4e / GSL At-will class powers ruining my archetypes

[Sadrik]

I thought that I would clean up this thread a bit.

There are two sides to the thoughts on removing at-wills, here are some of the thoughts presented over the last few pages and a few other thoughts that have occurred to me that have had merit to be placed on my list.

1. The game is not robust enough to remove at-wills it is calibrated in such a way that a single up tick or down tick will cause a catastrophic error in the math. This is obviously hogwash.

2. Removing at-wills will remove certain damage types that the game is expecting. By doing this it will cause problems to ripple through the system. This is a variation on point 1.

3. The new PHB2 feat which allows you to use any stat for your basic attacks is a further advancement of the 4e idea - any stat = any attack. Yes this can bring up wonkey things but it is all in the realm of 4e. Using STR with your crossbow is a good thing because the high STR fighter can now compete equally with the high DEX archer.

Yet:

The exact point is NOT to allow Fighters to throw around STR based-magic missiles (a basic attack) so they don't start doing the Wizard thing as well as the Wizard.

The Warlock crossbowing and rod fighting with his CON score. Neat! Again, I don't like it thematically, it is being argued that the game needs stuff like this to be fully functional. I agree, to a point only as far as this is one of the "ideas" of 4e. A wizard fighting with his INT or a Cleric fighting with his WIS does make making basic attacks more viable.

4.
20 + 20 + 20 + 10 + 10 + 10 + 10 is not the same as 20 + 10 + 10 + 10 + 10 + 10 + 10 + 10 + 10

Making a few assumptions, if the the DMs turn takes 5 minutes to control the monsters and the players on average take 1 minute each (counting the whose turn is it stuff too). One pass around the table with 5 players could take 10 minutes. That 7 round combat takes 70 minutes and the 9 round combat takes 90 minutes. This doesn't even get into the fact that all the mini-bonuses from the at-wills will eat more real time than the basic attacks will. That bonus 20 or more minutes better be super-fun.

5.

Originally Posted by arcady

Don't compare 4E to past versions of DnD.
'snip'
I was always bothered about how in past DnD...

That gave me a smile.

6.

Originally Posted by nightwyrm

Sadrik's PoV is that all magical effects should be extra special and something you can run out of and when the wizard runs out of magical effects, he should be happy to go from caster to crossbowman or staffdude.

Yup, and the fighter can do some wuxia effects in an encounter and then they are limited to sworddude or bowman.

Additionally, spell casters (wizard) can select some feats that give them reserve feats (use an encounter power twice during an encounter or three times at 16th level) and lowering arcane mastery feat (action point for daily) to heroic tier.

[Ourph]

I'm curious Sadrik, are you planning on applying the same thing to monsters? There are quite a few monsters with "magical" at-will abilities that lack any real basic attack form, like a mundane claw or bite. For example, the Blazing Skeleton uses either a Blazing Claw or Flame Orb at-will. Do you plan to makes these into encounter powers and give the Blazing Skeleton some kind of basic, mundane claw attack or are your concerns about endlessly spammed "special" attacks only related to PC abilities?

[Zustiur]

Originally Posted by Cadfan

Wow.

4e doesn't do what you said.

And 3e doesn't do what you said.

I think it rather depends on how much reading-between-the-lines you are doing at the time. The obvious example being the lack of fluff in the monster manual. While neither directly states that you should create a monster in a given way, by providing 3-400 canon examples it does encourage one line of thought or the other.

I think the point I was getting at (in my awfully long winded way), was as follows:
4E encourages you to think of the balance/stats first, and then hang a description on top. Simply because it provides all the instructions for balance.
3E lacked those tools, which caused the opposite effect - you created a creature first, and fit the appropriate stats etc afterwards, because until you knew what the creature was, you had no guideline to work with.

I'll admit it's a fairly subtle difference in reality. I'll also admit that 4E is easier, and provides a more predictable result.

Originally Posted by Majoru Oakheart

No disagreement here. Not following the rules of the game you are all playing causes problems. That was the main lesson I learned. Like, not removing at-will powers from all the classes or not allowing people to short rest when they obviously have.

The way you've phrased that suggests that you never house rule anything. Amusingly it also suggests that you should still be playing original DnD, because anything else would be a change, and therefore cause problems. I realize what you mean of course.

Ironically enough, I believe there IS a feat that does that. I'll have to wait for the full text, but the feat in PHB 2 lets you use a stat other than strength for basic attacks. Although, I believe it is melee attacks only.

Still, you miss the point. The goal is to have each class have their own cool thing to do that they don't suck at and fits their class.

So is the fighter who uses Str with his crossbow not encroaching on the archer's territory?
It seems 4E's ideal is that no class should ever overlap another's shtick, yet it has feats that allow them to do exactly that. Wizards now play a lot closer to fighters than they used to be, because they have so few spells to choose from. Fighters now play a lot closer to wizards than they used to be because they have all these spell-like powers. That seems to be considered okay while at the same time you're saying that they shouldn't overlap. Which is it to be?

Previous editions have taken the assumption that everyone starts out the same and diverges. 4E appears to take the assumption that everyone is already different and will possibly merge over time.

Playwise they're becoming the same, while fluffwise they're spreading further apart. It's all "X[W]" across the board, while trying to make the fighter not an archer.

That's not true at all. The entire point of establishing a baseline is so that you can accurately predict the effect of going OFF of that baseline.

Yes... You can vary off the baseline in either direction. Is the resulting average still 60%? It sure feels like it when I play.

True. It doesn't change much outside of combat at all, just inside.

Which defeats one of the initial reasons for wanting to make the change in the first place. But then, I never was a fan of encounters being the measure of recharge. (Note to those about to tell me 4E isn't for me, I already know that, we're not discussing which game I should play).

Originally Posted by Mallus

This analysis is shallow. It doesn't take into account the ability, or inability, to produce different damage types every round. [snip]

So it's not simply a case of 5*10 = 25*2...

Granted. But is it as unbalancing as some were suggesting earlier? I think not.

Originally Posted by Remathilis

Never seen a three-move checkmate with black, huh?

No, as it happens, but that doesn't invalidate the point anyway. The starting comment was that 'no game is perfectly balanced'. Black being able to win doesn't break the argument. Not even chess is perfectly balanced.

[Sadrik]

Originally Posted by Ourph

I'm curious Sadrik, are you planning on applying the same thing to monsters? There are quite a few monsters with "magical" at-will abilities that lack any real basic attack form, like a mundane claw or bite. For example, the Blazing Skeleton uses either a Blazing Claw or Flame Orb at-will. Do you plan to makes these into encounter powers and give the Blazing Skeleton some kind of basic, mundane claw attack or are your concerns about endlessly spammed "special" attacks only related to PC abilities?

I thought I replied to this yesterday but apparently Enworld ate it.
No, monsters are their own thing. They have their own set of rules (recharge). I think that trying to change the monsters needlessly complicates things. If a racial feature is at-will I don't really care, it is specifically the level 1 at-will class powers that concern me.