Discussing 4e Subsystems: POWERS!

[Hussar]

/snip

One of the most damage causing spells I ever used in the past was Stone to Mud and its reverse. Plus it could be used to open doors/walls/etc.

Granted it doesn't exist now, but an instant kill spell from a utility spell is what I call creativity!

Keep the filthy fireballs. Who needs a magic campfire anyway.

Umm, you don't think this is a problem? A spell that was not particularly intended to be a direct damage spell being "creatively used" to become an insta kill spell? I think that, right there, explains everything that's wrong with casters in D&D.

Yeah it is a racial ability. But not as silly as trying to be Scorpion from Mortal Kombat in D&D just to try to get some strange effect that shouldn't be had.

Tell me how in the real world that stunt of a power would be pulled?

Called shot in 3rd would effectively be an attack with a DC required extra to hit and pull it off. Most called shots in earlier forms would require a 20 on a d20.

So mechanically:

Roll your dice to attempt the called shot.
If you get a 20 on the dice then each target would take the damage.

Specifics would depend on your DM ruling how much damage is dealt.

I don't find cartoon antics to be a good way to claim a power as justified to improve options for a class though.

Shift the goalposts much? You were asked a direct question and cannot answer it. How do you do it in 3e or earlier editions? Can you? Can you do it?

An how often was oriental fighting styles used in medieval Europe?

That is the problem, that even without the Greyhawk influences, the game is still founded on that time frame with a little bit of extra fantasy. Look at the armor and weapons.

If that is the case, then where is the monk in the PHB?

If what you describe to be a Martial power, then it should be for the monk, otherwise these things aren't martial abilities in D&D as the monk will have similar functions be be of another power source rather than require physical contact.

I really see nothing that puts this fighter into physical contact like you describe, but just annoying them to rush him.

So when the Martial monk comes out, then a power like Kumite style may fit better, but it will be some pseudo-magic type of power rather than actual physical contact.

All in all it exceeds that funny word that starts with a "v".

Umm, what? I suggest you start doing a bit of research at The ARMA site if you think that "oriental style" martial arts weren't used in middle ages Europe. They were used ALL THE TIME. We have lots and lots of picture evidence and fight books that show exactly how they were used ALL THE TIME.

The only reason we don't know about European unarmed fighting styles is that it's a dead tradition. Not that they didn't exist. People using D&D style weapons and armor engaged in maneuvers that look pretty much like they were lifted straight from judo.

 

[justanobody]

Umm, what? I suggest you start

I suggest you start reading the full series of posts to understand what transpired in entirety. Then you might notice why oriental was discussed by reading what was quoted in the post and why it was linked to oriental martial arts.

 

[Fifth Element]

There you go then. You answer your own question as to how it could be done in older editions and didn't require some video game power to do it.

Wait, I thought this was something the character should not be able to do, as you said. So now you agree it could be done in 3E, and that's okay, but not in 4E?

 

[pukunui]

I wholeheartedly agree with your assessment, Stalker. The powers system is the biggest hangup I have with 4e and is the main reason I recently quit DMing it. One of the other guys in my group has decided to try DMing 4e instead, and I've agreed to play, but already I'm finding that I'm not liking it any more as a player than I did as a DM and I'm still only in the character creation stage!

I much prefer the SWSE talent/feat system, and while I acknowledge that it does not necessarily lend itself to "heroic fantasy" as well as traditional D&D games, I wish that WotC had gone with the SWSE system or something similarly open-ended and customizable for 4e. The latter's classes and multiclassing system really do feel like straight jackets in comparison to SWSE's. What makes it worse, as you've already pointed out, is that most classes have powers that are simply better than others. When I was first making a character, I decided I would try making a swordmage, but it quickly became apparent that there's only one set of class abilities/powers/feats that are good and the rest are all sub-optimal. Talk about lack of options.

Furthermore, as a powergamer, I'd much prefer to take a talent that lets me reroll as many stealth checks as I want each day than a power that only lets me do it once per encounter.

SWSE's talent system is infinitely more simple, elegant, and streamlined than 4e's power system ... and what's ironic is that SWSE came out of the 4e development process! They came up with something that was really great and they abandoned it in favor of a more restrictive, clunky, artificial system. VERY disappointing!

 

[justanobody]

Wait, I thought this was something the character should not be able to do, as you said. So now you agree it could be done in 3E, and that's okay, but not in 4E?

I was asked how to replicate a power with the claim you needed the power to perform the action, but allowed the person to disprove his/her own theory.

Whether I think the ideas behind the power are too silly, means little in that the power could have been done in older editions, and you didn't NEED the power to give you the option to do those things.

 

[Bagpuss]

I was asked how to replicate a power with the claim you needed the power to perform the action, but allowed the person to disprove his/her own theory.

My theory isn't you need the power to do an action. Just that the power system and encounter/daily mechanic better represents the genre (and even reality) than having every martial ability at-will like it was in earlier editions.

 

[justanobody]

My theory isn't you need the power to do an action. Just that the power system and encounter/daily mechanic better represents the genre (and even reality) than having every martial ability at-will like it was in earlier editions.

I don't see how the powers represent reality in any way. You just have more things told how to do it, rather than figuring it out on your own, and then left to wonder what when you want to do something there is no power for.

Wizards of the Coast: Let’s take a step back into general 4th Edition design philosophy… what can you tell us about the rationale for “power sources”—why were they created, what did you hope to accomplish with them, and how is the “martial” power source best defined?

Rob Heinsoo: Power sources are a way of describing the magical rules and flavor of our world while grouping classes who share some fundamental aspect of their approach to their power. The D&D world already contained the notion that some characters used arcane magic while others used divine magic; we just extended that notion to cover all our characters and to organize our class creation as the game develops over the years.

Power sources give everyone magical abilities across the classes. That doesn't represent reality, or the genre. Power sources are where the powers are derived from, so the concept that a fighter is using some innate magic ability to perform these power is the furthest thing I want from a fighter to be doing. There is no option within the powers system to allow for a fighter, or any other class that doesn't use magic unless they just forsake taking any powers, and then you would have people griping they are "not effective in combat".

At least with your description as martial ability being considered "at-will", which I despise since you are associating some new keyword to something to retcon it to fit, those abilities of the fighter were more natural and fitting to the genre.

Now everyone is tossing magic around with their powers.

That is why I say that funny power doesn't fit. Wrong genre. The genre was changed in order to suit the new edition.

I am sure I read before someone mention in their gripes that all classes were getting spells, and I agree that that is what powers are, and Rob seems to imply so as well.

So it may fit the newly created genre for D&D, but in no way does everyone slinging magic spells around work with reality.

I still prefer a dynamic where you are only limited by your HP and imagination to try things like Stone to Mud.

Sure it wasn't meant to kill people...or was it?

Powers are just something very out of place. They look flashy, but work poorly.

 

[firesnakearies]

Another fantastic analysis, as usual, Stalker0.

For myself, I feel very strongly compelled to simply give players more powers when I run the game. More actual power choices, and more power uses per period of time. Also, less reliance on extended rests to regain powers and surges. I'm working on a pretty comprehensive suite of house rules to address this issue.

My question is, how much does it break the game to just, say, double the amount of powers that PCs have? Ignoring the whole issue of "it's too complicated for new/casual players", just dealing with fundamental game balance.

How much do you think you'd need to beef up encounter levels to compensate for the fact that the PCs could use two or three times the number of powers that they have now?

What if you just denied them opportunities for extended rest? Would being forced to complete a large number of encounters in a row, by itself, make things challenging enough that having considerably more powers to use would not destroy the game's difficulty and sense of dramatic tension? Or would it be necessary to raise the actual encounter levels? (ie, by adding a couple of extra creatures to each fight, or the like)

I hate the whole "we fight once or twice and then camp out for the rest of the day" thing, especially when it's repeated over and over as a general adventuring modus operandi. I also hate the fact that classes have like 80-100 powers to choose from, but any given character is only ever going to have around 15-20 of them.

Personally, my inclination is to give the PCs a lot more flexibility and a lot more "juice" and stuff they can do, but just make the fights themselves a bit tougher and make resting a very rare opportunity.

 

[Bagpuss]

I hate the whole "we fight once or twice and then camp out for the rest of the day" thing, especially when it's repeated over and over as a general adventuring modus operandi.

That was our group playing 3rd Ed, in 4th Ed we routinely to four or five encounters a day, we've even done eight before now. Dailys are nice but most encounters are balanced so they aren't a requirement.

I also hate the fact that classes have like 80-100 powers to choose from, but any given character is only ever going to have around 15-20 of them.

If you could have all of them, why bother playing different characters, they would all be the same? Besides while you might have 15-20 at most, every time you level up you can shuffle a power out and another in, so there is plenty of time to play around with options.

Still if you really want no extended rest adventuring, just use the milestone mechanic, every say couple (or more) milestones, you get back 1/2 your healing surges, and your Daily powers.

 

[justanobody]

@firesnakearies:

So you just give extras powers, or toying around with the idea?

What about those places where you replace a power, and the player doesn't like/want any of those powers form the new level/choices?

Say 13th level, instead of replacing a power, could you grab a level 7 power to add or is that too much power to have the extra power, and those two powers do more than the one power, but allow for greater diversity in doing things outside of basic attacks?

That is something I am toying with, but balancing it across cloasses to give two lower level powers in the place of one is frustrating since they don't work the same across the board.

Or did I misunderstand your idea?