Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mercurius" data-source="post: 5789368" data-attributes="member: 59082">[MENTION=54846]Rechan[/MENTION], I realize that most of the specific problems have solutions, some of which I implemented when I was DMing. My default plan still is to start a new 4E campaign with those in mind, thus a more house ruled 4E. For instance, grind isn't much of a problem anymore because I was just lowering monster HP and/or implementing "kill-shots" when it became clear that a monster was going down anyway and it suited dramatic purposes (In other words, if a 282 HP monster had been reduced to 67 HP and a PC got a crit and did 52 HP, I'd call that monster kaput, or at least describe it as falling to the ground, trying to limp off, but then collapsing, unconscious, and they could finish it off). I am also planning on making magic items rarer but more powerful and interesting. Etc.Now the problem that I can't get around, perhaps because it is so intrinsic to 4E, is the reliance on the power system itself. On one hand, I like powers - I like the fact that a ranger or a fighter has cool things they can do, or that a rogue isn't simply "backstab or zilch" in combat (although our party rogue is all about getting combat advantage, to the point that it irritates the rest of the group). I really like the idea of power sources, which--at least in theory--brings a kind of magical quality to a world, that all adventurers can "tap into" a different kind of energy and channel it into their actions. But what I'm struggling with is a feeling more than anything else that I think results from the power system, a feeling of claustrophobia derived not as much from the number of options but from being limited to a pre-set option.Specifically, I'm talking what could be called the process of "diminishing powers" in combat. In most combats I start by using my Encounter powers first and then, if things are looking bad, going to Daily powers or, if the combat is winding down, using At-Wills. But it feels like old spellcasters use to feel: you're looking at a list of powers and crossing them off as you use them. There is nothing wrong with that, it is just that it is hard to break out of the box and do something that isn't a power (but can still be as effective as a power). Furthermore, once you use your great powers it is less exciting to use your at-wills (going from Attacks on the Run to Twin Strike is rather anticlimactic). I know, page 42, right? That's a paradigm shift that's hard to make and for which there isn't a ton of guidance, especially in terms of combat. About a year and a half ago I tried to institute what I was calling a "stunt power" or a "spontaneous power," telling the players that they could make up a power on the fly, improvise something, and depending upon how creative their description was, I would award a certain effect (e.g. whether it was 2W or 3W, any condition it might cause, etc). No one, not once, took me up on it and it soon faded away into distant memory.This is where I see powers as being somewhat--in a very rudimentary sense--"video gamey": by giving pre-set options they limit or, at least, don't encourage creative thinking and improvisation. In some sense I'd rather see powers vanish, spells return, and non-spellcasting characters get some kind of "power points" or "stunt points" that they can buff actions with. This would lead to the same result in terms of more elaborate effects that powers give, but leaves it in the hands of the players to come up with cool actions. I have barely thought this through, but here would be a comparative example:4E approach:I use Attacks on the Run and move seven squares, firing two arrows here and here, doing 3W + Dex damage each.New approach:I dart towards and past my enemy, firing two arrows while I'm running, spending four power points to buff my damage to 3W for each.I'm not talking about the difference in description - they're both relative sparse and about the same; what I'm talking about is whether I'm choosing a pre-set option (a power, Attacks on the Run) or whether I'm visualizing an action and then using a game mechanic to boost the damage capacity. I'm not even sure if there is any RPG with a system like that, but I do think it could work within the framework of 4E.In some ways I feel that 4E has accomplished the opposite of what it intended by giving more powers for non-casters to use. If a fighter has seven power choices rather than one, that seems like more options but the problem is that it is too easy to think "I have to choose one of these seven options" rather than "How can I spruce up my attack and do something cool?"I suppose the spellcasting equivalent would be the difference between pre-set spell lists and improvised casting. I like both, but I want more flexibility and guidelines for doing the latter. In the same sense that, in martial combat, I like having cool maneuvers or stunts that I can do, but I'd also like to be able to make stuff up on the fly and not have to assign a pre-set power to it. That is, I don't want to have to say: I run towards my opponent, fire an arrow, then dart to the side and leap off the wall, firing another arrow as I jump over my companion's head...uhh, I already used Attacks on the Run so I suppose that is Twin Strike?</blockquote>

Verification