/4eg/ - D&D 4e and 4e-like General: Dwarven Work edition

Have any of you lot had any experience with playing 4e on hexes? Seems like it'd fit it quite well.

>Thread motto: Don't feed the trolls!
Think I'll add this in every post mine to emphasize it.

About creating the natural evolution of 4e (the same way 5e is the natural evolution of previous editions), what do you guys think about getting rid of the situational modifiers that can bloat the combat? It is nice to build bonii until you pierce the heavens, but when you have to add +2 from the Leader power, +2 from Combat Advantage, +2 from Bloodied, +2 from this, from that, the damage roll becomes only a minor thing (because when 1d8 + 35, the die means little).

Getting rid of this also reduces the number of powers available. Doesn't need to go full Advantage/Disadvantage-only, no items, final destination, but improve more than simple +2.

My personal desire would forgo 1d20 in favor of 3d6, but then it would stray too far from 4e

>>54217467
Played Strike! on hexes (felt like it fits the mech scale better) and it worked out pretty well.

I see no reason why it would not work in 4e.

>>54217467
The only big change is how it affects bursts and blasts.
Bursts are pretty obvious, but it had been a while and I forget how you do blasts, but I do know it does change the number of spaces each one of them effects so there is a slight variance in close and area attacks as a result

>>54217524
I think the Cypher system just caps it. Basically, you have a level of challenge, and if you got 3 things helping you with that challenge (each giving you a +1 I think?) you lower its level by one, and that's it.

Could also do something like having/adding an "edge" dice that you roll along a d20. There's lots that can be done with that; increase/decrease the dice size, add advantage to that instead of the d20, have all sorts of effects key off of it, etc.

>My personal desire would forgo 1d20 in favor of 3d6, but then it would stray too far from 4e

Eh, 3d6 honestly isn't any better than the d20... as long as you got the correct amount of modifiers. 75% to hit is going to be 75% to hit, and you want to have tight/straightforward maths for a combat focused game like 4e. With a 3d6, the worth of modifiers would be all over the place.

A smaller dice, like a d12 or d10 would be a good way to make each modifier more meaningful, however, without adding a curve that complicates maths.

>>54217524
You could take a lesson from 5e, and give advantage instead of multiple small bonuses.
If you move to 3d6, you could stack advantage/disadvantage up to get something like 'best 3 out of 6d6'.
It would make playing with more than 1 Leader type more balanced, in 4e 2 Leaders combining their bonuses can be devastating, and make the party hit way above their weight class.
It's good tactics, but it's annoying how effective it is.

>>54217524

Something I've pondered in a potential rewrite is straight up removing sources of stacking bonuses. Have a number of clearly defined types and sources of bonuses, you can benefit from each of them, but there are no untyped bonuses of any sort. You can still stack numbers to an extent, but there's an implicit hard cap on exactly how much that matters.

>>54217688
>I think the Cypher system just caps it. Basically, you have a level of challenge, and if you got 3 things helping you with that challenge (each giving you a +1 I think?) you lower its level by one, and that's it.
This works because each challenge is represented by a number that is multiplied by 3 for the d20 DC (so a challenge 2 need a roll of 6, a challenge 3 needs 9 and so on...). So, if you have 3 ways of getting +1 bonii, in the end you get +3 thus reducing the challenge by 1.

>With a 3d6, the worth of modifiers would be all over the place.
Indeed, that's one reason to abolish bonii and go advantage/disadvantage, letting bonii apply in the damage roll or something else instead of attack/defense.

>>54217835
>advantage/disadvantage up to get something like 'best 3 out of 6d6'.
>6d6
Whoa there, buddy. Doesn't need to get this far. Best/worse 3 of 4d6 already give a really nice curve.

3d6 without bounded accuracy, since 4e is about getting stronger in a way previous challenges doesn't become even a nuisance after a while (and that's the minion role all about).

>>54217883

Actually, addition to this, what sources of bonus are really necessary?

Attribute Bonus, Skill Bonus, Feat Bonus, Power Bonus, Item Bonus... Anything else beyond that, really?

>>54218302
Combat advantage.

You may also want some bonuses stack (having like a morale boost from a warlord and a precision boost from some self applied buff), though I guess you could do something like "Bull's strength: your STR attribute bonus increases by one", but that's exactly the kind you don't want I think.

>>54218302
>>54218345

A good point. I forgot Proficiency Bonus too, although that could potentially be removed/folded into something else..

>>54218739
Been thinking of using the black hack approach to levels; basically instead of getting bonuses to everything as you level, your bonuses (or bonuses to the enemy stats) are based on the level difference between you.

So if you are 2 levels above the enemy, he gets -2 to all attacks and defenses. If he is 2 levels higher than you, he gets +2 to all.

You could easily adjust that even, if you want bounded accuracy in the game you could just divide the level difference by 4.

>>54218789

The one issue that springs to mind is that it could get very fiddly to manage in fights involving multiple enemies of different levels relative to the players. It's not impossible to deal with, but it is a bit of extra mechanics to remember and potentially get wrong.

>>54218837
That's why you put the number on the enemies. Players are expected to stay constant in level, so the enemy stats stay constant.

If you'd mix in lower level henchmen it... hmm, you are probably best off modifying their stats by how much lower they are compared to the players, should work out mathematically the same.

>>54216697
I would actually love a source on that comic strip, anybody know where it's from?

>>54218789
>>54218837
>>54218880
It's the same, but instead of accounting the bonus beforehand, you'll math it "in site". Good on paper, but sounds cumbersome to me.

And players like to see the numbers growing, even if the hit % is the same. Writing +30 on your sheet is good when you once started with +6, even if the 16 AC enemies are now 40 AC enemies.

>>54219320
>It's the same, but instead of accounting the bonus beforehand, you'll math it "in site"

Eh, not more than using the "MM3 on a business card" thing, but yeah.

The number increasing thing is valid though. I'd probably just do that with HP and damage, but I understand why having all that on your side of the paper is appealing.

>>54219287
>I would actually love a source on that comic strip
Are you serious

>>54219287
Dont anon its to good and to short. It will only leave you empty...

>>54219287

IIRC it's the Fells Five 4e comic, but I don't actually know off the top of my head where I'd go to find a copy.

>>54219287
>>54219933
I can post a link after work anon.

What piece of 4e lore did you anons find most inspiring? What were the pieces that really blew you away, or which still give you really solid ideas for campaigns?

Speaking personally, I really like Codricuhn, especially his artwork; there's just such a sense of implied massiveness. I really want to run a Dark Sun-esque "death world neo-barbarian" campaign with The Reveal being that the players' entire world is actually the surface of this planet-sized demonic elemental.

Nusemnee has to be without a doubt the most interesting god I've seen in D&D in a long time. I want to have her priesthood be heavily active in my settings, with whole "redemption guilds" aimed at supporting monstrous adventurers and their quests to turn their people away from their evil paths.

I could go on, but these two are worth pushing forward the most, I think.

>>54220207

After seeing it mentioned a few threads back I went and read up on the fluff of the Catastrophic Dragons, and they are seriously fucking cool.

>>54217524
Modifier spam doesn't bother me - I played Legend with no problem - and I absolutely hate 5E's advantage system.

>>54220238
>bother
>hate
Could you please improve on that? Seriously want to know why - 5e Advantage was praised as a really nice mechanic with little flaws.

Actually, speaking of Nusemnee... if I wanted to play an Invoker of Nusemnee who wants to restore her goddess to life, or at least take up her mantle, what Malediction, PP and ED would you anons recommend taking to strengthen that theme?

Dead God Avatar seems like the most logical Epic Destiny, but the other two ones are giving me some issues...

>>54220328
Having a one-size-fits-all mechanic for something that has no business being one-size-fits-all is bullshit and for me, reading a new die is way slower than mentally adding to or subtracting a few bonuses.

>>54220231
Aren't they just? MM3 set some awesome background for them, but their Dragon articles really gave them the shining spotlight. I mean, dragons embracing their elemental power to the point they become living catastrophes; how is that not awesome?

I just love the artwork they got too - especially the more ephemeral dragons. The Avalanche Dragon is just so weird and yet terrifying - it's an enormous cloud of dust and flying boulders, thousands of tons of free-falling rock that defies gravity and hates you personally.

Tell me that's not cooler than Mr. "I'm Lawful Good leaning on Lawful Neutral" 2e Brass Dragon, or whatever the hell it was before 4e...

File: Shiki.png (1MB, 845x1200px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 845x1200px

>>54220207
Nusemnee is a pretty bog-standard "redeemed monstergirl waifu goddess of redemption."

>>54220471
I know it's bait, but I'll bite anyway: who the hell have you been playing with that a deity like that can be called "bog-standard"?

The only other Goddesses of Redemption I can name off the top of my head are Elistaree - who, fair enough, *is* a monstergirl, but who only concerns herself with redeeming *drow* - and Saraenrae (or however it's spelt), and even then she's predominantly focused on being the Sun God and the Paladin God.

>>54220408
>a one-size-fits-all mechanic for something that has no business being one-size-fits-all is bullshit
>bullshit
Could you clarify more, please? The advantage mechanic exists exactly to reduce the hunting for every modifier that could be added. The downside of this is exactly itself: If you only ever need one source of Adv for its benefit, a player will try to find the the more constant source possible to acquire the effect. Calling it bullshit does nothing to improve the discussion, even if myself recognize the mechanic have this flaw.

>reading a new die is way slower than mentally adding to or subtracting a few bonuses
This is a good explanation of why you don't like it. Thanks for this answer.

>>54220580
Not that guy, but there's also the issue of granularity. A bonus in 4e can be anywhere from +1 to +10, while advantage is always just advantage.

This isn't that bad a deal, since 4e already unified most situational stuff into combat advantage, but it's still pretty limited when you want to replace every single modifier with that one thing.

>>54220563
It's a common theme in /tg/.

>>54220654
Maybe on /tg/, but it's never been a part of official D&D before.

You know what? I was going to ask /4eg/ what its favorite races were from 4e, but since >>54220471 clearly has monstergirls on the brain, let's shake it up:

What, in your mind, were the hottest pieces of female character artwork in 4e?

File: Wandering Swordmage.jpg (237KB, 1000x1311px) Image search: [Google]

237KB, 1000x1311px

>>54220802
Well, the Sha'ir from Heroes of the Elemental Chaos is the literal hotests. :p

More seriously, I have a preference for the Wandering Swordmage. Though I'll admit she isn't as "hot" as some of the other art people might post. I'm a sucker for the midriff.

>>54220929
I dig it, but mostly because I love panties or thongs are pulled high up on the leg.

File: IMG_0789.png (909KB, 640x1136px) Image search: [Google]

909KB, 640x1136px

>>54220802
The Battlemind from Zephyr Blade. She looks fucking great, it's not typical hotness but she attracts me so much.

>>54220238
>>54220328
My personal issue with advantage ous that it was a very common mechanic that interacted with a lot of the system.... but out didn't stack in any meaningful way.

>>54220802
>Maybe on /tg/, but it's never been a part of official D&D before.

http://realmofadventure.wikia.com/wiki/Meriadar

>>54220802
>>54220929
>>54221009
To contribute to my own thread... it's been a shamefully long time since I looked at my own 4e books, and between bad connection and not having them on my comp, I can't share them, but the female dwarf from the Rampaging Brute PP in Martial Power 2 is really appealing. Alongside the "prototype" Dwarf Cleric from Wizards Presents: Races & Monsters, they really cement how much I liked the new art design for dwarves in 4e.

Of course, gnomes and halflings got hotter too, but I can't point to any specific artwork off the top of my head...

Actually... you know what? I still wanna know: what was your favorite race that was either new to 4e, or got itself a makeover with the 4e shift?

And what specifically did you like about it?

>>54221275

It's cliche, but I love the Dragonborn. My first ever 4e PC was a Dragonborn Warlord and they were so amazingly fun to play, and the Arkhosia fluff was always interesting to interact with and try to live up to.

>>54221275
Half-Elf have never really felt as comfy as 4e, honestly, and I don't know why. Love them.9

File: download.png (82KB, 1715x679px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 1715x679px

>>54220649
> replace every single modifier with that one thing.
The idea was never that, but to reduce drastically numerical modifiers for this. Although my idea was even replacing the attack roll to 3d6 since I prefer bell curve. But since this would stray too far from D&D, I thought of a middle ground: 3d20, pick middle if normal attack, highest if advantage, lowest with disadvantage.

These are the results for <at least>. Standard attack makes 10 being hit 57% of the chance. If player and monsters are made with the same bonus in mind (+5 attack against AC 15), it is a hit 57% of the time. The design idea of the original 4e developers is 66% if I'm not wrong, and we get 64,8% against target number (TN) 9.

But then, the whole advantage goes away if it is implemented that way, with TN 15 being hit 65% of the times, and disadvantage meaning almost never hitting.

So, drop the 3d20, drop the 5e mechanic, search mor other means? How away from the 4e core rules one can go before it is a spiritual sucessor and not a sequel/retroclone?

>>54221275
Personally, I really liked the way that the dwarves shed some of their traditional Tolkienisms like being a dying race or having fewer and/or bearded women - and I really dug the fluff about the War of Chains. The Forgeborn Dwarves are such an awesome idea, I really love them.

I can't really explain why the Eladrin/Elf split makes them feel "cleaner" than the old High/Wood Elf split, I'm afraid.

I love how 4e finally made the Gnomes more than just "Good-Humored Magical Dwarves".

Dragonborn? They were fucking *awesome*, finally giving us something that was new and yet broad enough to fill any role.

Half-Orcs losing their rape connotations was a good thing, although honestly I would rather just reskin them as full-blooded orcs, because the notion you can't play a humanoid race unless it's been "purified" with human ancestry is... no.

Tieflings, honestly, I really liked. I can get the appeal of the old planewalker's handbook variety table, but, seriously, the reskin made sense because A: it was just taking into account the fact that all official tiefling art to that point boiled down to humans with one or more or horns, hooves and tails, and B: it fit the presentation of the race as an actual unified race and not a motley collection of extraplanar bastards.

>>54221275
Genasi, full stop

Anons? In the last thread, as an idle comment, I brought up what folks thought would be the result of dropping a party of 30th level 4e adventurers into Westeros (TV version). General consensus was that, if we presume Westeros is a low-Heroic tier Martials Only setting, they'd be running the place.

Well, "Battle of the Bastards" was on the box this morning, and it made me wonder: how much impact would said band of adventurers have on a mass conflict like that?

For sake of argument, let's say said party is five strong and consists of:

Swordmage (Aegis of Assault) - Wandering Swordmage - Arcane Sword

Invoker (Covenant of Preservation) - Flame of Hope - Dead God Avatar

Warden (Stormheart) - Storm Sentinel - Emergent Primordial

Sorcerer (Wild Mage) - Primordial Channeler - Lord of Chaos

Ardent (Mantle of Elation) - Catalyst - Demiurge

>>54223320

Depends if you're taking a more thematic approach or trying to stay 'realistic', as it were.

In an actual battle, the most efficient thing to do with a small, powerful group like that is special forces actions. Break supply lines, attack the command tent, take out officers or disrupt important formations, which can be significant and fun, but doesn't feel particularly heroic fantasy to me.

In the context of Westeros it makes sense though, and through that and direct conflict, they would be a significant asset to any side they supported. I'm also reasonably certain that, even if the army they were with lost, basically no force in Westeros could really stop them. At best they'd retreat after expending their resources and just come back the next day at full strength.

>>54223481
Let's go with the thematic approach of five 30th level PCs charging into the fray alongside Jon Snow. Then what happens?

I figure it'd probably be a Bolton massacre, what with the fireballs, spheres of annihilation, turning into living storms and so forth, but hey, I don't actually know as much about D&D as I'd like.

>>54221275
Basically all of them. The art and formatting alone did wonders for giving character to races which were threadbare before. Making half-elves and half-orcs actual races instead of 'half human half something else' was one of the great changes.

>>54223874

At level 30 and with the low power nature of Westeros, they'd churn through everything like a knife through butter. Hundreds or thousands of casualties inflicted personally, with ease and without much cost.

>>54224740
This. It would basically look like a Musou.

>>54220099

That'd be fucking awesome

>>54224740
Yeah, honestly I don't think anyone in westeros statted out would be higher than level 10 or so in terms of power.

>>54223874
The wizard flies over the battlefield, turns it into an electrified volcano hurricane, and leaves.

Considering that a couple of Huge wyverns constitute a nearly-invincible military force in the context of Westeros, a squad of well-equipped, barely-optimized, mostly-rested level 30 4e characters shouldn't be threatened by the combined firepower of the entire planet.

>>54217467
It fucks up Charges because charging generally requires straight lines.

>>54221196
>Rampaging Brute
>yfw life is short and hard, like the bodybuilding shortstack waifu that will never come in fast and get what she came for

>>54225453
Doesn't charging just require that the attacker always moves closer to the target?

File: Mountain Devotee.jpg (220KB, 640x1268px) Image search: [Google]

220KB, 640x1268px

>>54220802

>>54225790
One might almost think that you have a picture of her to share.

File: weight + momentum = mating press.png (806KB, 948x572px) Image search: [Google]

806KB, 948x572px

>>54225907
There were some good dwarves in 4e.

>>54225816
cute, CUTE! I want her to break my neck between her thighs, killing me instantly!

>>54225323
Well, in fairness, 4e Wyverns don't breathe fire.

>>54226016
Indeed. I think 4e literally had the best female dwarf artwork of any edition, and the male dwarves benefited from it as well, although the male dwarves have always been relatively decent.

File: phb dorf.jpg (18KB, 172x306px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 172x306px

>>54226162
I actually do like that 4e dorfs just look like short, thicc humans. Right in the PHB, our introduction to dwarven women is ginger shortstack with giant tiddies.

>>54225816
Needs to be thicker

>>54220099
>>54225100
>>54219933
>>54219287
http://readcomiconline.to/Comic/Dungeons-Dragons-2010
Read their tale and mourn the loss of one of the best D&D comics of all time.

>>54226899
Out of all the official licensed D&D comics, movies, and animations, the Fell's Five comic was the only one that actually felt like it was written by someone who had ever actually played D&D.

How do people feel about Gamma World 7e's character creation system, where you mash together two separate origins with their own power progressions and flavors?
Kinda feel like it'd be fun to use for a fantasy-themed heartbreaker, with several race and class-based origins to cobble together, even unlikely ones like an Elf/Dwarf origin combination, or a Lycanthrope/Monk.

>>54227884

>>54220207
I absolutely love the general theme of the Points of Light setting, that there are huge blank spaces for groups to fill in and explore. The whole setting felt very frontier and exploration oriented, like you were the first to step out into the darkness instead of following in the footsteps of Elminster or Drizzt

>>54228313
Mmm, yeah. So much goodness to use, but also so much interesting stuff to pilfer from and explore. I know Ravenloft purists scoffed at them, but I genuinely liked the 4e Domains of Dread much better - Ravenloft has always been too full of itself and too focused on a narrow, Neo-Victoriana definition of itself to really embrace its full potential.

>>54226966
Too bad they completely fucked up the canonical class/stat combo for Fell

Everyone else makes sense, dex/cha rogue, str/wis paladin, dex/wis ranger, cha/int warlock. Then Fell is apparently a str/con fighter, despite obviously being a resourceful warlord

>>54229038
Well, they were trying to push Essentials at the time and they wanted to pretend fun martials didn't deserve to exist during that time. Thanks Mearls.

>>54227884
combining multiple paths is so great. Legend and Strike! both do a version of it and I think it's the way to go to cover the breadth of 4e without the huge amount of splats.

>>54231332
I disagree, somewhat, the way Gamma World does it is cool, but the way Strike! does it is extremely limiting in terms of game design

I played 4e again and by Ioun how fun it was to come up with group tactics, even for monsters. I can't really do that in 5e, else everyone dies. 5e is just far too low powered for that.

>>54227884
Could you explain more? I never read Gamma 7e. You mean something like making races contribute 1/3 to the powers and classes the other 2/3?

>>54231605
That's been the experience I've had with the game too, I've tried to give 5e a fair shake even with my personal feelings on Mearls, but I've just found it lacks depth and balance. My players have been largely expressed that it just feels boring compared to the tactical nature of 4e and they miss the game they didn't think they liked until it was gone.

>>54231607
You get powers from your two races and the random mutation/artifact cards. There are no classes.

>>54231680
So a possible translation to 4e would be just that? A kind of hybrid race|class? I find it quite interesting.

>>54231605
>>54231644
4e and 5e are different games.
4e is Fantasy Avengers. 5e is more sword & sorcery. 4e is tactical, 5e is more loose. They're different kinds of game from the philosophy approach of each other and power level. WotC did this "right" because it wouldn't compete with itself, but tried to recover the lost shitfinder audience.

So I would really love to run a 4th ed game for my group. I know about the MM3+ math, but is there any other good general advice for someone who never got to play a ton of 4th?

>>54231987

Get a copy of the offline character builder, it makes chargen way easier by collating content in one place. Funin.space is also a great resource, an online rip of the compendium with all the content in a searchable index.

On houserules, give every PC an Expertise feat and Improved Defences for free, it's necessary to make the math work.

I'd also advice your players to look up the various 4e handbooks/guides for the classes they want to play. Not to follow them, the game works fine at low optimisation, but because they generally do a good job of describing how things work, your classes strengths and weaknesses, and can help you avoid some of the badly designed options present. There aren't too many, but there are a few.

>>54221925
>Tieflings, honestly, I really liked. I can get the appeal of the old planewalker's handbook variety table, but, seriously, the reskin made sense because A: it was just taking into account the fact that all official tiefling art to that point boiled down to humans with one or more or horns, hooves and tails, and B: it fit the presentation of the race as an actual unified race and not a motley collection of extraplanar bastards.
According to Classes and Races, early drafts of Tieflings had customizable Race traits (and races were more complex in general) but they dropped it later

>>54232131
>customizable Race traits (and races were more complex in general) but they dropped it later
And returned with it with the shifter and the secondary ability score being a variable

>>54232677
Kinda, yes. But if I'm not mistaken, their early approach had races with their own progression

>>54232695
Is possible for a heartbreaker 4e. Would help making less powers per class ir some would be adapted to race.

>>54233973
Wouldn't that restrict the races too much?

>>54234036
Not if they had many choices.

>>54234036
As >>54234068 said, would allow for better archetypical design, so an Eladrin can use some sword techniques even if Wizard or use some arcane magic even if Fighter, instead of taking up space for this in classes or taking too long to show (like a Eladrin PP) or taking up feats.

File: Pyrokinetic.jpg (239KB, 729x1191px) Image search: [Google]

239KB, 729x1191px

>>54231737
It's not just a translation, it is 4e, just with simpler mechanics. It seems to be wholly compatible with 4e monsters, you can simply drop them into a Gamma World game and they'd work fine.

>>54221009
She is so cute for me and I never really got why. I think I need help.

>>54234198
Reminder to self to add gamma world 7 to the list of 4e-likes.

Anons? During 4e's time in the sun, I mostly didn't bother picking up adventures, because I figured that there'd be very little if anything new in them. After exposure to Pathfinder and 5e revealed the tendency to adventures to feature new monsters, magical items and lore, I have to ask:

What new stuff, if anything, can be found in the various 4e adventures? Anyone remember?

>>54234198
Dragonborn fuck me, how I never saw that? Do you have the pdf, please?

>>54234892
Honestly it's not so much about the new but 4e's adventures were some high quality ones. Very well written and with fun combat.

>>54236367
I didn't actually read many. Which are the best ones?

>>54234892
I think that's a thing more unique to Paizo, I'm pretty sure most of the magic items and monsters made it to the compendium.

>>54236878
What compendium? I was unaware of any such thing.

>>54216697
Is that character builder fully up to date?

Because dang I've never seen an offline version with everything.

>>54229374
Every character was allegedly an Essentials class. This works well enough for Varis and Bree, but Tisha is clearly not a hexblade.

File: Steel Ego.jpg (223KB, 640x930px) Image search: [Google]

223KB, 640x930px

>>54221009
Not as good as the smugmind.

File: shardboob.png (505KB, 570x503px) Image search: [Google]

505KB, 570x503px

>>54240383
Speaking of which, shardboobs.

>>54234198
>It seems to be wholly compatible with 4e monsters, you can simply drop them into a Gamma World game and they'd work fine.
Completely true, for a while I was in a group doing a series of weekly one-shots, rolling up a new character every time. DM would often grab something out of the MV to use and it worked pretty well, 4e is great on the refluffing.

>>54239056
Should have most everything if it has CBLoader included, I haven't checked the download.

>>54240988
So, anyone else remember that there was a Dragonborn racial PP called the Gleeborn which noted that some human kings have been known to take Gleeborn courtesans?

Now, I know courtesan doesn't necessarily have to mean sexual, but an imp of the perverse is pushing me to ask: how many 4e fans out there would be willing to cuddle up to a curvy lady dragonborn if she expressed an interest?

File: really fluffy.png (657KB, 1000x724px) Image search: [Google]

657KB, 1000x724px

>>54241977
>an imp of the perverse is pushing me to ask: how many 4e fans out there would be willing to cuddle up to a curvy lady dragonborn if she expressed an interest?

Is this turning into /pfg/?

Shall we talk about fox hengeyokai next?

>>54242164
Why bother? Hengeyokai suck in D&D, they always have done, and the 4e version is not, to my knowledge, really any better than its predecessors in the last three editions.

If I wanted a 4e kitsune race, personally, I'd just reskin the Drow.

>>54242164
only if there's a 4e conversion and you post the pdf

File: 404_Ecology_of_Hengeyokai_(updated).pdf (315KB, 1x1px) Image search: [Google]

315KB, 1x1px

>>54242214
>conversion

>>54235289
https://www anonfiles cc/file/6c035cd69eb5905a82ba63428979d1d7

>>54241977
Nah, it's all about the Tieflings.

File: big tits tiefling.jpg (283KB, 1005x1382px) Image search: [Google]

283KB, 1005x1382px

>>54243570
relevant

Has anyone had an experience with polymorphing with a sentient artifact on you? I'm playing a druid and we found a magic talking orb that's guiding us around the dungeon, but if i wild shape with her on my person would she be a part of my new body? Could I head her thoughts and such? Obviously it will be up to our dm in the end, but just wondering.

>>54245701
Isn't all the guff stored in a pocket dimension for the duration of the transformation?

>>54240383
Not that much into smugness or blonds. Why yes I in fact am into asians

>>54241977
Sure, I reckon that'd be alright. Half-Elves would still be my shit, though.

>>54242202
They're good enough in 4e, nothing great but they are serviceable, for sure.

After the split of Eladrin/Elf from High/Wood, what about the half-humans? Should a homebrew refluff them? Half-orc would go full Orc, sure, since the original evil barbarian turned noble savage. But half-elves? A homebrew mine from the 3.pf time had them as Bastards, a time where they were outcasts from both races. But 4e made them the opposite: the diplomat. How to refluff half-elves to drop the "half" from them?

>>54247066
Simple

They're humans

Make "human" as it is in 4e an optional template, sort of like the variant human in 5e, but have half-elves be the ordinary humans

For the next session, in 6 months, my DMs want us to level up our characters to level 11, the RP explanation being a 7 years ellipsis, so I can pretty much justify any choice fluff-wise
I'm a level 4 Dwarf Bravura Warlord, which paragon path should I choose?

>>54217467
>Have any of you lot had any experience with playing 4e on hexes? Seems like it'd fit it quite well.

Yes, and also on a Martian Chess Board.

In general, I play on square tiles. I pull out the fucked-up tiles generally when they face far-realm enemies that can bend reality. My players once faced a Beholder in a hypercube dungeon.

It works and it doesn't. In particular, size Large enemies are bad for this - normally they take up 4 tiles - on hexes, do you want them to take up 3 (awkward shape) or 7 (very large) ?

>>54247483
>I pull out the fucked-up tiles generally when they face far-realm enemies that can bend reality.
Well now I have to try this.

>>54247562
>Well now I have to try this.

It's funny when you're describing scenery before pulling out the battle mats.

>You're in a room.
>The room has three walls
>You are dead certain all the walls are straight and all the corners are right-angle corners, yet there are only three walls.

File: hex-chess[1].gif (23KB, 222x256px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 222x256px

>>54247562
>Well now I have to try this.

Oh, I should add: Be careful you don't pick a tileset that turns out to be isomorph to hexes or squares. Martian Chess Tiles (pic related) works perfectly, or using (squares/hexes) when you're used to (hexes/squares) but if you end up picking some other tileset, there's a very high change that you're going to end up with tiles that are mathematically (and therefore rules-wise) equivalent to squares or hexes.

File: Untitled0.png (9KB, 147x128px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 147x128px

>>54247612
This pic related is the three-walled square room

By the rules of 4E D&D, this is a room with completely straight walls, 90 degree corners, and 3 walls.

File: Untitled3.png (4KB, 219x219px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 219x219px

>>54247642
>5000 hours in mspaint

And the square triangle room is what happens when a weird beast dissolves a quarter of a square room and then uses its powers to force the room to still be connected all around

>>54229038
I had figured Fell was a bog standard str/wis weaponmaster fighter.
He wasn't incredibly bright, but he had incredible insight into people and the circumstances around him.

>>54244393
If she puts down her arms, will she die?

>>54248201
But his brilliance was more "flash-in-the-pan" then the steady common sense you'd expect from a high wisdom character, also he tends to fall for a lot of traps that other characters spot

Which in my mind, just goes to show that the skill system is broken in 4e and the hard ties between skills and stats is stupid

Genuine questions;

Is what's the biggest differences between 4e compared to PF and 5e?

>>54249635

Presentation. Standardised formatting and templating makes everything look very different, even when a lot of it really isn't.

Aside from that though, class balance and Martials actually being allowed to have nice things is the big one. Also nerfing/restricting out of combat spells to the Rituals system, making them useful tools rather than 'instantly solve a problem' tokens.

>>54249635
Mechanical or by design? It is a whole different power curve, both crunch or fluff.

>>54249635
Resource management is standardized, instead of some classes having ki, or rages, or superiority dice or spells, everyone has powers

Also, terms are delivered in terms of gameplay rather than real-world comparisons, so instead of "five feet" 4e will say "1 square", instead of "1 minute" 4e will say "10 rounds". Personally I freaking love this as it opens the game up massively, you can scale the size up or down with squares instead of feet, playing anything from pixies to giant robots, and turns and rounds last as long as they're dramatically required to

>>54248259
>skill system is broken in WotC D&D and the hard ties between skills and stats is stupid
that's been obvious for a while now

>>54249635
One big thing is actions. There are no full round actions, and particularly no full attacks. The majority of attacks are done with standard actions (which may entail several attacks, but usually not). Instead of swift actions, there are minor actions which you CAN trade move or standard actions for (as well as trading standard for move, obviously). Just like PF, you have one immediate action per round, but it doesn't eat any actions of out your next turn. Everyone also has one opportunity action per TURN, which is what is spent on opportunity attacks.

All in all it leads to a much greater focus on movement and positioning in combat.

It's also designed to have combat last a few rounds at least (I'd estimate 3-5 as the most common range) as opposed to 3.PF's one or two round combats.

File: ws.png (87KB, 335x416px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 335x416px

With the wording on the power, it seems as if everything becomes a part of you when you wild shape.

Do you guys think 4e could be used to do an early 20th century pulp-action story?

I kind of want to mix that kind of crazy action with the sort of bonkers combat setpieces 4e is so good at providing

>>54248259
>also he tends to fall for a lot of traps that other characters spot
Perception != Insight, anon.
He could read people and situations, and there were plenty of times where this was shown.

>>54251497
It sorta says openly that your equipment becomes part of you and you drop what you are holding save implements in plain text.
What you have on you melds into your form.

>>54252428
there were also plenty of times when he came up with brilliant, on-the-fly plans and made extremely convincing arguments, threats and bluffs

If I were to stat him, I'd say he's a resourceful warlord. statline of 18/10/10/14/11/14 and training in history, athletics, insight and diplomacy

>>54252457
So item in pouches and bags you hold become part of you as well, just stuff the artifact in there no?

>>54252521
oh, and he has the battlefront leader feature, as visible by his impressive shield

>>54252521
>>54252550
You forgot his pointed training in Arcana, Nature.
We will continue to butt heads on the idea of whether being able to see plot threads and be innovative is intelligence or wisdom based.

>>54252548
Yes.
However, if you have some baller item, I, as DM, may find a way to wrench your day for giggles.

>>54252645
intelligence is having an idea, wisdom is being able to tell if the idea is good or not

>>54252704
Eh that'd fine, I just want to stir the pot a little and have fun, since the item currently hates everyone in the party but me.

>>54252393
Easily, especially if you refluff pistols to mechanically be hand crossbows. It's actually quite easy.

Bonus points if you narrate everything like R. E. Howard would.

>>54252393
Could need some tweaks because 4e can be pulp-y as hell, but combat if too much focused on melee and less on cover.

>>54232079
Quick question anons. What do you all think of the standard point buy for 4e? Is everything supposed to go off of the standard point buy with MM3 math fixes or can it be upped a bit? and if so what is the highest point buy you'd allow without making characters into untouchable gods.

>>54253108

Honestly standard point buy is fine. As long as you have +4 in your attack stat and a +3 or +2 for most of your secondary effects, it's hard to go wrong.

>>54253130
Sort of figured it works just fine, kinda just wanted to play with it a bit though to see what I could come up with. was thinking of allowing a small group to use 28 point buy instead of the standard 22.

>>54253169
I'd do that only if you aren't giving them themes

>>54253183
maybe 25 then. I really like giving my players every option to customize their character the way they want them.

>>54253215
The thing about 4e point buy as it is, is that it's impossible to go 18/16

So I'd never go higher than 24 points, any more and 18/16 becomes possible

>>54253215
Might just give them a stat array instead to use

16,16,14,10,10,10 that should equal out to about the same as what I'm looking give my players.

>>54253301
Not quite sure what you mean by going 18/16 unless of course you mean having those scores before race adjustments. But that could work as well. 24 points is enough to play around with and take care of a penalty or even things out a bit more.

>>54253341
I mean before racial adjustments, obviously

>>54253215
If you really want to give your players flexibility, a good way to make it so all races get floating ABS increases. So a dragonborn could have a +2wis +2 int or whatever they like. It doesn't really unbalance things either.

Glad to see my favorite edition of DnD still has some life in it. Any online or rol 20 games run from here? I'd totally be up for one

>>54253378
That could work, except I sort of see that making humans obsolete as a character race, since they only get one ABS to adjust, unless you were going to give them two like everyone else. Then I could see that being the perfect solution.

>>54253409
The floating stat isn't what makes humans in 4e, it's the +1 to all NADs and the feat

>>54253390
I found one about a year ago on the gamefinder that's still going. Supposedly there's a lot of demand for games but few GM's who don't already have a stable group.

>>54253378
>>54253409
A new take on 4e should abolish racial adjustment to stats.

File: fffff.png (148KB, 480x640px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 480x640px

>finally get into a 4e game on roll20
>no one in the 'party' has any connections at all to the rest of the party
>very first session gives everyone different motivations that demand we split up
>dm says he's going to be too busy for sessions that would have been 2 and 3

Why do these things happen, anons? If that could have been saved it won't even have players by the time week 4 rolls up.

>>54253774

I agree with this. Racial stat adjustments don't really make the game any more interesting. I'd prefer to emphasise a races traits through powers and passive effects.

>>54253858
Because the people who went to that session to play a game with other people didn't actually want to play a game with other people. They each wanted to play the game in their head that they actually liked, and when they realized that they'd have to compromise and play something else that took into account the presence of other human beings, they all decided that they had better things to do.

This always happens when strangers try to game. There's no motivation to be a friend to anyone else.

>>54254271
Well, it actually requires you to not be a twat.
After doing a few online games with friends I know irl and a few strangers, I understand why roll20 people are on it.

>>54254712
>I understand why roll20 people are on it.
In my case, it's living in the middle of bumfuck nowhere.
Even if I had people to game with in person it would be an hour long drive somewhere for someone.

File: 63348481_p9.jpg (154KB, 600x737px) Image search: [Google]

154KB, 600x737px

I like how elves are actually good at nature/archery shit in 4e.

It's how I think of them primarily and then there's PF where they don't get a wis bonus or nature bonus because reasons?

>>54254271
>This always happens when strangers try to game.
I have had several successes with online games myself but

NEVER with someone I met on Roll20 and
NEVER with someone I met for D&D

I've also done con games and D&D encounter games IRL which are generally fine.

Here's a question for you /4eg/.
>Do you play/run other editions of D&D?
>If so, do you find those editions suited for different types of stories or adventures?
>What type of stories does 4e tell best?

Anons? What was your favorite class for each role?

Personally, I've always been a caster fan and not very fond of divines, but my list would look something like:

Defender: Swordmage
Controller: Wizard
Leader: Warlord
Striker: Sorcerer

>>54262077
L: Warlord (Favorite Class right here)
D: Fighter (Pally is also pretty nice)
S: Sorcerer
C: Sorcerer with a focus on AoEs Honestly I barely look at controllers, but if I really had to pick it would probably be Invoker

>>54262077
Fighters and Wizards, for sure. The best-developed and best-supported defenders and controllers, respectively. It's just really nice that LFQW isn't a thing anymore, and Fighters are actually fun and effective in play.

For strikers... I'm thinking Rogues are actually at the optimal level of interesting without being boringly simple or excessively cute. Engaging and rewarding to play.

Warlords probably win for leaders. No sparkle laser blasting, just good old enabling and shouting you back onto your feet.

>>54257916
I love the differentiate between Elves, Eladrin and that the dozens of sub-races can largely fall under one of those two labels pretty easily.

>>54261948
>Do you play/run other editions of D&D?
I started in 2e, played through 3rd and gave 5th a good shake to try it out. At the moment? I don't run or play any of the D&D editions, but every invite I get from people is for 5e or Pathfinder, whilst the edition I always hope to play or run is 4e.
>If so, do you find those editions suited for different types of stories or adventures?
I think 1e/2e have a distinctly more medieval feel to them, and I think 5e is a lot more low power and you spend a few levels as an apprentice adventurer before you actually feel like you're adventuring.
>What type of stories does 4e tell best?
4e for me is higher power without training wheels. You're competent right from the start, and you're saving towns, regions or even the whole world throughout a campaign. Whenever a friend laments they just don't feel cool or useful in their game (or that they're bad and chose bad classes when the wizard overshadows their ranger in every way), that's when I'll soft pitch 4e :)

>>54262077
Defender: Warden
Controller: I haven't played one honestly, but I'd try a Wizard or a Druid
Leader: Warlord
Striker: I've played a lot of strikers and I'm hard pressed to choose a favourite. Avenger has stood out for me, but Monk and Rogue are top of my list to play when I get the chance.

File: 52898678_p0.jpg (343KB, 600x800px) Image search: [Google]

343KB, 600x800px

>>54262077

Defender: Swordmage because I like being able to stand where I want, which is usually "not inside the auto-damage aura of the solo".
Controller: Wizard has all of the "quit hitting yourself" charm type spells.
Leader: Bards/Skalds because +4 to untrained skills is amazing.
Striker: Rogue because 4e is the only edition of D&D to get them right and it feels like a shame not to play one when I'm the striker.

>>54262077
>Defender: Hybrid
>Controller: Hybrid
>Leader: Hybrid
>Striker: HYBRID!

>>54262077
>Leader: Bard|Ardent
Is there anything more fun in this world than general Bardism? Oh yes - Kamina-inspired Bard. Bonus points if I get to sound like Brian Blessed.

>Controller: Invoker|Cleric
THE POWER OF CHRIST COMPELS YOU! A load of effects, getting up close and personal... It's a fun one, and a nice break.

>Striker: Rogue
I absolutely love rogues, thieves, knaves, the whole lot. 4e made them REALLY fun and varied, from John Wick-style brutality to Han Solo and James Bond-esque suaveness to getting your enemies to lose sight of you at the slightest moment.

>Defender: Battlemind
I love Paladins, but something about the Fightbrain makes me smile, doesn't matter what - the writing, the art, the powers... It's just such a fun character.

So here's a question.

Warlord seems to often be peoples favourite Leader, if not favourite class overall. What aspects of Warlords design as a Leader works so well, and where do the other options fall short in comparison? Are there ways to make the other Leaders more fun inspired by Warlord, without degrading Warlords uniqueness or identity?

>>54266118
I suspect a lot of it has to do with the Warlord's "lead from the front" style where he gets to attack aggressively and be rewarded for doing so by granting lots of free attacks and bonuses.

File: 1482099635119.jpg (384KB, 1600x900px) Image search: [Google]

384KB, 1600x900px

>>54262077
Defender: Swordmage because who doesnt like to teleport everywhere and laugh at enemy positioning?
Controller: Psion because it is very versatile and I like the flavor of either closing or opening aberrant rifts and fighting the Lovecraftian horrors that break through.
Leader: Warlord because FUCK YEAR, WARLORD!!!
Striker: Barbarian because who doesnt like making an unkillable murder machine who can solo most encounters by level 18?

>>54266293

So Warlords get to be proactive, while most other Leaders are reactive instead?

File: 1498444392417.jpg (80KB, 736x541px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 736x541px

>>54266118
I think its because the class doesnt make you feel like just a side character. For a Warlord its not just buffs, healing, or AoEs it is very much getting in to the thick of things, helping the other classes, especially strikers, really shine, and then the healing part comes in after everything else. Its a very versatile class with a lot of good support and interesting options.

>>54266713
Bards are mostly proactive, followed by Shamans and Ardents. Most Artificers and Clerucs are quite good but unlike enabling, buffing and debuffing aren't half as fun. You can give your allies BIG NUMBERS, but what's really fun is shuffling the battlefield and having them wreck face with extra stuff you're granting - and it can hurt through sheer numbers.

Greater Magic Weapon is far more effective in raw terms than Death From Two Sides (which is a really strong power) but goddamn is Death From Two Sides FUN.

>>54266118
Personally I could never get over the issue of them being a martial class when it's time to do healing.
Like, abstracting HP from meatpoints is one thing, yelling at someone to get on their feet when they're in the negatives and down two death saves already is shonen manga shit.

>>54266949
Did you have a problem with that in 3.5, with the Marshal class that did the same thing?
Or draconic vigor aura which was explicitly described as "pleasant waves that make you forget about your injuries"?

>>54266949

...Alternatively, it's like half of all action movies ever made. Where someone is down, beaten and bloodied, blinking and groaning, clearly right at the end... And then someone shouts at them to not give up, to keep fighting. And they do.

What are some weird races you've enjoyed playing, /4eg/?

>>54266986
That's the tone of it and I love it.

>>54266949
I was always confused about that. My old DM used to rule that dying characters can't hear you and so can't be brought up by warlord powers.

>>54266981
I got into tabletopping after PF was a thing, so no.
I took a look at the the rules for level adjustment and the skill lists for the two mostly similar systems and was like, nah, I'll pass on 3.5e.

>>54267506
Your old GM is shit. SHIT. He gimps one of the main feature of a class with a shit explanation. The motivation goes beyond hearing. It is subconcious. As far as I recall a deaf character can be healed as good as anyone. Heck, I'm on phone but I think even a Vampire can be healed that way.

>>54267252
Old Kobolds were pretty awesome, Shifty was an amazing racial power.

>>54267590
That's actually a really good explanation. A lot of warlord features specify that they only affect people who can see and hear you. If people were healed just by liking you without having to see or hear you, you wouldn't have to be there at all. You also shouldn't have to expend the use of any of your powers, because they're benefiting from the mere memory of you, not from what you're doing right now, which they're unaware of.

>>54266981
3.5 dragon shamans were magic, but yeah, 3.5 marshals were stupid for exactly the same reason.

The biggest thing I can't get over is that the person being affected by the warlord/marshal COULD do these things without him. They could heal themselves from even fatal injuries without an action, and they could take an extra attack every round, but they never figure that out. Warlords/marshals retcon every other character into a complete idiot.

>>54267912
They don't "heal fatal injuries" or "grant another attack". Warlords/Marshals instead make you grit your teeth and overcome your crippling pain for a few seconds more and point out an opportunity for a strike that you'd have missed otherwise

>>54267973
Which they shouldn't be able to do. In all likelihood, the warlord's companions are as good or better at hitting stuff than the warlord is. It's a truly shitty striker who can't see an opportunity to hit someone that the fucking middle manager can see (probably from further away than the striker and obscured by one or more party members, quite possibly from the wrong angle, and the opportunity lasts long enough to convey it with words without the situation changing, and also the enemy might be able to understand those words too and correct whatever it's doing wrong!)

>>54268054
>GET UP ON THE HYDRA'S BACK

>>54268089
Never would have thought of that in a million years. Thanks, guy who knows less about hydras than me and is also worse at fighting than me. Sincerely, the ranger.

>>54267912
>>54268054

You're an idiot. If you can't wrap the head around someone being able to bring out the best in others and spur them on to things they didn't think they were capable of, I'm not sure what to tell you. Have you ever meaningfully interacted with other human beings in a group?

>>54268187
The kinds of decisions that real leaders, coaches, managers, etc. can make that might have a meaningful impact are not the kinds of decisions that the average party's warlord is allowed to make. A warlord doesn't have hiring/firing power, for instance. A warlord also can't dictate what the party actually does (unless he's also the bossiest player at the table and the other players are okay with it.)

As for the value of interpersonal relationships, people have this thing called long-term memory. The people who influence me do so even if they're more than 10 squares away and even if they aren't actively yelling at me.

>>54268187
When someone thinks that leaders and managers have no value, they're one of two kinds of person:

Someone who has never had a good boss, or
Someone who has never been a good subordinate

>>54268325

And you really find that too much of a stretch? You can't even begin to fathom how a heroic leader in a fantasy story might be able to spur their friends on in ways that don't seem 'realistic' to us?

As for that last phrase I'm not even sure why you think it's relevant, save for that you just don't understand anything about why or how the Warlord is so fucking awesome.

So I'm working on a 4e rewrite with some friends and we're trying something a bit different with the six stats, and how they relate to defences. In addition to the standard Fort/Ref/Will relationship we want each stat to also be used for a secondary defensive thing. HP and Surges are clear, but we wanted a third one to keep the relations nicely balanced.

We're pondering a concept of 'Wind', a small pool of THP that refreshes at the start of every encounter. Probably not large, just stat mod, but that would also be refilled by Second Wind/Leader heals, and might have interaction with some powers- A power might do bonus damage if you still have it, or refill it if it's empty, as an example.

Any thoughts on the general idea? Of the six stats, which two would seem the most natural fit for it to you?

>>54269237
>a small pool of THP that refreshes at the start of every encounter
Call it Stamina? But you'd have to "discount" it from true HP or Surges, else you're giving more rounds of survivability to characters.

>>54269679

Well, we're rebuilding our math from the bottom up with these new numbers in mind, but yeah, you're right in that it will make people a bit tougher overall, so there'll need to be more damage to compensate.

>>54269826
On your second question:
>Of the six stats, which two would seem the most natural fit for it to you?
I would go Constitution, but remove it from starting HP.

>>54269237

>we want each stat to also be used for a secondary defensive thing
But what for?

>that it will make people a bit tougher overall, so there'll need to be more damage to compensate.

Is the point in just inflating numbers?

Legitimately don't get the intent behind these decisions.

>>54270132

Because every stat combination being beneficial to both primary and secondary defences, but in different ways, increases the viability of different stat combinations, and creates a number of distinct durability dynamics that might play and interact in different ways. It's about giving player characters choice and creating more functional differences between characters that will be mechanically engaging in play.

>>54270196

To expand on this-

In 4e, certain stat combinations are just better than others, and while you can assign stats to be used for various class powers and features, the actual value of each stats innate mechanics vary wildly, with some being incredibly broad and useful and others being niche and pointless.

Making every stat equally valuable, and giving every two stat combination its own distinct defensive benefits lets us use any two stat combination for a classes particular set of powers and features without worrying too much about dedicating some of their features to making up for their defensive deficit, since we can be sure everyone has a stable baseline.

This works particularly well for Defenders, as we can use stat combinations that before might have seemed underwhelming or even straight up bad for a class based around durability and toughing through.

Alongside this we're also having each stat linked to an equal number of skill, and with every skill being linked to two stats to further increase the variety and options available.

>>54255358
My running experience is that if I haven't met you irl, then you are probably a shit player.
That said, everyone gets a shot.

>>54261948
>Do you play/run other editions of D&D?
I only run 4e, but I play 2e and 3.XPF occasionally.
>If so, do you find those editions suited for different types of stories or adventures?
3.xPF serves games that are more about individuals and their success than the party and it's success, and, for better or worse, lends itself to people who want rules in print rather than the DM's call or refluffing.
>What type of stories does 4e tell best?
Heroic/Villainous troupe tales, high adventure more similar to real life mythology than what is normally associated with D&D. I think that disconnect is what turned a lot of people off; Big Damn Heroes is the name of the game doing big damn things, rather than rags to riches. Conan is a sterling example, in his own stories, his rise to fame started when he was 14 years old leading a wildly successful raiding party against a powerful neighboring nation's premier border city (I believe it was Hyperboria).

>>54268331
This.

So, my players have yet to realize I am cribbing from Fell's Five hand over fist. I have already sent them to the "mysterious plane shifting Eladrin city", and they are soon going to be finding a strange magic artifact covered in dwarven script hundreds of years out of date.
This is all side shit compared to what they are dealing with right now (I also am using elements of the Hammerfast module to fuck with the dwarves, half orcs and elven folk in the party), but so far, it's been turning out wonderfully well, with the party banter rollicking, the players being caught off guard with the city and it's (to them) unimaginable politics, the gnome quietly getting cozy with all factions and the elf/eladrin/half elf being shat on by everyone important (because they need to get thru their heads that just because they are pretty to humans doesn't mean shit to dwarves and orcs), the dwarf being courted by the daughter of the guild leader and the half orc being inducted as a mighty champion of Gruumsh (against his will) after the tale of his besting a famous orcish warlord in single combat by the local priests of Gruumsh.
So, who is else running a fantastic game?

File: krombopulous-michael-oh-boy-here-i-go-killing-again.jpg (25KB, 500x437px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 500x437px

>>54267252
I actually just got done playing a Thri-Kreen Rogue as Krombopulos Michael

It went pretty well.

Do you let players know if a minion class enemy is a minion on face, or hide it from the player until they attack it?

>>54272883

I don't explicitly declare it, but it's usually obvious from the miniatures/tokens I'm using. Significant threats get the cool miniatures or unique portraits, minions get lots of small, generic minis or portraits.

File: a2356263.jpg (14KB, 430x227px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 430x227px

>>54273082

What kind of unique portraits?

>>54273408

Whatever cool looking bit of monster art I've dug out of my folder that week.

Sometimes when reading 4e handbooks I come upon things like "if youre a lycan, youre only here for x"

Someone explain to me what they mean and how it works and why its important enough to mention.

>>54273963

Could you post an example? Because I'm not sure I understand.

>>54274004
http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?469379-Righteous-Wrath-The-Avenger-s-Handbook-(wiki)&prefixid=wotc

>Lycan (werecheese)
>== Druid ==

>You're here because you're a lycan looking at ''Blood Moon Stalker'', and looking for options. Well, they're bleak on the encounter front. There are some daily buffs that might be worth the action cost though.

>>54274103
References a build I'm not familiar with that requires to be druid, so it lists the options that are useful for that build.

"You are here for X" means you are looking at this guidebook for something not directly related to your character.

>>54274257
Alright, now pls explain werecheese to me

>>54274103

Ah. Well, that refers to a character using one of the werebeast themes. At level 10, they get a power that lets them shapeshift into a beast form, but still retain all equipment bonuses, and can use weapons and implements not related to your form. Opens up some pretty nasty builds, thanks to things like Claw Gloves.

>>54274279
its like a werewolf but with cheese instead of a wolf

>>54249635
4e has an entire turn-based combat board game in it, a la Final Fantasy Tactics or maybe even X-COM.
Other versions of D&D have janky conversion rules for playing it that way (that almost everyone uses anyway), and aren't optimized for it, but also try to leave more room for freedom in how you describe your actions (where in 4e, all viable actions you can perform are powers you've selected previously in one way or another.)

4e did have rules for improvised actions, but they're extremely restrictive and punishing, often resulting in something worse than an at-will power choice, that has to compete with not only your suite of at-will powers, but also your suite of much-more-powerful encounter powers, that you very quickly end up with plenty of.

I like both 4e and 5e, but i like 5e best when the DM is very lenient with "stunts" and improvised actions, and I like 4e best when the DM puts extra thought into cool battlefield map features to play around with.

4e does have an entire role playing game in it (and the skill check and "role playing" part of the system is in no way worse than, say, 3.5e or pathfinder, if you play those by the book,) but it's also an ENTIRE combat board game.

Other RPGs tend to be an entire role playing game with either a third or two-thirds of a combat board game in them.

>>54275839
>4e did have rules for improvised actions, but they're extremely restrictive and punishing
Wut

>>54276303

Page 42 was a nice idea, but the damage expressions they suggest do kinda suck, and they suck worse the higher optimisation your game is. I think that's more just another case of them not really understanding their system early on than anything else though.

>>54276405
I wonder how hard it would be to rework the damage expressions on page 42 to still make them worth doing.

Also GMs should be ready to tack on status effects/ongoing damage/forced movement to those as the action warrants.

Although I am actually perfectly find with those page 42 damage expressions being sub-par for once they start spamming those sorts of things.

>>54270421
I don't think the stats are imbalanced as they are, but I do agree certain stat combinations are weaker simply due to lower NADs. A simple solution would be to give those class subtypes a feature that put one of those ability score bonuses into a different NAD. So a earthbound warden could use their con bonus for will, for instance.

>>54276405
You just base the numbers on the level they hit above their weight.

So if the optimized party is fighting an encounter 6 levels above them, have the table use the 6 level above damage/effect values.

Also don't forget to use the updated table, the one in the DMG is a bit underpowered.

Anons, what's the most fun you've had in a 4e game?

>>54223320
>>54279403

So, just referring to the two posts above, what are some awesome things that you've either seen Epic tier characters do, or could see them do?

For example, what about an Epic Star-Lock invoking the Dread Stars - making Allabar swim into view above the gathering, or causing a Star Spawn to temporarily materialize before an audience?

Or an epic Druid howling and calling forth every beast within a mile, to sit in loyal attendance and stare ominously at those before them?

>>54279403
Played a xenophobic drow rogue that had escaped from matriarchal oppression who then tricked the party, on first meeting, into thinking he was some exotic noble in an Eberron game. Playing an asshole who has to pretend to be nice to everyone was a lot of fun, the first encounter, a lightning rail heist was very memorable too.

What's a good 4e based game for players that want Sci-Fantasy Space Opera? I've got a current homebrew going that I need to steal space naval combat rules for.

>>54280718
Strike!

>>54280771
Never heard of it. Any good? Moreover, is it compatible with base 4e rules in a way that I can drop it on my players without too much explanation?

>>54280718
You could just stick to 4e and steal the rules for Spelljammers, Elemental Skiffs and other planar vessels, of course. I think Manual of the Planes, Secrets of the Elemental Chaos and/or Secrets of the Astral Sea have them all.

>>54221275
Referring back to this, did any anons like the "racial variants" that popped up in Dragon? Winterkin Eladrin, with their icy magic, super stealthy Dusk Elves, genasi-esque Forgeborn Dwarves, or Tieflings of the Blood-Crowned Courtier, Blightseer and Broken Mirror bloodlines?

>>54280862
Cool. Does Strike have anything for modern/futuristic weapons and gear that is markedly better than anything a character from 4e would have?

>>54217524
Sounds like it'd FUCK leaders.

I prefer exploding d8s to 3d6. Suspiciously near-identical probability distribution but with greater variety and fewer rolls. Anyone know how to feed 2 exploding d8s into anydice, by the way?

>>54280862
I wanna jack off violently til my wrist breaks every time I think of how great Blood Crowned Courtiers are, classic tieflings sneaked in but they also have a ferocious transformation power and an enemy inits debuff? Why yes please.

>>54279403
killing a level 9 troll at level 2 or so with a battlerager (I had 2 PCs helping me put I tanked all the damage)

led to the DM throwing a troll at me a year later when I was playing... a cleric in an offensively weak party, total slaughter

>>54270421
see, I like the conceptual room that certain otherwise sucky stat pairs (strcon dexint wischa) allows Hospitalier + Honored Foe paladin are INSANE (Honored Foe is the old school battlerager) and Battleragers used to be indestructible in melee.

The cost is a gaping weakness, but I find that clever.

Equal overall utility would be nice though.

>>54279403
My warlord letting a bitchy half orc die when we were being slaughtered by bugbears that were higher than us. The DM screeched at us every time we tried to discuss hit points ooc and I wanted to save the healing for myself and my friend, since it looked like most of the party was gonna die.

After he killed the half orc he had the bugbears flee.

>>54275839
>but also try to leave more room for freedom in how you describe your actions

Sounds like you're a moron.

>I like both 4e and 5e, but i like 5e best when the DM is very lenient with "stunts" and improvised actions,

The fact that 4e enables strong stunts and other editions have no comment on it whatsoever demonstrates this is tired troll nonsense from years ago.

If "having nothing whatsoever allowing you to improvise" is a feature then surely 4e is at least as good any other edition is just as good in that respect, no?

If you want a purely generic roll-to-hit dude, make an MBA expert. How can anyone not see that?

>>54218247
>>54217835
One thing that is nice about 3d6, even though I prefer exploding d8s (almost probability curve but way less rolling), is you can have mini-advantage. Unnecessary most of the time.

And I see no problems with a 4elike having bounded accuracy.

>>54226899
This is amazing. It perfectly captures the "high-powered jackasses who are both amazing and terrible at everything" vibe I've gotten from every D&D game I've ever been a part of.

They also made gnomes look cool. That by itself deserves a goddamn medal.

>>54227884
It's good for a more casual game. I didn't find GW very good for a long term game but it was great for a few months. Perfect for a 4e lite, especially.

But mainly I blame the gimmicky cards/tech system for that.

Do you think there's a possibility that 4e could take the same path as 3.PF?

Say another company get's similar rights to PF to make a 4e System that isn't D&D?

Get rid of the samey-ness and safeness maybe?

>>54282522

As long as you don't use any copyrighted terms, you don't technically need any rights. You can't actually copyright game mechanics.

That being said, I know there are a lot of different people on /tg/ working on their own 4e retroclones on and off. Heck, I'm one of them. Although what I'm working on with some friends probably won't be compatible with 4e directly, we're taking and reinterpreting the ideas to try and make the whole thing work better as a whole.

File: Improvised Actions and Combat Contests (special attacks etc).png (721KB, 712x672px) Image search: [Google]

721KB, 712x672px

>>54281528
You're entirely misunderstanding my post.
My argument isn't that improvised actions and free action descriptions aren't possible in 4e; my argument is that the pre-made actions of your character are so much better, and the improvised actions you can take are so much worse, that even in situations where it's a good idea to do something in particular (say, kick someone into a pit), it's probably better to just go for a Daily or Encounter power that deals damage even if it doesn't send your enemy into the hole.

And so, despite not having "rules against" freely describing your actions, the game still manages to make it completely untenable.

Because 5e noncasters tend to have fewer things to do (and this is true; they do have fewer things to do, which is a bad thing in my book,) it just so happens that in the section where Grapple and Shove are described, the game suggests that the DM can come up with new contest actions. And because (1) the DM is not shackled to some particular set of templates the way he is with 4e's pg. 42 and (2) those improvised actions are competing either with your "Standard Action" options, which can be fairly weak, or depending on your DM, only on the scope of one attack (if the improvised action can be taken in place of a single of your potentially multiple attacks, like Grapple), actually doing so will occasionally pay off, and so it's worth the player's time and effort to come up with stunts every now and then.

I've played and analyzed both games exhaustively, and I like both of them.
I was one of the chief defenders of 4e during its heyday.
Eat shit.

>>54282717
The action you described is called a bull rush in 4e, and it is a tactically sound option when you can force a save or die/suck roll on an opponent. Even if it takes two turns to knock an equal level enemy into a pit, that's still mathematically as good as a striker encounter power.

4e appears to be strict on improvised actions, but that's only because most combat actions can be boiled down into something that already exists. The problem is that everything is so clearly defined, it doesn't leave the player with much left to describe: there's no describing an action and having the GM interpret it, it isn't necessary. It takes some conscious thought to overcome this and it's really easy to slip into just explaining the mechanical effects of your attack and leaving out the fluff.

>>54283543

Nothing in 4e stops you having fun fluffing your powers though.

I still have trouble not describing my Warlord literally shouting 'Vengeance is Mine!' when they trigger that power though. It just feels so right.

>>54283575
Absolutely not, that's why we play a ttrpgs and not just a war game, but when you don't have to pitch your action to the GM every turn you run the risk of getting purely mechanical. I've seen it happen often and there is legitimacy to the criticism that 4e lacks incentive to rp, but it only takes a little effort and an awareness of the pitfall to avoid it. Its a weird side effect of a mechanically comprehensive system.

Good Heroic tier feats for a human illusionist wizard (Seer theme) who's a combination of actual fortune teller and stage magician?

>>54282717
>Because 5e noncasters tend to have fewer things to do (and this is true; they do have fewer things to do, which is a bad thing in my book,) it just so happens that in the section where Grapple and Shove are described, the game suggests that the DM can come up with new contest actions.
Contested rolls are a shitty mechanic because when both sides are rolling you're at mercy of the dice more than anything else, especially with the push for 'bounded accuracy'. That's why 4e is always roll against enemy defense.

>And because (1) the DM is not shackled to some particular set of templates the way he is with 4e's pg. 42 and (2) those improvised actions are competing either with your "Standard Action" options, which can be fairly weak, or depending on your DM, only on the scope of one attack (if the improvised action can be taken in place of a single of your potentially multiple attacks, like Grapple), actually doing so will occasionally pay off, and so it's worth the player's time and effort to come up with stunts every now and then.
Your complaint boils down to '4e gives the DM some hard numbers to use as guidelines while 5e does not'. This is better fixed by tuning the numbers rather than getting rid of them, because otherwise you're expecting DMs who are unfamiliar with the underlying math to wing it, and that has historically worked out poorly on average.

A reasonable band-aid fix might be to break out improvised actions into AED strengths and let the DM pick accordingly, so just swinging across a chandelier is only equivalent to At-Will while kicking over the barrel of oil to make a zone is Encounter strength. Use existing powers as the template for the improvised powers, with the understanding that you're only getting access to what may be another class power because there's a map object you're using to do it. This is significantly more complex than the single page of rules improvisation currently has though.

>>54285079
Not him, but improvised actions in 4e are made explicitly to be worse than the relative at-will power. (See bullrush vs Fighter's tide of iron)

>>54285398
Except Tide of Iron requires a shield, being a fighter to get the power, and is an attack against AC, while bullrush can be done by anyone wielding anything and targets Fort.

>>54285503
Bull rush also has a dogshit attack bonus and does no damage.

So for the longest time I've heard that Essentials is kinda crap and not to bother with it. But just poking around on the compendium looking for inspiration for design stuff, I stumbled across the Thief's 'Rogue's Trick' at wills, and they all seem really damn cool. Not really worth losing the depth of the Rogue class as a whole, but something I'm considering trying to fold into the Rogue in my own design.

http://funin.space/index.php?search=trick+rogue%2Butility&folders%5B%5D=power

Are there any other things like this in Essentials? ideas better than the meh the classes generally are?

>>54285398
Bull Rush isn't improvised.

They did fuck up Bull Rush, Grab, etc., though.

>>54285672
The special shots of the Hunter weren't bad, but the class is meh as usual.

>>54285672 again

Oh, and the Blackguard (Not actually a class from Essentials proper, but based heavily in the class designs from there) is really cool at a glance but then you're just sitting there trying to figure out how to make it actually work.

>>54281504
Hospitalers can be fucking mental. They can straight up ignore damage.

What is the worst experience you've ever had playing a particular class? Any role.

>>54288844

It wasn't particularly bad, but I did have a somewhat frustrating experience with a GM who was incapable of ever placing monsters within two squares of each other, making the most common 3x3 AoE area basically useless. They weren't doing it intentionally, it was more instinct than malice, but it made AoE powers feel really pointless and unsatisfying to use.

>>54288844
Well, there was how my pre-Expertise Halfling Battlerager with 16 starting Strength and wielding an axe started to drop off in ability to actually hit things in high heroic. Particularly a boss fight in which I pretty much had to crit to hit.
This was pre-errata Battlerager, though, so I still had some ridiculous staying power going for me.

14 Dexterity Half-Elf Rogue.

Wasn't fun at all.

>>54291015
I'm currently playing a game where someone has a 12 dex ranger and they're wondering why they don't hit anything.

>>54291015
>>54293460

The game really should just have included a warning in giant red text 'PUT AN 18 IN YOUR ATTACK STAT'

>>54293476

But anon, players have the freedom to make their character however they like, even though the system math requires a certain degree of optimization in order to not suck ass at the things they do.

>>54293460
Please tell me they have a decent str score to fix that with.

>>54293945

For my attempted rewrite I'm abandoning the pretense. Your designated attack stat is at +4, you can muck around with the rest as you like.

>>54293959
Hey, I wouldn't go that far, there are shenanigans builds you can do.
Skalds for example don't actually have to care about their charisma stat at all; they can dump it at the cost of one feat. Or no feats, if they use str.

>>54293996

Well, I'm also considering just letting you designate a stat and use it for all attacks, rather than it varying on a power to power basis.

>>54294010
You could also run it like a duo or tri-stat powers where you pick from 2 or 3. That way you can get the stat flavors of classes without limiting the player too much.

>>54293947
Nah.
They later made a beast master ranger

File: 1379736453822.gif (266KB, 478x369px) Image search: [Google]

266KB, 478x369px

>>54294432
Truly, there is no hope even if the Optimization Gods intervened.

>>54293476
+3 is generally seen as alright if only for specific builds. That said, that was in the very beginning, pre-PHB2. None of us knew how to play.

>>54293959
Are you willing to go far enough to just drop the six attributes entirely?

>>54294432
>Almost made a beast master ranger but I decided to go two-blade instead
Dodged a bullet there

>>54279403
Nearly dying to a practically bottomless pit

>>54295554
Not him, but I would.

Anons? Query: what do you consider to be some of the most flavorful, "race focused", lines of character development to be in 4e?

For example, a Dragonborn Sorcerer (Dragon Magic) with the Scion of Arkhosia Paragon Path and the Draconic Incarnation Epic Destiny?

Or a Blood-Crowned Courtier Tiefling Warlord with the Shadow Captain Paragon Path and the Prince of Hell Epic Destiny?

>>54253390
I have one that runs on Sundays (or monday mornings for our australian player.) We're a tid low, and could use a 4th/5th player

File: Australia-Kangaroo_1024x1024.png (28KB, 800x511px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 800x511px

>>54297284
>patriotism intensifies
I wish there were more 4e interested folks locally, 5e has taken off massively with new players but seems to have a really low retention rate, and all the older folks are playing Pathfinder and refuse to try anything else.

So 4e general, what character sheets do you like to use most? Do you just print off from the character builder? Do you use a form-fillable of the same thing, a completely digital sheet or something hand written?

A mate just expressed interest in running a game and I'm looking for something nice and physical instead of just using the builder and a printer

>>54298002
I just use the printed offline builder. You can customize the panels and cards to strip out the useless ones and save space/paper that way. Fuck spending half an hour copying every power and recalculating half of it every time I level.

The online builder character sheets were horrifically wasteful in terms of space usage, my two or three page printout would become six or seven.

>>54295554
>>54297144

We considered it, but we thought we might lose a significant amount of familiarity doing that. Keeping the system recognisably D&D makes it easier to market to that demographic.

>>54297284
What time? I may join depending on it.

>>54297222

I'm currently playing a Dragonborn Warlord multiclass Paladin of Bahamut, whose heading into Honourable Blade and en route for Bahamut's Vessel.

Basic idea is a platinum Dragonborn, born with the blessing of Bahamut, but who wanted to walk their own path. To prove themselves worthy of his blessing by their own hand, rather than relying on him. Thus a Martial focused class and PP, even if eventually they won't be able to deny their role as a blessed divine champion of the Platinum Dragon.

>>54225791
This is correct. Every square of movement has to bring you closer to the target.

>>54298841
One way is to build the system without stats, and make them an optional rule that modifies the system just a little for that extra flavor.

E.g. all attacks are made with a +4 base, as if all attacking stats were 18. With the optional rule, this could range +3 to +5.

I think this was the original design, but they had to keep stats because MUH DND

>>54285672
The Berserker is, in my opinion, one of the more fun classes to come out of the essentials era. Especially when you factor in that they can take normal Barbarian powers. This gives a lot of different ways you could play it.

I wish it had some kind of mark rather than a defender aura, but unfortunately they're an essentials era defender.

>>54297673
>sted folks locally, 5e has taken off massively with new players but see
>>54298877
>What time?
GMT 11:00, though for me that's 1:00PM (Hawaii) and it's early in the morning the next day for the aussie. For the standard american it's late afternoon, early evening, on sunday nights.

>>54298877
>>54253390
DM here, My throw-away skype is Throawaybrown if you're interrested

>>54297673
Where in Australia are you?

>>54300873
Sydney, South Western Suburbs

>>54216697
Is there not a 4e Trove? That's surprising. We should assemble one.

>>54302378

While the books are nice, the existence of cbloader and funin.space mean you don't really need them for most things

>>54302465
I like having the fluff text on hand.
Can't tell you how many people I've seen try to play a tiefling like "I was just born this way to normal parents".
That's not how that works in 4e, snowflake.

>>54303512
Ehhh... I do consider 4e a vast and sweeping improvement in fluff over general D&D both before and since, but I'm not above stealing some golden nuggets from amongst the dross. Letting tieflings interbreed with humans and produce the occasional "surprise" via dormant lineage isn't so big a deal for me.

>>54297284
>Sunday
Suddenly experiencing intense regret over moving my weekly game to Sunday.

>>54303572
Pah, maybe in a homebrew setting I'd allow that, but the thing is less an issue of genetics and more your entire family tree has been cursed to shit by an infernal pact.
To treat the pact as anything less is to remove almost the entire point of it.
I'd accept "was human and I or my parents made a new pact" a lot more easily than "born as a tiefling, but to humans".

>>54300188
>>54299115
That's actually quite decent for me, I'll join up when I get back home from England.

306/28/79/10

>>54216697
Is there any simple version of 4e that's not Strike!? Specifically something that keeps 6 stats, d20, all the jazz.

Might run something for my autists, doubt they're ready to give up on muh natural 20s.

>>54306998

Not really. You might find some fun in Gamma World?

>>54307162

4e Gamma World can be pretty fun.

What's better for an avenger, Unarmored Agility or to take armor feats?

>>54307854
unarmored agility, always

How would you feel about a 4e inspired system that removed 'more numbers' feats entirely? Anything that just gave a bonus to a number with no other flavour or benefit is gone, trying to make every single feat actually interesting instead?

Along with this, getting rid of the class feats that are straight up upgrades everyone playing that class should take, and instead giving each class 'talent' or some such slots, where all those quite dull mechanical bonuses are reassigned. You can't take all of them, but everyone gets a decent selection of them as they level up, letting you improve your features and such.

Possibly combined with reducing the number of feat slots overall, to make each and every one a more interesting, meaningful choice.

>>54309596
Better, probably.