Are you tired of conditions?

[Niflheim]

However, next time your front-line fighter is stunned the entire combat, the important thing is that your group survived the encounter - so obviously some of the players were unaffected. The role of a fighter is a defender, and players that don't want to 'take one for the team' should probably play a striker.

I think the issue is that it seems, to me, the same person is "taking one for the team" every battle. Besides, if the defender switches out for a new class, then another character (usually a melee build in my experience) will be the focus of the continuous, frustrating, conditions.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I think the issue is that it seems, to me, the same person is "taking one for the team" every battle. Besides, if the defender switches out for a new class, then another character (usually a melee build in my experience) will be the focus of the continuous, frustrating, conditions.

yes, the fighter is always a defender... but the DM should ignore him once in a while so that his abilities will trigger...

... ok, i am very good at forgetting that my monsters are marked... so the party´s fighter does a considerable amount of hacking, but other chars are not completely safe...

 

[Stalker0]

I agree U lich. I have been very bad at ignoring utility powers that help with saves/defenses and going for damage stuff or powers that put me in position to do more damage. It is up to us a players to be better about that.

Utility powers are rare, and often the only source of noncombat power a player gets. If players are forced to take powers to reduce conditions...then I would site that as an argument to say conditions are too frequent.

 

[Infiniti2000]

Utility powers are rare, and often the only source of noncombat power a player gets. If players are forced to take powers to reduce conditions...then I would site that as an argument to say conditions are too frequent.

Maybe I don't understand your point here, but what it sounds like you are saying is, "Conditions occur too often and if you try to reduce them in frequency, then that simply proves that they're too frequent."

What's the alternate proposal to conditions, btw, bland damage?

 

[Jhaelen]

Utility powers are rare, and often the only source of noncombat power a player gets. If players are forced to take powers to reduce conditions...then I would site that as an argument to say conditions are too frequent.

In a way I agree with this. In my experience there are almost always at least two utility powers on every level, I'd like to get. Typically one of those is mostly useful outside of combat and one is only useful in combat. Since combat effectiveness is generally more valuable, the 'real' utility powers that often go a long way to define a class don't get chosen - which is a pity.

PCs simply get too few utility powers.

 

[Bagpuss]

Flesh Golem - Two daze (save ends) attacks every round, plus extra attacks when bloodied. Extremely debilitating.

It's hardly "Extremely debilitating". You still get a standard action, which since it comes from a melee attack, means a melee character is most likely in range to respond with a encounter or daily if they want. Sure you can't make OA or immediate actions, which counters a lot of the defender class abilities, but they can still be effective.

Even if a creature can daze at range you can still charge.

 

[Tuft]

Utility powers are rare, and often the only source of noncombat power a player gets. If players are forced to take powers to reduce conditions...then I would site that as an argument to say conditions are too frequent.

Very emphatically agreed. My bard just got up to 10th level yesterday, and it really feels like a must to take Savior's Song (until the end of the encounter, any ally within 5 can reroll one failed save / turn). I would just loved to have had some kind of non-combat option...

In a way I agree with this. In my experience there are almost always at least two utility powers on every level, I'd like to get. Typically one of those is mostly useful outside of combat and one is only useful in combat. Since combat effectiveness is generally more valuable, the 'real' utility powers that often go a long way to define a class don't get chosen - which is a pity.

PCs simply get too few utility powers.

Also agreed. I wish there was some kind of feat where you could swap out combat powers for utility powers. With a three-striker team, my combat pwers don't do very much anyway...

 

[Dreadite]

I think it's important to realize that conditions take away one of the main reasons D&D is "fun" for players: Their ability to do whatever they want. It's an effect that limits the sandbox in which they play, so many players express frustration with this.

It's important to take that frustration and use it constructively for story purposes or to emphasize a big threat. Conditions become tiresome when used in every encounter. This often this crops up when a DM is trying to control some out of control optimized build or another similar reason.

Sometimes it's best to let the players be their powerful selves... and then in fights where the foe means business, all of a sudden their ability to do their shtick is taken away. Focus on that helpless feeling: How does the PC feel when they're at someone's mercy? You can turn a condition into an excellent roleplaying opportunity, while simultaniously reminding the players that they're mortal and/or not always in control. It's just best used sparingly.

Obviously, this means I'd suggest using condition monsters for boss fights for the most part. Some conditions this isn't very critical (immobilized is hardly a death sentence for some, etc) but the big whammies like daze, stun and sleep/death effects should be saved for BBEG type fights when the PCs really need to feel like their life is on the line.

 

[CapnZapp]

Good post, Dreadite.

In other words, what the common voice seems to be saying is...?

"If only the WotC designers had used a little bit of the caution associated with petrification, swallow and Rust Monster's ability when designing monsters with Stun (and, to some extent, Daze and ranged Immobilize)"

 

[Mesh Hong]

After my gaming group finished up today, the party fighter was complaining, saying he is so tired of being stunned/dazed/immobilized etc every other round.

I normally DM but tonight I was playing, but I'll admit I have some sympathy. In one fight I was grabbed, restrained, and/or dazed the entire fight.

One of 4e's design goals was to increase each character's ability to participate in a fight. That's why powers that would knock someone out for the entire combat were commonly removed.

But have they? In some cases, they seem to have been replaced by an unending stream of short duration conditions that often amount to the same thing.

For example in the game I run, the party was fighting an iron golem, whose basic attack dazes with a save end duration. The party's fighter was dazed literally the entire fight...and I'm sure that wasn't the most fun for him.

So curious what other people's thoughts are.

Am I tired of conditions?

Has anyone looked at this from another angle, i.e. from a monsters vs. PCs point of view?

The amount of conditions the players can dish out can be truely terrifying, and the poor monsters are usually completely unprepared for such eventualities.

PC's get a whole host of options for getting or giving extra saving throws, get magical kit that gives them bonuses and at least have the option of developing statergies to deal with conditions. Most of the monsters that the PCs will come across don't have these advantages, and if they regularly did I would be guilty of competetive or adverserial meta gaming.

The monsters I try and save from a merciless death every week are very regularly under the following conditions:-
Blinded
Dazed
Weakened
unconcious - then coup de grace'd for massive critical damage
-2 to attack
-2 to AC
Immobilised
Massive ongoing damage (14 radiant)
normal ongoing damage

Thankfully I do not have a wizard in my group so I don't get stun locked, for which I am eternally grateful.

Am I tired of conditions?

I can see how it might be annoying for the PCs to be weighed down by conditions, and personally I do try and avoid the obvious annoying combinations, but really it is only fair that the monsters have access to the same set of conditions that the players use.

Short and slightly tongue in cheek answer

If you don't want to be dazed, weakened, dominated or stunned then stop using:

Turn Undead (immobilise)
Wrathful Thunder (dazed)
Beacon of Hope (weakened)
Weapon of the Gods (-2 to AC)
Searing Light (blinded)
Radiant Action (ongoing radiant damage equal to level of caster)
Solar Wrath (stunned if undead)
Crown of Glory (slowed)
Certain Justice (dazed & weakened)
Splintering Shot (-2 to attack for rest of encounter)
Pinning Strike (immobilise)
Blinding Barrage (blinded)
Deep Cut (ongoing damage)
Sand in the Eyes (blinded)
Knockout (unconscious)
Flames of Phlegethos (ongoing damage)
Avernian Erruption (ongoing damage)
Iron Spike of Dis (immobilise)

And that's just my group. Amazingly the Warlord has no powers that give a difficult status effect to an enemy, I am not counting knocked prone.

Anyway I just thought I would give everyone a different angle for the discussion.