Themes... what are they?

[Colmarr]

I do see the point and the flavor is there - but flavor doesn't matter when nobody is going to use it.

As I commented in the article about the theme itself that RW linked to (BTW, Morrus has asked elsewhere that all comments on the theme be posted there so it's easier to track feedback), I love the way the mechanics of the power enforce the fluff. If a skyseer tells you that using power X this encounter will be a bad idea, he's almost certainly right.

As for whether the power is mechanically useful, I believe it is. As RW says, all it does is move the outcome point forward. Put another way, at the cost of the Skyseer's minor action, you know with almost 100% certainty whether a power will hit or not when it is used.

That's of serious value from a planning perspective.

 

[Mummolus]

I'd just like to point out that the fact they haven't been added to the game in general is plain criminal in my opinion. They are one of the best things added to 4E over its entire lifespan. I am befuddled that the rest of the system doesn't enjoy them yet.

BEFUDDLED I TELL YOU.

Quite right. My biggest disappointment by far with Heroes of Shadow is the absence of new themes. Vampire itself seems like an excellent theme rather than class, for that matter.

 

[RangerWickett]

Good points, Aegeri. I think I'll add a note saying that the player can choose to use powers to grant bonuses or rerolls while making the 'skyseer' roll.

That leads to an odd causality thing, like if an elf sees the future, where he rolls 1, then elven accuracies and rolls 2. He's expended his use of elven accuracy, so if he chooses not to make the attack he got a vision of, he never gets a chance to use elven accuracy on any attack he _actually_ makes. But I think it could work.

Or would it be better to say you can use elven accuracy and heroic effort when you make the actual attack? I think applying rerolls at the moment of the attack makes more sense, because stuff like avenger's oaths depend on conditions when you make the attack.

 

[keterys]

At time of -

Skyseer: "Do not take the shot, friend, for the wind will gust against you."
Elf: "Oh!? Then I'll just aim... like this!"

 

[RangerWickett]

And a human just grunts heroically and puts his back into it, while the avenger says, "Are you there God? It's me, Margaret, and I really want to hit that dragon."

My next character will be an avenger named Margaret.

 

[Aegeri]

I know RangerWickett has responded and I think his fix should work, which should mean it has an interesting use (especially if your attack boosting abilities would work perfectly normally - as far as I can tell all they know is that a lot of effort was required to make that attack hit).

I love the way the mechanics of the power enforce the fluff.

While this is a legitimate point, it's rather moot if nobody ever uses it because of the fact it prevents a great deal of abilities that affect d20 rolls. For example, why would an Avenger ever want to use this (actually even with the proposed fix an avenger still wouldn't want to use it - but he would be a tiny corner case and therefore quite ignorable)? Why would a Warlord ever want an ally to use this (Remembering if they spend an AP, they get a substantial bonus to hit with their next attack roll)?

Put another way, at the cost of the Skyseer's minor action, you know with almost 100% certainty whether a power will hit or not when it is used.

This isn't quite true. A lot of conditional modifiers can apply on an attack outside of just the d20 roll - which as I noted this power can't apply any of them (because it's not strictly speaking an actual attack roll). In addition to this a lot of allies can affect rolls at the time to boost a hit (especially once you get into paragon and epic tiers) with immediate interrupts. By removing the attack roll effectively, the power removes the ability for most of those to trigger and thus makes it a very poor power to use on anything important - which can be salvaged in a remarkable amount of ways if you get high enough in level especially.

A really strong example is a Warlord with his ally (whoever that is) with this power. Would you personally risk using this with Lead the Attack? What if that Ally was a Warpriest? The Warlord gets up to the creature, rolls a 1 and just as he's about to sadface - REROLL THE 1 (often that dramatically in my experience) cries out from the adjacent warpriest and his reroll 1 power salvages the terrible attack roll. High fives are exchanged and a monsters pants are firmly pulled down around its ankles for a good hard heroic spanking (gee I'm getting hot and bothered already). In this powers case, same situation but the Warlord rolls it ahead of time thinking it could be handy. Whoops! Just boned your most important daily powers and the Warpriest can't save you - even though he actually totally *could* have done so.

Of course if it is explicit that it counts as the attack roll as if you had rolled it then, which allows all the above stuff to trigger on a missed attack (or just in general) like heroic effort, a warlords tactical presence and such forth it becomes a lot more useful - while still being pretty mechanically risky. It's also worth noting that you have effects in the game that work like this as well, such as dice of Auspicious Fortune.

Edit: I would like to point out - for the record - that I really like the theme and especially love the daily power it has. I personally feel the daily power is worth the price of admission alone. It also has clearly got a lot of love in the thought process behind what the place of the theme in the world is and the supporting fluff it has. Something that I think Wizards could learn from. It is hard to judge the theme though, because themes aren't just an extra encounter power or a couple of features - but also about what they give you access to. A poor entry power doesn't matter if the later powers are awesome.

 

[Colmarr]

Stuff

I think you're over-reading the power. And I hope the rules aren't as stuffy about what constitutes an attack as you imply.

The power says simply "The next time the ally would make an attack roll for that power during this encounter, he must instead use the rolled result. If the power has multiple targets or attack rolls, only the first roll is replaced."

While I agree that the text as written would prevent re-rolls such as Elven Accuracy, I think the bolded text preserves things like the Oath class feature and Ranger powers like Split the Tree.

As for powers that grant bonuses (as opposed to re-rolls), I don't see how they come into it at all. Look skyward determines the result of your die roll. There's nothing there that prevents you adding combat advantage or any other circumstantial bonus, regardless of whether it is power-based or not.

Having said all that, the fact that we are having the discussion at all is evidence that misunderstanding is possible. Perhaps re-word as:

The ally chooses an attack power he knows, rolls a d20, and marks the result. The next time the ally would make an attack roll for that power during this encounter, he must use the marked result as if he had rolled it on a d20. If the player would normally make multiple attack rolls for any reason, only the first roll is replaced.

​

PS. It's no doubt discussions like this that make writing for RPGs a professional's game. The intent behind the power is abundantly clear, and anyone trying to raise the "it's not an attack roll" argument at an actual table should IMO be soundly beaten.​

 

[RangerWickett]

The ally chooses an attack power he knows, rolls a d20, and marks the result. The next time the ally would make an attack roll for that power during this encounter, he must instead use the rolled result. If the power has multiple targets or attack rolls, only the first roll is replaced.

When the ally uses the rolled result, he can still apply effects and powers to modify the attack roll. For example, a human could still use human perseverance, an elf could still use elven accuracy, a warlord’s tactical presence would still grant a bonus if the ally used an action point to use the power, and an avenger would still roll a second die and pick the better of the two results.

How's that?



Also, I love themes, not just the ones I made. They let you get funky combinations that 4e otherwise isn't so nice toward. Like halfling thieves who are sneaky and everything until suddenly they go, "I AM A GLADIATOR! THIS IS SPARTAAAAA!" and kick you into a pit.

 

[Dalamar]

Wouldn't "The next time the ally would make an attack roll for that power, he uses the marked result as his first attack roll instead of rolling a die" work for the second sentence?

 

[Insight]

Quite right. My biggest disappointment by far with Heroes of Shadow is the absence of new themes. Vampire itself seems like an excellent theme rather than class, for that matter.

Vampire would have been far better implemented as a theme. As would lycanthropes for that matter. D&D characters do not typically start as undead, but every once in a while become undead (or lycanthropes or whatever) during the course of adventuring. This seems more like a theme (or multiclassing).