Ampersand: Sneak Attack

[ajanders]

They haven't yet bothered to put the precise definition in any of their previews, but from the Book of Nine Swords, it seems as if they are willing to make a relatively "fixed" definition. They might not say "a encounter is a 120 seconds time span", but they will probably define something like "after 1 to 5 minutes of rest (or at least non-fighting), you can recover your per encounter powers. Which also means that you can still play a "war of attrition" with per encounter powers by sending waves of enemies in short order. Obviously, this should be used with care.
[deletia]

In terms of the versimilitude, I understand the concept of, for example, invoking a magical power that lasts "only a few minutes" -- one two minute encounter, for example.
It's when the power lasted two minutes this morning, five minutes this afternoon, and pooped out after thirty seconds yesterday that my disbelief senses start tingling.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

In terms of the versimilitude, I understand the concept of, for example, invoking a magical power that lasts "only a few minutes" -- one two minute encounter, for example.
It's when the power lasted two minutes this morning, five minutes this afternoon, and pooped out after thirty seconds yesterday that my disbelief senses start tingling.

Or it always lasts approximately (though probably not exactly) the same, unspecified time, and you were only fighting for two minutes, five minutes, or thirty seconds...after which the duration of the power becomes unimportant because it certainly didn't last long enough to make it to the next event at which it would be useful.

Also, I think that it would be more accurate to say it lasted 12 seconds, 36 seconds, or 6 seconds, since if it's a per-encounter power those are more likely durations than 5 minutes. That's 50 rounds. Assume that the power lasts about 3 minutes (give or take) and you're covered.

 

[Incenjucar]

In terms of the versimilitude, I understand the concept of, for example, invoking a magical power that lasts "only a few minutes" -- one two minute encounter, for example.
It's when the power lasted two minutes this morning, five minutes this afternoon, and pooped out after thirty seconds yesterday that my disbelief senses start tingling.

Consider it from the angle of adrenaline. Once the combat is over, it crashes, regardless of how long the combat is. Magic has no reason to NOT function in a similar way.

 

[Tusz]

Consider it from the angle of adrenaline. Once the combat is over, it crashes, regardless of how long the combat is. Magic has no reason to NOT function in a similar way.

That's what I'm thinking. The effect lasts as long as the caster remains focused on the effect, but this is mentally taxing and can't be maintained for more than a couple minutes before the energies start to pan-fry the mage's brain.

 

[Hjorimir]

Those are explicitly abstract. They give only final numbers; they don't describe actions. An "attack" in most versions of D&D is not explicitly described; it's a mix of feints, parries, twists, and so on. You roll the dice, look at the numbers, and reverse-engineer to describe the action.

Other things are more 'real'. A bow attack, for example, uses one arrow per roll -- it cannot be described as an abstraction showing multiple attacks. If you grapple someone, you have him held. You have your arms (or whatever) around him. The move to grapple might be abstracted, but the final result is not -- he's either grrappled, or he isn't. A bull rush, or the rogue maneuver descrived earlier, is 'real', in that someone is really moved X squares..he's not subject to an abstract, unmapped 'positional defect'[1].

So while it's easy to imagine a three foot halfling managing to slice open a dragon's throat when the dragon leans down to snap at him (because there are no explicit rules for hit location, and size differences are calculated in armor class and damage), it's much harder to imagine that same halfling bull-rushing the dragon off a cliff without the use of 'magic' or special training'. (Working in size and strength modifiers to the check, I'm not sure even a 20th level fighter could do it to a CR 20 dragon, but I'm not sure...) The dragon 'really moves' -- he's now X squares away from where he was.

The manuevers in 4e are described in fairly explicit fashion, and their effects often involve moving or shifting targets. The strain of coming up with 'believable' (not necessarily 'realistic') descriptions for these manuevers might prove taxing for many groups, when you have to do it over and over and over, and not get repetitive or boring. ("So, the dragon tried to bite me and misjudged and tumbled tail-over-head 5 squares...again?")

We'll see. The problem is, D&D combat is very much NOT 'shift your brain in neutral'. It's detailed, complex, and tactical. It's a wonderful system. 4e looks to be every bit as crunchy. This means that you're constantly shifting between detailed resolution and abstract description, and the more barriers there are to making that shift, the less fun combat becomes.

You lost me as soon as you suggested that your character's bow attack is more 'real' than gravity.

 

[Hjorimir]

Personally, I think realism absolutely should be chucked out as worthless. Whereas I think verisimilitude is useful. Since this is a semantic point, I'm defining realism here as "fidelity to real life" and verisimilitude as "having internal consistency". The D&D world is so basically separated from our world that I think a search for realism in some areas is meaningless. In a world where cats can kill commoners, ravens fly at a quarter the speed of ravens in our world, and gravity doesn't work the same way, trying to get realistic doesn't make sense to me. But internal consistency is something I like. When you're reading Beowulf and he can hold his breath underwater for hours and swim in full plate, that's utterly unrealistic, but it does seem internally consistent for the world Beowulf lives in.

What he said...

 

[ZombieRoboNinja]

Regarding the complains some people have that Stealth and Thievery are fixed skills, I think that goes to the stated design philosophy of all characters being good at their basic role as a fixed starting point. If you're playing a Rogue, no matter what else you do, you're at least good at being sneaky and light-fingered tricks. As they've said, it's so there's less of a system mastery requirement to not-suck by missing out on an essential class skill or ability.

I'm thinking that this is a way to flesh out some less "skilled" classes as well.

For example, I'm betting fighters get Intimidate as a standard trained skill (along with Athletics). In 3e plenty of fighters wouldn't bother spending precious skill points on social stuff, but by making it a "freebie" (or mandatory, depending on your outlook), fighters get an automatic niche in social encounters. (Likewise with paladins getting Diplomacy, clerics getting Religion, warlords getting History, etc.)

Conversely, by focusing the rogue's skills on thievery and stealth to some degree, the class becomes less of an abstract "skill monkey." You should be picking a rogue because you want to act roguish, not because you want 8+Int skills for your noble diplomat (goes the 4e logic).

 

[ajanders]

Consider it from the angle of adrenaline. Once the combat is over, it crashes, regardless of how long the combat is. Magic has no reason to NOT function in a similar way.

Adrenalin - or endurance, or strength, or whatever - does wear off in the middle of combats.
That's actually a perfectly valid tactic for winning fights: put up a full defense until your opponent gets tired, then hit them.
It's called the "Homer Simpson."
How do you outlast a power that lasts "as long as the fight does"?

 

[SSquirrel]

That would be my favourite solution too. Describe the power in such a way that the rule restrictions are obvious/feel natural/do not need to be memorized. And, if you cannot do it, then change the rule.

Or gee, have At Will, Per Encounter and Per Day sections of your character sheet with the abilities listed under each. Problem memorizing solved.

 

[Belphanior]

Or gee, have At Will, Per Encounter and Per Day sections of your character sheet with the abilities listed under each. Problem memorizing solved.

Using the character sheet to effectively manage your PC? Insidious!