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

[Kesh]

Oh boy can I see the "DM's fiat" flames rising from a concept like that. I have to admit, I much prefer something like "recharge takes 1 standard round/1 minute" or something like that, because that's less cause for heated arguments (and don't anybody tell me roleplayers are reasonable adults who are able to come to calm solutions about stuff like that ) than something like "The DM will tell you when an encounter has finished and you can recharge your abilities".

It won't make a difference. If it's "1 minute of rest" the DM just has to say "you can't rest now."

"Why not?"

"Because… (insert unreasonable explanation here)"

DM fiat isn't something the rules can fix.

 

[Geron Raveneye]

It won't make a difference. If it's "1 minute of rest" the DM just has to say "you can't rest now."

"Why not?"

"Because… (insert unreasonable explanation here)"

DM fiat isn't something the rules can fix.

Yeah...you know that, I know that, and those who play long enough know that as well. But there's 5 years of arguing around 3.X by now that taught me plenty of people actually believe the rules not only can but must fix DM's fiat, even if it means eliminating the job of DM, and that the DM should play second fiddle to the RAW. And the slightest hint of a mechanism that will strengthen the DM's control over something that affects the player character will be greeted by a Greek Fire barrage from exactly that crowd. Rules Lawyers are much nicer, compared...you can always trust them to try and argue the most advantage out of anything, and some even admit defeat when you confront them with a clear rule.

 

[Imaro]

Here's some thoughts I had on per encounter abilities, they relate to the two posts below on anothe thread, but seem appropriate here as well...

Quote:
Originally Posted by gizmo33
So what happens here? That hitpoints (and by extension healing magic) become the only significant resource, or do even they respawn with a moment's rest? If the party never feels the need to retreat, then basically all possible 4E outcomes boil down to victory or death?





Quote:
Originally Posted by Patryn of Elvenshae
In Saga terms, the Jedi can certainly attack with his lightsaber every round and can continue to do so as long as he has Hit Points. However, using a properly timed and placed Force Slam to beat up a horde of battle droids / clone troopers / stormtroopers is fun. And being able to do that once or twice in each combat is fun. Being able to do that once a day is less fun (because it's less likely you'll use it or more likely that once you use it it'll be time to take a sizeable break).



I wanted to comment on these two posts. I bought Star Wars SE and have found a problem, at least IMHO, with the whole replenishing encounters, and it is exactly what gizmo33 states above. With very little resources to waste, the "mook" encounters serve no purpose but scenery with the most risk coming from random occurences like max damage rolled or a critical hit on the players...otherwise these encounters really require very little tactical thought or strategy to beat. In essence my players(mostly jedi and one soldier) threw hella force powers at the "mooks" and obliterated them as long as they're initiative was high enough. They didn't have to worry at all about resource management since, as long as they lived, they'd be a-ok(all their power refreshed in the next encounter).

While the "Big Bad" encounters require tactics and strategy, it really becomes an all or nothing type thing with the encounters. If you waste your resources without thought on the BB encounter, then you'll probably die. It's a little jarring actually, since the two modes of play don't mesh or complement(in the case of teaching actual strategy with less dangerous encounters) very well.

This is something that kind of turned me off Star Wars(though there is still enough in the realm of streamlining that I would play it again). I found the "mook" encounters a total bore as GM, and after enough play I think my players began to look at them as little more than an anoyance to get to the BB. I guess this is great for Star Wars, ut I worry about it in D&D.

 

[FickleGM]

I would have no problem with a character resting for a minute within an encounter to regain a spent ability, if resting is a feasible option. I don't think that it would be feasible for the majority of encounters, but if the character can find a way, then more power to him. If said character rejoined the encounter, for that character it would be a new encounter and he would roll his initiative accordingly.

 

[Raven Crowking]

In practice, yes, because you can intuit when the encounter (an episode of significant interaction with the environment) begins and ends, without having to worry about counting timers.

(And no, it doesn't have to be hard to keep track of time. It can be as simple as keeping track of the total rounds spent in combat, and if it goes above a certain number, the party loses. It's an abstract solution, but if handled well, the players never have to notice.)

 

[Stalker0]

I wanted to comment on these two posts. I bought Star Wars SE and have found a problem, at least IMHO, with the whole replenishing encounters, and it is exactly what gizmo33 states above. With very little resources to waste, the "mook" encounters serve no purpose but scenery with the most risk coming from random occurences like max damage rolled or a critical hit on the players...otherwise these encounters really require very little tactical thought or strategy to beat. In essence my players(mostly jedi and one soldier) threw hella force powers at the "mooks" and obliterated them as long as they're initiative was high enough. They didn't have to worry at all about resource management since, as long as they lived, they'd be a-ok(all their power refreshed in the next encounter).

That is the exact purpose of mook encounters. Mooks are there to make the pcs look good, to let them try crazy stuff just because it sounds neat even if it isn't the best mechanical use of their actions, because they don't need to optimize to win these encounters. If you don't want to run these encounters just don't use mooks.

To me, the main advantage of the encounter system is for many adventures I only want to have a couple of combats. Now each can be important and memorable, I don't have to burn off the parties resources in order to provide challenge.

This is more and more important at high levels. If you don't drain the parties resources they will dominate, but if throw something with a strong enough CR to challenge them at full resources, you run a strong chance of annihilating them.

 

[hong]

(And no, it doesn't have to be hard to keep track of time. It can be as simple as keeping track of the total rounds spent in combat, and if it goes above a certain number, the party loses. It's an abstract solution, but if handled well, the players never have to notice.)

Now, now. The circumstance in which time is a critical resource is an isolated one, and I am sure you did not mean to imply it should be treated as critical when it actually isn't.

 

[Imaro]

That is the exact purpose of mook encounters. Mooks are there to make the pcs look good, to let them try crazy stuff just because it sounds neat even if it isn't the best mechanical use of their actions, because they don't need to optimize to win these encounters. If you don't want to run these encounters just don't use mooks.

To me, the main advantage of the encounter system is for many adventures I only want to have a couple of combats. Now each can be important and memorable, I don't have to burn off the parties resources in order to provide challenge.

This is more and more important at high levels. If you don't drain the parties resources they will dominate, but if throw something with a strong enough CR to challenge them at full resources, you run a strong chance of annihilating them.

Okay, first off a stormtrooper isn't designated as a mook(actually CL 1), I'm using that term because that's what they were like in play. If this is part of D&D 4e I hope more advice and guidance on structuring challenging encounters vs. auto-win/die being the only challenging encounters, will be in the DMG.

Second, even if you want to have only a few encounters(under the per-day paradigm)...can't you just scale the encounters to a higher difficulty and still provide a challenge with fewer actual fights, or have a bunch of encouters that whittle away the PC's resources but aren't automatically win or die?

Third...Totally agree, but in SW I was running into this problem at low levels as well.

 

[Geron Raveneye]

Just as a thought experiment, would it be possible to create a bridge between "per encounter" abilities and "per day" abilities by using the current system of magic with slightly different spells?

Imagine, for example, a 1st level spell called Cantrip that has a duration of 1 hour/level and enables a caster to use any of the 0 level spells, 1/round and 1 at the same time only.

Or a Magic Missile spell that isn't insta-hit but requires a ranged touch attack, has a medium range, a duration of 1 hour/level and allows a caster to create 1 force missile and fire it off as a standard action, causing 1d4+1 points of damage on a successful ranged touch attack? Maybe add an option that allows him to discharge 1 hour worth of missiles (600 if my math doesn't fail me) to create a burst effect that causes 1d4+1 points of damage to every creature in a 30' radius?

Would those spells be overpowering as 1st level spells? Would it change the current gameplay drastically? The caster still has to manage a spell slot as resource, but gets longer use out of it. A bit like the old Melf's Minute Meteors, only with a longer duration (1 hour vs. 1 round/level).

 

[Raven Crowking]

Now, now. The circumstance in which time is a critical resource is an isolated one, and I am sure you did not mean to imply it should be treated as critical when it actually isn't.

No, I meant to imply that keeping track of time isn't really a major problem, and that therefore your objection on that basis to just saying "reset with 1 minute's rest" if that is what is meant is nonsensical.

RC