D&D 4e question

[Chibibar]

Yea. 4.0 kinda made all classes into combat class.

BUT you don't have to play 4.0 or even better, you can make your own skills/spells/ and rules (once you get more experience on the game) We have so many homebrew rules for our gaming group.

 

[Ravenpoe]

It's already been stated, but it deserves to be repeated.

The number one rule of being a good DM is this: Allow your players to be awesome. In fact, encourage them to be so. Your job is to tell a story in which they are the heroes and do awesome shit. You're on their side (but never let them know this).

The rules are also just guidelines. Has the character sprung a trap that, according to the rules, would lead to the death of his character? In most cases, this is probably not the best course of action... maybe a hidden mechanism knocks him out to be kidnapped instead... now the party gets to rescue him!

Ok, that's a lame example, but I think you get the idea.

 

[RoboKomodo]

I found one of the biggest things I was worried about before I started DMing was how to communicate with the players effectively. A great way is to listen to some of the podcasts on iTunes of people playing D&D, particularly the ones from WotC with Kurtz, the guys at Penny Arcade and Will Wheaton, cause the guy DMing is, well, a professional DM.

 

[Math242]

ah thanks for the tip, i'll do that

 

[eMagdAeH]

Why not? All they did was take the party roles that were implied in 3.5 and make them explicit.

They also pigeon holed everyone into those roles, instead of allowing generalists like before.[/QUOTE]

This is a different vein of thought, but similar idea...

4.0 really did a lot of pigeon holing that I wasn't a big fan of. I had made a Spell-Scarred subclassed DW Fighter with the idea that he was a nearly uncontrollable berserker. The DW was an aesthetic thing (again with the pigeon holing). I didn't feel like the sneaky roguish types really fit the idea I had for the character, but I ended up finding that to be effective while following the game rules I ended up needing to switch to a rogue.

Thanksfully, our DM is VERY open with the rules, and let us get away with a lot. Oh well, that's my personal gripe to it. Honestly, if it's not too late, I'd recommend bringing your group back to 3.5 for your self-written adventure. Again, this is total opinion, but I don't think I'm alone in that opinion.

 

[Chibibar]

Why not? All they did was take the party roles that were implied in 3.5 and make them explicit.

They also pigeon holed everyone into those roles, instead of allowing generalists like before.[/QUOTE]

This is a different vein of thought, but similar idea...

4.0 really did a lot of pigeon holing that I wasn't a big fan of. I had made a Spell-Scarred subclassed DW Fighter with the idea that he was a nearly uncontrollable berserker. The DW was an aesthetic thing (again with the pigeon holing). I didn't feel like the sneaky roguish types really fit the idea I had for the character, but I ended up finding that to be effective while following the game rules I ended up needing to switch to a rogue.

Thanksfully, our DM is VERY open with the rules, and let us get away with a lot. Oh well, that's my personal gripe to it. Honestly, if it's not too late, I'd recommend bringing your group back to 3.5 for your self-written adventure. Again, this is total opinion, but I don't think I'm alone in that opinion.[/QUOTE]

What I did with my group (before we went back to 3.5) is that for magic users, I incorporate a lot of the spells that was remove and put back into the game via per encounter and per day powers. A lot of the skill checks we put back in, tweak for specialization and such.

I do love the new combat system in 4e. It makes the fight goes faster and "more epic" for the players. I know that mages get the shaft in early levels since they don't have many spells to work with or how many time they can cast, but it kinda even out at the end.