D&D Gold/XP Equivalency (is now general D&D playstyles thread)

[Professor Smarmiarty]

Originally Posted by krogothwolf

No CE Characters.

He allows LE and NE characters though?
That's good because it teaches you an important lesson: It's ok to murder all your party mates as long as you plan it well beforehand and maximise your profits from it.

[krogothwolf]

Originally Posted by Smarty McBarrelpants

He allows LE and NE characters though?
That's good because it teaches you an important lesson: It's ok to murder all your party mates as long as you plan it well beforehand and maximise your profits from it.

Yeah he does. The CE would throw off the whole group if we could create them in terms of Campaign. We're dealing with a Demonic Invasion into our world and If I was CE i would backstab the lot and join the king summoning the demons so thats why we aren't allowed.

Yeah Tactics tends to type a crapload when he does. I think he likes making us read, or his Wife helps him edit and articulate his thoughts or something.

At least it allows you to specialize the monsters in the end if you desire. Using a static template would probably have made the battles feel repetative. Why does it sound like 4E focuse so much on battles and less on Roleplaying though? I though D&D was about roleplaying and such. Hell RP even comes into my battles, I can blast people with a spell on my team and its okay because since it wouldn't harm them if they weren't evil or neutral its their own damn fault for getting hurt cause they weren't good enough.

[Tev]

Originally Posted by krogothwolf

At least it allows you to specialize the monsters in the end if you desire. Using a static template would probably have made the battles feel repetative. Why does it sound like 4E focuse so much on battles and less on Roleplaying though? I though D&D was about roleplaying and such. Hell RP even comes into my battles, I can blast people with a spell on my team and its okay because since it wouldn't harm them if they weren't evil or neutral its their own damn fault for getting hurt cause they weren't good enough.

Originally Posted by Tev

As for 4th Ed being all about combat. You are right, the rules for it are mostly about the thing in the game that needed the most rules. I'm not really sure why Wizards decided to save paper and let the players deal with out of combat flavor in their own way, but they did and I am glad for it. I like roleplaying out my encounters outside of combat free from a ton of rules telling me how I can or cannot deal with any given situation.

I think it's pretty much that.

[krogothwolf]

So then its pretty much up to the DM if you're RPing within your allignment? adn the consequences of what would happen if you don't? Or does it even matter though?

[Tev]

Originally Posted by krogothwolf

So then its pretty much up to the DM if you're RPing within your allignment? adn the consequences of what would happen if you don't? Or does it even matter though?

Alignment is a lot more fluid in 4th. You are Lawful Good, Unaligned, or Evil.

There aren't really any powers that deal heavily in alignment and as a system the alignment system was a bad crutch that was never properly followed anyway. This new system allows for players to just play. If their actions are evil then that's up for the DM to decide.

EDIT: Note that Unaligned is not Neutral, but is made up of an amalgamation of all the alignments that you really don't see anymore (Chaotic good, neutral good, lawful evil......) All it means is that you aren't some paladin paragon of good or some horrid evil monster.

[krogothwolf]

How does one deal with a Paladin say becoming fallen or something like that? I mean its obvious certain actions would make it happen of course but how does it go about doing that, is that also up for the DM?

[Tev]

Originally Posted by krogothwolf

How does one deal with a Paladin say becoming fallen or something like that? I mean its obvious certain actions would make it happen of course but how does it go about doing that, is that also up for the DM?

Fallen like being evil? It's not really an issue as Paladins now get to choose to either be Lawful Good or whatever alignment that their deity is (many are Unaligned).

Really, it's now up to the players and the DM how their stories play out. That little sentence that's usually in the front or back of D&D books that says "If these rules don't work for you, don't use them?" Yeah, Wizards just decided it was easier to just not print rules for stuff that players can make up on their own.

[krogothwolf]

I suppose that makes sense. I dislike the full out unrestrictedness of it but it seems 4th was created with the mind of attracting more players and not having them worry about alarge learning curve.

[Tev]

Well it's not like they took away all of your social encounter skills. You still have Bluff, Diplomacy, Intimidate.......Insight to know if you're being lied to.....various knowledge based skills like Arcana, History, and Religion.

All in all you still have the tools to do many out of combat encounters. They just stuck to shoring up the part of the game that needed the most fixing and balance with the rules it needed (combat).

[krogothwolf]

Ah I see. Well this has at least given me tons of more info on 4ed at least. How does Skill Challenge actually work?