At-will class powers ruining my archetypes

[Sadrik]

Why would it be important that the basic attacks are useless?

I am kinda guessing where you might come from. It's like a feat that gives you a +3 bonus to hit points, accompanied with a second feat that grants you +1 hit points per level (minimum 3).

Yes, if you gain nothing from a basic attack and you gain some minor boon from an at-will why would you use a basic attack unless forced to? A wizard shoots magic missiles why would he ever dream of throwing a shuriken? That is just dumb right. But if Magic missile was a 4d4+INT encounter power and he had no at-will powers. Then he might need to throw a shuriken now and again.

Aside from this, basic attacks have a use - they are used for opportunity attacks and charge attacks, and often also triggered by certain powers. (The simplest example might be Commanders Strike). (And everyone would love to have an opportunity attack when the situation comes - it's a free swing at your opponent!)

Strangely, by removing at-wills all of the maneuvers that you just cited become more powerful - as players add more stat points to STR and DEX. An interesting side effect.

Additionally "tricks" from page 42 of the DMG and other "at-will" basic maneuvers could be used more with that open space (the rounds freed up from sheepishly at-willing your best at-will).

 

[Obryn]

If I had never played the game would you find that you could easily dismiss my ideas as coming from some inexperienced loon who simply purports change for changes sake? My argument stands that at-wills take something from the game. You can disagree with me, fine. But this line of argument is insulting.

I'm not dismissing anything - it's clear that you see some things you don't like in the rules, and are looking for ways to make it more to your taste. That's an admirable goal. Like I said, 4e out of the box (just like 3e out of the box) won't suit everyone's tastes.

I'm not questioning your goals, and I'm not questioning your preferences. But there are a lot of folks offering suggestions to help make this work in ways that are conscious of the game design, and you're more or less dismissing them out of hand.

I mean exactly what I said in my post - I am not saying that playing the game will make you love everything about it. That would be insulting. I am saying that, just like with every game, major tinkering might do things you wouldn't expect. Getting practice and experience will help you learn what to expect.

I'd be telling you the same thing if you were planning to tinker with 1e, RC, 3e, or WFRP. Tinkering and house-ruling are awesome. But it's best to learn a system before you make major changes. I wouldn't make any major changes or customizations to a car engine before I learned how to change my oil and sparkplugs, either.

-O

 

[Alas]

My argument stands that at-wills take something from the game.

I've read through the entire thread, but I still feel like I'm coming late to the party, so I hope my question doesn't sound impertinent-- but can you clarify what at-wills take from the game?

In my understanding, at-wills are one of the design spaces where a class's schtick resides. Rogue at-wills allow a character to stab and slip away, a wizard's at-wills allow a character to blast or befuddle at range, and so forth. The at-wills are like the class features-- they're what the class does instinctively (or first nature, or with practiced ease, whatever idiom floats your boat). I think there could stand to be a few more choices in at-wills for each class, but the supplements and Dragon are making me happy so far, and the mechanics for the existing at-wills seem robust enough to take a fair amount of refluffing in the interest of better portraying particular character concepts.

I guess I just don't understand how currently having the option to use at-will A, at-will B, or a basic attack is worse than only having the option to use a basic attack. What are at-wills taking away?

 

[Sadrik]

Well, then be insulted. You shouldn't be, but I can't stop you.

I am not insulted I just feel it is kind of asinine that I would have to throw out my credentials to not be dismissed offhandedly.

 

[Sadrik]

I'm not dismissing anything - it's clear that you see some things you don't like in the rules, and are looking for ways to make it more to your taste. That's an admirable goal. Like I said, 4e out of the box (just like 3e out of the box) won't suit everyone's tastes.

I think it might be good for you to go back and read what you have written.

I'm not questioning your goals, and I'm not questioning your preferences. But there are a lot of folks offering suggestions to help make this work in ways that are conscious of the game design, and you're more or less dismissing them out of hand.

Again, go back and read what I have written.

 

[Caliban]

Yes, if you gain nothing from a basic attack and you gain some minor boon from an at-will why would you use a basic attack unless forced to? A wizard shoots magic missiles why would he ever dream of throwing a shuriken? That is just dumb right. But if Magic missile was a 4d4+INT encounter power and he had no at-will powers. Then he might need to throw a shuriken now and again.

I'm a wizard not a ninja. Why the hell would I want to throw a shuriken?

Strangely, by removing at-wills all of the maneuvers that you just cited become more powerful - as players add more stat points to STR and DEX. An interesting side effect.

Seems to be that you are basically advocating magic magic using classes weaker and martial classes stronger.

The points you put into STR and DEX have to come from somewhere. So you will end up with characters being weaker in their primary casting stats because those stats are less useful. Or having even less variety among casters because they will all be forced to have Str, Dex, and 1 casting stat. Dumping Con, and 2 of their mental stats. Sounds like the will have less variety under your system.

Additionally "tricks" from page 42 of the DMG and other "at-will" basic maneuvers could be used more with that open space (the rounds freed up from sheepishly at-willing your best at-will).

I don't "sheepishly" doing anything. I gleefully blast away with my arcane might, because I'm not being reduced to sticks and stones like a fool who doesn't know how to cast spells.

Some classes can make excellent use of basic attacks (primarily the martial based classes) while others do not (primarly the arcane classes).

I have a wizard who makes a basic melee attack as well as most melee focused characters, but it was a choice. You shouldn't force people into making every character a melee or bow fighter as well as whatever their class attack theme is supposed to be.

You are simply reducing the number of viable builds for characters, and making the combats drag out more.

The more you argue for it, the more poorly thought it seems. You strip the classes of their basic powers and force them to use the weakest attacks in the game and claim that it opens up more "variety". I don't need to find out how many ways my wizard or rogue can suck with a basic attack they weren't meant to use.

 

[Sadrik]

I've read through the entire thread, but I still feel like I'm coming late to the party, so I hope my question doesn't sound impertinent-- but can you clarify what at-wills take from the game?

Well, I am afraid that if you did not get it from reading the last 4 pages then you may not get it at all. I think most people get it, it just is not to some people's taste.

I guess I just don't understand how currently having the option to use at-will A, at-will B, or a basic attack is worse than only having the option to use a basic attack. What are at-wills taking away?

An interesting solution from another thread was to give every class 10 at-will power level encounter powers. With the assumption that combat would go 10 rounds and that then the player would have just as many options to use with their single bloated stat. I actually like this solution. It deals with the fundamentally-designed-in-the-game-stat-bloat in a sensible way and makes characters have plenty of options.

 

[Skallgrim]

I think I've gotten the major points, and to me, what the OP is looking for is simply something that D&D (particularly 4e) doesn't do very well. One of 4e's biggest strengths, I feel, was in looking at what D&D does well, and what it does poorly, and stop doing the latter to do more of the former.

For instance, GURPS handles this in a manner that seems like it would be to the OP's liking. All attacks which physically hit the target (as opposed to sway it's mind, or poison it's lungs) are determined by Dexterity plus skill. Thus, if a mage wants to be good at tossing a lot of missile spells, he will need a good DEX, which would also pay off in using weapons. Then, on top of that, GURPS has a wide variety of skills, which each individually cost very little out of your character point allotment. Someone can get a marginal skill pretty easily, though the specialist will have to spend a bunch of points. Thus, it is easy for everyone to have a passable set of backup combat skills.

GURPS also uses a much more flexible time system than D&D, in that you will be able to attack and defend each round (which is a second) with most melee weapons, but a powerful ranged spell, like an Explosive Fireball, will need to be charged for 3 seconds, aimed for a second, and then released.

Thus, the system lets you balance powerful magical effects versus mundane martial attacks fairly easily. The powerful effects can take longer to create, as well as requiring more skill points to learn. The less potent attacks can be used more often, and require less skill point investiture.

What GURPS does not do well is allow you to make iconic, easy to run characters quickly. Unless you are very practiced with the system, it can take HOURS to generate a character. In addition, character generation is a skill in GURPS (Character Optimizers in D&D have nothing on GURPS). It is possible to create weak, virtually useless characters, or, in the absence of good supervision, broken, hideously over-powered characters. GURPS also can allow you to throw archetypes on their ear. The mage with invisibility and death touch (and little else), who goes around killing everyone by tapping them, or the mage with Enlarge Self who simply grows to giant size and crushes his enemies, but knows very little other magic.

D&D 4e has rules which replicate a particular type of epic fantasy feel, with an emphasis on character growth in power, and is easy to play, learn, and run. I think that altering the system in this manner could do a great deal of violence to the system's ability to meet those goals (but, of course, it is your game).

 

[Sadrik]

I'm a wizard not a ninja. Why the hell would I want to throw a shuriken?

Can you buy me another keyboard

 

[Obryn]

I think it might be good for you to go back and read what you have written.

Again, go back and read what I have written.

I've read the entire thread, and I don't know how I can be more clear or more helpful. It took a bit to grasp what you're looking for - and I'm not even sure I'm 100% clear on that now - but it seems like you're treating criticism and questions as hostility.

So - good luck to you. I hope you find a way to make this work for you.

-O