D&D 4e General

Combat in 4e does not have to take long.
If the players have a solid grasp on their characters' abilities and options and pay attention, combat can be quite fast. But that is a pretty big 'if'.

Depends on the session. I've rarely had sessions with more than one combat, but the combat itself can last between an hour and 1-1/2 session, depending on factors such as player timeliness, complicated enemies and distractions from the game itself. Skiller challenges are good for the variation, and not all face-offs should be resolved through actual combat.

It's true, and if you compare it to wargames like 40k, warmhordes, or even mordheim, it's MUCH faster, with no loss in depth of combat, it's just when you compare it to other editions of D&D, it's slower. You can totally get it down to 30-45 minutes per combat with an experienced group, but that's still comparatively longer.

>The (save ends) on Disrupting Shot works pretty well
By controller standards, Disruptive Shot is dreadfully bad. It is, at best, a single-target immobilized (save ends) or dazed (save ends). Compare this to what other controllers can have for a level 1 encounter power: a Primal Predator druid's Thorn Spray for a gigantic defense debuff in an area, a Covenant of Wrath invoker's pinpoint multitarget dazing and pushing with Thunder of Judgment, or a wizard's area control with Grasping Shadows, Illusory Obstacles, or Twilight Falls.

At levels 3 and 7, where another controller class would receive even better encounter attack powers to expand its repertoire, all a ranger (hunter) receives is... another use of Disruptive Shot at level 3, and yet another use of it at level 7 (plus another Aspect of the Wild that will probably never see use). That is pathetic.

The only meaningful upgrade to Disruptive Shot comes at level 13, with the blinding and the weapon-based rider, but by then, other controllers are working with seriously potent powers. Primal Predator druids render an enemy extremely vulnerable to a nova with Rending Claws, Covenant of Wrath invokers can set up a close blast 5 of enemies with near-guaranteed attacks against them and dazing with Brilliant Revelation, and wizards are laying down hard control in area burst 2s with Dark Gathering or Prismatic Burst. The ranger (hunter) cannot keep up with these.

This does not even begin to cover another damning weakness of the ranger (hunter): no daily attack powers with which to apply truly devastating control.

>Twin Strike can be achieved through a feat for damage purposes
Twin Strike is probably better than actually bothering with Clever Shot or Rapid Shot, but in this case, I am wondering why one is not simply playing a PHB1 ranger instead.

I made a silly fighter/rogue build a while back, basically just using fighter as a means to get the shock trooper paragon path while also multiclassing into monk for monk unarmed strike.

It was really feat intensive for very little reward, but those d12 sneak attack punches were fun as hell

Did 4e ever get siege rules, or is that another thing I'm importing from C&T?

Slap a d6 on the table after the first round of combat, 1 facing up.
It goes up by one every turn, and players add it to attack rolls.

Do people have any suggestions for some fun 4e campaign modules for a beginner-level 2nd level party? I'm gonna DM a campaign soon and I'm not completely comfortable with the system either, and I want to ease them in with something nice and structured.

New (GM) to 4e here, how necessary is the 4 player, C/L/D/S role spread? Is it viable/reasonable to adapt the game for 3 players, and if so, what roles should they take?
Right now I have a party of a tree warden, caster cleric, and archery ranger, played by mostly new players. Can I make up for the lack of controller by reducing the number of minions/large groups of enemies in encounters?

Not the 2huposter who knows what he's talking about, just felt like joining in.

Reavers of Harkenwold is absolutely and undoubtedly the best 4e adventure available for 2nd-level characters. It presents a cohesive storyline, makes good use of both combat encounters (with Monster Manual 3 math) and skill challenges (with Rules Compendium DCs), and is actually quite epic in scope for such a low-level adventure.

The only truly necessary role is leader.

As long as a party has a leader, it can be built to compensate for a lack of other roles. It is really quite easy to turn any character into a secondary striker, there are many classes with naturally high defenses that can make a defender actually superfluous, and AoE and control options abound for any class.

2/encounter minor action healing, on the other hand, is much rarer. Not just anyone can pick that up. This is what makes having a single leader necessary.

4e works somewhat well in a three-person party, but not as well as with four or five party members. The most noticeable downsides to running for three PCs are that combat encounters will be relatively simplistic due to having less moving parts, and anything AoE-based (for both PCs and monsters) will be underpowered for the same reason.

In a three-person party, defender/leader/striker is perhaps the best setup, since, as said above, AoE is weak in such a context, thereby diminishing a controller's value. However, the warden is an AoE defender, so I would recommend a switch to a single-target defender such as a fighter or a Strength/Wisdom paladin.

It would help to have two melee characters so that the defender has someone to flank with, so I would also suggest that the ranger be a two-weapon melee ranger instead. Lastly, the ranged cleric should absolutely swap out Healer's Lore for Battle Cleric's Lore for the sake of survivability.