Happy 4th Edition release day!
Sorry this is a little late. Technical problems aggrevated by Windows.
A couple weeks ago I told you all how I was looking forward to creating a new character for Smite’s upcoming 4E campaign. Well I’ve been thinking a lot about it and with the new rules out I am starting to get a picture of what I’m going to do. Here is what I’ve come up with so far.
Race:
He’ll be a dwarf. It’s just been far too long since I played a dwarf. I kept getting lured in be the power of the elves and the novelty of the Tieflings. So no matter that Dragonborn Paladins are brutal and Humans are super sweet no matter what you want to play, I am going to play a dwarf goddammit! I still think they totally shafted the dwarves again. Some of the traits they’ve given dwarves I won’t be able to evaluate until I get more familiar with the system. I’ve only given it brief look, mostly at the things that would affect my fledgling character concept. Anyway the new Dwarf has several traits which are sub par at best. They have a +5 saves vs poison. If I understand the new way poison is used then this will only allow the dwarf to shake off after effects of the poison and not reduce the damage dealt in any way. They get proficiency with hammers but not axes which us kind of a bummer. They still have the ability to move at full speed when encumbered or in armor but that is the least they could do since they are now the only race that moves at less than 6 squares (which used to be called 30’. Don’t get me started on that.) That’s right, Halflings now move at the same base speed as humans. So Dwarves are taller than Halflings and are medium size while Halflings are size small and Halflings are still faster than dwarves. WHY!? But here is what really sets them apart: Every other race that has a special power has an active power. Something they can initiate and therefore use as often as they choose. Dwarves have a passive power, the ability to reduce how much they are pushed or pulled by 1 space. So no matter how much pushing and pulling is in the rules, it is entirely out of the PCs hands as to if this power will ever be used.
Class:
Since I decided on a dwarf I will either be going classic or against type. I love playing dwarven fighter/priests and if that role needed to be filled I could do that, but what I would really like to play is something different. I was thinking Rogue but after looking at he new rules Ranger and Warlock are legitimate options too. Apparently the new Warlock is powered just as much by Constitution as Charisma. Ranger and Warlock share a limitation that worries me a bit. Rangers pick ranged or 2 weapon style and Warlocks choose a power source. These restrict what powers they each can choose as they progress. So if there are 70 something powers they can choose from then these classes have a limitation in that they only get to choose from half or a third of that total. That’s just a quick impression however, there is a lot of real estate in the Player’s Handbook given to the classes and I have barely looked at it, but from what I’ve seen a Striker class is the kind I am looking for. Multiclassing is a little weird now so I am not sure if that will be worth it. I was a big fan of the Ranger/Rogue combo back in 3.x so I might see if I can pull that off in 4E.
The Fun Stuff:
Face it in D&D old and new you have to pick class and race before you can even start thinking about things like physical appearance, mannerism, and history.
He’ll have long brown hair and beard which he braids beads into. This causes rattling when he is moving which sounds like a bead curtain. (I have no intention of taking stealth skill.) He’ll have black on black eyes. A birth defect, called Coalborn, which can either (at DMs discretion) have a positive or negative social impact among dwarves. Other races will probably just ignore it.
He’ll carry throwing hammers which he’ll juggle when nervous or uncomfortable. This means I’ll have to put a respectable number into Dex. You never hear of Dex based dwarves.
As for history I want a twist on the typical dwarven exile story. I am thinking that my character’s family could have left their dwarven homeland due to ideological differences instead of the more traditional chased out by monsters or exiled. His eyes could also have been a factor. Either way he doesn’t feel comfortable among other dwarves because of it. He feels they look down on him (even if they don’t.)
It is our duty as players to give our characters motivation. What makes them an adventurer? If you don’t fill this in then there is a serious risk of your character sitting around doing nothing and retiring early. And it can’t be wealth. Seeking one’s fortunes is a traditional motive but really PCs tend to end up so incredibly rich so at some point that will become meaningless. I prefer to use either use internal goals (I had an elf bard who wanted to be a rock star and everything he did was to that end) or some intangible condition (my tiefling was seeking a place where he felt he fit in.) So that being said, what is a good motivation for my new dwarf? I’m thinking he has something to prove; maybe to the world in general, maybe to the dwarven community, maybe eventually to himself. I mentioned a couple of weeks ago how I was looking at a lower charisma character and this motive goes well with a low self esteem. Maybe he should aspire to be the new Dwarf King a job which he would be hopelessly inept at.
And last thing I always do, come up with a name. I stil don’t have one for this character. I’ve used the serious names like Tilbar Shatterstone and the silly names like Hackkemupp Bloodblade in the past. I am not sure which way I should go this time.
That’s all I’ve worked out so far. As I look thru the new rules I’m sure I’ll get some more inspiration. Who knows I might just be seduced by the Dark Side and go with a Dragonborn Paladin.
Posted on June 6th, 2008 at 4:48 pm. About 'Happy 4th Edition release day!'.
Dude - you totally want a two-weapon dwarf ranger.
First of all, he gets his axe proficiency for being a ranger, so you can totally go battle axe plus hand axe and use all the two weapon powers.
Your article leaves out the most important power that dwarves have - free second wind. Every character in 4th edition can get one “free” healing surge per combat, but they have to give up their attacks and take full defense (+2 to AC) to get that surge. Dwarves do it while keeping up the attack, making a two-weapon dwarf ranger all the more playable.
The ranger description lets you take dungeoneering instead of nature skill. You could easily be a dwarven ranger sworn to slay the undead or denizens of the underdark, and never really care all that much about nature.
Dwarves get a cool feat that gives them extra damage with hammers and axes. At higher levels, you could take a heavy armor feat and not really lose class features (you won’t have the greatest DEX anyway).
This is a build that totally fits with 4th edition, and should feel pretty awesome in practice.
Posted on June 6th, 2008 at 5:17 pm. About 'Happy 4th Edition release day!'.
Good idea on the axe specialization feat, I missed that. I probably wouldn’t waste my time going for heavy armor. I’d have to burn 2 feats just to have the option to take plate proficiency. I’m thinking of taking the multi Rogue feat and maybe take a few powers from that class. (I just can’t have a character that doesn’t tumble.)
I probably overlooked the healing surge thing because I didn’t think it was a big deal. In my experience the only thing important about healing is that you get it, not how quick you can use it. Besides, if someone else is playing a Cleric the dwarf just makes it so the Cleric doesn’t worry about him as as much.
Oh yeah, and I definitely like the Dungeoneering option. It’s not that I want to not care about nature mind you. I just like the idea of dwarves knowing the underground environment.
Posted on June 10th, 2008 at 12:50 am. About 'Happy 4th Edition release day!'.
Working on a Warlock… picking the type (”pact”) of Warlock doesn’t limit the powers you can choose, but rather grants additional bonuses for certain powers. It might say “grant +2 bonus; if Fey pact, the bonus is 1 + Cha mod” (fey pact warlocks specialize in Cha). You can pick the powers that don’t give you the extra bonus if you like - OK, you’re not getting every tweak, but somtimes those infernal powers are just too awesome.
I’ve not really looked into the Ranger, but I suspect it’s the same kind of deal.
Posted on June 10th, 2008 at 1:05 am. About 'Happy 4th Edition release day!'.
I have peripherally thought about 4th edition and the ensuing campaign. Well… ok… I’ve acknowledged 4th Ed.’s existence and know Smite is looking to start a campaign. I don’t know where I am with this all…but I wish they’d stop revising things so much and put out more material for what already exists. I’m not buying into their gravy train because I don’t want to spend the money and I don’t care to have more RPG books in my library than actual books that are literature. Sure 3.0 was flawed and needed some tweaks, just publish a compendium of errata though, don’t create a whole new set of rules. Oh yeah the hard bound 3.5 book was necessary… for the money! Ugh! So if 3.5 was bothersome then what about 4.0… I’ve heard they’ve done away with some things completely and other things they’ve made over pretty drastically… was 3.0 that bad ? If so, how did that happen ? What happened to play testing ?
This is not to say I won’t like 4′th Ed. but the point being I don’t really want to have to reinvest time and money to learn an new RPG system that call itself D&D. I mean why not just go to a percentile based dice system…. introduce critical tables and more mechanics… oh wait… we have that… I really liked the 3.0 revision because it introduced a hard and fast skill system and the feat system was cool. Plus it had been awhile since anything new came out for the D&D name. I bought into that, but 3.5, was it really necessary? Some of the rules changes made sense but some were really inane, what they did to druids was discombobulating and their ruling on haste was a waste. They should have just soft bound a rules errata that was nicely indexed, not put out a whole new edition of hardbound books. This way we as GMs can pick and choose the rules we want to adopt (eh we do that anyhow right) with a quick and inexpensive reference.
Silliness…
So on the my thoughts of a character if I were to play in this campaign… I have no idea what the rule changes are… but I don’t know that I really care. Unless I roll a broken character (Elena v 2.0) I’m not thinking about how to make use of the rules. I am just gonna go with what I feel inclined to play. I’ve played a fighter rogue recently that was ungodly broken good(when I rolled her character I sucked the life out of not only the Buffalo Sabres but the NHL, because for that season the Sabres were poor and then the NHL PA went on strike and shut the season down). I have a sorceror currently in Random’s campaign who is a walking (flying now) missile boat. I also had a halfling bard in a pretty short lived campaign. I have been playing Neverwinter Nights 2 and ran into character that was this gnome bard who literally talked the party into a slumber… and thought hmmm how fun could that be… though it could be annoying as well and probably a bit taxing on me as my personality isn’t always one of of chatter… I could change the character to a cleric (for purposes of playing a different class) and having him preach boring sermons that put people to sleep… eh… well who knows…
Oh yes… this is a rant… but 4th Ed. kinda got me going…
Posted on June 12th, 2008 at 7:28 am. About 'Happy 4th Edition release day!'.
4th edition looks to be a whole new ball game. While the 3-to-3.5 numbering was apt in indicating evolutionary progress, so to is the big number 4 in setting the tone for a great leap forward. So maybe you won’t like that 4 has in store, but I think it’s unfair to call it an unnecessary grab for your money by those Wizards bastards.
Similarly, the whole don’t know/don’t care on the rule changes? A shame. I think it’ll be worth the time invested. I get ya a PHB if it helps. Ya won’t be rolling abilities on character creation so don’t let that keep you up at night.
I think/hope we’re going to look back on 3/3.5 as a vital step along the way out of the 1st/2nd edition backwaters, but not holding a candle to 4. I sure don’t think 3/3.5 was broken or ended up the way it did for lack of testing - it was a system that allowed itself to become overburdened in time, and it did. 4 is like pruning back a tree and getting it returned to a pleasing shape. Sure, it’ll have growth issues in the future, too, but that’s no reason to dismiss it now.
Anyone in drive distance to Batavia, NY (14020) interested in a seat at a late-summer-launching 4E campaign, give a shout. Guaranteed to be less painful than a trip to the dentist, most days. And you get to see your triumphs and foibles repeated here for the world (we kid, we kid) to see.