Rule of Three: March 13

[Pyromantic]

Saves (pre-4E) are really only superficially active, and fundamentally very different immediate reactions/interrupts. I would be disappointed to see immediate actions go away, and saves be treated like they're some kind of replacement.

A Save is mechanically equivalent to the spell attack rolls in 4E. I suppose some might feel more "involved" if they're rolling the die, but it takes only a minimal understanding of the game to understand how illusory that involvement really is. You're rolling the die instead of the DM. That's all. A shame that they're abandoning a completely sensible simplification (spells are attacks, just like everything else) that does nothing but make the game easier to learn, but without removing any actual depth, for the sake of such a superficial "involvement". And why should spells be the only things opposed by "active" defenses, anyway?

Overall, I've not seen much problem with immediates in 4E. The one-per-round limit keeps them in check, and their presence adds a lot to the game.

QFT.

A degree of out-of-turn actions has all kinds of benefits IMO. It gives a greater sense that combat is really interactive, rather than simply "can you do x damage before I can do y damage". It can increase player involvement, and IME that can actually speed up play, since people are more engaged in what's going on.

I'm also worried that this idea limits interesting out-of-turn actions only to times when you're responding to magic, moving us one step closer to having magic as interesting in the game and martial practice as boring and rote.

I have a positive opinion of just about everything I've read about Next, but this is a notable exception.

 

[DEFCON 1]

As far as the "slower ramp up" for classes... the thing you need to remember is that we're most likely going to get some additional abilities from the themes as well. And thus if you added up the features you might get from the class AND the theme in DDN, you could very well end up starting at 1st level with the exact same amount of abilities and stuff that you'd get in 3/4E by class alone. Then those few extra class features that were delayed from 1st level, start appearing at 2nd, 3rd etc.

The one thing they have to be careful about is not giving too much stuff to 1st level characters, since they seem to now be an amalgamation of race, class, and theme. So spreading out class features over a few early levels is not the doom scenario I think it might be thought to be.

 

[Will Doyle]

I'm going to echo dkyle and pyromantic here about the immediate actions: picking up a die and rolling a save is a really low form of player involvement. Immediate powers give players an incentive to focus on what's happening off their turn, and the tools to perform some really dramatic actions. I'd be saddened to see them go.

The solution isn't to remove them, it's to regulate them.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

I'm going to echo dkyle and pyromantic here about the immediate actions: picking up a die and rolling a save is a really low form of player involvement. Immediate powers give players an incentive to focus on what's happening off their turn, and the tools to perform some really dramatic actions. I'd be saddened to see them go.

The solution isn't to remove them, it's to regulate them.

I read that section not as removing interrupts entirely, but tying conditional, limited use interrupts to saving throws, as some kind of hybrid between 4E, earlier D&D, and something new. Instead of:

"You get attacked by a fireball. Have the attacker roll against Reflex, or try to make a Reflex save, "

You get:

"You get attacked by a fireball. You get to make a Reflex save. If you have something that interrupts the actions--like a 1/encounter power to dive out of the way before the blast activates--you can use this to modify the Reflex save roll, results, exact parameters, etc."

Of course, exactly how that would work with weapon attacks in traditional D&D is the $64,000 question. Perhaps if only weapon reactions are left as true 4E interrupts, and these are tightly regulated, the bulk of the game play issues go away. That would be another way to distinguish weapons from other attacks and defenses.

 

[Kobold Avenger]

2) Interrupts need to go away. If the general pace of combat picks up and they don't last 45 min to an hour then we won't miss them. A return to simple initiative on a d6 rolled each round could help break up the monotony of wating for a static turn to come around. IME this type of init system results in a fair number of simultaneous action rounds which are very exciting.

It doesn't matter if it's a d6 or a d20, rolling initiative every round will slow combat down.

 

[dkyle]

"You get attacked by a fireball. You get to make a Reflex save. If you have something that interrupts the actions--like a 1/encounter power to dive out of the way before the blast activates--you can use this to modify the Reflex save roll, results, exact parameters, etc."

That interrupt ability is essentially identical to (hypothetical 4E-style power):

Rolling Dive (Rogue Utility)
Encounter, Immediate Interrupt
Trigger: You are targeted by an Area or Close attack.
Effect: Shift to the nearest unoccupied square not targeted by the attack.


So, I'm not sure what's gained here? It just takes a general purpose mechanic (Immediate Action Powers), and turns it into a specific mechanic, tied to a specific kind of defense. What benefit is there to that?

And as far as I'm concerned, going back to rolled Saves vs. spells is bad, but it sounds like "tradition" has already won the day on that one.

 

[ExploderWizard]

It doesn't matter if it's a d6 or a d20, rolling initiative every round will slow combat down.

IF interrupts, huge piles of hitpoints, and analysis-paralysis menus of power options remain then yes.

 

[Nebulous]

I hate interrupts. It feels like i'm playing Munchkin the card game. Not D&D.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

So, I'm not sure what's gained here? It just takes a general purpose mechanic (Immediate Action Powers), and turns it into a specific mechanic, tied to a specific kind of defense. What benefit is there to that?

And as far as I'm concerned, going back to rolled Saves vs. spells is bad, but it sounds like "tradition" has already won the day on that one.

Well, that's the rub. If you go back to traditional rolled saves, then what it buys you is better handling time. Everyone is going to roll the save (versus having the wizard roll versus the defense) anyway. So now instead of being an actual "interrupt" in the game flow, the power is simply an option to change what you are already doing. Mechanically in the game, it results in the same thing for the character. From the player handling time perspective, it should be a modest improvement that compounds over time--while still allowing a positive reaction by the character.

If you don't go back to traditional rolled saves, it is a moot point.

 

[TerraDave]

I liked everything here.

But I always like Ro3. They should put this guy in charge...at least of the Legend and Lore column.