Ravenloft took my NADs

September 9th, 2010

The Ravenloft board game uses stripped-down D&D 4e rules, which means that, as far as I’m concerned, it’s auditioning to become the real D&D rules. I think each piece of the whole baroque structure of D&D should be examined for freshness daily.

Notably absent from Ravenloft are the Non AC Defenses (NADs): Reflex, Fortitude, and Will. Every Ravenloft attack targets AC. I gotta tell you… I didn’t miss my NADs.

Reflex, Fortitude, and Will saving throws, introduced in 3e, were a huge advance from the saving throws of 1e and 2e. 4e further improved the system by having the attacker, not the defender, roll the d20. I think the next big improvement – maybe in 5e – might be to eliminate the whole subsystem. Whaa? Paul, you’re crazy! I know, right?
Read the rest of this entry »

Thirdhand science says: Randomize your treasure!

September 8th, 2010

Laura Redcloud’s review of “How We Decide” gives me some (pseudo?)science to justify something I already believe:* random game rewards are more fun.

[W]e get pleasure when our (subconscious) expectations of reward are met, and we feel upset when those expectations are dashed. Additionally, we get extra dopamine when the reward is surprising. So, what we like, from most to least:

-2 Surprising disappointment
-1 Predictable disappointment
+1 Predictable confirmation of expectations
+2 Surprising confirmation of expectations

1e D&D is a hulking eldritch megabeast born from a mad wizard’s experimental combination of surprising rewards and surprising punishments.

4e repudiated randomness for sanity, balance, and survivability. On the whole, 4e is stronger for it.

Treasure, though, is an area where randomness should reign.
Read the rest of this entry »

problems with monster HP: prove me wrong! or right!

September 7th, 2010

This morning I claimed that monsters gain too many HP per level, based on the fact that a) PC damage increases by 1 point per attack, and b) the design intent is that monsters be killed by 4 attacks.

Check my math! I said that a reasonable average damage for level-30 at-wills is 38 HP (or slightly more for a striker). Can you guys make me some builds? (Remember, these are all-around decent character builds, not optimized-for-damage builds.) The rules are: you choose a class, an at-will power, an attribute arrangement of your choice, and no more than 4 feats and 2 magic items.

hit point lessons from mm3 on a business card

September 7th, 2010

It seems to me that 4e monster Hit Points don’t scale properly.

From examining the MM3 on a business card, we see that every level, monsters get +1 to hit, defenses, and damage. At level 1, they have about 32 HP, and they get 8 HP per level.

(From what I’ve seen, PCs tend to have comparable to-hit, defenses, and at-will damage. Of course, over the course of a fight, PCs are better than monsters, due to encounter and daily powers, feats, and other complications. In the simplest cases, though, PCs and monsters can stand in for each other.)

So what’s the problem? As far as I can see, the monster math above suggests that at higher levels, fights will drag on longer as monsters gain proportionally more HP. And indeed, in practice, I see this happening. I recently ran a level 30 adventure, and the fights took forever. Here’s why:

Take a level 1 monster. He has 32 HP. He (and his opponents) do an average of 9 points of damage per hit. That’s great! That means it will take about 4 hits to kill a monster. A highly damaging hit (a crit or encounter power) might bloody the monster in one hit. That feels exactly right to me. In fact, according to this excerpt from Player’s Strategy Guide, 4 hits per monster is the design intention: “Assume that your heroes can kill a typical monster with four successful attacks.”

At level 1, we are exactly on target. However, monsters gain 8 HP per level! That means, in order to keep up, the PCs (who should be able to kill a monster in 4 hits) need to increase their average damage by 2, every level. In order to stay on par, all level-30 PCs (leaders and controllers as well as strikers) would need to be doing about 70 damage per hit. There’s no way they can do that! The result? Monster HP outstrips PC damage.
Read the rest of this entry »

something is wrong with the wizard

September 6th, 2010

Since it’s Labor Day, I will hold off on part 7 of my Mazes and Monsters retro-clone in favor of a bizarre D&D speculation that, with feats of sophist acrobatics that will astound you, I will turn into a celebration of the US federal holiday, and the brave men and women who make up our national workforce.

I work at a software company. The other day, a QA guy told me, “Something is wrong with the wizard.” Somehow, for a moment, I was transported 1000 years back and maybe 2 or so universes sideways. His words filled me with dark portent (even darker portent than his normal words, which are pretty dark, because he’s QA).

Let me try to describe to you the terrifying scenario that – for a fraction of a second – lived inside my head:

Picture yourself a peasant who lives in a peaceful valley; it’s peaceful because the Good Wizard protects it from the evil threats of the outside world. In the immortal words of John Michael Osbourne:
Read the rest of this entry »

The No Win Scenario!

September 4th, 2010

I ran a very fun encounter recently that had a lot of elements of a no win scenario. Only 3 of my 6 players had shown up, and though I scaled down the encounter’s EL for 3 players, they were missing both the cleric and the paladin, the only really good sources of healing they had available to them. To make matters worse, the head guy had a nasty immobilization ray that he kept using on the monk and rogue, and the only other enemy had a reach of two, reducing them to using mediocre ranged attack, while being continually pounded each round.

Things were looking dire pretty early on, with the monk bloodied and the rogue on the verge of unconsciousness. However, I had provided the PCs with a solution that the wizard eagerly jumped on: a skill challenge to free a powerful beast the villain had in enchanted chains. Once free, the beast would attack the villain, giving the PCs a chance to free prisoners in the area and escape. I liked the skill challenge for a couple reasons:

  1. It did a good job of creating the tension of one group trying to buy time in battle so another person can accomplish an important goal, which is a welcome change of pace from most D&D battles where the goal is simply to mash the enemy into a paste.
  2. Each success gave the PCs another potential benefit that could help turn the tide of the battle in their favor.

The skill challenge worked as follows: Read the rest of this entry »

and now a puzzle challenge!

September 3rd, 2010

This morning I described a king’s tomb, with a narrow hole at the top, under which is a seal that paralyzes all who step on it.

So how would you, a lone thief, rob the tomb? The room is a dome, with the only entrance a hole in the ceiling, 30 feet up. The seal is directly beneath the hole, and occupies a 3×3 square. Treasures are scattered around the sides of the dome. All you have is a weapon and an Adventurer’s Kit.

graverobbing over the Glyph

September 3rd, 2010

African Civilizations by Graham Connah

African Civilizations by Graham Connah

Let’s rob a king’s grave!

Some West African kings were buried in a manmade hill. First the king and his treasures, along with some unlucky servants, were interred in a wooden dome. Then tons of earth was piled on the dome. Finally the new hill was covered with clay and fire-hardened. This was a difficult tomb to rob – although a narrow vertical chimney was left. (Why? For the soul to escape, as in Greek tombs?)

This chimney could make a good tomb/dungeon entrance. It’s wide enough for one PC to squeeze down; then there’s, say, a 30-foot drop to the floor.

What’s to protect such a tomb against robbers? It’s easy to climb down to the floor on a rope. Let’s say that in the center of the tomb, right under the shaft, is a rune-covered seal; anyone standing on it is paralyzed and takes ongoing damage (no save!) until they’re somehow moved onto a safe square.

I’d play it like this: PC 1 says “I climb down the rope.” The DM doesn’t say that PC 1 is paralyzed; he says, “OK, we’ll get back to you” and asks the other PCs what they are doing. If they yell down into the tomb, they get no answer. Based on how long the PCs spend waiting and talking before they take action, the paralyzed PC might take one, two, or three rounds of ongoing damage. (A mean DM would secretly time the PCs’ discussions and dithering and deal damage every 6 seconds of realtime, but try as I might, I just can’t play D&D like a World-Class Jerkwad.)
Read the rest of this entry »

how to be classy

September 2nd, 2010

Be a wine snob!

Wine snobbery, along with an upper-class accent and a superciliously raised eyebrow, is one of the great, easy markers of the upper class. If the PCs hobnob with nobles, then they must drink wine. Invent a superior wine for the extra-elite to drink: it won’t take long before the PCs will know when they’re getting the best.

When giving PCs wine, let them make a History check. If they succeed, they know the wine’s quality, and the player may talk about its “oakiness”, “untertones of astral currant” and “tanens” for one full minute before anyone is allowed to hit them.

Wine snobbery, and overpriced vintages, have been around forever. A good Tokay was quite expensive in the medieval period, and Louis XV called it the “Wine of Kings, King of Wines”. Falernian is mentioned in a lot of Roman authors. On a wall in a Pompeii bar it says: “For one coin you can drink wine. For two you can drink the best. For four you can drink Falernian.”

In my campaign, I’ve invented a few beverages. The Talasay is the most sought-after: a bottle of the Talasay ’82 in a treasure horde might be worth more than the rest of the treasure. Its quality is only exceeded by the emerald wine of the fey lords, after drinking which, it is said, all other wines taste like ash. On the other side of the spectrum, there’s Dogsbreath, good enough only for dwarves to drink.

Essentials Red Box final thoughts

September 1st, 2010

That’s it! We’ve blogged everything we could blog about the D&D Essentials starter set. Blog of Holding will now stop spamming people with hourly updates and return to a once-a-weekday schedule.

On the whole, I think the new Red Box is a very good intro to 4e D&D. Although it’s mostly useless to me, it’s one of my favorite 4e products so far. I often feel slightly embarrassed when introducing someone to 4e: you don’t realize just how complicated it is until you’re explaining it to someone. I feel that the new Red Box could teach the game to a bunch of short-attention-span but reasonably smart junior high kids.

Hmm, new people playing the hobby is a good thing! But it also means lots of junior high kids talking smack on message boards! MIXED FEELINGS!

The red box is also theoretically a great way to get your start DMing. I’ve got a player in my current D&D game who is going to give DMing a try with the adventure in the red box, while we all play Essentials characters.

I’m super excited because I’ll have a chance to play D&D instead of running it all the time. I hope she’s looking forward to DMing in a slightly simpler but still fun and engaging environment!

I hope she’s looking forward to DMing a PROBLEM PC.

So, at the end of this liveblogging experiment, what does everyone think: should we do another intensive review when we get our copies of Heroes of the Fallen Lands? or is there such a thing as posting too much?

More Red Box thoughts…