Can the GM cheat?

[Umbran]

But I'm guessing that criticising what's actually IN 4e would require you to expose yourself to the books. And you can't do that; you might accidentally like it or something.

We can do without the snark. Really. It never helps. It does not convince the other guy you are right, you know, and it makes you look like you're personally unpleasant to folks who disagree with you. So, really, take a pass on it next time. Thanks.

 

[Kingreaper]

Apologies, I should have kept to attacking the arguments; rather than the source.

 

[timASW]

No, it's really not.
The problem is, you don't have a clue what marking is, as you've just demonstrated.


1) Rangers aren't defenders. They don't mark.
2) In fact, there are no ranged defenders whatsoever.



3) OMG! Opportunity attacks are MAGIC!

Opportunity attacks are exactly like mark attacks, they're an extra attack gained due to your opponent provoking it by improperly defending themself.


4) There is no such power.

The closest power the ranger has is the ability to shoot an opponent while that opponent is aiming; thus taking advantage of the distraction.


Your description isn't a parody of the content of 4th ed, it's a parody of a parody.

Sorry but I was responding to a 4e PLAYERS examples upthread. Apparently you all have a hard time understanding your own game when giving hyperbolic defenses of it.

Do continue quibbling over minutia in a game I think sucks though. I'm sure you'll convince me with the next post how world of warcraft aggro is really a good thing in a table top game. Maybe Mike Mearls just needs to read a few of your posts and they'll rethink doing a complete 180 from 4e because of its utter awesomeness.

No doubt he just forgot how it really works, I mean he only wrote half of it. That sort of thing can slip your mind.

Mod Note: See my post below. ~Umbran

 

[Kingreaper]

I'm sure you'll convince me with the next post how world of warcraft aggro is really a good thing in a table top game.

I wasn't arguing that WoW style aggro was a good thing in a tabletop game (although there are board games that have it, where it works quite well) because, as I've demonstrated, 4th edition didn't have WoW style aggro.

WoW style aggro decides who the critters attack. Marking doesn't, it just makes it harder to attack others... like opportunity attacks.

I'm not even going to argue that marking was a good thing.
I liked it, and it served a purpose (making detailed tactical combat work better); but a lot of people don't even like the style of combat that makes it useful.

I'm just trying to correct your erroneous understanding of what it involved.

 

[Manbearcat]

@timASW @Kingreaper Not that it matters as the conversation has moved away from the main topic (and toward utter futility), but these sorts of effects were the Ranger intercession effects I was invoking (now citing); the first one easily enough being narrated as a Ranger's arrow intercepting an enemy's arrow with his own (the negative to hit basically always yielding a miss) and the directional shrapnel of the exploded enemy arrow being the damage portion of the effect. We've done just that in my game to great cinematic effect. The second just being interception of an incoming attack (be it melee or missile, what have you) and absorption of most (or all on occasion...which could then be narrated as intercepting and shattering an arrow to pieces) of the incoming force. The second two are other arrow tricks that the Rogue/Ranger has used in our game to good effect (saving an ally from a fall with a timely arrow and redirecting an ally's attack toward success, respectively).


[sblock]

WotC 4e

Disruptive Strike
You thwart an enemy’s attack with a timely thrust of your blade or a quick shot from your bow.
Encounter

Martial, Weapon
Immediate Interrupt Melee or Ranged weapon
Trigger: You or an ally is attacked by a creature
Target: The attacking creature
Attack: Strength vs. AC (melee) or Dexterity vs. AC (ranged)
Hit: 1[W] + Strength modifier damage (melee) or 1[W] + Dexterity modifier damage (ranged). The target takes a penalty to its attack roll for the triggering attack equal to 3 + your Wisdom modifier.

Defensive Volley
Your swift arrow weakens an enemy’s attack.
Encounter

Martial
Immediate Reaction Ranged weapon
Requirement: You must be wielding a bow or a crossbow.
Trigger: An ally is hit by an attack
Target: The triggering ally
Effect: You reduce the damage the target takes by your Dexterity modifier plus half your level.

Arrow of the Savior
Your arrow saves a falling friend by pinning him or her to a nearby wall, or presenting a sudden handhold.
Encounter

Martial
Immediate Interrupt Ranged weapon
Requirement: You must be wielding a bow or a crossbow.
Trigger: A creature in range falls and has a wall or floor within 1 square of it
Target: The triggering creature
Effect: The creature can attempt a saving throw to avoid falling farther. If successful, you can slide the creature 1 square to a horizontal surface, or to a vertical surface that the creature now climbs.

Back on Target
Your arrow deflects an ally’s attack back onto its true course.
Daily

Martial
Immediate Interrupt Ranged weapon
Requirement: You must be wielding a bow or a crossbow.
Trigger: An ally misses an enemy within range with a ranged attack.
Target: The triggering ally
Effect: The target can reroll the attack with a +4 power bonus.

[/sblock]

 

[Umbran]

Apparently you all have a hard time understanding your own game when giving hyperbolic defenses of it.

Yes, but apparently you have a hard time figuring out that two posts after someone gets warned about snarkiness is a really poor time to engage in it yourself. So, I'm not sure you're in a position to criticize at the moment.

Folks, address the logic of the post, not the person of the poster. Don't make it personal. If you find you can't resist when you post, we suggest you walk away from the discussion until you can.

 

[Blackbrrd]

Did I fudge dice and alter numbers on the fly? Absolutely. The campaign was such that the player characters were grossly imbalanced (as I allowed the players the freedom to play whatever type of character they wanted to play) and I often made things more difficult on the player characters who were the most powerful.
...
Think about the difference between a 20th-level character and a 3rd-level character in D&D. That's how far apart the power-level was.

I don't think what you did here is ok. Why have the players roll the dice when it won't have any effect* on the combat? It would feel like playing a computer game with somebody using an aimbot. Pointless. I wouldn't want to play in a game like this.

I have no problems with the occasional fudge, but I do feel it has to be the exception. I actually prefer making it easy for the party to ressurect a character instead of fudging the dice roll that killed him. If I want a certain outcome for a situation, for instance the party thief sneaking up on a guard and I want him to succeed, I don't ask him for a roll, I just tell he succeeded.

*Assumed as there is no way any dice rolling will let a level 3 character be relevant in a game with level 20 characters.

 

[billd91]

I don't think what you did here is ok.

Not really your call. If his players are OK with it, that's that.

 

[Kingreaper]

Not really your call. If his players are OK with it, that's that.

This thread was started because his players weren't​ okay with it.

 

[Blackbrrd]

This thread was started because his players weren't​ okay with it.

Yeah, I am not saying you can't play a game where you disregard the dice, I am saying it's something I would avoid.

I do think that as a GM, if you are going for a cinematic game where the dice doesn't decide the outcome of a combat (you fudge a large percent of the dice rolls), I think it's better to just skip the dice altogheter.

I have played with a couple of DM's that fudge the dice a lot in combat, and I really dislike it. There are several techniques to handle badly created encounters that are much better than dice fudging. This is how I do it:

Encounter too easy:
- Just let the critters die and make the next one harder. Players like to have their characters beat up the mobs.
- Add a few more HP to the mobs in the encounter (20-50%)
- Add reinforcements that arrive during the battle

Encounter too hard:
- Let the party suffer a setback, but be a bit lenient with helping them back on track after the combat.
- Reduce the amont of HP of the mobs in the encounter (20-50%)
- Have some help arrive in the form of random mobs, NPC's the players helped earlier or the like
- Introduce terrain effects the characters can exploit'
- Let the monsters start fighting between themselves, with one side enlisting the help of the PC's.

My current DM who does fudge a bit too much actually pulled the: "Help from previously helped NPC's come to your assistance" fudge a couple of sessions ago. I know he did it because we were in trouble, but it was totally plaucible and the player characters were still the heroes and it still felt as our decisions where the ones that mattered.