D&D 4E Am I crazy? I've just gotten a hankering to play 4e again...

[AbdulAlhazred]

Right, I have to look at those threads some more, some of them I read years ago. But my initial feeling is that this is pretty accurate. I think a LOT of 4e powers and combat rules work fine, but they do tend to be designed to showcase things the players choose to do (IE the 'moves' they make) vs the circumstances they choose to act in. This could be a deep topic, it probably deserves a thread!

And reading in more depth.... I haven't really garnered any incredibly deeper insight. I think you're @pemerton pretty close to the mark. I want there to be plenty of rightward arrows. There are a lot of mechanical ways to accomplish that, so there's plenty of room to think about it. I need to go back and work on HoML 2.0 conceptually and see what I can come up with. Maybe it is worth creating a thread on. Sadly EnWorld doesn't seem to have a home for game design threads, really...

 

[pemerton]

And reading in more depth.... I haven't really garnered any incredibly deeper insight. I think you're @pemerton pretty close to the mark. I want there to be plenty of rightward arrows. There are a lot of mechanical ways to accomplish that, so there's plenty of room to think about it. I need to go back and work on HoML 2.0 conceptually and see what I can come up with. Maybe it is worth creating a thread on. Sadly EnWorld doesn't seem to have a home for game design threads, really...

Also leftward pointing arrows - so that mechanical processes generate fiction rather than just more numbers/rolls:

Eg

I try to hide => make a Stealth check

I'm hidden behind a bush <= I succeed on my check

I leap out from behind the bush to hit you => make an attack roll
It's an ambush! => get a bonus on the attack roll​

Whereas what you're wanting to avoid is

I try to hide => make a Stealth check

_____________{ I activate my "super stealthy strike" power
_____________{ I achieve the "hidden" game state and make an attack roll
_____________{ So I get a bonus on the attack roll​

(I'm using "_____________{" to try to signal cube-to-cube arrows with no leftwards arrows)

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Also leftward pointing arrows - so that mechanical processes generate fiction rather than just more numbers/rolls:

Eg

I try to hide => make a Stealth check​

​

I'm hidden behind a bush <= I succeed on my check​

​

I leap out from behind the bush to hit you => make an attack roll​

It's an ambush! => get a bonus on the attack roll​

Whereas what you're wanting to avoid is

I try to hide => make a Stealth check​

​

_____________{ I activate my "super stealthy strike" power​

_____________{ I achieve the "hidden" game state and make an attack roll​

_____________{ So I get a bonus on the attack roll​

(I'm using "_____________{" to try to signal cube-to-cube arrows with no leftwards arrows)

Pretty much. I mean, I'm not violently opposed to some of the later, if they have pretty strong narrative connotations such that we can clearly understand what they represent, and that such a sequence at least BEGINS with a rightward arrow (IE your 'Super Stealthy Strike' requires actual cover to start with, and isn't largely just achieved by use of some other power 'Hide In Plain Sight', although that last could be cool now and then). In fact, I would say, it is OK to have the leftward arrows be quite common when you can, say, impose a cost for using them in lieu of finding fictionally based 'rightward' circumstances. This is, in fact, what HoML does with 'practices', they are literally a way to substitute a different narrative such that you can A) impose a different attribute/skill more favorable to you (presumably) and B) invoke an explicit cost to change the fiction based on the narrative description of that practice.

I think this is actually pretty in keeping with other narratively focused 'story game' systems. PbtA goes a bit further, in that it lacks anything similar to a grid, and insists that every action be based entirely on fiction, with only limited leftward pointing arrows, and many of those being simply the list of moves you have in your playbook (although things like hold and certain tags also count).

 

[pemerton]

PbtA goes a bit further, in that it lacks anything similar to a grid, and insists that every action be based entirely on fiction, with only limited leftward pointing arrows, and many of those being simply the list of moves you have in your playbook (although things like hold and certain tags also count).

Leftward-pointing arrows in PbtA will be things like:

I charge the Orc, sword in hand => Make the Hack & Slash move, but first​

As you charge, you have no cover against the archers who are all around you => Make the Defy Danger move​

Arrows pincushion your mail, slowing you down and testing your fortitude <= The Defy Danger result is 6 or less​

______________________________________________________________________________=> Take -1 going forward​

_______________________________________________________________________________{The Hack & Slash result is 10+​

The Orc falls down dead!_____________________________________________________<=The damage roll exceeds the Orc's hp as listed by the GM​

(Sorry if the formatting is a bit wonky, but hopefully my arrows make sense, including that one cube-to-cube near the end, from damage roll to hp total which then triggers the leftward arrow back to the fiction. One thing about PbtA is that there is not a lot of cube-to-cube, but there is a bit: in DW there are hp; in AW there is the harm move and its relationship to the harm clock.)

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Leftward-pointing arrows in PbtA will be things like:

I charge the Orc, sword in hand => Make the Hack & Slash move, but first​

As you charge, you have no cover against the archers who are all around you => Make the Defy Danger move​

Arrows pincushion your mail, slowing you down and testing your fortitude <= The Defy Danger result is 6 or less​

______________________________________________________________________________=> Take -1 going forward​

_______________________________________________________________________________{The Hack & Slash result is 10+​

The Orc falls down dead!_____________________________________________________<=The damage roll exceeds the Orc's hp as listed by the GM​

(Sorry if the formatting is a bit wonky, but hopefully my arrows make sense, including that one cube-to-cube near the end, from damage roll to hp total which then triggers the leftward arrow back to the fiction. One thing about PbtA is that there is not a lot of cube-to-cube, but there is a bit: in DW there are hp; in AW there is the harm move and its relationship to the harm clock.)

Right, DW has a bit of combat mechanics, hit points, damage, DR, and how they interact with moves like Hack-N-Slash. You always get shunted quickly back to fiction. Certainly one thing DW (I assume most/all PbtA) lack is a lot of mechanics which set things up. In 4e you have "I move" and you change your mechanical and fictional location on the grid/in the world, and then that new position interacts with your options for an attack, for example. So, DW really is not very tactical at all, really that element is entirely missing in a pure game sense.

That is certainly a trait of 4e, it has a very strong game component. I like that aspect, especially since it doesn't seem to detract much from story, though some sub-par power design does exist.

 

[Garthanos]

Right, DW has a bit of combat mechanics, hit points, damage, DR, and how they interact with moves like Hack-N-Slash. You always get shunted quickly back to fiction. Certainly one thing DW (I assume most/all PbtA) lack is a lot of mechanics which set things up. In 4e you have "I move" and you change your mechanical and fictional location on the grid/in the world, and then that new position interacts with your options for an attack, for example. So, DW really is not very tactical at all, really that element is entirely missing in a pure game sense.

That is certainly a trait of 4e, it has a very strong game component. I like that aspect, especially since it doesn't seem to detract much from story, though some sub-par power design does exist.

The definition of tactical for me is that there is some cost benefit analysis which can be applied in actions taken and the situational results of them which as you mention set up subsequent actions (people need to remember this latter for good skill challenges too)

Bland bald faced hit point loss can result in fictional positioning (like with the bloodied and dying conditions ;p)

 

[nogray]

Well, current trend in conversations aside, I am the same sort of crazy as the OP. Just last week, my group restarted an epic 4e campaign that had been on hiatus for a year or so. I think this will be the "final push," taking the characters from 28-30 and resolving some epic destinies. I (as the DM) have a lot to plan out. I'm strangely looking forward to it. I plan on a lot of cosmology-shaking events in these coming levels. I believe I will start a thread on it later today or sometime tomorrow.

 

[Garthanos]

Umm just the act of forcing an enemy to pay part of its attention on defense in real life very much inhibits their ability to attack. If attacking targets by default reduced their chance to hit anyone... looks over at rattling effect.. well almost that requires a hit. But the threat of an attack distracting an enemy from attacking is a very real thing. It is one of the reasons deceptions are such a huge thing in tactics.

Flanking is related of course.

It occured to me that such an effect could have a generalized harder to fight multiple enemies at once, which in my action hero book is not such a good thing now maybe the hero is a threat or conductive of inducing caution in enemies near him while attacking anyone (sounds a bit like a fighter schtick)

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

It occured to me that such an effect could have a generalized harder to fight multiple enemies at once, which in my action hero book is not such a good thing now maybe the hero is a threat or conductive of inducing caution in enemies near him while attacking anyone (sounds a bit like a fighter schtick)

I could see there being some discipline which made you unflankable. Maybe not ALWAYS, but at least partly. Another way to implement stickiness of a sort would be something like "the space you control is difficult terrain." That actually comes fairly close to how Wardens often work IIRC, at least in practice.

 

[Garthanos]

I could see there being some discipline which made you unflankable. Maybe not ALWAYS, but at least partly. Another way to implement stickiness of a sort would be something like "the space you control is difficult terrain." That actually comes fairly close to how Wardens often work IIRC, at least in practice.

Perhaps a berserker when berserk might become unflankable... with Instinctual Awareness feat or some such

I adjusted the Deva ability to affect minions as though they were bloodied. It is a bit like the concept your awesomeness holds off your adversaries.