D&D 5E FeeFiFoFum *splat* goes the giants

[Lyxen]

Maybe I'm showing my age, but I have no idea what those acronyms mean

And I'm showing off, because I did not know them off before yesterday, and I'm probably way older than you.

But I found them useful and they've been used in this thread, so I thought I'd reuse them. See here...

 

[Lyxen]

CaW = combat as war;
CaS = combat as sport;
CAP = combat as performance? Not sure of this one!

About the last one, it was used yesterday in a context that led me to believe that it's simply narrative combat where the results is mostly linked to the performance of the actors in terms of role, but I might be wrong.

 

[dave2008]

Aura of Dread: Any creature within 60 feet that has a proficiency bonus of +3 or less gains the frightened condition until they leave the aura.

Adamantine Scales: Unless the attacker has a +4 proficiency bonus or higher, they suffer disadvantage on all attack rolls.

Weakening Mist: Make a constitution saving throw. On a failure, take exhaustion equal to 6 - your proficiency bonus.

Skill Absorption: Make a charisma saving throw. Your proficiency bonus drops by 1, and the creature's increases by 1. When your proficiency bonus drops to 0, you become paralyzed.

I like the idea of keying certain monster traits off of prof. bonus. I like that it works for PCs and monsters too. Nice idea - I might have to borrow it!

 

[jmartkdr2]

CaW = combat as war;
CaS = combat as sport;
CAP = combat as performance? Not sure of this one!

Yup. I brought that up.

For those who missed it: it's when the combat isn't about challenge, but about showing off your character. That could mean the cool thing this crazy build can do, or a narrative thing that ties to your story. Winning or losing is incidental to the point of the scene.

It's not war, or even a sport: it's just a show.

 

[ad_hoc]

Yup. I brought that up.

For those who missed it: it's when the combat isn't about challenge, but about showing off your character. That could mean the cool thing this crazy build can do, or a narrative thing that ties to your story. Winning or losing is incidental to the point of the scene.

It's not war, or even a sport: it's just a show.

This is the first I've heard the term but it makes sense.

A lot of groups play that way and not CaS or CaW so it's good to have another term for it. Both the 'theatre kids' type of player as well as the 'optimizers' use Combat as Performance.

Fundamentally what probably separates the theatre kids and the optimizers is that the former care about how their characters work together while the latter are in competition with each other to see who can show off the most during the combat. I could still have fun in a theatre kids game but an optimizers game would turn me off.

Still, my preferred gaming is Combat As War. When starting a new campaign I often have new players fill out the group but through it all I am thankful I have had at least 1 player from a previous game go to the next one. This is important so the players know that TPKs really can and do happen.

I still have players who are looking for that heroic fantasy of always charging in no matter the perceived danger only to die horribly. If they know there is a chance they can die it's all good. If they have the expectation that things will be nudged so they are not actually in danger then there can be hurt feelings.

I don't like when DMs pretend that things are dangerous when they know full well that they're going to ensure everyone will be alright. I think we can still have Combat as Performance when everyone knows the conclusion is foregone, it's just how we get there that is the fun part. The DM lying to the players is a no go and I think may be why in part no matter how much we warn some players at my table that they really could die if they do the thing they are still shocked when their character really does die.

 

[Lyxen]

A lot of groups play that way and not CaS or CaW so it's good to have another term for it. Both the 'theatre kids' type of player as well as the 'optimizers' use Combat as Performance.

Are you sure about the latter ? Most of the ones I've met are CaS, I think...

 

[jmartkdr2]

Are you sure about the latter ? Most of the ones I've met are CaS, I think...

At a table of only optimizers, I think you'll most likely end up at CaS. But at a table with assorted playstyles, optimizers will want to show off their cool tricks at least, and as a dm I'm inclined to let them do so at least once. Even in game that's mostly CaW. It's fun for them.

 

[HammerMan]

Yes, it is, I've tried. The fact is that 4e powers are all combat orientated, there is nothing in the classes for exploration or social apart from skills. Rituals take too long and too many resources. So yes, it is harder, it was definitely harder for our style of play.

sigh...okay, lets dispel some of your lies first...

at 2nd level everyone got utility powers they get to choose from some non damaging combat abilities and other more role play socol or exploration abilities

wizard cantrips where all non combat.

remember those rituals that both A can't help you cause they can't be done in combat, and B don't fit your style.

90% of the social/exploration IS skills in every edition..,. including 5e. What class feature does fighter get that is for exploration in 5e? what about social? (and again negating skills) what about the rogue? The ranger and druid gets class features that do, and of course (because spells rule everything) spells CAN be other things...

You don't like 4e, that is fine. I don't care if you do or not, but don't like it don't pretend that there is no way to play Combat as War in 4e...there is. Again my BEST 4e game went multi levels with 0 combat.

 

[Lyxen]

sigh...okay, lets dispel some of your lies first...

Let's see who lies, my friend...

at 2nd level everyone got utility powers they get to choose from some non damaging combat abilities and other more role play socol or exploration abilities

Oh yes, I went back to the PH, and I looked at the first so called utility power:

• Bless: Effect: Until the end of the encounter, all targets gain a +1 power bonus to attack rolls.

Oh yes, so much social and exploration.

Out of curiosity, I went for the whole list of the cleric:

• Cure Light Wounds: The target regains hit points as if it had spent a healing surge.
• Divine Aid: The target makes a saving throw with a bonus equal to your Charisma modifier.
• Sanctuary: The target receives a +5 bonus to all defenses. The effect lasts until the target attacks or until the end of your next turn.
• Shield of Faith: The targets gain a +2 power bonus to AC until the end of the encounter.

All of these are linked to combat, except maybe Cure LIght Wounds, but not ONE of them is linked to exploration and even less social. So now who is the liar, pray tell ?

wizard cantrips where all non combat.

Ah yes, cantrips, great, all 4 of them, so much power for exploration and social... And all from one class. Fantastic.

remember those rituals that both A can't help you cause they can't be done in combat, and B don't fit your style.

As I've mentioned, rituals have many drawbacks, in particular the fact that they are very slow and cost a lot. That being said, I agree that rituals were one of the fine inventions of 4e, but still most of them are fairly useless. Come on, Discern lies allows you, after 10 minutes of rituals, to discern lies for 5 minutes ?

90% of the social/exploration IS skills in every edition..,. including 5e. What class feature does fighter get that is for exploration in 5e? what about social? (and again negating skills) what about the rogue? The ranger and druid gets class features that do, and of course (because spells rule everything) spells CAN be other things...

in 5e all classes have powers, a lot of them non-combat, in addition to the spells that many classes have.

You don't like 4e, that is fine. I don't care if you do or not, but don't like it don't pretend that there is no way to play Combat as War in 4e...there is. Again my BEST 4e game went multi levels with 0 combat.

Then what were you playing 4e for ? Again, I'm not saying that it's impossible to do what you did, but then, what was the point of playing 4e, of having a balanced system for all classes in combat, of burdening yourself with all these powers that were never used ? And where, in fact, the extremely few non-combat abilities were even more concentrated on a few classes than in other editions ?

 

[HammerMan]

in 5e all classes have powers, a lot of them non-combat, in addition to the spells that many classes have.



Then what were you playing 4e for ? Again, I'm not saying that it's impossible to do what you did, but then, what was the point of playing 4e, of having a balanced system for all classes in combat, of burdening yourself with all these powers that were never used ? And where, in fact, the extremely few non-combat abilities were even more concentrated on a few classes than in other editions ?

so funny you ignore that other then skill rogues and fighters get 0 exploration and 0 social abilities...

as for why we used 4e (and why I still like it in many ways better then 5e) is those powers you dislike, allow me to make a warlord (the class) who is a smart fighter instead of a strong one... and a charismatic one too... I can take some skills some rituals and some utility and then be as useful as a cleric AND STILL NOT use magic...


Especially when reflavoring for a modern "Urban arcane" setting 4e works way better then any other D&D game.

I see 4e 3e 2e 5e Basic alll being the exact same amount of each 'pillar' as they call it now...the thing is 4e does away with caster supremacy that every other edition has.

why wouldn't I use ANY RPG for role playing? it is in the name it is the RP part of RPG