3/9/2009 - Dragon Interrupted

Haha, back at them. They'll have to set for the XP if they dont discover Ethan's carrying the hoard :)

Dragons in 4e are really cool, IMO the best implimentations of dragons in D&D.   I'm going to post the combat log for this battle a few comics from now after it gets settled in the comic.

Do you still recieve a wish if you cut off a dragon's head? It's been a long time since i've played and we used to use that rule.  I don't even know if it was a real rule!

Huh, ok, 4e dragons are the coolest "published D&D" dragon. ;)  Getting a wish for cutting off a dragon's head wasn't a rule as far as I remember, but it sounds interesting.

Agreed, 4E dragons are really cool, especially the white dragon. The revamp of it on 4E was my favorite so far. The draconomicrom was an awesome read in this edition as well, since it gives out a lot of the lore and information about the chromatic dragons, I can't wait for the release of the next few books.

Hmm...why does everyone here worship 4e? I really don't see what's so great about it.

Battles are balanced, battles are more than I attack, they attack, I attack, they attack.   Less accounting and more playing.  The game hasn't been ruined yet by ever more powerful rulebooks that trump previous books causing DMs to either pick and choose which rules to allow causing players to be unhappy about throwing hundreds or thousands of dollars away or to allow all rules and have some players be monstrously powerful with stupid class/race combinations like cleric Sea Turtles with levels of dragon disciple, dragon devotee the vow of poverty feat with 50+ strengths!

Whats so wrong about 4e?

I don't "worship" 4e, though I'll tell you that it's the most consientiously designed version of D&D to date.  It may not be what you like, but it does what it does better than previous editions did.  Still, it may not do well other things that previous editions did, but it's not trying to because that's not what they were going for.

Despite popular belief, D&D can't be everything to everybody.  It's either going to serve one style well, or it will serve all styles really, really poorly.

I'm preparing my first 4e campaign, and I gotta say that I'm having a really fun time with it. Given, it's not the most in-depth system for roleplaying(heck, no DnD edition is that), but it must be the most simple-effective set of rules for D&D so far. If something is good and simple, it's two times good, and getting rid of most of the real complicated rules for newcommers(I'm teaching a 11 year old right now how to play), and taking in account a lot of other factors for character balance(BAB, Aligment, Multiclassing) I think it's so far the best one for newcommers.

The lack of a bazillion tables is also a plus on my side. Let alone that we don't have the classes and multiclasses lost into a thousand books.

That wish thing is totaly homebrewed, but in 2nd edition if you subdued a dragon it had to serve you for a year and a day as a loyal servant. It was also the only creature in the game that non-lethal subdual damage could be aplied to.

I must say, I disagree. If it's true what you say, that 4e is easy and efficient, I like it even less. If you want my opinion, some degree of difficulty is and should continue to be one of the distinguishing features of D&D. That's what you can use as an excuse to snicker behind the backs of everyone who makes fun of oyu for being a nerd. (Find 5 billion dollars under a rock?!? I think not!!) I take pride in the fact that I am capable of playing and even (albeit not masterfully) running a game that actually takes mental skill, and if 4e dumbs it down the way it sounds like it does, I simply could not stomach it.

That, and all the fricking weird new classes.

If that were the case, surely 1e does a better job than 3.5.  3.5 has all kinds of crazy weirder classes than 4e, and 1e didn't even like the players to understand what number they needed to roll to hit!.  The DMG had all the charts.
4e does a better job than 3.5 at being streamlined and fun, 1e does a better job of having obfuscated rules.

I'm not suggesting adding more confusing rules and unnecessary difficulty to the game makes it better. I just don't think it should be too easy. Heck, most of my 4e hatred probably comes from the fact that they changed so much stuff, added to the fact that I have used 3.5 (and at the very beginning, for a very brief period, 3.0) for my entire gaming career. I've never liked change. By the way, I don't think any of the basic 3.5 races were as freaking weird as the 4e ones. I mean, they've got a tiefling as a basic race, fer crying out loud. The weird races of 3.5 came from the Monster Manual, and I find overly complicated characters to be pretty awesome for some reason. In conclusion, I'm sure 4e has plenty of good qualities as a game, but whatever they are, I don't care about them and prefer to focus on the massively annoying overhaul.