Monster Power Recharge

[Timeboxer]

I don't think that's the majority opinion. Most people seem to think recharge 4 means recharge on a 4 or better, ie 4, 5, or 6.

I figured someone would call me on this. Remember that what you actually see in the Monster Manual is the following:

Swift Arm of Destruction (standard; recharge ) ✦ Healing

It seems like it would be silly for to also imply .

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I thought I'd be able to field this by pulling out Keep on the Shadowfell which has a handy "How to read monster stat-blocks" page.

However, while it fully explains things like "Intitiave x - The monsters initiative modifier" (as if that weren't obvious.) It says nothing about what the recharge 5, 6 it lists means.

However, I will say that I've never seen Recharge 4 on any monster that wasn't a DDXP one, and I think Ari once suggested you roll for each.

So I'm pretty sure it's roll for each, and it's

4,5,6
5,6
or 6.

Also, personally, I'd just roll for the one you want to use and if it recharges, use it. If not, roll on the next best choice.

Fitz

 

[Kordeth]

I figured someone would call me on this. Remember that what you actually see in the Monster Manual is the following:

Swift Arm of Destruction (standard; recharge ) ✦ Healing

It seems like it would be silly for to also imply .

Yep--what we haven't seen so far is a power that looks like this:

Swift Arm of destruction (standard; recharge )

So that part is speculation, but I for one like the concept.

 

[Terwox]

I figured someone would call me on this. Remember that what you actually see in the Monster Manual is the following:

Swift Arm of Destruction (standard; recharge ) ✦ Healing

It seems like it would be silly for to also imply .

The only plausible argument against this is that the power is a misprint and should read merely .

This argument is also fairly weak in my opinion, compared to the speed of play allowed by less die rolls given if only one die is rolled per monster for their powers. Also, as the rules are supposed to add randomness to monster powers, having a set of powers that recharged on , and another on , would not be as random -- rolling a 5 would indicate both powers were recharged, as opposed to the more random system, where both powers only recharge on a six. (I'm afraid that's a bit too clunky to be immediately clear, and I apologize for that.)

 

[Mort_Q]

That would make sense.

Then why go to such great lengths to make the system so different from everything else?

If it really was get this number or above, like an attack roll, why not use the established mechanic? would be 50% or recharge on 11 or above on a d20.

Using the different dice, the custom icons... makes no sense in the 4e KISS approach if they didn't mean it to be different.

Or maybe I'm reading to much into it?

 

[Timeboxer]

However, I will say that I've never seen Recharge 4 on any monster that wasn't a DDXP one, and I think Ari once suggested you roll for each.

Fair enough. I like rolling just once, to be honest, mostly because otherwise you have to keep track of die-power correlations somehow, and it feels smoother to me to be somewhat more stateless.

 

[Boarstorm]

My reading of what rules we have is that Amy Kou'ai's method is the correct one.

Of course, I have access to no more information than anyone else, so my theory is no more valid than someone else's.

 

[drjones]

I believe the mechanic is designed to be easily scannable. As in you begin the round, throw a d6 or two and glance at the paper to see if anything matches your roll which is why is displayed rather than . I am sure a lot of folks would not find this necessary but it doesn't cause any problems either and is a reminder that you need to check for recharge.

 

[Belphanior]

Then why go to such great lengths to make the system so different from everything else?

If it really was get this number or above, like an attack roll, why not use the established mechanic? would be 50% or recharge on 11 or above on a d20.

Using the different dice, the custom icons... makes no sense in the 4e KISS approach if they didn't mean it to be different.

Or maybe I'm reading to much into it?

is easy to do with 11+
approximates to 13+
approximates to 18+
Not a very elegant progression, eh?

On top of that, this nonsensical progression encourages third party monster-makers to use recharge values of 10+ or 15+ or even just a natural 20. I think their goals and playtests induced them to choose a method that's less prone to tinkering and is more reliable. Even a minimal recharge value of will likely come up once in a fight, while the minimal value of "20" isn't.

 

[beverson]

I thought I'd be able to field this by pulling out Keep on the Shadowfell which has a handy "How to read monster stat-blocks" page.

However, while it fully explains things like "Intitiave x - The monsters initiative modifier" (as if that weren't obvious.) It says nothing about what the recharge 5, 6 it lists means.

I was disappointed by this as well. They did a good job of explaining everything else in the statblock, and left that off.

Sure would be nice if someone from WotC would pop in and clarify it for us once and for all.