D&D 4E 4E combat and powers: How to keep the baby and not the bathwater?

[Li Shenron]

Whenever I see something like this (that you can do 'powers' without a power system), I always want to mention this:

Suppose you have a decent basic D&D game, but one where the GM says "no" when you make a suggestion about doing an attack that's not just a simple basic attack. Or even better, they say "no" where you make a suggestion that you do the same maneuver they're allowed more than once a session. Or take your power and make an arbitrary rule that makes it far less effective than just making a basic attack.

That's what D&D was like for many, many people before the power system. That was the entire point of the system: you can do interesting things that the GM agrees will work reliably without having to get their permission.

Imagine if I was playing an AD&D fighter and said "I just dropped a foe, so I'm going to take an extra blow as the attack cleaves into the adjacent foe." How many GMs would allow that? And how many would allow it every time, instead of eventually saying "you're just trying to get away with something, cut it out!"

And yet when you're using the 3X combat rules, you can do exactly that, all the time, with cleave. The 4E power system lets you choose between dozens of effects just like that. The GM approves the power, and you know it's going to actually be available and work for you. No negotiating, no "the circumstances don't work this time," no "you've done that too often, your foe counters it."

I don't understand how it's hard to see that idea as a bad thing. If you do see it as bad, what would you suggest if your players wanted to be as creative as you can be with the powers system on the fly, every combat? If you say "great! I'd love it!" then why would actually putting some rule mechanics behind it be a bad thing?

Either I don't understand this, or it makes no sense to me...

What do you mean, to be creative?

If you mean that you can freely come up with a new combat trick anytime you want, this is not what you can do in 3ed and it is also not what you can do with 4ed powers. In 3ed there's a bunch of non-standard combat options available to everyone, some of which however are penalized; to remove the penalty and make them good, and also for more combat tricks, you need to gain your feats. In 4ed you need to gain your powers. There's no difference between the editions in terms of "creativity", because you must have picked up those class features before you can use those combat tricks, you can't just come up and ask the DM to let you do something that feats or powers do if you didn't get them when levelling up.

I think the only problem with 3ed feats system, is that the books did not provide enough interesting feats (and compared to spellcasters, there were still too few combat feats/tricks). Also, I think the concept of "feats chains" was theoretically a good idea, but ultimated restricted the creativity in character design.

So that's the only thing they need to do: design many more feats that grant combat tricks compared to the 3ed amount, and grant more per character.

The only potential problem with that, is what to do with players who do not want a complex fighter-type PC, because they'll get the same amount of feats. You can make feats that just give a flat bonus to something, but they you end up with too many bonuses which in turns make the low-complexity fighter stronger than the high-complexity fighter. Unfortunately you cannot split bonuses to fractional values, to make flat-bonus feats less valuable. Perhaps you can bundle combat tricks in multiple per feats? Or maybe trade between 1 flat-bonus feat and 2/3 combat tricks?

 

[Li Shenron]

Back to the OP topic of the baby and the bathwater...

Which is the baby and which is the bathwater in your opinion?

For me, the baby of 4e powers is the interesting combat tricks themselves, which increase the flexibility of a fighter character and allows for a more tactical PC.

The bathwater is the AEDU mechanic which totally breaks my SoD. Take all powers and modify them (reduce effects and/or increase requirements) so that they become all at-wills, and I'm perfectly fine.

But I am willing to compromise, so I could even keep the bathwater as long as it is purificated/deionized in a way that doesn't break my SoD, which is mostly because the fighter is and must remain non-magical at its core, for example in the following way:

- at-wills: these are completely fine, and in fact are what by default every martial/non-magical ability normally works
- encounters: I'll never buy these unless they are tied with a fatigue mechanic, which however must remain as simple as possible; perhaps a cumulative penalty every time after the first attempt (penalty resets at the next encounter)
- daily: only tricks with a clear supernatural nature, for those who like the magical fighter concept, but do not force anyone else to have daily powers!

The above require one and only thing: to completely remove the idea that every single fighter character gets X at-wills + Y encounters + Z daily powers.

Just design all of the above so that they are balanced enough against each other, that every PC can choose to have e.g. only at-wills (the traditional, wholly non-magical fighter), or only encounters (the "edgy" fighter?), or only dailies (a more heavily magical fighter), or any combination of the respective amounts. That means in practice, take the 4ed powers and turn them into 3ed feats... when nobody forced you to take a certain number of feats that worked 1/day for instance.

 

[LostSoul]

In my 4E game I allow the martial encounter exploits to be used at-will, assuming some sort of fictional trigger is met.

For example, here is a trigger we are using for some dragonborn mercenaries: when they have a clear swing at their target's back. If they have a clear swing at their target's back they can use that exploit. The benefit of using the exploit is that it does some extra damage.

We played on Friday. The PCs dug a pit trap and were able to lead a worg into it. The dragonborn mercenaries had a clear swing at its back and beat the crap out of it.

The mechanic works well enough; you get a clear picture of what is going on in the battle (immersion) and there are interesting choices to be made. You can customize your warrior to fight in the style that you like, too.

If I was to design from the ground-up I'd come up with a framework for this sort of "extra damage" and apply those based on the fictional details of the different character's actions. eg. "Within enemy's guard with a small weapon: 2d10 damage."

Fighters would get benefits of wielding many types of weapons and armour, extra HP, high attack bonuses, and being able to get in an extra "beat" - multiple attacks. Thieves would probably get a bonus to in-close knife-work, surprise attacks, and that sort of thing.

 

[Chris_Nightwing]

Some interesting discussions!

I fall on the codification side of the argument though I'm afraid, but 'light' codification. I think it's great that the system might allow for on-the-fly moves, but for me there are flaws beyond just 'different DMs might rule things differently'. For instance, I fail to see how Fighters become interesting if they can trip or knock things down when they deal no damage with this move, given that Wizards could have some sort of kaboom force power at later levels.

So for special moves I would make them variants of the basic attack. You will deal damage as usual, so the key is to apply a suitable penalty in exchange for the riding effect you'll get if you hit. Improvisation or no I would have a golden rule along the lines of:

Special Manoeuvre - Make a basic attack at a -2 penalty, with one additional hit effect as follows: knock target prone, push target 5', disarm target (picking up a weapon shouldn't provoke AoO to stop this being too powerful), next attack on target gets advantage, target cannot move next round, and so on..

You could make effects dependent (or easier, or better) dependent on weapon/shield use. The key is that the rule is simple. You want something extra (that could be damned useful in the right circumstance) - take a penalty to hit, but you still deal damage so that you're not wasting your time.

 

[FireLance]

I wonder whether another possible way to manage "encounter" level powers for martial characters is to have a random chance of fatigue*, expressed as a -2 to attack rolls, until he takes a short rest (or whatever is the equivalent in 5e).

I see this as having two advantages:

1. It encourages martial characters to delay a bit before using their more powerful attacks, preventing early novas.

2. A martial character could be allowed to attempt "encounter" level powers as many times in a fight as he wants, risking increased fatigue each time.

In addition, you could have a "Practised Maneuver" feat which allows the character to use a single maneuver once per encounter without risking fatigue - allowing for 4e style encounter powers.

* Quick and dirty suggestion: If an AEDU character of the same level has N encounter powers, the chance of fatigue should be [100 - (20 x N)]%.

 

[Someone]

This is a workable solution, of course. You can set the penalties ridiculously high(probably somewhere between -5 and -10), and give martial characters class abilities that completely wipe out the penalty in one shot. That'll allow fighter types to be good at a few melee tricks. Anything they don't have the class ability for though, casters will probably be superior(or at least equal) at.

Agreed, though the bonuses granted by wizards and clerics don't need to be that big, it's a system for a completely new game, not a house rule to tackle on an existing ruleset.

I was thinking on something like this, speaking in 4e terms:

Common tactics:

You can choose to add one of these results to your basic attack at a -5 penalty to hit:

• Deal [W] extra damage
  
• Choose to deal extra damage equal to your offhand weapon OR gain a +1 shield bonus to AC
  
• Deal only ability damage and drop the enemy prone
  
• Push the enemy 1 square
  
• Pull the enemy 1 square
  
• Slide the enemy 1 square to one square adjacent to you (melee only)
  
• Automatically hit for ability damage (Wizard only)
  
• Slow the enemy for 1 round
  
• Turn the attack into a close blast 3 (melee only)
  
• Turn the attack into a close burst 1 (melee only)
  
• Turn the attack into a burst 1 within 10 squares (ranged only)
  
• Grant ability modifier temporary hit points to an ally
  
• Ability damage only, and an ally within 5 squares can make a basic attack.
  
• You can shift 1 square before or after the attack
  
• +4 to hit, and the enemy is pushed 1 square (unarmed attack only)
  
• No damage, and you initiate a grapple (unarmed attack only)

Etc (the list isn't complete). Each character can choose 2 effects from the list, restricted by class (only clerics can choose the +temp hit points tactic, for example), and use them without the penalty to hit but not simultaneously.

Spending 1 Fatigue points you can also deal +[W] damage to the attack. (Fatigue points return after a short rest, and the number of fatigue points you can spend on a single round increases with level)

Spending 1 Exhaustion point (Exhaustion points return after an extended rest, and the number of exhaustion points you can spend on a single round increases with level) you can:

Gain an extra standard action to use that round

Cast a Spell from the list you've prepared (or perhaps Cast a Ritual with reduced or null gold cost and casting time)

Add +2[W] damage to your next attack, and it gains one of these effects:

• You can spend a healing surge (fighter only)
• An ally can spend a healing surge (cleric only)
• You can choose 2 effects from the common tactics list and apply it to the attack.
• You can choose 1 effect from the tactics list that's not instantaneous and detrimental to an enemy, and that effect lasts until the enemy saves.
• Up to one target is Stunned for 1 round.
• Up to three targets are Dazed for 1 round.

This is only a rough sketch, but you get the idea. This system is a bit too complicated for basic characters, but they could have their choices reduced or automatically set in exchange for passive bonuses.

 

[Hassassin]

The only baby I'm interested in salvaging is approximate balance between caster and non-caster classes. Anything else that 4e changed with the power system wasn't significantly better than in earlier editions, or was worse, IMO. However, I understand that many people want codified "interesting" abilities for martial classes. So 5e will need something like that.

There are two main features with the encounter and daily abilities in 4e that I suspect fans are interested in: 1) they are cool moves and 2) when to use them is a tactical or strategic concern. A system like [MENTION=3424]FireLance[/MENTION] proposed on the first page, where the more powerful abilities are tied to your die roll has the former, but not the latter feature. A 3e-like system with a list of maneuvers always usable also doesn't have that feature in a strong sense.

An alternative way (that I've mentioned before) to limit more powerful abilities would be to associate a penalty with using them. Using an "encounter"-level ability would make you fatigued until you can take a short rest (e.g. -2 to all checks). To limit their use after the first attempt they could be unusable while fatigued, there could be a condition track with tired and exhausted, or they could be even less likely to work than other abilities when fatigued (e.g. -2 to other checks, but -4 or even -8 to fatiguing abilities) - this should make them on average a poor choice at that point.

That would change the game from one where you blow your encounter abilities in the beginning of an encounter to one where you are encouraged to use them later to minimize the negative effects. This would support a view of those abilities as cool finishing moves, which IMO would be better fit to how such abilities usually work in literature and movies.

[sblock=Example]Taking a very simplified view of combat, an example would be a fighter whose basic attack deals 1d8+3 damage with 60% hit chance. He has access (either through class, feat, or because everyone does) to Power Attack which is a fatiguing ability that deals double damage.

Average damage from the fighter's basic attack: 60% * 7.5 = 4.5
Average damage from Power Attack: 60% * 15 = 9

Average damage from basic attack while fatigued (-2): 50% * 7.5 = 3.75
Average damage from Power Attack while fatigued (-8): 20% * 15 = 3 (or not available at all)

In a 5 round encounter, the fighter's expected damage would be 24 if using PA on the first round and 27 if using it on the last round.[/sblock]

 

[Bluenose]

The bathwater is the AEDU mechanic which totally breaks my SoD. Take all powers and modify them (reduce effects and/or increase requirements) so that they become all at-wills, and I'm perfectly fine.

But I am willing to compromise, so I could even keep the bathwater as long as it is purificated/deionized in a way that doesn't break my SoD, which is mostly because the fighter is and must remain non-magical at its core, for example in the following way:

- at-wills: these are completely fine, and in fact are what by default every martial/non-magical ability normally works
- encounters: I'll never buy these unless they are tied with a fatigue mechanic, which however must remain as simple as possible; perhaps a cumulative penalty every time after the first attempt (penalty resets at the next encounter)
- daily: only tricks with a clear supernatural nature, for those who like the magical fighter concept, but do not force anyone else to have daily powers!

The above require one and only thing: to completely remove the idea that every single fighter character gets X at-wills + Y encounters + Z daily powers.

You know what breaks my suspension of belief. A system which allows you to use any trick you know at any time, no matter how situational that trick might be. Now I'm fine with requiring some sort of circumstance to come up at the table to allow me to use the more powerful powers. Whether that's derived from high dice rolls or from positioning is something I can compromise over. I will not compromise with a system that allows me to keep doing the same trick over and over again, regardless of how often the situation it might be useful in would come up in reality.

 

[erleni]

What I would do is:

Attach to every power (and I would like even basic attack, trip, etc. to be powers) a cost in term of fatigue/mana/force of will/whatever points. Fatigue will be used for martial maneuvers, mana for magic, force of will for psionics, etc.

Let the character start the day with a given resource pool in fatigue/mana/etc. based on its classes and levels. Each time you gain a level you increase your pool in one or more categories based on the class (or prestige class) you level up in, so say that a fighter will get 20 points of fatigue and a paladin will get 10 of fatigue and 10 of mana.

With increasing levels you may learn new maneuvers, each one with a cost tagged to it (some may have a cost in more than one category, so that an assassin may have martial maneuvers with fatigue costs and maybe shadow maneuvers with a cost in fatigue and mana or fatigue and shadow, if there is a shadow points pool).

Basic maneuvers are available to everybody and can be boosted spending more points (maybe you'll have to take a feat to get the possibility to boost an existing basic maneuvers).

If you want to give at will powers just give them a zero cost.

Short rests refill a portion of the pool (say 20%).

An extended rest refills the whole pool.

Permanent injuries, illnesses may affect your total pool amount in one or more categories.

This system would be flexible and will allow to retain both 4e powers and more generic maneuvers. Up to the player to decide what he wants to stock on.

 

[BobTheNob]

For me, the baby of 4e powers is the interesting combat tricks themselves, which increase the flexibility of a fighter character and allows for a more tactical PC.

The bathwater is the AEDU mechanic which totally breaks my SoD. Take all powers and modify them (reduce effects and/or increase requirements) so that they become all at-wills, and I'm perfectly fine.

Li is right, lets focus on the point of this thread.

At a high level, we need something for the fighter that is more interesting than "I attack". There is debate over whether 4e's power structure is appropriate for the fighter, and frankly I am also with Li on this. The SoD left me scratching my head. In addition...

4e fighter (our groups experience, actually applied to all the martial classes we had, being half the party)..
Start of campaign : "Awesome, look at how interesting fighters are"
End of campaign : "It just feel like a melee wizard which uses an axe instead of a staff"
It looked great on paper, but when martial archtypes were homogenized under a single mechanic umbrella they shared with magical archtypes, frankly (IMHO) classes lost some distinction.

I not only find the AEDU mechanic hard to swallow for martial archtypes on a fluff/SoD level, I just didnt like they used an identical mechanic to magical archtypes.

Im with the idea of rolling down to at-wills only (really, it doesnt make them that different from feat picks), but I do still like the idea that every single martial maneavor you can do is attempt-able by anyone as a core rule as opposed to being an exception. Its just the martial arch-types have the gumph to do it better.