|
It's working perfectly fine for me.
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 04:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 15:19 |
|
|
Yeah, I definitely don't already have the dodgy non-official version that seems to work a whole lot better than the official one, unless you're on a Mac, no sir...Red Metal posted:It's working perfectly fine for me. Ah excellent. That probably means that it's particular to the account... Apparently resubscribing can break things, going from the old style of subscription to the new?  Time to find out how good their support response is 
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 05:19
|
|
|
Nah it's just dodgy as heck cause it isn't being supported, keep trying and eventually it'll load a stable instance.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 06:29
|
|
|
I brought up the question “so what do we play after this campaign“ and it was suggested that we do a 2-3 session dungeon crawl, just to try some character build ideas, which morphed into “let's do Madness at Gardmore Abbey“ almost instantly. It's post-essentials and I should be able to use it as-is, regarding monster math, right? Any tips on accomodating six players?
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 12:43
|
|
|
Noxin of Shame posted:Yeah, I definitely don't already have the dodgy non-official version that seems to work a whole lot better than the official one, unless you're on a Mac, no sir... Which browser are you using? The online builder works on firefox, but not on chrome for me, strangely.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 18:05
|
|
|
My Lovely Horse posted:I brought up the question “so what do we play after this campaign“ and it was suggested that we do a 2-3 session dungeon crawl, just to try some character build ideas, which morphed into “let's do Madness at Gardmore Abbey“ almost instantly. It's post-essentials and I should be able to use it as-is, regarding monster math, right? If they do want things scaled up, I think the XP increase is equivalent to adding 1 standard monster of equivalent level to the PCs. The easiest way to do things is to take one monster in that encounter or area, scale it up or down to the party level and add them to fights. For reference, I'm running it right now on the forums and in OOC chat there's been whining about the high difficulty of the encounters, though no one has died and I've told them running away without taking out every monster is an option, and so far they've consistently been able to take out every monster. They bought in when I told them I heard it was a challenging module, so unless they straight up say I should make it easier, I'm running it as is. It might go the same for you but in the other direction. Since it's less work for the GM and you're a player too and your fun matters too, not having to do extra work should have value.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 19:12
|
|
|
Has anyone found a good way to speed up combat encounters? I feel like they were always the main thing that would slow down my games. I still think 4e is my favorite edition, but I just wish the combat only took half the time. It feels like every turn takes 20 minutes and people spend more time unengaged than active.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 21:45
|
|
|
Mordiceius posted:Has anyone found a good way to speed up combat encounters? I feel like they were always the main thing that would slow down my games. As for making turns faster, help players have their accuracy and damage ready to go, things like the character builder sheets' power cards help a lot, and try to not use/discourage temporary bonuses, as these slow down turns trying to figure out the new math.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 22:14
|
|
|
Mordiceius posted:Has anyone found a good way to speed up combat encounters? I feel like they were always the main thing that would slow down my games. Use Fantasy Grounds' combat tracker on a laptop/surface-style tablet. Makes tracking effects, modifiers, DMGO, saves, and everything you need to keep track of absolutely amazing. It's 40dollars for a once-off lifetime license and with that you can do everything in 4e that you will ever need to do. Does suck that it's up front but for 4e its worth it. My group for 4e have been using it and have only run into combat speed issues that are player caused (people that hmm and haww about their action only when it comes to their turn etc). If you have DDI you can easily put the entire compendium and everything into FG for drag-drop use. If you dont have DDI anymore, but use CBLoader or similar its the same deal.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 23:45
|
|
|
Spiteski posted:Use Fantasy Grounds' combat tracker on a laptop/surface-style tablet. Makes tracking effects, modifiers, DMGO, saves, and everything you need to keep track of absolutely amazing. That's a great idea. Thanks.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 23:58
|
|
|
Blank Construct posted:Which browser are you using? The online builder works on firefox, but not on chrome for me, strangely. Yeah, Firefox and IE11 still support Silverlight, but Chrome and Edge do not. I'll keep trying, hopefully I'll get access soon enough.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 00:40
|
|
|
I wanted to share the statblock I made for a downscaled, level 18 Tiamat, which I put up against a party of level 13 characters:quote:Tiamat Level 18 Solo Brute
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2016 05:03
|
|
|
Green head MVP. MVH.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2016 05:33
|
|
|
Yeah, at the very least make that dominate last until the end of the head's next turn, save ends on dominate on an at-will is absurd, hell, any kind of dominated on an at-will is too much, dazed would be more reasonable.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2016 06:00
|
|
|
Yeah, unless one of your players is built specifically to poo poo out saves as often as possible, do not use the green head as-is. Dazed + slowed has better synergy anyways.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2016 06:04
|
|
|
This was heavily adapted from the level 35 Tiamat as the final boss of the Scales of War adventure path - I actually didn't use the Dominating Gaze more than once because I realized that it would've hosed over the players really badly - Epic-level characters would have had ways to mitigate it, I just didn't see it for what it was until game time.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2016 06:14
|
|
|
That's fair.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2016 20:09
|
|
|
Hey all. Im slowly converting my 5e group to 4e, and wanted some help with encounter design. We're level 4, with Dragonborn druid Drow cleric Half elf rogue Tiefling rogue Half orc ranger Human bard Human paladin What is my xp budget for a typical encounter? Do all pcs get the budget, or is it divided by players? What are good combos to fight the party?
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2016 23:06
|
|
|
Your typical encounter for 7 level 4 PCs is 7 level 4 monsters, which is the beauty of 4e encounter design imho. That translates out to 1,225 xp. I would suggest going with some elites, which count as 2 monsters to drop your workload, or have several monster be the same kind of monster. If you want to have a lot of weaker combatants, definitely go for minions instead of lower xp monsters, minions count as 1/4 of a monster, so while a level 1 monster is 100 xp, a level 1 minion is 25
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2016 23:19
|
|
|
With that many players, you might also want consider doing a single encounter over multiple waves, both for sanity's sake and because seven PCs can blow up pretty much anything if they can all hit it in the same turn. Wave one could be something like: Elite soldier (leader) Brute Controller Minion soldier x4 Wave two shows up two or three rounds later and is: Skirmisher Minion artillery x4 Wave one lets everyone settle into the battlefield, defender locks down whomever is most dangerous while the PCs discover the joy of focus fire and probably murk something in a single round. Wave two inverts the situation by creating the potential for the minion artillery to return the favor - the leader has to start doing real triage and hopefully the controller has some area clear left.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2016 23:51
|
|
|
Going to be running a long term Zeitgeist game online thanks to suggestions from goons in this thread. Anyone interested in playing? Might have one to two spots. Friday 6pm ish PST.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2016 09:42
|
|
|
Spiteski posted:Going to be running a long term Zeitgeist game online thanks to suggestions from goons in this thread. I would be down depending on the schedule.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2016 10:43
|
|
|
Ash Rose posted:I would be down depending on the schedule. Like frequency? It will be weekly, starting January.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2016 20:20
|
|
|
What's the format? PBP? Roll20? 'Cause I'd likely be down for Roll20.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2016 21:11
|
|
|
The Crotch posted:What's the format? PBP? Roll20? Fantasy Grounds, it's like Roll20, except better in every way. edit: just kidding, it's really good especially for 4e, and I have the ulti license so no one needs to buy their own copy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2016 22:02
|
|
|
Spiteski posted:Going to be running a long term Zeitgeist game online thanks to suggestions from goons in this thread. I ran a local group through the first two adventures of Zeitgeist. The campaign owns. Good luck. What is the difference between Fantasy Grounds and Roll20? A buddy of mine recently asked me to run a game (which I'll most likely do Zeitgeist), so I was going to go with Roll20, but I've never really looked into Fantasy Grounds.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2016 22:34
|
|
|
Hello my girlfriend (also a goon) and I would be extremely down for an online zeitgeist game and 6 PM PST on Fridays works super well for both of us, and I'm fairly familiar with Fantasy Grounds.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2016 22:58
|
|
|
Spiteski posted:Fantasy Grounds, it's like Roll20, except better in every way.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2016 23:28
|
|
|
Mordiceius posted:I ran a local group through the first two adventures of Zeitgeist. The campaign owns. Good luck. Fantasy Grounds is a client-based program, not browser based, and has a much nicer combat and effects tracker compared to Roll20. It's a little less to learn (no learning macros like Roll20) but less forgiving to make your own maps, and has the downfall of not being accessible by phone/tablet. In return you get an astoundingly good effect and combat tracker and an interface that removes a lot of the math and remembering that a crunchy game like 4e requires. As to everyone interested in playing, I've made a thread for people to get some more info, and throw up characters. In doing so though, I realised my time was wrong, and it's 4pm PST, not 6pm, I apologise for the mixup.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 01:52
|
|
|
Spiteski posted:Going to be running a long term Zeitgeist game online thanks to suggestions from goons in this thread. I'm running a group, and we're almost done with loving Adventure 10 and holy shitballs is it a great campaign. Best I've ever seen.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 02:28
|
|
|
Mordiceius posted:I ran a local group through the first two adventures of Zeitgeist. The campaign owns. Good luck. Having used both, Fantasy Grounds is markedly superior in tracking what goes on in your game, but you do need to learn your way around the no-tooltip, graphical interface.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 02:29
|
|
|
The only big failing of Fantasy Grounds when it comes to 4E is that it has no real concept of the battlemap. You can't have auras automatically apply (unlike ongoing damage & saves which are handled every initiative tick) when they're valid, and the system can't detect when you're flanked, moving through threatened squares, etc. The only thing the battlemap can do is calculate distance once you've laid down a grid, which is nice and better than not having it, but I find it stings. Particularly when you move beyond heroic and auras become a more frequent occurance, along with creatures that threaten two and three squares out.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 19:09
|
|
|
So, once we hit the new year one of my gaming buddies is planning on running an Essentials-only game. Now, while I'm not completely new to 4E what I played of it wasn't much and my knowledge is extremely limited and out of date (and I know zero about the essentials books). What pitfalls of the Essentials should I be aware of before I start considering character concepts? I want to play a warlock, for instance, but how good is the Essentials warlock? I do mean I'm very new to 4e, by the way. I think the role I want to play is striker? (Basically blow stuff up/stab things to death).
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 20:18
|
|
|
LucyWanabe posted:So, once we hit the new year one of my gaming buddies is planning on running an Essentials-only game. Now, while I'm not completely new to 4E what I played of it wasn't much and my knowledge is extremely limited and out of date (and I know zero about the essentials books). What pitfalls of the Essentials should I be aware of before I start considering character concepts? I want to play a warlock, for instance, but how good is the Essentials warlock? oh god why
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 20:27
|
|
|
The only things you have to be really wary of IMO are the Heroes of Shadow junk, if that's included in your GM's definition of Essentials. That was really a low point in 4e design, with the Binder, Vampire, Executioner, and Blackguard all being anywhere from "overcomplicated for what it's trying to do" to "nonfunctional at a basic level". Otherwise, most anything you pick will have a reasonable baseline functionality through most of Heroic. If you guys get farther, then a lot of the classes will run out of support, and will fall behind the curve (except the Mage, of course). You'll also want to make sure you pick something that fits with your desired level of mechanical engagement. Hexblade is around the middle of the pack, with no choice of Encounter powers, but access to Dailies. And if you guys make it out of Heroic, it's a pretty reasonable time to try to lobby your GM for normal AEUD classes if you're bored of what you've got.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 20:47
|
|
|
Binder and vampire are horrible, and executioner is overcomplicated. Are you saying that blackguard is overcomplicated too? I don't really think it's particularly worse than something like an OG warlock in practice. Then again, OG warlocks aren't exactly wonderfully designed either. Blackguard not getting a daily til 5 is dumb as hell though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 22:36
|
|
|
Dick Burglar posted:Binder and vampire are horrible, and executioner is overcomplicated. Are you saying that blackguard is overcomplicated too? I don't really think it's particularly worse than something like an OG warlock in practice. Then again, OG warlocks aren't exactly wonderfully designed either. It's not like a Warlock where if they're your curse target they get always get xdx+x based on whatever feats, etc you have. Instead you get +CHA when you have CA, + when you fulfil your vice, etc. I gave one to someone who isn't super mechanically inclined because it's an E-class, and I think they would have been better off with a regular Barbarian. Granted, they're not awful. I just would honestly put them as more fiddly than a lot of O-classes.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2016 00:05
|
|
|
Bladesinger is also an Essentials class, and should also be relegated to the dustbin of history alongside Binder. Vampire can stay, but only as a hybrid.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2016 00:09
|
|
|
LucyWanabe posted:I do mean I'm very new to 4e, by the way. I think the role I want to play is striker? (Basically blow stuff up/stab things to death). Elementalist is the quintessential Blow Stuff Up class, and at low levels especially, it's no slouch at damage.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2016 00:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 15:19 |
|
|
Essentials-only means no Warlords though
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2016 01:17
|
|
