Post/Author/DateTime	Post
vardock 11-05-06, 08:53 PM	when I saw the characters we were going to use I was Horrified. these were the worst characters I have ever seen SINCE I SAW with a Cha. of 9 and a Con. of 3 (not in this game). the gear they gave them was Horrible. since when do you Give a character with Marshal weapons Proficiency A MACE, when a Warhammer would clearly do a better job. the armor given was also WAY below what a 4th level character should have. Having a paladin with a 17 Ac (adjusted fot the foul up on the character sheet) at this level is embarissing. And they only gave the archery specialised Ranger 20 Arrows!!!! Why Does the Paladin have a Cha of 10!?!?! why does he have cleave and the Fighter does not?!?!?! Why give everyone Dodge!?!? Did the Guy who Made the Sheets ever actually play D&D, or was he just drunk? EDIT: sorcerer stats were not from D&D DAY
Seeker95 11-05-06, 10:10 PM	I think the PCs were fine. They were the "Boards standard" 32-point buy, multiclass-at-will, everything is available at the corner magic shop type of PCs to be sure. Instead, they were your core, 25-point buy, magic is not ubiquitous, and classes must be earned type of PCs some of us old-timers grew up with. When video games make reset a norm, and they don't even cost a quarter any more, I can see why "standard core" might be viewed as sucky.
rudie 11-05-06, 10:20 PM	I thought all the characters were just fine, the only problem I had was the fact that the paladin had 10 cha..and I got stuck playing in :P
justdmjeff 11-05-06, 10:37 PM	Instead, they were your core, 25-point buy, magic is not ubiquitous, and classes must be earned type of PCs some of us old-timers grew up with. When video games make reset a norm, and they don't even cost a quarter any more, I can see why "standard core" might be viewed as sucky. Amen to that.
fatal error 11-05-06, 10:54 PM	I think the PCs were fine. They were the "Boards standard" 32-point buy, multiclass-at-will, everything is available at the corner magic shop type of PCs to be sure. Instead, they were your core, 25-point buy, magic is not ubiquitous, and classes must be earned type of PCs some of us old-timers grew up with. When video games make reset a norm, and they don't even cost a quarter any more, I can see why "standard core" might be viewed as sucky. I admit, I have no first hand experiance with this event. However, assuming what the OP said was correct: So having Sorcs with Chas of 9 or a Paladin with a Cha of 10 is what most people do with 25 point buy? Those are the primary and secondary abilities for those classes, respectively. And I'm not sure what, "everything is available at the corner magic shop type of PCs to be sure." has to do with getting a warhammer over a mace. . .
Nadaka 11-05-06, 11:17 PM	A Sorcerer with a charisma of 9? wow. Say hello to a Mr commoner and his trusty squirrel. SPELLS? I don't need no stinking SPELLS! :rolleyes: EDIT: actually looking over the character sheets... I dont see a sorcerer with a charisma of 9 & constitution of 3... And looking at the character sheets, only the paladin seems to be really gimped. The rest ok (but not great). Dodge was definately not the best feat choice for everyone, and they had poor equipment, well below the suggested 5400gp worth.
The White Sorcerer 11-05-06, 11:25 PM	Instead, they were your core, 25-point buy, magic is not ubiquitous, and classes must be earned type of PCs some of us old-timers grew up with. Well, they were pretty crappy core, 25-point buy, magic is not ubiquitous, and class must be earned type of PCs. A 25-point buy paladin should NOT have a Charisma score of 10. Also, cleric of Moradin with Animal domain? :confused:
The White Sorcerer 11-05-06, 11:27 PM	EDIT: actually looking over the character sheets... I dont see a sorcerer with a charisma of 9 & constitution of 3... That's because these are the worst characters vardock has seens since such a character. He never said one of the characters had such stats.
fatal error 11-05-06, 11:45 PM	That's because these are the worst characters vardock has seens since such a character. He never said one of the characters had such stats. ACK! How'd I miss that? . .
rudie 11-06-06, 12:58 AM	Well, they were pretty crappy core, 25-point buy, magic is not ubiquitous, and class must be earned type of PCs. A 25-point buy paladin should NOT have a Charisma score of 10. Also, cleric of Moradin with Animal domain? :confused: Actually, I have the sheet right here, its good and earth domains. Just to tell ya.:)
Roivas 11-06-06, 01:07 AM	The only major issues I had were the fact that my druid didn't have a wooden shield [non-magical of course], my feats weren't listed, and the druid prepped summon nature's ally. That's like a cleric prepping cure light wounds. My other beef was due to some lucky GM listen rolls we had to fight every single monster in the same combat. We didn't live past room with the gargoyle. It was rather frusterating. I thinkwe could've pummled the monsters individually, but fighting a cleric, his two zombie things, a wizard, his magma buddy, the hellcat, and the flaming skull all at once was a TPK waiting to happen.
Articman 11-06-06, 10:32 AM	Ok yes the adventure was overpowered but we did our right. We made it through the entire adventure except for the Hellcat at the end.
JasonOrlandoHawk 11-06-06, 10:54 AM	I actually GM'd the adventure at our local gaming shop, and these are my complaints: Second to "Why'd they give the Paladin a Charisma of 10?" complaint. Also, is just me, or did the Wizard have the Worst Miniature Ever? Hello, I'm a wizard cleverly disguised as a RANGER!!! The power levels seemed a little low for the Characters, but then again, the adventure was designed for 6 Characters, as opposed to the standard 4 Characters. Also, this was a "solve the curse in the middle of the night" style adventure, which may explain the lack of a larger amount of gear. The group I ran for barely completed the entire adventure. The final room w/ the Hellcat should have finished them off. The fighter had 2 HP left. The wizard had 3 HP left. The Cleric was completely out of Cure spells. The Ranger only had 10 HP left and 2 Arrows. The Paladin goes through the door first and gets beat near senseless by the Hellcat. The Paladin has 1 HP left. The Cleric uses the Holy Smite spell... The Hellcat botches... The Party does a victory dance on it's grave a round and a half later!!! All the characters survived. Some humorous incidents from my game: 1) They walk into the Tomb, and I describe the room as normal, including the weird yellow skull w/ two emerald-green eyes. The Wizard, w/o pausing for one second, "I walk over to the skull and pick it up!" (The monster fires two point blank shots, dropping the Wizard to 2 health, which cost the cleric a LOT of his spells to fix.) 2) After defeating Arevar, the evil Conjurer, the party retrieves and reseals the book in it's original vault... completely forgetting the HELLCAT they've been worried about encountering since they first entered the dungeon. The party made it all the way to the front door before the Wizard said, "Oh yeah!!! Guys, we forget to find the Hellcat!!" (I didn't bother to hide the minis from the group, so they knew what was coming in some respects. I don't care. They still almost died several times.) 3) They all horribly failed their spot checks to notice the two Dread Warriors and the Evil Cleric sneaking up behind them as they went into the Kitchen. The Dread Warriors crash in and start smacking everyone around (largely b/c the Dwarf was raiding the pantry looking for Alcohol). The Rogue tumbles past the Dread Warriors, out the front door, and fails the spot check to see the Cleric again. The cleric, on the next rounds, successfully sneaks up behind the Rogue, only to initiate the Worst Grapple Check Ever. First, he ties the Rogue on an opposed Grapple w/ a total of 5! Then, the Rogue rolls a total of 2, to which the Cleric responds with an amazing BOTCH!!! 4) We've all heard of Dwarf tossing, but my game featured the new game of Halfling tossing. The flameskull was out of reach, and only the Ranger had the necessary Ranged attacks, but he was running out fast. So, they decided to THROW the halfling to see if it could tackle the Flameskull. (They missed.)
The White Sorcerer 11-06-06, 10:57 AM	Actually, I have the sheet right here, its good and earth domains. Just to tell ya.:) Hmm... They must've seen the error and changed it. The cleric of Moradin used to have the Animal domain.
Grand Theft Otto 11-06-06, 11:04 AM	Apparently the 10 charisma was to have the paladin be a "role playing" not a "roll playing character". Yes, a wotc employee actually excused that crappy design by trotting out that cliche. What better way to introduce new players to the exciting world of D&D by having some neato abilities they cant use! Yay, you get a +0 to your saving throws! Lay on hands for 0 points! Fear my +0 to hit with my smite! The only good thing is maybe it will discourage people from playing paladins, and the stupid class will be dropped for 4th edition.
Seeker95 11-06-06, 11:30 AM	The only good thing is maybe it will discourage people from playing paladins, and the stupid class will be dropped for 4th edition.If I get my way (and I might), 4e will drop more than jsut the paladin. There will be four classes: Warrior - Mage - Priest - Rogue Everythng else will be based on your character development through Feat, Skill, and Flavor choices. Bring on 4e!
Sulaco 11-06-06, 11:38 AM	I thought all the characters were just fine, the only problem I had was the fact that the paladin had 10 cha..and I got stuck playing in :P Yeah, that was just stupid. I also don't understand why the thief had crap gear but 144 unpsent gold pieces. :nonono: Our group made a pretty good run of it. For some reason one of the PCs (the ranger) decided to make a run for it when the opened the door on Arevar and the Magma Hurler. He took off the way we came in and got ganked by the Cleric and Dread Warriors. The good thing about it, though, was that, cos we heard the fight outside, we were ready for them when we exited. After dispatching the Hellcat - thank Bog I, as the cleric, used the Align Weapon scroll to give the fighter a Good-aligned weapon - we blasted out the front door and got a surprise round on them. I cast my last spell - Hold Person - on the cleric and he failed miserably. One successful coup de gras from the rogue later and he was paste. One Dread Warrior went down to the fighter and paladin, and a very successful Turn Undead sent the other Dread Warrior fleeing to into the night. It was a fun little adventure, though pretty tough for this rather ill-prepared and poorly-equipped party.
Sulaco 11-06-06, 11:40 AM	If I get my way (and I might), 4e will drop more than jsut the paladin. There will be four classes: Warrior - Mage - Priest - Rogue Everythng else will be based on your character development through Feat, Skill, and Flavor choices. That is my hope as well. I want there to be four core classes - the aforementioned Warrior, Mage, Preiset and Rogue - and from there you select a career to follow that determines what "flavour" you are.
Sulaco 11-06-06, 11:43 AM	Apparently the 10 charisma was to have the paladin be a "role playing" not a "roll playing character". Oh please, what a pantsload. How much roleplaying did they expect us to do in a single-shot, short-duration, combat-oriented module? Was I meant to use Diplomacy on the Hellcat? Crap stats do not inspire better roleplaying, they inspire new players to fial at things, get their asses handed to them, and decide that D&D is no damned fun.
Grand Theft Otto 11-06-06, 01:08 PM	Oh please, what a pantsload. How much roleplaying did they expect us to do in a single-shot, short-duration, combat-oriented module? Was I meant to use Diplomacy on the Hellcat? Crap stats do not inspire better roleplaying, they inspire new players to fial at things, get their asses handed to them, and decide that D&D is no damned fun. That was my thought. From what I've gathered, there were a LOT of TPK's. New players + characters intentionally designed to be weak + terrible gear = dirt naps. Not the route I'd take to get people into a game of high heroics.
DungeonMaster 11-06-06, 01:09 PM	If I get my way (and I might), 4e will drop more than jsut the paladin. There will be four classes: Warrior - Mage - Priest - Rogue Everythng else will be based on your character development through Feat, Skill, and Flavor choices. Bring on 4e! On a side note I agree wholeheartedly with this statement.
Someone 11-06-06, 01:25 PM	If I get my way (and I might), 4e will drop more than jsut the paladin. There will be four classes: Warrior - Mage - Priest - RogueI would have a few more than 4 classes... But I would drop the "lawful good only" of the pally- you could be a CE "paladin of Erythnul", for example. Back on topic, why was all the stuff pre-gen? If I were teaching someone the game, I would want to do a little bit on character creation. Or in any event, instead of having just 6 pre-made characters for 6 players, why not have 9 or 12, and let them choose?
Escef 11-06-06, 01:36 PM	Back on topic, why was all the stuff pre-gen? If I were teaching someone the game, I would want to do a little bit on character creation. Or in any event, instead of having just 6 pre-made characters for 6 players, why not have 9 or 12, and let them choose? Because walking 4 to 6 people through character creation could take a long time, and they wanted more people to play, not sit and watch. I also just thought of the only reason one could use to justify the Paladin's Cha score. To make all those special abilities a non-issue so that new players don't have to keep track of all those special abilities. It's not a good reason, imho, but it is a reason.
Seeker95 11-06-06, 01:37 PM	I would have a few more than 4 classes... But I would drop the "lawful good only" of the pally- you could be a CE "paladin of Erythnul", for example.A paladin is a warrior-priest for god. Want to play a paladin? Decide whether you want to be a righteous-warrior, a combat-priest, a multi-class warrior-priest, or even a rogue in the service of your deity. And *call* yourself a paladin. You don't need the rules to dictate your alignment, or any of the other things that straight-jacket the mechanics of a paladin when all the class needs to be is a flavor-built champion for god.
Sulaco 11-06-06, 01:47 PM	A paladin is a warrior-priest for god. Remember, paladins do not even need to serve any church or god. A paladin is not a warrior-priest for God, he is a soldier inteh war against chaos and evil.
Drax Hoak 11-06-06, 02:13 PM	Yup, my party got TPKed. There were only four of us, and Mr. DM apparently didn't bother to adjust the difficulty to make up for that fact. Plus our party was the Ranger, Wizard, Cleric and Rogue, no Paladin or Fighter -- the rogue was totally useless because there was hardly a trap or locked door in the place. If we just could have rested... Or had better equipment... Or had characters that weren't designed by a mentally challenged monkey... We might still have prevailed. I mean, what was up with those feat choices? The wizard had Great Fortitude? WTF? Half the characters had Dodge or other similarly worthless feats. And yeah, the Paladin having a CHR of 10 was embarrassing.
funnymanmike 11-06-06, 02:24 PM	Ok i ran the game, and the one guy Died while everyone else ended up running away. That being said the characters were fine. Maybe beacuse i am a old schooler, maybe beacuse i like challenges. But i felt that the characters had everything they needed to defeat the adventure. I felt the adventure also contained anything elsed they needed but didn't have on them. They had the +1 weapons they needed, they had the spells they needed, the cleric had extra cure light wounds spells. heck every player should have had a second wind card to begin play with anyway. The adventure was great, i enjoyed the EL's and will be basing stuff off of that design in the future. ie. party level 4, = 1x el 6, 2x el 7, 2x el 5 scale it up and down as needed.
Sulaco 11-06-06, 03:08 PM	Maybe beacuse i am a old schooler, maybe beacuse i like challenges... Nope, those aren't the reasons. It am old-school (24 years of D&D and counting) and I enjoy a challenge, and neither of those factors made these PCs any less crap to me. One of the main aims of D&D Games Day is to entice new players. Having the PCs of said potential new players die cos they, the PCs, have been so poorly constructed is not likely to inspire them to continue playing the game.
Prak, the Mad 11-06-06, 03:18 PM	I was wondering what others thought... I played the paladin, and made copius use of Detect evil so the gargoyle was no problem, I saw a room with six coffins and a horned, winged statue, so I went to the middle of the room and DE'ed, found the statue to be evil, and smashed it, then proceeded through the door, the thing never activated because I smashed to pieces before anyone even got near the switch. The skull was irritating as it flew up out of reach, but we killed it. The cleric wasn't too bad, as our cleric succeeded at turning them or did something else to make them flee, so we just meleed the poor evil cleric with a x-bow. the magma hurler and wizard were no real problem, I got dropped and used my card, but rolled to low, so had to wait for the cleric to heal me, I got back up after he had rebuked the thing and then we meleed the mage. on to the hellcat room. I was the first through the door, and the first that got dropped. we retreated, taking more damage, eventually getting most if not all of the party to the divination room behind the iron door, were I intended for us to rest. The hellcat couldn't track us(didn't see where we went, stone doesn't hold scent too well), wandered by, scratched at the door, and would've left had the cleric not decided to cast divine favour and charge the cat... we all died, except the cleric who still had his card and was found unconscious later. so yeah... horrible ability scores, bad spell selection(the dm actually let the guy who was playing the cleric and wizard choose his own spells) and a very challenging 'boss battle' that I think we could have won had we rested... not only that, but we had a group of three newbs and two experienced gamers, I had to practically shout at the player of the ranger "You're facing a hellcat! you want a paladin! we're going to fall back and heal!" maybe next year they can create two types of adventure, one for newbs being aided by an verteran, and the other for all veteran players who decided to come down, see what's happening at their FLGS and see what free sh*te they can get from World D&D day.
Reinforcements 11-06-06, 03:20 PM	That is my hope as well. I want there to be four core classes - the aforementioned Warrior, Mage, Preiset and Rogue - and from there you select a career to follow that determines what "flavour" you are. Sounds similar to how d20 Modern works - not that there's anything wrong with that. I'm all jealous, though. I worked all day Saturday, so I didn't get to participate (in fact, I work at a mall where there were two stores getting their DnD on. Rargh!)
Count Arioch the 28th 11-06-06, 04:03 PM	About the 4E thing: There doesn't need to be a priest calss at all. It just needs to be warrior/rogue/mage, and just let mages use healing magic. Arcane/divine magic split is archaic and nonsensical.
Sulaco 11-06-06, 04:18 PM	Sounds similar to how d20 Modern works - not that there's anything wrong with that. My model is actually the Warhammer Fantasy RPG. • Your choice of class determines what careers you can take. • Some careers are unique to come classes, some are not. • There is no multiclassing, but lots and lots of career changes. • Skills, abilities and stat increases are derived from careers. • Some careers require certain other careers as prerequisites. • There are also advanced classes which generally can only be achieved through certain basic classes.
Sulaco 11-06-06, 04:36 PM	About the 4E thing: There doesn't need to be a priest calss at all. It just needs to be warrior/rogue/mage, and just let mages use healing magic. Arcane/divine magic split is archaic and nonsensical. There doesn't need to be a "priest" class per se, but I think dividing Arcane from Divine into two distinct core classes is useful. Actually, come to think of it, the best options for the core classes would probably be to avoid any of the current core-class names (those would all instead be career choices). Something along the lines of: warrior, acolyte (divine magic), adept (arcane magic), and expert.
Altar_Boy 11-06-06, 05:22 PM	Issues: - Bad characters? The Rogue was the worst. Half the foes were unsneak-attackable, one trap in the whole thing, and damage so low, it couldn't pentrate DR. The Paladin was useful enough for his Aura of Good and Turning. - Monster. Yeah, played to their full potential, the players would have no chance. - Linearity of the adventure. Please, next year, do not make TWO entrance into the dungeon. For the sake of unwise PCs who would split into two groups and explore both halves of the Dungeon at once. But yeah. It was a hoot.
Berzerker_prime 11-06-06, 08:31 PM	That was my thought. From what I've gathered, there were a LOT of TPK's. New players + characters intentionally designed to be weak + terrible gear = dirt naps. Yeah, but... Why!?! I played the cleric for the first session of the day where I played (got there early because dragon minis make me happy) and our group completely owned the game! I hung out for the rest of the day and eves-dropped on two other groups that played afterward and found that both groups had at least four PCs dead or unconscious at one point in time. And talking to the guy that ran the game that was going on at the same time as ours, he said he had five in negative health at one point. I really don't get why! It wasn't a rediculously easy adventure, sure. But a little common sense kept our PCs alive just fine. Matter of fact, for the first hour or so, none of the players could roll anything above an 11. So you really can't even attribute our success to lucky rolls. In any case, all I know is that none of our PCs were ever even unconscious. Matter of fact, I rather owned as the cleric, nearly single-handedly taking out both the wight and the fire demon thingy (name escaping me...). The characters were plenty effective as long as you used the right thing at the right time. Magic Stone on the wight pasted it into the wall in a fine red mist, turn the skull thingy, grab the scrolls out of the coffer, move on. Easy as pie. The scroll of Holy Smite took out the fire demon thingy in a single blow. Hellcat? Bless the party, Bane the cat, align weapon on the fighter, use the scroll of see invisible on yourself and use the flasks of holy water as splash weapons while the rest of the party goes midieval on it. Result: one pasted hellcat. The equipment they gave you wasn't nearly as lame as people seem to think it was. We used ours to great effect. These weren't twinked out characters. Yes, I saw several places where they could have given them better feats, stats, equipment, whatever. But sometimes, part of the fun of it is just usin' wha'cha got. Sweet water to you. Berz.
Makuya 11-06-06, 08:48 PM	Whoa. I am very glad my mom made me go to my PE class that day.
Demose 11-06-06, 09:35 PM	Was our group the only one to notice the fighter using a great axe and a shield? My fiancee picked that and she feigned innocence of the haxs when we all noticed, but ah well, at least she owned up on stuff. Playing the ranger kinda sucked due to the one summon natures ally he had prepared. Why not something else? And the wizard was dumb enough to use glitter dust on the enemy wizard instead of on the hellcat when he knew FAR WELL that a hellcat was in store. Some metagaming would have saved the party from the TPK at the hellcat... but then again, so would not having a creepy spaced out guy to play the rogue. Overall it was fun and i enjoyed getting the free mini. My fiancee named it Trevor.
Ogre4Hire 11-06-06, 10:14 PM	My group got owned pretty hard. It didn't help that there were only 4 of us, the guy playing the cleric hadn't played in 8 years and didn't know any of the rules for 3.5 (kept trying to do things the 2E way), and it really didn't help that the fighter was being run by a 10 year old kid who always ran away for 2 rounds before coming back to the fight. We got hammered a bit by the Gargoyle, the Cleric didn't heal up the Fighter (who got hurt the most), then we went into the room and couldn't do a damn thing to the Flameskull (literally, only hit it three times, and only 1 attack got through its Blur and Mirror Image), my Wizard got drained by the Wight before the Cleric Turned it, and then we all got taken out by the Flameskull's eye-rays. The fact that the Wizard had a pretty sucky spell selection and a totally useless array of scrolls didn't help.
The White Sorcerer 11-07-06, 02:27 AM	Was I meant to use Diplomacy on the Hellcat? No, of course not, don't be silly. Were that the case, they would've given the paladin decent Charisma.
bobsan 11-07-06, 08:17 AM	Don't forget though Berzerker_prime, you guys were using modified versions of the characters. Someone in our area playtested the characters and, after having a bad experience with them, re-made them in time for Games Day. So the characters you guys were using were slightly above the originals.
blood_kite 11-07-06, 03:42 PM	I'm wishing that I hadn't turned down the opportunity to help with the game day. I would have looked at those characters and probably redone them. Multiple EL 7 fights with characters almost designed TO suck is not how I would want to introduce D&D to people. Designing it for 6 players is no excuse since plenty of tables are likely to go off with 4 or 5 players if the alternative is no game. I don't have a copy of the character sheets but when I looked at them I noticed that they didn't seem to have a consistent point buy and that they were pretty woefully under-equiped. The CR/EL system in DMG is supposed to be balanced by the wealth-by-level system in the DMG. If you don't have roughly an amount of equipment consumate to your level, challenges are harder because the CR of the creature assumes you have more than just your base stats and class abilities. In our game I'm pretty sure the GM softballed on certain things. I arrived after the game had started and took over the wizard that another player was about to leave open. The player had decided to ignore the default spells and pick his own. Noticing the feats and equipment of some of the other characters I thought this had been prudent, until I looked at what he had chosen. 2nd level spells consisted of invisibility, knock, and knock. No real combat spells and doubling up on a spell he already has a scroll of and already has a rogue for. Did this person think that the rogue was going to be completely incapable of opening doors and disabling traps in a one-shot that the rogue was supposedly designed for? I looked at the default list and saw a range of spells that was a good balance when augmented with his scrolls. Did the rogue actually have decent Search, Disable Device, and Open Locks scores? I recall our rogue mentioning that the GM had allowed him to switch his Str and Cha since he really didn't see much of a point in talking his way through a dungeon crawl. I was also lamenting our fighter-without-bonus-feats, since Smite was about the only class feature that had any bearing on the game. The archer Ranger not having Precise Shot didn't seem to have much bearing since the ranger refused to shoot into melee on the premise that he didn't want to risk shhoting players, which he couldn't do but the DM never tried to clear up. The GM wouldn't let the rogue take 20 on Search checks "because failing a Search check by 5 or more could set off the trap." I could see it wasn't worth arguing and it never became an issue since they set off the only trap in the dungeon. I think the only 2 things that kept the hellcat fight from killing us all was the fact that the GM placed it on the circle and never moved it (which didn't mean too much since we somehow won initiative and walked right up to it), and the fact that the wizard's last real spell, glitterdust, removed its concealment. After that it was just a matter of surviving the claw, claw, bite that could drop most of the characters in 1 round. I've had more fun in Living Greyhawk Core Specials that consist of nothing but a dozen APL (average party level) plus 1-3 or higher fights in one day with no resting. Probably because we had appropriate gear for our level. A wand of Cure Light Wounds is a parties friend. Even a partially charged one might have made the Game Day event more survivable.
Sapp 11-07-06, 03:55 PM	After the types of arguments I've been seeing lately, I'm surprised this thread even exists. Isn't a good DM supposed to fudge encounters to allow his PCs to survive? Even if the PCs suck, a little fudging here and there can help them survive.
Vacerious 11-07-06, 04:11 PM	Ummm, Would somebody please provide a link to the character sheets? For those of us who wish to join the discussion? Free Cookie! Vacerious
Reversefigure4 11-07-06, 05:15 PM	Some metagaming would have saved the party from the TPK at the hellcat... Isn't the point of Games Day to introduce new players to DnD? If so, any scenario that requires metagaming is pointless, because the players literally won't be able to do it. How much roleplaying did they expect us to do in a single-shot, short-duration, combat-oriented module? Obviously none. If they had wanted roleplaying, the pre-made characters might come with a pre-made background. It could be as simple as a single paragraph. "You were abandoned as a child on the steps of the temple of Pelor, and have always wondered what your parent's tale is. You don't want to see any more children abandoned, so you chose to become a Paladin to do enough good in the world that no child needs to be left behind. Likes: Cheese, Smiting Evil, a warm fire. Hates: Gambling, whoring, satanic blood rituals." Simple, but it gives the players something to get their teeth into. And I agree: Bringing a bunch of (theoretically new) players into DnD and slaughtering them does not inspire them to become repeat players.
Morrowner 11-07-06, 05:17 PM	That isn't a good way to introduce noobs and give people out of the game a refresher course in Dungeons and Dragons "Hey, here are some truly underachieving PCs. Don't worry about dying, though. I'm going to save your asses the whole session!"
High Octane 11-07-06, 07:49 PM	Its one thing to create a 25 point build. Thats not bad. However, they built them BADLY. I can tell just from the 10 charisma paladin. Charisma is the most important stat FOR a paladin, after MAYBE strength. Hell, old school pallies HAD to have 17 charisma to be paladins! Everyone had dodge? Why? I could see the rogue maybe, but no one else needed dodge. Fighter needs weapon focus, power attack, etc.
Seeker95 11-07-06, 09:42 PM	However, they built them BADLY.They built them without optimization, and without a hint of min-max. Not quite the same as building badly.Charisma is the most important stat FOR a paladin, after MAYBE strength.Depends on the flavor of paladin you are seeking. Charisma is probably in the top three most important stats for a standard sterotype paladin, but "most important" is a bit of hyperbole.Hell, old school pallies HAD to have 17 charisma to be paladins!Old school paladins had to be human, wanted an armor class with negative numbers, and had minimum wisdom strwngth and charisma score requirements. What was required in previous versions of the game is irrelevant to just about any discussion of 3e topics.Everyone had dodge? Why?Maybe because Dodge gives you a +1 bonus to AC agaisnt any one opponent? At lower levels, that extra 5% hit avoidance is not a bad thing at all.I could see the rogue maybe, but no one else needed dodge.Need is a pretty definitive term, and one that is subject to quite a bit of potential debate. What a PC needs or doesn't need depends on the concept in mind, the player with that concept, and the nature of the game world in which you are playing. I'm not directly disagreeing with the points you have made; merely noting that the conviction with which they are offered is somewhat overstated. These were not the best, most optimized character builds to come out of the generator, but the vehemence with which folks seem to be denouncing them makes an anti-war rally seem more like an ice cream social.
Manyfist 11-07-06, 09:55 PM	I just hope if they come out with 4.0 they continue to make 3.5 books. For if 4e only has 4 or 3 base base classes I won't be buying any 4.0 books. Skills and Feats only get you so far, if it does away with Psionics, the Warlock, and some other Classes just for Mage (Priest), Rogue, Warrior this would be the death of D&D imo.
Ogre4Hire 11-07-06, 10:05 PM	Given that the theme of D&D has always been "more options" not "less options," I seriously doubt that there are plans to axe it down to 4 classes anytime soon. And Wizards is not going to support 3.5 after the release of 4.0 any more than they supported 2E after the release of 3E.
Manyfist 11-07-06, 10:08 PM	Given that the theme of D&D has always been "more options" not "less options," I seriously doubt that there are plans to axe it down to 4 classes anytime soon. And Wizards is not going to support 3.5 after the release of 4.0 any more than they supported 2E after the release of 3E. Lets hope not, if they do... man 4.0 splat book would be RIP 4.0 then the next would be RIP D&D.
Kobold_Avenger 11-07-06, 11:22 PM	The Char's stat must have been rolled... the pally had 30 point-buy stats other had 28, 26, cant remember the rest. Stats were placed bady. The Hell cat's Rake damage was devastating (a few times it did more damage then the wiz had Max hitpoints) And the DM let rebuild our char's all with 32 point-buy, 1 char refused to. He gave the fighter an extra +1 on on his axe. He lets us skip the cleric and dreads. The adventure was reasonably until the hellcat. We lost the wizard, the pally(me) and the fighter. The other dm's at the place i was almost all got TPKs.
Nadaka 11-08-06, 12:05 AM	They are 4th level, that means they have a +1 stat bonus. I have not added them up myself, but that might explain the discrepancy.
Terraneaux 11-08-06, 12:56 AM	They *were* built badly; there were numerous inconsistencies with the basic ruleset. You want to make simple characters without a ridiculous amount of numbers power, fine. For the purpose of introducing people to DnD, these were bad ideas. 25 point buy characters would have been fine. Seriously, next time this happens and im helping out at the store im remaking them *all*.
Sulaco 11-08-06, 11:04 AM	I just hope if they come out with 4.0 they continue to make 3.5 books. For if 4e only has 4 or 3 base base classes I won't be buying any 4.0 books. Skills and Feats only get you so far, if it does away with Psionics, the Warlock, and some other Classes just for Mage (Priest), Rogue, Warrior this would be the death of D&D imo. I think you are missing the point. The four-core idea defines your starting point and abilities. From there you would further select a career such as ranger, priest, wizard, bard, etc. - dependent on which of those was available to you based on your core-class choice - which would then defines what skills, feats, spells, and special abilities were available to you.
Prak, the Mad 11-08-06, 03:03 PM	They *were* built badly; there were numerous inconsistencies with the basic ruleset. You want to make simple characters without a ridiculous amount of numbers power, fine. For the purpose of introducing people to DnD, these were bad ideas. 25 point buy characters would have been fine. Seriously, next time this happens and im helping out at the store im remaking them *all*. yeah, same here, hell, I'm going to see if my shop has any extra dm kits that I can get my hands on so that I can run a group of player made 4th level characters through and see if they can make it...
Berzerker_prime 11-08-06, 03:24 PM	Don't forget though Berzerker_prime, you guys were using modified versions of the characters. Someone in our area playtested the characters and, after having a bad experience with them, re-made them in time for Games Day. So the characters you guys were using were slightly above the originals. They weren't that different, though. I was looking at the version of the cleric they have posted on the main page and it was not noticeably different from what I played. I don't know about the other five, but the cleric was just fine. Sweet water to you. Berz.
Disciple_of_Juiblex 11-08-06, 06:30 PM	Personaly, i thought they where fine, our group had 7 characters to start, but we lost two after the fight with the cleric. so with 5 characters it was still fairly easy. i was playing a warrior and i nearly one-shoted the floating skull. the wraith was also an easy kill (free attack of opertunity by me when it got up) took only 2-3 more hits. the gargolye gave us allitle problems but after a lucky crit it was toast. the spellcaster with the book two 2 hits total (a charge by a me and the ranger shot it). its elemental buddie took allitle longer but wasent difficult. the only, and i do mean only problem was the helcat. it nearly killed me but we nixed it before any one died... IMO they wernt that bad.
bobobravado 11-08-06, 08:51 PM	i had a great day out with my friends, had lots of laughs, and played some D&D. that doesn't happen often enough for me. we ALL got to play together, i wasn't really worried about the characters we had. even though i understand the complaints. i went to the ONLY gameshop in my state that had the event (in rhode island), here goes a shameless plug to Disposable Heroes in johnston, ri, found a great new gameshop to visit and support.oh by the way i was the paladin and rolled awful all day. no one died mainly because our cleric rolled off the charts for turning ( at least 1 natural 20) and played great. it's not really the scores of the characters that define the game , but the role playing and ingenuity of the characters (and players) that do.
Sapp 11-09-06, 01:26 AM	There doesn't need to be a "priest" class per se, but I think dividing Arcane from Divine into two distinct core classes is useful. Actually, come to think of it, the best options for the core classes would probably be to avoid any of the current core-class names (those would all instead be career choices). Something along the lines of: warrior, acolyte (divine magic), adept (arcane magic), and expert. I have an even better idea than what you and the others have come up with. How about we get rid of classes altogether? One class would subsume them all. The Adventurer. Everything else (attack, spell power, skill, and so on) would be career choices and determined through superior roleplaying. The spells too will be consolidated too. All we really need are "Fire Spell", "Cold Spell", "Lightning Spell", "Acid Spell", and "Sonic Spell", "Summoning Spell", and so on. The level will be determined just by that, the level itself. "Fire Spell 1!" Of course the actual name of the spell the player chooses for himself. That makes more sense for roleplaying. If we really wanted to be fancy, we can add templates to those spells too. Apply "Cone Template" to "Fire Spell 4" and end up with Blast of Flame. Other templates might include, "SR Piercing Spell", "Long Range", and so on. I think we can simplify attributes as well. Get rid of the mental attributes, because they get in the way of roleplaying. Your PC is as smart as you, the player, will be. He is as charismatic as you are, and he has as much wisdom. The physical stats might be different. Not sure how they can be handled, but I'm sure we can simplify those as well. I think the weapons need to be simplified as well. Some of them are even weaker than others! Consolidate them. There will be 3 types of weapons: Ranged, Melee, and Unarmed. Each one has its own advantages. Problem solved. If a player wants a fancier weapon, he'll have to describe it and play it out through roleplaying. There'll be weapon templates too. "Broken Weapon" would be a template that's applied eventually to a weapon that's used often without repair. The players can make any changes they want to the game through roleplaying, career choices, and so on. It's clever game design, and nothing can really go wrong... anything that does go wrong can be blamed on poor roleplaying, not poor game design. Best of all, by dumping the responsibility of the work onto consumers, the designers of 4.0 won't have to fix anything. It's up to the individual consumers to fix the issues themselves through roleplaying.
Escef 11-09-06, 07:15 AM	I think you are missing the point. The four-core idea defines your starting point and abilities. From there you would further select a career such as ranger, priest, wizard, bard, etc. - dependent on which of those was available to you based on your core-class choice - which would then defines what skills, feats, spells, and special abilities were available to you. This sounds suspeciously like 2e kits...
Sulaco 11-09-06, 09:37 AM	This sounds suspeciously like 2e kits... It is inspired by the Warhammer FRP which predates 2e and its kits by many years.
Sulaco 11-09-06, 09:41 AM	Personaly, i thought they where fine, our group had 7 characters to start, but we lost two after the fight with the cleric. so with 5 characters it was still fairly easy. i was playing a warrior and i nearly one-shoted the floating skull. the wraith was also an easy kill (free attack of opertunity by me when it got up) took only 2-3 more hits. the gargolye gave us allitle problems but after a lucky crit it was toast. the spellcaster with the book two 2 hits total (a charge by a me and the ranger shot it). its elemental buddie took allitle longer but wasent difficult. the only, and i do mean only problem was the helcat. it nearly killed me but we nixed it before any one died... IMO they wernt that bad. Just cos you got good die-rolls does not make them any less bad.
Sulaco 11-09-06, 09:43 AM	I have an even better idea than what you and the others have come up with... Man, that is one long post. You clealry put a helluva lot effort work into being sarcastic than I do.
Sapp 11-09-06, 02:05 PM	Man, that is one long post. You clealry put a helluva lot effort work into being sarcastic than I do. Only half of it was laced with sarcasm, so it only took half of the effort. I was actually being half-serious.
Dragon Snack 11-09-06, 02:41 PM	While not directly about the D&D Day characters, I think this quote is somewhat germane to the issue at hand... In years of running the Dungeon Delve, I’ve noticed something about the D&D players who find their way to the table. They approach character death with great relish. In fact, they’re a little masochistic about it, high-fiving their buddies with glee after their PC meets a gory demise. There seems to be a design philosophy that is a disconnect from what the majority of players want. I really can't understand how people would be excited for their character to die, even in a one shot. I don't know who he was watching, but I saw NO high fives or even smiles from the players whose characters died when I went through the Dungeon Delve. I had a ton of fun (sarcasm alert!) playing a Wizard against a Dragon that seemed to be designed to make me useless in combat as well (stacked Spell Turning?). Of course, if the Dragon had killed me, I could have taken my free mini and left - so maybe I would have been smiling... Add that to some questionable DMing (which I saw at GenCon, so I can only assume it happened in at least some of the game stores across the country) and you don't have a very satisfying experience for people. Much less NEW people... (edit: The quote comes from this article: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/dd/20061013a not the boards)
Escef 11-11-06, 04:16 AM	It is inspired by the Warhammer FRP which predates 2e and its kits by many years. Which is arbitrary to me. I'd prefer not to go back to kits. A precedent that was established in The Complete Thieves' Handbook was that lack of a kit constituted a kit. Then there was the "True Paladin" kit. Kits, kits, kits, as far as the eye could see. And the powercreep? It was no creep, it moved by leaps and bounds. Yes, one could draw a parallel with PrCs. But I don't use those much either. I guess I'm just tired of kits, because so many of them were stupidly overpowered for no reason.
Sim_antix 11-11-06, 10:29 AM	Ok so I have been thinking about this for a day or two and the more I do the more I like the idea of using generic base classes and then letting the player flesh it out to fit his character concept. They already have the generic base classes done up for us in Unearthed Arcana. I could really see doing that for 4E but I think it would rile too many feathers if i tried to implement it now in 3.5
Grizzled Gryphon 11-11-06, 12:13 PM	I played the Wizard. I thought it kind of odd that a ranger mini portrayed my char the best, but whatever. Not only did I manage to be the only char left, but I had the best AC (shield and mage armor), but I also had the most hit points (false life). I also was never hurt during the encounter. However, the Hellcat killed the cleric, the rogue, and the ranger. With that, I ran away. Me vs. the Hellcat and the wizard? Not likely. Especially seeing as all I had left was 0 level spells. I have to agree, the characters were poorly made, though. The Magma Elemental killed the Fighter and the Paladin, and would have easily killed the party if not for DM mercy. Its ranged attack did something like 3D8+1D6+10 damage. And, it could do it EVERY ROUND. As the Fighter was the toughest as far as Hit Points go (besides me), and it killed him outright in one hit, the rest of us were doomed. The chalenge rating of the creatures, in such quick sucession, is what really doomed the game. Had we down time, and had we been able to get back spells, and whatnot, it would have been possible. There was 5 games at he store I played at, and NONE of them survived. Well, except my lone wizard, who made good use of Full Retreat!! :P
Sapp 11-11-06, 12:28 PM	Generic base classes, modularity in general, might not be bad from the consumers' perspectives; however, I don't think it would be good design from WotC's perspective.
Greg K 11-11-06, 03:23 PM	If I get my way (and I might), 4e will drop more than jsut the paladin. There will be four classes: Warrior - Mage - Priest - Rogue Everythng else will be based on your character development through Feat, Skill, and Flavor choices. Bring on 4e! I say start with the three generic classes (warrior, expert, and adept) from UA, but have seperate adept spell lists for arcane, nature, and divine. Then add in the following classes: 1) Expert Warrior (for swashbucklers, wilderness warriors): Light Armor, Good BAB, Medium Fort and Reflex saves. Either a) d10 and 4 skill points per level or d8hd and 6 skill points per level. 2) Expert adept*: uses the bard spell progression. Medium BAB, Light Armor, Medium Reflex and Will saves. 6 skill points per level; 3) Warrior Adept*: uses the bard spell progression. Medium BAB, Medium Armor, d8 hd, 2 skill points per level; Warriors Weapon selection * at character generation choose to cast arcane spells, divine spells or nature spells. Then a) use d20 Talent trees as per d20Modern b) have two skill options for each class: Urban and Wilderness (think Rogue/Wilderness Rogue or Ranger/Urban Ranger)
Otto the Bugbear 11-12-06, 10:34 AM	In years of running the Dungeon Delve, I’ve noticed something about the D&D players who find their way to the table. They approach character death with great relish. In fact, they’re a little masochistic about it, high-fiving their buddies with glee after their PC meets a gory demise. This is rather suspect to me. If that's the premise behind the adventure and characters designed for D&D worldwide game day, why not just have the following adventure: DM: Okay, you've all got your characters and your minis, right? Players: Yep (players rattle off their name and the character they'll be playing) DM: Right. A colossal red dragon lands and breaths fire on your group. Everyone make reflex saves. Players: :uh-huh: Players: :uh-huh: Players: :uh-huh: Players: :dancin: :cheer: :w00t: :clap: Players: Good one! Can we have our minis now? Intentionally designing an adventure and the characters to give this exact same result, but dragging it out time-wise, isn't really changing anything except how long the players get to hang out together. If getting players to hang out together is the real driving force, just let DMs design their own adventures and characters. At least the onus of TPKs will be on the individual DMs rather than such craptastic design by the publishing company. Cheers Otto :rolleyes:
Grizzled Gryphon 11-12-06, 11:30 AM	Meh. 4.0? So, you take a class, then pick a career, which defines what abilities you have? Sounds a lot like what taking different CLASSES does now... all your changing is the name class to career.
vardock 11-12-06, 02:56 PM	why does every thread I see about PC powers turn into a 4th edition debate??? As for the generic classes. you can use them in 3rd edition. they are PRINTED in the Unearthed Arcana.
a_psh 11-12-06, 03:25 PM	Isn't a good DM supposed to fudge encounters to allow his PCs to survive? Even if the PCs suck, a little fudging here and there can help them survive.The standard is a bit different in one-shots, though. Because the long-term reward system of loot and XP is meaningless, the only real motivator you have is whether you "win" or "lose" the adventure itself. Most D&D adventures are dungeons, however, so "win" becomes "get to the end" and "lose" becomes "die".
a_psh 11-12-06, 03:31 PM	There seems to be a design philosophy that is a disconnect from what the majority of players want. I really can't understand how people would be excited for their character to die, even in a one shot.Hmm... I think this is actually what happens at a lot of convention one-shots. The thing is, D&D Game Day represents taking that model -- developed while playing a bunch of games with strangers who all went to a con with you -- and applies it to a local community event. Which is totally not what people expect from the usual game in a gaming store.
a_psh 11-12-06, 03:33 PM	It is inspired by the Warhammer FRP which predates 2e and its kits by many years.Burning Wheel has taken the "careers" concept and really gone crazy with it (err, I think "lifepaths" is the new name for that general kind of thing now). I'm honestly not impressed with the results, but I think that's because of how BW in general works rather than the lifepaths.
NineInchNall 11-12-06, 07:31 PM	My model is actually the Warhammer Fantasy RPG. • Your choice of class determines what careers you can take. • Some careers are unique to come classes, some are not. • There is no multiclassing, but lots and lots of career changes. • Skills, abilities and stat increases are derived from careers. • Some careers require certain other careers as prerequisites. • There are also advanced classes which generally can only be achieved through certain basic classes. Oh, god no. I'd really hope that they don't go that route. Class == job == career == straitjacket. No, thanks. Just as people are starting to finally dissociate class and role, thinking of characters in in-character terms rather than their classes, Warhammer FRP comes along and actually refers to character classes as careers. Thanks, WFRP. You've set roleplaying back another large step.
a_psh 11-12-06, 07:46 PM	Thanks, WFRP. You've set roleplaying back another large step.To be fair, it did that in the 80s, back when nobody had taken a step forward from that in the first place. (I'm deeply convinced that careers/lifepaths only work in a classless system.)
Sapp 11-12-06, 09:33 PM	The standard is a bit different in one-shots, though. Because the long-term reward system of loot and XP is meaningless, the only real motivator you have is whether you "win" or "lose" the adventure itself. Most D&D adventures are dungeons, however, so "win" becomes "get to the end" and "lose" becomes "die". Oh, I don't disagree. I was partially being sarcastic. I was only sincere in the sense that I honestly wanted to know peoples' opinions of how much responsibility belongs to the DM on the subject of power dynamics in D&D? Would it be right to say that WotC can crap out whatever they wanted because it's a good DM's job to fix it?
a_psh 11-12-06, 10:14 PM	Would it be right to say that WotC can crap out whatever they wanted because it's a good DM's job to fix it?I think it's a good GM's job to fix it if he's going to be running it. In other words, "this module sucked" isn't a fair excuse for creating all kinds of terribly unfun situations. (Though I realize everyone will be blindsided by some stupid little detail that totally wrecks the adventure but isn't obvious during just a read-through every once in a while, of course.)