Forked Thread: Once per day non-magical effects destroy suspension of disbelief

[Dannyalcatraz]

However, if you can accept the possibility that these sorts of techniques can exist in a fantasy world,

If the fluff & mechanics matched up to something that looked so outré that I could believe it borders on the mystical, then perhaps I could accept non-reliable 1/day martial maneuvers.

But they don't. They simply don't read as powers that are so beyond the pale that they need to be limited to 1/day, regardless of PC level, regardless of opponent skill.

Look at them, read them. Imagine Bas Ruten or anyone else mentioned in this thread as a 4Ed PC trying some of these maneuvers against utter mooks. Against the barely trained. Against the halfway competent. Against the trained but still relatively inexperienced. Against an equal.

There is no reason why Bruce Lee couldn't wander from room to room using the same maneuver against any given mook he encountered in Han's island. Its not until he fights someone like Bolo or Han himself that his options become limited.

And its not because he's tapped out, its because he's fighting a trained warrior. He might be able to land a "daily" technique once on Han and/or Bolo even though he used it on a dozen different, but much less skilled, opponents that day.

So, not "daily" but "per encounter" or "at will" depending upon the foe faced.

 

[Delta]

Too little, too late – we've already covered this, aside from the fact that you are cutting the bread pretty thin there.

What on earth are you talking about? I'm replying directly to the question you raised in the OP. Do you not remember the subject on which you started this thread?

 

[FireLance]

If the fluff & mechanics matched up to something that looked so outré that I could believe it borders on the mystical, then perhaps I could accept non-reliable 1/day martial maneuvers.

But they don't. They simply don't read as powers that are so beyond the pale that they need to be limited to 1/day, regardless of PC level, regardless of opponent skill.

It looks like you are making a slightly different argument: not that martial daily abilities don't make sense, but that certain martial daily abilities don't need or don't deserve to be martial daily abilities.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

It looks like you are making a slightly different argument: not that martial daily abilities don't make sense, but that certain martial daily abilities don't need or don't deserve to be martial daily abilities.

I'm arguing that I haven't seen evidence in the RW that martial dailies exist, and furthermore (in answer to your assertion in post #70) that none of the 4Ed martial dailies describes something that makes sense as a daily- there's nothing "fantasy" about them.

IOW, it is possible that there is some kind of supernatural martial daily that could indeed be performed 1/day...but the 4Ed exploits that have that label don't satisfy.

The problem is that the designers took a square peg- martial maneuvers- and tried hammering them into a smaller round hole- their "Daily Exploits" mechanic that all the other classes have.

They're sacrificing believability on the altar of balance.

If, like the HERO martial arts abilities, maneuvers were situationally or tactically limited, they would make more sense:

"X maneuver may only be performed after a successful Grab,"

"Y maneuver cannot be performed with successive actions,"

"Z maneuver only works against a given foe one time ever,"

"AA maneuver renders both you and your foe prone,"

- all limit the usability of martial maneuvers. It would also ensure that a PC couldn't just use the same extremely powerful maneuver over and over again.

 

[FireLance]

I'm arguing that I haven't seen evidence in the RW that martial dailies exist, and furthermore (in answer to your assertion in post #70) that none of the 4Ed martial dailies describes something that makes sense as a daily- there's nothing "fantasy" about them.

IOW, it is possible that there is some kind of supernatural martial daily that could indeed be performed 1/day...but the 4Ed exploits that have that label don't satisfy.

I'd say that there is usually nothing overty fantastic about martial daily maneuvers, just as there was nothing overtly fantastic about Luke Skywalker firing the torpedo that took down the Death Star. Anybody could have done it if he was lucky enough, but in Luke's case, it wasn't luck.

Similarly, there is nothing overtly fantastic about an ability like Villian's Menace. In fact, it is theoretically possible that a fight could play out the same whether the fighter used villian's menace or not, if he consistently rolled 1 or 2 points higher for attack rolls and 2 or 4 points higher for damage rolls when he didn't use the ability. However, the fact that he can exceed his normal limits for attack rolls and damage rolls when he does use the ability makes it seem to me that there is some extra effort going on, and it isn't that great a stretch for me to accept that he can't make the same effort again without taking an extended rest.

The problem is that the designers took a square peg- martial maneuvers- and tried hammering them into a smaller round hole- their "Daily Exploits" mechanic that all the other classes have.

They're sacrificing believability on the altar of balance.

This is only a bad thing if you think that believability is more important than balance. Plus, there are other effects apart from balance that some people consider to be positive, such as: simplicity and avoidance of repeated attack routines (see below).

If, like the HERO martial arts abilities, maneuvers were situationally or tactically limited, they would make more sense:

"X maneuver may only be performed after a successful Grab,"

"Y maneuver cannot be performed with successive actions,"

"Z maneuver only works against a given foe one time ever,"

"AA maneuver renders both you and your foe prone,"

- all limit the usability of martial maneuvers. It would also ensure that a PC couldn't just use the same extremely powerful maneuver over and over again.

PCs may attempt to make use of the same attack routines over and over again, though, e.g. Grab, then maneuver X, then grab again; or Y, then Y1, which also cannot be performed with successive attacks, then Y again; Z against foe #1, Z against foe #2, Z against foe #3, etc.; AA maneuver, then stand, then AA maneuver again.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I'd say that there is usually nothing overty fantastic about martial daily maneuvers, just as there was nothing overtly fantastic about Luke Skywalker firing the torpedo that took down the Death Star. Anybody could have done it if he was lucky enough, but in Luke's case, it wasn't luck.

Its skill + the Force. It was difficult, yes, but it was skill.

And I bet as an experienced Jedi, he could make that shot 9 times out of 10 tries a day.

Similarly, there is nothing overtly fantastic about an ability like Villian's Menace.

And I have a problem with that, obviously.

In fact, it is theoretically possible that a fight could play out the same whether the fighter used villian's menace or not...<snip>...it isn't that great a stretch for me to accept that he can't make the same effort again without taking an extended rest.

That's not the issue.

The issue is whether there is any logic to why my use of Villain's Menace against Relatively Unskilled Mook #1 means I should be unable to use Villain's Menace against Sub-Boss #1 three rooms and 2 combats away.

And further, meaning that I'm still barred from using Villain's Menace 2 (character time) hours later, against Unskilled Mook #7.

The ONLY logic presented is game balance, and that's simply insufficient. There are other ways for the Fighter's exploits to be balanced without being disruptive of the immersive experience.

This is only a bad thing if you think that believability is more important than balance.

Ideally, they should be considered equally.

PCs may attempt to make use of the same attack routines over and over again, though, e.g. Grab, then maneuver X, then grab again; or Y, then Y1, which also cannot be performed with successive attacks, then Y again; Z against foe #1, Z against foe #2, Z against foe #3, etc.; AA maneuver, then stand, then AA maneuver again.

Yes...but he's not going to make every attack roll unless he's fighting a mook. After all, his foe isn't just standing there- he's trying maneuvers of his own.

Here is where HERO is more videogamey than 4Ed, but in a good way.

When I play Tekken, I can try all of Yoshimitsu's maneuvers as many times as I want. Typically, a particularly powerful but difficult maneuver will only work once or twice.

But I can try it as many times as I want.

And when I play a bad Tekken player, or bamboozle the AI, I can actually win a fight simply using the same powerful but difficult manuver over and over.

If, however, I face a good player, or I'm in the latter rounds, trying the same maneuver over and over again will simply get me whupped.

Is it potentially repetitive? Sure- so is physical combat. Watching MMA, you're going to expect someone trying to initiate a grapple. And if you can't grapple at least a little bit, you can't win- ask Kimbo Slice. Besides, repetition is logical- if my foe can't stop me from smacking him in the face with my mace, why should I stop?

But instead of allowing physical combat to be repetitive when the situation says it very well should be, 4Ed swings the pendulum completely the other way- You can't be repetitve because some things can only be done once per day.

Ever.

You've lost your choice about how to logically run your PC in combat because of a design decision.

 

[hong]

Yes...but he's not going to make every attack roll unless he's fighting a mook. After all, his foe isn't just standing there- he's trying maneuvers of his own.

Here is where HERO is more videogamey than 4Ed, but in a good way.

When I play Tekken, I can try all of Yoshimitsu's maneuvers as many times as I want. Typically, a particularly powerful but difficult maneuver will only work once or twice.

But I can try it as many times as I want.

And when I play a bad Tekken player, or bamboozle the AI, I can actually win a fight simply using the same powerful but difficult manuver over and over.

And you can do exactly the same thing in 4E against minions.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Really?

Where does it say that non-reliable once daily exploits can be used multiple times against mooks?

Or that using non-reliable dailies against minions doesn't count as using it?

Or that if you've used a non-reliable daily exploit against a serious opponent, you can still use it against lesser foes?

No kidding- I haven't seen this, and I don't recall anyone else as having mentioned it AFAIK.

 

[hong]

Really?

Yes. It is very simple. You make an attack roll against a mook. You do damage. It falls down. You can now describe the process by which your attack made it fall down how ever you like.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

No, hong, that isn't what I'm talking about at all.

I know minions in 4Ed are as durable as tissue paper, but I'm talking about ACTUAL USE of a daily power against an obviously lesser foe.