Troll Lord Games

***This will contain spoilers***

Okay, my group and I have begun playing the 4th Edition module, Keep on the Shadowfell, using the pre-generated characters and Quick Start rules provided with the module. I figured Id give a rundown of our thoughts and experience.

First, let me give you my prior thoughts on 4th edition. When the game was first announced and I saw some of the things that they were changing, I was cautiously optimistic about the game and what it might entail. After picking up the first preview book, Races and Classes I became downright excited. After that, and more and more came out about the game, my enthusiasm was gradually curbed.

"Upon receiving my pre-ordered copy of Keep on the Shadowfell.my enthusiasm went straight out the window. Holding the product in my hand and seeing the pre-generated characters made it look more and more like this was most definitely not the game for me. There was no more speculation, I was seeing some of the rules, in print and in my hands and I didnt like what I saw. I almost decided that I wouldnt even give the game a shot after reading through the quick-start rules and the module. It really, really didnt do anything for me. My wife, however, talked me into at least running a session of it to try it firsthand before I cancelle dmy pre-order of the core books.

My group has mixed thoughts on the system as well but largely felt only a "meh." in regards to 4e. But still we decided wed give it an honest go. So, thats what this is.

First let me talk about the product itself. The module comes in a folder, with two books inside. One adventure book and one quick start guide. There are also 3, double-sided battle maps included in the folder. The physical look of the product is impressive. Nicely done (I love the folder idea) plus it has a simple, classy look to it. I like that sort of thing. The booklets are made on some sub-par paper in my opinion though, making the overall value of the product less appealing because of the flimsiness of the paper.

At $30 it seems like robbery, but I feel robbed with the prices of a lot of RPG products lately ($50 + for a boxed set these days? With flimsy, crappy maps!) So its not just the Lizards of the Coast doing that sort of thing. Plus, I imagine the non-standard format of the product made the price to print go up some.

So, fairly unenthusiastically we sat down to play. The pregen party consisted of:

Halfling Rogue

Half Elf Cleric

Human Wizard

Tiefling Warlord (Not in the quick start book but included as a web extra on their site. No, I didnt need an account or log-in to get the PDF download of the warlord pregen).

We only had time for about a 2 hr session today and ate up about 30 minutes of that talking about WFRP (our next planned campaign). Once we got the game rolling the party was headed towards the town of Winterhaven in search of a mentor of theirs who had gone missing after supposedly heading to Winterhaven in search of a burial site of a dragon.

Along the road to Winterhaven they were attacked by a group of 8 kobolds. And so the 1st fight began.

It was awesome.

Really, really awesome.

This did not feel like a level 1 encounter. Characherts and critters both have a higher amount of HP's, kind of like the kicker in Hackmaster. so, it wasn't a fight of one shot drops (with exception of the kobolds classified as minions, they're mooks who are meant to be taken out I guess.)

The fight was fast paced and fun. Even for us being unfamiliar with the rules. The powers felt funny at first, with player's stumbling over them:


I uhhh...I uh use my..uh...Deft Strike?

Although, after the 2nd round of combat the players were more comfortable with the powers and blended them into the RP.
Using my Inspiring Word I shout out "Dont give quarter! Press the attack Suri! We're almost to you!"

It was non-stop action from the start of combat until the end FOR EVERY SINGLE CHARACTER. No one got left out.

The "powers" didn't feel video-gamey to me or my players. In fact, they are no different than feats, stunts, or any other special maneuvers you see in a myriad of systems. in fact, the abilities seemed to give my players things to RP off of and by the end of the first fight you could already see character development going on as my players more solidified what these generic pregens we're to them.

The warlord class seems pretty sweet, with pretty nifty abilities to aid his party in combat. As the fight progressed he became the natural leader for them on the battlefield and you could see the other characters jumping to obey his calls on the field of battle.

With the fight complete we stepped outside for a smoke and talked about our thoughts. The entire group unanimously loved it. They went from "meh" to "rah!" after a single encounter.

Gearing the game back up again they traveled to the town and did a fair share of RP upon their arrival as they tried to discern the location of their missing mentor. With time being short, we called it quits for the day.

During the after game talking everyone agreed that they want to continue the module. In fact they were pretty hyped about the system, wanting to try and get together again tomorrow to play.

So, I've got to say it's going well so far. We'll see if it manages to keep it up. I've decided not to cancel my pre-order after all.

I played the 4E D&D day adventure yesterday and thought it was really fun. In 3.5, to be 'effective' on the battlefield I just trip things and hit them and repeat that manouvre a fair bit. In the 4E demo, the fighter I played had a lot more options. It still felt D&Dish. (I did want to yell out my power names, anime style, by the other players threatened to throw things at me.)

I don't think I'd run it though - too fiddly for my tastes, but I'd be up for playing it again. For running, I'll stick with C&C. (C&C combats are still massively quick compared to both 3.5 and 4E.)
_________________
Visit the Castles & Crusades wiki!
http://castlesandcrusades.wikispaces.com/

There really are only three general responses --

1) Awesome! This game does everything I always wanted! I'll play this every chance I get!

2) Stupid! This game has nothing I need! I would not play this if I was paid.

3) Meh. This game could be better. I'll have to make it work.

I, personally, find it extremely funny that you talk about a two hour session, and that session is one fight... against kobolds. Wow. Kobolds. Two hours. 8 whole kobolds. My last C&C session involved 24 kobolds (ironically) and they were dispatched in a matter of minutes (something like half and hour due to a player needing to use the restroom.)

Yep. What the hell happens when 4e is not in combat-simulator mode? No one ever talks about its non-combat play.... ever.

I'm going with #3, so far.

If you like 2 hour combats against 1 HD monsters (and that, against a whole 8 of them) just imagine the awesomeness of 40 hour fights against 2 HD skeletons.

I hope 4e offers more than this, honestly.

serleran wrote:
There really are only three general responses --

1) Awesome! This game does everything I always wanted! I'll play this every chance I get!

2) Stupid! This game has nothing I need! I would not play this if I was paid.

3) Meh. This game could be better. I'll have to make it work.

I, personally, find it extremely funny that you talk about a two hour session, and that session is one fight... against kobolds. Wow. Kobolds. Two hours. 8 whole kobolds. My last C&C session involved 24 kobolds (ironically) and they were dispatched in a matter of minutes (something like half and hour due to a player needing to use the restroom.)

Yep. What the hell happens when 4e is not in combat-simulator mode? No one ever talks about its non-combat play.... ever.

I'm going with #3, so far.

If you like 2 hour combats against 1 HD monsters (and that, against a whole 8 of them) just imagine the awesomeness of 40 hour fights against 2 HD skeletons.

I hope 4e offers more than this, honestly.

Well, it was actually less than 90 minutes. He does mention talking about Warhammer for about 30 minutes, then they had a smoke break, probably 10 to 20 minutes there. So its probably more like an hour.

4E is definitely sounding like fun, but nothing that makes me want to invest in a new system etc... In my younger days when I wanted to invest hours to just reading new systems, probably. Now? Nope, I am happy with where I am and don't have any pressing need to do a new system for D&D. Let alone an entirely new feel to it all.

I'll just pay attention and steal whatever sounds or looks good.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

Also add in that at first any new system is a bit slow once you get used to it. Interesting though is that one of our fence riders is liking it. Also from a person who stresses the game aspect over the 'role playing' aspect (me) this sounds like it could be fun.
_________________
The Lord of Ravens
My blog

serleran wrote:
Yep. What the hell happens when 4e is not in combat-simulator mode? No one ever talks about its non-combat play.... ever.

Thats because RP is pretty much the same in every game system I've played. Ever. NPC and PC interaction, in character, isn't very rules intense and pretty much runs the same in every game.

Also, the entire session wasn't taken up with the fight with the kobolds. A majority of the actual play time was spent in the village of Winterhaven interacting with NPCs while the party attempted to determine what happened to their mentor and then planning for their next move.

Can't really comment on the rules part of that because like I said. RP isn't very rule intensive. I can say that the rules didn't prevent my players from RP'ing.

One thing I found interesting though was how quick my players took to their characters. Generally it takes them a few sessions to get a feel for their characters, especially with pregens they are less than enthused about. Our first session in a new system usually has more number crunching than RP due to them not really knowing their characters or the game system. Such wasn't the case last night.

Thanks for your review DD. More or less what I watched at the table yesterday. After all, it seems that 4e will not be a bad game. Vox populi, vox dei

Quote:
Thats because RP is pretty much the same in every game system I've played. Ever. NPC and PC interaction, in character, isn't very rules intense and pretty much runs the same in every game.

Not quite true. Some games, like, say, 3.x D&D, have rules for it, with checks and rolls, and a reliance on game mechanics to handle the result - almost treating it like it is a combat, in itself: one side rolls, the other side tries to beat that result. No one has mentioned how 4e handles anything but tactical melee... and I find that odd. It also gives the (false?) impression it is wholly geared to combat, and if that is the case, the seeming "need" for miniatures makes it less a RPG and more like a board game. That is not bad, necessarily, but it is different.

serleran wrote:
Not quite true. Some games, like, say, 3.x D&D, have rules for it, with checks and rolls, and a reliance on game mechanics to handle the result - almost treating it like it is a combat, in itself: one side rolls, the other side tries to beat that result. No one has mentioned how 4e handles anything but tactical melee... and I find that odd. It also gives the (false?) impression it is wholly geared to combat, and if that is the case, the seeming "need" for miniatures makes it less a RPG and more like a board game. That is not bad, necessarily, but it is different.

Well, I guess this is a double-edged issue.

On one hand, games that handle "social" aspects mechanically (like 3.x) are reviled because they strip the RPG element from the game. OTOH, if we look at games like Classic or AD&D, they do not have rules to handle these aspects at all, and the only thing that remains is, essentially, combat.

So, if all 4e handle is combat, is it a "good" RPG game or not? If one compares it to 3.x or (A)D&D, then gets a different answer depending on whether one likes 3.x or (A)D&D most. The same object ends up with different evaluation depending on who you ask. Which perhaps it is fine; tastes vary, after all.

When it comes to the issue, I am in favor of having mechanics for social aspects only when the players cannot cover this aspect by themselves (perhaps with the exception of morale). One should have mechanics to do things that as a player one cannot do, which is mostly the handling of physical world. Although, one could argue that penalising a player for not being able of being "Diplomatic", might be a bit harsh and not fun.

It is a critical component to know, as the answer determines whether 4e is "rules-heavy' or "rules-light." It is one thing to have a major focus on tactical combat (many games have this - not all do so equally), but have a much more abstract nature for non-combat interactions; so, the real question is-- does 4e carry forward the 3.x ideology of "a rule for everything." The lack of information could be read as meaning "there is nothing on it." If that is true, I actually think it's good, but because no one has ever said anything about it, there is no way to know... hence the questioning.

serleran wrote:
It is a critical component to know, as the answer determines whether 4e is "rules-heavy' or "rules-light." It is one thing to have a major focus on tactical combat (many games have this - not all do so equally), but have a much more abstract nature for non-combat interactions; so, the real question is-- does 4e carry forward the 3.x ideology of "a rule for everything." The lack of information could be read as meaning "there is nothing on it." If that is true, I actually think it's good, but because no one has ever said anything about it, there is no way to know... hence the questioning.

That is something I wondered myself, but looking at the reduced skill lists and the pregens, I would think it is lighter than 3.x in this respect. Let's hope it stays so!

Seeing as this is only the quick-start rules I can't comment on how the full game will treat it but I can definitely say there have been no calls so far in the module for gather information checks or any thing similar. Just a list of what sort of questions the PC's may have and what NPC's could give them answer to.

The rest was left up to RP.

There is a bit I remember reading further in the module where Diplomacy and other skills are mentioned in regards to getting info from an NPC in the keep but it doesn't simply cal for rolls, it lists a series of questions, etc that the NPC would ask over the course of the discussion. With the PC's needing 4 successful rolls before they get 4 failures. Plus it seems to try and get the entire party involved in the RP interaction with this NPC with the guy putting various characters on the spot at different times with his questions during the course of the RP/Rolls.

How backwards compatatble does the game feel?

A major plus of C&C was the fact that it could pull material from all editions. I rarely bought WOTC material, but I did buy NG and GG material. Atre the game mechanics still close enough to reasonably port over, or has 4E evolved into "too" differrent a game?

It may be a "great" game, but without enough backward compatability, I'll pass.
_________________
A Room Zoom Zoom. A Room Zoom Zoom. Gilly Gilly Gilly Gilly Ot Zat Za Come open the magic door with me, With your imagination there's so much we can see. There is a doorway that leads to a place. I'll find my way by the smile on your face.

I don't really see anything that would be too different. My main issue is always the "feel" of the game, and mechanical differences aside it still "felt" like D&D.

As for backwards compatibility, I'm not the best person to ask in that regards. I convert all manner of ideas and mechanics from various games to systems TOTALLY different so I think everything is compatible, it's just a matter of maintaining the feel.

Do I think you could use old modules for 4e? yeah, that's a given no matter what system you are talking about. Heck, I've run parts of pathfinder using RIFTS. And used C&C modules in Savage Worlds.

As far as compatibility my main concern is fluff, and thats portable no matter what the system.

So, I guess it depends on the individual seeking to do conversion or seeking compatibility.

DangerDwarf wrote:
So, I guess it depends on the individual seeking to do conversion or seeking compatibility.

Sounds like a "no" to me.
_________________
It is a joyful thing indeed to hold intimate converse with a man after ones own heart, chatting without reserve about things of interest or the fleeting topics of the world; but such, alas, are few and far between.

Yoshida Kenko (1283-1350)

*chuckles*

Again it depends on what you are looking for. Do I see myself plugging 2nd Edition kits into the game? Nah.

Do I see myself using some of my old modules? Yeah.

Plug and play spells? Prolly not.

My d20 Dragonlance books and 1st and 2nd Edition Greyhawk books? Yeah.

I consider 3e as not being "backwards compatible" mechanically, but other folks swear it is. Eye of the beholder and all.

DangerDwarf wrote:
I don't really see anything that would be too different. My main issue is always the "feel" of the game, and mechanical differences aside it still "felt" like D&D.

As for backwards compatibility, I'm not the best person to ask in that regards. I convert all manner of ideas and mechanics from various games to systems TOTALLY different so I think everything is compatible, it's just a matter of maintaining the feel.

Do I think you could use old modules for 4e? yeah, that's a given no matter what system you are talking about. Heck, I've run parts of pathfinder using RIFTS. And used C&C modules in Savage Worlds.

As far as compatibility my main concern is fluff, and thats portable no matter what the system.

So, I guess it depends on the individual seeking to do conversion or seeking compatibility.

Well I've converted Rifts material and Gurps material in the past. As you said, fluff doesn't neeed converting... if the baseline of attributes are close enough (as are Gurps and Rifts too C&C) then its not a problem.

I wouldn't bother with the character classes- I like C&C and AD&D classes just fine...

I guess the question I had regards whether the mechanics are tied to the fluff...NPC character HAS to have X ability in order for the story to make sense (X abililty being some feat or at will ability that doesn't port into C&C all that well).

Another concern I had was the ratio of fluff to combat crunch. One of the play test reports I say stated that most of the adventures revolved around battle mats and maps.
_________________
A Room Zoom Zoom. A Room Zoom Zoom. Gilly Gilly Gilly Gilly Ot Zat Za Come open the magic door with me, With your imagination there's so much we can see. There is a doorway that leads to a place. I'll find my way by the smile on your face.

My initial look at H1 thought the same thing. That it was just a series of encounters. So far (and I readily admit it's only been 1 short session) we had enough RP. The book has it interspersed into it and gives the DM enough to expand upon or ignore as he sees fit, depending on his group's style. It has more RP built into it than some old dungeon crawls which are little more than a series of encounters if the group and DM do nothing to "spruce it up".

The battle mat mentality is another concern of mine. So, we should be getting together for another short session today and I plan to leave the battle map put away and see how the game runs without it. We've still got a lot of testing to do to see if this is something we will play long term. Right now I just know that our first go at it was fun enough to prevent us from dismissing it out right.

I for one want to thank you... and I hope to hear a few more regulars here try it out. Don't get me wrong -- I'm definitely a 'confirmed Crusader'. However I keep on setting myself on top of a fence as to whether to get the core set or not. I admit, it's purely that collector instinct of me more than anything else. Of course, a part of it is also to get a better look at what it's got. I loved reading through parts of the two books of Experimental Might from Monte and I've enjoyed the Pathfinder initiative as well.



Maybe I'm just a sucker for punishment!

M
_________________
"You face Death itself in the form of... 1d4 Tarrasques!"

Partner to Brave Halfling Publishing
http://www.arcanacreations.com

The more real reviews* I see the more I get interested because I am hearing the same things. Good speed, combat is very well done and still feels like D&D. It's hard not to be interested when you hear that.

* Real reviews being those that are not shills spewing corp propaganda. And no the Necro reviews don't count as real since they have to like 4e for their business model to work.
_________________
The Lord of Ravens
My blog

One thing I will say I'm not really sure of so far is the Second Wind / Healing Bursts thing.

It seems a little odd to me.

Yes, we all know that HP's are and abstraction of more things than simply physical health. It has been that way since the beginning. But, it didn't always come across that way.

In 4e the abstraction is made readily apparent and it is taking a bit of readjustment of thinking on my part to get used to it.

In some instances the healing bursts seem logical. In other instances they do not.

I really liked the feel it gave when the Warlord used his Inspiring Words ability to give encouragement to the rogue, activating her second wind, gaining a few HP's back and the Rp of it worked really well as she threw herself back into the fray with a fervor.

Other times it seemed more of a stretch for me though. I guess time will tell if the bursts are something we'll care for or despise. Right now it is the hardest thing for me personally to adjust to.

I am in no hurry. They are supposedly doing an SRD equivalent for 4E. I'll wait for that and make up my mind. I am in no hurry, everyone I game with is fine with staying C&C. Trying out 4E is a "some time in the future" thing.

I guess that is one advantage to having good groups. As long as we are having fun we really don't care what we are playing. IT certainly helps us to not feel any pressure to hurry up and convert to anything.

Besides, every item I have seen "cool" about 4E is easy enough to adapt to C&C. Plus both campaigns I am running still have far to to go until their ends, and I am sure not going to switch systems in the middle of the ride.

So I have plenty of time to look, read, and decide.

I just know that too much of what 4E is doing is way too high fantasy for me. I am also not sure I like the changes to the magic system. I run games into high levels, and spell casters are god like enough. So I am very concerned about high level 4E spell casters being gods.

There are a lot of potentially over powering issues in 4E I want to give a thorough look over before I even consider adapting the system.

So I see myself just adapting 4E stuff to my C&C over the next couple of years, until I start hearing the system complaints, and figuring out what the issues are, and if there are fixes, or if its just best for me to stay with C&C.

I am predicting an 80%+ probability that I will be sticking with C&C and my house rules.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

We played our 2nd session of the module today, this time without a battle map to see how well the game stacks up in combat without one.

I'll just discuss the combat without a battlemat here. There were two main combats. The first was an ambush by some more kobolds. The opposition to the party was:

1 Kobold Skirmisher

3 Kobold Dragonshields

1 Kobold Wyrmpriest

To give an idea of the HP levels, the kobolds all had between 27-36 hpsand ranged from level 1 to 3 in their respective "roles".

Combat still played extremely smooth without the battle mat. I was initially concerned about the abilities of the warlord and the Rogue that allows them to control battlefield movement to a degree. It appears the worry was unwarranted, the abilities were still used without a battlemat and it was no different or difficult in using such things in Savage Worlds without a mat.

The combat went smooth, didn't bog down and most importantly, the players enjoyed it. The warlord got a little cocky and almost got creamed because of it but his dice were hot all session long.

The 2nd combat of the session was at a burial site. I would most likely used a battlemat for this encounter regardless of what system I played, to give a better idea of the terrain layout. I still tried it without however. It was against:

2 Guard Drakes

4 Human Rabble

1 Gnome Skulk

1 Halfling Slinger

Again, the combat was smooth and seamless without the battle map. The wizard got knocked unconscious during the fight and overall it was pretty intense. Overall, another great encounter.

We got to use more of the skill system this session. Those familiar with the DC's of 3e will recognize the system easily enough. Although the skills seem more suited to what I like. A combined skill for Perception. same with Thievery. Mechanically nothing gave us any problems and the system didn't get in the way of our groups roleplay style.

So, thats 2 readily enjoyable sessions for us so far.

After this session we talked about the game for a little bit and two of my players asked if they could keep playing these characters after the core books came out or if I'd make them roll up new ones.

I guess they are sold.

I'll probably go back and forth with the battlemat in the game. Depending on the number of combatants and the type of terrain around the encounter. But it is extremely nice knowing it isn't required to play a good game.

The cleric definitely has a different feel to it, although right now I can't explain why. it just does to me. The wizard slinging seemingly non-stop spells seemed odd to me the first session, but not at all this go around. Evenwith the barrage of spells he is far from outclassing the other characters, so right now it is all good there.

And again, I'm not seeing anything to prevent people from playing whatever their preferred style with this system.

Kael'Thas, the Teifling warlord, is rapidly becoming agroup favorite as far as personality goes as well as his effectiveness as part of the team on the battlefield. That kind of blew my mind because all of were kind of anti-tiefling prior to beginning.

There are lots of things to say about 4E. One of them is that IMO it is not in any way D&D that many of us grew up on. Though, that has already been said a hundred thousand times, it bares worth repeating again. I played Keep on the SHadowfell a few days ago, and it was my introduction to 4E. Wow, I can't tell you how much I hated it. Yeah, you might say I'm a hater, but 4E is nothing but a game that focuses on mechanics. Not everything in this first module is spelled out of course, but with the basics, 4E is going to be nothing but an explosian of mechanics.

Personally, I think the mechanical experience of 4E is just terrible.

-O
_________________
> Omote's Advanced C&C stuff <
Duke Omote Landwehr, Holy Order of the FPQ ~ Prince of the Castles & Crusades Society

DD I'm really wanting to try this now. Seeing your group like it is a plus in wanting to snag a copy of KOTSF for a session. It looks like a game that will fit in this recent shift I have had in what I like in a game.
_________________
The Lord of Ravens
My blog

Wow, I pictured C&C getting some D&D fans when 4E came out, not the other way around.

There will be shifts in many directions. I'm not a fan yet I am just interested in this especially with the number of joe gamers that have went from not sure to liking it. Besides there is room in my shelf for both.
_________________
The Lord of Ravens
My blog

Yeah, just because it looks like my group will be playing 4e, it in no ways means we'll be scrapping our other systems.

We're game junkies.

slimykuotoan wrote:
Wow, I pictured C&C getting some D&D fans when 4E came out, not the other way around.

And to touch on this a little more, I think TLG is letting a big opportunity pass them by in all this chaos. Some marketing and some evocative products to stimulate some interest could have gone a long way to garner additional interest in a game I still think is one of the best out there.

As is though, the often sluggish production schedule hurts them at times in my opinion.

Heck, I've been able to take up golf as an additional hobby with my unused RPG budget. Golf! That aint no cheap hobby either.

My group just started playing this module last night and incidently made it to almost the exact same spot in about the same amount of time. So far its been alright (I like learning new systems), but I'm a little hung up on the minis thing. About halfway thru the session I was comparing my experience with 4E to my first experience with Warhammer Quest. This is not necessarily bad (I like WQ) but it did feel more like a board game or video game, just my opinion. I'm still on the fence overall and am waiting till we can play some more to figure out if it'll go in my collection.