Has 4e changed the way you play D&D? Forked Thread: Discussing 4e Subsystems: POWERS!

[Cadfan]

My style has changed somewhat, so I voted yes.

Mostly its changed in that the game better supports what I tried to do with the end years of 3e- run larger encounters with multiple weaker monsters. I firmly believe that its more fun to beat up 5 monsters than to beat up 1 monster, because you get 5 "rewards" over the course of the fight as each monster dies, instead of just one reward at the end. 4e better facilitates that, I think. Its not something that 3e can't do, its just something that 4e does a little better.

But in terms of improvised mechanics? I probably wouldn't do things exactly the way the qutoed text did, but I have changed how I handle that sort of thing.

3e's basic way of handling improvised attacks is to make sure they suck. That's a blunt way of putting things, but its basically how things went. If you decided to kick a monster in the groin instead of stab it, you'd probably do 1d3+str damage, gain a very minor bonus like Dazed if your DM is generous, and lose a bunch of attack roll bonus and damage bonus because you're not using your fancy magical weapon. That's how it goes across the board in 3e- fancy stuff that doesn't actually stab the bad guy doesn't use your weapon, your weapon is your source of all goodness, so fancy stuff that doesn't actually stab the bad guy sucks. Its why Improved Trip is so great- it changes the rules and lets you get an attack AND trip someone.

4e avoids that problem by letting you attack AND do fancy things, and encouraging the DM to allow both at once when possible. I'd probably use the Improvised Attack charts in the DMG rather than just use your weapon bonus and damage, but the whole point of the Improvised Attack charts is that they should come out relatively close to your weapon bonus and damage anyways, plus whatever effect makes sense based on context.

So yes, this breakthrough, the idea that I don't have to strictly wed myself to the "internal physics" of the game when the game is more fun without them, has changed how I DM. Its something I could have done in 3e, I suppose, but the system seems to discourage it, and certainly doesn't do anything to encourage.

 

[Hypersmurf]

I'd probably use the Improvised Attack charts in the DMG rather than just use your weapon bonus and damage, but the whole point of the Improvised Attack charts is that they should come out relatively close to your weapon bonus and damage anyways, plus whatever effect makes sense based on context.

Sure. I had a player in the combat just gone who asked "Can I make an unarmed attack in an attempt to Daze instead of dealing damage - punch him to make him see stars?"

The fighter had Combat Advantage, the opponent was bloodied, and he'd be giving up the proficiency and enhancement bonuses of his weapon plus any damage; sounded like a fair trade to me, so I said Sure.

He rolled a crit, so I upgraded the condition from Dazed (Save Ends) to Stunned (Save Ends).

But in general, if someone was using a normal "Deal damage" power, I'd just use the weapon stats even if the flavour was a kick or a head-butt, because otherwise I'm penalising anything other than "I hit him with my sword", and that gets boring.

Hmm... trying to put it into words. I can picture a player, in the middle of a round, thinking "Man, it would be stylish right now to hack a leg off that table so the chest falls on his foot", or "It'd be cool to snatch a torch off the wall and shove it in his face", or "I'd love to grab his collar and butt him in the face"... but then deciding that the improvised weapon stats are so much weaker than "I hit him with my sword" that they'd be foolish to try it. I want those moments to happen... so if the players know that they aren't giving up any mathematical advantage by trying something different, they're more likely to give me that variety that I enjoy. And if someone specifically wants to generate an effect - let's say they want to blind him with the torch, rather than just dealing damage? - I've got page 42 as a guide. But if it's all just flavour leading towards defeating the enemy through hit point attrition - albeit in stylish fashion - then the weapon mechanics are already balanced towards that goal, so I'll use them.

-Hyp.

 

[justanobody]

That's not at all what the OP was talking about. The quote in the OP was about using the same mechanic to resolve a variety of actions, regardless of whether this is what the mechanic is intended to represent.

What?

Being exposed to games like Dogs in the Vineyard, Iron Heroes, and Burning Wheel changed the way I looked at gaming overall. I subsequently approached D&D and (at the time) HERO differently than I had before that.

It's not about need.

I don't understand what you are saying either. That you tried new things because of exposure to other things outside of D&D? Like saying playing in a game with one DM, and a new DM in a new game does things differently, so you CAN try new things, so you do?

Is that what you mean?

No, 4th edition has not changed the way I play.

I explore, talk with NPC's, solve riddles and puzzles, fall victim to traps and hazards, help those who need it, punish those who deserve it, put the boots all forms of evil and get the boots put to me if I bite off more than I can chew. Oh, and let's not forget about taking their stuff.

Exactly this. Except for how you get those things done if 4th only directly goes with 4th in its series of subsystems.

I follow the new ruleset, but the things I try to do have gone unchanged for many years.

Poke the floor with a poll to check for traps of throw the halfling down the hallway for the same effect.

 

[amysrevenge]

Yes.

The skill challenge mechanic encourages people to participate outside of combat who were... weak roleplayers in previous editions. It also limits, to some degree, the domination of tables by stronger personalities (such as myself). It makes a mechanics-based attempt to level the playing field as far as "camera time" goes, both in combat and while roleplaying.

I'm speaking from a club-based RPGA perspective, where table composition varies from event to event, but the same larger community of people is involved in general.

 

[Storminator]

But in general, if someone was using a normal "Deal damage" power, I'd just use the weapon stats even if the flavour was a kick or a head-butt, because otherwise I'm penalising anything other than "I hit him with my sword", and that gets boring.

-Hyp.

I'm DMing my son in a solo game, and fortunately, I read this thread before our last session.

He looks over his power cards and says, "I want to use Mage Hand to pull a log out of the fire and throw it at one of the kobolds!" Sounds like Magic Missile to me, so that's how I resolved it.

Later, when he wanted to throw the kobold's soup pot over all of them, I just asked for his Acid Arrow card and he got to attack a pack of kobolds with their own soup. Makes him very happy...

PS

 

[amysrevenge]

he got to attack a pack of kobolds with their own soup.

Not sure whether this counts as "best DM ever" or "best dad ever". lol