Disappointed in 4e

[ExploderWizard]

But that's for a unit of soldiers, generally. The unit breaks, and thus the entire group is out of the battle. Sure, many still live, but they get scattered and unable to regroup into any size capable of being a threat. If their side loses, they'll likely die trying to flee as the enemy sends cavalry/whatever to hunt down survivors. If their side wins, they can't go back; they'll likely get executed for leaving the battle. Similar to how in 3E, killing a swarm's hp doesn't kill all x thousand of the bugs, it just utterly scatters them.

This concept does not work so well on the individual level D&D deals with, IMO.

I agree. Morale works well as a group mechanic. Basic D&D got it right. Check morale for the group if things start heading rapidly towards defeat. At that point the victors can pursue the broken troops or end the engagement holding the field.

Individuals should decide if surrender or retreat is a viable option depending on thier intelligence, knowledge of the foe, and other factors.

The 4E movement rules did make it harder to retreat without getting whacked though.

 

[The Little Raven]

The 4E movement rules did make it harder to retreat without getting whacked though.

Eh? One of the complaints I often see about the 1:1 movement is that it allows you to move more easily without being whacked, usually phrased that monsters can move past defender-types easier because movement cost isn't increased by diagonals.

 

[Benimoto]

Wait a second. We can have a discussion about using a Skill to do damage or even kill someone?

How is that going to work at an RPGA event?

As a pretty regular RPGA DM, I like it any time any of my players wants to do something "out of the box". RPGA sessions have a natural tendency to be not particularly memorable by default, and a few wacky things happening in a game can change that. Plus, there's been a big push, especially in 4th edition, for the RPGA modules to be run less "tournament-style" and more customized to the play style of the table.

Plus, if you want to describe an Intimidate check as doing physical damage, just do so. Say that the target clutches his/her chest and goes pale. Say that the player coincidentally picked the goblin with a heart condition. It's been pointed out repeatedly in the thread that stress can cause as much damage as physical violence. Further, the concept of hit points as only "meat points" is ridiculous and has been since 1st edition.

 

[ExploderWizard]

Eh? One of the complaints I often see about the 1:1 movement is that it allows you to move more easily without being whacked, usually phrased that monsters can move past defender-types easier because movement cost isn't increased by diagonals.

The diagonals are not the problem. The double move action is the culprit unless errata has been released.

On a double move your 2nd move action must match the first. So If I want to shift out danger before retreating I can then only shift again instead of moving any real distance, so the thing I want to get away from is still right there in my face (2 squares away)

 

[The Little Raven]

The diagonals are not the problem. The double move action is the culprit unless errata has been released.

On a double move your 2nd move action must match the first. So If I want to shift out danger before retreating I can then only shift again instead of moving any real distance, so the thing I want to get away from is still right there in my face (2 squares away)

Um, no.

A double move is two moves of the same type, which is given specific rules to avoid things like "your first move ends you in an illegal square." Double move does not prevent you from taking two entirely separate move actions. There is no errata necessary.

 

[ExploderWizard]

Um, no.

A double move is two moves of the same type, which is given specific rules to avoid things like "your first move ends you in an illegal square." Double move does not prevent you from taking two entirely separate move actions. There is no errata necessary.

Two moves of the same type? So if my 1st move is a shift my second move can be something other than a shift?

EDIT: Ok I think I see the difference. You can take two move actions in a round of different types.

 

[Shazman]

Do we need to pull out the quotes from Mr. Gygax explaining that hit points in D&D do not represent only physical damage? This "stupid" concept has been a part of D&D since the beginning, and I doubt it will go away now.

And please note that some proportion of your hit points do represent physical damage, so you can have it both ways.

Notice I said hp being ONLY morale is stupid. I'm okay with morale being a small component of hp, but changing the hp concept to make it be completely about morale is just plain stupid. Like I said earlier, do attacks hurt your morale or do they just plain hurt? If the game is all about morale let's just have everyone trade insults and make intimidating displays instead of actually fighting. Let's reduce the most popular RPG to grade school name calling. That's a great way to suck the excitement and drama from the game. That is not a game I want to be part of.

 

[LostSoul]

Notice I said hp being ONLY morale is stupid. I'm okay with morale being a small component of hp, but changing the hp concept to make it be completely about morale is just plain stupid. Like I said earlier, do attacks hurt your morale or do they just plain hurt? If the game is all about morale let's just have everyone trade insults and make intimidating displays instead of actually fighting. Let's reduce the most popular RPG to grade school name calling. That's a great way to suck the excitement and drama from the game. That is not a game I want to be part of.

Hit points are both hurt and morale - or they can be neither. They're very nebulous.

If you don't want the game to be reduced to grade school name calling, have your character say more interesting, exciting, drama-laden things.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

If the game is all about morale let's just have everyone trade insults and make intimidating displays instead of actually fighting. Let's reduce the most popular RPG to grade school name calling.

Beating of shields, high hats and weird musical isntruments were part of warfare as intimidatory effects. Sensible people do not really want to fight, it dangerous.

 

[ExploderWizard]

Beating of shields, high hats and weird musical isntruments were part of warfare as intimidatory effects. Sensible people do not really want to fight, it dangerous.

I'm with you here. All these things should be able to influence morale. I would use it as fear effect rather than hp damage though. They tend to make you run away rather than wear you down.

Using hp damage for this would be like watching a barbarian screaming in the face of his opponent who casually ignores him until 0 hp is reached and he finally faints from the fear.

Morale is something that just kind of holds or breaks. I don't see it as ablative.