Flavour First vs Game First - a comparison

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

The system actually does that. As long as you have a striker in the party it doesn't matter what kind of flavor it has. All that counts are the mechanics.

Of course you can reflavor 3E classes too - but those, especially prestige classes, are usually build with a theme in mind, not a function. In 4E, the function comes first and foremost. It is even clearly stated that they made sure your character will function in its role no matter what you do. So, it really doesn't matter if you call your striker a warlock or rogue or ranger, or what mechanics you use for any of the three, as long as it's a striker.

Flavor is irrelevant for the mechanics - which is also seen by the lack of "antimagic field" and similar things that may only affect one sort of powers.

Is seems as if we are talking cross-purpose.

You are right, it doesn't matter what kind of Striker you play for the purpose of defeating encounters. But each individual power is still themed after what kind of Striker you are.

 

[Fenes]

Is seems as if we are talking cross-purpose.

You are right, it doesn't matter what kind of Striker you play for the purpose of defeating encounters. But each individual power is still themed after what kind of Striker you are.

But there is no mechanical difference. Flavor is irrelevant for the power design. Function is all that matters.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

But there is no mechanical difference. Flavor is irrelevant for the power design. Function is all that matters.

No. Compare the Ranger, the Rogue and the Warlock Powers. How many of them are easily interchangeable? Would a power like Tendrils of Thuban make sense for a Rogue?

 

[Fenes]

No. Compare the Ranger, the Rogue and the Warlock Powers. How many of them are easily interchangeable? Would a power like Tendrils of Thuban make sense for a Rogue?

Is that a trick question?

Death Cloud
You throw a flask of contact poison. When it shatters it creates a poisonous cloud, causing the victims to become poisoned and suffer seizures, rendering them immobile. Since most of the substance is usually left where it fell, it can be stirred up with a thrown stone.

Daily * Martial, Poison, Implement, Zone
Standard action * Area burst 1 within 10 squares
Target: Each creature in burst
Attack: Dexterity vs. AC
Hit: 4d10+dex modifier poison damage, and immobilised (save ends)
Effect: Burst creates poisonous cloud that lasts until the end of your next turn.
Sustain minor: Maxe a dex vs. AC attack against all targets within the zone. On a hit, the target takes 1d10+dex modifier poison damage and is immobilized (Save ends).

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Is that a trick question?

Death Cloud
You throw a flask of contact poison. When it shatters it creates a poisonous cloud, causing the victims to become poisoned and suffer seizures, rendering them immobile. Since most of the substance is usually left where it fell, it can be stirred up with a thrown stone.

Daily * Martial, Poison, Implement, Zone
Standard action * Area burst 1 within 10 squares
Target: Each creature in burst
Attack: Dexterity vs. AC
Hit: 4d10+dex modifier poison damage, and immobilised (save ends)
Effect: Burst creates poisonous cloud that lasts until the end of your next turn.
Sustain minor: Maxe a dex vs. AC attack against all targets within the zone. On a hit, the target takes 1d10+dex modifier poison damage and is immobilized (Save ends).

I like it. Well, except for one thing - where does the flask of poison come from? I am not saying we won't say powers like this eventually, but at least the core avoids creating something out of nothing for martial characters.

But it's a cool item effect. I wouldn't be surprised if some alchemy item in the Adventures Vault would look like this.

 

[Fenes]

I like it. Well, except for one thing - where does the flask of poison come from? I am not saying we won't say powers like this eventually, but at least the core avoids creating something out of nothing for martial characters.

But it's a cool item effect. I wouldn't be surprised if some alchemy item in the Adventures Vault would look like this.

The flask comes from the same source arrows for rangers come from. If you can handle martial powers and dailies, having a flask at hand when needed for a daily is really no stretch at all.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

The flask comes from the same source arrows for rangers come from. If you can handle martial powers and dailies, having a flask at hand when needed for a daily is really no stretch at all.

What I can handle is not necessarily what the system will handle.

But I've played Torg - Ammo is no concern if you don't have a setback. Hollywood magazines are standard. But i think even Torg doesn't support hollywood grenades.

On the other hand, we're talking about a daily power. So I suppose you are right.

 

[Fenes]

What I can handle is not necessarily what the system will handle.

But I've played Torg - Ammo is no concern if you don't have a setback. Hollywood magazines are standard. But i think even Torg doesn't support hollywood grenades.

On the other hand, we're talking about a daily power. So I suppose you are right.

Indeed. Ammo seems no concern for rangers either. Or does anyone actually count arrows, and then tells the ranger "sorry, you don't have enough arrows for hail of arrows"?

 

[Raven Crowking]

I like it. Well, except for one thing - where does the flask of poison come from?

If you start thinking in terms of "in world" logic, 4e falls apart rather quickly. Indeed, the most common 4e advice that I am reading here (and elsewhere) is to not think about it from a simulationist viewpoint. I.e., don't consider what X ability represents, just accept the mechanics and move on.

That seems, to me at least, to bolster Fenes' claim considerably.


RC

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Indeed. Ammo seems no concern for rangers either. Or does anyone actually count arrows, and then tells the ranger "sorry, you don't have enough arrows for hail of arrows"?

I don't know if anybody does, but the rules assume you do for other items, IIRC. Whether you actually do that is another matter. I think counting Ammo is a task that can be ignored in most games that promote lots of violence. I'd probably keep doing it in Warhammer, since it belongs to the gritty feel. Of course, we also did it (including the arrow breaking rule) in 3E for quite some time... *yawn*

If you start thinking in terms of "in world" logic, 4e falls apart rather quickly.

"in world" in the sense of "game rules = physics of the world", yes. Assuming that logic tells us that the physics must be identically to our own, except where it's explicitly not, like effects labeled as magic/supernatural.