Proposal: Things to be nerfed

renau1g · Jun 12, 2009

Well....I guess it's the ability of a 3rd level encounter power being better than many epic tier level powers for the same class. Yes you need to hit with them, but that's the same with any power. It's similar in comparison to the level 13 barbarian power, which is 10 levels higher...and a striker power.

Also, the multiple playtesters with multiple data sources is not practical, but the general feeling of a wide variety of gamers both her and other sites that the power is overpowered relative to many other encounter powers in the game then yes, I think there's a large enough cross-section. And if statisticle analysis isn't enough to compare...I don't know what other evidence besides recording my (or others ) games on our webcam for ppl?

Oni · Jun 12, 2009

KenHood said:
And I will continue to reiterate it.

The majority of the arguments against a particular power are based upon conjecture, rather than experience. It's like telling everyone to stop driving cars because there's a distinct mathematical possibility that they will get into a collision and die.

If you have multiple playtesters with actual data and results that validate a particular conclusion, I'm all for making a change.

However, all I've been reading amounts to...

"Oh, don't do that! He might be too powerful!"

"Oh, don't do that! It might break the game!"

"Oh, don't do that! On a Tuesday, when the moon is full, and a man with a righteous heart says his prayers, a character might instantly kill his target with that power."

It's like listening to a bunch of soccer moms talking about why they won't let their children go to playgrounds because of all the child-molesters and kidnappers.

There's a human element that's discounted when everyone starts talking about nerfing the rules: the DM. No set of rules is perfect, but the system has a built-in self-correcting element--that guy that makes up the world the players hang out in. Trust your DM's to have the sense and sensibility to 'fix' the rules when they're broken in a game.

Why can't we just say, "Shall we use PH2 in L4e?" and leave it at that? After we've put the book into play, once we discover through experience that a particular power is not working, then we can make a global fix. You might discover that the issue never comes up in actual play, and we won't have wasted all this time and effort discussing the issue, when we could have been doing something.

I find it's better to head off problems before they develop as it tends to create less tension than fixing it after the fact.

Trust your DM is a great way of doing things in a traditional setting, but when you have a shared community it's helpful to have some consensus, because players expect their powers to work a certain way consistently from game to game. And no DM wants to be overturned but a Judge because they think a power works one way, or should work one way, when it in fact works another.

We actually do have access to massive bank of playtesters all thanks to the internet. If you've got the interest you can find all sorts of information about how things work in practise. Also you have access to some of the keenest minds when it comes to rules (quite a few keener than the designers it seems). The CharOp board over at WotC's is a fantastic barometer for what rules are problematic and to what extent.

Lastly, you can state your case without being snide or insulting.

Don Incognito · Jun 12, 2009

I'm actually with Kenhood on this. Ironing out the details isn't a reason to delay all of the goodness.

Also, being snide and insulting is an American tradition.

Atanatotatos · Jun 12, 2009

What about non-americans?

covaithe · Jun 12, 2009

Don Incognito said:
Also, being snide and insulting is an American tradition.

Perhaps, but it's not acceptable in this forum. Or, indeed, anywhere on these boards. Let's cool it down a bit, please.

I think we've discussed all of this enough, by this point. Does anyone have a proposal that they want to make? If we're going to vote, I want to know what it is that I'm voting on.

renau1g · Jun 12, 2009

I propose that we limit Rain of Blows to three attacks, not four.

Simple, keeps it as an effective choice, but not overpowering.

Done.

Oh, and to disallow the Righteous Rage of Tempus feat from the FR book. Auto-Crit? No thanks.

Atanatotatos · Jun 12, 2009

What ren said, plus make the bloodclaw, reckless, radiant weapons' damage bonus an item type bonus.
-Also, state clearly that the power of Bloodiron weapons only repeats damage from the weapon's own dmg bonus on crits (no extra dmg from weapon properties, feats, class feature etc.)
-Also, make echoes of thunder's bonus a power-typed one.
-Type all penalties to saves depending on the source (feat, power, item, etc.)
-Now that I think about it, I'd disallow Wintertouched too.
-Limit salves of power to only one use per day.

Ozymandias79 · Jun 12, 2009

well , I am with Kenhood about this.

so I vote NO!!! to the entire proposal

Oni · Jun 12, 2009

Perhaps it would be easier and confuse the issue less to tackle each change individually.

Here are the ones that I think are important, and my own thoughts on solutions.

RoB: make it a daily.

Stacking Save Penalties: Save penalties do not stack, or there is a hard cap on how low they can go (say -5 or a penalty from a single source whichever is greater)

Reckless: Ban

Bloodclaw: Change to minor action to activate, or item bonus and once per round.

Salve of Power: Ban