Fun Learning 4e

[Dimers]

Since this PC is stuck in the White Room; they are mostly just helping me to get the Basics down, for 4e. I'm a little odd, in that I believe that even a straight 10 PC should still be able to engage in the game, not just PCs with High Stats and only one or two Low stats.

That's technically true. Such a character wouldn't be of much use in fighting level-appropriate enemies or handling level-appropriate skill tests, but they can interact with all aspects of the game system. And of course you can roleplay without any reference to stats at all.

Any suggestions on which Deity to pick?
Bahamut looks like a good pick ...

... says the guy with "Dragon" in his username Optimal characters rarely take Channel Divinity feats, honestly, so the choice is unlikely to have mechanical impact.

On the other hand, following a deity's tenets works differently in 4e than other systems, and that may help your choice. Clerics, paladins, avengers and other divine classes can't "fall" or get cut off from their god's power unless the GM explicitly violates RAW (p61-62). You get invested with the power and that's that. But if you act in a way your god or her representatives would dislike, the mortal agents might come hunting you. So do pick a deity whose principles you can abide by (listed on p21-22). That's the reason the PHB tells you to pick a good or neutral god for most games (p62).

[HouseRules]

This is incorrect, level 1 HP adds CON Score, not CON mod. Low level 4e characters are extremely durable by the standards of other editions.

Yakk disagree that you add con score at level 1.

It's even on page 14 of PHB 1.

[Jaeda]

The armor of Bahamut is the only one that I've seen in play. The ability turn a crit into a regular hit can be a lifesaver and is almost assuredly better than divine fortune if the situation comes up. Most of the others can be kind of finicky. Pelor's radiance has the disadvantage of both being circumstantial (only while fighting undead) and essentially being a closer range, slightly more powerful version of your turn undead power.

That said, since divine fortune is kind of weak and turn undead is very circumstantial, I'm going to disagree with Dimers and say if you think you have a uses for your deity's channel divinity feat, you should go ahead and take it. I do like his suggestion though that Bahamut is a fitting choice for the Great Dragon.

[Lanaya]

Yakk disagree that you add con score at level 1.

It's even on page 14 of PHB 1.

Yakk disagreed about you getting 'Constitution at Level 1 + Maximized Hit Dice Every Level', because there is no such thing as hit dice in 4e, nor is there anything that closely resembles them. There is a fixed amount of HP per level that has nothing to do with dice. It's also not based on your con score at level 1, it's based on your current con score, so increasing your con will increase your HP.

[Great Dragon]

That's technically true. Such a character wouldn't be of much use in fighting level-appropriate enemies or handling level-appropriate skill tests, but they can interact with all aspects of the game system. And of course you can roleplay without any reference to stats at all.

This is one of the peeves that I have with D&D. Everything in the game revolves around the focus on High Stats to be able to be effective at doing things, like fighting Monsters.
The monster's AC should be based on the BaB/Proficiency of the Character/s, with only a few monsters AC being adjusted up to require Higher Stats.

Sure, like a lot of Fantasy Games, the PC/s are supposed to be Heroic, and are more likely to have better than average abilities. But, I also like Folk Stories of how the Character went from Average Person to Hero. Where those higher Stats make doing things easier for those Characters, instead of making it where those without can barely engage.

*******
As for the Skill Tests, I might be required to figure out some other way to accomplish the Goal.
And the DM should make doing so possible, if not actually encouraging the Players to do this.
*******

... says the guy with "Dragon" in his username Optimal characters rarely take Channel Divinity feats, honestly, so the choice is unlikely to have mechanical impact.

I don't always go for the obvious.
Are there any Non Channel Feats that you suggest?

The armor of Bahamut is the only one that I've seen in play. The ability turn a crit into a regular hit can be a lifesaver and is almost assuredly better than divine fortune if the situation comes up. Most of the others can be kind of finicky. Pelor's radiance has the disadvantage of both being circumstantial (only while fighting undead) and essentially being a closer range, slightly more powerful version of your turn undead power.

I do like (Dimmers') suggestion though that Bahamut is a fitting choice for the Great Dragon.

Which is why I put him there.
Humm, since this PC is supposed to be "Help Party": Looks like Bahamut it is.....

[NomGarret]

I don't always go for the obvious.
Are there any Non Channel Feats that you suggest?
.

Sticking to PHB1, not really. What I would suggest is making a shortlist of any feats that you like. You'll have another five of them over the course of the Heroic Tier, and since prereqs are typically minimal, you can take them in whichever order you like. Some, like Improved Initiative, are better for the controllers and defenders in your party to lay down their area attacks and get into position. Good teamwork is not running into where the wizard was going to place their wall, after all. Others, like Toughness and Durable, are best saved for in-game choices once you see how often you run out of hp or surges.

One thing I would take a look at is multiclass feats. Now, you only get to pick one, but it does qualify you for future feats and paragon paths of that class. Plus you get training in a skill and a little taste of one of their class abilities. Student of Battle is good if you just want to double-down on being leadery.

[Vhaidara]

Sure, like a lot of Fantasy Games, the PC/s are supposed to be Heroic, and are more likely to have better than average abilities. But, I also like Folk Stories of how the Character went from Average Person to Hero. Where those higher Stats make doing things easier for those Characters, instead of making it where those without can barely engage.

So, this is one of the places where 4e is different from other systems. There's a reason that levels 1-10 are called "Heroic" tier. You're already past your origins an in to being a Hero.

And honestly, why would it be a problem for a system to assume you have the stats that the system says you will have? The game is built around the assumption of the 22 point buy (or the array I posted earlier). Games running that are what things are expected to have, it allows you to engage with the feat system (since a lot of feats will have requirements of your stats) and it gives you some control to be independent of the power of chance that comes from being in a d20 system.

[Jaeda]

I'll second that if you try to play using a commoner array that you are going to have a bad time (since you won't be hitting very often, many riders will have no effect (since they are ability based), and you will get pummeled by enemies who frankly have better stats than you). In any game, you should try to play it the way the designers intended before you change things since it is usually built that way for a reason. Please tell me you don't add salt to your food at a restaurant before tasting it.

[Great Dragon]

If you want to keep things simple, I would just take a basic array (probably 16/16/12/12/10/8)

You also mentioned Point Buy, where is that given? DMG1 ?

Please tell me you don't add salt to your food at a restaurant before tasting it.

Fair. Another reason why I'm doing this thread.

Figuring out what all 4e does, as well as Killing bad ideas about it.

[Vhaidara]

You also mentioned Point Buy, where is that given? DMG1 ?

PHB1, I believe. It's the default character creation method
also here
http://www.asmor.com/scripts/4eAbilityScores/

[Dimers]

Point-buy and some other standard stat arrays are on PHB 17-18.

I'll second that if you try to play using a commoner array that you are going to have a bad time (since you won't be hitting very often, many riders will have no effect (since they are ability based), and you will get pummeled by enemies who frankly have better stats than you). In any game, you should try to play it the way the designers intended before you change things since it is usually built that way for a reason.

I can't argue with the second part, but the first can be addressed by a GM. PCs get zero point-buy? Just subtract 3 from everything the monsters do and from skill DCs, boom, done. (Okay, sure, there are a couple other issues like monster HP. But you get what I'm saying.) Or pit the commoner-PC team against two goblins instead of five. Lower the difficulty to what those PCs have a shot at handling.

@Great Dragon -- Since this thread is to help you see why/how people like 4e, let me put this right up front: a lot of us like being heroic, and 4e starts from heroic. Poor stats get in the way of that goal in many ways. Maybe you'll feel better about your successes when they require a lot of in-game effort, but you're not likely to find a group of players who like 4e and also have that preference. I'm not saying all 4e players want easy wins. But it's a fair generalization that we want to have a good chance at making a difference, at not wasting turns.

[Great Dragon]

Thanks!!

I don't mind playing Heroes, and in fact that's what I feel most Editions of D&D were.
Try playing a Commoner in AD&D, or only taking the Commoner Class (or any of the other NPC Classes) in 3e. Ugh !!

I'll keep in mind that 4e was designed and intended for that kind of play.

I'll look over the feats, and as much of the other things as possible over the next week.

Thank you all for your help and patience.

[ve4grm]

Thanks!!

I don't mind playing Heroes, and in fact that's what I feel most Editions of D&D were.
Try playing a Commoner in AD&D, or only taking the Commoner Class (or any of the other NPC Classes) in 3e. Ugh !!

I'll keep in mind that 4e was designed and intended for that kind of play.

Yeah, even more than other editions, 4e was meant to model a Heroic style of fantasy. Character are better than your average commoner.

Just go with the standard ability array, and you'll be fine.

[MeeposFire]

Funny enough the reliance on ability scores of certain amounts to be able to really make the game work is an aspect of 4e (and 5e for that matter though nowhere near as much and 3e to a more limited extent) that I do not like. One of my favorite aspects of AD&D and earlier versions of D&D is that you do not really need high ability scores to make an effective character at least as much as in these other editions (even more so if you eliminate in AD&D the minimum ability scores needed to cast certain spells and if you add bonus thief ability points then you can alleviate their issue as well). Playing a lowish str high int fighter is actually very effective in 2e but doing that in some other editions is not that great (and you would likely be told to play another class or multiclass depending on which edition you are playing).

On the plus side 4e did do the work to make it so that a character using point buy in a reasonable manner or using a standard array in a way that makes sense for a class you get a character that works. So the game works really well in terms of mechanics but I am not a fan of the need for certain levels of ability scores and the rather large increasing of stats over time needed to keep up with the math.

[ThePurple]

Playing a lowish str high int fighter is actually very effective in 2e but doing that in some other editions is not that great (and you would likely be told to play another class or multiclass depending on which edition you are playing).

Personally, I think this is one of 4e's biggest flaws. The design emphasis on each class having a specific mainstat and secondary stat gets kind of boring, imo, especially when you're pushing the "heroic" character concepts or you want to play an sub-optimal race (e.g. none of the stats they get are main or secondary stat for a class). Why shouldn't an extremely intelligent tactical warlord be capable of using swordplay to outsmart their opponents and hit rather than simply having to use high strength to hit with warlord powers (unless they burn a feat and multiclass into Swordmage)? Why shouldn't a fighter (as a defender) with high charisma be able to manifest some nice fighter-y bonuses out of that? Why is Intelligence basically useless for Clerics even though Religion is an Int based skill?

By that same token, it's always bothered me that the skill lists for so many classes are so extremely small (Weaponmaster Fighters get access to Athletics, Endurance, Heal, Streetwise and Intimidate, which is such a limited non-combat repertoire that I'm never surprised that people feel useless in skill challenges).

4e's classes are very concept limiting (almost to the point where the concept needs to match a class to be effective), which is why my homebrew has basically gotten rid of them. PCs have roles and pick their primary and secondary stats based upon the character. The classes are guidelines for how to build a PC, but they're so limiting that you miss out on a *lot* of really cool concepts that should be effective (and some utterly absurd ones that are crazy effective but don't really grok with me as sensible).

[MeeposFire]

Personally, I think this is one of 4e's biggest flaws. The design emphasis on each class having a specific mainstat and secondary stat gets kind of boring, imo, especially when you're pushing the "heroic" character concepts or you want to play an sub-optimal race (e.g. none of the stats they get are main or secondary stat for a class). Why shouldn't an extremely intelligent tactical warlord be capable of using swordplay to outsmart their opponents and hit rather than simply having to use high strength to hit with warlord powers (unless they burn a feat and multiclass into Swordmage)? Why shouldn't a fighter (as a defender) with high charisma be able to manifest some nice fighter-y bonuses out of that? Why is Intelligence basically useless for Clerics even though Religion is an Int based skill?

By that same token, it's always bothered me that the skill lists for so many classes are so extremely small (Weaponmaster Fighters get access to Athletics, Endurance, Heal, Streetwise and Intimidate, which is such a limited non-combat repertoire that I'm never surprised that people feel useless in skill challenges).

4e's classes are very concept limiting (almost to the point where the concept needs to match a class to be effective), which is why my homebrew has basically gotten rid of them. PCs have roles and pick their primary and secondary stats based upon the character. The classes are guidelines for how to build a PC, but they're so limiting that you miss out on a *lot* of really cool concepts that should be effective (and some utterly absurd ones that are crazy effective but don't really grok with me as sensible).

Clearly I agree with you but oddly warlord is one of the few who can make it work since they have a fair number of decent to pretty good powers that involve the warlord making basic attacks so you could take melee training or intelligent blademaster to make effective basic attacks and use those powers (such as vengeance is mine). It does not change the point at all but it is one of the few classes that can somewhat do it and still make actual attacks.


As for the skills I would be in favor of porting the 5e background skill idea of adding additional skill prof (not just access but actual prof) for your background. Does not solve everything but it would help.

[Great Dragon]

Thanks for posting, everyone!!

I'm stuck with Insomnia, and on my phone right now, so might not be able to put in witty responses.
As always, look for edits.

Will look at Battle Cleric some other time.

(Still double checking, let me know if you see anything I missed.)

<Cleric moved - again>

[PoeticallyPsyco]

Unless I misremember, every character starts with 100gp to spend on whatever they want, and I think all the equipment (weapons, armor, and adventuring gear) is in Chapter 7.

[Dimers]

One Bonus Feat: Human Perseverance +1 to saves.
Fortitude Defense: +3 Con +1 race +1 feat = 15
Reflex Defense: +1 Dex = +1 race +1 feat = 13
Will Defense: +2 class + 3 Wis +1 race +1 feat = 17

Saves aren't the same as defenses. That's one of the big differences in terminology that trip people up. When an enemy imposes some nasty effect on you that lasts more than a few seconds, you make a save against it at the end of each round (p279). By default that's an unmodified d20, and anything 10 or higher succeeds -- a 55% chance. With the Human Perseverance feat, you could hit that 10+ by rolling a 9, so your chance to throw off persistent debuffs goes up to 60%. But your Fortitude, Reflex and Will are completely separate.

At Will: Priest’s Shield; Sacred Flame; and Lance of Faith

Encounter: Healing Strike

Daily: Guardian of Faith

Utility: Divine Fortune and Turn Undead
(I think these go here)

Basically, yeah. When people talk about gaining utility powers, they're usually referring to the ones you get from your class* at levels 2, 6, 10, etc. (Chart on p29) And depending on how you arrange things in your head, you might want Turn Undead listed under "Encounter" since it's an attack. Lumping it with Divine Fortune helps clarify that it's one-or-the-other, though.

* Later books give you more options based on your trained skills and sometimes your race, not only from the class utility powers.

Priest's Shield isn't as likely to hit as the other at-wills, of course. But working with just PHB materials, I'd say it's a good choice. Sacred Flame and Lance of Faith are both "ranged", so you'd provoke opportunity attacks for using them.** Page 290 discusses OAs and refers you to p287 regarding how to make the attack. P268 has more info on how opportunity actions work. By taking a melee power, you can do something better than a basic attack when you're surrounded.

Again, later books expand your options. Fairly late in the game's lifespan, Wisdom-based melee cleric attacks were introduced.

** Almost all monsters -- maybe all of them? not sure -- have a "melee basic attack" that's reasonably accurate. Even if you're facing archers and spellweavers, try not to provoke opportunity attacks without good reason. As p290 mentions, they get to take a swing before you can finish the provoking action, possibly negating it completely by KOing you.

[Jaeda]

Hit Points: 22 (12 +10 Con score). (+5/lv)

You should have 28 hp; you forgot to adjust it when you changed your constitution. You should note that you are bloodied at 14 hp and you recover 7 hp when you spend a healing surge. You should also record that you get 7(Class) + 3 (Con) = 10 healing surges each day.

Saves aren't the same as defenses. That's one of the big differences in terminology that trip people up. When an enemy imposes some nasty effect on you that lasts more than a few seconds, you make a save against it at the end of each round (p279). By default that's an unmodified d20, and anything 10 or higher succeeds -- a 55% chance. With the Human Perseverance feat, you could hit that 10+ by rolling a 9, so your chance to throw off persistent debuffs goes up to 60%. But your Fortitude, Reflex and Will are completely separate.

That's one that I made the first time I played 4e.

[Great Dragon]

Edited in changes. Thanks!

Saves aren't the same as defenses. That's one of the big differences in terminology that trip people up. When an enemy imposes some nasty effect on you that lasts more than a few seconds, you make a save against it at the end of each round (p279). By default that's an unmodified d20, and anything 10 or higher succeeds -- a 55% chance. With the Human Perseverance feat, you could hit that 10+ by rolling a 9, so your chance to throw off persistent debuffs goes up to 60%. But your Fortitude, Reflex and Will are completely separate.

Ummm..
Please Run that again, a little slower....

So, Evil Mage casts Sleep on My Cleric.

Do they need to beat my Will Defense to affect me?
Or do I roll a save to resist?

If they succeed...

Does my Cleric need to Roll 9+ to wake up each round?

Or is it something else?

[Jaeda]

The Evil Mage casts sleep! They make an implement attack (the bonus is listed in their stat block) against your will defense, which is good for you since that is the best of your non-AC defenses. Unfortunately, they rolled 12+4 = 16, which meets your Will defense (since the feat bonus doesn't apply), so you fall unconscious (save ends). On your turn, you can do nothing, because you are asleep. At the end of your turn, you make a save. You roll a 9+1 (feat) = 10 and recover. If you didn't have the human perseverance feat, you would stay asleep and would try again next turn (you almost always need a 10).

Most effects are either "until the end of your next turn" or "save ends". Almost all instances of ongoing damage (such as from being poisoned or put on fire) are the later and will work exactly like the above.

[Great Dragon]

@Jaeda: thanks!!

Ok. Cleric wakes up and notices that Evil Mage is busy Monologue-ing their poor Minion/s.

So, Cleric uses his Implement to cast his Lance spell.

Attack roll?
or try to beat Evil Mage's (?) Defense?

If hit - does Astral Fire apply?

[Highfeather]

@Jaeda: thanks!!

Ok. Cleric wakes up and notices that Evil Mage is busy Monologue-ing their poor Minion/s.

So, Cleric uses his Implement to cast his Lance spell.

Attack roll?
or try to beat Evil Mage's (?) Defense?

These two are the exact same thing. An attack roll in 4e is always made against the enemy's Defenses - specifically the one listed in the power. In the case of Lance of Faith, you will be rolling to beat the Evil Mage's Reflex Defense. It is an Implement attack roll using your Wisdom, so you roll a d20, add your Wisdom modifier and half your level and compare that to the Evil Mage's Reflex Defense. If you meet or exceed that number, you will hit. The attack roll technically also includes other bonuses such as an Enhancement bonus from a +X Magic Weapon, but those are unlikely to be relevant at first level.

If hit - does Astral Fire apply?

Astral Fire gives you "a +1 feat bonus to damage rolls when you use a power that has the fire or the radiant keyword." The power block for Lance of Faith has the Radiant keyword, and the 'Hit' line specifies that you have to roll a d8 for damage, making it a damage roll. So yes, Astral Fire applies.

The easiest way to actually check if a feat that keys off a damage type applies is to just look at the damage the power deals. With how the rules work regarding damage types, if you do a certain type of damage with a power, that power has the relevant keyword - Radiant in this case.



In general, saves versus defenses is fairly easy, you just need to let go of the terminology used in other editions.

An attack roll will always be versus someone's defenses (numeric value), with the power calling out which defense you are targeting.

Saves are nearly always against conditions, and are indepedent of your ability scores. There is only a generic "saving throw" in 4e, no specific Str/Con/etc. saving throw.
You can easily determine if you need to roll a saving throw against an effect by looking at its duration. It can be a specified point in time ("until the end of your next turn"), in which case no saves are involved.
If the effect instead says "(save ends)", you will by default need to roll a saving throw at the end of each of your turns until you save against the effect (or are dead, of course). Unless otherwise specified, the DC for a saving throw is always 10.

It can get a little more complex from there, but everything is fairly straightforward. There is, for instance, a difference between "Immobilized (save ends) and Dazed (save ends)" and "Immobilized and Dazed (save ends both)". In the first case you have two (save ends) conditions on you, so you would roll two saving throws - one against each condition. In the second case, (save ends both) means that they both are ended on the same saving throw. You only roll one saving throw, and if you meet the DC, both conditions will be gone - otherwise they will both remain.
The other thing I would like to point out are Death Saving Throws - which actually behave like every other saving throw, just with different DCs. 9 and below is essentially a 'fail' - three strikes and you're out. 10-19 is neutral and your condition doesn't change. 20 will allow you to heal via spending a healing surge. Because of this, your Human Perseverance feat will also bump up your Death Saving Throws by 1.

The final thing I will quickly want to point out in this already slightly too complex post is the nature of bonuses. For instance, both your feats give a +1 feat bonus to something - and bonuses of the same type do not stack. Luckily, they are for two different things in this case - one is for saves, the other is for damage. You can tell the bonus types apart from the wording: +1 feat bonus, +1 enhancement bonus, +1 item bonus, etcetera. So if you ever come across another feat that gives you, for instance, a +2 feat bonus to saving throws, note that you cannot stack it with Human Perseverance. Only pointing this out because it's a common mistake made early on, with people aiming to gain 'immunity to saving throws' for instance, which would essentially be the case (aside from debuffs) with a flat +9 bonus to saving throws because of the default DC of 10. If bonus types weren't a thing, a Human could achieve this at level 12 (out of 30...) by just taking the Human Perseverance feat 9 times.

[Dimers]

If bonus types weren't a thing, a Human could achieve this at level 12 (out of 30...) by just taking the Human Perseverance feat 9 times.

Nah, can't take a feat more than once unless it says so (p192), same as in 3rd-ed. But that's a good point about the death saves! With the Human Perseverance feat, Great Dragon, you can roll a 19 on a death save and get the benefit of a 20 (p295).

Reviewing that section reminded me of another difference between editions. If you're at negative hit points when you get healed, you reset to 0 before the healing. 5e copied that concept but 3.X didn't have it.

[Excession]

Ok. Cleric wakes up and notices that Evil Mage is busy Monologue-ing their poor Minion/s.

Your saving throw is made at the end of your turn. Once your cleric wakes up their turn is over, and you would need to wait until the next round to attack.

There is a feat is a later book that lets you make saves against some effects at the start of your turn as well, but you won't have access to that with just PHB1.

[Great Dragon]

Reviewing that section reminded me of another difference between editions. If you're at negative hit points when you get healed, you reset to 0 before the healing. 5e copied that concept but 3.X didn't have it.

5e did change it a little.
In that unless you take enough damage to put you at your maximum HP in negative value, the PC didn't go below zero HP, where only three death save Failures was death. (3 strikes is also here, in 4e)

Unless I misremember, every character starts with 100gp to spend on whatever they want, and I think all the equipment (weapons, armor, and adventuring gear) is in Chapter 7.

Thanks!
Don't want ya to think you were ignored.
I'll check ASAP.

Edit: friend was also up late, and gave info via email.
Cost for Armor, Mace and Light Crossbow = 70 go.
Equipment next time.

@MeeposFire and ThePurple:
that goes for you two as well !
Some others did reply (thanks) but was directed at other posters.

I'll get to you when on my Tablet, maybe Friday.
Sorry for the delay.

An attack roll in 4e is always made against the enemy's Defenses - specifically the one listed in the power.

AFB, so….

That……. almost confused me.
Ok, so - powers are attacks against a Defense (numerical value)

But, just using your (weapon) at the foe is an attack (using either Str or Dex, depending on type - or are other Stats also allowed?) against their Armor Class.

(Does getting up cost movement?
Half? (5e) or Full?)
If so, assume that he got up before casting the Lance spell. I actually forgot to put that in.

<Moved>

Does 4e have Mage Armor?
If so, assume Evil Mage has that.
(Assuming 14 Int, What is AC?)

If Shield spell exists, assume their Master is a meanie, and didn't teach that to Evil Mage.

(But, go ahead and list what it does, please.
Not just for me, but also for anyone else reading this Thread.)

Your saving throw is made at the end of your turn. Once your cleric wakes up their turn is over, and you would need to wait until the next round to attack.

There is a feat in a later book that lets you make saves against some effects at the start of your turn as well, but you won't have access to that with just PHB1.

I did manage to find a way to get all the 4e books (except Modules) but they won't be here until the end of the month. (No more mad money! For this month, anyway)
So, listing things in the other books (with page numbers, please) is still useful.

Edit

I dispute the assertion that 4e is automatically “heroic”, and that ability scores are as critical to having an effective game as is made out. 4e seems heroic because the default setting for creating encounters is set to “easy”. If you used the same playstyle to run a 1e game, the characters would seem just as heroic.

Also, ability scores seem essential only because the game tells you that players need to succeed in d20 rolls most of the time.

<Snip>

If you somehow contrived for that fighter to have a 10 strength (which I don’t think is even possible using point buy)

So a zero to hero campaign is completely doable using 4e. You just can’t drink the kool-aid.

Well, the lowest I got was two 11s.
So Maybe: 16 Con, 14 Wis, 12 Int, 12 Cha, 11 Dex and 11 Str?

Or take the Standard Array and drop that 8 into Str.

But, most Players aren't likely to do that.

[Beoric]

I dispute the assertion that 4e is automatically “heroic”, and that ability scores are as critical to having an effective game as is made out. 4e seems heroic because the default setting for creating encounters is set to “easy”. If you used the same playstyle to run a 1e game, the characters would seem just as heroic.

Also, ability scores seem essential only because the game tells you that players need to succeed in d20 rolls most of the time.

Take a first level, 1e fighter equipped with a longsword, scale armor and a shield, which is relatively typical equipment until you score some loot. His stats are rolled, so lets say he has a strength of somewhere between 10 and 15, and a constitution of between 10 and 14. He has an AC of 5, does 1d8 damage and on average will have hit points of 5.5.

Let’s say he is fighting a hobgoblin, which has an AC of 5, does 1d8 damage and on average will have hit points of 5.5. So in that respect they are essentially identical.

However, the 1st level fighter needs a 1 to hit the bugbear, so he will only hit the hobgoblin 30% of the time. The hobgoblin, by contrast, hits the fighter on a 13, or 40% of the time.

Using the standard random monster generation table, if the fighter is on the first level of a dungeon he could encounter 2-8 of these, so using the large parties of 1e (padded out with hired mercenaries and henchmen) that is not so bad. However, if he descends to the second level he would encounter 4-16 (and would get double the treasure). If he goes to the third level he would encounter 6-24, but if he defeated them he would get triple the loot.

And it is still possible on the first level of the dungeon to encounter, for example, 2-5 bugbears. Each bugbear has an AC of 5, an average of 14.5 hit points (ie. 164% more than the fighter), and hits the fighter on an 11, or 50% of the time, while the fighter still hits the bugbears only 30% of the time.
By contrast, in 4e a first level character is generally fighting monsters that are considerably weaker than him. A level 1 standard monster is nowhere near as tough as a level 1 PC. A level 1 elite is probably more of an even match.

The point buy system pretty much ensures that the lowest strength score a fighter is likely to have is a 16. A level 1 fighter with a 16 strength using a longsword is +7 to hit, and will hit a level 1 standard skirmisher (with an AC of 15) on a natural 8, or 65% of the time; he would hit a soldier 55% of the time. If you somehow contrived for that fighter to have a 10 strength (which I don’t think is even possible using point buy) he would still hit an at-level soldier 40% of the time, which is still much better than the 1e fighter fighting the hobgoblin.

The 4e game feels heroic because the publishers advance different expectations, but there is no reason why you have to buy into those expectations. A game with potentially low ability scores could be run if the party was willing to run away when necessary, pad out the party with henchmen and hirelings, accept a lower frequency of successful attacks, pick its battles, pay close attention to tactics, and choose lower risk fights.

Note this last requires the DM to adopt an approach where certain areas are, on average, predictably more dangerous than others. Lower levels of dungeons are more dangerous than higher levels, forests are more dangerous than roads, swamps are more dangerous than forests. Parties can then choose heir level of risk.

Another reason why 4e is no more “heroic” is that the good utility powers actually come later in the game than in other editions. Most characters don’t even gain access to non-combat utility powers until level 2, whereas spellcasters get them at level 1 in 1e (think feather fall or jump). And the next tier of spells, which in 1e you get at 3rd level, you don’t receive until level 6 in a 4e game (think levitate or invisibility). In terms of resources, a 1st level 4e party actually has less to work with than a 1st level 1e party.

So a zero to hero campaign is completely doable using 4e. You just can’t drink the kool-aid.

[masteraleph]

5e did change it a little.
AFB, so….

That……. almost confused me.
Ok, so - powers are attacks against a Defense (numerical value)

But, just using your (weapon) at the foe is an attack (using either Str or Dex, depending on type - or are other Stats also allowed?) against their Armor Class.

Which is also a numerical value. All creatures (whether PCs or NPCs) have an AC, Reflex, Fortitude, and Will. In the case of PCs, you'll have to calculate those. For NPCs, they're listed in the stat block. Typically AC will be a few points higher than the other defenses, because most attacks vs. AC are with weapons, and Weapon attacks add in the proficiency bonus (either +2 or +3 depending on the weapon type). Weapon attacks vs. non-armor defenses ("NADs") are more accurate, usually, than ones vs. AC. You're comparing the d20 of the attack roll, plus appropriate bonuses, to the defense listed. If the attacker's total is equal or higher, they hit.

(Does getting up cost movement?
Half? (5e) or Full?)

This is another 4e vs. 5e difference- in 4e, you have Standard, Move, and Minor, and you generally can't stop in the middle of a move to do something else (there are some powers and items in the game- I don't recall if they're in PHB1- that let you stand up as a minor action). Standing up takes your move action.

If so, assume that he got up before casting the Lance spell. I actually forgot to put that in.

Cleric sees that his spell has failed to kill (assuming hit: 1d8+1 = 6 Average damage) the Evil Mage, but maybe has caused the Minion/s to hesitate in attacking him.

Making sure that he has both his shield and mace ready, Cleric moves up to the Evil Mage, and tries to knock some Sense into him!

Does 4e have Mage Armor?
If so, assume Evil Mage has that.
(Assuming 14 Int, What is AC?)

If Shield spell exists, assume their Master is a meanie, and didn't teach that to Evil Mage.

(But, go ahead and list what it does, please.
Not just for me, but also for anyone else reading this Thread.)

I did manage to find a way to get all the 4e books (except Modules) but they won't be here until the end of the month. (No more mad money! For this month, anyway)
So, listing things in the other books (with page numbers, please) is still useful

This is another big difference between 4e and other editions, and it is perhaps the single most liked aspect of 4e for DMs. NPCs (generally monsters, but also true of allies) do not follow PC rules. They are found as statblocks, with the appropriate defenses, hit points, etc. listed in the stat block- note that the numbers in Monster Manual 1 and 2 had issues, so people generally use MM3 and Monster Vaults 1 and 2 if they can. They have certain attacks, but typically far fewer than your average PC does, at least by the time you're in upper heroic, and again, all of the appropriate attack bonuses, damage amounts, effects, etc. are listed in the stat block. They have more hit points than a similarly leveled PC, but few healing surges, since they're designed to be around for an encounter and then go away. They might have items on them, but the items don't give them additional bonuses that you'd get from gaining the item- it's assumed that's baked into the stat block. In short: the Evil Mage might have a Shield ability, but not necessarily, and you wouldn't build a level 3 enemy mage like you would a level 3 PC mage. It's because of this that encounters are so easy to slap together in 4e- take a few enemies of appropriate level, and there are dozens or hundreds for any level, reskin the abilities, and POOF! you have the appropriate enemies. No building an entire party of enemy PCs where you're not sure how their abilities will interact with your party.

In general, NPCs will have an AC of roughly Level +14 and non-armor defenses of roughly level +12- in the case of a high INT mage, Reflex might be level +14, Fortitude level +10, and Will level +12 or 13. Are they level 1? 15 AC, 15 Reflex, 11 Fortitude, 13 Will. Level 4? 18 AC, 18 Reflex, 14 Fortitude, 16 Will. What's their attack vs. your defenses? Roughly level +5 vs. AC, +3 vs. NADs. So their Sleep ability (which is NOT the level 1 Daily power Sleep) probably is 1d20+4 vs. Will at level 1, 1d20+7 at level 2, or 1d20+33 at level 30 (though note that effects probably change as levels increase). There are also standard numbers for monster damage and their hit points, as well.

This, BTW, is why it's so important to give out appropriately leveled items (and why WotC introduced feats to increase PC attack and NADs in later books- they realized that PCs fell behind the curve at higher levels.) PCs need to keep up with enemies adding +1 to attack/defenses every level, and PCs only get +1 every 2 levels from leveling up. So PCs need appropriate Enhancement bonuses, ability bonuses, feat bonuses to keep up. This is something some folks disliked about 4e, and WotC tried to solve it via an optional Inherent Bonus system that reduces the number of items handed out, and then via the "flat math" of 5e.

[Great Dragon]

@masteraleph:
That helped, thanks !!

Is there Encumbrance listed anywhere?