Please step away from the 4th edition "effect everything" abilities.

[keterys]

I've written a few adventures now for public consumption... and each time I've had to have in the back of my mind "Is there too much undead, that a generic radiant undead smashing team will have too easy of a time" or "Will something that stuns all demons flatten the board?", and there are items I've had to avoid giving out "weaken all elementals and demons? I plan to use too many demons, can't have that" basically because D&D allows overspecialization against certain creatures.

So, yeah, I've had to change encounters because turn undead was too big of a deal. I'm pretty good with balancing around the idea that some fights the wizard is better for, some fights the rogue, etc... but the idea that some _campaigns_ (Against the Lich King, etc) divine characters, especially the cleric, is better for? Not happy.

 

[triqui]

Completely useless in a fight huh?

Not sure what game some of you were playing but it sure as hell doesn't sound like 3rd edition. Rogues had more than just Sneak Attack, in case you didn't know.

A few other posters already answered this, but you are wrong.

Tell me something a rogue had in combat, that a commoner does not (yes, commoners can buy tanglefoot bags and caltrops too).

Level 1 rogue, in a standard array, with a regular build (that is, not a 20 STR great axe-wielding half orc rogue with no dexterity), vs a 1 HD skeleton. Go ahead. I'm waiting.

 

[Ratinyourwalls]

Nope. I disagree. This is absolutely something that shouldn't be leaving the game. Having super specialized class features like Favoured Enemy or Smite Uncle Paul's Underwear aren't cool and need to stay dead.

 

[ForeverSlayer]

Nope. I disagree. This is absolutely something that shouldn't be leaving the game. Having super specialized class features like Favoured Enemy or Smite Uncle Paul's Underwear aren't cool and need to stay dead.

Disagree 100%.

 

[ForeverSlayer]

A few other posters already answered this, but you are wrong.

Tell me something a rogue had in combat, that a commoner does not (yes, commoners can buy tanglefoot bags and caltrops too).

Level 1 rogue, in a standard array, with a regular build (that is, not a 20 STR great axe-wielding half orc rogue with no dexterity), vs a 1 HD skeleton. Go ahead. I'm waiting.

What are you waiting for? I know Sneak Attack won't work on a 1 HD skeleton. A 1hd skeleton has 6 hit points which means a rogue wielding a rapier could take one out without a str bonus.

Sneak Attack doesn't work on everything and I am greatful for that but it's not the rogue's only class feature.

I'm not sure what you are trying to prove and by the looks of it you don't either.

 

[Ratinyourwalls]

What are you waiting for? I know Sneak Attack won't work on a 1 HD skeleton. A 1hd skeleton has 6 hit points which means a rogue wielding a rapier could take one out without a str bonus.

Sneak Attack doesn't work on everything and I am greatful for that but it's not the rogue's only class feature.

I'm not sure what you are trying to prove and by the looks of it you don't either.

So your answer is essentially "yeah he's as effective as a commoner."

 

[hafrogman]

A 1hd skeleton has 6 hit points which means a rogue wielding a rapier could take one out without a str bonus.

A 1HD skeleton also has DR 5/bludgeoning. Just a note.

 

[triqui]

What are you waiting for? I know Sneak Attack won't work on a 1 HD skeleton. A 1hd skeleton has 6 hit points which means a rogue wielding a rapier could take one out without a str bonus.

Sneak Attack doesn't work on everything and I am greatful for that but it's not the rogue's only class feature.

I'm not sure what you are trying to prove and by the looks of it you don't either.

A skeleton has DR 5/bludgeoning so your rogue wielding a rapier does 1 point of damage 16.6% of the rounds (half that actually, since he can miss the attack as well)

Sneak Attack is not the rogue only class feature. But it is the only one in combat, which is what this thread is about: "effect everything abilities"

 

[Connorsrpg]

This was actually something that rubbed me wrong about 4E after a while. While it was clearly motivated by letting everyone do something, so it is 'fun' for all, I think they went too far. Unfortunately the saying in my head re 4E became "Everyone can do everything all the time!"

It is clear a lot of players like that style. But then monsters become defined by their attacks mainly, not their defenses - b/c all characters can over come them with no extra assistance/thought.

From weaker resistances to no immunities, poison jus removing hps, rogues gaining extra damage vs iron golems (simply for flanking), every PC having 3+ actions a go (and many powers actually allowed more than one), etc.

So, I guess I agree with the OP, but more from the monsters' POV. Some should just require a bit more thought/tactics other than simply doing more damage. Undead being the prime eg. Wooden stakes and sunlight vs vampires, crushing weapons to smash skeletons.

So maybe more of these restrictions need to be built into the monsters as opposed to the classes? In any case, I like battles where some PCs might have to come up with alternatives. Everyone being able to do everything all the time actually ruined the fun for me. (Though there are MANY things I do love about 4E - I have no preferred edition - hence my hope for 5E/Next).

 

[Belphanior]

I'm a little disappointed. The typo in the thread title made me think this was an argument against the Genesis of the world.

I think people who oppose the "can be used against anything" abilities are being a little selfish. Just because you don't enjoy a certain vision of the ranger, means nobody should be able to get it? The easiest thing to do would be to take the Ranger's Quarry and houserule that it can only be used on one certain type of creature. That would be much easier to implement than to put in Favored Enemy and then houserule it into a Quary-style ability instead.