Interesting overview. I'm afraid the few months I played 3.0, during the time the new 3.5 book was coming out, and then some 3.5, I found the first system I HATED. When I realized I was actively trying to get my character killed because it was a chore to show up for the game, I just quit because that was dysfunctional gaming - as has been echoed before, I'd rather have no gaming, than bad gaming. I'm not saying 3.x is bad, objectively, but it was bad for ME.
Against my intent, I joined Umiushi's maptool game here, of 4e, because he was patient and improvisational enough, and while it still had things I did not cotton to well, I did find it had a few more ups than downs, compared to 3x for me. If I HAD to pick one of the two, I would choose to play 4e, so just from your summary, I have to say I think it is unfortunate they've gone "backward" on the next D&D, though I have no intention of playing it.
Good entry. I'm so tired of the 4E bashing it's nice to see the other side of it. My guess is that "Next" will become something that the 3.5/Pathfinder group will appreciate. I've accepted that 4E is a game that's just different from most others. I like it for all the reasons you do and for the detailed combat. I was never as much in it for the RP (which I do enjoy) as for the combat. When I've DM'ed I find that I can throw anything at the PC's (within the game mechanics) and have a lot of fun watching well-played characters overcome the challenges.
This is great thank you you!!!
no problem, any comments on how the adventure runs would be appreciated. Also, I'd start at the moathouse at the very least. Helps sets the stage for the campaign.
Great, thank you.
These are pretty difficult encounters mind you. BUT, if you want to beef them up, my best suggestion is three fold. Either add extra guys (of what is there) OR convert minions to henchmen (if there are minions) OR up the level of SOLO monsters. And in case you missed it, this is the latest post. Starting at the moathouse is a good place to throw them into the mix.
But good luck.
Thank you very much for your hard work. Going to start my players through ToEE tonight. Your choices for encounters are awesome, but I've increased the difficulty a little, due to my players being very good at tactics and teamwork without min/maxing their characters. They just know their role very well and tend to roll decently. It's frightening being their DM sometimes.
WOW, I haven't seen a note in what looks like 7 months. I could try. My plate is somewhat full right now, but I'll get back to it in my free time.
The conversion notes were great. If you would continue this, I would appreciate it.
I converted it to 3.5 also, but I lost those notes. Basically was the same as the original, but I modified what the ancient cloakers were (added many a template to the actual cloaker).
Also, I took some creative freedom with bits of it. Especially how EACH door is booby trapped and locked. From a player POV, that would get tedious/boring/frustrating. So I suggest locking/trapping only CERTAIN doors.
Awesome! I am the original author of this adventure and it is really cool to see someone is so interested in the adventure that he is willing to convert it to 4th ed. I look forward to downloading the end result and perhaps one day play it with new players. If I ever move beyond 3.5
apparently not. IN case you do, go to the forums at www.herogames.com and check out my blog there. Same exact content, but updated.
thanks. Some of the notes are more for me than my players. I am new to the game, so writing things out helps me remember the details involved. The more powers I write up though, the lazier I get .
Nice write up and seems to be a very interesting template to use in any fantasy/medieval game.
I like the henchman Idea. Minions are fun because they are fragile and make you feel badass, but sometimes they are just Too fragile
Yeah, that's happened to me too. Exept reversed. I myself like 3.5 more than 4th and I don't brag about it. You like 4th more, I don't really care, 'cause I'm not in your group.
I wouldn't consider all 3.x players snobs. There are people like that in 4th ed. players too. There are rpg nazis in both editions.
Granted that this is the first comment left on this post, I do see that there has been 11 views of the post so far. I think that most folks just read and move on to the next.
Not to be argumentative, but I feel I need to clarify some things.
First, I am not making this class to fill in a void with respect to role and power source. I am doing it because I like the image of the dragoon.
Second, you really need to understand what makes the dragoon a dragoon (aka be somewhat familiar with final fantasy) before criticizing the flavor of it all. Or if it fits, or whatever.
As such, athletics has to be a required skill, because what distinctly sets a dragoon apart is his leaping ability. And because jumping is part of the athletics skill, he kind of needs to have it.
As for bloodied being the trigger, that is a very dragon like characteristic. The dragonborn race AND dragons from the MM all have some fancy thing happen when bloodied. Second, that mark is a generic mark, not a dragonic mark when bloodied for first time. Meaning it lasts until ENT and it only gives a -2 to atks if not main target. Also,the dragoon can choose which ones to mark and which to not in burst.
Warden can mark multiple bad guys at once each round, and the fighter can if his power targets more than one guy. The dragoon can only mark multiple guys with bloodied fury or an encounter/daily power. Again, those marks are generic, not draconic marks.
As for leaping, that is what makes the dragoon something unique. NORMALLY, you wouldn't be charging a lot in a combat, but leaping encourages you to charge constantly. Maybe that is overpowered, but that's not the argument you try to make.
Something that REALLY upsets me is you accusing me of "ripping off" material. This isn't meant to be something for WOTC to read and publish. Its purpose is to take what is there and tweek it only slightly to give the image of the dragoon, without compromise and to minimize balance issues. If you don't have the primal power book, then don't use the dragoon. But I am not about to go and reproduce something from a copyrighted source.
As for draconic mark, I think you completely misconstrued what I was writing. First, name's a name. I don't care what you call it, I was just giving it a name. As said at the top, this was about mechanics, not flavor. Second, the soaring retort is probably less powerful, not more powerful, than the aegis of assault. It only has range of 6, and what is not there, but should have been, is that it is a leap, so you have to have LOS and LOE and 3' of clearance. Ferocious retort is supposed to replace aegis of shielding. So your mark has to attack someone that is not you to even trigger it. That doesn't happen often, so you don't get to use it often. I guess stunned is a bit over the top (in epic level encounter powers only), so I have changed that to be dazed. Basically, it was supposed to be like frightful presence of a dragon, but that's a bit much.
As for power source, martial didn't fit because of the breath attacks. For powers, each level, I have one close blast from wizard or sorcerer, one power that allows you to use it with a charge (mostly from fighter), one power that allows a free generic mark (usually from fighter or swordmage), and one fighter power (preferably one involving spears or polearms). The breath attacks don't make sense without implement, so that is why it needs to be arcane.
Well Yukon. First off, the arcane defender, the swordmage, already exists.
But you already know that of course.
Next is the ability and skill set. I know the sorcerer doesn't have int as a key skill, but still, you could put something involving the arcane. Why is Athletics a mandatory skill? To me it makes no sense. If it had to have a mandatory skill I would say only arcana. The fighter is a big brute and even he doesn't have athletics as a mandatory skill.
Next are the class features. You said Draconic Mark is the SAME as Swordmage Aegis, and with soaring retort, you took the aegis of assault but just made it more powerful. Also, in Eberron there are Dragonmarks, so I would recommend changing that name of Draconic Marks so other, less leninent eberron people don't call you out much worse on it. I haven't seen any reference to dragons in this entire article, either. (Well except for the dragoon thing, so I guess if you took out one "o" you would technically have a relation) For those without Primal Power (like me sadly) I have no idea what Ferocious Scream IS. And you shouldn't even be ripping it off anyway.
On your original ideas, the Leap seems like a waste of a feature. Charges aren't used that often. If your dragoon seemed to move like the assassin does I might be more lenient on this, but considering he wears heavy armor I strongly doubt it at this point. The Bloodied Fury already busts out the "draconic mark" which I have already called you out on. Remember, being bloodied does happen often to people, especially defenders (after all, they are the meat shields). That is also insanely overpowered, considering all defender's regular powers only mark one opponent at a time. That power could actaully work against him, considering the enemies will turn swordpoint on him and he will be giblets, poor dragoon.
The at-will power doesn't even have the implement keyword. Stunning is a very powerful thing, and to close burst 5 your enemies into being stunned on every single turn is indescribable. I guess you could call it overpowered or godly, but that would be quite the understatement. It is an immediate interrupt, but without a trigger specified...speaking of, an at-will immediate interrupt?! That has no place as an at-will power, maybe an obnoxiously overpowered class feature, but not an at-will power. At-wills are standard actions.
The dragoon doesn't have the feel of the arcane power. Currently it feels like a mixture of martial and primal with a sprig of arcane.
You also really need to include flavor for those who have not played Final Fantasy. But then again, since I have not played Final Fantasy, maybe I am just the wrong person to be criticizing. I guess I am the wrong person to enjoy this sort of thing, but you should make it loosely-based. If you make it 100% based on the FF Dragoon you will run into balance issues. (Trust me, I know, I tried to copy a book series into a campaign setting. Still trying to fix that.)
I apologize if I am sounding harsh, which probably involves the fact I am a little sleep-deprived at the moment. I will say a few good things. The hit points/healing surges seem balanced, you are aiming for a defender role, and I do enjoy that you are making a class with weapon implements that aren't blades.
Also, if you want someone to make powers in the D&D 4e format for you, I am happy to volunteer.
normally i try to abstain from the war, this blog was to investigate the basis of their argument. The recent comment, however, was an attack on older editions, but it makes me think that's why someone would think what they think.