D&D 4th Edition [and other..oh, who are we kidding. 4th Ed!]

Of the Tabletop, and other, lesser varieties.

Moderators: SecondTalon, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
TallMax
Posts: 108
Joined: Sat May 10, 2008 9:37 pm UTC

Re: D&D 4th Edition [and other..oh, who are we kidding. 4th Ed!]

Postby TallMax » Fri Jul 11, 2008 11:20 pm UTC

PHB.>_< The PSB was an old acronym from a homebrew
"the time will come when men such as i look upon the murder
of animals as they now look upon the murder of men"

---
leonardo da vinci

User avatar
Benitosimies
Posts: 326
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2007 5:57 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: D&D 4th Edition [and other..oh, who are we kidding. 4th Ed!]

Postby Benitosimies » Thu Jul 17, 2008 3:10 am UTC

I've noticed that every new edition of D&D has this built-in (hardcoded?) game setting that's all orthogonal to the previous settings. Pre-AD&D I guess assumed you were walking around in Mystara if you weren't all up in Blackmoor. Third edition had those goofy greyhawky gods you're supposed to accept are in every game. There's always this new set of attributes that are assumed to be in your D&D world if you just bought the game and you're reading Setting stuff. Like gnomes.

I skimmed through the 4E monster manual entry for Gnome and it was all like 'Gnomes are these mofos, who can shift between the Fey plane and also the real world.' So gnomes are a new thing now. And so is a Fey Plane. Before, gnomes were just tricky assholes and they could talk to badgers because natural selection had deemed it thus. Before that gnomes were some smart people who were good at Illusions. There wasn't a wizard specialty for anyone other race but gnomes could Illusion the pants off of anyone else. Furthest back I'm pretty sure there weren't any gnomes.

I said to myself what the hell I am designing my own gnomes and that is final. Enough of this business where you are changing the fictional facts.
хлэб и Воля

User avatar
Maseiken
The Candylawyer
Posts: 2827
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 11:13 am UTC

Re: D&D 4th Edition [and other..oh, who are we kidding. 4th Ed!]

Postby Maseiken » Thu Jul 17, 2008 5:37 am UTC

Well... I'll make MY own Gnomes!
Wit Blackjack!
And Hookers!
"GRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOWR!!!!"
(Translation: "Objection!")

Maseiken had the ball at the top of the key...

User avatar
Vaniver
Posts: 9422
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 2:12 am UTC

Re: D&D 4th Edition [and other..oh, who are we kidding. 4th Ed!]

Postby Vaniver » Thu Jul 17, 2008 5:46 am UTC

The gnome race in the back of the MM seemed acceptable, but I for one am glad the buggers are gone. Damn gnomes.
I mostly post over at LessWrong now.

Avatar from My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic, owned by Hasbro.

User avatar
GhostWolfe
Broken wings and scattered feathers
Posts: 3892
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 11:56 am UTC
Location: Brisbane, Aust
Contact:

Re: D&D 4th Edition [and other..oh, who are we kidding. 4th Ed!]

Postby GhostWolfe » Thu Jul 17, 2008 5:50 am UTC

Maseiken wrote:Well... I'll make MY own Gnomes!
Wit Blackjack!
And Hookers!

In fact, forget the Gnomes!
and the Blackjack!
Linguistic Anarchist
Hawknc: ANGELL IS SERIOUS BUSINESS :-[
lesliesage: Animals dunked in crude oil: sad. Animals dunked in boiling oil: tasty.
Belial: I was in your mom's room all night committing to a series of extended military actions.

User avatar
Maseiken
The Candylawyer
Posts: 2827
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 11:13 am UTC

Re: D&D 4th Edition [and other..oh, who are we kidding. 4th Ed!]

Postby Maseiken » Thu Jul 17, 2008 5:52 am UTC

Damn straight!
"GRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOWR!!!!"
(Translation: "Objection!")

Maseiken had the ball at the top of the key...

User avatar
Yakk
Poster with most posts but no title.
Posts: 11115
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 7:27 pm UTC
Location: E pur si muove

Re: D&D 4th Edition [and other..oh, who are we kidding. 4th Ed!]

Postby Yakk » Mon Sep 08, 2008 7:19 am UTC

Vaniver wrote:The gnome race in the back of the MM seemed acceptable, but I for one am glad the buggers are gone. Damn gnomes.

I'm a monster! Rawr!

(Someone was looking for this thread, and I think your post needed a good Rawr!)

So, skill challenges are really crufty, but a good basis to inspire building your own.

There are a few infinite damage loops built around rerolling that are fixed if you take the "you must use the second roll" clause in every reroll power seriously.

Ranger at-will twin strike is too good. Ranger/Fighter Careful Attack/Sure Strike attacks suck. Rogues have an at-will power that is a gimpy charge that happens to use dex, and Rogues in general have problems with basic melee attacks unless they pump strength (which is important for OAs).

Rogues have issues doing a "run off and assassinate that Artillery(Leader) for us", unlike the other 2 strikers.

At high levels, Orbzards can perma-stun-lock solo monsters too reliably.

Offensive teleport powers should not be allowed to teleport people into the sky.
One of the painful things about our time is that those who feel certainty are stupid, and those with any imagination and understanding are filled with doubt and indecision - BR

Last edited by JHVH on Fri Oct 23, 4004 BCE 6:17 pm, edited 6 times in total.

User avatar
mbrownmx
Posts: 24
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 4:27 am UTC

Re: D&D 4th Edition [and other..oh, who are we kidding. 4th Ed!]

Postby mbrownmx » Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:15 pm UTC

Yakk wrote:There are a few infinite damage loops built around rerolling that are fixed if you take the "you must use the second roll" clause in every reroll power seriously.
\

Interesting. Myself and another friend of mine, both of whom I'd describe politely as powergamers, haven't noticed anything like this yet. Mind giving an example?

User avatar
Xanthir
My HERO!!!
Posts: 5400
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 12:49 am UTC
Location: The Googleplex
Contact:

Re: D&D 4th Edition [and other..oh, who are we kidding. 4th Ed!]

Postby Xanthir » Mon Sep 08, 2008 6:23 pm UTC

mbrownmx wrote:
Yakk wrote:There are a few infinite damage loops built around rerolling that are fixed if you take the "you must use the second roll" clause in every reroll power seriously.
\

Interesting. Myself and another friend of mine, both of whom I'd describe politely as powergamers, haven't noticed anything like this yet. Mind giving an example?

Seconded. The only one I know of is using a combination of Elven Accuracy and that Demigod lvl30 power that essentially gives you infinite Encounter powers. There are several easy interpretations of the rules that destroy it, though.
(defun fibs (n &optional (a 1) (b 1)) (take n (unfold '+ a b)))

User avatar
Yakk
Poster with most posts but no title.
Posts: 11115
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 7:27 pm UTC
Location: E pur si muove

Re: D&D 4th Edition [and other..oh, who are we kidding. 4th Ed!]

Postby Yakk » Mon Sep 08, 2008 8:45 pm UTC

Demigod 30.
Paladin power that lets you reroll a damage roll.
Vorpal Weapon

Vorpal Weapons use exploding dice, so there is no upper limit on the damage delt by a single blow's roll.

Empty all powers, use elven accuracy to guarantee a hit with infinite rerolls, on the hit-that-is-a-20 burn your refresh power on recharging the Paladin reroll damage power. Now continue to roll your Vorpal exploding damage dice until the target takes enough damage, and then refresh even accuracy.

And yes, there is the limit on the number of free actions per turn, and the "you MUST take the 2nd roll" clause in every reroll power, which makes this not work.
One of the painful things about our time is that those who feel certainty are stupid, and those with any imagination and understanding are filled with doubt and indecision - BR

Last edited by JHVH on Fri Oct 23, 4004 BCE 6:17 pm, edited 6 times in total.

User avatar
Xanthir
My HERO!!!
Posts: 5400
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 12:49 am UTC
Location: The Googleplex
Contact:

Re: D&D 4th Edition [and other..oh, who are we kidding. 4th Ed!]

Postby Xanthir » Mon Sep 08, 2008 9:19 pm UTC

Thought so. Every infinite-damage loop I've seen revolves around Demigod 30.

I prefer allowing reroll powers to be interpreted liberally, but altering the definition of a "spent" power. If a power is used to modify another power, it doesn't finish resolving until the power it modifies is finished resolving. Thus Demigod 30 can't kick in until *after* you've made all your rolls, assigned damage, etc.

It's possible that there are still issues with this, of course. This just allows the possibility of blowing two reroll powers on a *really* important roll, which I don't see any sense in restricting.
(defun fibs (n &optional (a 1) (b 1)) (take n (unfold '+ a b)))

User avatar
mbrownmx
Posts: 24
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 4:27 am UTC

Re: D&D 4th Edition [and other..oh, who are we kidding. 4th Ed!]

Postby mbrownmx » Mon Sep 08, 2008 9:22 pm UTC

Yakk wrote:Demigod 30.
Paladin power that lets you reroll a damage roll.
Vorpal Weapon

Vorpal Weapons use exploding dice, so there is no upper limit on the damage delt by a single blow's roll.

Empty all powers, use elven accuracy to guarantee a hit with infinite rerolls, on the hit-that-is-a-20 burn your refresh power on recharging the Paladin reroll damage power. Now continue to roll your Vorpal exploding damage dice until the target takes enough damage, and then refresh even accuracy.

And yes, there is the limit on the number of free actions per turn, and the "you MUST take the 2nd roll" clause in every reroll power, which makes this not work.


Ok, I guess I see the sort of thing you're getting at. I assumed it was sorta weaker phrasing re: taking the second roll that was allowing these sort of things; there doesn't seem to be much room for interpretation, at least in my mind, on that particular paladin power (I could probably be convinced on Elven Accuracy, as that's a weaker "use the result of the second roll, even if it's worse"), but that paladin one is much harsher (I assume intentionally, to allow them to put out other reroll things, too).

@ Xanthir: To me, at least, I think the point was to limit blowing all your re-rolls at once. There's plenty of ways to phrase it (e.g. "Use this roll in place of any previous result") if you wanted to allow two rerolls of, say, damage, on the same power.

User avatar
Xanthir
My HERO!!!
Posts: 5400
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 12:49 am UTC
Location: The Googleplex
Contact:

Re: D&D 4th Edition [and other..oh, who are we kidding. 4th Ed!]

Postby Xanthir » Mon Sep 08, 2008 9:31 pm UTC

Myeh, rerolls are weak enough (when they aren't infinite) that I really don't have a problem with them all being blown at once. I've done a lot of research on reroll systems in D&D - definite diminishing returns. On the other hand, when you *really* need to hit...

I think the "use the second roll" wording was just to make it simple and absolutely clear that this is *not* a "reroll and take the best" situation. I honestly don't think it was intended to limit you to rerolling once and only once.
(defun fibs (n &optional (a 1) (b 1)) (take n (unfold '+ a b)))

User avatar
mbrownmx
Posts: 24
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 4:27 am UTC

Re: D&D 4th Edition [and other..oh, who are we kidding. 4th Ed!]

Postby mbrownmx » Mon Sep 08, 2008 9:37 pm UTC

Xanthir wrote:Myeh, rerolls are weak enough (when they aren't infinite) that I really don't have a problem with them all being blown at once. I've done a lot of research on reroll systems in D&D - definite diminishing returns. On the other hand, when you *really* need to hit...

I think the "use the second roll" wording was just to make it simple and absolutely clear that this is *not* a "reroll and take the best" situation. I honestly don't think it was intended to limit you to rerolling once and only once.


I think it depends on the phrasing, as I sort mentioned above.

Elven accuracy says: "Use the second roll, even if it's lower." I'd let someone do a double-reroll with that, as that to me does sound like the "don't take the best, take the more recent roll" effect.
The paladin power Yakk was referring to (from Astral Weapon Paragon path) says "you must use the result of the second roll," which (at least to me) sounds stronger than the Elven accuracy one, which is why I'd not allow a second reroll there.

Spuddly
Posts: 264
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2008 7:11 pm UTC

Re: D&D 4th Edition [and other..oh, who are we kidding. 4th Ed!]

Postby Spuddly » Mon Sep 08, 2008 10:06 pm UTC

I've been curious as to how important flat bonuses are vs. rolls. I started playing a ranger, and getting two attacks a round with twin strike seems better than one attack at +2 or one attack with dex damage. It's a bugbear ranger, so the damage dice are up a grade, which I think makes shooting twice more appealing.

The rogue at wills seem flat out better, though. Weapon + dex + cha on a shuriken? Yes please.

I just started a game as a bugbear ranger, my friend as a goblin rogue (Oh me yarm, goblins make ideal rogues!). Our DM is running us through the adventure at the back of the DMG. As two strikers, we've done pretty well. We got to, and defeated, the kobold priest room, only using like 5 healing surges between us. We did roll for stats (4d6, drop one), and I got extremely lucky (total of +12 modifiers, including an 18). The goblin rogue also has +12 worth of modifiers, but a 17, not an 18. He rolled abysmally for something like 9 sets of dice (total modifier of +4 or less, usually less). Finally the DM just rolled a beautiful set for him and told him to use those.

I had been bad mouthing all the feats that only activate on a crit. Crit specs always struck me as pretty worthless in D&D unless you really, really gamed your char for criticals. Browsing through feats and weapons, something proc-ing only 5% of the time (until epic tier) seemed pretty useless. Of course, I rolled 5 natural twenties on attacks in the session, and at one point, rolled 3 nat 20s in a row. Which got me to wondering- what's the chance, with two attacks/round, that at least one will be a critical?
Give me your eyes;
I need sunshine.

User avatar
Xanthir
My HERO!!!
Posts: 5400
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 12:49 am UTC
Location: The Googleplex
Contact:

Re: D&D 4th Edition [and other..oh, who are we kidding. 4th Ed!]

Postby Xanthir » Mon Sep 08, 2008 10:19 pm UTC

mbrownmx wrote:
Xanthir wrote:Myeh, rerolls are weak enough (when they aren't infinite) that I really don't have a problem with them all being blown at once. I've done a lot of research on reroll systems in D&D - definite diminishing returns. On the other hand, when you *really* need to hit...

I think the "use the second roll" wording was just to make it simple and absolutely clear that this is *not* a "reroll and take the best" situation. I honestly don't think it was intended to limit you to rerolling once and only once.


I think it depends on the phrasing, as I sort mentioned above.

Elven accuracy says: "Use the second roll, even if it's lower." I'd let someone do a double-reroll with that, as that to me does sound like the "don't take the best, take the more recent roll" effect.
The paladin power Yakk was referring to (from Astral Weapon Paragon path) says "you must use the result of the second roll," which (at least to me) sounds stronger than the Elven accuracy one, which is why I'd not allow a second reroll there.

That's fine. I interpret it differently, and unless/until we play in a game together, there's no problem there.

Honestly, the difference is miniscule.
(defun fibs (n &optional (a 1) (b 1)) (take n (unfold '+ a b)))

User avatar
mbrownmx
Posts: 24
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 4:27 am UTC

Re: D&D 4th Edition [and other..oh, who are we kidding. 4th Ed!]

Postby mbrownmx » Mon Sep 08, 2008 10:20 pm UTC

Spuddly wrote:I've been curious as to how important flat bonuses are vs. rolls. I started playing a ranger, and getting two attacks a round with twin strike seems better than one attack at +2 or one attack with dex damage. It's a bugbear ranger, so the damage dice are up a grade, which I think makes shooting twice more appealing.

The rogue at wills seem flat out better, though. Weapon + dex + cha on a shuriken? Yes please.

I just started a game as a bugbear ranger, my friend as a goblin rogue (Oh me yarm, goblins make ideal rogues!). Our DM is running us through the adventure at the back of the DMG. As two strikers, we've done pretty well. We got to, and defeated, the kobold priest room, only using like 5 healing surges between us. We did roll for stats (4d6, drop one), and I got extremely lucky (total of +12 modifiers, including an 18). The goblin rogue also has +12 worth of modifiers, but a 17, not an 18. He rolled abysmally for something like 9 sets of dice (total modifier of +4 or less, usually less). Finally the DM just rolled a beautiful set for him and told him to use those.

I had been bad mouthing all the feats that only activate on a crit. Crit specs always struck me as pretty worthless in D&D unless you really, really gamed your char for criticals. Browsing through feats and weapons, something proc-ing only 5% of the time (until epic tier) seemed pretty useless. Of course, I rolled 5 natural twenties on attacks in the session, and at one point, rolled 3 nat 20s in a row. Which got me to wondering- what's the chance, with two attacks/round, that at least one will be a critical?


Personal opinion: the benefit of the other at-wills is more the special than the extra damage/to hit, but I'd need to do more math than I'm willing to right now to figure out when 2 attacks is better than 1, given a certain stat block. Hit and Run and Nimble Strike, for instance, both allow you some freedom to escape a nasty situation while still doing damage with the single attack.

As for Ranger vs. Rogue: they look a little better on paper, but the fact that the rogue's weapons are probably gonna be a die size or two less hurts them a little. They also aren't as safe darting around (Deft strike grants movement, not shifts), at least with the at-wills only, so if the rogue gets in a tight spot, he may wish he had Nimble Strike. (Relatedly: Kobold Rogues are also extremely nasty little buggers, with shifting as a minor action).

Keep in mind both of you have very high modifiers. The PHB even recommends rerolling if modifiers are greater than +8 (before racials), to balance PC powers. Because they're only two of you, it's probably ok in your current setup, but a great many PCs won't have really high stats in more than 1 place.

WIth two attacks, odds that at least one is a crit is 1-(.95*.95) = .0975, or about 10%.

User avatar
Yakk
Poster with most posts but no title.
Posts: 11115
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 7:27 pm UTC
Location: E pur si muove

Re: D&D 4th Edition [and other..oh, who are we kidding. 4th Ed!]

Postby Yakk » Tue Sep 09, 2008 1:27 am UTC

Twin Strike is the top tier choice, damage wise. It gets even better as you get enchantments and feats (like weapon focus, bastard sword, etc).

The Rogue vs Reflexes, and +Cha damage, are among the next tier -- except, of course, that the Rogue is forced to use tiny [W] dice to use the powers.

Nimble Blade (+1 to hit with CA) is the best Rogue feat.

d8 HQ dice is not that good -- + weapon damage is better for Rangers.
One of the painful things about our time is that those who feel certainty are stupid, and those with any imagination and understanding are filled with doubt and indecision - BR

Last edited by JHVH on Fri Oct 23, 4004 BCE 6:17 pm, edited 6 times in total.


Return to “Gaming”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 62 guests