Ampersand: Sneak Attack

[Lizard]

I also don't know why people don't like the "build" options. "Build" = "ranger combat style, except for more character classes than just rangers now."

Because it felt kludgy in the ranger? Better to have just given bonus feats.

And because it enforces the idea of 'right' and 'wrong' choices, even if there's no game mechanics?

And because it evokes MMORPG concepts and all those entail?

And because, as I noted way-back-when, it's much better to have these things discovered organically than imposed from the top?

 

[Cadfan]

Also, for the record, I really like the Weapon Talent section.

Certain weapons kind of blow, and while I personally believe that any weapon option should be viable, it is really hard to make all weapon options viable when some weapons are... well, kind of objectively superior to others. You can fix some of this with "heroic physics," but there are limits.

The Rogue Weapon Talent section has the effect of making two less viable choices suddenly better if you happen to be a particular character class. The way I think of this is, if a weapon is "in genre" for you, you get a boost at using it. To other characters for whom the weapon is "out of genre," its still a weak choice. So the Rogue gets an attack bonus with daggers, making daggers better than they would be for a character who also has access to shortswords. And shuriken get a damage bonus, making them better than they would be in a world that has other thrown weapons. I entirely approve.

 

[AllisterH]

Because it felt kludgy in the ranger? Better to have just given bonus feats.

And because it enforces the idea of 'right' and 'wrong' choices, even if there's no game mechanics?

And because it evokes MMORPG concepts and all those entail?

And because, as I noted way-back-when, it's much better to have these things discovered organically than imposed from the top?

And I direct your attention to earlier in the thread when WOTC explained WHY they went with suggested build options.

They originally went with your method and determined it wasn'tt he best method conducive for gaming. I don't think you can fauly WOTC for this given they explictly tried it your way and found that it didnt work as well as it should.

 

[mach1.9pants]

I also don't know why people don't like the "build" options. "Build" = "ranger combat style, except for more character classes than just rangers now."

Especially since, unlike the 3E Ranger, they are OPTIONAL. Don't like 'em, don't use 'em.

 

[Cadfan]

In addition, the ranger's combat style choices were kind of set off on their own within the ranger class. They consisted entirely of 3 bonus feats, with no integration into the rest of the ranger's abilities. This looks to have changed. Not only is there an initial ability gained based on rogue build selected, there are also implications for later abilities. In my opinion, this takes the good thing about a "build" choice (turn one class into sort-of two), and improves upon it.

 

[Primal]

If he actually has a Ring. Just because he can have one doesn't mean he has one.

And the thing with the implement is definitely a feature.
I mean, if I look at a guy with heavy armor and a sword, I probably know that he's going to use the sword in combat, right?
If I see a Cleric with a Holy Symbol of Gruumsh I don't exactly expect him to stay in the background and casting only healing spells...

You're correct -- yet somehow I suspect that this is expected of PCs and NPCs alike (i.e. certain "slots" have to be filled by a certain level because of game balance). Or, that wizard could be wearing "normal" bejeweled rings.

My main points was the implement, because unless 4E has no protection spells from elements, it could ruin the encounter. For example, if that elven wizard uses a wand, your players may deduce his tradition and which elements it is linked to ("He's a Golden Wyvern -- cleric, shield us all from fire and acid!").

 

[Incenjucar]

Wait what's wrong with being able to identify a threat...?

Player: "Look, it's a dragon, I bet it flies, has a breath weapon, and uses seriously nasty melee attacks!"

DM: "Hey, no meta-gaming!"

:\

Unless the CHARACTERS are grossly ignorant of the world they live in, they should be aware of things like "Rings are used only by the most powerful of souls" and whatnot.

 

[Lizard]

And I direct your attention to earlier in the thread when WOTC explained WHY they went with suggested build options.

They originally went with your method and determined it wasn'tt he best method conducive for gaming. I don't think you can fauly WOTC for this given they explictly tried it your way and found that it didnt work as well as it should.

I read it, and still don't like it. I feel the negatives of explicit builds are worse than the negatives of 'too many choices'.

 

[Silvergriffon]

And because it evokes MMORPG concepts and all those entail?

Every time I see this sentiment I smile.

I have played in 4 released MMOs, still play in 2 and have beta'd half a dozen more. I have spent alot of time on their respective forums. The desire to share your character creations is not unique to MMOs. In fact, there are more character "builds" posted on WotC's D&D forums than on any MMO's forums. Mostly because no MMO has more than the barest fraction of the possibilities inherent in D&D character creation.

 

[Lizard]

In addition, the ranger's combat style choices were kind of set off on their own within the ranger class. They consisted entirely of 3 bonus feats, with no integration into the rest of the ranger's abilities. This looks to have changed. Not only is there an initial ability gained based on rogue build selected, there are also implications for later abilities. In my opinion, this takes the good thing about a "build" choice (turn one class into sort-of two), and improves upon it.

You seem to be conflating "build" with the choice of Rogue Tactics. "Build" is a suggestion of talents/feats/etc to pick. "Rogue Tactics" is a game mechanical choice. The latter is a lot more like the ranger in 3e; the former is more like the archetype suggestions discussed in Hero Builder's Guidebook or Complete XXX, just with more of an authoritarian weight to it due to the MMORPG association.