PDA

View Full Version : 4E "That Can't Be Right..." Moments...



TheEmerged
2008-06-27, 07:24 PM
Pardon me while I make fun of myself.

Wait, the kobolds in the sample adventure in the DMG start at with 24 & 27 HP at first level, but even my party fighter doesn't have that much! What gives?

Turns out that once again, reading is an important skill to have :smallredface: "Hit Points at 1st Level:" for every class reads "X+ Constitution score". I was adding the modifier alone...


--------------
Off Topic: I can be barbarian now? ;)

SamTheCleric
2008-06-27, 07:28 PM
Haha, I did that the first time I built a character... I couldnt figure out why my rogue had less than 20 when the rogue in KotS had a SMALLER con and more hitpoints.

Live and learn.... :smalltongue:

VForVaarsuvius
2008-06-27, 07:55 PM
In my RPG, linked to below, someone was joining and races have a few base stats for you to add onto. He thought they where class stats, though, and would keep saying stuff like "Why do bards have so much strength" and "Why do wizards have so much accuracy"? Truly, reading is a good skill to have.

Lord Herman
2008-06-27, 07:56 PM
I had a "That Can't Be Right..." moment when one of the 1st-level PCs decided to push a 30-hp goblin off a cliff, and succeeded with a single roll versus fortitude.

I knew the goblin should have gotten some kind of saving throw, but I couldn't find it anywhere in the text on Bull Rush. I later found out it was mentioned in the DMG, in the part about terrain hazards.

mikeejimbo
2008-06-27, 08:42 PM
One of our players made that HP mistake. I'm actually amazed that I didn't!

Dhavaer
2008-06-27, 08:51 PM
I made the hp mistake too, the first time.

I was pretty stunned when, while running a casual duel between a warlock I planned to use and a few monsters, the warlock (lvl 2) bloodied a tangler beetle (lvl 5) with a single, mighty spell. That was pretty awesome. Apparently 4e PCs can solo things well above their level.

TheEmerged
2008-06-27, 09:33 PM
I had a "That Can't Be Right..." moment when one of the 1st-level PCs decided to push a 30-hp goblin off a cliff, and succeeded with a single roll versus fortitude.

I knew the goblin should have gotten some kind of saving throw, but I couldn't find it anywhere in the text on Bull Rush. I later found out it was mentioned in the DMG, in the part about terrain hazards.

It's also on PHB 284, under "Falling". In three tries now during my 'test' runs of the sample scenario in the DMG, I've yet to have someone fail the save to go into the sludge pit.

Justin_Bacon
2008-06-27, 11:52 PM
There are rules for escaping from ropes but no rules for tying ropes? That can't be right...

(It's right.)

turkishproverb
2008-06-27, 11:59 PM
There are rules for escaping from ropes but no rules for tying ropes? That can't be right...

(It's right.)

But Use Rope is USELESS! just like Craft and Perform!

:smalltongue:

Oracle_Hunter
2008-06-28, 12:43 AM
There are rules for escaping from ropes but no rules for tying ropes? That can't be right...

(It's right.)

I, for one, cannot sleep at night unless I know that I can screw up tying a rope.

No, Thievery is not substitute! I want a d% table to tell me what kind of knot I tie, and how hard it is to get out of, just like the good ol' 2e unarmed combat table. Gosh darn it, how can you endorse a system without rigorous knot-tying mechanics! Isn't that the point of making a system in the first place? :smallamused:

What can I say? I'm still amused that people are baffled by the lack of a Use Ropes skill. It's hi-lar-i-ous :smallbiggrin:

icefractal
2008-06-28, 04:40 AM
There are rules for how much illumination magma provides - but no rules for how much damage lava does. Not even a possible range, or "if you fall in lava, you die" - all it says is that lava, like pits, is hazardous terrain. :smallsigh:

And yet they go into detail on things live Bloodstone, various types of dungeon slime - don't you think lava might be a little more iconic than that stuff?

bosssmiley
2008-06-28, 06:58 AM
I had one over the basic resolution mechanic:

"d20 + 1/2 class levels + mods? So...everyone is in a 1/2 BAB class now?" :smallconfused:

Dan_Hemmens
2008-06-28, 07:00 AM
I had one over the basic resolution mechanic:

"d20 + 1/2 class levels + mods? So...everyone is in a 1/2 BAB class now?" :smallconfused:

Actually, everyone is a 2/3 BAB class now, since 4E has more "levels" than 3.X.

arnoldrew
2008-06-28, 07:42 AM
Actually, everyone is a 2/3 BAB class now, since 4E has more "levels" than 3.X.

No...everyone is 1/2 BAB, because you basically get 1 point of BAB every other level.

Dan_Hemmens
2008-06-28, 07:48 AM
No...everyone is 1/2 BAB, because you basically get 1 point of BAB every other level.

No, nobody is anything BAB, because BAB isn't a 4th edition concept.

Point being: If you're going to compare 5E "level bonus to attacks" with 3.X "BAB" then 2/3 is a better comparison than 1/2, because at your top level (20 in 3.X, 30 in 4E) you wind up with +15.

Curmudgeon
2008-06-28, 08:13 AM
If you're going to compare 5E "level bonus to attacks" with 3.X "BAB" then 2/3 is a better comparison than 1/2, because at your top level (20 in 3.X, 30 in 4E) you wind up with +15.
That would be 3/4 BAB (15/20) then, the same as for the middling classes like Rogue in 3.x.

Dan_Hemmens
2008-06-28, 08:15 AM
That would be 3/4 BAB (15/20) then, the same as for the middling classes like Rogue in 3.x.

Quite right. I am an idiot. I was thinking the middling path was 2/3 not 3/4.

Oh dear maths.

nagora
2008-06-28, 09:38 AM
Point being: If you're going to compare 5E "level bonus to attacks" with 3.X "BAB" then 2/3 is a better comparison than 1/2, because at your top level (20 in 3.X, 30 in 4E) you wind up with +15.
Flippin' heck, Tucker! Dan's already moved onto the next edition!

Edit: is it any good? Are there rules for tying knots?

Dan_Hemmens
2008-06-28, 09:41 AM
Flippin' heck, Tucker! Dan's already moved onto the next edition!

Maths. Not. Work. Today. Help.


Edit: is it any good? Are there rules for tying knots?

It sucks. There's no rules for tying knots and no social skills. How do I speak in character now!

potatocubed
2008-06-28, 09:56 AM
So, here's a quirk I've discovered...

Failing a skill challenge doesn't bring an adventure to a grinding halt, it just forces you to do things the hard way.

But D&D characters gain very real strength - in the form of XP and loot - from adversity.

So characters will level up faster by failing skill challenges than they possibly could by passing them, especially when you consider the relative reward weightings for combat and non-combat encounters.

Am I missing something? :smallconfused:

Starsinger
2008-06-28, 09:56 AM
I had one of those "This can't be right..." moments when I asked my group if they wanted to play D&D and they didn't groan. :smalltongue:

Flickerdart
2008-06-28, 09:58 AM
It sucks. There's no rules for tying knots and no social skills. How do I speak in character now!
No, no, man. It's realistic, since we nerds that play it also have no social skills. :smalltongue:

Tallis
2008-06-28, 10:21 AM
Fighters don't get proficiency with plate armor.....

....is that a misprint?

Learnedguy
2008-06-28, 10:26 AM
So, here's a quirk I've discovered...

Failing a skill challenge doesn't bring an adventure to a grinding halt, it just forces you to do things the hard way.

But D&D characters gain very real strength - in the form of XP and loot - from adversity.

So characters will level up faster by failing skill challenges than they possibly could by passing them, especially when you consider the relative reward weightings for combat and non-combat encounters.

Am I missing something? :smallconfused:

Why talk when you can cave in his skull and take his stuff?

Seriously, hasn't it always been like that:smalltongue:?

Dan_Hemmens
2008-06-28, 10:29 AM
Fighters don't get proficiency with plate armor.....

....is that a misprint?

Doesn't seem to be.

If I had to guess, I'd say it was designed to make lightly armoured fighter builds more viable. Previously there was literally no reason for a Fighter not to wear Plate, because it's pretty much better than everything else and you've paid for it in advance, as it were.

A light blade fighter is pretty viable in 4E, particularly with Rain of Blows.

SamTheCleric
2008-06-28, 10:45 AM
Doesn't seem to be.

If I had to guess, I'd say it was designed to make lightly armoured fighter builds more viable. Previously there was literally no reason for a Fighter not to wear Plate, because it's pretty much better than everything else and you've paid for it in advance, as it were.

A light blade fighter is pretty viable in 4E, particularly with Rain of Blows.

*nods*

Fighter in Scale Mail with the Scale Spec feat gets the full +8 Armor, no check penalty and no penalty to movement. With an elf, that's moving 7 squares in heavy armor. *drool*

kamikasei
2008-06-28, 10:47 AM
Fighters don't get proficiency with plate armor.....

....is that a misprint?

I think the logic is "instead of making them pay a crazy price for basic, mundane plate, we'll just make them spend a feat".

Charity
2008-06-28, 10:48 AM
A spear or sword specialist fighter is likely to have a decent dex, in fact the best AC available is, i believe Hide armour with a maxed out Dex so it's possible that a fighter will actually avoid heavy armour all together.
On top of this Plate is not all that to be honest, you get 1AC and for that you sacrifice 2 off a load of skills and in the Paragon tier you can even lose the movement penalty for scale.

Pinnacle
2008-06-28, 10:52 AM
A warlord can wake people up from unconsciousness by yelling at them.

Kurald Galain
2008-06-28, 11:07 AM
Why talk when you can cave in his skull and take his stuff?

Seriously, hasn't it always been like that:smalltongue:?

No :smallsmile:

First edition D&D had explicit rules that if you were to hit a dragon with the flat of your sword, doing half damage, you could tame him by reducing him to zero hit points that way. Exactly how you use the "flat" of a lightning bolt is unclear. Then again, that rule was more than a little silly, hence it hasn't showed up (to my knowledge) in any later edition.

JaxGaret
2008-06-28, 12:01 PM
So, here's a quirk I've discovered...

Failing a skill challenge doesn't bring an adventure to a grinding halt, it just forces you to do things the hard way.

But D&D characters gain very real strength - in the form of XP and loot - from adversity.

So characters will level up faster by failing skill challenges than they possibly could by passing them, especially when you consider the relative reward weightings for combat and non-combat encounters.

Am I missing something? :smallconfused:

No, that makes perfect sense, after all.

Also, it is an awesome quirk if you take the bull by the horns and run with it - "hey guys, here's another chance for us to make it as hard as possible for ourselves! Let's screw up real bad this time, I feel like a little adversity today."

It could be a running joke in the campaign that your party fails skill challenges. Hard.

:smallsmile:

chiasaur11
2008-06-28, 12:13 PM
A warlord can wake people up from unconsciousness by yelling at them.

Hey, if a R. Lee Emery style drill sargent couldn't make you get up from almost any injury just for the opportunity to kill him later, he isn't trying hard enough.

potatocubed
2008-06-28, 12:36 PM
It could be a running joke in the campaign that your party fails skill challenges. Hard.

:smallsmile:

"How did you get to be the captain of the royal guard, Lord Bobthefighter?"

"I started by failing to tie my shoes*, then graduated to failing to negotiate important peace treaties. I failed to detect an assassin, fell in every pit from here to the edge of the world, and I've never solved a puzzle in my life. That's given me a lot of opportunity to practice my swordwork..."

"How about you, High Priest Bobthecleric?"

"Failure brings me closer to my divine patron."

"Avandra?"

"No, Bahamut."

:smalltongue:

* Actually because there's no Use Rope skill so it's an untrained Dex check...

CarpeGuitarrem
2008-06-28, 12:45 PM
A warlord can wake people up from unconsciousness by yelling at them.
Hey, if Richard (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Looking_for_Group) was yelling at me in my sleep, I'd consider myself lucky that I got a chance to wake up!

loserthree
2008-06-28, 01:37 PM
Was running a little "The System, and You" educational combat exploration between a Ranger/Paladin, two-character team and a young white when we found how crazy some of the dailies get.

PHB 94: Wrath of the Gods
Everyone standing next to the Paly when they blow this cooldown does the Paly's Cha mod in extra damage for every attack roll.

Both were made with the Standard Array and were level 8. So the Paly was Dragonborn and had a 20 Cha by that time.

The Ranger used abilities like Twin Strike or his multi-damage-roll cooldowns to take the most advantage of Wrath of the Gods as he could.

After five rounds the dragon is down and we add up the damage done by the Wrath of the Gods bonus, 45 hp. Then we compare that to level 5 & 7 attack cooldowns and find that it's not as crazy as it looks.

"I know what you're thinking. Did he use all his Daily Powers, or does he have one left. Well, to tell you the truth, in all this excitement I kind of lost track myself. But being that I'm a level 15 character with Powers that would blow your head clean off, you've got to ask yourself one question: do I feel lucky. Well do you, punk?"

Tallis
2008-06-28, 02:52 PM
Doesn't seem to be.

If I had to guess, I'd say it was designed to make lightly armoured fighter builds more viable. Previously there was literally no reason for a Fighter not to wear Plate, because it's pretty much better than everything else and you've paid for it in advance, as it were.

A light blade fighter is pretty viable in 4E, particularly with Rain of Blows.

That's true, but paladins do get proficiency in plate. That seems odd to me. Why should the class that splits it's time between combat and prayer get a combat related proficiency get an ability that a pure cmbatant doesn't?

I see how it's workable, it's just odd. Much like clerics and paladins not being answerable to their gods.

Somebloke
2008-06-28, 02:55 PM
So, here's a quirk I've discovered...

Failing a skill challenge doesn't bring an adventure to a grinding halt, it just forces you to do things the hard way.

But D&D characters gain very real strength - in the form of XP and loot - from adversity.

So characters will level up faster by failing skill challenges than they possibly could by passing them, especially when you consider the relative reward weightings for combat and non-combat encounters.

Am I missing something? :smallconfused:
I personally play it as 'if you fail the check and are forced to fight/etc, then you only gain the XP you would have gotten from the skill check (the fight difficulty XP being equal to the fight XP 'pool').

I am sure that when I explain this to my characters they will be completely understanding.

Oracle_Hunter
2008-06-28, 03:05 PM
That's true, but paladins do get proficiency in plate. That seems odd to me. Why should the class that splits it's time between combat and prayer get a combat related proficiency get an ability that a pure cmbatant doesn't?

I see how it's workable, it's just odd. Much like clerics and paladins not being answerable to their gods.

Yeah, it's kind of weird, but it works when you realize that Scale Mail is really, very much better for a Fighter (who has to move around a lot and make skill checks) than for a Paladin (who mostly soaks up damage instead of dealing it out). Mainly, this is used to give a little difference between the fighter and the paladin, and since Plate isn't all that good compared to Scale, it works out.

Re: Skill Challenges
This is true, until you note that Complexity 3 or higher challenges give experience like an EL (Complexity) fight. So you get the same experience, but in one you aren't going to die, while in the other you might be killed but you might also get treasure.

If you want to balance the treasure, add some bonus treasure in non-social skill challenges, with a failure gets you past the challenge, while a success gets you XP and bonus loot. Quite workable.

Behold_the_Void
2008-06-28, 03:19 PM
That's true, but paladins do get proficiency in plate. That seems odd to me. Why should the class that splits it's time between combat and prayer get a combat related proficiency get an ability that a pure cmbatant doesn't?

I see how it's workable, it's just odd. Much like clerics and paladins not being answerable to their gods.

Paladins have more strictly defensive abilities and benefit from that heavy armor. Fighters have some striker-like abilities, and aren't as purely defensively focused, defender-role notwithstanding.

Dan_Hemmens
2008-06-28, 04:43 PM
That's true, but paladins do get proficiency in plate. That seems odd to me. Why should the class that splits it's time between combat and prayer get a combat related proficiency get an ability that a pure cmbatant doesn't?

Actually, I think it makes sense for exactly that reason.

Paladins are pretty much designed to be "Knights in Shining Armour". They get plate proficiency because, hey, otherwise it wouldn't be shining armour would it.

Fighters, on the other hand, are supposed to represent pretty much anybody that fights with melee weapons, from pit fighters to barbarians to hoplites to knights. Fighters still get the option to buy plate proficiency, but they don't get it for free, because they get a huge whack of other stuff for free.

Assuming they put as much effort into balancing the classes as they claimed, giving Fighters Plate Proficiency would have involved docking them something else, by making Plate Proficiency optional you make the possible number of Fighter options broader.

Thinking about it, it's another good example of the way that limitations actually increase your options. If you get Plate Proficiency free, then anybody who doesn't wear plate is basically wasting a class feature, if you make it optional, you make other builds more viable.

Jack Zander
2008-06-28, 04:53 PM
If you get Plate Proficiency free, then anybody who doesn't wear plate is basically wasting a class feature, if you make it optional, you make other builds more viable.

Well... only in people's minds. Either way they'd blow a feat or some such anyway for the ability you had to take away so it's all the same really.

Pinnacle
2008-06-28, 05:04 PM
Well... only in people's minds. Either way they'd blow a feat or some such anyway for the ability you had to take away so it's all the same really.

No, the "wasting a class feature" part still stands. If they get plate free, those who don't use it have a class feature they're not using; if they get something that anybody would use instead, only people who use it spend the feat.

Artanis
2008-06-28, 06:33 PM
Back on the original topic...


I haven't played many 4e sessions, but in the first one, I had made a Wizard and was thinking, "geez, that INT gives me an awful lot of AC, and my hp is pretty good. I'm going to be a whole lot harder to kill than a 'squishy' should be..."

Half an hour later, an enemy attacks, punches straight past my AC with remarkable ease, and drops me to one-quarter health. My opinion on how durable a Wizard was went back to "extremely squishy" REAL quick

shadow_archmagi
2008-06-28, 06:39 PM
No, the "wasting a class feature" part still stands. If they get plate free, those who don't use it have a class feature they're not using; if they get something that anybody would use instead, only people who use it spend the feat.

You don't understand. Yes, it is true they would not be using a class feature. But it isn't as though they'd be any weaker than a fighter who does make use of it.

It isn't like wasting a feat, or something that you have a limited supply of. If Fighters got the bonus ability of being able to buy up to 4 weightless frogs for free, would it be "wasteful" not to use it?

PhallicWarrior
2008-06-28, 07:00 PM
Back on the original topic...


I haven't played many 4e sessions, but in the first one, I had made a Wizard and was thinking, "geez, that INT gives me an awful lot of AC, and my hp is pretty good. I'm going to be a whole lot harder to kill than a 'squishy' should be..."

Half an hour later, an enemy attacks, punches straight past my AC with remarkable ease, and drops me to one-quarter health. My opinion on how durable a Wizard was went back to "extremely squishy" REAL quick

Wait. Int gives a bonus to AC (Defense?) now?

Dhavaer
2008-06-28, 07:11 PM
Wait. Int gives a bonus to AC (Defense?) now?

Yes, if you're wearing light or no armour you apply either your Dex or Int modifier to your AC.

tbarrie
2008-06-28, 07:20 PM
Yes, if you're wearing light or no armour you apply either your Dex or Int modifier to your AC.

Which means that in 4E, you can not only be too agile for armour to be useful, you can be too smart for armour to be useful.:)

Collin152
2008-06-28, 07:32 PM
Which means that in 4E, you can not only be too agile for armour to be useful, you can be too smart for armour to be useful.:)

"Want to put on a bulletproof vest first?"
"nah, I'm too smart for that."

THAC0
2008-06-28, 08:16 PM
That's true, but paladins do get proficiency in plate. That seems odd to me. Why should the class that splits it's time between combat and prayer get a combat related proficiency get an ability that a pure cmbatant doesn't?

I see how it's workable, it's just odd. Much like clerics and paladins not being answerable to their gods.

Also, there is a mechanical reason. Paladins - especially Charisma based paladins - have MAD and are unlikely to be able to meet the stat requirements for plate armor via feat. Whereas fighters are far more likely to be able to meet those requirements without having to sacrifice their primary attributes (otherwise known as Usefulness).

disorder
2008-06-28, 08:39 PM
If Fighters got the bonus ability of being able to buy up to 4 weightless frogs for free, would it be "wasteful" not to use it?
Dude, you turned down the weightless frogs? Why do you even bother to PLAY this game?

Rockphed
2008-06-28, 08:56 PM
Which means that in 4E, you can not only be too agile for armour to be useful, you can be too smart for armour to be useful.:)

Since there is no maximum dex bonus on armors, you can't be either:smalltongue:

TheEmerged
2008-06-28, 08:57 PM
RE: Fighter/Paladin plate. Hey, give the poor fighters a break, they can barely afford scale armor & both a melee & ranged weapon ;)

I thought it was a misprint at first too. Like the fact that fighters don't start out with a known skill by default (neither do warlords). Having run throiugh some sample sessions (3 times now, and I *still* haven't had a kobold fail the save to keep from being thrown into the sludge pit) I have to say it doesn't really hurt them in practice yet.

Pinnacle
2008-06-28, 09:03 PM
Since there is no maximum dex bonus on armors, you can't be either:smalltongue:

Except that all heavy armors keep you from using your Dex or Int bonus at all.

Andras
2008-06-28, 09:06 PM
Except that all heavy armors keep you from using your Dex or Int bonus at all.

Sometime in 4E, people are just too smart to wear good armor. :smalltongue:

King_of_GRiffins
2008-06-28, 09:49 PM
Sometime in 4E, people are just too smart to wear good armor. :smalltongue:

Actually, it'd be that there's armor that's too good to be worn by smart people, but I just like splitting hairs :smalltongue:

I think the first "That's not right" sort of moment occured when I saw you no longer rolled your saving throws, they were set. But then I saw people roll for spells, so it started making some sence.

Also, I noticed that while you can 'grab' and thus immobilize opponents, and drag them away too, there is no more 'grappling'. It seems sad that I can't grab, punch/beat on, pin, hog-tie, and wrestle all with the same skill anymore.

The_Werebear
2008-06-28, 10:13 PM
I found it kind of interesting that Paladins of Asmodeus do radiant damage. Then I flipped through the DMG and saw that DM's were supposed to change it for worshippers of evil deities.

erikun
2008-06-28, 10:35 PM
Actually, it'd be that there's armor that's too good to be worn by smart people, but I just like splitting hairs :smalltongue:
Aww, a griffin! Cute!
.... sorry.

Anyways, it's not related to 4e, but in my first game of 3.0e, my cleric started out with 16 Dex, breastplate, and a tower shield, and some magical equipment for a total of 12 AC. Yep, I forgot that you start at 10 AC, and then add the bonuses. :smalltongue: The amazing thing? We ran through a couple sessions before catching the problem, yet the enemies weren't hitting my unusually low AC anyways.

King_of_GRiffins
2008-06-28, 10:54 PM
Aww, a griffin! Cute!

That made my day, thank you so much for that :smallbiggrin: *gives griffin-hugs*

And really, I sorta made the same mistake in 4E today while reprinting my sheet :smallredface:

Collin152
2008-06-28, 10:56 PM
That made my day, thank you so much for that :smallbiggrin: *gives griffin-hugs*


Heyheyheyheyheyhey.
If griffin-hugs are going around, I want in on them!
:smallfrown:

King_of_GRiffins
2008-06-28, 11:06 PM
Heyheyheyheyheyhey.
If griffin-hugs are going around, I want in on them!
:smallfrown:

Well, only because you asked so nicely :smalltongue: *gives Collin griffin-hugs as well*

Now get back on-topic! :smalltongue:

The New Bruceski
2008-06-28, 11:41 PM
RE: Fighter/Paladin plate. Hey, give the poor fighters a break, they can barely afford scale armor & both a melee & ranged weapon ;)

You got a ranged weapon? Scale, shield, adventurer's kit and a longsword left me with 20 gp. Cheapest non-sling is 25 gp.

Mewtarthio
2008-06-28, 11:46 PM
Sometime in 4E, people are just too smart to wear good armor. :smalltongue:

Well, what do you expect? If you're that smart, you're either an evil mastermind (in which case you're required by law to wear either simple dark clothes or a lab coat; capes are optional) or the group's "smart guy" (in which case you'll be wearing somewhat unattractive street clothes, and probably glasses). Only the big, dumb losers wear good armor! :smalltongue:

Helgraf
2008-06-29, 02:22 AM
Hmm, did a doubletake on seeing that Shields now benefit your Reflex defense as well as your AC - especially since the way the character sheet is laid out, this is not obvious.

Somebloke
2008-06-29, 08:09 AM
Well, only because you asked so nicely :smalltongue: *gives Collin griffin-hugs as well*

Now get back on-topic! :smalltongue:

Brilliant. Just brilliant.

You crushed their ribcages. I hope you're happy.

One of the more jarring things concerning player options- why do I have a mental image of some 4e design editor sitting in a chair, stroking a hairless cat and saying, 'look people- all I want here are clerics with frikken lasers.'

shadow_archmagi
2008-06-29, 08:13 AM
Hmm, did a doubletake on seeing that Shields now benefit your Reflex defense as well as your AC - especially since the way the character sheet is laid out, this is not obvious.

Wait, what!? How does that... what!?


Wha!?

Pepz
2008-06-29, 08:47 AM
I'm still having a "that can't be right" moment about death and dying. I just can't believe that there's only a 5% chance of stabilizing by yourself when at 0 hp.

Seems like such a small chance.

Haven't played 4e yet so not sure how often PC's hit 0 hp.

Renegade Paladin
2008-06-29, 09:05 AM
Meteor swarm only does 8d6+INT damage. Except wait, that is right. :smallyuk:

OneFamiliarFace
2008-06-29, 09:19 AM
No, Thievery is not substitute! I want a d% table to tell me what kind of knot I tie, and how hard it is to get out of, just like the good ol' 2e unarmed combat table. Gosh darn it, how can you endorse a system without rigorous knot-tying mechanics! Isn't that the point of making a system in the first place? :smallamused:

Holy crap! I forgot about that table! Haymaker ftw. Man, and now I'm remembering second edition martial arts when playing a ninja was awesome.

Erm...sorry...nothing about 4e here. Just. You know. 2e had some awesome stuff, complicated as crap or not. But while I'm still off-topic: Griffin hugs are about the coolest thing I've heard of recently and will be spread liberally by the new King of Griffins added to my first 4e campaign.

Perhaps my PCs will have a "That can't be right" moment!

JaxGaret
2008-06-29, 11:40 AM
Re: Shields giving a bonus to Reflex saves - this is a model of shields protecting a portion of the body from harm. I.e. if a fireball explodes next to you, one can use the shield to block some of the effect.


I'm still having a "that can't be right" moment about death and dying. I just can't believe that there's only a 5% chance of stabilizing by yourself when at 0 hp.

Seems like such a small chance.

Haven't played 4e yet so not sure how often PC's hit 0 hp.

This is incorrect. Here is what the rules actually say:


Death Saving Throw: When you are dying, you need to make a saving throw at the end of your turn each round. The result of your saving throw determines how close you are to death.
Lower than 10: You slip one step closer to death. If you get this result three times before you take a rest, you die.
10–19: No change.
20 or higher: Spend a healing surge. When you do so, you are considered to have 0 hit points, and then your healing surge restores hit points as normal. You are no longer dying, and you are conscious but still prone. If you roll 20 or higher but have no healing surges left expressed as a negative number, your condition doesn’t change.

Thus, it is a 5% chance each turn that you stabilize on your own. If you run the maths, you'll see that a Dying character left to their own devices has about a 1/3 chance of stabilizing themselves, and a 2/3 chance of transitioning to Dead.

That's without any bonuses to the Death saving throw that some characters will have.

potatocubed
2008-06-29, 11:51 AM
Lower than 10: You slip one step closer to death. If you get this result three times before you take a rest, you die.

Incidentally, the implication of this is that if combat ends and you can 'rest' before you die, you'll get better again. Although the number of hp you have in this instance is unclear to me.

Mewtarthio
2008-06-29, 01:34 PM
Incidentally, the implication of this is that if combat ends and you can 'rest' before you die, you'll get better again. Although the number of hp you have in this instance is unclear to me.

Any sort of rest (by the official definition of the term: ie "short or extended rest") requires at minimum five minutes of time. Thus, you'd in theory have to keep rolling for the next thirty rounds before you'll have sufficiently rested. In practice, of course, you'll either have teammates on hand to revive you or have a TPK on your hands (in which case the monster simply eats you and everything fades to black).

chiasaur11
2008-06-29, 01:40 PM
Well, what do you expect? If you're that smart, you're either an evil mastermind (in which case you're required by law to wear either simple dark clothes or a lab coat; capes are optional) or the group's "smart guy" (in which case you'll be wearing somewhat unattractive street clothes, and probably glasses). Only the big, dumb losers wear good armor! :smalltongue:

Hey, we're a progressive bunch.
You can also wear a lab coat.
(but only if you're smoking a pipe at least once a week)

Doctor coats are okay too.

tbarrie
2008-06-29, 01:41 PM
Lower than 10: You slip one step closer to death. If you get this result three times before you take a rest, you die.
Incidentally, the implication of this is that if combat ends and you can 'rest' before you die, you'll get better again. Although the number of hp you have in this instance is unclear to me.
To me, the implication is that if you drop below 0, fail two saving throw against death, get healed, and are knocked back below 0 during the same fight, then you've still only got one strike left.

Even if you argue that a disabled character starts "resting" as soon as combat stops around them (which seems a bit silly), you haven't actually taken a rest until five minutes have passed.

THAC0
2008-06-29, 02:33 PM
To me, the implication is that if you drop below 0, fail two saving throw against death, get healed, and are knocked back below 0 during the same fight, then you've still only got one strike left.


This is correct, from my understanding.

Fortunately, my DM didn't realize this till after my poor Paladin had gone down and up several times during one combat!

King_of_GRiffins
2008-06-29, 02:39 PM
Erm...sorry...nothing about 4e here. Just. You know. 2e had some awesome stuff, complicated as crap or not. But while I'm still off-topic: Griffin hugs are about the coolest thing I've heard of recently and will be spread liberally by the new King of Griffins added to my first 4e campaign.

Perhaps my PCs will have a "That can't be right" moment!

Oh no, it'll be perfectly right :smallbiggrin: Please, send me a copy when you stat him out!

As for death and dying, I seem to have encountered the same problem last session, and we were wondering when, after combat, does our near-dead party member come back up? Lasting five-minutes and then getting a healing surge seems about right, though in the end, I just used 'Inspiring Word' to give him a brief eulogy at which point he just stood back up.

TheEmerged
2008-06-29, 10:21 PM
You got a ranged weapon? Scale, shield, adventurer's kit and a longsword left me with 20 gp. Cheapest non-sling is 25 gp.

No shield, and the ranged weapon is a sling :smallredface:

Starbuck_II
2008-06-29, 10:45 PM
You got a ranged weapon? Scale, shield, adventurer's kit and a longsword left me with 20 gp. Cheapest non-sling is 25 gp.

throwing dagger (that is throwing a dagger)?

erikun
2008-06-29, 10:53 PM
Buy javelins, handaxes, or throwing hammers. STR bonus to attacks and damage, and cheaper than a crossbow. You'll need to grab more from the dead kobolds, though.

Starbuck_II
2008-06-29, 11:28 PM
Buy javelins, handaxes, or throwing hammers. STR bonus to attacks and damage, and cheaper than a crossbow. You'll need to grab more from the dead kobolds, though.

When ever i use a Sling I mine (read as camp) Kobolds for special ammo. I mean, that stuff is rarer than epic magic items. Magic items you can eventually make or buy: but no one sells Fireshot or Glueshot.

Helgraf
2008-06-30, 12:28 AM
Wait, what!? How does that... what!?


Wha!?


It's not perfect, but look at it this way - Reflex is getting out of the way. A shield is more like mobile cover than armor; so you're combining your Reflex (movement to minimize the impact) with the cover of your shield to minimize your exposure to the effect.

Yeah, I know, you could then counter-argue that armor should do the same thing. I said it wasn't a perfect reasoning. However, while armor is generally custom-cut to fit your body, shields project around the body by the nature of their shape; so you can use them to create a sort of blast reduction area.

Charity
2008-06-30, 02:54 AM
http://www.mainlesson.com/books/marshall/beowulf/zpage089.gif

Sort of thing