D&D 4E New to 4ed. : what do i have to know/look out for?

[MoutonRustique]

Another thing I would like to tell you: you know when people say about 4e being focused on combat-heavy, dungeons crawling game? It’s just not true. Don’t do a classic dungeon crawl adventure. In my experience, 4e is better adapted to event-based, heroic, scene-by-scene game. So instead of an enormous dungeon, playing combats as the plot unfolds and tension scenes demand is the way to go here. Dungeons must be small, with lots of non-combat encounters. This isn’t either a quality or flaw: it’s a feature, just what it is.

That also means that many 4e’s adventures were horrible. Because they tried to use the dungeon-crawl theme.

The bold text bears repeating.

Someone also used the phrase: "This isn't Dungeons & Dragons, it's Dragons and Dungeons" as a rather pithy turn of phrase.

To counter my friend above:
You can use very large dungeons (in that the map is very large), but it requires a little bit of an adjustment:
1 - you'll want to group areas of the dungeon as encounters as opposed to [rooms]

2 - a good deal of the dungeon should not have creatures - this works as a double bonus: one, less low-value combats; two, the players now have access to more terrain, hazards and traps to use against the enemies by maneuvers and falling back and such; extra bonus(!): it often makes more sense in the fiction to have a bit of breathing room (ha!) between creatures...

[/pedantic counter]
[MENTION=51843]Eilathen[/MENTION]
As to the adventures - yes, many are built on the: [room 1 -fight!], [room 2 - fight!], [corridor 1 - fight!], [...] structure that is so very poor.

On the flip side, it's not much work at all to cut those combats out of the adventure, and to group a couple into more significant events. On the whole, I've found 4e adventures to nurture some very cool stories and ideas - they're just not well served by the implementation...

Lastly - xp in 4e is a great gage of power when building encounters. 90% of the time (19 times out of 20 - hehe, poll stat humour) the encounter guidelines will deliver what was indicated. Other than that, I strongly urge you to set-up a different leveling system for your players. There are mountains(!) of very good, different options.

My preferred one: remove "kill xp" completely. Make major quests worth ~1/4 of a level's xp, and minor quests 1/12 (a third of the big ones). This makes the outcomes of the adventure and the choices of the PCs matter more. And it removes the very, very bad incentive to kill everything in sight. Another good aspect of this approach is that you can set the pacing quite easily by changing the number of major quests required to gain a level (For instance: You want every adventure to have a major quest and characters to gain a level after a successful adventure? - bam! Done.)

 

[MwaO]

It is really easy on the DM because the math works right, at least with post MM3 math.

The boni don't get crazy at higher levels, since the math works. However, hit points generally inflate faster than damage. The real big issue I found with gaining levels in 4e is the action economy. I've had monsters dish out an attack of opportunity, which caused three players to shout out that they had immediate interrupts they wanted to use, and after that's done the monster got toasted (didn't manage to land the hit due to death), which then caused a PC to get a free attack, which triggered a free action, and then we're surprised that it's only Player 2's turn now... *sigh*. I find 4e surprisingly broke down a bit at paragon.

A good rule of thumb to use is that if you get your round done in a minute, you get a +2 to hit for your first attack next round. So taking too long to get your OAs/interrupts off = losing the +2 to hit. Plus, if you as DM move on, then too bad.

This is in part because multi/off-turn attacks are too valuable given how bonuses work - better to have 3 taps at 1w vs 1 tap at 6w by early paragon as an example, and WotC thinks 6w is crazy good...

 

[pemerton]

what would you 4e veterans tell a new 4e GM and/or player? What are the pitfalls of this edition? Overpowered builds to avoid? Details to keep in mind?

The only real houserule we use is no Expertise feats.

My main GMing advice would be - focus on the scene/encounter, and letting the players drive the action via their PCs. Here is an old thread about that.

I've had lots of actual play threads on these boards, that talk about encounter design, managing action (both combat and skill challenges), etc. Here are the links:

Some tweaks to H2 Thunderspire Labyrinth
Time-travel with witches and spiders
An ancient temple
Combat-free session
Social-only session, and very pivotal for the campaign
More combat-free, with a moral twist
First dealing with Kas
Hobgoblins and Calastryx
Doppelgangers
Wizard reborn as invoker
Some downtime skill challenges
The underdark
Rescued by a duergar
The PCs “return the favour”
A purple worm
Entering Phaervorul (P2, scaled up)
Epic dreams
More adventures in Phaervorul
On the Barrens in the Abyss
In Mal Arundak
The Shrine of the Kuo-toa
The Soul Abattoir, and Torog
Into the Feywild
Frost giants
More frost giants
The Prince of Frost
Slaads
Githzerai
Confronting Lolth
Defeating Lolth
Sealing the Abyss
Defeating Orcus, then escaping through the Abyss
Arrival at the Mausoleum of the Raven Queen
Still fighting Kas and Jenna Osterneth
Inside the Mausoleum of the Raven Queen
Trying to hold off the end of the world by defeating the tarrasque

EDIT: While the occasional choke-point encounter can be fun, as a general rule 4e loves space. This allows everyone to move; it allows the PCs to be split up into separate "fronts"; it allows circular paths (the DMG2 has a good discussion on this); etc.

So don't be afraid of space.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Read the essentials books for how to run skill challenges, and then ask ppl here about it.

Dont think of skill stuff and combat as separate things, think of them all as parts of potential encounters. Both use rounds, d20 rolls, and win conditions.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Yay double post!

 

[pemerton]

Read the essentials books for how to run skill challenges, and then ask ppl here about it.

I don't think the Essentials book gives very good advice.

In particular, the worked example depends upon using a GMing technique that has (to the best of my knowledge) never been expressly called out or discussed in a D&D book - namely, when the last check fails the GM weaves back in earlier events in the challenge as the consequence, even though the NPCs in question are not the causal explanation for the check's failure.

Treating a failed check in narrative rather than ingame causal terms is a very important part of running a skill challenge, yet the 4e books never talk about it. They seem to assume that a GM will work it out by osmosis.

The best advice I know of for running skill challenges is found in other game systems entirely: Robin Laws HeroQuest revised, the mid-90s game Maelstrom Storytelling, and the Burning Wheel's idea of "intent and task". Some discussion of the latter can be found in this free download of the core mechanics of Burning Wheel Gold.

 

[Raith5]

Another thing I would like to tell you: you know when people say about 4e being focused on combat-heavy, dungeons crawling game? It’s just not true. Don’t do a classic dungeon crawl adventure. In my experience, 4e is better adapted to event-based, heroic, scene-by-scene game. So instead of an enormous dungeon, playing combats as the plot unfolds and tension scenes demand is the way to go here. Dungeons must be small, with lots of non-combat encounters. This isn’t either a quality or flaw: it’s a feature, just what it is.
That also means that many 4e’s adventures were horrible. Because they tried to use the dungeon-crawl theme..

This is very good advice. You have to think of 4e adventures like scenes in a film, because combats are so substantial.

I would add that adding interesting/challenging terrain is important, as is having other goals in combat other than winning the fight every once and awhile (rescuing the captives before they they are slain, preventing a ritual being completed etc).

And yes, as others in this thread have said 4e allows roleplaying like every other edition of D&D, despite what some might say.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I don't think the Essentials book gives very good advice.

In particular, the worked example depends upon using a GMing technique that has (to the best of my knowledge) never been expressly called out or discussed in a D&D book - namely, when the last check fails the GM weaves back in earlier events in the challenge as the consequence, even though the NPCs in question are not the causal explanation for the check's failure.

Treating a failed check in narrative rather than ingame causal terms is a very important part of running a skill challenge, yet the 4e books never talk about it. They seem to assume that a GM will work it out by osmosis.

The best advice I know of for running skill challenges is found in other game systems entirely: Robin Laws HeroQuest revised, the mid-90s game Maelstrom Storytelling, and the Burning Wheel's idea of "intent and task". Some discussion of the latter can be found in this free download of the core mechanics of Burning Wheel Gold.

That's a lot of extra buy in (mostly time sink) just to play 4e DnD. I don't think they need to do all that. Skill challenges work out of the box. I'd rather recommend old 4e sly flourish advice articles than digging into other games.

Personally, that advice isn't even that useful for me, because I tend to use skill challenges most in exploration and as part of combat, and play things much more fast and loose in social scenes. But for folks who don't want to do that, check out what's left of the various 4e blogs. Especially sly flourish.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

4e's niche is action adventure role-play. It literally tells you in the DMG 'skip to the exciting parts' and that is basically what the game wants you to do. Imagine an action movie. You don't spend scene after scene on the mundane details of the hero equipping himself, training, researching, etc. Each of those gets its quick scene or even just maybe an acknowledgment. If it has plot significance, then it gets one short scene. Likewise there isn't some long drawn-out scenario of trudging through the swamp, making the boat, etc. You get to the Temple of Doom pretty quick and things move right along with each succeeding scene presenting some obstacle and setting up the next one.

4e combats should resolve things or set things up. They should both HAVE a plot and be PART of a plot. Pemerton's scene framing techniques work well here to allow you to evolve what that plot is and how the characters fit into it. There are other ways of course, but it has the virtue of heavy table participation and lack of railroading.

Dynamic action, that's what you want. This is largely why a lot of the older adventure material from previous editions doesn't easily translate. A 4e encounter in some dungeon chamber isn't that exciting unless it involves some real dynamic action of a type that was rarely present in the old days. A running fight in a collapsing mine shaft is a 4e sort of thing, a slugfest in a 20x20 chamber with a few cookie cutter orcs is NOT.

 

[Eilathen]

Again, thanks a lot to all of you (wow, pemerton, lots of links for me to check out...thanks for the work!).

Quick question - what do you all think of the magazines that were available for 4e? Dungeon Magazine and Dragon Magazine. Are there some really good issues from both lines? Is it worth it to check them out?