems.

As for the faults, well, if you don't enjoy grid based tactical combat and fantastic heroes in fantasy land, 4e is definitely not for you.

Also, many of its cooler stuff left underdeveloped. Lots of things on release were jank as shit, and though most got fixed, it's still sorta jank at parts, and you can "feel" the patched-ness. And electronic tools are so good that they basically obsolete PDFs/physical copies. Oh and about half the Essentials classes (classes that were released in books titled "essentials") are sorta trashy. Homebrewing is sorta hard when you go beyond single feats/powers and refluffing (but in exchange, doing that is pretty easy).

>>53039990
So we're playing the zeitgeist campaign with my group.
I made a brutal scoundrel rogue with a mark of the storm, I want to abuse the shit out of riposte strike. I'm only level 1 right now, and we got gifted with 750 gold
I don't know what to do with it! There is so much items.
Is something mandatory, like +1 AC armor or weapons? For my lightning weapons I know I need 5000gp so I can't buy it right away. Should I save up?

>>53075315
>Should I save up?
Depends on your GM and how he gives out items.
If he's stingy with useful items and gold you might want to save, but otherwise you most likely want to invest in something else.

>>53075340
He's mostly going to follow the adventure I think, so I'm not sure.

>>53074669

Pro:
It is probably the best tactical skirmish campaign game ever made. No other one comes close in terms of character options, character growth and tactics.

Cons:
It doesn't really have much more to it than the tactical game - skill challenges are bland, there's little depth to non-combat skills, rituals and the like are mostly just hand-waved, cause nobody can be bothered to track residuum. But if you're fine with either skipping the RP, or having it largely system leave, it's fine.

Also, the math was wonky at the start, some things were unbalanced, and the class support was uneven. All of this except the class support was gradually fixed, although some of the methods (feat taxes) are usually houserules away. Quite a lot of errata, if you're running from books and not digital.

>>53075454
>But if you're fine with either skipping the RP, or having it largely system leave, it's fine.
As a avid Call of Cthulhu player who just started D&D 4, I don't see the RP problem at all.
I do just like before. I talk, describe what my character do, and the GM ask me to roll a skill check of some sort if it's necessary.

I really don't understand this complaint at all.

>>53075365
I'm not familiar with the adventure but you might want to spend the money on armor or other, non-weapon magical items.

>>53075315
At first level, no need for magic weapons/armor yet. Get equipment/consumables that you think could provide useful.

>>53075480
Mostly it's because there's not dozens of superfluous "reality emphasizing" skills that nobody ever really wasted their precious few skill-points on.

There's no Use Rope skill in 4e, there's no Craft (Basketweaving) or Craft (Sailor) skill, there's no Knowledge (Ming Dynasty of China) skill, etc.

Basically, it's people bitching because 4e dumped all of the "simulationist" skills that 3.5 used, after the designers sat down and asked
each other "so, really, just how much use is the typical adventurer going to get out of Carpentry skill or Blacksmithing skill?" and trimmed the skill list down to the stuff a typical adventurer would actually *need*.

Add in there's no class features that only matter in off-screen or down-time, and that most of the "do anything" spells were redefined as rituals, and people whinged about it being purely "combat-focused".

>>53075480
Like I said, if you're happy to just do free-talking for the non-combat stuff, you won't have a problem. But play follows mechanics - D&D 4E has about 95% of it's mechanics dedicated to combat, so you're being nudged into having really combat heavy games - just look at the published adventures.

We rotate through games, and we just finished up a game of Exalted. It has a pretty good subsystem for social encounters, involving reading people to find out what they love or hate, leveraging that to manipulate their social perspectives, and eventually convincing them to do what you want. I don't mind a bit of free-form RP in D&D, but you could run a three-four session court intrigue in Exalted and have it still be interesting, because it has mechanical support. You could do the same thing in D&D 4E, but it'd be more like just having a conversation, since you would hardly engage with the rules at all.

>>53075637

It's also the fact that there's no real degrees. If you're trained Arcana, you're trained in Arcana, and not any better, worse or different than the other guy with int primary who's trained in arcana.

We rotate our games around a bit, and we just finished up an Exalted game.

>>53075729
>It's also the fact that there's no real degrees. If you're trained Arcana, you're trained in Arcana, and not any better, worse or different than the other guy with int primary who's trained in arcana.

Except your level, INT bonus, and feats.

>>53075734
Oh, and background and equipment (including things like boons), and possibly racial bonuses and the occasional utility powers.

Almost forgot about those.

I think that should cover everything.

>>53075734

Every group I've ever played in has had everyone at the same level (combat basically falls apart if you don't). Nobody ever takes feats for skills, because it conflicts with combat abilities which, as discussed, are the vast majority of the game (unless you're doing something janky, like Sage of Ages)

>>53075734
>INT bonus
If you're both int-primary that is going to be within a point or two. The variance of the d20 roll is going to drown out the difference between two int-primary arcana-trained characters, which'll only ever amount to a point or two.

>>53075729
>You could do the same thing in D&D 4E, but it'd be more like just having a conversation, since you would hardly engage with the rules at all.
But that's what I don't get.
It's the same in CoC. And nobody complains about CoC not being narrative driven.
You have SAN, but that's about it. Intrigue are done by talking, having clues and discovering the mysteries.

>>53075786
>Every group I've ever played in has had everyone at the same level (combat basically falls apart if you don't)

It's still important to mention. You keep improving, but the entire world doesn't.

> Nobody ever takes feats for skills, because it conflicts with combat abilities which, as discussed, are the vast majority of the game (unless you're doing something janky, like Sage of Ages)

If you cover the feat taxes you are free to take whatever.

That you decided that in your game you will be focusing all of your skills on combat is your own decision, not something the game enforces.

>If you're both int-primary

You don't have to be though. Like, if you just assume that only INT primaries will have arcana, sure. But 4e assumes you'll be trained in skills that aren't your primaries and will be (probably) untrained in some that are.

Any more granularity than that is basically wasted.

>>53075852
I think we could have more granularity. Maybe a tier bonus. Its wonky that an 80 years sage that never adventured, and thus is level 0, have the same Arcana bonus of the 17 year old (1 first level) Sorcerer (or a 45 year old, 20 level Warlock) due to both being Trained.

>>53077802
The sage could always have a background or theme that increases his arcana.

Guys, give me your most interesting encounters. Especially things that challenge a fighter/rogue/ardent/artificer group around lvl 3.
What I've mostly noticed is that they lack AOE and minions are kind of a problem, because they can't just be wiped out easily.
What are some monsters that make the fighter focus more on his defender role? He easily locks down single stronger foes, but I kind of want him to choose between two different but equally dangerous enemies - or should I try enemies that move around more? Would be happy if you linked the monsters on the funin compendium!
I also take any good ideas that you've used for set pieces which played a part in your fights.

>>53078221
Do npcs/monsters even get that? They work differently from PCs anyway, so there's really no way to compare them
This is also something which I really like about 4e. It doesn't pretend that PCs and NPCs/monster have something in common. Rules-wise they're created in very different ways, which sets them apart each other quite nicely

>>53078456
One of the most difficult yet fun fights I've ever experienced was a fight against four orcs (standard monsters) and four goblins (minions) in a party of 4 with no AoE at level 3, maybe throw something like that at them?

>>53066700
You need the feat to actually be able to prepare and use rituals, too

>>53075729
The guy with int primary will far outstrip someone without as both level.
And skills have so much to pump them up fully optimized skill users are in a whole other league than either.

>>53078456

I guess it can't hurt to post these up https://docs.google.com/document/d/1iXLefbaHm-DzJsnNASzvFe1G2BYYG7UeOA_5ibUthwk/edit

They were made for a group of 3 level 3 characters, my first time making stats, but the fights went pretty well. I think I might have undertuned them a little, although I did near kill the defender twice, so idk.

More generally, any thoughts on the stats would be cool. Feedback to help me do better in future.

>>53075808
IT's because people were used to the simulationism of 3.5, so the shift was jarring and uncomfortable. The main complaint is actually "not muh d&d" and they are attacking narrativism as a whole, they've just never played anything but d&d so other things that play like 4e never come into the debate.

>>53075480
Rule of thumb is that 9 times out of 10, when someone complains about a lack of roleplaying in 4e, it's usually code for "There aren't enough rules that let me roll dice to avoid having to roleplay."

>>53078694
Thx, I will check out those. I've not gone over 6 enemies as of yet, as I'm not fond of managing too large numbers of monsters, but I guess I'll have to try.

>>53079214
Those look good, I like their abilities. From what I've seen monsters from the Monster Manuals usually only have one regular attack and one special, but those often have two good attacks and a recharge power, so I like that. Can't say much numberswise though.


Are there similar monsters somewhere in the official stuff?
Additionally, I've had some trouble encouraging movement in combat, are there some enemies that force the players to move around? Or should I handle that via set pieces?

>>53080770

The delayed AoE on the final boss was an idea to try and make in combat movement more necessary. Every turn the boss drops down a 3x3 square which, next turn, will be hit by a very nasty attack, forcing the players to try and get out the way. And if you drop the central square on someone, a single square shift won't cut it.

>>53080922
I wish I still had my custom monsters. Had a really nasty Solo that nearly wiped an epic level party by itself.

I only remember it was a Time Reaper of some sort I called the Paradox Overlord(I was still in my edgy phase at this time) that used a scythe. He had a few abilities I recall too.

>Rolled initiative 3 times and got a full turn on each count.
>Rolled a d20 at the top of every round, and could replace any d20 made during that round with the pre-rolled d20, his own or an enemy's
>Had a Recharge that let him shift double his movespeed.
>Could pull 6 copies of himself from alternate timelines, essentially minion versions of himself. Could do this once, and recharged when he got bloodied.
>Had a time blast of sorts that stunned everyone in an AoE. Saves only degraded it down to Dazed, then Slowed, and then finally went away. Could only do it once.
>Had a double strike that let him basically make an MBA twice.
>Had a 1/round reaction that let him basically reroll saves, flavored as taking it, then rewinding time to try again Prince of Persia style.

I forget what else he had. The party thought he was a little overtuned, which I could see I guess. Was a fun fight though.

File: p030_0_00_1.jpg (156KB, 550x698px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 550x698px

>>53078456
The answer to all questions like these is always the same.
Manscorpions, anon. Manscorpions.
I've played since the basic days (1971 ""master race"" ftw fellas) and 4e is my favorite edition, hands down. The rage over this edition on tg was flat out unwarranted and made several, several 4eg threads toxic. I wish those same posters were around now after the advent of 5e so I could give them a big hearty FUCK YOU, FUCK FACE. That shit back then was ridiculous. Like, I'm just trying to enjoy the fucking game, dude, stfuuu, GODDAMN.

Sorry for not adding anything to the topic, just had to get that off my chest for what feels like the thousandth time.

>>53082218
Yeah, so how about instead of raging you tell me in which MM the manscorpions are? The Dank Sun book?

File: 1476240557077.jpg (211KB, 502x800px) Image search: [Google]

211KB, 502x800px

When something says it gives +2 to all defenses, does that include AC?

>>53082573
Yes.

>>53081542
>>Rolled initiative 3 times and got a full turn on each count.

This is basically my standard rule on making bosses. They have the hitpoints of a monster their level, multiplied by the party size, and they act a number of times each round equal to the number of people in the party.

You can basically "bossify" any same-level monster by doing that, and giving him a few nifty powers. The multiple turns make control effects shorter (so you can't just lock them down and trivilaize them) but still have an impact on the same number of actions.

>>53079332

I've never played an edition of D&D other than fourth, so that's hardly my motive. What I have played is half a dozen other systems that do things completely differently. And, like I said, I love fourth. When I want a dungeon crawl, it's my go-to system.

Saying that you rolling dice is a substitute for role-playing is just as stupid as saying you can't have an optimised character (to whatever extent) and roleplay. Role-playing is about deciding what your character does, and why, while dice are about whether they succeed. It's not just putting on a bad accent and boring the table with purple prose.

File: 1493774052755.jpg (28KB, 599x459px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 599x459px

>>53082356
I'm sorry. It was just so unfair to poor little 4e. That edition had a rough time and broken base syndrome doesn't even begin to cover it. YES I'm still angry.
If I'm not mistaken anon, manscorpions can be found in the Forgotten Realms. I forget which supplement but I'm pretty sure I can find em right quick for you.

>>53083138
You should give other editions a try

There's something to love in every D&D edition, yes, even 3.5

>>53039990
dammit.

the stupid character generator says my superior ki focus counts as an offhand weapon and won't use the ki slot.

>>53083024
I think he also had done way of mitigating lock downs. All save ends effects on him got downgraded to end of next turns.

>>53083197

*shrug* it's not like I didn't play them due to obstinacy or something. When my playgroup came together, 4E was the current edition, so that's the D&D we played.

There's too many other systems in the world to spend time (and so much money) playing every D&D variant, even if they each have value.

>>53084186
ask around, from my experience there's plenty of people out there willing and capable of running AD&D and 2nd edition, and a bajillion out there running 5e and 3.5

>>53084186
>There's too many other systems in the world to spend time (and so much money) playing every D&D variant, even if they each have value.
This.
I have played most editions from D&D, but I stopped with 4e, because there isn't enough different between them.
The core themes remain the same, but the mechanics are only mildly different in the long scheme of things. Better to play a wide variety of games, then the same game with different paint.

File: in2256dex.jpg (8KB, 299x168px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 299x168px

>>53039990
Dear lord, I made a BUSTED ass monk. He does +13 damage on every hit, (15 if they are bloodied) specializes in multiple attacks, and his flurry of blows attack does 10 damage and I can take a -2 to hit to have it do 14 (with another +2 if they are bloodied!). Also my AC is 30 and can be buffed to 33 effortlessly, or 35 if I blow a utility daily

>>53085025
hes level 11, btw

>>53085025
Monks are so fucking good in 4e.

>>53085025
You can power attack with implements?

Also, how are you multistriking as a class which gets no multistrike powers?

>>53085025
he does a TON of damage, but he spreads it around. Hes as much a controller as he is a striker.

If I use my Supreme Flurry daily utility, i can use my flurry of blows 4 times in a round, for and automatic 56 damage on top of whatever i deal with my attack

>>53085112
dude, what are you talking about. my at wills are a close burst 1 that hits everybody and a blast 2. Most of my encounter powers hit multiple opponents.

I love 4e because I can be a TWF fighter and not suck balls

>>53085161
You can TWF in 5e if you pick the right classes. Just not as a fighter. Because this isn't mix and match and really who cares what weapon you use?

Its hilarious cause hes just this little halfling that runs around bashing people in the shins with a little club.

====== Created Using Wizards of the Coast D&D Character Builder ======
level 11
Halfling, Monk, Tiger Claw Master
Monastic Tradition: Iron Soul
Background: Burglar (+2 to Thievery)

FINAL ABILITY SCORES
Str 14, Con 18, Dex 23, Int 11, Wis 11, Cha 9.

STARTING ABILITY SCORES
Str 13, Con 13, Dex 18, Int 10, Wis 10, Cha 8.


AC: 30 Fort: 21 Reflex: 23 Will: 17
HP: 80 Surges: 11 Surge Value: 20

TRAINED SKILLS
Acrobatics +19, Athletics +12, Thievery +20, Stealth +16

UNTRAINED SKILLS
Arcana +5, Bluff +4, Diplomacy +4, Dungeoneering +5, Endurance +9, Heal +5, History +5, Insight +5, Intimidate +4, Nature +5, Perception +8, Religion +5, Streetwise +4

FEATS
Level 1: Superior Implement Training (Transcendent Ki Focus)
Level 2: Lost in the Crowd
Level 4: Crashing Tempest Style
Level 6: Iron Parry
Level 8: Unarmored Agility
Level 10: Flowing River Style
Level 11: Effortless Motion

POWERS
Monk at-will 1: Steel Wind
Monk at-will 1: Five Storms
Monk encounter 1: Scattering of Leaves
Monk daily 1: Whirling Mantis Step
Monk utility 2: Supreme Flurry
Monk encounter 3: Eternal Mountain
Monk daily 5: Disrupting Fist
Monk utility 6: Centered Defense
Monk encounter 7: Fist of One Hundred Strikes
Monk daily 9: Twilight Touch
Monk utility 10: Adamantine Bones

ITEMS
Monk Unarmed Strike, Ki Club +1, Magic Ki Focus +3, Iron Ki Focus, Robe of Eyes Cloth Armor (Basic Clothing) +3, Iron Armbands of Power (heroic tier), Gauntlets of Blood (heroic tier), Amulet of Life +1, Backlash Tattoo (heroic tier), Acrobat Boots (heroic tier)
====== Copy to Clipboard and Press the Import Button on the Summary Tab ======

>>53085176
Again, TWF Fighter.

>>53085161
I wish ranger could be something other than a twf. It's too hardcoded into the class
>>53085176
and the right fighting styles, and the right feats, and don't need your bonus actions, etc

>>53085112
I don't power attack, its part of the Tiger Claw Master Paragon Path. Looking over it closely, it looks like I don't get the bloodied bonus to my flurry of blows power, since it only applies to attack rolls, and you don't actually roll for damage with flurry of blows.

>>53085149
oh, multitargeting

Sorry, you said "multiple attacks" and I assumed you meant hitting one dude multiple times, not hitting multiple dudes at once

>>53085193
I mean, it's not as if your weapon choice is going to give you weapon-specific advantages over monsters or something, so you might as well just get a polearm and say 'This polearm is actually two swords'.

>>53085206
No, you absolutely don't need feats for it, unlike most weapon fighting in 5e which has compulsory feat crap. And you don't need a fighting style, and the classes it's good on tend to have bonus actions sometimes anyway.
Barbarian-rogue, low level barbarians, bladesinger and melee cantrip rogues can all make 'optimal' use of two weapon fighting, and probably some I forgot but for rangers/fighters/paladins it's not really 'optimal', but it can work.


So, yes, it's a bit restricted, but I guess the idea is 'What's the difference between two swords and a refluffed two swords using different mechanics?'

>>53085256
monk is busted cause everytime you hit you get flurry and deal damage without having to make an attack roll. As long as I'm next to at least two opponents, I deal an extra 20 damage between the two of them every time I hit, minimum.

>>53085274
PAM can suck my dick and I don't want to talk about it.

>>53039990

4e modern when?

I want to post my two weapon fighter build for 5th. Is there some way to fill out and post a pdf character sheet?

File: DwarfBerserker.jpg (199KB, 744x1039px) Image search: [Google]

199KB, 744x1039px

>>53085274
If you want to wield anything bigger than a shortsword (and draw weapons properly or some weird shit?), you must have dual wielder. Rogue had to get a special subclass so they wouldn't have to deal with bonus action overlap (most of the time). Barbarian is possibly the most anti-twf class in the game, especially if you're berserker, which upsets me greatly.
Seriously, what the fuck were they thinking when they designed that subclass?

>>53085344

Fucking never. I hope WotC never, ever revives the 'Modern' brand. D&D does not do well outside of its comfort zone.

>>53085344
I think it already exists actually. One of my friends had a third party book for it

>>53085372
Also another personal gripe, rapier and dagger builds are really clunky compared to 4e

anybody have any links to some broken 4e builds?

>>53085464
"Broken" builds don't really exist in 4e unless you're referring to full-party compositions

>>53085522

Well, there are a few busted as fuck exploits like the draconic rebreather, although I think most of them got errata'd out.

>>53085565
rebreather was never errata'd and entirely legit imo

>>53085464
https://web.archive.org/web/20150929123504/http://community.wizards.com/forum/4e-character-optimization/threads/1478896

I think there are some there

This is my barbarian meme build.

Bugbears and Large sized Mordencrads don't mix.

====== Created Using Wizards of the Coast D&D Character Builder ======
level 1
Bugbear, Barbarian
Feral Might: Rageblood Vigor

FINAL ABILITY SCORES
Str 20, Con 14, Dex 13, Int 10, Wis 8, Cha 10.

STARTING ABILITY SCORES
Str 18, Con 14, Dex 11, Int 10, Wis 8, Cha 10.


AC: 15 Fort: 17 Reflex: 12 Will: 10
HP: 29 Surges: 10 Surge Value: 7

TRAINED SKILLS
Intimidate +7, Endurance +6, Athletics +9

UNTRAINED SKILLS
Acrobatics, Arcana, Bluff, Diplomacy, Dungeoneering -1, Heal -1, History, Insight -1, Nature -1, Perception -1, Religion, Stealth +2, Streetwise, Thievery

FEATS
Level 1: Weapon Proficiency (Mordenkrad)

POWERS
Barbarian at-will 1: Howling Strike
Barbarian at-will 1: Recuperating Strike
Barbarian encounter 1: Avalanche Strike
Barbarian daily 1: Thunder Hooves Rage

ITEMS
Hide Armor, Mordenkrad
====== Copy to Clipboard and Press the Import Button on the Summary Tab ======

>>53085734
Why are you using a Mordenkrab and not a Gouge?

Come on, Gouges get you spear expertise and, once your dexterity gets high enough, surprising charge (assuming you multiclass into fighter, but you're a barbarian so of course you do)

>>53085734
I love that its possible to have a 6d8 encounter power at first level.

>>53085758
What a gouge?

>>53085372
>You must have dual wielder to use a 1d8 weapon instead of a 1d6 weapon
Oh, big fucking wow. +2 dex is always better than +1 AC and +1 to damage, because it also gives to hit, save throw, stealth, et cetera.
Dual wielder is only useful when you hit the 20 ability score cap and can't think of anything else to get.
Rogues don't always have to use their bonus action, especially if they have mobile (Which a lot of melee rogues should have) or if they have swashbuckler archetype. Of course, that's another feat, but that's less related to two weapon fighting and more to being a melee rogue. I'll admit, when I mentioned rogue with melee cantrips, I'm more referring to 'they'll use green flame blade or booming blade and not actually use their bonus action most of the time unless their enemy has a high AC'.

Barbarian is absolutely the best TWF class in the game. Levels 1-4 if you don't have free feats or something it does the most damage for barbarian. Don't forget you add rage damage to your bonus attack. The only other thing barbarians would use their bonus action on there is raging in the first place. And nobody sane would play berserker except for the level 6 ability.
Barbarogue is like barbarian but they can't use big weapons, so they might as well use dexterity weapons and thus they might as well use two weapon fighting unless they want to use a shield which makes it much harder for them to grapple, something barbarogue is pretty damn good for.

>>53085791
Dark sun weapon

It's a superior two-handed 2d6 weapon with brutal 1, like the mordernkrad, but instead of being a hammer, it's both a spear and an axe. Allowing the use of feats and features from both. For barbarians, the big ones are surprising charge and spear expertise for more damage on charge attacks

>>53085907
>Oh, big fucking wow. +2 dex is always better than +1 AC and +1 to damage, because it also gives to hit, save throw, stealth, et cetera.

I like it cause it lets me hurl up to 4 axes my first turn (when I reach 10th level fighter)

>>53085967
well, if it ain't in the character generator it ain't going to happen.

>>53085986
http://funin.space/compendium/item/Gouge.html

It's in the online character builder

>>53085986
You'd need the wotc.index file and CBLoader. Dark Sun content was never added officially but some dedicated fans brought in all the missing content.

>>53085986

Further up the thread a few different versions of cbloader were linked, try some of them to see if you can get the dark sun content. My one has it.

>>53085403

Got a link?

>>53085974
Really, your DM should just say 'Yeah, you can draw thrown weapons as fast as you can throw them'

I mean, daggers are already worse versions of handcrossbow.

The real problem about 5e is the weapon feats.
Also >>53085445
Rapier builds work just fine, I don't know what's wrong with that, aside from having to understand melee cantrips sometimes. Daggers are just eh.

>>53085464
Butwhy
So you can ban them?

>>53086200
Not the guy you're replying to but I have these lying around. Never played either.

https://mega.nz/#!Zsgj3KJB!BHIcPUF1Mwi52Ibhcs0HyfEY_yQimMWez8OxP-_VYZM

https://mega.nz/#!c8B0nKpC!zq8PDsRxp9OeGfOoPOgsKY1qaMLrscIodWqMLWsrCt4

>>53086051
>wotc.index
where can i find this?

>>53086422
Grab this >>53042411 builder. It has all the official things, including CBLoader, the .index file and all the files that the .index file would download (I uploaded those just in case the server the .index file refers to ever gets taken down).

>>53085112

Also, yes, you can power attack with implements, provided your str is 15 to get the feat and you are doing a melee attack, because those are the only requirements for the feat. Can't imagine a lot of situations where you'd want to and qualify to do it though, outside of DEX/STR monks.

what does rattling do again?

>>53086637
-2 to target's attacks I think?

>>53086637
If a creature has training in Intimidate and deals damage with a power that has the rattling keyword, the target takes a -2 penalty to attack rolls until the end of the user’s next turn. A target that is immune to fear is not subject to this penalty.

>>53086487
thanks bro

>>53086487
You don't happen to have a complete list of updates for adventure tools do you? I am going to update the pastebin with the new links and make a new thread.

>>53087309
https://mega.nz/#!5dUG3Axa!u0NSNPy2q4V-WzJg4Jy4BTM2ln-ygbpVswuJyJzjD_4
Install updates in chronological order.

>>53087354
The list is technically not complete but the updates are complete in that the december update contains all previous updates. However the january update is still needed because I think that's the last regular update from WotC or something.

Anyway, install january first and december last. I don't think it matters at all if you install any other updates in between.

>>53087531 New Thread/ New Links
>>53087531 New Thread/ New Links
>>53087531 New Thread/ New Links

>>53087541

...Why? we're nowhere near bump limit.

>>53087558
I don't want to hassle with putting up the new links some other time and would rather just do it now

>>53087663
Should really wait till we hit the bump limit at least.

>>53087743
I don't want to wait until it hits page 9 or 400 posts. I might not be here then and the new links wouldn't get posted.

Anyone love the Avenger?

>>53088906
It makes my dick double hard.

>>53039990
So, I've always absolutely loved 4e. It leaves out ridiculous string of rules for roleplay, which imo should be mostly free form without needing rules, but the combat is just so juicy. Unfortunately, I've never gotten a chance to play it past 1st level.

Recently, I've thought about running a side game for a few of my players (we play a homebrewed game) and using 4e. I plan on using the inherent bonuses so I don't have to dish out insane number of magic items, and I know to use MM3 math and later, but I don't remember which feats to give everyone for free to get rid of feat tax. What are the feats I should give, and additionally, do giving these feats for free allow everyone to take whatever feats they want (ie, will they absolutely need any other feats, or is it free for all past the mandatory feats I intend to give for free)?

Also, I love 4e generals cause aside from the autists who try to sperg out, everyone in the generals genuinely like the game and it's nice to see that.

>>53039990

>4e
>comfy

this is the only explanation for still playing 4e, holds up.

>>53089670
Improved defenses and an expertise feat of their choice. Some believe giving out the later essentials expertise feats is too much, seeing as most are worth it even without the scaling bonus. I had a DM that just gave versatile expertise to solve weapliment issues/encourage using multiple weapon types.

>>53089782
The later essentials expertise feats are like the Axe expertise and Orb expertise feats, right? So if I want to keep it simple, just give out improved defenses and weapon OR implement expertise?

>>53089852
>The later essentials expertise feats are like the Axe expertise and Orb expertise feats, right?
Yes. Though axe expertise is pretty shitty
>if I want to keep it simple, just give out improved defenses and weapon OR implement expertise?
Giving improved defenses and versatile expertise is the simplest option imo.

>>53089955
Thought axe expertise looked wrong. And yeah, I can see how versatile expertise is better. It's both implement and weapon expertise in one.

>>53090086
I'd personally recommend holding off on giving improved defenses out for free until level 2 or 3

File: galahad.jpg (124KB, 400x750px) Image search: [Google]

124KB, 400x750px

What would you recommend build wise for a paladin that excels at mounted combat

>>53092123
mounted combat feat, white horn knight PP, holy steed feat, be sure to be a chaladin, not a straladin

>>53089736
What would you play instead that hits all the same notes?

File: 1464561455022.jpg (2MB, 2540x3165px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2540x3165px

Would a retroclone have audience or it is too much work for little return?

Take in consideration that a retroclone wouldn't have a charbuilder to easy the chargen.

Would it be better just a patch fix with little modification to the core or enjoy the brew and innovate in several concepts (rule-wise or even setting-wise, like making a sci-fi or modern one)?

>>53093493

As someone currently working on one, it's a passion project but we think if we angle it right there might be a market. But at the end of the day if we just end up with a game we all enjoy playing that'll be pretty okay.

We do have a programmer on team, though, and are planning on budgeting for a character builder app if and when we actually get a budget. Likely not as shiny as the character builder, more along the lines of Chummer and the like, but it should still be helpful.

>>53093642
pls take my money

>>53092028
I think the charOP forums determined the numbers didn't start falling behind for attacks and defenses until levels 5 and 7 respectively. If you wanna go strictly by only what is statistically necessary you can wait till then to hand them out

I don't see why you need tax feats. I was in a campaign and played to level 14 and we were constantly taking down monsters that were 2 or more CR's above us.

You're characters are already insanely powerful, if anything I think its the monsters who need a buff.

>>53095193
4e doesn't have CR though

>>53095193

It's less about power and more about keeping the math consistent and preventing it being a whiff-fest, which isn't particularly fun.

>>53095233
whatever you call it

>>53095235
thats why there are miss effects and defenders

>>53095304
Only dailies have miss effects, and not even all, and most defenders need to hit to mean anything

They probably should've given more powers miss effects

>>53095728
2/10, you actually went there.

>>53095763
>saying a good game is good
/pfg/ says otherwise.

>>53095843
>bringing your edition warring shit here

Fucking 4rries gotta ruin things for everyone.

>>53095852

...You're blaming people for telling you to fuck off when you're the one shitposting a thread about a different game?

File: C-vvscdW0AQbaK1.jpg (123KB, 1008x671px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 1008x671px

>tfw I had the best 4th edition game ever in a massive dark sun campaign 5-6 years ago
>rebooted everything in roll20, writing individual location descriptions for every town and city
>tfw Roll20 doesn't seem to have any plugins for 4th ed powers, forcing my players to write them all down individually

For fuck's sake. 5th has all the buttons and macros to pop spells into chat... why couldnt roll20 have at least a little of that for 5th? It's depressing.

File: 911b8bb0989d24b4b7f0ecbcc83d5a51.jpg (89KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 1024x768px

>>53096536

*For 4th, fuck.

>>53096536
5th edition in roll20 had direct support from WotC, 4th edition doesn't

Be thankful there's even a baseline 4e system on roll20 and you don't have to make it yourself

>>53096521
Why come to 4chan if you can't handle people telling your awful game is awful?

There's a reason it died and people play Pathfinder instead.

>>53096640
Why don't you go be a salty bitch elsewhere

>>53096536
I rather enjoyed putting in 4e powers manually. I had fun coming up with unique macro interactions and flavor text
>>53096852
You shouldn't feed trolls anon. That's like internet 101

>>53096877
>I'll just call him a troll

Well, I guess I found the same 4rry shitting up the That Guy thread, ironically enough.

File: mr. bones watches some stupid kid get in line for his wild ride.jpg (170KB, 975x632px) Image search: [Google]

170KB, 975x632px

I really enjoy 4e, but I haven't run it before, and I'm going to be running a game soon. I vaguely remember there being a pasta about how to fix some of the math problems that used to get posted in the OP of 4e threads, but I can't seem to find it. Something about using books other than MM1/2, and handing out either pre-errata weapon expertise or improved defenses?
Anything else I should be concerned with? Anything in particular you'd ban as a feat/power/class option/etc?
How many minions are worth one real combatant, would you say in practice?

File: printablemm3businessfront.gif (27KB, 1050x600px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 1050x600px

>>53097298

Follow the XP budget rules in the DMG, they cost minions pretty well.

As for adjustments, I just straight up give every PC an Expertise feat (the essentials ones with interesting side benefits) and Improved Defences for free at level one. While the math might only be necessary later, I figure it doesn't hurt.

As for monster math, use the MM3/Monster Vault, with pic related summarising the best values to work from.

On classes and options, I dislike the Essentials classes but YMMV, Assassin is barely functional trash, Vampire is just weird, and Seeker is entirely without merit. Functional, but does nothing interesting or better than any other class, which is a real shame.

>>53097298
number of minions per combatant is mostly dependent on the party's capacity for multistriking. Ranging from 5 or 6 minions per standard monster when you've got at-will aoes in the party, to 2 minions per standard monster when all anyone can do is single target attacks

>>53097342
Honestly, the Assassin's biggets problem is that it's a class who's gimmick is dealing assloads of delayed damage in a game where everyone else is focusing on frontloading damage. This means by the time you stack enough shrouds to keep up, the target's usually dead anyways, unless everyone's leaving it so you can do your thing, which is dumb if it's a stronger monster since you want it dead ASAP. If it's not a stronger monster, than shrouding it is just a waste.

Vampire mostly suffers from having basically no choices, I think you pick...2 utilities during your entire 30 level career? Not including themes, PPs, and EDs of course. It's healing surge gimmick is interesting and hard to get used to, though if you have someone beefy like a Warden, it generally doesn't matter since they have more surges than they'll ever use anyways.

Seeker.....I don't remember much about it to be honest. I remember it had some controllery stuff, but that's about it. Not awful(considering this is 4e, and there's only 2 classes I'd consider straight up unplayable), but very underwhelming.

My 2 biggest pet peeve Essentials classes are Binder and Cavalier, both of which I consider straight up garbage. Like, 3.5 Monk tier garbage.

cont..

>>53097298
see
>>53089782
>Anything else I should be concerned with? Anything in particular you'd ban as a feat/power/class option/etc?
Many post essentials classes are powerful early on, but quickly fall far behind their counterparts. Some are just bad all the way through.
Their hybrids can also be overpowered, as they award nearly all their class features with no drawbacks. Many DMs ban the hybrids or the classes altogether, but I personally don't mind them. I mean they're not so broken that they unbalance encounters, they might just be under/overtuned compared to other pcs
>>53097342
Seeker got a dragon magazine to give it good options. The downside though is that there is only one good way to build them. Except for hybriding of course

>>53097427

I feel like the intro to the Seeker Handbook says it best

>Seekers are not good. The designers didn't eat their Wheaties the morning they wrote the Seeker, and the result is a Controller who specializes in perfectly ignorable soft control. Still, if you're reading this you likely want to play one, and if you do you probably fall into one of these two groups (or both, like me):

>You like to be challenged when you play D&D and you like to optimize, but your friend wants to play a Goliath Pacifist Runepriest. If you play a Seeker you can optimize to your heart's content without overshadowing your CharOp-phobic friends.

>You are in love with the Seeker conceptually. All those melee STR builds with big weapons start to blend together, but the Seeker looks and plays radically different from even the most similar builds (Ranged Weapon Bard, Hunter, Thrown Weapon Ranger). It's a Primal iteration of the Arcane Archer archetype, and that makes it cool.

>Fear not; with proper care, the Seeker can ascend to the lofty heights of mediocrity, and actually approach competency instead of burdening the party by increasing xp budgets without contributing significantly.

>>53097427
Binder is amazing, worse at absolutely everything than a baseline warlock

Worse at damage, worse at control, worse at aoe, worse survivability. It's honestly amazing that it even exists

Still though, not the worst 4e thing, that's still got to be the Bladesinger and the knight, the two classes where the book lies about how they should be built

>>53097427
Note I forget about the Assassin, just play an Executioner. They're basically an Assassin with a better striker feature.

Binder is a squishy controller class(with less control abilities than it's Striker parent class, the Warlock) that dies to a stiff breeze, has no real damage to speak of, and has a class feature based around killing things or being next to things when they die. It also has a locked daily at level...9 I believe which is just a worthless summon.

Cavalier is a Defender that can't defend worth shit. It has the same aura defender mechanic that the Knight has(ie, only triggers when the triggering enemy is in melee range), except it has the same damage the Paladin's mark has. You know, the Paladin mark that's whole benefit is it's long range and feat support? Also, Cavalier's mark doesn't get the Paladin marks' feat support. Mearls also took mounts away from the Paladin to make them Cavalier exclusive to try to trick people into playing it. Except mounts actually make him worse, since the aura comes from you, not your mount. Meaning you pick which of the 4 squares your mount takes up that you're "occupying" and the aura comes there. Yes, it overlaps with your mount, meaning your worthless aura is now only half as big.

Seriously, fuck Cavaliers.

>>53097484
I haven't played Knights much, but you're dead on about Bladesingers. They're alright if you play them ad a Dex focused Striker with Int secondary, instead of playing them as a far shittier Wizard like the book tries to trick you into doing.

>>53097514
And I forgot a note about the Binder as well.

If you want to play one, play either a Warlock or a Hexblade. Both do it's job way better than it'll ever do.

>>53097427
Seeker was plagued by being a controller with no hard control
>>53097484
Cavalier actually have a pretty good eladrin build that makes them into some bizarro swordmage. But yes, the book does lie about how you should build them, but it lied about some of the original class builds too. First thing that comes to mind is the ruthless ruffian build for rogues

>>53097514
I recommend building bladesingers as str-focused strikers with a dex secondary, to get full damage on your basic attacks and have two good saves instead of just one

Knights on the other hand the book tries very hard into making you play a str/con defender. While the actual strategy to building a knight is to use whatever means necessary to avoid using strength, even taking melee training if it comes down to that

>>53097557
>Knights* actually have

I read a bit of stuff online about how the witch is kinda mediocre, is that true?

>>53097557
I remember that build, using intelligent blademaster to bypass using strength, then using stuff like Eladrin Swordmage Advance and those eladrin-only knight options to teleport everywhere and always be wherever you need to be

>>53097591
It's certainly not as good as mage or O-wizard, but it still has access to all the wizard spells so it's still pretty damn good

>>53039990
Man, I'm not a huge fan of 4e's gameplay, but you have to hand it to them regarding tools. 4es tool suite is better than for any other ttrpg ever made.

>mildly surprised touhoufag hasn't shown up

>>53103279
Probably too busy playing/shitposting about the new game, since it came out today.

Tell me about the best terrain you've ever fought on /4eg/. From either side of the screen is fine, I just want my fights to not be lame as shit.

>>53103367

New game?

File: 1494121368905.jpg (465KB, 1536x2048px) Image search: [Google]

465KB, 1536x2048px

>>53103384
New 2hu game demo releases today at Reitaisai
Not sure if it's uploaded yet.
Trial of the new fighting game spinoff too.

>>53103415

Ahh.

Although that reminds me of something I discussed with some people.

Do you think 4e could have dabbled more in some more interesting AoE patterns? Close Burst/Close Blast/Area Burst are all pretty simplistic. (Also Close Burst and Close Blast sharing an acronym is annoying.)

Do you think you could do 4e combat with actual patterns? Are there any AoE's you think they should have added to the system?

>>53099268
Definetly agreed. Always a big fan of how easily and conveniently everything's laid out.

Despite not playing 4e anymore, I find myself borrowing a lot from it whenever I need to hammer out some homebrew clarity fixes for other systems.

>>53103768
I'd like to see cones or lines desu, but there are already walls, which kind of do lines.
>(Also Close Burst and Close Blast sharing an acronym is annoying.)
Who the fuck thought this naming scheme was acceptable? They're way too close in name and effect, and I've lost track of how many times I or one of the other players mixed up the two at the table.

>>53103768
I do sort of miss "line" AoEs from other D&D editions

>>53103837
>>53103844

The problem with lines in 4e is that they interact strangely with precision positioning.

A friend suggested an 'Arc' area as a compromise, being the square (or squares) directly adjacent to one side of a character or monster, plus one square either side of it, with the number being how long the arc extends.

So an Arc 1 power would just hit 3 squares adjacent, which would be suitable for a broad,s weeping slash, while an Arc 5 power would be a 3x5 column that could represent raking a beam over an area. I thought it could be neat, although I am describing it badly despite remembering that somehow they managed to do a better job.

>>53103279
Has touhoufag even posted recently? I haven't seen him for months since the last time he was unjustly banned

>>53097567
Knight is probably one of the better classes in Essentials if you do stuff like Half-Elf Sonnlinor's Hammer with Adept Dilletante, but if you go STR/CON that's just stupid.

>>53103809
I can see that. I really like how fast it is to make enemies in 4e compared to other dnd, for instance. Even 5es method takes way too long to do on the fly, mid session, when something unexpected comes up. With 4e it's real easy to upgrade some level 5 goblins to level 15 goblins if need be.

>>53103837
>They're way too close in name and effect, and I've lost track of how many times I or one of the other players mixed up the two at the table.
The way I remember it is the word burst has a U in it, just like (you) are in the middle of a burst

>>53097591
If you're in a story-heavy game and your DM is one that is one that likes to hint at the future, the Augury utility can be nigh game breaking
(though a truly great DM would only give you enough to slide right into the trap he'd already set anyway)

>>53104300
He posts in pathfinder general.

He's actually one of the better posters, since he actually posts about the game.

>>53096596

Remember, they were totally going to produce their own digital tabletop for 4th.

>>53096640
>There's a reason it died and people play Pathfinder instead.

Can't even keep your editions straight. People play Pathfinder cause 3.5E died. After 4E's untimely end, people play...13th Age?

>>53097382

I quite liked 13th Ages rules for minions - you have X "mooks" in a mob, and the HP total is for the mob as a whole. So if you have 5 mooks in a 50-hp mob, every time you deal 10hp, it kills a figure.

It solves two of the problems with minions, IMO - one, they were *too* fragile, to the point where auto-damage could kill them, guaranteed. Two, using bigs hits against them was a waste, so they were basically ignored until someone had an AoE power that could roast them all. Nobody wanted to waste even a standard-action at-will to kill a single mook.

>>53096536
That's why you use the Maptool framework instead.

>>53045291
Yeah I like 4e's lore a lot, and I especially like how its in many ways an evolved version of Dark Sun lore, or feels like it. The Gray and the Elemental Chaos in particular.

>>53105880
I cannot fucking stand early 4e minions, but most late 4e minions seem to have it under control.

>>53097484
Hm, I have made a few decent hybrid binders. I seem to recall there being workable things about them, anyway. If hybrid binders actually exist.

>>53097619
Well, your choices for Eladrin Knight are using the Intelligent blademaster stuff, or going with the warlock PP that lets you do INT (cold) damage and slow around you every time you teleport.

Sounds pretty fun, but still very simple. Wonder what sort of builds you could do with martial cross training.

>>53107129
What's the difference?

>>53107677
Early 4e minions are things that can be melted at will with no real problem. All they have going for them is player psychology; in my experience, PCs almost always go for the biggest, most impressive target, so in many fights, minions are ignored unless they are obviously the best target. But there's no real chance of them equalling a normal monster (I wish non elite, non minion, non solo monsters had a distinct name).

Late 4e minions tend to be set up either with consequences in mind for killing them or not killing them. This isn't a consistent thing, but the Infernal Animus and Gas Spore are pretty good about this sort of thing.

There are still some iffy late stage 4e minions that do basically nothing.

>>53107722
>>53107677

So there are a lot of minions that are of the "if you kill it at the wrong time or place, it fucks things up to some degree" variety. Which is fine.

Elemental Eye Cultists (lv11 minions) are part of a neat set. They are flavored as drow and are noted to be Tharizdun servants, but from the context it seems clear they're supposed to be Ghaunadaur (sp) cultists. They are an example of dudes who punish players for ignoring them: they mark and weaken those they hit. And Elemental Evil goes with everything.

>>53107757
>Elemental Eye Cultists
>marked and weakened
Jeez, yeah that's a completly different power level from earlier 4e minions.

>>53107774
I guess a more concise explanation is "late 4e minions tend to have roles which have a big impact."

Dunno what is great about the Grimlock minions, but then again they're brutes; doing damage and only that is reasonable, and a Grimlock, though level 18-ish, doesn't really strike me as something that can contend with Epic PCs often without being almost instantly killed. They are afterall something like the degenerate descendents of cannibal cults in the underdark, but not really all that supernatural.

I always like to keep an eye out for ranged minions: Kuo-Toa Artillery seem good.

Gas spores are actually level 4 according to this, and a fav of mine.

One of the most powerful minions in the Underdark book are Swordwing Cutters (level 28 skirmishers); they have fly 10, reach 2, a measly 14 damage on a hit (20 on a crit), but also knock people prone. If they are killed, then as an immediate interrupt, all the other swordwing cutters can shift 5 as a free action. Not really sure that they're worth it, being level 28 and all, but reach 2 dudes knocking you prone and being largely immune to AoE (one blast will probably only kill one) seems reasonable.

Broken Wrackspawn and Broken Wrackspawn Pit Guardians (15 & 28) are similar to the Elemental Eye Cultists mechanically. They give a -4 to saves to bloodied types in their aura, and they weaken you on a hit until they die. Their 3e flavor has them as good souls tortured by fiends until they become horrendous monsters, and their bone spears are pulled forth from their own bodies, and convey some of the pain that they experience on their victims. The 4e version doesn't seem to make reference to the bone spear, but Wrackspawn in general are Torog's deformed handiwork, often (?) formerly willing types, and the Broken ones are the failed result of such processes. Torog is a total bro though, he will give immortal life and his idea of eternal entertainment to anyone who shows up.

>>53074778
>ded game
You only need 4-5 players; a world of "That Guy" basement-dwelling college yolos need not apply.
>Been playing 4e bi-weekly since it came out, haven't touched 5E since the playtest.
Feels good.

>>53105855
4e doesnt have a good similar replacement (unless you like strike).

So that 4e players still play 4e. And the playerbase gets smaller every day.

4e retro clone attempts have cropped up, but I've yet to see one be completed. Either 4e isn't popular enough for a retroclone revival, or it people aren't having a hard enough time finding physical books.

I suspect between the offline character builder, powers on your sheets, and only needing the rules compendium as a player, that might drag out 4es death for a while, but eventually it's gonna need an in print/print on demand retro clone of the rules cyclopedia, and monster manuals, at least, if it's going to stay alive - more than that if it will exist to people who aren't going to go to the trouble to pirate and crack the offline cbuilder to play.

>>53075729
That's kind of backwards though. The issue, if it can be called that, with 4e was that it actually tried to address that. It boiled it down to some mechanics, and people found it hard to re-abstract it, even though it actually works pretty well.

Take your court intrigue. A 3e DM could get their players throwing out some persuasion or bluff etc to try and convince people. I've actually just started planning to run an Exalted game and I like the intimacies thing. But for DnD going from 3rd to 4th, they DID implement mechanical support, it was a part of their goal. That support was skill challenges. On the table, it shouldn't look much different than CoC or 3e. People are talking, lying, persuading, bribing, investigating. But on the DM side, he's noting down successes and failures and awarding bonuses. That was the entire point of the Skill Challenge system, so that something like parts of a court intrigue could still have a place in adventure modules and be built as an "Encounter" just like one would build a combat encounter and still have a proper mechanical backbone to it.

Unfortunately, just like someone who says "I attack him" or the DM who just says "You hit it", you'd get people running Skill Challenges completely off the paper. Especially since it was unfamiliar compared to previous editions.

>>53108532
The problem with 4e retroclones is that recreating a system like 4e is HARD

There are no shared spell lists, every class has it's own complete set of powers from 1 to 30. There are thousands of powers available to PCs in 4e

>>53108365
That's great as long as your group stays active. If some people move/die/stop playing, you'll have a much harder time finding new players or a new group for a dead game than a live one.

>>53108566
>hard to find players

eh its hard to find a DM for
its not hard to find players for anything

>>53108556
Agreed. There *are* a ton of powers. Though that's reduced when you consider how many powers are "the same as lower level power x, but scaled up to be actually useful at this level of play"

Coming the rule compendium/ core rulebook in a way that's clearly compatible with cbuilder would be easier, of course.

But the fact remains that the 4e player base is shrinking, and the number of 4e books in the wild is not going up.

And to play 4e now you basically need the prayed cbuilder, which is again, not very newbie friendly.

You're unlikely to see new 4e groups form. You will have the occasional new player join an established group and play with PDFs and cbuilder. That's about it.

>>53108556
I wouldn't mind seeing something like a 4e/5e hybrid that did use some shared powers in a tasteful fashion.

>>53108586
DMs are harder to find. This is true. If you're DM moves, either one of you steps up, or you have to suck it up and play what's available to you. And the odds of that including 4e go down the line 4e has been dead with no successor game.

>>53108635
Considering I mainly ForeverDM in 4e, I'll count myself as a rare drop.
roll20 is still a good option, but less so everyday.
>The wife is DMing right now, so I've started working on FalloutPnP, and am using my 4e knowledge to make it a post-apocalyptic successor.

>>53109218
A 4e-inspired Fallout?

What have you got done?

>tfw the 2 threads that you have been following for a few days and were full of happy people waxing about a loved series are both autosaging and near page 10
>to be replaced with more nattering bullshit, X wat do trash, 40k edition warring
I love this thread, but I hate it only reminds me how awful this board is, and other boards are only worse, somehow.

>>53109607
you can make a new thread, comrade.

>>53109642
Honestly, omae, I'm scared lightning won't strike twice, and a redux would end like the OTHER 4e thread someone tried to make about using minions well that was trolled and shitposted in for 2 hours straight.
I'd rather have good memories of this thread and good fun (and information and tips I can use in my own game) than make some shit show that does little beside add to the bump count.