blargney the second
blargney the minute's son
10. grog too dumb to realize grog can do thing more than once.
101 roleplaying descriptions justifying martial dailies
- Thread starter Aberzanzorax
- Start date
JoeGKushner
Adventurer
Style: It's all about style. If you pulled out the best at each and every attack, why, then it becomes just another common attack! You've got to do things with panche!
blargney the second
blargney the minute's son
Panic button. You freak out, close your eyes, and swing wildly. This cool move comes out but you have no idea how to reproduce it when you're not panicking.
I think some of the (narratively nifty) rationales miss the mark in that they don't reflect knowledge that choosing to do the trick more than once per day is actually not an option. That's like saying (even in previous editions) that a magician could cast more spells, but simply chooses not to.
blargney the second
blargney the minute's son
They don't ALL have to work for you. Just find the one that does and run with it.
It's more that none of those are to the point at all. "Just find the snorkel and flippers that work for you and run with them." Swim with them, certainly -- but if the person seeking equipment in this case could swim in 4E, then he would not need a way to run around the pool's edge (a slippery business).
Last edited:
Here's another idea, that may or may not work for you.
The idea is to accept that the encounter/daily use restrictions are a "real" physical phenomenon in the game world, albeit one that has no explanation that is known to the characters (or the players.)
Quote by OP:
I would argue that the implied claim, that if you don't have those "descriptions" as to what is "really" going on, then you are unable to effectively "roleplay," is not necessarily true. In real life, we deal with situations in which we don't have those "descriptions" all the time.
For example, consider when I use Microsoft Word and I click the "bold" icon, in order to make the text I am about to type bold. Now essentially we have a "rule" of the form "when the bold button is clicked, all typed text will show up bold until the bold button is clicked again" (okay, it could end up being a little more complicated but you get the idea.) Now what's the "fluff" that justifies this "rule" - i.e. what's the "description" of "really happening" when I click that icon? This question certainly has an answer (the state of some electrical circuit representing a bit in RAM changes, and Word checks that bit when I type in a character in order to decide how to display it) but I don't need to know anything about electrical circuits or RAM in order to use Word. When I use Word, I'm operating from a purely functional description (when you do this, this happens) rather than from any description about what's "really happening".
There are of course many other examples in real life. You don't have to know how a car's engine works in order to drive a car, nor do you have to know how radio communication works in order to use a cell phone. The point here is that we use purely functional descriptions in real life all the time, and our sense of "immersion" in real life doesn't seem to suffer, so there's no inherent reason why "immersion" in an RPG would have to suffer just because the character is operating from a purely functional description (this power only works the first time I try to use it in a day) rather than from a description about what's "really happening."
Of course, immersion is a subjective thing, so I'm not trying to say that anyone who has immersion problems is "not playing the game right" or anything like that. I'm just pointing out a new way of looking at the problem, that some players might find useful.
The idea is to accept that the encounter/daily use restrictions are a "real" physical phenomenon in the game world, albeit one that has no explanation that is known to the characters (or the players.)
Quote by OP:
I would argue that the implied claim, that if you don't have those "descriptions" as to what is "really" going on, then you are unable to effectively "roleplay," is not necessarily true. In real life, we deal with situations in which we don't have those "descriptions" all the time.
For example, consider when I use Microsoft Word and I click the "bold" icon, in order to make the text I am about to type bold. Now essentially we have a "rule" of the form "when the bold button is clicked, all typed text will show up bold until the bold button is clicked again" (okay, it could end up being a little more complicated but you get the idea.) Now what's the "fluff" that justifies this "rule" - i.e. what's the "description" of "really happening" when I click that icon? This question certainly has an answer (the state of some electrical circuit representing a bit in RAM changes, and Word checks that bit when I type in a character in order to decide how to display it) but I don't need to know anything about electrical circuits or RAM in order to use Word. When I use Word, I'm operating from a purely functional description (when you do this, this happens) rather than from any description about what's "really happening".
There are of course many other examples in real life. You don't have to know how a car's engine works in order to drive a car, nor do you have to know how radio communication works in order to use a cell phone. The point here is that we use purely functional descriptions in real life all the time, and our sense of "immersion" in real life doesn't seem to suffer, so there's no inherent reason why "immersion" in an RPG would have to suffer just because the character is operating from a purely functional description (this power only works the first time I try to use it in a day) rather than from a description about what's "really happening."
Of course, immersion is a subjective thing, so I'm not trying to say that anyone who has immersion problems is "not playing the game right" or anything like that. I'm just pointing out a new way of looking at the problem, that some players might find useful.
I think that the designers also had game balance in mind when they created these abilities. That is the reason why the ability is restricted. So, yeah, they probably thought: "It is cool that the Eye of Gruumsh can spit at their foes and blind them with it." But they also said: "Lets not make it too powerful and restrict the usage to once a day."
The same is true for the martial dailies in 4e.
If you cannot agree with the fact that 4e separates powers into at-will, encounter and dailies and the way the system is set up, then why are we arguing about it here? I agree with you that this is a big change from 3e. And if that makes you unable to play 4e, that is fine. I understand your point of view. I do not share it, though. To give you a personal example: I do not like Rolemaster very much and I can give you my reasons, if you ask me (at this point, they do not matter here or there or anywhere anyways). I do not play Rolemaster. End of story.
And I do not think that the supposed lack of believability in martial dailies is valid, because this thread already contains a lot of ways to explain them roleplayingwise. T
After all, this is what this thread is about. And I think a lot of these explanations are just great and I will use them. A big "Thank You!" to all those who posted them.
Here they are (I hope this makes copying them easier for those who want to use them, too):
1. The fighter has a great warrior as an ancestor. The ancestor can only provide brief glimpses of clarity when they are most needed, so the fighter calls upon him for battle advice, and so activates a daily.
2. The fighter must actually dislocate several joints to pull off a particular dextrous daily. It is painful and causes swelling that prevents those joints from dislocating again until they have been rested adequately.
3. The fighter's fortitude and strength is sufficient to do the maneuver only once a day. Think of a strongman contest. Maybe they can lift a car once, but after that, they've given their all. They are NOT lifting that maximum weight again until a nap and some breakfast.
4. The fighter's adrenaline reaches a crescendo. Like a 100 pound mom lifting an I beam off of her child's leg to escape a burning building, the fighter is only able to do this when the poop really hits the fan, and they are so driven by biochemical moxie that they step into another mindset entirely.
5. The secret is in the wrist. Most people don't use all the muscles in their arm, because the wrist and finger muscles are generally pretty weak. You've trained your wrist and finger muscles to, at the point of impact, push forward with that little extra bit of oomph, giving your attack FAR more follow through and power than you normally could achieve. However, this puts a lot of strain on your wrist, and if you tried it again without resting you risk breaking it.
6. The technique of your style was created by an Arkhosian warrior of old, taller and stronger than any man. The strikes have speed and power that are nearly godlike. Unfortunately, you're an elf. Though strong, your power can't match his, and your build is just too different. The most potent techniques of the style put enormous strain on your light body, tearing apart your muscles as you use it.
7. Useful for a speed move like Cascade of Blows: It's a well known fact that you should time your strikes with your breath. Exhaling as you strike gives you greater power and speed, inhaling as you retract and parry gives you greater muscle tension for defense. A perfect internal timer for the flow of battle. However, there's another internal timer: Your heart. Timing your strikes to your heartbeat allows you to strike mulitiple times in the space of a few seconds. Do I really need to go into why keeping this up is a bad idea?
8. As I offered in the other thread: gifts of the gods. As in Greek mythology, heroes and monsters are pieces in games of the gods. The powers have arbitrary effects because they are miraculous, and arbitrary limitations because that's part of the game the gods play. Does every goodwife and ploughman get such abilities? No -- only those chosen to play roles requiring them, in the heroes' sagas.
9. Heroes bind spirits to their service, the terms of which are as in the 4E rules. See RuneQuest, especially Cults of Prax, for general "flavor" that may be inspirational. Drawing again on RQ, different classes (or builds within a class) might involve different Runes.
10. Situational Awareness: Once the enemies see an encounter power used, they're on their guard against it.
11. Combat Awareness: Dailies are such complex moves that the user has to rest and practice it again before he can put it to effective use again.
12. Honour. You've learned an incredibly powerful move, but you will lose honour if you use it on anything but the most powerful of foes.
13. Too damn strong. You damage your weapon whenever you use that move, so you have to take several hours to fix it when your party camps. (Works best if you are bound to a specific weapon.)
14. Future Sight: You glimpse what your enemy will do ahead of time and unleash a devistating attack on him before he can make his move.
15. Hidden Discipline: Unlike the moves every upstart knowns, if you unleash your best abilities too often it gives enemies the opportunity to copy and counter them. Them must be husbanded for only the times deemed necessary.
16. grog too dumb to realize grog can do thing more than once.
17. Style: It's all about style. If you pulled out the best at each and every attack, why, then it becomes just another common attack! You've got to do things with panche!
18. Panic button. You freak out, close your eyes, and swing wildly. This cool move comes out but you have no idea how to reproduce it when you're not panicking.
Now, if there is nothing to your liking, it would seem you have a general problem with the system. That is ok, too. But then this thread has nothing to offer to you at this point, in my very personal opinion.
Last edited:
blargney the second
blargney the minute's son
19. You get in the zone.
No, I am not playing 4e now. There are elements that I really like, but those one's I don't are enough to keep me from, currently, playing it. However, I do keep an eye out at third party products and people's house rules. I even keep an eye out at a few WOTC products.
The above is pretty much how I got into 3e. I like a lot of 3e core, but the things I did not like kept me from playing it. Then, UA came out and between that and a few third party products, I had what I needed to really get into 3e- just 3e house ruled to do what I wanted.
If the same happens with 4e, I'll give it another look. In the meantime, I'll play/run a modified 3e, and play both Rolemaster and Ars Magica. I might also be willing to run Warriors and Warlocks for fantasy as I like M&M (I haven't seen W&W). Then again, I am also very picky about the mechanics that I like.
