Has 4e changed the way you play D&D? Forked Thread: Discussing 4e Subsystems: POWERS!

Phaezen · Nov 14, 2008

Forked from: Discussing 4e Subsystems: POWERS!

Hypersmurf said:
I'm finding that I'm approaching running 4E with a completely different mindset to how I approached running 3E/3.5.

Let's say there we have a rogue with a +1 rapier, facing an orc.

The player alternatively says "I stab him with my rapier!" or "I kick him in the groin!"

In 3.5, I would have him make an attack roll with a +1 enhancement bonus, dealing 1d6+1 (+ Str) lethal damage for the rapier, or an attack roll with no enhancement bonus, dealing 1d3 (+ Str) non-lethal damage (and provoking an AoO) for the kick.

In 4E, I'll assume that the rapier is the Accessory for the power he's using (Sly Flourish, say), and I'll include the rapier's proficiency bonus and enhancement bonus in the attack roll, and he'll use d8 for [W]... for either the stab or the kick. The cinematic description is flavour; the mechanics of the power are the same either way.

Now, if the rogue doesn't have a rapier, and says "I kick him in the groin!", I won't let him use Sly Flourish, or Sneak Attack - he doesn't have a weapon to use as an Accessory for the power that meets the Light Blade requirement. With no weapon, the kick in the groin is an unarmed attack, so no proficiency bonus, no enhancement bonus, and [W] is a d4.

So the mechanics of "I kick him in the groin!" change, depending on whether or not he is holding a rapier.

I would never have run 3E that way. But if I ran a 3E game today... I'd now consider doing it like that.

As an in-game example - the Ranger PC was fighting a dinosaur, in a jungle clearing. He said "I throw my chakram up into the tree above the dinosaur, to cut loose two of the big spiky gourd-fruits, so they fall on his head."

If I'd been running this in 3.5 a year ago? I'd have accepted that there were big spiky fruits in the tree - that's cool. Then I would have assigned an AC to hit the stalks in order to drop the fruit. Assuming the attack roll hit, then I'd have had to figure out if they hit the dinosaur, and how much damage a falling spiky fruit deals. I probably would have given the dinosaur a Reflex save with an on-the-spot arbitrarily-assigned DC, and picked a damage figure that seemed reasonable.

In 4E? He rolled his Twin Strike using the chakram as the Accessory, and hit the dinosaur's AC with one attack roll and missed with the other. So one spiky fruit fell, and hit the dinosaur dealing chakram damage.

A year ago in 3.5, it wouldn't have occurred to me to assign the dinosaur's AC as the target DC for cutting a spiky fruit, or to assign the chakram's damage to the fruit. What about the range increments to the fruit? What about the size modifier? The fruit is Tiny, the dinosaur is Large! The dinosaur has a Dex modifier of +1, but the fruit is an immobile object with a Dex modifier of -5!

But if I ran the same scene in 3.5 today, I'd be tempted to do exactly that.

-Hyp.

This is something I have noticed in my own gaming experience.

I am currently playing in a 3.5 game and dming one, I did run a short 4e test campaign for the group i dm for, and we will be changing to 4e when the campaign ends.

I the game i am playing in, I play a cleric and have found that I am nova'ing less, conserving my spells to use when they are needed. As a result, the party is managing more encounters in a day.

As for Dming, I am more relaxed with the rules, finding ways to say yes to my players instead of trying to shut them in a rules box. They have responded in kind by coming up with more interesting ideas, rather than scanning rule books for loopholes, vague language and so forth.

This has happened organically, almost without a conscious choice on my part.

Anyone else had similar experiences?

Betote · Nov 14, 2008

If a DM assigned the effects of my actions as the quoted text says and I'm a player, I'd turn on my nintendo DS.

That's it, if the DM is doing the same thing whatever I try, why bother trying new things?

For the kick to the groin, unarmed attack at -4 (for aiming). If it hits, target is sickened 1d4 rounds.

For the fruit attack, attack at CA 14 [10 + 4 (tiny)]. Each hit is 1d6 damage to the dinosaur. If I'm in a good mood, Fort save (10+damage) or be blinded 1d4 rounds.

justanobody · Nov 14, 2008

No. Quite simply because I don't think of 4th edition and the components thereof as D&D.

When I sit down to play, I play a certain way. If the rules cannot accommodate this and try to tell me I cannot play the way I want, then there is a problem with the game, not my way of playing. So no need to change the way I play D&D because some new fangled edition came out with a whole bunch of silliness.

In the above examples...

Kick doesn't get to use the power because the power defines itself.

The fruit trick can be done in either edition by targeting the fruit, etc. I would know in advance what the fruit does. Probably not any damage, and falling on the critter would also be very low chance. But it could easily startle it or something else to give the "attack" some kind of benefit. So while the dinosaur looks to see what it came form the PCs would have a momentary advantage and get a "free round" of attacks or push the dinosaur's turn to the last for being distracted.

But the way things sometimes must be done in 4th in no way affect how I would do things in another edition. I only change how things are done in 4th for 4th.

It would be really like saying how things were done in Rifts changed the way I play D&D. They are too dissimilar systems to translate playstyles into each other.

el-remmen · Nov 14, 2008

Wait a minute! Targeting the branches overhead to drop fruit on your dinosaur opponent's head and it does weapon damage?

That is the kind of Jackie Chan action movie stuff I don't like in my D&D.

But mechanically it certainly seems like a good way to handle that kind thing if that is the style of play you prefer.

rkwoodard · Nov 14, 2008

complete opposite

justanobody said:
It would be really like saying how things were done in Rifts changed the way I play D&D. They are too dissimilar systems to translate playstyles into each other.

See, I am the exact opposite. Playing dissimilar systems is what leads me to inovating play styles in all systems.

Both 4ed, and C&C have both re-defined how I DM 3.5.

I use skills as class abilities and have a ranged of DCs laid out (from easy to all-but impossible) and modifiers are very generalized.

RK

Wombat · Nov 14, 2008

Yes -- it closed my D&D games.

We have switched to Ars Magica.

Lord Mhoram · Nov 14, 2008

4E hasn't changed the way I played because another system did that decades ago. 4E has some (very minor) elements of approach as the system I normally play.

If anything I always ran 3.x that way, and find that 4E is closer to how I run things.

justanobody · Nov 14, 2008

rkwoodard said:
See, I am the exact opposite. Playing dissimilar systems is what leads me to inovating play styles in all systems.

Both 4ed, and C&C have both re-defined how I DM 3.5.

I use skills as class abilities and have a ranged of DCs laid out (from easy to all-but impossible) and modifiers are very generalized.

RK

I don't see how or why you would need to change your overall way of playing any game because of another.

I play Catan the way Catan takes being played, and I play Monopoly the way Monopoly needs to be played. Same for Axis and Allies.

They all have same overall goals, of getting objectives, but the objectives themselves are so different, that you cannot take on strategy to use in the other games.

Likewise the way you play 4th changing how you play other games like D&D earlier editions, just seems strange.

I mean you cannot approach OD&D thinking about the powers you have in 4th and such or the healing surges.

Greg K · Nov 14, 2008

I don't play 4e. However, in 3e, I'd give the Rogue a penalty to hit for kicking to the groin. If the attack is successful, the target would have to make a Fortitude save or be stunned.

Fifth Element · Nov 14, 2008

justanobody said:
I mean you cannot approach OD&D thinking about the powers you have in 4th and such or the healing surges.

That's not at all what the OP was talking about. The quote in the OP was about using the same mechanic to resolve a variety of actions, regardless of whether this is what the mechanic is intended to represent.

Has 4e changed the way you play D&D? Forked Thread: Discussing 4e Subsystems: POWERS!

Has 4th Edition Changed the Way You Play?

Yes

No

Panda

Phaezen

First Post

Betote

First Post

justanobody

Banned

el-remmen

Moderator Emeritus

rkwoodard

First Post

Wombat

First Post

Lord Mhoram

Hero

justanobody

Banned

Greg K

Legend

Fifth Element

Legend

Similar Threads