I find it odd that a blog labeling itself as a Revised Edition resurgent would pay any heed to a blog that almost universally talks about 4th Edition (I also review digital games, apparently). Buuut, he does have me on his blogroll. So…win?

First Issue
Katallos doesnt like that 4th Edition refers to each class’s powers as, well, powers. Its a kind of global label that encompasses the majority of what a class offers (and what makes them unique). To him, the word power just doesnt grok with the fantasy genre. I dont really care since in the narrative people dont refer to them as such, and some classes might not refer to them by their “source name” (exploits, spells, prayers, etc).

I suppose there might be another label for this game mechanic that would work better, but I’d say this is more of a nitpick than anything: his second point is much more interesting.

Second Issue
Often I see this stated as something like, “its like mashing a couple of buttons over and over again,” but I’m glad that Katallos is willing to at least make the concession that 3rd Edition had this as well. I’m just going to take it a step further and say that 3rd Edition had it a lot worse.

See, in 3rd Edition many classes, especially those without spells, were basically relegated to a routine of roll to attack, and roll to damage if you hit. Thats it. No kicker effect, few if any conditions (and those were often extremely limited), and not combat dynamics. Once you got your character in melee, be prepared to just stand there and trade blows til someone runs out of hit points. Fighters, low-level rangers, monks, paladins, and more spent almost all of their time making a nondescript attack roll over and over and over.

His complaint? That 4th Edition does basically the same thing. I would agree, except this is false. Well, I suppose its not entirely false since to be fair most of the time in combat you will be repeating one of 3-5 different things over and over. Not necessary in subsequent rounds, but I mean you’ll probably end up using something like reaping strike at least twice in the same encounter. At least until you get a few levels under your belt and start getting access to multiple encounter powers. Those do a good job of reducing the time combat lasts and how many times you’ll fallback on the at-will stuff.

By the rules, a 3rd Edition fighter can only make an attack roll for damage if he hits. Sure, there are a few other combat actions you can take like grapple or disarm, but those are generally incredibly difficult to reliably use, and even then you would want to burn feats to give it a snowball’s chance in hell. The other stuff Katallos mentions can only be done if he takes some feats, allowing you to switch into different modes that dont do anything except subtract from his attack roll in order to increase AC or damage. In the end, he still makes an attack roll to deal basic damage. How does this compare to 4th Edition? Well…

Every fighter in 4E has at least three attack options in a given round without resorting to the use of special actions (grab, bull rush, etc) or feats. Those extra combat actions? Much more reliable and you dont have to burn a feat to avoid getting whacked for your troubles. You get two at-will powers by virtue of being alive, and you can also opt out to use a basic melee attack, which is mechanically identical to 3rd Editions melee attack except that at level 21 the damage dice are doubled (helping to keep it somewhat useful).

Again, not quite the same. At all.

He also claims that in 3rd Edition you could use description in your attacks, such as by making a jump check to leap at an opponent before attacking. You can still do this in 4th Edition with Athletics, so…I fail to see the difference. He also mentions that if he rolled well enough, he could sometimes get a damage bonus, which is a houserule and fairly abusable. By allowing a player to make a non-penalized roll to randomly determine a benefit, you have just created incentive for the player to always make the attempt because there is absolutely no drawback. Just make jump checks all the time and see if you get a little extra. Bad, baaad mechanic! *swat* It would be like letting wizards make Arcana checks to see if they can boost their spell save DC: they’d do it all the fucking time.

Going back to combat narrative, if you think that the at-will fighter exploits somehow detract from it, then just continually use melee basic attack. Its the exact same fucking thing from 3rd Edition. Not that you cant dynamically describe existing exploits in various ways. The existing flair does not discourage, but merely provides a default description that mostly helps explain how the power does what it does. Its just fluff. You can use it or invent your own. Just because they started dropping descriptions in 3rd Edition books for spells doesnt mean that I was forced to use them, just like I dont always describe monsters, magic items, equipment, or locations the way they are in the books.

Third Issue
This I can somewhat agree on, at least for new players. Yes, many powers generate conditions or modifiers. Yes, they can and do change on a round-by-round basis. I think that this adds a dynamic layer to combat that helps make it fun and interesting without overtly penalizing players for the long term with stuff like ability damage/drain and level drain. Honestly if you forget a modifier here and there (and people will do this in all games), its not going to break anything.

Out of his entire post, this is the only point that makes sense to me.

Fourth Issue
Ah, the good ol’, “everyone is a spellcaster” argument. Easy-sauce.

What Wizards of the coast did is make all characters follow the same resolution mechanic. This is good for precisely the reasons that you preferred it in the past: system mastery is bad. Players should not have to become heavily invested in the game in order to “unlock” certain elements. If a player wants to play a wizard, why should it be any more difficult or convoluted than playing a fighter? If they are into fantasy and really enjoy magic, its not going to be fun if they have to memorize additional rules and resolution mechanics.

Besides, I never really liked that wizards were only wizards for an hour of each day.

I disagree on your claim that classes play the same. Having played many of the classes and seen other players try them out, I can say with confidence that even classes with the same role do not run the same way: you cannot play a fighter like you play a paladin, and you dont play a druid like you play a wizard. Hell, you dont even necessarily play a ranger the same way you play a rogue, and they are both martial strikers!

When I played a cleric, I mostly hung back and used my prayers to blast monsters and bolster my allies. When I gave the artificer a shot (another leader), I instead relied upon a combination of melee and ranged attacks to grant my allies bonuses and also create constructs and barriers. When I played a warlord, I was up in the thick of melee inspiring people and providing tactical advice. All leaders, none of them the same.

Shazbot is familiar with rangers and rogues, and he can feel free to pipe in on his experiences with both.

You cant see the background laser-wooshy thing, but it was there this morning I swear.

Technically, there should be a “ka-bong” in there, since tide of iron uses a shield.

I dont know what the fuck that thing is supposed to be. An ogre, troll, or trogre. Whatever. Cue Final Fantasy victory theme of your choice. You can do a pose animation, too.

Here’s some cooler art out of Primal Power to make up for it.

Not really sure about the graphics in this shot: the textures dont look too hot and frankly neither does she.

Worst Macaulay Culkin impression evar.

Fat and bulemic? Reminds me of an uglier (if thats possible) Allfather D’Aronique from Preacher.

So there you have it. A monster that as far as I know exists to be killed because she is ugly and I guess eats babies. Literally. I’d really prefer to see videos flaunting the character creation system and/or gameplay mechanics, personally. Maybe something on how questing works?

Stick in the Mud is the first official adventure for Chaos Scar. Its for level 1 characters, and actually wont provide enough XP to net a level (a bit over half, I think). There’s only about five encounters, making it a little longer than your typical delve. All in all it has this nostalgic feel of when I played Diablo 2 and went into the Den of Evil: it was sweet, short, and I got some levels and loot for my troubles.

I’m curious if Wizards is going to go this route for all their adventures, as it seems sufficient for a night of gaming (five encounters is about what I’d expect my group to plow through given 3-4 hours time), but also has the preparation advantage since the backstory isnt super complex or necessarily linked to larger events. If you have the prep time then you as a DM could link it into future adventures or other events, but if you dont then I think its great for people without a lot of time on their hands.

There are three suggested hooks to get the players going. One is for them to retrieve a staff for an ancestor of the dude that made the keep, and another gives you a cash bounty per bullywug head (the XP reward is also boosted if you kill them all). My favorite though is the second hook where a NPC asks you to scrape mud off of them and bring it back for some kind of magical experiment.
I really like how one of the quests is that a NPC wants you to bring back mud samples taken from various bullywug types. He gives you a one time payment of 30 gp for each individual monster (croaker, mucker, twitcher, and mud lord). It’ll be interesting to see how people react to this sort of immersive monster harvesting project. Also? The XP reward goes up if you collect it from all four.

Its got my interest so far, but how does the actual adventure part hold up?

The first encounter was surprisingly engaging despite its simple layout. It takes place in the ruined foundations of the keep build by the sorcerer-dude, and is a square area with lots of missing walls and debris. The missing rooms make it somewhat like a maze, which would let players use some dynamic movement and tactics. Since the outer walls are also damaged, you could approach this encounter using stealth try and net surprise, but you could also launch a pincer attack by coming in from two ways. I think that it caters to both tactical players and the ones that just want to kick in the door and start hacking…or both.

The next encounter occurs after you go underground, in a study. Its much more narrow than the ruined keep, but its underground so thats to be expected. There are a few terrain features that players can manipulate: braziers, tables, and bookshelves (oh my). The braziers can be toppled over to provide concealment, the tables can be used as cover, and the bookshelves can be…hopped onto with a…DC 20 Athletics? Whaaa?
Mind you, these shelves arent standing up, they are already knocked over. I dont know about you, but if I knock my shelves over that I could get on them extremely easily. I mean, even if I couldnt jump on top I can still fucking climb something thats barely a foot-and-a-half high. The author also makes a not to remember the -2 penalty for the mud, but I’m not sure if he’s already included it or what. The old DM screen lists a level 1 hard DC as 20, but I’d say its more of a moderate thing. I would drop the DC to 15 and then up it to 17 because of the mud.

I dont want to spoil the rest of the encounters, but the author does a good job of repeating terrain features so that players can learn what to do with them in one encounter and use it in the immediate future. Also, there is a slight mix up on monsters, so its not just a repetitive grind of bullywugs. Better yet? Unlike the first Scales of War adventure the composition makes sense. He includes narrative bits for the bullywugs, such as by having them taunt players in Primordial. Its sweet, its short, and it delivers. This is bad for me since I’m on a DMing hiatus because of school, and I really want to fucking run this.

-Fin T.T

Its more or less supposed to be player driven, heavily supporting the, “Say yes,” mantra. The DM provides description and exposition, then lets the players loose to do whatever it takes to destroy the meteor. My main problem is that from what I’ve read, there isnt really any reason to do this. Sure, its gathering up an army worthy of Mordor, but they arent really doing anything. Mebbe its just a very proactive stance?

Adventures out of Chaos Scar as supposed to be ran with minimal prep time, which is good, but then most adventures are setup that way. Its also remote and modular enough to be dropped into any campaign, which is great for Points of Light buffs like myself. Normally I’d say tough shit to the crowd using prepublished campaigns (like myself) since you dont know how far spread its going to end up being, but the stated campaign goal is very simple and straighforward: get to the end and kill the meteor. So, hooray for Diablo 2-like simplicity?

I think its an interesting feat they’re attempting here. Very flexible in terms of player choice, easy to port into any campaign, but the end-game goal is given right from the start. Hrmm…well…the first adventure is out, so I guess I’ll go read that and see how it goes.

Not sure if the campaign is fully worked out, since they are accepting submissions for it.

Just goes to show what wild speculation is worth :\

Yes…the Primal power source already has a formidable and compelling controller class in the Druid…but as it turns out, the Seeker is utterly and completely it’s own animal and vastly different from all of the other controller classes.

The most unique thing about the Seeker is that this class does not utilize implements like other controller classes to focus her evocations, but instead relies on ranged weapons such as bows, crossbows and thrown projectiles. A lot of the Seeker’s powers involve loosing arrows wreathed in a swirling maelstrom of spiritual power that upon contact with the foe, creating area of effects that damage or hinder surrounding enemies. Some powers create terrain altering zones as well.

The Seeker is Wisdom based, with secondary effects keying off of Strength or Dexterity. Their primary class feature, Inevitable Shot, allows them to make a ranged basic attack against a nearby enemy when they miss their primary target. Also many of her evocations state that they can be used as a ranged basic attack. This makes the Seeker an effective secondary striker, as they are almost always doing damage.

The Seeker class also offers two different builds to choose from, each with it’s own “Seeker’s Bond” encounter power. The Bloodbond, which was detailed in the D&Di preview, grants the Encaging Spirits encounter power. This creates a burst effect that pushes and slows enemies as a minor action. In addition, this class feature also allows the Seeker to shift as a minor action while not wearing heavy armor.

The article, written by Robert J. Schwalb, with design commentary by himself and Stephen Radney-MacFarland, also details to Prestige classes: The Crimson Hunter, who is like a vengeful primal assassin, and has features that mostly promote their secondary striker effects. The Seven Fates Archer is a spirit talking Seeker who is purely about control.

All in all, the Seeker class is very jizz-worthy. If I had known about this before, I would probably have utilized this class for Antioch’s primal-centric “Songs of Erui” campaign rather than my Shifter Archery Ranger, Greymalkin. Simply put, I want to play this class like a motherfucker.

======================================================================================

Which brings me to my character concept: Hawk-Eye, the Half-Orc Seeker.

Since the Seeker class is Wisdom and Dexterity based, Elves are about the most perfect choice, with Razorclaw Shifters nipping at their heels.

But optimal is boring to me…so I decided to go with a Half-Orc (my personal favorite race across all my years of playing D&D. I have yet to play one in 4E though, alas.)Partially because the Half-Orc is usually characterized as a savage fighter who relishes in melee combat, and I wanted to change it up, and partially because their Furious Assault power and Dexterity bonus lend themselves well to the Strikery-ness of the Seeker.

In addition, I decided to go with the Ranger multiclass, to increase damage output and open up a whole world of archery based feats and Paragon Paths. At some point, during the heroic levels, Hawkeye would be taking feats like Weapon Expertise: Bows, Weapon Proficiency: Greatbow, Distant Advantage, Lethal Hunter, Weapon Focus: Bows, etc.

In paragon levels, I would probably have Hawk-Eye take the Battlefeild Archer PP, to bolster his hit% and Battlefield Experience + AOE=sad DM : )

====== Created Using Wizards of the Coast D&D Character Builder ======
Hawkeye
Half-Orc Seeker, level 1
Inevitable Shot, Seeker’s Bond: Bloodbond, Hunter’s Quarry (Ranger MC)
Background: Forest (+2 Perception)

FINAL ABILITY SCORES
Str 12, Con 14, Dex 16, Int 10, Wis 17, Cha 8.

STARTING ABILITY SCORES
Str 10, Con 14, Dex 14, Int 10, Wis 17, Cha 8.

AC: 15 Fort: 12 Reflex: 14 Will: 14
HP: 26 Surges: 9 Surge Value: 6

TRAINED SKILLS
Acrobatics +8, Athletics +6, Perception +11, Nature +8, Perception +10, Stealth +8

UNTRAINED SKILLS
Arcana +0, Bluff -1, Diplomacy -1, Dungeoneering +3, Endurance +4, Heal +3,
History +0, Insight +3, Intimidate +1, Religion +0, Streetwise -1, Thievery +3

FEATS
Level 1: Warrior of the Wild (Ranger Multiclass)

POWERS
Seeker at-will 1: Elemental Spirits
Seeker at-will 1: Stinging Swarm
Seeker encounter 1: Spider Spirits
Seeker daily 1: Storm of Spirit Shards

Half-Orc encounter: Furious Assault

ITEMS
Adventurer’s Kit
Leather Armor
Longbow
Quiver (30 arrows)
Mace

Judging by the screens the game has some really great graphics going on. Kind of like if World of WarCraft upgraded its graphics engine to something remotely current. Even the faces dont seem nearly as offensive as what I’m used to seeing out of RPGs where you get to generate your own character. Kind of refreshing to see models that havent quite tumbled into the uncanny valley.

However this says nothing about actual gameplay, which is of far more import. So, onto trailers!

First off, the Denerim trailer doesnt do much for me. It shows off more graphics and combat stuff, which looks impressive enough but doesnt explain much about Denerim except that I guess they are fighting against…something. I’m not sure what, though someone mentioned the blight.

I then watched the violence trailer, which showcased some very cinematic mass battles and thats not an indicator of what you’re actually going to get out of the game. No, it looked par for the course of what I expect out of role-playing games, which was still pretty neat. On one hand, I wanted to get excited about it, but…I find that game trailers tend to overhype the game and in the end I dont want to get disappointed by getting my hopes up. I think I’ve just gotten jaded on a lot of the trite, cliche role-playing games that seem to get pushed out all the time, which offer almost nothing but still run sixty fucking dollars.

That being said, these are just first impressions based entirely off of a handful of screenshots and a couple trailers. At this point the game looks like many RPGs I’ve seen, just with better graphics. Ehhhh… Its a spiritual successor to Baldur’s Gate, which was great back in the day…but they also did Neverwinter Nights, which I couldnt stand. So…whether I’m going to like it is anyone’s guess, but we’ll see come launch time.

Immediately following our corporate branding is a large, easy-to-read navigation bar-ish…thing. This is greaaaaat. Way better than having all the shit on the left, and middle, and at the top. While it could use a better indicator aside from colored text to let you know where you are, its certainly a step in the right direction.

For categories, I like that Game Products features the “core essentials”, so new players can easily figure out what books they actually need. Likewise, there are sections for DMs and players that display magazine articles and books for the respective party, making it easy to stick to the content you want…or simply find the shit intended for you. Kudos.

Tools lists all the optional digital utilities that you can use with the game. I’m glad that the designers finally got around to making it easy to locate the demos for Character Builder and Adventure Tools by using big-ass buttons instead of tiny fucking links adrift somewhere within a wall of text.

Gotta say, I think I still like this one better.

EDIT: Dear Wizards, please color your hyperlinks and leave the goddamned underline alone: those are the two indicators that a hyperlink even exists. Kplzthx.

Vignettes (pg 22)
I’m doing this in my adventure arc, At The Mines of Madness, where the players get to play some of the victims, and actually decided on this when I saw it in a DMG2 preview on Wizards.com. Having read the entire section (again?), I’m going to do some flashback sequences in Songs of Erui for when Greymalkin met Grynn for the first time, and maybe even when adventurers arrive to take down Grynn’s tribe and master, allowing the group to see first hand Gribbeth’s capabilities.

I think its a good way to not only roll through a given character’s background, but to ensure that the DM and players are all on the same page. Its kind of a pain when I as a DM drop some info on something and it confuses the player its intended for, giving you one of those, “No, my father was supposed to be dead, remember?” moments that stops the game as the DM and player fiddle through the details again.

Companion Characters (pg 27)
I had a player who wanted to play D&D via chat, but only him and his girlfriend were available. Since a pair makes for a poor party and neither wanted to play a fighter or paladin, they ended up getting a big-ass dog that would work as a defender. It was mostly like a monster stat block, but was on par with their own defenses and attack bonuses and the like (plus it could also get more powers and feats).

I think companion characters are cool and can be a fun roleplaying tool. The baby owlbear in the The Whispering Cairn made for an awesome bit of social roleplaying as the party argued over taking care of it, selling it, or training it as a guard animal (even though one of the players kept telling him that you cant train them like that). They ended up selling it to Allustan, since they were having a hard time taking care of it while adventuring, but I could see parties having semi-regular companions making appearances, such as Mouse in The Dresden Files.

Terrain (pg 58)
Provided quite a few ideas for me, and I ended up using a blood midge cloud in the next adventure I ran. Not much to say about the normal terrain: you get some new terrain and mechanic information on how it works, so hopefully this guides DMs on how to do their own stuff.

Now, the section on terrain powers was too cool and too short. There’s only seven, and that makes for a sad Antioch… I’m happy to say that at least I did the wall-pushing bit mostly right. I’d used something like that in The Hounds of Ulster, where the players could crush phase spider swarms under rocks (counted as a blast attack, so it deal bonus damage) while breaking phase spider webs that were blocking line of effect for teleporting. It required a skill check but affected a smaller area of effect. T.T

The Entire Fucking Chapter On Customizing Monsters (pg 102)
I’m a sucker for making thematic adventures, and when I was in a kid I’d done the elemental dungeon with lots of fire things here, water things there, etc. Nowadays I like to keep things…consistent, lets say. If I use goblins, then likely most of its going to be goblins unless I’ve got a good reason to swap them out. Not in the Keep on the Shadowfell sense where they “upgrade” to hobgoblins, oh no: I’ll just use higher level goblins.

Monster themes really grab me since my current campaign uses a lot of primal elements. With the Feywild Denizen themes, I can reflect the subtle influence of Erui and the Feywild on their inhabitants much, much better now. I’m also going to rework several monsters in At The Mines of Madness to include elements from the Those Who Hear theme…

Divine Boons (pg 139)
Me likey. Granting characters special gifts that are not just material treasure is awesome. I’m going to use this when characters start getting rewards from spirits or the fey courts.

Item Components (pg 146)
I like this because I was already doing it since 2nd Edition, I just didnt have an exact set of mechanics for it. ^_^

I like this second interation a looot more than the first one, mostly because much of the information out of DMG had been drilled into my brain from years of playing games, reading about running games, and listening to my group bitch about the shitty games they’d been in. This one does go through some of the old motions that I’m used to (mostly with player personalities and motivations), but it seems to focus on more veteran aspects of the game.