D&D 4E 4e Special Ability PER Encounter stinks...

[Aloïsius]

Again, how long is that exactly. 10 minutes, 1 hour, or what? I like specifc time tables, especially when it comes to character abilities and spells.

It's not time based, it's event based. Did you had the time to "cool down" have a small pause, loot the body, heal your wounds etc... ? Then this encounters is over, and you will have replenished your potential the next time.

In some ways it seems better (more movie-like) but I usually prefer adventures to be book-like. All in all, I think it's probably still possible to have the book-like,

Wich books ? Except from LotR, fantasy is often about the heroes overcoming dozen of foes. Just read the D&D classical "drizzt stories...In one of them, the heroes are cutting through a whole drow city.

 

[Geron Raveneye]

If this means that paladins can "fall" for a specified number of encounters, I'm all for it!

It's not the number of falls that make a paladin a blackguard...but the one after which he doesn't pick himself out of the mud again.

 

[Baby Samurai]

Actually, it is the opposite for me – I usually throw too little at the party, in that I often might only throw one combat encounter in a day against the party, which means the casters can go ape-crap in that encounter. And don’t give me the ‘But they should track their resources because they don’t know if there will be another encounter that day’. When a party wants to rest they can usually find a way to, especially at higher levels. Also, the party shouldn’t have to worry about these encounters that “may” or may not happen, it ruins suspension of disbelief

“Well, I figure the DM needs to throw one more encounter against us to meet the quota…"

And this brings up another point, I don’t want to have to feel contrived into throwing X encounters a day at a party, if I want to throw 1, or 13 encounters against the party, the rules should be balanced to accommodate that as the adventure/story/dungeon etc demands.

This assumed 4 encounters day malarkey has got to be one of the most arbitrary, and odd design decisions I’ve ever heard of – lame.

And the overpowered, antiquated, Pseudo-Vancian, Gygaxian magic/spell system has been a thorn in my side for 20 years – always loathed it.

 

[amethal]

"Encounter" = "opportunity to interact in a significant way with the environment"

You don't need WotC to give you a definition.

You don't, and I don't, but apparently for some people it opens the door for the dreaded "DM fiat".

DM's using their judgement is a good thing; its why I game with human beings rather than computers, even though computers are much better at remembering rules. Humans can make judgements, and in my opinion "has the encounter ended?" is going to a very easy judgement in 99% of cases.

I also expect WotC to give lots of examples to help people make the decision in the other 1% of cases.

I'm currently playing a binder in a 3.5 game, and to show my support for the new rules I'm going to voluntarily restrict my "once every 5 rounds" powers to once per encounter from now on and save myself some bookkeeping.

 

[Li Shenron]

Wich books ? Except from LotR, fantasy is often about the heroes overcoming dozen of foes. Just read the D&D classical "drizzt stories...In one of them, the heroes are cutting through a whole drow city.

Yeah, you're right I am thinking mostly about classic literature rather than FR literature which in fact I have never read.

But usually even those cases where a hero cuts through an army are because the hero is vastly superior to anyone in the army. In a per-encounter game (or a CRPG like WoW) a hero needs only be slightly superior to each foe to cut through the army.

 

[F4NBOY]

Mouseferatu has already quoted it, and I'll quote it again, because it needs saying and thinking about.

I think that the whole thread has started off on the wrong foot. It is taking the assumption that 'per encounter' means that you've automatically got the abilities available at the start of each encounter and thus divides into the minutae of 'what is an encounter'



SWSE has 'per encounter' abilities because once you've used them, you can't reuse them until you've had the chance to recharge them, and the recharge time is long enough that it is very unlikely to crop up during an actual encounter.

Of course, they could have referred to 'recharge out of encounter' abilities, but that doesn't have the immediate impact of 'per encounter'; it is a more complex way of saying something that doesn't necessarily bring anything extra to the party (although obviously it might have forestalled some discussion along these lines!)

Cheers

Few people paid attention to your post.
Unfortunatelly for some people reason is not as fun as bash-on-guesses can be.

 

[ruleslawyer]

Yeah, you're right I am thinking mostly about classic literature rather than FR literature which in fact I have never read.

But usually even those cases where a hero cuts through an army are because the hero is vastly superior to anyone in the army. In a per-encounter game (or a CRPG like WoW) a hero needs only be slightly superior to each foe to cut through the army.

How is this true? An encounter with an army is one encounter.

If yo prefer, "once per encounter" is easy enough to houserule to "once until you rest for one full minute to replenish the ability." That gives you the "A balrog. And I am already weary." scenario, as well as the ability to pace adventures a bit faster.

 

[Nebulous]

Let's remember that in 3x only the barb has the per encounter mechanic for anything. Since 4e will likely use this mechanic more often, I'm sure they will take a little time to clarify what an encounter should mean.

They definitely will have to clarify some more. Now that i think about it, the definition of an actual "encounter" is hazy in my mind. I can see arguments ensuing between a DM and player as to when his special powers should have "recharged." What about two different fights in two adjacent rooms, where let's say a span of 10 seconds maybe passes? Is that one encounter, or just a continuation of the previous one? What if the PC's know there are orcs behind the door? What if the orcs know the PC's are there?

 

[Raven Crowking]

Maybe he meant two hours of real time, to play out the however-many-rounds of combat?

Sounds like about six to ten rounds to me.....

Put me in the camp that says "Some abilities are approriate for per encounter, some are not" with the caveat that I know that some will disagree with me as to which are which.

I would also say that, where per encounter mechanics exist, I'd like to have a reason why they exist per encounter. For example, if the barbarian rages, then when the rage is over he is exhausted, therefore he cannot rage again. That works for me. The paladin being able to heal once per encounter doesn't work for me. Why can't he heal more?

In the "per day" paradigm, the paladin's deity (or whatever) grants certain resources on a regular basis, and presumably has enough to do so that this process is automated or semi-automated. The implication is that the paladin has limited healing because the power that grants said healing isn't paying strict attention all the time. If, OTOH, this becomes a per encounter power, the implication (to me) is that the deity is paying attention, doles out healing once, withholds it thereafter, and then waits for some arbitrary point where the paladin can "refocus" (read "plead for more healing power").

I know that there are as many ways to interpret this as there are people to do the interpretting, but this is what that would feel like to me.


RC

RC

 

[Raven Crowking]

If a DM does anything like send another wave of goblins every nine rounds so the per encounter abilities can't refresh then that DM is being a dick.

I politely disagree.