DISCLAIMER: The following is an irrational rant, which will no doubt be disproved as fallacious via a superior understanding of mathematics, but nevertheless I feel I must get this off my chest.
Last night, after my barbarian missed for the third round while trying to attack a mage who was prone, no less, I couldn't help but wonder why it's so difficult to boost your attack modifier with 4e. This isn't the first time my PC has struggled to hit what should be a "squishy" baddie, and I know it's not just my dice ...
My barbarian is 5th level and has a +10 attack modifier. Admittedly, a 3.5 barbarian at the same level with the same ability scores and a similar +1 magic weapon would also have a +10 attack modifier, but for some reason I feel like it wasn't as hard to hit things in 3.5. Maybe it's because many 4e monsters have very high defenses relative to the PCs.
I'm not the only one in the group who struggles to hit the monsters (whereas they hardly ever seem to have any trouble hitting us), and I guess what's frustrating is that, while some of the others aren't frontline fighters so it makes some sense that they can't hit as well, my PC is a warrior type. She's supposed to be good at hitting. Sure, when she does hit, she hits pretty hard, but she seems to miss quite regularly.
So I was looking through the feats and stuff and, while there are heaps of feats for increasing damage, there's really only one feat I can take to boost my attack beyond what I've got already and that's Weapon Expertise (which is in the PHB2, no less, so if you were only playing with the PHB1 you'd be out of luck). After that, I'm pretty much just stuck with waiting for my half-level modifier to increase or the arrival of a better magic weapon (or the upgrade of my existing one).
I'm sure someone will point out that it was just as hard to boost your attack modifier in 3.5 or even Star Wars Saga, but it sure doesn't feel that way. I think it's just because monsters are so bloody hard to hit in 4e whereas PCs are very hard to miss ... :P
Cheers,
Jonathan
DISCLAIMER: The following is an irrational rant, which will no doubt be disproved as fallacious via a superior understanding of mathematics, but nevertheless I feel I must get this off my chest.
Speaking of which, 5th-level opponents will tend to have an AC in the 17-21 range. Your barbarian, with a +10 attack bonus, will hit the highest of these half the time.
In other words, your rant is mostly an issue of having rotten luck, not of opponents being difficult to hit.
Speaking of which, 5th-level opponents will tend to have an AC in the 17-21 range. Your barbarian, with a +10 attack bonus, will hit the highest of these half the time.
In other words, your rant is mostly an issue of having rotten luck, not of opponents being difficult to hit.
I dunno. I regularly roll in that range only to be told I've missed. It's frustrating, especially when it happens with a daily power.
Then your DM has pumped the monsters up or uses higher-level monsters regularly...
We're playing H2: Thunderspire Labyrinth, so he's just using whatever's in there.
Based on my own experiences DMing, I know that WotC regularly makes their own adventures insanely difficult, so that could easily be what the problem is but still ...
Regardless of my personal experiences, though, why is it so difficult to boost your attack modifier in 4e?
Because 4E is based around a somewhat-meticulously calculated balance. If you could have +20 to hit at level 5, then nothing would be a threat. There are a lot of ways to get little bonuses, however: weapon expertise, combat advantage (flanking), bonuses from leader powers, charging, magic weapons
Oh, I agree ... having +20 at level 5 wouldn't be much fun. But what about +12 or +13? Just enough to give me a slightly better than 50-50 chance of hitting.
Besides, I reckon balance is overrated anyway. IMO, the 4e devs sacrificed too much of the fun on the altar of balance when they were making the game.
(of which you should probably have a +2 by level 5), etc.
Yes, I probably should ... but should doesn't mean I will. It's all dependent on the GM / what's in the adventure.
I've found that PCs always end up behind where they should be with magic items when playing WotC adventures - either because they don't find the secret treasure horde, don't kill the guys with the cool treasure, don't want / can't use what's been given out (which is an even worse problem in 4e, if you ask me, since PCs have less versatility in terms of switching out different kinds of weapons/implements), or there simply isn't enough treasure to begin with ...
This is evidenced by the fact that whenever a new PC joins the group, they always have much better gear than the rest of the PCs. Maybe this is just a problem that our group has, I don't know, but that's what my experience has been (both as a DM and a player).
And, to be honest, the fact that D&D PCs are still somewhat dependent on magic items to be effective is annoying. IThe previews had given me the impression that they were doing away with the "Christmas tree" effect but they didn't really. They might have made it so you only really need three magic items and everything else is just window dressing but the fact that you still need any at all is bothersome. But I digress ...
Yes. I'm hard to please. I expected too much of 4e and I am still sorely disappointed.
As for dealing with the magic item effect, there are certain house rules that have been suggested on the house rules forum. Basically, remove all enhancement bonuses from all weapons, armor, and neck items, and just automatically give players a +1 bonus every 5 levels (3/8/13/18/23/28). Items would retain their powers, properties, and critical hit bonuses.
The fact that your DM is shorting you on gear is not a problem with 4e, it's a problem with (surprise!) the DM.
A 50-50 chance to hit is typical, even fully 'geared up'. This is where teamwork comes in. You should have a flanking buddy at the VERY least. Unlike previous editions, nobody can be a one man show; you all have to work together.
It IS a problem with the WotC official adventures that they don't have enough magic items in them. It's assumed (around here, at least) that the DM will fill in the missing treasure with more according to the treasure parcel system outlined in the DMG. If he's not giving you proper items, you might want to bring to his attention that the math of 4E only works if the players have the proper bonuses.
Yeah. The thing is that he doesn't spend much time on prep work. I think he probably just looks over the upcoming adventures shortly before game time. The rest of his free time is spent parenting or playing WoW.
As for dealing with the magic item effect, there are certain house rules that have been suggested on the house rules forum. Basically, remove all enhancement bonuses from all weapons, armor, and neck items, and just automatically give players a +1 bonus every 5 levels (3/8/13/18/23/28).
I actually wanted to do that when I was DMing, but my players vetoed the idea. The rest of them like the idea of getting magic items with pluses on them. That's part of what makes it D&D for them.
Yes, they did do away with the 'christmas tree'. You no longer need Rings of Protection, various doodads to boost your stats, cloaks of resistance, your wizards and clerics aren't walking around with bags of wands and scrolls, you aren't hunting for books of permanent stat boosts, and so forth.
I dunno ...
The fact that your DM is shorting you on gear is not a problem with 4e, it's a problem with (surprise!) the DM.
If the DM still has to work hard to make sure everyone has the right amount of gear, then I'd say there still is too much dependence on that gear to be effective ... There may not be a "Christmas tree" anymore, but there's still "magic item dependence". You shouldn't have to have a +x anything to be effective ...
A 50-50 chance to hit is typical, even fully 'geared up'. This is where teamwork comes in. You should have a flanking buddy at the VERY least. Unlike previous editions, nobody can be a one man show; you all have to work together.
Yes. I think this is something that still hasn't quite sunk in for my group yet. They sucked at teamwork when I was DMing 3.5 and it showed. They sucked at teamwork when I was DMing 4e and it showed. And even I suck at teamwork now that I'm just playing instead ... we all just want to be effective on our own. So perhaps 4e isn't the right game system for us? I know it's not the right game system for me.
Last night, after my barbarian missed for the third round while trying to attack a mage who was prone, no less, I couldn't help but wonder why it's so difficult to boost your attack modifier with 4e. This isn't the first time my PC has struggled to hit what should be a "squishy" baddie, and I know it's not just my dice ...
My barbarian is 5th level and has a +10 attack modifier. Admittedly, a 3.5 barbarian at the same level with the same ability scores and a similar +1 magic weapon would also have a +10 attack modifier, but for some reason I feel like it wasn't as hard to hit things in 3.5. Maybe it's because many 4e monsters have very high defenses relative to the PCs.
I'm not the only one in the group who struggles to hit the monsters (whereas they hardly ever seem to have any trouble hitting us), and I guess what's frustrating is that, while some of the others aren't frontline fighters so it makes some sense that they can't hit as well, my PC is a warrior type. She's supposed to be good at hitting. Sure, when she does hit, she hits pretty hard, but she seems to miss quite regularly.
So I was looking through the feats and stuff and, while there are heaps of feats for increasing damage, there's really only one feat I can take to boost my attack beyond what I've got already and that's Weapon Expertise (which is in the PHB2, no less, so if you were only playing with the PHB1 you'd be out of luck). After that, I'm pretty much just stuck with waiting for my half-level modifier to increase or the arrival of a better magic weapon (or the upgrade of my existing one).
You wouldn't be a barbarian if you were only playing with PH1.
;)
In regards to your problem, maybe you could get one of your groupmates to play a battlecleric? That would certainly help with your problem, being the beneficiary of Righteous Brand.
Here's how I do it, as a DM: I've got a sheet of paper on which I track the total XP that I've given out, as well as the parcels I've given out. For each level, I write out the numbers 1-10, and after each combat, I roll a few d10s, cross out the rolled numbers (re-roll if I've already crossed out that number), and then hand out the appropriate parcels, as listed in the DMG. For picking appropriate items, I just figure out who's got the least amount of interesting items, and pick something relatively appropriate. Thankfully, the Adventurer's Vault has a big list of items by level, so I just scan that and pick out something that sounds neat. In the end, I don't really have to prep much before-hand.
This is the sort of thing I do when I'm DM, but I can't speak for the guy who is DMing now. Like I said, I don't think he does any prep outside of just looking over the upcoming encounters and running them as they are.
You wouldn't be a barbarian if you were only playing with PH1.
;)
Uh yes ... yes, that's true. Very astute of you. But what I meant was that if someone in general is just playing any warrior type character using only the PHB1, they won't be able to use Weapon Expertise (which used to be Weapon Focus, but for some reason they changed even that to boost damage instead of attacks ... so then they had to reintroduce it in the next PHB as a different feat ... :rolleyes
In regards to your problem, maybe you could get one of your groupmates to play a battlecleric? That would certainly help with your problem, being the beneficiary of Righteous Brand.
We have got a battle cleric and he has even more trouble hitting than I do. With him, it really is mostly bad luck, though ... he regularly rolls 1s and 2s and the like.
We have got a battle cleric and he has even more trouble hitting than I do. With him, it really is mostly bad luck, though ... he regularly rolls 1s and 2s and the like.
new dice maybe :D
I do feel your pain though. I've had mixed games with 4e some where we all keep missing the same blasted kobold again and again lol and what should be a short combat seems to go on for hours. Others where we've just owned the whole lot in a couple of rounds. Sometimes it's luck, sometimes it's a monster a couple of levels higher than us and others it's lack of CA or some other buff that increases our ability to hit. It IS very frustrating though when you repeatedly miss a target especially on a daily... I missed with sleep yesterday which sucked royally.
Anyhoo, if it's not the dice and others are having trouble hitting too, then maybe have a word with the DM and suggest he tinkers with the monster levels I think people have said that WoTC do make hard modules, and you want the game to be fun. Or grab the weapon expertise feat if you're allowed or keep your fingers crossed for a +2 weapon in the very near future.
Good luck, though I hope your hit rate improves as it can severely hamper the game's enjoyment if you miss nearly every time. (Esp when the two bladed ranger keeps rolling criticals... but that's another story ;) )
But what I meant was that if someone in general is just playing any warrior type character using only the PHB1, they won't be able to use Weapon Expertise
With just PHB1, Fighters get +1 to atk from their Talent, Rogues get +1 to hit with their daggers, and along with Archer Rangers their primary to-hit stat is basically their most loaded stat (damage, AC, to hit). Melee Rangers split off Str but Twin Strike overcomes that anyways with up to an effective +25% to hit.
Hm, +10 to hit... 18 Str for +4, +2 from level 5, +1 from +1 Weapon Enhancement, +3 weapon for +10?
vs 14+lvl AC so vs AC 19.
That's a 60% chance of hitting. With Weapon Expertise, 65%, with CA that's 70%, with WE and CA that's 75%.
(18 Str from buying 16 then +2 Racial.)
Of course, this pales in comparison with a rogue starting with 20 Dex, a +1 dagger, dagger talent, and weapon expertise (2+5+1+1+1+3 = +13). :P
Of course, this pales in comparison with a rogue starting with 20 Dex, a +1 dagger, dagger talent, and weapon expertise (2+5+1+1+1+3 = +13). :P
Agreed, only moreso since any melee rogue worth his salt will be getting Combat Advantage for that oh so important Sneak Attack. So it's really 2+5+1+1+1+3+2 = +15. Rogues are the accuracy kings of 4e, or were until the Avengers came around.
Off topic, writing this post somehow reminded me of the movie clue a bit. "Even if you were right that would be 1+1+2+1, not 1+2+1+1." :P
new dice maybe :D
LOL. Yeah. Although I did roll about five natural 20s last night ... it's just none of them were on attack rolls. :P
I do feel your pain though. I've had mixed games with 4e some where we all keep missing the same blasted kobold again and again lol and what should be a short combat seems to go on for hours. Others where we've just owned the whole lot in a couple of rounds. Sometimes it's luck, sometimes it's a monster a couple of levels higher than us and others it's lack of CA or some other buff that increases our ability to hit. It IS very frustrating though when you repeatedly miss a target especially on a daily... I missed with sleep yesterday which sucked royally.
Yeah. Missing with a daily is probably one of the least fun things in the game.
Anyhoo, if it's not the dice and others are having trouble hitting too, then maybe have a word with the DM and suggest he tinkers with the monster levels I think people have said that WoTC do make hard modules, and you want the game to be fun. Or grab the weapon expertise feat if you're allowed or keep your fingers crossed for a +2 weapon in the very near future.
It's either that or we all need new dice.
I am planning on getting Weapon Expertise at 6th level. And I'm hoping to upgrade my sword to a +2 at some point. Not really sure how to go about doing that exactly, although I know it can be done. I guess I'll have to talk to the DM. But I know the others are pretty low on magic items. I've only got some good stuff because my PC came in at level 3 after I stopped DMing and the other guy took over.
Good luck, though I hope your hit rate improves as it can severely hamper the game's enjoyment if you miss nearly every time. (Esp when the two bladed ranger keeps rolling criticals... but that's another story ;) )
Yes. Thanks. I haven't missed every time but it sure happens more than I'd like it to ...
Last night, after my barbarian missed for the third round while trying to attack a mage who was prone, no less, I couldn't help but wonder why it's so difficult to boost your attack modifier with 4e. This isn't the first time my PC has struggled to hit what should be a "squishy" baddie, and I know it's not just my dice ...
My barbarian is 5th level and has a +10 attack modifier. Admittedly, a 3.5 barbarian at the same level with the same ability scores and a similar +1 magic weapon would also have a +10 attack modifier, but for some reason I feel like it wasn't as hard to hit things in 3.5. Maybe it's because many 4e monsters have very high defenses relative to the PCs.
As to the prone target, you should have Combat Advantage, too. That is an additional +2. If you were still missing often (unless due to bad rolls), then something was being done wrong. That is a +12 to your attack roll. There are a couple of AC25 in the adventure, but they are either elite or solo creatures. I think it is pretty much assumed that you will be needing help on them, even if they become prone.
Agreed, only moreso since any melee rogue worth his salt will be getting Combat Advantage for that oh so important Sneak Attack. So it's really 2+5+1+1+1+3+2 = +15. Rogues are the accuracy kings of 4e, or were until the Avengers came around.
And started rolling all of their attackd twice. I can feel the WoW player in me screaming "broken! nerf!" but I'll refrain.
I haven't gone through the PHB2 much, although I do own it. So I'm not the best source of information for Barbarians (now if we were talking Starlocks, I could be of help), but here are a few things I would do to help somewhat.
1) Seek to gain combat advantage whenever and wherever you can.
2) Take powers than can make enemies easier to hit prior to using a daily.
3) Stay as close, if not adjacent, to your cleric as often as possible for Righteous Brand goodness. Ask for it if he/she isn't "getting it."
4) Do not blow a daily unless you have been buffed considerably to hit if at all possible (see #3).
Also, you may have to break the striker mold somewhat and be more reactive to your party than proactive. When we first started playing 4E (we were also very used to all being one-man shows in 3.x), despite being a striker, I would delay my actions until the end of the round to see where my damage/status effects would be the most effective and most likely to hit. I quickly learned my parties tendencies and as such, I was able to take Improved Initiative at level 4 and be more proactive with the knowledge that I had a pretty good idea what the other PCs were going to do and not "waste" actions.
Case in point:
Our very first session in the Shadowfell Keep module, our party got split up and it ended up being myself and the Battle Cleric vs. Irontooth while the Fighter, Rogue and Wizard were on the other side of the cavern trying to get through the kobolds. The cleric went first in the initiative order and ended up using Cascade of Light on 'tooth and missing. I then proceeded to Dreadful Word/Prophecy of Zhudan him two segments later which caused the cleric to now change his tactics. He now never uses Cascade of Light until after I Dreadful Word unless he has no other recourse.
4E does take some adjustment when you're used to the 3.5 ruleset. But it's not that bad, you just have to try new things, be willing to communicate/work with your party instead of around them and most of all be patient.
So that means if you're having a problem hitting, there are only two possibilities:
A) You had a run of bad luck
B) Your GM is making you fight things tougher than you should
As for the second part of your post, "Why is it so hard to increase accuracy?" The game is balanced around the 50% to hit mark. You will hit easy enemies more than 50% of the time, and tough enemies (solos and elites) less than 50% of the time. If they make bonuses to hit too easy to acquire, that will skew the balance (easy opponents become a cakewalk and tough opponents become "normal".)
My players work like hell to get whatever minor bonuses they can to attacks and damage. You should see how they go at it, they're the best. They're level 10, with about +2/3 weapons, so much of the time they're able to manage a +16 once they get combat advantage. Monsters at their level have around a 24-26 AC, so they hit a little more than half the time. And that's if they're attacking AC.
I'm just making a guess, but like someone say about, maybe there's no teamwork.
My players work like hell to get whatever minor bonuses they can to attacks and damage. You should see how they go at it, they're the best. They're level 10, with about +2/3 weapons, so much of the time they're able to manage a +16 once they get combat advantage. Monsters at their level have around a 24-26 AC, so they hit a little more than half the time. And that's if they're attacking AC.
Great point. I actually really dislike attacking AC in 4E, which is why I'm very glad I'm a Starlock. Hell, I watch the Rogue (he's optimized but rolls terribly), Fighter (not very good with the mechanics of the class, but he tries) and Cleric miss more on average than myself or the Wizard and I feel bad for them. I'm by no means optimized, but I've set myself up to be very good at attacking Will defense and that's my bread-and-butter. I fall back on Reflex defense should Will defense prove to be too high to attack reliably/consistantly. Ideally, being able to attack every defense type is quality but is hard for most classes to muster.
Ironically, my dream character is an Eladrin TacLord/Spiral Tactician/Legendary General from an RP and metagaming perspective. But when I look through the powers and seeing everything vs. AC it makes me cry irl.
My barbarian...
I dunno. I regularly roll in that range only to be told I've missed. It's frustrating, especially when it happens with a daily power.
Yeah. Missing with a daily is probably one of the least fun things in the game.
Really?
Did you notice that ALL the barbarian daily attacks are "Miss: half damage"?
Did you realize that you get the special effect that ALL the barbarian dailys grant even if you do not hit?
Playing a barbarian I do not care if I hit with a daily or not. I know I will deal damage, I will enter the rage (unlocks damage bonus from feats), and will get some super cool effect from the daily. Hitting with a daily does not really matter for a barbarian! Actually it is worse not to hit with an at-will because there is no "Miss: half damage".
And BTW: a Potion of Clarity costs 50 GP and gives you a re-roll.
And you can't blame the system that you are not able to hit with a +10 bonus, especially when CA gets you to +12, when the average enemy has an AC of 19. You hit on a 7!
Besides you should have +11 to hit with (Level +2, Str +4, feat +1, prof. +3, enh. +1). And if you are really worried about hitting, why aren't you already at Str +5? A 17 starting score before racial adjustment is not that expensive to buy - and Str is your primary stat. And you should charge with Howling strike which is another +1 on attack and would bring you to +13 - with combat advantage +15.
You could hit the average enemy with CA on a 4!
And I haven't even mentioned that you could already have a +2 weapon, which would let you hit on a 3!
Maybe it's just a matter of perception? If you have about a 60% hit rate (which is probably closer to the mark than 50/50), that still feels like much less to many players. People tend to keep track of negatives more than they do positives. Also, if due to bad luck it's often your dailies and encounter powers that fall in the 40% category of misses, your character will be less effective than if they are mostly in the 60% category of hits.
Yes. It's undoubtedly mostly a matter of perception, if not completely so. I just felt like complaining to see what people would say. LOL.
Really?
Did you notice that ALL the barbarian daily attacks are "Miss: half damage"?
Did you realize that you get the special effect that ALL the barbarian dailys grant even if you do not hit?
Playing a barbarian I do not care if I hit with a daily or not. I know I will deal damage, I will enter the rage (unlocks damage bonus from feats), and will get some super cool effect from the daily. Hitting with a daily does not really matter for a barbarian! Actually it is worse not to hit with an at-will because there is no "Miss: half damage".
I'd rather deal full damage than half damage. 4e monsters all have too many hit points so the faster you can kill them and move on the better. Sure, dealing half damage is better than dealing no damage, and I could roll all 1s even if I am doing full damage, but I think it's more a matter of principle ...
And BTW: a Potion of Clarity costs 50 GP and gives you a re-roll.
Right. I'll just add a few of those to my character sheet and subtract the right amount of gold from the party's stocks. Never mind if there aren't any available in any of the magic item shops ...
And I haven't even mentioned that you could already have a +2 weapon, which would let you hit on a 3!
You have now. And again, I'll just add this to my sheet since I should have one.
[RANT]One of the things I hated the most about coming onto the forums and asking for help with the last edition was that someone would always come on and post, "Oh just get x, y or z magic item! That'll solve your problems!"
Sure, maybe in a computer game where you can just cheat and give yourself whatever magic item you want ... but while it may, in theory, solve all my problems to get x, y or z magic item, whether or not I actually will get it is not a sure thing.
The only way to be absolutely sure I get all the right equipment for my level would be to make a new character.
Otherwise, it is entirely up to the whims of the DM and/or the vagaries of the adventure in which we are playing.[/RANT]
Was the mage a Duergar? Because their AC is usually higher than any of their other defenses.
Yes it was. :embarrass
But...any 5th-level Character with Ritual Casting can get Brew Potion, and then a Potion of Clarity, and anyone can get a +2 Magic Item (as long as their DM isn't doing it wrong :S).
Regarding brewing potions - I'll mention it to the guys who got the Ritual Caster feat for free. No one's really doing anything with rituals in our group. I think it's because our pacing has been too fast for them. We just don't really ever give ourselves enough downtime.
As for the magic item, OK anyone can get one but not necessarily whenever they want ... right? Don't get me wrong, I'd love a +2 weapon! But I feel like everyone's making it sound a lot easier to get magic items than it really is (and possibly should be).
I'll concede that the 4e devs may have done away with the Christmas tree effect, but they did not get rid of the "ye olde magick item shoppe" mentality ... eg. the "Just go and get x, y or z item" that I mentioned before. Not every campaign has a magic item shop or convenient monster treasure box around every corner where you can "just get" a particular item.
I know that 4e explicitly tells DMs to ask their players for magic item wishlists and to customize treasure packages so that players get the things they want, but as a DM, I don't like that idea. As a player, I don't really like it either but the powergamer in me probably does ...
That sucks that a Duergar just happened to be there, just to tip you over the edge. That kind of "coincidental" BS always fries my noodle, so yeah, I definitely feel for ya.
I don't think it was a case of the duergar just happening to be there ... we are currently assaulting the duergar fortress in the Thunderspire Labyrinth adventure, so I wasn't at all surprised that he was there. I was surprised (and frustrated) that I was having so much trouble hitting a guy who was supposed to be "squishier" than his more heavily armored compatriots.
Hmm...assuming 2 from half lvl, 4 for ability, 3 proficiency, 1 enhancment, 1 from charging, 2 from C.A, 1 from feat...thats an easy +14 to hit for a decent Barbarian. Somethings wrong here. I havent found hitting to be that hard when my group did that adventure. Its either bad luck or your DM is messing with the AC.
I haven't got Weapon Expertise yet. I'll definitely be taking that next level, though (6th level).
I can assure you, though, that the DM is not messing with anything. For one thing, he's not a fan of "messing" with the rules at all (when I was DMing, he was always the most resistant to any changes/house rules I wanted to institute), and for another, he is a big procrastinator and is addicted to WoW, so he does very little prep work. I'd be surprised if he spends even an hour on prep work before each session ...
So yeah ... I guess that leaves bad luck and poor team tactics.
I'll admit that I'm (mostly) having fun with the barbarian. It's a change from the type of characters I usually play (stealthy skill monkeys). My next character, though, is going to be a bard or a warlord, and I'm going to take over the job of whipping the group into shape in terms of teamwork and tactics (everyone always says I'm the most tactical-minded player in the group, so I may as well put that to use as a player and not just when I'm DMing ... ;)).
Yeah. The thing is that he doesn't spend much time on prep work. I think he probably just looks over the upcoming adventures shortly before game time. The rest of his free time is spent parenting or playing WoW.
I don't do much prep work either but I do try to make sure my PC's get what they need. Does anyone in your party have a +2 item because the first item of that calibur should have been in your level 2 treasure parcels and there should have been 2 in your level 3, and 3 in your level 4. In other words there's almost no reason why every member of your party shouldn't have at least 1 +2 magic item by 5th level.
I actually wanted to do that when I was DMing, but my players vetoed the idea. The rest of them like the idea of getting magic items with pluses on them. That's part of what makes it D&D for them.
For me as well. Plus there are quite a few magic items who's effects depend on their enchancement bonus. I just try to make sure my players get enough items to keep them at about the right level of magic threshold.
If the DM still has to work hard to make sure everyone has the right amount of gear, then I'd say there still is too much dependence on that gear to be effective ... There may not be a "Christmas tree" anymore, but there's still "magic item dependence". You shouldn't have to have a +x anything to be effective ...
It's not hard. Treasure in all the previous editions was way harder. Practically a cakewalk in comparison in 4e.
Yes. I think this is something that still hasn't quite sunk in for my group yet. They sucked at teamwork when I was DMing 3.5 and it showed. They sucked at teamwork when I was DMing 4e and it showed. And even I suck at teamwork now that I'm just playing instead ... we all just want to be effective on our own. So perhaps 4e isn't the right game system for us? I know it's not the right game system for me.
Maybe. 4e is really designed such that teamwork is critical to party success. I don't expect you'll ever find yourselves in a position where any player is so individually awesome that their teammates no longer matter. If this is something you're looking for, you might want to consider going back to 3.5 where this was a lot easier.
Oh, I agree ... having +20 at level 5 wouldn't be much fun. But what about +12 or +13? Just enough to give me a slightly better than 50-50 chance of hitting.
That's what situation modifiers are for. Combat advantage, bonuses from leaders and powers. It's not hard to get WELL over that 50-50 with a little effort from your teammates.
Besides, I reckon balance is overrated anyway. IMO, the 4e devs sacrificed too much of the fun on the altar of balance when they were making the game.
I dunno I've had many unhappy experiences playing 3.0/3.5 where I felt like my character was almost useless while some of the other pcs were superhuman in comparison. Doesn't happen so much in 4e.
Yes, I probably should ... but should doesn't mean I will. It's all dependent on the GM / what's in the adventure.
I think a lot of people on these forums tend to forget this simple fact.
I've found that PCs always end up behind where they should be with magic items when playing WotC adventures - either because they don't find the secret treasure horde, don't kill the guys with the cool treasure, don't want / can't use what's been given out (which is an even worse problem in 4e, if you ask me, since PCs have less versatility in terms of switching out different kinds of weapons/implements), or there simply isn't enough treasure to begin with ...
This is kind of meant to be true with the parcel system as well but rarely played that way. It's designed to be a guideline on how much treasure to put into the adventure during the planning stage but there is no guarantee that the players will find it all. I think in many games (including my own) the DM's give out every item in the list each level which results in quite powerful characters but the system was not really designed around the player being entitled to all those items.
This is evidenced by the fact that whenever a new PC joins the group, they always have much better gear than the rest of the PCs. Maybe this is just a problem that our group has, I don't know, but that's what my experience has been (both as a DM and a player).
I recently changed the rules of my games so that new pcs start with only Magic items with a plus equivalent to the magic threshold at their level, not their choice of items. I might then bestow some items on the pc before he enters play, but no free selection of your wish list from the book.
And, to be honest, the fact that D&D PCs are still somewhat dependent on magic items to be effective is annoying.
It's one of those things that's part of the D&D legacy and a very deliberate design choice. Obviously wizards has made systems where this isn't true. (SW Saga) Wizards designed it this way because magic items are so much a part of the D&D experience.
The previews had given me the impression that they were doing away with the "Christmas tree" effect but they didn't really. They might have made it so you only really need three magic items and everything else is just window dressing but the fact that you still need any at all is bothersome. But I digress ...
You only really suffer if you fall too far behind the "magic threshold" on your attacks and damages. Every other part of equipment is just there to give you new options.
Yes. I'm hard to please. I expected too much of 4e and I am still sorely disappointed.
Not me, I LOVE 4e. Previous to my 4E campaign I ran an incredibly complicated SW:Saga game where I ran two seperate parties on seperate nights of the week on the same game world. One party was good, the other evil. All throughout the game their actions would influence the events the other party experienced. It was an incredible challenge for me as a DM made even more challenging by the lack of DM support material for saga. (Threats of the Galaxy had not even been released yet) I made nearly everything for that game from scratch, when it came to npcs and foes. I put in about 3-4 hours of prep each week for each party. It was all worth it when they came together for their final epic battle though.
By comparison 4e is a breeze. I can put together a whole night's worth of adventuring in just a couple hours of prep and can easily just make it up on the fly if I don't have time to prep. Beats making my players wait an hour while I hand craft the enemy they're going to fight when they go and find trouble I didn't prepare for.
I don't do much prep work either but I do try to make sure my PC's get what they need. Does anyone in your party have a +2 item because the first item of that calibur should have been in your level 2 treasure parcels and there should have been 2 in your level 3, and 3 in your level 4. In other words there's almost no reason why every member of your party shouldn't have at least 1 +2 magic item by 5th level.
Off the top of my head, the ranger has a +2 fireburst bow and I'm pretty sure that's the only +2 item any of us have. He's also got a +1 amulet and some bracers.
The fighter has an intelligent bloodthirsty axe but it's only +1. I'm pretty sure that's the only magic item he has. His player doesn't care about magic items though.
The cleric has +1 armor and a +1 holy symbol but he's a battle cleric so the holy symbol is virtually useless to him and he has just got a regular non-magical weapon, so that's probably partly why he has trouble hitting things.
The wizard has a +1 orb (if he hadn't angered a certain barbarian woman, he would've had a +2 orb by now but it got thrown into a 300 ft deep crevice ...). I'm not sure what else he has as he joined the group at level 3.
I'm not sure what the paladin has because his player just joined the group, so he started at 5th level. He built the PC using the Character Builder, so it's probably all right.
That just leaves me. My PC came in at third level and hasn't gotten any new items since then. She's got a +1 bloodclaw fullblade, +1 hide armor of cleansing, boots of adept charging, and a +1 cloak of the walking wounded.
It's not hard. Treasure in all the previous editions was way harder. Practically a cakewalk in comparison in 4e.
I realize that. But what I'm saying is that I don't think the DM bothers to fiddle with treasure parcels at all. I'm serious. He as much as admits that he doesn't do much, if any, prep.
Maybe. 4e is really designed such that teamwork is critical to party success. I don't expect you'll ever find yourselves in a position where any player is so individually awesome that their teammates no longer matter. If this is something you're looking for, you might want to consider going back to 3.5 where this was a lot easier.
I have considered going back to 3.5 (once upon a time I said "Never again!" but more recently I've begun to soften my stance). However, SWSE is my ruleset of choice and I am currently working on converting it to a fantasy game for when I am ready to GM again.
That's what situation modifiers are for. Combat advantage, bonuses from leaders and powers. It's not hard to get WELL over that 50-50 with a little effort from your teammates.
Yeah. I'm beginning to get that. I've been playing with the majority of the guys in the group for about two years now, some longer, and we still aren't good at the teamwork thing. They were never any good at it when I was the DM (with both 3.5 and 4e), we're not any good at it with SWSE (which one of the other guys is GMing), and we're still not good at it with 4e (which yet another of the guys is GMing).
I dunno I've had many unhappy experiences playing 3.0/3.5 where I felt like my character was almost useless while some of the other pcs were superhuman in comparison. Doesn't happen so much in 4e.
I have had that experience as well, but I think things like using point buy instead of rolling and stuff like that can go a long way to alleviating character power disparity ... and I feel like the devs just went a little too far in the opposite direction with 4e.
I think a lot of people on these forums tend to forget this simple fact.
I think so too.
It's one of those things that's part of the D&D legacy and a very deliberate design choice. Obviously wizards has made systems where this isn't true. (SW Saga) Wizards designed it this way because magic items are so much a part of the D&D experience.
Yes. I love the low magic feel of the SWSE rules and that's partly why I'm converting them. It's mainly just because I love the system so much. I think it's the best system WotC has done and I really wish they'd made 4e along the same lines.
Not me, I LOVE 4e. Previous to my 4E campaign I ran an incredibly complicated SW:Saga game where I ran two seperate parties on seperate nights of the week on the same game world. One party was good, the other evil. All throughout the game their actions would influence the events the other party experienced. It was an incredible challenge for me as a DM made even more challenging by the lack of DM support material for saga. (Threats of the Galaxy had not even been released yet) I made nearly everything for that game from scratch, when it came to npcs and foes. I put in about 3-4 hours of prep each week for each party. It was all worth it when they came together for their final epic battle though.
Sounds interesting. I hear you on the lack of GM support though. The guy who is running our actual SWSE game is aborting the current campaign - we're at 11th level now - because he hasn't got the material and doesn't want to spend all his free time coming up with it, so he's starting us over at the beginning because he can use some prefab stuff for the lower levels. We're all sorely disappointed but hey ... there's just not much out there for SWSE at the higher levels. He also made it harder for himself by deciding he was tired of "save the world" campaigns and chose not to go with the DoD adventure path (but he used a little bit of it early on, so now he feels like he can't use any of it without making it feel repetitive).
At least with my conversion, since it's going to be fantasy, I'll be able to use a lot of D&D 3.5 stuff for the higher levels.
By comparison 4e is a breeze. I can put together a whole night's worth of adventuring in just a couple hours of prep and can easily just make it up on the fly if I don't have time to prep. Beats making my players wait an hour while I hand craft the enemy they're going to fight when they go and find trouble I didn't prepare for.
I'll admit that 4e is much easier to DM, but I think it's a lot harder to play. The devs kept going on about how much easier they'd made the game, but I don't think they've really made it any easier overall. They've just shifted a good chunk of the complexity from one side of the DM screen to the other, and I know that a good number of the guys in my group (myself included) aren't particularly happy about that.
I remember during 3.5 days that people were always complaining about how non-casters were boring and didn't have enough to do aside from "whack whack whack" with their weapons ... so what does WotC do? They make everyone a spellcaster with all the added complexity and bookkeeping that that requires ... but the thing is that some people actually like playing a simple character that just goes "whack whack whack". There are several of those guys in my group. They're not happy with the way 4e works. They can't be bothered with all the marking and status effects and situational modifiers and things.
We're just going along with it because that's what the GM wanted to run.
Basically what happened was that I started a 4e campaign with Keep on the Shadowfell. They didn't even get all the way through the first floor of the keep before I just couldn't take it anymore -- while being DM was a lot easier, because being a player was so much harder, I found myself still doing most of the work because some of the others just couldn't handle the added complexity of their characters ... that and I was finding more and more than I really didn't like the 4e ruleset -- so I ran a little Halloween "house of horrors" thing and took the PCs out of Keep on the Shadowfell. Then one of the other players took over and led us through a little "Ravenloftish" fairy tales gone horrible wrong side trek before dumping us back in the "real world" and sending us to Thunderspire Labyrinth, which is where we are now.
I remember during 3.5 days that people were always complaining about how non-casters were boring and didn't have enough to do aside from "whack whack whack" with their weapons ... so what does WotC do? They make everyone a spellcaster with all the added complexity and bookkeeping that that requires ... but the thing is that some people actually like playing a simple character that just goes "whack whack whack". There are several of those guys in my group. They're not happy with the way 4e works. They can't be bothered with all the marking and status effects and situational modifiers and things.
Just use power cards, dude. It makes it pretty easy to keep track of stuff if you ask me. Certainly FAR easier than in 3.5. Many 3.5 spells would not have fitted on a card, so constant rules-references were a necessity. Didn't someone suggest this to you in a previous thread already...?
Whereas before, spellcasters needed to constantly check spell descriptions in the book, now nobody does.
Just use power cards, dude. It makes it pretty easy to keep track of stuff if you ask me. Certainly FAR easier than in 3.5. Many 3.5 spells would not have fitted on a card, so constant rules-references were a necessity. Didn't someone suggest this to you in a previous thread already...?
Whereas before, spellcasters needed to constantly check spell descriptions in the book, now nobody does.
Dude. We do use power cards and they do not make it any easier. Not for some of us anyway.
I think the issue is that with 3.5, if you weren't playing a caster, you generally only encountered the game's complexity during character creation and advancement and you could avoid the rest of it if you never attempted to grapple or bull rush anything. Complexity during gameplay is even more optional in the SWSE system, it all depends on what feats and talents you select. With 4e, however, there's no avoiding the complexity during gameplay because every character is now a spellcaster and there's all sorts of situational modifiers, status effects, and whatnot that you have to remember to use or save against or whatever.
So the issue isn't whether 4e makes it any easier to play a spellcaster (you may be right on that account). The issue is that with 4e it is no longer possible to play a non-caster. This is probably the biggest issue that others in my group have with 4e (although it is but one of many, many issues that I have with it).
I'll admit, though, that I think the fact that we swap between two different game systems (4e and SWSE) every other week adds to the confusion, especially where they have similar rules that are implemented differently -- like just last session the guy who plays the cleric kept wanting to spend an action point to reactivate one of his spent encounter or daily powers and we kept having to remind him that what he was thinking of was spending a Force Point to reactivate a spent Force Power ...
I went down but managed to roll a natural 20 on my dying check, so back up I went and continued the fight. Three of the other PCs went down but two - the fighter and the cleric - were stabilized by the duergar (to take as slaves, I guess). The paladin died unfortunately. The last two PCs - the ranger and the mage - managed to survive as well, with the ranger on only 2 hit points for the last few rounds.
Anyway, so I rolled well when I really needed it tonight and it was a helluva lot of fun! Afterwards I commented that killing the BBEG with two crits surely amounted to a reward of an upgrade of my weapon to +2 for story reasons (such an epic fight surely would infuse the blade with more power or something ...). We'll see ... Next level I'm definitely taking Weapon Expertise though. If I can get the weapon up to +2, then that'll give me an increase of +3 at level 6 for a total attack modifier of +13.
I know it's all random luck and such but one thing that often seems to happen is that I roll lower when I get more situational bonuses - like from Combat Advantage or whatever. I seem to have more luck when I attack things on my own (but not always).
Anyway, one thing's for sure -- even if my barbarian struggles to hit things on a fairly regular basis, she seems pretty damn indestructible! Yes, luck is involved (both times I've been dying, I've rolled natural 20s), but those temporary hit points and my massive healing surge value (15) really help keep me in the fight.
GameScience Dice.
We've had problems similar to this in past campaigns... You have no idea how much of a difference a more accurately cut die seems to make. Now this is not likely the entire problem, but it definitely helps "even out the playing field". Dice these days really seem to be made with lower quality craftsmanship in general. There are many physics-related reasons why your rolls can be so consistently low, followed by critical hits. It's explained fully on the site.
Other than that, I definitely concur with the illusion of personal perception. I have a player who quit playing the game because he never thought he could hit anything. I showed him a chart of his hits and misses--in which hits were a vast majority--but sometimes I think we talk ourselves into an insurmountable level of frustration.
Here's a different angle:
GameScience Dice.
Thanks for the URL. I'll check it out.
Other than that, I definitely concur with the illusion of personal perception. I have a player who quit playing the game because he never thought he could hit anything. I showed him a chart of his hits and misses--in which hits were a vast majority--but sometimes I think we talk ourselves into an insurmountable level of frustration.
Yeah. Our group has developed some funny superstitions about our dice rolling and such.
One guy regularly rolls below 5 on his d20s. This same guy has suggested leaving all your dice with the 1s facing up so that side gathers dust and will fall face down when you roll it, giving you a natural 20 - sort of a "buttered toast always lands face down" theory, I suppose. It doesn't work though. But maybe that's because I knew it wouldn't ... :P ;).
We've also observed that whoever is GMing tends to roll better when they're GMing than when they're being a player, although even this isn't always true (the guy who GMs Star Wars doesn't seem to have any better luck, while the guy who GMs 4e may seem to be rolling better because the monsters in the WotC modules all have relatively high attack modifiers). In my case, I know I rolled better as GM but maybe that's because I was generally making more rolls overall anyway ...
I'll admit that it is undoubtedly mostly an issue of perception.
If I could get some dice that roll better more often, though, then I'd be all for it!
We're playing H2: Thunderspire Labyrinth, so he's just using whatever's in there.
My group got TPK'd in there. And in the following module too. Have fun.
My group got TPK'd in there. And in the following module too. Have fun.
Yeah we almost had a TPK (actually I think the GM was trying for a "capture everyone rather than kill them" scenario) but we managed to take out all the bad guys at the cost of only one PC. My barbarian may struggle to hit things quite often but she is nigh-on indestructible!
DISCLAIMER: The following is an irrational rant, which will no doubt be disproved as fallacious via a superior understanding of mathematics, but nevertheless I feel I must get this off my chest.
Speaking of which, 5th-level opponents will tend to have an AC in the 17-21 range. Your barbarian, with a +10 attack bonus, will hit the highest of these half the time.
In other words, your rant is mostly an issue of having rotten luck, not of opponents being difficult to hit.
Speaking of which, 5th-level opponents will tend to have an AC in the 17-21 range. Your barbarian, with a +10 attack bonus, will hit the highest of these half the time.
In other words, your rant is mostly an issue of having rotten luck, not of opponents being difficult to hit.
I dunno. I regularly roll in that range only to be told I've missed. It's frustrating, especially when it happens with a daily power.
Then your DM has pumped the monsters up or uses higher-level monsters regularly...
We're playing H2: Thunderspire Labyrinth, so he's just using whatever's in there.
Based on my own experiences DMing, I know that WotC regularly makes their own adventures insanely difficult, so that could easily be what the problem is but still ...
Regardless of my personal experiences, though, why is it so difficult to boost your attack modifier in 4e?
Because 4E is based around a somewhat-meticulously calculated balance. If you could have +20 to hit at level 5, then nothing would be a threat. There are a lot of ways to get little bonuses, however: weapon expertise, combat advantage (flanking), bonuses from leader powers, charging, magic weapons
Oh, I agree ... having +20 at level 5 wouldn't be much fun. But what about +12 or +13? Just enough to give me a slightly better than 50-50 chance of hitting.
Besides, I reckon balance is overrated anyway. IMO, the 4e devs sacrificed too much of the fun on the altar of balance when they were making the game.
(of which you should probably have a +2 by level 5), etc.
Yes, I probably should ... but should doesn't mean I will. It's all dependent on the GM / what's in the adventure.
I've found that PCs always end up behind where they should be with magic items when playing WotC adventures - either because they don't find the secret treasure horde, don't kill the guys with the cool treasure, don't want / can't use what's been given out (which is an even worse problem in 4e, if you ask me, since PCs have less versatility in terms of switching out different kinds of weapons/implements), or there simply isn't enough treasure to begin with ...
This is evidenced by the fact that whenever a new PC joins the group, they always have much better gear than the rest of the PCs. Maybe this is just a problem that our group has, I don't know, but that's what my experience has been (both as a DM and a player).
And, to be honest, the fact that D&D PCs are still somewhat dependent on magic items to be effective is annoying. IThe previews had given me the impression that they were doing away with the "Christmas tree" effect but they didn't really. They might have made it so you only really need three magic items and everything else is just window dressing but the fact that you still need any at all is bothersome. But I digress ...
Yes. I'm hard to please. I expected too much of 4e and I am still sorely disappointed.
As for dealing with the magic item effect, there are certain house rules that have been suggested on the house rules forum. Basically, remove all enhancement bonuses from all weapons, armor, and neck items, and just automatically give players a +1 bonus every 5 levels (3/8/13/18/23/28). Items would retain their powers, properties, and critical hit bonuses.
The fact that your DM is shorting you on gear is not a problem with 4e, it's a problem with (surprise!) the DM.
A 50-50 chance to hit is typical, even fully 'geared up'. This is where teamwork comes in. You should have a flanking buddy at the VERY least. Unlike previous editions, nobody can be a one man show; you all have to work together.
It IS a problem with the WotC official adventures that they don't have enough magic items in them. It's assumed (around here, at least) that the DM will fill in the missing treasure with more according to the treasure parcel system outlined in the DMG. If he's not giving you proper items, you might want to bring to his attention that the math of 4E only works if the players have the proper bonuses.
Yeah. The thing is that he doesn't spend much time on prep work. I think he probably just looks over the upcoming adventures shortly before game time. The rest of his free time is spent parenting or playing WoW.
As for dealing with the magic item effect, there are certain house rules that have been suggested on the house rules forum. Basically, remove all enhancement bonuses from all weapons, armor, and neck items, and just automatically give players a +1 bonus every 5 levels (3/8/13/18/23/28).
I actually wanted to do that when I was DMing, but my players vetoed the idea. The rest of them like the idea of getting magic items with pluses on them. That's part of what makes it D&D for them.
Yes, they did do away with the 'christmas tree'. You no longer need Rings of Protection, various doodads to boost your stats, cloaks of resistance, your wizards and clerics aren't walking around with bags of wands and scrolls, you aren't hunting for books of permanent stat boosts, and so forth.
I dunno ...
The fact that your DM is shorting you on gear is not a problem with 4e, it's a problem with (surprise!) the DM.
If the DM still has to work hard to make sure everyone has the right amount of gear, then I'd say there still is too much dependence on that gear to be effective ... There may not be a "Christmas tree" anymore, but there's still "magic item dependence". You shouldn't have to have a +x anything to be effective ...
A 50-50 chance to hit is typical, even fully 'geared up'. This is where teamwork comes in. You should have a flanking buddy at the VERY least. Unlike previous editions, nobody can be a one man show; you all have to work together.
Yes. I think this is something that still hasn't quite sunk in for my group yet. They sucked at teamwork when I was DMing 3.5 and it showed. They sucked at teamwork when I was DMing 4e and it showed. And even I suck at teamwork now that I'm just playing instead ... we all just want to be effective on our own. So perhaps 4e isn't the right game system for us? I know it's not the right game system for me.
Last night, after my barbarian missed for the third round while trying to attack a mage who was prone, no less, I couldn't help but wonder why it's so difficult to boost your attack modifier with 4e. This isn't the first time my PC has struggled to hit what should be a "squishy" baddie, and I know it's not just my dice ...
My barbarian is 5th level and has a +10 attack modifier. Admittedly, a 3.5 barbarian at the same level with the same ability scores and a similar +1 magic weapon would also have a +10 attack modifier, but for some reason I feel like it wasn't as hard to hit things in 3.5. Maybe it's because many 4e monsters have very high defenses relative to the PCs.
I'm not the only one in the group who struggles to hit the monsters (whereas they hardly ever seem to have any trouble hitting us), and I guess what's frustrating is that, while some of the others aren't frontline fighters so it makes some sense that they can't hit as well, my PC is a warrior type. She's supposed to be good at hitting. Sure, when she does hit, she hits pretty hard, but she seems to miss quite regularly.
So I was looking through the feats and stuff and, while there are heaps of feats for increasing damage, there's really only one feat I can take to boost my attack beyond what I've got already and that's Weapon Expertise (which is in the PHB2, no less, so if you were only playing with the PHB1 you'd be out of luck). After that, I'm pretty much just stuck with waiting for my half-level modifier to increase or the arrival of a better magic weapon (or the upgrade of my existing one).
You wouldn't be a barbarian if you were only playing with PH1.
;)
In regards to your problem, maybe you could get one of your groupmates to play a battlecleric? That would certainly help with your problem, being the beneficiary of Righteous Brand.
Here's how I do it, as a DM: I've got a sheet of paper on which I track the total XP that I've given out, as well as the parcels I've given out. For each level, I write out the numbers 1-10, and after each combat, I roll a few d10s, cross out the rolled numbers (re-roll if I've already crossed out that number), and then hand out the appropriate parcels, as listed in the DMG. For picking appropriate items, I just figure out who's got the least amount of interesting items, and pick something relatively appropriate. Thankfully, the Adventurer's Vault has a big list of items by level, so I just scan that and pick out something that sounds neat. In the end, I don't really have to prep much before-hand.
This is the sort of thing I do when I'm DM, but I can't speak for the guy who is DMing now. Like I said, I don't think he does any prep outside of just looking over the upcoming encounters and running them as they are.
You wouldn't be a barbarian if you were only playing with PH1.
;)
Uh yes ... yes, that's true. Very astute of you. But what I meant was that if someone in general is just playing any warrior type character using only the PHB1, they won't be able to use Weapon Expertise (which used to be Weapon Focus, but for some reason they changed even that to boost damage instead of attacks ... so then they had to reintroduce it in the next PHB as a different feat ... :rolleyes
In regards to your problem, maybe you could get one of your groupmates to play a battlecleric? That would certainly help with your problem, being the beneficiary of Righteous Brand.
We have got a battle cleric and he has even more trouble hitting than I do. With him, it really is mostly bad luck, though ... he regularly rolls 1s and 2s and the like.
We have got a battle cleric and he has even more trouble hitting than I do. With him, it really is mostly bad luck, though ... he regularly rolls 1s and 2s and the like.
new dice maybe :D
I do feel your pain though. I've had mixed games with 4e some where we all keep missing the same blasted kobold again and again lol and what should be a short combat seems to go on for hours. Others where we've just owned the whole lot in a couple of rounds. Sometimes it's luck, sometimes it's a monster a couple of levels higher than us and others it's lack of CA or some other buff that increases our ability to hit. It IS very frustrating though when you repeatedly miss a target especially on a daily... I missed with sleep yesterday which sucked royally.
Anyhoo, if it's not the dice and others are having trouble hitting too, then maybe have a word with the DM and suggest he tinkers with the monster levels I think people have said that WoTC do make hard modules, and you want the game to be fun. Or grab the weapon expertise feat if you're allowed or keep your fingers crossed for a +2 weapon in the very near future.
Good luck, though I hope your hit rate improves as it can severely hamper the game's enjoyment if you miss nearly every time. (Esp when the two bladed ranger keeps rolling criticals... but that's another story ;) )
But what I meant was that if someone in general is just playing any warrior type character using only the PHB1, they won't be able to use Weapon Expertise
With just PHB1, Fighters get +1 to atk from their Talent, Rogues get +1 to hit with their daggers, and along with Archer Rangers their primary to-hit stat is basically their most loaded stat (damage, AC, to hit). Melee Rangers split off Str but Twin Strike overcomes that anyways with up to an effective +25% to hit.
Hm, +10 to hit... 18 Str for +4, +2 from level 5, +1 from +1 Weapon Enhancement, +3 weapon for +10?
vs 14+lvl AC so vs AC 19.
That's a 60% chance of hitting. With Weapon Expertise, 65%, with CA that's 70%, with WE and CA that's 75%.
(18 Str from buying 16 then +2 Racial.)
Of course, this pales in comparison with a rogue starting with 20 Dex, a +1 dagger, dagger talent, and weapon expertise (2+5+1+1+1+3 = +13). :P
Of course, this pales in comparison with a rogue starting with 20 Dex, a +1 dagger, dagger talent, and weapon expertise (2+5+1+1+1+3 = +13). :P
Agreed, only moreso since any melee rogue worth his salt will be getting Combat Advantage for that oh so important Sneak Attack. So it's really 2+5+1+1+1+3+2 = +15. Rogues are the accuracy kings of 4e, or were until the Avengers came around.
Off topic, writing this post somehow reminded me of the movie clue a bit. "Even if you were right that would be 1+1+2+1, not 1+2+1+1." :P
new dice maybe :D
LOL. Yeah. Although I did roll about five natural 20s last night ... it's just none of them were on attack rolls. :P
I do feel your pain though. I've had mixed games with 4e some where we all keep missing the same blasted kobold again and again lol and what should be a short combat seems to go on for hours. Others where we've just owned the whole lot in a couple of rounds. Sometimes it's luck, sometimes it's a monster a couple of levels higher than us and others it's lack of CA or some other buff that increases our ability to hit. It IS very frustrating though when you repeatedly miss a target especially on a daily... I missed with sleep yesterday which sucked royally.
Yeah. Missing with a daily is probably one of the least fun things in the game.
Anyhoo, if it's not the dice and others are having trouble hitting too, then maybe have a word with the DM and suggest he tinkers with the monster levels I think people have said that WoTC do make hard modules, and you want the game to be fun. Or grab the weapon expertise feat if you're allowed or keep your fingers crossed for a +2 weapon in the very near future.
It's either that or we all need new dice.
I am planning on getting Weapon Expertise at 6th level. And I'm hoping to upgrade my sword to a +2 at some point. Not really sure how to go about doing that exactly, although I know it can be done. I guess I'll have to talk to the DM. But I know the others are pretty low on magic items. I've only got some good stuff because my PC came in at level 3 after I stopped DMing and the other guy took over.
Good luck, though I hope your hit rate improves as it can severely hamper the game's enjoyment if you miss nearly every time. (Esp when the two bladed ranger keeps rolling criticals... but that's another story ;) )
Yes. Thanks. I haven't missed every time but it sure happens more than I'd like it to ...
Last night, after my barbarian missed for the third round while trying to attack a mage who was prone, no less, I couldn't help but wonder why it's so difficult to boost your attack modifier with 4e. This isn't the first time my PC has struggled to hit what should be a "squishy" baddie, and I know it's not just my dice ...
My barbarian is 5th level and has a +10 attack modifier. Admittedly, a 3.5 barbarian at the same level with the same ability scores and a similar +1 magic weapon would also have a +10 attack modifier, but for some reason I feel like it wasn't as hard to hit things in 3.5. Maybe it's because many 4e monsters have very high defenses relative to the PCs.
As to the prone target, you should have Combat Advantage, too. That is an additional +2. If you were still missing often (unless due to bad rolls), then something was being done wrong. That is a +12 to your attack roll. There are a couple of AC25 in the adventure, but they are either elite or solo creatures. I think it is pretty much assumed that you will be needing help on them, even if they become prone.
Agreed, only moreso since any melee rogue worth his salt will be getting Combat Advantage for that oh so important Sneak Attack. So it's really 2+5+1+1+1+3+2 = +15. Rogues are the accuracy kings of 4e, or were until the Avengers came around.
And started rolling all of their attackd twice. I can feel the WoW player in me screaming "broken! nerf!" but I'll refrain.
I haven't gone through the PHB2 much, although I do own it. So I'm not the best source of information for Barbarians (now if we were talking Starlocks, I could be of help), but here are a few things I would do to help somewhat.
1) Seek to gain combat advantage whenever and wherever you can.
2) Take powers than can make enemies easier to hit prior to using a daily.
3) Stay as close, if not adjacent, to your cleric as often as possible for Righteous Brand goodness. Ask for it if he/she isn't "getting it."
4) Do not blow a daily unless you have been buffed considerably to hit if at all possible (see #3).
Also, you may have to break the striker mold somewhat and be more reactive to your party than proactive. When we first started playing 4E (we were also very used to all being one-man shows in 3.x), despite being a striker, I would delay my actions until the end of the round to see where my damage/status effects would be the most effective and most likely to hit. I quickly learned my parties tendencies and as such, I was able to take Improved Initiative at level 4 and be more proactive with the knowledge that I had a pretty good idea what the other PCs were going to do and not "waste" actions.
Case in point:
Our very first session in the Shadowfell Keep module, our party got split up and it ended up being myself and the Battle Cleric vs. Irontooth while the Fighter, Rogue and Wizard were on the other side of the cavern trying to get through the kobolds. The cleric went first in the initiative order and ended up using Cascade of Light on 'tooth and missing. I then proceeded to Dreadful Word/Prophecy of Zhudan him two segments later which caused the cleric to now change his tactics. He now never uses Cascade of Light until after I Dreadful Word unless he has no other recourse.
4E does take some adjustment when you're used to the 3.5 ruleset. But it's not that bad, you just have to try new things, be willing to communicate/work with your party instead of around them and most of all be patient.
So that means if you're having a problem hitting, there are only two possibilities:
A) You had a run of bad luck
B) Your GM is making you fight things tougher than you should
As for the second part of your post, "Why is it so hard to increase accuracy?" The game is balanced around the 50% to hit mark. You will hit easy enemies more than 50% of the time, and tough enemies (solos and elites) less than 50% of the time. If they make bonuses to hit too easy to acquire, that will skew the balance (easy opponents become a cakewalk and tough opponents become "normal".)
My players work like hell to get whatever minor bonuses they can to attacks and damage. You should see how they go at it, they're the best. They're level 10, with about +2/3 weapons, so much of the time they're able to manage a +16 once they get combat advantage. Monsters at their level have around a 24-26 AC, so they hit a little more than half the time. And that's if they're attacking AC.
I'm just making a guess, but like someone say about, maybe there's no teamwork.
My players work like hell to get whatever minor bonuses they can to attacks and damage. You should see how they go at it, they're the best. They're level 10, with about +2/3 weapons, so much of the time they're able to manage a +16 once they get combat advantage. Monsters at their level have around a 24-26 AC, so they hit a little more than half the time. And that's if they're attacking AC.
Great point. I actually really dislike attacking AC in 4E, which is why I'm very glad I'm a Starlock. Hell, I watch the Rogue (he's optimized but rolls terribly), Fighter (not very good with the mechanics of the class, but he tries) and Cleric miss more on average than myself or the Wizard and I feel bad for them. I'm by no means optimized, but I've set myself up to be very good at attacking Will defense and that's my bread-and-butter. I fall back on Reflex defense should Will defense prove to be too high to attack reliably/consistantly. Ideally, being able to attack every defense type is quality but is hard for most classes to muster.
Ironically, my dream character is an Eladrin TacLord/Spiral Tactician/Legendary General from an RP and metagaming perspective. But when I look through the powers and seeing everything vs. AC it makes me cry irl.
My barbarian...
I dunno. I regularly roll in that range only to be told I've missed. It's frustrating, especially when it happens with a daily power.
Yeah. Missing with a daily is probably one of the least fun things in the game.
Really?
Did you notice that ALL the barbarian daily attacks are "Miss: half damage"?
Did you realize that you get the special effect that ALL the barbarian dailys grant even if you do not hit?
Playing a barbarian I do not care if I hit with a daily or not. I know I will deal damage, I will enter the rage (unlocks damage bonus from feats), and will get some super cool effect from the daily. Hitting with a daily does not really matter for a barbarian! Actually it is worse not to hit with an at-will because there is no "Miss: half damage".
And BTW: a Potion of Clarity costs 50 GP and gives you a re-roll.
And you can't blame the system that you are not able to hit with a +10 bonus, especially when CA gets you to +12, when the average enemy has an AC of 19. You hit on a 7!
Besides you should have +11 to hit with (Level +2, Str +4, feat +1, prof. +3, enh. +1). And if you are really worried about hitting, why aren't you already at Str +5? A 17 starting score before racial adjustment is not that expensive to buy - and Str is your primary stat. And you should charge with Howling strike which is another +1 on attack and would bring you to +13 - with combat advantage +15.
You could hit the average enemy with CA on a 4!
And I haven't even mentioned that you could already have a +2 weapon, which would let you hit on a 3!
Maybe it's just a matter of perception? If you have about a 60% hit rate (which is probably closer to the mark than 50/50), that still feels like much less to many players. People tend to keep track of negatives more than they do positives. Also, if due to bad luck it's often your dailies and encounter powers that fall in the 40% category of misses, your character will be less effective than if they are mostly in the 60% category of hits.
Yes. It's undoubtedly mostly a matter of perception, if not completely so. I just felt like complaining to see what people would say. LOL.
Really?
Did you notice that ALL the barbarian daily attacks are "Miss: half damage"?
Did you realize that you get the special effect that ALL the barbarian dailys grant even if you do not hit?
Playing a barbarian I do not care if I hit with a daily or not. I know I will deal damage, I will enter the rage (unlocks damage bonus from feats), and will get some super cool effect from the daily. Hitting with a daily does not really matter for a barbarian! Actually it is worse not to hit with an at-will because there is no "Miss: half damage".
I'd rather deal full damage than half damage. 4e monsters all have too many hit points so the faster you can kill them and move on the better. Sure, dealing half damage is better than dealing no damage, and I could roll all 1s even if I am doing full damage, but I think it's more a matter of principle ...
And BTW: a Potion of Clarity costs 50 GP and gives you a re-roll.
Right. I'll just add a few of those to my character sheet and subtract the right amount of gold from the party's stocks. Never mind if there aren't any available in any of the magic item shops ...
And I haven't even mentioned that you could already have a +2 weapon, which would let you hit on a 3!
You have now. And again, I'll just add this to my sheet since I should have one.
[RANT]One of the things I hated the most about coming onto the forums and asking for help with the last edition was that someone would always come on and post, "Oh just get x, y or z magic item! That'll solve your problems!"
Sure, maybe in a computer game where you can just cheat and give yourself whatever magic item you want ... but while it may, in theory, solve all my problems to get x, y or z magic item, whether or not I actually will get it is not a sure thing.
The only way to be absolutely sure I get all the right equipment for my level would be to make a new character.
Otherwise, it is entirely up to the whims of the DM and/or the vagaries of the adventure in which we are playing.[/RANT]
Was the mage a Duergar? Because their AC is usually higher than any of their other defenses.
Yes it was. :embarrass
But...any 5th-level Character with Ritual Casting can get Brew Potion, and then a Potion of Clarity, and anyone can get a +2 Magic Item (as long as their DM isn't doing it wrong :S).
Regarding brewing potions - I'll mention it to the guys who got the Ritual Caster feat for free. No one's really doing anything with rituals in our group. I think it's because our pacing has been too fast for them. We just don't really ever give ourselves enough downtime.
As for the magic item, OK anyone can get one but not necessarily whenever they want ... right? Don't get me wrong, I'd love a +2 weapon! But I feel like everyone's making it sound a lot easier to get magic items than it really is (and possibly should be).
I'll concede that the 4e devs may have done away with the Christmas tree effect, but they did not get rid of the "ye olde magick item shoppe" mentality ... eg. the "Just go and get x, y or z item" that I mentioned before. Not every campaign has a magic item shop or convenient monster treasure box around every corner where you can "just get" a particular item.
I know that 4e explicitly tells DMs to ask their players for magic item wishlists and to customize treasure packages so that players get the things they want, but as a DM, I don't like that idea. As a player, I don't really like it either but the powergamer in me probably does ...
That sucks that a Duergar just happened to be there, just to tip you over the edge. That kind of "coincidental" BS always fries my noodle, so yeah, I definitely feel for ya.
I don't think it was a case of the duergar just happening to be there ... we are currently assaulting the duergar fortress in the Thunderspire Labyrinth adventure, so I wasn't at all surprised that he was there. I was surprised (and frustrated) that I was having so much trouble hitting a guy who was supposed to be "squishier" than his more heavily armored compatriots.
Hmm...assuming 2 from half lvl, 4 for ability, 3 proficiency, 1 enhancment, 1 from charging, 2 from C.A, 1 from feat...thats an easy +14 to hit for a decent Barbarian. Somethings wrong here. I havent found hitting to be that hard when my group did that adventure. Its either bad luck or your DM is messing with the AC.
I haven't got Weapon Expertise yet. I'll definitely be taking that next level, though (6th level).
I can assure you, though, that the DM is not messing with anything. For one thing, he's not a fan of "messing" with the rules at all (when I was DMing, he was always the most resistant to any changes/house rules I wanted to institute), and for another, he is a big procrastinator and is addicted to WoW, so he does very little prep work. I'd be surprised if he spends even an hour on prep work before each session ...
So yeah ... I guess that leaves bad luck and poor team tactics.
I'll admit that I'm (mostly) having fun with the barbarian. It's a change from the type of characters I usually play (stealthy skill monkeys). My next character, though, is going to be a bard or a warlord, and I'm going to take over the job of whipping the group into shape in terms of teamwork and tactics (everyone always says I'm the most tactical-minded player in the group, so I may as well put that to use as a player and not just when I'm DMing ... ;)).
Yeah. The thing is that he doesn't spend much time on prep work. I think he probably just looks over the upcoming adventures shortly before game time. The rest of his free time is spent parenting or playing WoW.
I don't do much prep work either but I do try to make sure my PC's get what they need. Does anyone in your party have a +2 item because the first item of that calibur should have been in your level 2 treasure parcels and there should have been 2 in your level 3, and 3 in your level 4. In other words there's almost no reason why every member of your party shouldn't have at least 1 +2 magic item by 5th level.
I actually wanted to do that when I was DMing, but my players vetoed the idea. The rest of them like the idea of getting magic items with pluses on them. That's part of what makes it D&D for them.
For me as well. Plus there are quite a few magic items who's effects depend on their enchancement bonus. I just try to make sure my players get enough items to keep them at about the right level of magic threshold.
If the DM still has to work hard to make sure everyone has the right amount of gear, then I'd say there still is too much dependence on that gear to be effective ... There may not be a "Christmas tree" anymore, but there's still "magic item dependence". You shouldn't have to have a +x anything to be effective ...
It's not hard. Treasure in all the previous editions was way harder. Practically a cakewalk in comparison in 4e.
Yes. I think this is something that still hasn't quite sunk in for my group yet. They sucked at teamwork when I was DMing 3.5 and it showed. They sucked at teamwork when I was DMing 4e and it showed. And even I suck at teamwork now that I'm just playing instead ... we all just want to be effective on our own. So perhaps 4e isn't the right game system for us? I know it's not the right game system for me.
Maybe. 4e is really designed such that teamwork is critical to party success. I don't expect you'll ever find yourselves in a position where any player is so individually awesome that their teammates no longer matter. If this is something you're looking for, you might want to consider going back to 3.5 where this was a lot easier.
Oh, I agree ... having +20 at level 5 wouldn't be much fun. But what about +12 or +13? Just enough to give me a slightly better than 50-50 chance of hitting.
That's what situation modifiers are for. Combat advantage, bonuses from leaders and powers. It's not hard to get WELL over that 50-50 with a little effort from your teammates.
Besides, I reckon balance is overrated anyway. IMO, the 4e devs sacrificed too much of the fun on the altar of balance when they were making the game.
I dunno I've had many unhappy experiences playing 3.0/3.5 where I felt like my character was almost useless while some of the other pcs were superhuman in comparison. Doesn't happen so much in 4e.
Yes, I probably should ... but should doesn't mean I will. It's all dependent on the GM / what's in the adventure.
I think a lot of people on these forums tend to forget this simple fact.
I've found that PCs always end up behind where they should be with magic items when playing WotC adventures - either because they don't find the secret treasure horde, don't kill the guys with the cool treasure, don't want / can't use what's been given out (which is an even worse problem in 4e, if you ask me, since PCs have less versatility in terms of switching out different kinds of weapons/implements), or there simply isn't enough treasure to begin with ...
This is kind of meant to be true with the parcel system as well but rarely played that way. It's designed to be a guideline on how much treasure to put into the adventure during the planning stage but there is no guarantee that the players will find it all. I think in many games (including my own) the DM's give out every item in the list each level which results in quite powerful characters but the system was not really designed around the player being entitled to all those items.
This is evidenced by the fact that whenever a new PC joins the group, they always have much better gear than the rest of the PCs. Maybe this is just a problem that our group has, I don't know, but that's what my experience has been (both as a DM and a player).
I recently changed the rules of my games so that new pcs start with only Magic items with a plus equivalent to the magic threshold at their level, not their choice of items. I might then bestow some items on the pc before he enters play, but no free selection of your wish list from the book.
And, to be honest, the fact that D&D PCs are still somewhat dependent on magic items to be effective is annoying.
It's one of those things that's part of the D&D legacy and a very deliberate design choice. Obviously wizards has made systems where this isn't true. (SW Saga) Wizards designed it this way because magic items are so much a part of the D&D experience.
The previews had given me the impression that they were doing away with the "Christmas tree" effect but they didn't really. They might have made it so you only really need three magic items and everything else is just window dressing but the fact that you still need any at all is bothersome. But I digress ...
You only really suffer if you fall too far behind the "magic threshold" on your attacks and damages. Every other part of equipment is just there to give you new options.
Yes. I'm hard to please. I expected too much of 4e and I am still sorely disappointed.
Not me, I LOVE 4e. Previous to my 4E campaign I ran an incredibly complicated SW:Saga game where I ran two seperate parties on seperate nights of the week on the same game world. One party was good, the other evil. All throughout the game their actions would influence the events the other party experienced. It was an incredible challenge for me as a DM made even more challenging by the lack of DM support material for saga. (Threats of the Galaxy had not even been released yet) I made nearly everything for that game from scratch, when it came to npcs and foes. I put in about 3-4 hours of prep each week for each party. It was all worth it when they came together for their final epic battle though.
By comparison 4e is a breeze. I can put together a whole night's worth of adventuring in just a couple hours of prep and can easily just make it up on the fly if I don't have time to prep. Beats making my players wait an hour while I hand craft the enemy they're going to fight when they go and find trouble I didn't prepare for.
I don't do much prep work either but I do try to make sure my PC's get what they need. Does anyone in your party have a +2 item because the first item of that calibur should have been in your level 2 treasure parcels and there should have been 2 in your level 3, and 3 in your level 4. In other words there's almost no reason why every member of your party shouldn't have at least 1 +2 magic item by 5th level.
Off the top of my head, the ranger has a +2 fireburst bow and I'm pretty sure that's the only +2 item any of us have. He's also got a +1 amulet and some bracers.
The fighter has an intelligent bloodthirsty axe but it's only +1. I'm pretty sure that's the only magic item he has. His player doesn't care about magic items though.
The cleric has +1 armor and a +1 holy symbol but he's a battle cleric so the holy symbol is virtually useless to him and he has just got a regular non-magical weapon, so that's probably partly why he has trouble hitting things.
The wizard has a +1 orb (if he hadn't angered a certain barbarian woman, he would've had a +2 orb by now but it got thrown into a 300 ft deep crevice ...). I'm not sure what else he has as he joined the group at level 3.
I'm not sure what the paladin has because his player just joined the group, so he started at 5th level. He built the PC using the Character Builder, so it's probably all right.
That just leaves me. My PC came in at third level and hasn't gotten any new items since then. She's got a +1 bloodclaw fullblade, +1 hide armor of cleansing, boots of adept charging, and a +1 cloak of the walking wounded.
It's not hard. Treasure in all the previous editions was way harder. Practically a cakewalk in comparison in 4e.
I realize that. But what I'm saying is that I don't think the DM bothers to fiddle with treasure parcels at all. I'm serious. He as much as admits that he doesn't do much, if any, prep.
Maybe. 4e is really designed such that teamwork is critical to party success. I don't expect you'll ever find yourselves in a position where any player is so individually awesome that their teammates no longer matter. If this is something you're looking for, you might want to consider going back to 3.5 where this was a lot easier.
I have considered going back to 3.5 (once upon a time I said "Never again!" but more recently I've begun to soften my stance). However, SWSE is my ruleset of choice and I am currently working on converting it to a fantasy game for when I am ready to GM again.
That's what situation modifiers are for. Combat advantage, bonuses from leaders and powers. It's not hard to get WELL over that 50-50 with a little effort from your teammates.
Yeah. I'm beginning to get that. I've been playing with the majority of the guys in the group for about two years now, some longer, and we still aren't good at the teamwork thing. They were never any good at it when I was the DM (with both 3.5 and 4e), we're not any good at it with SWSE (which one of the other guys is GMing), and we're still not good at it with 4e (which yet another of the guys is GMing).
I dunno I've had many unhappy experiences playing 3.0/3.5 where I felt like my character was almost useless while some of the other pcs were superhuman in comparison. Doesn't happen so much in 4e.
I have had that experience as well, but I think things like using point buy instead of rolling and stuff like that can go a long way to alleviating character power disparity ... and I feel like the devs just went a little too far in the opposite direction with 4e.
I think a lot of people on these forums tend to forget this simple fact.
I think so too.
It's one of those things that's part of the D&D legacy and a very deliberate design choice. Obviously wizards has made systems where this isn't true. (SW Saga) Wizards designed it this way because magic items are so much a part of the D&D experience.
Yes. I love the low magic feel of the SWSE rules and that's partly why I'm converting them. It's mainly just because I love the system so much. I think it's the best system WotC has done and I really wish they'd made 4e along the same lines.
Not me, I LOVE 4e. Previous to my 4E campaign I ran an incredibly complicated SW:Saga game where I ran two seperate parties on seperate nights of the week on the same game world. One party was good, the other evil. All throughout the game their actions would influence the events the other party experienced. It was an incredible challenge for me as a DM made even more challenging by the lack of DM support material for saga. (Threats of the Galaxy had not even been released yet) I made nearly everything for that game from scratch, when it came to npcs and foes. I put in about 3-4 hours of prep each week for each party. It was all worth it when they came together for their final epic battle though.
Sounds interesting. I hear you on the lack of GM support though. The guy who is running our actual SWSE game is aborting the current campaign - we're at 11th level now - because he hasn't got the material and doesn't want to spend all his free time coming up with it, so he's starting us over at the beginning because he can use some prefab stuff for the lower levels. We're all sorely disappointed but hey ... there's just not much out there for SWSE at the higher levels. He also made it harder for himself by deciding he was tired of "save the world" campaigns and chose not to go with the DoD adventure path (but he used a little bit of it early on, so now he feels like he can't use any of it without making it feel repetitive).
At least with my conversion, since it's going to be fantasy, I'll be able to use a lot of D&D 3.5 stuff for the higher levels.
By comparison 4e is a breeze. I can put together a whole night's worth of adventuring in just a couple hours of prep and can easily just make it up on the fly if I don't have time to prep. Beats making my players wait an hour while I hand craft the enemy they're going to fight when they go and find trouble I didn't prepare for.
I'll admit that 4e is much easier to DM, but I think it's a lot harder to play. The devs kept going on about how much easier they'd made the game, but I don't think they've really made it any easier overall. They've just shifted a good chunk of the complexity from one side of the DM screen to the other, and I know that a good number of the guys in my group (myself included) aren't particularly happy about that.
I remember during 3.5 days that people were always complaining about how non-casters were boring and didn't have enough to do aside from "whack whack whack" with their weapons ... so what does WotC do? They make everyone a spellcaster with all the added complexity and bookkeeping that that requires ... but the thing is that some people actually like playing a simple character that just goes "whack whack whack". There are several of those guys in my group. They're not happy with the way 4e works. They can't be bothered with all the marking and status effects and situational modifiers and things.
We're just going along with it because that's what the GM wanted to run.
Basically what happened was that I started a 4e campaign with Keep on the Shadowfell. They didn't even get all the way through the first floor of the keep before I just couldn't take it anymore -- while being DM was a lot easier, because being a player was so much harder, I found myself still doing most of the work because some of the others just couldn't handle the added complexity of their characters ... that and I was finding more and more than I really didn't like the 4e ruleset -- so I ran a little Halloween "house of horrors" thing and took the PCs out of Keep on the Shadowfell. Then one of the other players took over and led us through a little "Ravenloftish" fairy tales gone horrible wrong side trek before dumping us back in the "real world" and sending us to Thunderspire Labyrinth, which is where we are now.
I remember during 3.5 days that people were always complaining about how non-casters were boring and didn't have enough to do aside from "whack whack whack" with their weapons ... so what does WotC do? They make everyone a spellcaster with all the added complexity and bookkeeping that that requires ... but the thing is that some people actually like playing a simple character that just goes "whack whack whack". There are several of those guys in my group. They're not happy with the way 4e works. They can't be bothered with all the marking and status effects and situational modifiers and things.
Just use power cards, dude. It makes it pretty easy to keep track of stuff if you ask me. Certainly FAR easier than in 3.5. Many 3.5 spells would not have fitted on a card, so constant rules-references were a necessity. Didn't someone suggest this to you in a previous thread already...?
Whereas before, spellcasters needed to constantly check spell descriptions in the book, now nobody does.
Just use power cards, dude. It makes it pretty easy to keep track of stuff if you ask me. Certainly FAR easier than in 3.5. Many 3.5 spells would not have fitted on a card, so constant rules-references were a necessity. Didn't someone suggest this to you in a previous thread already...?
Whereas before, spellcasters needed to constantly check spell descriptions in the book, now nobody does.
Dude. We do use power cards and they do not make it any easier. Not for some of us anyway.
I think the issue is that with 3.5, if you weren't playing a caster, you generally only encountered the game's complexity during character creation and advancement and you could avoid the rest of it if you never attempted to grapple or bull rush anything. Complexity during gameplay is even more optional in the SWSE system, it all depends on what feats and talents you select. With 4e, however, there's no avoiding the complexity during gameplay because every character is now a spellcaster and there's all sorts of situational modifiers, status effects, and whatnot that you have to remember to use or save against or whatever.
So the issue isn't whether 4e makes it any easier to play a spellcaster (you may be right on that account). The issue is that with 4e it is no longer possible to play a non-caster. This is probably the biggest issue that others in my group have with 4e (although it is but one of many, many issues that I have with it).
I'll admit, though, that I think the fact that we swap between two different game systems (4e and SWSE) every other week adds to the confusion, especially where they have similar rules that are implemented differently -- like just last session the guy who plays the cleric kept wanting to spend an action point to reactivate one of his spent encounter or daily powers and we kept having to remind him that what he was thinking of was spending a Force Point to reactivate a spent Force Power ...
I went down but managed to roll a natural 20 on my dying check, so back up I went and continued the fight. Three of the other PCs went down but two - the fighter and the cleric - were stabilized by the duergar (to take as slaves, I guess). The paladin died unfortunately. The last two PCs - the ranger and the mage - managed to survive as well, with the ranger on only 2 hit points for the last few rounds.
Anyway, so I rolled well when I really needed it tonight and it was a helluva lot of fun! Afterwards I commented that killing the BBEG with two crits surely amounted to a reward of an upgrade of my weapon to +2 for story reasons (such an epic fight surely would infuse the blade with more power or something ...). We'll see ... Next level I'm definitely taking Weapon Expertise though. If I can get the weapon up to +2, then that'll give me an increase of +3 at level 6 for a total attack modifier of +13.
I know it's all random luck and such but one thing that often seems to happen is that I roll lower when I get more situational bonuses - like from Combat Advantage or whatever. I seem to have more luck when I attack things on my own (but not always).
Anyway, one thing's for sure -- even if my barbarian struggles to hit things on a fairly regular basis, she seems pretty damn indestructible! Yes, luck is involved (both times I've been dying, I've rolled natural 20s), but those temporary hit points and my massive healing surge value (15) really help keep me in the fight.
GameScience Dice.
We've had problems similar to this in past campaigns... You have no idea how much of a difference a more accurately cut die seems to make. Now this is not likely the entire problem, but it definitely helps "even out the playing field". Dice these days really seem to be made with lower quality craftsmanship in general. There are many physics-related reasons why your rolls can be so consistently low, followed by critical hits. It's explained fully on the site.
Other than that, I definitely concur with the illusion of personal perception. I have a player who quit playing the game because he never thought he could hit anything. I showed him a chart of his hits and misses--in which hits were a vast majority--but sometimes I think we talk ourselves into an insurmountable level of frustration.
Here's a different angle:
GameScience Dice.
Thanks for the URL. I'll check it out.
Other than that, I definitely concur with the illusion of personal perception. I have a player who quit playing the game because he never thought he could hit anything. I showed him a chart of his hits and misses--in which hits were a vast majority--but sometimes I think we talk ourselves into an insurmountable level of frustration.
Yeah. Our group has developed some funny superstitions about our dice rolling and such.
One guy regularly rolls below 5 on his d20s. This same guy has suggested leaving all your dice with the 1s facing up so that side gathers dust and will fall face down when you roll it, giving you a natural 20 - sort of a "buttered toast always lands face down" theory, I suppose. It doesn't work though. But maybe that's because I knew it wouldn't ... :P ;).
We've also observed that whoever is GMing tends to roll better when they're GMing than when they're being a player, although even this isn't always true (the guy who GMs Star Wars doesn't seem to have any better luck, while the guy who GMs 4e may seem to be rolling better because the monsters in the WotC modules all have relatively high attack modifiers). In my case, I know I rolled better as GM but maybe that's because I was generally making more rolls overall anyway ...
I'll admit that it is undoubtedly mostly an issue of perception.
If I could get some dice that roll better more often, though, then I'd be all for it!
We're playing H2: Thunderspire Labyrinth, so he's just using whatever's in there.
My group got TPK'd in there. And in the following module too. Have fun.
My group got TPK'd in there. And in the following module too. Have fun.
Yeah we almost had a TPK (actually I think the GM was trying for a "capture everyone rather than kill them" scenario) but we managed to take out all the bad guys at the cost of only one PC. My barbarian may struggle to hit things quite often but she is nigh-on indestructible!