General RPG DiscussionDiscussion of all RPGs and non-system-specific topics. DM/GM/player issues, settings, etc. Rules discussion belongs in one the forums below.
They can now achieve a lot of the effects without dependence on magic items which is a good thing in my opinion. In 3rd Ed particular a character was as defined by his items as much as anything else.
I am not sure "defining" is the right work - unless I think in terms of "muscle definition" - Most of the cruicial items where just giving you plusses that would somehow affect your ability to hit and deal damage or avoid or survive damage. And not in any particular interesting way, just by increasing your numbers.
(A very simple example of interesting might be more an example like Boots of Flying - you can fly so you can deal damage to other flying opponents, or you can fly to avoid taking damage. But it's "interesting" because these uses are more open ended. Just adding +2 to Strength to get a +1 to attack and damage isn't interesting.)
Of course, 4E didn't entire eliminate this, but at least its not hidden behind ability enhancement and stuff like that, its straigtforward "this adds to attack and damage, this adds to AC and this adds to other defenses). Still boring, but at least without the fiddliness.
Thoughts of the Arch Chancellor - My weblog on EN World - containing game related material, like: house rules, design theories, reviews, play reports, adventure ideas
Secret Member of <Think we would just hide our secret with a spoiler tag, eh?>
Good write up! I agree that the level of choice could be improved, however, I, like others have mentioned, play down the notion that most gamers will always pick the ‘best’ option. The fighter player in my group, for example, is somewhat of a power gamer yet he likes the ‘big damage’ powers with no rider. What’s fun for him is rolling as much damage dice as possible (and he absolutely loves the executioners axe btw) and he doesn’t care much about riders, because that’s what the other players focus on.
I think the developers did a great job in not only designing powers around individual play-style tastes, but also around giving power gamers a choice within the group context. The fighter may say ‘hey I don’t need a lot of rider powers because there’s two controllers in our group. I need to step up and be more of a striker fighter and choose my powers accordingly”.
Is there room to improve? Absolutely. As splats come out, we know it’s going to open creative builds. The ability to swap powers at new levels is a nice touch too, as I’ve seen put to great use in my party.
Kender Taunt is that a Racial ability? If so it does seem rather more limited than something open to all fighters. Also how does that work mechanics wise, does it involve some sort of check or is it automatic?
A called shot can hit multiple targets, how does that work mechanically?
Kender Taunt is that a Racial ability? If so it does seem rather more limited than something open to all fighters. Also how does that work mechanics wise, does it involve some sort of check or is it automatic?
A called shot can hit multiple targets, how does that work mechanically?
Yeah it is a racial ability. But not as silly as trying to be Scorpion from Mortal Kombat in D&D just to try to get some strange effect that shouldn't be had.
Tell me how in the real world that stunt of a power would be pulled?
Called shot in 3rd would effectively be an attack with a DC required extra to hit and pull it off. Most called shots in earlier forms would require a 20 on a d20.
So mechanically:
Roll your dice to attempt the called shot.
If you get a 20 on the dice then each target would take the damage.
Specifics would depend on your DM ruling how much damage is dealt.
I don't find cartoon antics to be a good way to claim a power as justified to improve options for a class though.
Balancing of Powers
As I said in the last section, 4e has a problem with players picking the same powers over and over again. Part of this is the choice of one power, part is the limited number of choices we have in the core books, and finally it’s the fact that many powers seem very poorly balanced with each other.
I’ll give a quick example, the 5th level fighter’s daily, Rain of Steel. To my mind, this is the only fighter daily worth considering. I can have a daily that lasts all fight and does automatic damage, or a daily that might do some damage and a status effect for a round or two.
Like others have responded, I think that the whole "best power" thing is something that depends highly on your group and the style of each player in it. Playing with a few different groups, I've found that certain groups will develop a particular style and that the wisdom of playing in that style will percolate through the group until it just seems like common sense.
Rain of Steel seems poorly balanced when you put the fighter in a hypothetical situation where it could inflict 50[W] damage, but that situation is just that, hypothetical. Rain of Steel has an opportunity cost--it can't be used with any other stance. It also trades damage in the present for damage in the future. Finally, unlike the other two Fighter Daily 5 powers, it doesn't inflict any sort of condition. Any sort of balancing system has to assign values to these kinds of things, and those values are going to be subjective.
Yeah it is a racial ability. But not as silly as trying to be Scorpion from Mortal Kombat in D&D just to try to get some strange effect that shouldn't be had.
Now who's limiting player options?
Quote:
Tell me how in the real world that stunt of a power would be pulled?
Here are three examples of the top of my head.
Feigning weakness, so that your enemies close to exploit it, then swing as they come in.
Literally shout something like "Come on then" taunting the enemies to focus on you.
Or all the enemies just happen to close on you at once, and you swing to defend yourself.
The shift while being forced movement, is just a rule mechanic, it doesn't in this case have to represent actual an force involved (like Scorpion in Mortal Kombat).
The NPCs just elects to move towards the fighter at that time (for whatever reason), and he is ready to exploit it.
Quote:
Called shot in 3rd would effectively be an attack with a DC required extra to hit and pull it off. Most called shots in earlier forms would require a 20 on a d20.
So you either make it so hard that it is never worth doing (like needing a 20 on the dice) or have it easier and end up with it being worth trying every round, especially if you build a character to exploit whatever rule the DM comes up with.
Quote:
I don't find cartoon antics to be a good way to claim a power as justified to improve options for a class though.
It's hardly cartoon, I can think of several examples from the genre in film and literature where a hero has been surrounded and lashes out at several opponents when they close on him.
Does really mimic what I'm taking about (drawing opponents towards you), and they don't work well together, since
Goad only effects one opponent and they have to be threatening you to start with.
Still lets look at Goad.
Say you design a character around that feat, you max out your AC and defenses, boost your Cha, so that melee opponents (known for having low will saves) will always attack you.
That will then become your tactic in every fight against a melee opponent. And why not you've invested a lot in this build?
They are forced to attack you every round and there is nothing the DM can do, the other players just either heal you or flank to sneak attack it with no fear of being attacked, etc.
Those sort of combats and the whole of it because you pull the same tactic every round, then become predicable and routine.
The "Come and Get Some" scene can be found in many movies. It is always portrayed in a manner letting you think that this is what HAS to happen at that moment. (Though this expectation is sometimes subverted - like in Princess Bride and Inogo finally meeting his nemesis - and it running away).
All those fiddly bits "roll a bluff/taunt check to goad your enemies bla bla bla" - they just distract from the scene you expect to see. This is just a scene that, when the opportunity presents itself, has to happen!
So, now back to your regularly scheduled Subsystem Discussion thread.
Thoughts of the Arch Chancellor - My weblog on EN World - containing game related material, like: house rules, design theories, reviews, play reports, adventure ideas
Secret Member of <Think we would just hide our secret with a spoiler tag, eh?>
Feigning weakness, so that your enemies close to exploit it, then swing as they come in.
Literally shout something like "Come on then" taunting the enemies to focus on you.
Or all the enemies just happen to close on you at once, and you swing to defend yourself.
The NPCs just elects to move towards the fighter at that time (for whatever reason), and he is ready to exploit it.
There you go then. You answer your own question as to how it could be done in older editions and didn't require some video game power to do it.
Notice yourself using a "taunt" ability that is a racial for Kender, but doesn't discount other races or even classes from doing something to piss off the enemy to rush him, or the enemy leader to order them all to rush him.
So the power isn't need to do it.
Explain to me why you can only swing your sword at more than one enemy in this sweeping motion once per encounter in 4th and that make sense?
Because you ran out of use of the power right? So it is ok to be "like the movie where it has to happen" as mentioned by M_R, but you can only do it once, because a fighter is so inept at being able to do something more than once.
I call that a lack of options.
DM: Sorry Tom, you can't make anymore wild swings at the enemies hoping to hit more than one at a time because you used up your encounter power.
Isn't it great to play in a movie script where the director (DM/rules) dictate (railroad) you actions and choices?
There you go then. You answer your own question as to how it could be done in older editions and didn't require some video game power to do it.
Notice yourself using a "taunt" ability that is a racial for Kender, but doesn't discount other races or even classes from doing something to piss off the enemy to rush him, or the enemy leader to order them all to rush him.
So the power isn't need to do it.
Explain to me why you can only swing your sword at more than one enemy in this sweeping motion once per encounter in 4th and that make sense?
Because you ran out of use of the power right? So it is ok to be "like the movie where it has to happen" as mentioned by M_R, but you can only do it once, because a fighter is so inept at being able to do something more than once.
I call that a lack of options.
DM: Sorry Tom, you can't make anymore wild swings at the enemies hoping to hit more than one at a time because you used up your encounter power.
Isn't it great to play in a movie script where the director (DM/rules) dictate (railroad) you actions and choices?
I see it more of a narative tool than a "video game power". It also works in line with my experience of fighting (JKA Kumite and Goju Ryu Iri Kumi). Some techniques are more difficult to complete and require the right distance, body positioning, balance and openings in your opponents defense to execute.
So for example, basic jabs, snap kicks and mawashigeri (roundhouse kicks) to the body would be my at will attacks, very little effect but they are easy to execute and are used to position your opponent for your more effective techniques.
For encounter techniques, more difficult you need the right balance and have to work openings in your opponents defence, you will most likely only be able to pull these off once or twice in a three minute bout. You are looking at head high mawashigeri's, reverse mawashi to the body, using strong defenses to turn your opponent and open his back, as well as small sweeps to put him off balance so you can land other techniques easier.
For Dailies, requiring perfect balance, positioning as well as working your opponent into a position where his balance and defences are not in place to counter, full sweeps and throws, are the big ones here. Unless you are very skilled you will most likely be able to execute these once a tournament (usually 4 or 5 fights).
Similarly, for martial exploits you can draw the same conclusions, your encounter powers require a certain set of circumstances that you can manoeuvre into once in a fight. Dailies, require even more skill to set up and you can usually manage to get the right circumstances once every 4 or 5 encounters.
An how often was oriental fighting styles used in medieval Europe?
That is the problem, that even without the Greyhawk influences, the game is still founded on that time frame with a little bit of extra fantasy. Look at the armor and weapons.
If that is the case, then where is the monk in the PHB?
If what you describe to be a Martial power, then it should be for the monk, otherwise these things aren't martial abilities in D&D as the monk will have similar functions be be of another power source rather than require physical contact.
I really see nothing that puts this fighter into physical contact like you describe, but just annoying them to rush him.
So when the Martial monk comes out, then a power like Kumite style may fit better, but it will be some pseudo-magic type of power rather than actual physical contact.
All in all it exceeds that funny word that starts with a "v".
An how often was oriental fighting styles used in medieval Europe?
That is the problem, that even without the Greyhawk influences, the game is still founded on that time frame with a little bit of extra fantasy. Look at the armor and weapons.
If that is the case, then where is the monk in the PHB?
If what you describe to be a Martial power, then it should be for the monk, otherwise these things aren't martial abilities in D&D as the monk will have similar functions be be of another power source rather than require physical contact.
I really see nothing that puts this fighter into physical contact like you describe, but just annoying them to rush him.
So when the Martial monk comes out, then a power like Kumite style may fit better, but it will be some pseudo-magic type of power rather than actual physical contact.
All in all it exceeds that funny word that starts with a "v".
In popular culture, the term "Martial Arts" often specifically refers to the combat systems that originated in Asian cultures. However, the term actually refers to any sort of codified combat systems, regardless of origin. Europe is home to many extensive systems of martial arts, both living traditions (e.g. Jogo do Pau and other stick and sword fencing and Savate, a Frenchkicking style developed by sailors and street fighters) and older systems collectively referred to as Historical European martial arts that existed until modern times and are now being reconstructed by several organizations. In the Americas, Native Americans have a tradition of open-handed martial arts, which includes wrestling, and Hawaiians have historically practiced arts featuring small and large joint manipulation. A mix of origins occur in the athletic movements of Capoeira, a practice that was created in Brazil by slaves and was based on skills brought with them from Africa.
All forms of fighting have techniques that can be broken down in terms of how often you see them in an average bout, as I tried to do with karate, based on my experiences. All martial arts come down to positioning yourself and your opponent so you can deliver your most lethal strikes and techniques to end the conflict, and can be broken down into standard techniques (at will), Effective techniques that require positioning and can end a fight(encounter) and deadly fight finishing techniques that require precises positioning (daily).
Okinawan, Goju-Ryu is the style, Iri kumi is a semi contact, non stop bout, compared to kumite where the fight stops with every point (similar to fencing).
Quote:
Originally Posted by justanobody
It isn't the African (Brazilian?) one that I can't spell or pronounce very good, but can get close with fun-etics.
Cop-a-way-uh
Quote:
A mix of origins occur in the athletic movements of Capoeira, a practice that was created in Brazil by slaves and was based on skills brought with them from Africa.
It is a very loose and flexible style, most of the training looks like dancing, as they had to disguise the fact they were training.
I would say all martial arts, even wrestling and boxing, have thier strengths and would be very hesitant to say which is the best. It comes down to the relative skill of the combatants at the end of the day.
I am jsut saying for the powers, they seem a bit too much even compared to what the different martial arts can do realistically.
I prefer fighters to not look like they are using some magic pushmepullyou stuff without contact.
You are a melee class, so get physical!
Fair enough. However a lot of fighting does involve controlling distance. Just by changing your stance or dropping a defense you can entice an opponent to come closer or shift to the side. Likewise, there are several techniques, such as a thrusting snap kick than can move your opponent away from you.
Unfortunately, these things are difficult to see if you are watching a bout, unless you know what you are looking for.
Besides, once a martial powered class hits paragon, you are starting to hit the Bruce Lee level of things. As for Epic, you are meant to be doing what normal humans can't.
Gee, what a shock to come to a thread wherein 4e players are discussing 4e systems in order to gain a greater familiarity and master of 4e rules only to find justanobody running on for pages telling us all how badwrongfun it all is.
Justanobody must be a 4e character, since his tactic just seems to be to spam the same attack power over and over and over again.
On a different note, this is what Come and Get It looks like a split second before its used -
There you go then. You answer your own question as to how it could be done in older editions and didn't require some video game power to do it.
No because of the issues I mentioned above. If the older edition rules allowed something to happen one round (like Goad) there was nothing to stop the player using the same trick every round. Which made for a really boring game.
So if the DM goes outside the rules to allow say bluff to do the feign injury trick, that either screws over the fighter that suggested the move because there is no way he'll have decent ranks in Bluff for a one off idea like that, or the Rogue character will automatically succeed, so want to try it again next round. What's to stop him?
Well perhaps the DM saying they won't fall for the same trick twice... so you can only do it once an encounter... hmm why not make it a power then?
Quote:
So the power isn't need to do it.
No it's not needed, but it does give DM's and players more ideas, and more guide lines as to what's a sensible stunt for this level. A power is just this systems mechanic for handling dramatic action.
Quote:
Explain to me why you can only swing your sword at more than one enemy in this sweeping motion once per encounter in 4th and that make sense?
Why don't you try it's very easy to do as well...
Feigning weakness, so that your enemies close to exploit it, then swing as they come in. They aren't foolish enough to fall for you bluff a second time.
Literally shout something like "Come on then" taunting the enemies to focus on you. After being beaten round the head, realising you are too much of a challenge, they decide to pick on an easier target.
Or all the enemies just happen to close on you at once, and you swing to defend yourself. Having seen your wild sweep, you enemies decide to pace their attacks hoping one can create an opening that a flanking one can exploit.
Quote:
Because you ran out of use of the power right? So it is ok to be "like the movie where it has to happen" as mentioned by M_R, but you can only do it once, because a fighter is so inept at being able to do something more than once.
No your fighter is so skilled he can spot the opportunity to exploit the situation to do the powers effect, but the opportunity rarely happens during combat. A fighter without the power might be presented with the opportunity, but he lacks the skill to exploit it. It's why fighter powers are called exploits.
Quote:
I call that a lack of options.
DM: Sorry Tom, you can't make anymore wild swings at the enemies hoping to hit more than one at a time because you used up your encounter power.
Isn't it great to play in a movie script where the director (DM/rules) dictate (railroad) you actions and choices?
Actually players in 4th Ed have more narrative control with their powers than they did in 3rd Ed. They can decide when the opportunity arises for them to pull off their exploits. They decide when the opponents line themselves up for their Whirlwind Attack.
Despite having Whirlwind attack with a 3rd Ed character for 5 levels I only ever got to use it once. Generally because we either fought so few opponents or because knowing I had it, the GM avoided letting me get in situations where it would be really useful.
In 4th Ed I now control those situations at least once an Encounter. I determine the narrative of the combat for that round, I determine the NPC motivations for focusing on me. I like the fact 4th Ed gives some of the fight choreography to the players.
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
