D&D 4E 4E is too balanced - options to replace all martial dailies?

[Mishihari Lord]

You keep saying that, but you're not really justifying it in any way. We get that this is your opinion, and lots of people disagree with you. I don't think anyone will be convinced either way.

Lots of people agree with him too. (raises hand)

If you say it's a random event, then why would the random event happen exactly when one of the combatants says it does? That's certainly not what happens in RL. If you say that the player rather than a character decides when a random event occurs, then you're giving the player a power that only the DM has in standard D&D. Either way it's not a reasonable simulation of combat, which is what I aim for in RPG combat. Sure you can say it's just a game deal with it. Some people are okay with that. I'm not. For me, if the combat system breaks my suspension of disbelief, I might as well be playing chess or tiddlywinks to resolve the conflict for all the verisimilitude it has.

 

[Camelot]

RPG magic can operate any way the group is willing to accept.

RPG physics can also operate any way the group is willing to accept.

In my world, a normal person can train themselves enough that they can perform feats of greatness that people in our world could only dream of. Of course, it requires a lot of training. Level 1 martial heroes already have a lot of training and are already able to perform amazing exploits.

 

[Droogie128]

Martial dailies make more sense if you break it down into time actually spent fighting. Say the average fight lasts 6 rounds (36 seconds), and you have a 4 encounter day, one of which is a skill challenge. That's less than 2 minutes game time of actual fighting. Saying that you get that one opportunity to really lay down the big hit during 108 seconds of fighting, in between all the bobbing and weaving, feinting, etc..... it's not too hard to swallow.

 

[Arlough]

Sorry about the ramble, earlier. Distractions and interruptions lead to a less focused post.

What I was trying to say is that Daily powers are your character taking advantage of that once per day opportunity.
The reason why you have control of it is because in 4e, you are not the character. In 4e, you are the character's personal writer/director, crating a cinematic story telling.
If you watch movies you will note that the hero doesn't use his mega-attack all the time. Wouldn't be cool, then. Also, if the attack required that someone gives the character that special opening, and everybody always gave that special opening, then the movie would be considered boring and unwatchable.

Basically, I am saying that Daily powers are that 1/100 opportunity, but because you are the writer/director, you get to choose the exact moment that opportunity occurs to have the greatest climactic effect.

My favorite, the Wuxi Finger Hold. Skadoosh.

 

[Saeviomagy]

If you say it's a random event, then why would the random event happen exactly when one of the combatants says it does? That's certainly not what happens in RL. If you say that the player rather than a character decides when a random event occurs, then you're giving the player a power that only the DM has in standard D&D. Either way it's not a reasonable simulation of combat, which is what I aim for in RPG combat.

'Standard' D&D doesn't enforce the DM as sole narrator. There's nothing stopping the players from contributing to the games narrative (and there's a substantial body of material that encourages those contributions). Just because the minis are on the table doesn't stop that.

 

[KahnyaGnorc]

For different versions of these "groove points," there's a few computer RPG examples that I can think of off-hand:

Dark Age of Camelot (among others): attack chains, you hit with one ability, which opens up the next one in the chain, which opens up the next one.

World of Warcraft: A few examples, warriors and tanking druids build up rage through attacks and getting attacked, which power their special abilities. Rogues and melee dps druids execute abilities that build combo points and finishers that turn those into bigger effects. Death Knights use Runes, that recharge over time, to do some abilities that build Runic Power, which is used for bigger abilities.

Lord of the Rings Online: Champions build "Fervour" with their smaller attacks and use them to power bigger attacks. Hunters, as long as they don't move, build "Focus" with their smaller attacks and use it for bigger ones. Wardens have 3 basic moves that they use to build combos, then release them in a more powerful "Gambit" attack.


Actually, the LotRO Warden example would be interesting. You'd have 3 At-Will Powers (A melee weapon attack, a shield bash, and a shout) and your more powerful attacks (normally, Encounter and Dailies) require a specific combination of those three be executed. Like, the weapon attack->shield bask->shout = one power unlocked, but those in a different order would unlock another power. Not sure how it would translate from a pseudo-real-time fight to a turn-based fight (or from electronic to PnP).

 

[I'm A Banana]

The "groove" system closely parallels the working FFZ Limit system I've got going. The idea is to raise the tension over time. Rather than let the player decide when the "ULTIMATE MOMENT" is, the DM sets it up and says, "Okay, now you can have an ultimate moment."

Another idea is to have Dailies cost Action Points, or only allow their use when you spend an action point (so you have your normal requisite actions and then, if you want, you can Action Point it and then blow a daily), which has the virtue of restoring after every couple of encounters.

The thing is that Dailies are sort of meant to be a nod to long-term resource management in older editions (which 4e largely got rid of), along with Healing Surges, so both of those do futz with that. However, 4e combats take so long that it's rarely an issue -- 4 per session is pretty high from what I've seen! Usually, it's 2-3, and then a "rest" before you break for the next session. So it's probably not a big deal.

If you wanted to add more LTR to 4e...that's a different thread.

 

[Mishihari Lord]

'Standard' D&D doesn't enforce the DM as sole narrator. There's nothing stopping the players from contributing to the games narrative (and there's a substantial body of material that encourages those contributions). Just because the minis are on the table doesn't stop that.

I don't recall seeing anything in the corebooks of any edition of D&D where a player is given narrative power. There are a lot of good games that do give players narrative power but D&D has never worked that way. Definitely not my cup of tea either.

 

[Mishihari Lord]

The reason why you have control of it is because in 4e, you are not the character. In 4e, you are the character's personal writer/director, crating a cinematic story telling.

That's quite true, and probably 4E's biggest break with previous editions. I really don't care for it though, which is why I'm interested in discussions like this that can involve taking things back the other way.

 

[Frankie1969]

I don't recall seeing anything in the corebooks of any edition of D&D where a player is given narrative power.

This is an interesting point, so I wanted to look it up. Not exactly, but fairly close, is Dude, Where's My Rule Zero?