Disappointed in 4e

[Fifth Element]

Really? Because, IME, the DM would either say, "You stand up" or "The ogre tries to whack you down before you can stand up; make a Reflex save" or something of that nature.

You don't see the mechanical difference there? The ogre does not smack you back down when you intend to get off the floor, or wish you could get off the floor, or in the case when you roll a death save. He smacks you when you get off the floor, or when you start to get off the floor. When you use a move action to get off the floor. If it's an immediate interrupt, the ogre smacks you before you are able to finish getting off the floor. If it's an immediate reaction, the ogre smacks you after you have finished getting up.

If the ogre succeeds in smacking you back down, you have still used your move action. Without you using an action, the attack is not triggered.

If you wanted to get up but could not, the ogre would not smack you. The DM might say "You try to rise but you have no strength and remain on the ground", because according to the rules you are not allowed to stand up.

The ogre's action would not be triggered unless you were able to get up, in game terms.

Really?

Really?

Yes, really, or else I wouldn't have written it.

Well, LostSoul's initial "colour" had the fighter start to claw his way up the wall, and then collapse, so I guess that wasn't colour either. The creature gets an immediate reaction to the wall-clawing-upward. And I guess, then, "4e can be a good game if you violate the rules" is back on.

The starting to claw up the wall, and then collapsing, is pure flavour. It's a way to describe what's happening. He's not actually using a move action to stand up, and that it what would trigger the reaction. If you do not use an action in game terms, then there is nothing that triggers the reaction.

Actually dancing a jig requires actually getting up, which requires an actual move action to accomplish.

This is what I mean about your possibly weak knowledge of 4E rules interfering with your understanding of the discussion. You claim that something that uses a move action (getting up and dancing, which would actually be two move actions, one to get up and one to dance) is exactly the same as something that does not use a move action (describing your death save as attempting to get up but failing).

 

[Fifth Element]

Nope.

If colour is anything that doesn't impact resolution, and both X and Y don't impact resolution, then both X and Y are colour, regardless of whether or not you like X or Y.

Sure. But you colour example does impact resolution. It requires actions that can trigger attacks. So by your own definition, it is not colour, and therefore not the same thing.

 

[wolfen fenrison]

I'd say my biggest dissapointment in 4E is that it plays (and reads) like a table top MMORPG, they seem less like rule books and more like walk throughs. The fighter is favorite class from 3E and I am dismayed at how the 4E fighter has been reduced to just HP/AC tank.

I remember an arguement w/ my uncle who plays lots of video game rpgs. He loved playing fighters, but didn't understand why a wizard or rogue could out "DPS" (a term that should have no place in D&D anyways) a fighter (is his opinoin the fighter should be the king of combat damage out put). So I put it this way "A spellcaster can only deal massive amounts of damage a few times a day, after that he is just a smart commoner w/ a stick. Rouges can only sneak attack when they catch them by surprise or are flanking, the later puts them right in harms way, and some creature types are immune to sneak attacks (plants, oozes, elementals, undead), and then there are abilities like improved uncanny dodge. Fighters with magic weapons, damage improving feats, are (w/ few exceptions) consistant with their damage out put. When the party comes up against a vampire and the wizard runs out of spells, the cleric is busy keeping everyone alive, the fighter is usualy the one puting him into the ground. Now he it seems in any given situation he is a shield of meat that hits back.

The Fighter thing is just a glaring example, others include delaying classes and monsters from the core books just to sell future books.

 

[pemerton]

Attempting to take an action is what the player announces; success or failure is determined through game mechanics or DM Fiat.

You seem to be presupposing here that the game mechanics do not make player announcement sufficient for success of action resolution.

I am saying that all games have "smart play" element built into them, whether intended or not.

You seem to be presupposing here that what counts as "smart play" is the same in all RPGs (or at least all versions of D&D).

Both presuppositions are contentious. Some 4e mechanics do permit player announcement to be sufficient for success. And smart play in 4e is not the same as in 1st ed AD&D. In particular, in the former game it is sometimes "smart play" for a player to have his/her PC do things that are not necessarily smart from the PC's point of view - the game mechanics are designed to sometimes reward what is, from the point of view of the PC, rashness or excessive flamboyance. The same sort of thinking underlies the hit point mechanics.

And I still reiterate - if you are playing an RPG, and there is no mechanical reason not to do certain things to maintain verisimilitude, and you as a player choose not to, and then you are irritated by the lack of verisimilitude - well, you have no one but yourself to blame.

But it can be made verisimilitudinous in any event: if you absolutely won't refrain from pushing on to the next tomb because the mechanics don't require your PC to rest, then in the gameworld your PC is such a driven tomb-looter that no amount of physical debilitation slows him/her down. Presumably your PC is also the sort of sociopath who won't take a break on the weekend to have lunch with friends and family, because there is no game-mechanical advantage to doing that either. I'm not sure I want to play that PC, but I can see that it has a place in the gameworld of D&D.

Now I have no objection to an RPG that does permit these sorts of activities to generate mechanical advantages (eg HeroWars might allow me to get a benefit from a Relationship keyword if I have lunch with friends and family, or to get a benefit from resting to heal if I have a Physical keyword like "works best after rest") - but, to reiterate, if you won't rest unless the mechanics mandate it then you are roleplaying someone with a personality disorder.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Movement impacts resolution. It's important in D&D.

Movement only impacts resolution where it.....impacts resolution. If the DM or player add jig-winking as colour, chosing full well not to act on it as colour, then it is colour.

Right?


RC

 

[Raven Crowking]

You seem to be presupposing here that what counts as "smart play" is the same in all RPGs (or at least all versions of D&D).

Not a presupposition in this particular case, though it you want to feel it is, you can answer whatever strawman you like.

 

[Fifth Element]

Movement only impacts resolution where it.....impacts resolution.

No, it always impacts resolution, because it takes actions to move. Using your action to jig means you can't use it for something else, and that affects how an encounter is resolved.

That's why the "trying to get up" colour doesn't affect anything. You don't have an action to use, so it doesn't matter what you say you're doing. You won't be actually doing anything.

But jigging takes actions. Three, come to think of it. A move action to get up, another move action to jig, and a free action to drop prone again.

 

[Raven Crowking]

No, it always impacts resolution, because it takes actions to move. Using your action to jig means you can't use it for something else, and that affects how an encounter is resolved.

That's why the "trying to get up" colour doesn't affect anything. You don't have an action to use, so it doesn't matter what you say you're doing. You won't be actually doing anything.

But jigging takes actions. Three, come to think of it. A move action to get up, another move action to jig, and a free action to drop prone again.

Please assume the C & P, and feel free to respond.

RC

 

[Fifth Element]

Please assume the C & P, and feel free to respond.

You're going to have to explain that one.

 

[Zustiur]

You're being ridiculous. If the character were not "unconscious", dancing a jig would be an action, per the rules. Again per the rules, unconscious characters cannot take actions. So he cannot dance a jig.

If you let him dance a jig, the player would be right to ask "well if I can dance a jig, why can't I run across the room to get the heck out of here?"

The jig-dancing itself would not impact resolution. Allowing an unconscious character to take an action (which would be required in order to actually dance the jig) could very well impact resolution.

Paraphrased:
You're being ridiculous. If the character were not "unconscious", trying to get up would be an action, per the rules. Again per the rules, unconscious characters cannot take actions. So he cannot try to get up.

Forget the jig part if you like. Focus on the winking at the elf bit.
How is winking at the elf more of an action than trying to get up?
Both are actions, or neither are actions.

Note the following
An unconscious character cannot take an actions.
Most small movements, such as speaking, winking and dropping a weapon are free actions. Attempting to stand is a move action. Therefore you cannot do any such thing according to the rules.