Discussing 4e Subsystems: POWERS!

[Hussar]

/snip

Either that or the power should specifically state: "You got lucky. The circumstances were just right ..."

It works much easier if you simply assume that's there. Considering that's the basic philosophy behind EVERY power that's not At-Will, do they really need to append it to the bottom of every power?

 

[lutecius]

You don't like player empowerment. Fine. 4E is clearly not for you. I think it's time to move on. Now perhaps we can have a 4E thread without you telling everyone how much it sucks?

So now 4e threads are "fan only"? interesting.

Anyway, I'm with pukunui. I don't see how not being able to do something more than once per encounter, no matter what, is empowering, "narratively" or otherwise.
Gamist? Artificial? sure. But the abillity to "decide when the opportunity arises" once per encounter is certainly not more empowering than at will attacks in previous edititions. In the end, the dice still decide whether a power works.

And even if you consider the "miss effects" as narrative control, I'm of the mind that dms should control the world and players their characters. It makes things clearer and immersion easier.

Oh and before some fanboi tells me that "4e is not for me". Well, duh!
I just like discussing game systems and thought it was the point of this thread.

 

[Timeboxer]

Anyway, I'm with pukunui. I don't see how not being able to do something more than once per encounter, no matter what, is empowering, "narratively" or otherwise.
Gamist? Artificial? sure. But the abillity to "decide when the opportunity arises" once per encounter is certainly not more empowering than at will attacks in previous edititions. In the end, the dice still decide whether a power works.

I wouldn't call it "empowerment", I'd call it "control." Basically the ordinary order of operations is inverted -- rather than narrative pre-conditions allowing a maneuver to occur, the maneuver itself creates its own narrative pre-conditions. In terms of who has a hand in how the narrative actively plays out, 4E powers tilt control toward the players -- not because of any particular notion that players can change narrative on a whim, but because their interfaces to the world have narrative-changing abilities built into them.

 

[Fifth Element]

So now 4e threads are "fan only"? interesting.

No, but it would be nice if they were constructive-discussion-only. Rather than:

A: "Hey, let's talk about this aspect of 4E"
B: "Okay. Here's what I think."
A: "Not sure I agree with that."
C: "4E sucks."
A: "I don't think that's fair. I like it."
C: "You're not listening. 4E sucks."
Etc.

That's the essence of a lot of threads around here.

Oh and before some fanboi tells me that "4e is not for me". Well, duh!

If you're referring to me, please check my sig.

I just like discussing game systems and thought it was the point of this thread.

Indeed. And you are doing so with a thoughtful post that doesn't insult anyone. That's all we can ask for. But we can ask for it, because it's not always what we get.

 

[pukunui]

To be honest, I'm not sure it's the narrative/control aspects of the power system that bother me. I think it's more the artificiality of the system and the fact that it comes across as incredibly inflexible and restrictive that I don't like.

It's not just that I can only garrote someone once a day ... there's a whole host of other restrictions that I don't like. Why can I only take utility powers at specific levels? Why can't I just be a fighter or a wizard for my whole career? Why do I have to either multiclass or specialize?

On top of that, as Stalker0 pointed out, it is clear that, despite the fact that 4e favors game balance over flavor and simulationism, not all powers are balanced with each other and in the end you get a small cluster of powers/feats/and other abilities that become the only ones "worth" taking ... which ends up making the whole system even more restrictive.

Anyway, I'm not sure I'm explaining myself all that well, and I'm probably also covering already well-trodden ground here, so I'll stop now. Plus I'm at work and have already spent enough time procrastinating today as it is.

Suffice it to say that while I initially thought 4e was for me (so much so that I had "4e is 4 me" in my sig for a while), I am finding more and more that it is not ... I wanted to like it so very very much but it's just ended up being one great big disappointment - with the 4e class structure being the biggest disappointment of them all.

(EDIT: Yes, I'm exaggerating - there are a few little things here and there that I really do like about 4e. The entire class structure, however, is not one of them.)

 

[Maniac]

Hello everyone,

One of my disconnects with the Fighter powers is that as a Player, I have to think about things differently than what my character is thinking. This breaks my immersion a little bit.

I've become used to many D&Disms over the years and so I've been able to map them to the "game" reality enough to satisfy me.

I could use some help doing the same with fighter powers.

As a wizard (or any magically powered character) I can buy that my power is only effective for a limited number of times in Character. I could even see how I might speak about it in character.

In some ways, it is easier for my to view Martial Power as ever so slightly Magic as to explain how I might only be able to muster the power once a day.

Are there any other ways I might be able to "think" as my martial character in regards to powers?

Thanks.

M.

 

[FireLance]

Are there any other ways I might be able to "think" as my martial character in regards to powers?

The one that I find works best for me is:

"Whew, that was tiring, and I think overexerted/strained [specific muscle X]. I'm going to have to rest five minutes/six hours before I can do that again."

 

[pukunui]

The main justification that I've seen is that the limited-use martial powers involve an element of chance and/or require circumstances to be just right in order to set up and pull off ... and thus, while your character may well be repeatedly attempting to pull off these actions "in the background" during any given encounter, it is only when you, as the player, consciously choose to use a given power that your character actually succeeds.

This explanation might work for you. Sadly it doesn't work for me.

 

[RyvenCedrylle]

Perhaps, pukunui, something that worked for me will work for you as well. I completely deskinned all of the powers. At-will, encounter, daily, everything. No flavor whatsoever, just raw effect. On my turn, I choose the effect I want, not the power. Tide of Iron, for instance, has been a shield bash, a kicked-over table, a shoulder check, a thrust kick, a hard shove, and at one point, an enraged cat. I may be lucky with my DMs, of course, but I find pulling the flavor text off the power deletes some of the monotony.

That being said, 4E isn't my favorite game ever, but it's fun for the purposes it was intended.

 

[pukunui]

Perhaps, pukunui, something that worked for me will work for you as well. I completely deskinned all of the powers. At-will, encounter, daily, everything. No flavor whatsoever, just raw effect. On my turn, I choose the effect I want, not the power. Tide of Iron, for instance, has been a shield bash, a kicked-over table, a shoulder check, a thrust kick, a hard shove, and at one point, an enraged cat. I may be lucky with my DMs, of course, but I find pulling the flavor text off the power deletes some of the monotony.

My immediate reaction is: "But I shouldn't have to do that!"

However, I am willing to give it a try, so thank you for suggesting it.