D&D 4E Are powers samey?

[Garthanos]

A level 1 wizard no damage you do yourself mostly just tricking the enemy with illusions from a distance, if they get to close you do have a way to push them back called thunderstrike
Direct the Strike (I made a half elf) - range 5 only use a minor illusion to distract an enemy so your ally gets a free shot
Hypnotism (charlatans trick) - at will use a minor illusion to induce the enemy to hit their ally or rush in a direction you would like.
Charm of misplaced wrath - even bigger version of the hypnotism maybe you picked an image of their worst enemy.
Grease mess up the scene with slippery stuff.
Make the enemy think they are a frog ( more hypnotism from the charlatan)
At level 2 Feather fall.

 

[Xetheral]

* I definitely agree that there is a level of tactical depth associated with all of this stuff that is undesirable for some/many players. Further, I also agree that featuring the conflict-charged scene as pretty much the exclusive locus of the action while simultaneously reducing the impact of spell power plays, means that the historical profile of D&D extra-encounter strategy will be muted (and/or moved to a different axis). However, while both of those are interesting asides (and both relevant to the question of why certain folks didn't like 4e), they are indeed still asides to the question of "sameness."

I agree with much of your post, but disagree with your conclusion above. From my perspective, muting extra-encounter strategy directly impacts the feeling that 4e powers are "samey" (for players whose preferred playstyles emphasizes such extra-encounter strategy, anyway). When such a player goes to pick powers and can't find many relevant to extra-encounter strategy, the powers can come across as lacking in breadth in comparison to other editions that did not mute extra-encounter strategy. Would you agree that "lacking in breadth" is a valid criterion by which one who perceived such a lack of breadth might judge powers to be "samey" in comparison to other editions?

* The question of tactics and Initiative order is an interesting one. What I've seen in all of the 4e games I've GMed is that its something like this (I'll use the encounter that you quoted above and I'll simply use a Fighter as an example).

PRE-INITIATIVE: The Fighter player is considering each of the following possible moves for round 1:

1) Weave between the Lightning Pillars and get to the NPC and start the process of breaking it out of the machine; Run (Move +2 but give up CA) > Mighty Sprint > Standard Action Athletics Check to sunder the machine > Action Point Heal to mend the ailments the machine is causing the NPC (hoping for 2 out of the 4 required successes by round 1). Invariably, this would change the situation of the Skill Challenge with the machine possibly having countermeasures it can deploy (steel tentacles perhaps?) that the Fighter would have to withstand/defeat next round.

2) Force the Mad Scientist (MA) into melee it can't escape (hopefully preventing it from getting to the rune to teleport to a Pillar); Run > Run > Mighty Sprint (which includes a buffed Athletics check to leap and climb the pillar to the balcony to get adjacent to MA > Action Point Seize and Stab Daily Power for big damage to the MA and to Grab him which he can't get out of until the END of its NEXT turn. The MA would be damaged + shut down hard with that Grab for multiple ROUNDS with this effect and Combat Superiority (its ranged attacks would yield OAs) and it wouldn't be able to get to the Teleportation Rune + Marked (subject to all of its effects) + subject to Combat Superiority (making getting away a virtual impossibility unless it can Force Move the Fighter away from it or teleport from where it is).

3) Get to the nearest Lightning Pillar to kill the two Flesh Golem Minions that have just been animated by the Pillar and then sunder the Pillar; Run (hopefully avoid the Lightning Damage when the Fighter gets in proximity) > Standard Action to Cleave (a hit on the first one and the 2nd one is auto-swept with the Minion Sweeper rider of Cleave) > Action Point Athletics Check to Sunder the Pillar and destroy it (shutting off the ability for the MS to port there, shutting off the Minion activation, shutting off the proximity Lightning damage).

4) Get to the East Entrance to man the 15 foot opening (which, with Combat Superiority and a 3 SQ opening, the Fighter basically becomes an impenetrable wall that anything that comes from that corridor would die upon) that the Iron Golem is in and engage the Golem; Run > Charge the Iron Golem as a Standard Action Attack (and decide if they want to use Bull Charge Encounter Power - Damage + Push + Shift Adjacent + Secondary attack for Prone - as you can sub it for a Melee Basic Attack). Creature is at least Marked and subject to Combat Superiority (as above) but probably also damaged + Pushed into the corridor + Fighter adjacent + possibly Prone. If the Golem is Prone, the Fighter may then decide to Minor Action Mighty Sprint to get adjacent to either a Lightning Pillar and Sunder it or get adjacent to the pair of Flesh Golems underneath it > Action Point to Athletics (Sunder) the Pillar or Cleave the Flesh Golems.

This whole turn would possibly leave the following scenario in its wake; (a) that Flesh Golem damaged by around 1/4, (b) basically useless for round 1 (as it would have to spend all of its action economy to get up from Prone and move into the room), and (c) either both Flesh Golems under the pillar killed or the Lightning Pillar destroyed.


As I look at this decision-point and the possible action declarations it could yield, I see (a) extreme diversity, (b) significant effectiveness in tipping the scales for the good guys in each outcome, (c) different mechanical interactions, (d) different amount and type of resource investment.

The only thing Initiative order might do is change the final formulation of the 4 decision-points up top a bit (which one they finally decided to prioritize), possibly removing 1 or 2 and opening up another 1 or 2. For instance, if the Flesh Golems goes before it and they become spread out, that would limit the Cleave aspect of (3) above.

My intent in drawing a distinction between pre- and post-initiative was related to the difference between what you called "extra-encounter strategy" and in-combat tactics. I wasn't trying to refer to how the initiative order can impact in-combat tactics.

In 5e, for example, a valid approach to your encounter would be to scry on the NPC, teleport in, and then teleport out with the NPC on the first turn of combat (or possibly immediately, depending on the number of casters with Teleport and when/whether the DM calls for initiative to be rolled). 4e powers largely don't have that kind of encounter-bypassing utility--instead they're mostly focused on how to win combat after initiative is rolled. (As I discuss in my other posts, rituals add in some extra-encounter strategy capabilities that powers lack, but, in my opinion, not the full range of options available in other editions.)

The complaint that Attacks are "samey" because they have the same purpose (combat and controlling the battlefield)...isn't that just tautological? Tautological in the same way that complaining that a pencil and a pen and a marker and a crayon are all the same thing because their category is "implement to scrawl on a medium with?

I entirely agree that the "samey-ness" of 4e powers is tautological across several categories in which individual posters have claimed that 4e powers feel "samey". Such categories include "abilities with a unified mechanical framework" and "in-combat abilities". But being tautological doesn't make the "samey-ness" label irrelevant. For example, an engineer can validly complain that a pencil, pen, marker, and crayon are "too samey" on the basis that having multiple scrawling implements is redundant, and what she really needs is any one scrawling implement plus a straightedge and a compass.

 

[WayOfTheFourElements]

A level 1 wizard no damage you do yourself mostly just tricking the enemy with illusions from a distance, if they get to close you do have a way to push them back called thunderstrike
Direct the Strike (I made a half elf) - range 5 only use a minor illusion to distract an enemy so your ally gets a free shot
Hypnotism (charlatans trick) - at will use a minor illusion to induce the enemy to hit their ally or rush in a direction you would like.
Charm of misplaced wrath - even bigger version of the hypnotism maybe you picked an image of their worst enemy.
Grease mess up the scene with slippery stuff.
Make the enemy think they are a frog ( more hypnotism from the charlatan)
At level 2 Feather fall.

Cool, but I'm not talking about "in combat." I'm talking about out of combat - using trickery to avoid initiative rolls. I don't want to trick someone into hitting an ally, get an ally to make a free shot, or things like that. I want: combat = lose condition.

 

[Garthanos]

Cool, but I'm not talking about "in combat." I'm talking about out of combat - using trickery to avoid initiative rolls.

Use skills for that ... done.

 

[WayOfTheFourElements]

Use skills for that ... done.

Except I'm still forced to take attack powers.

 

[Garthanos]

Except I'm still forced to take attack powers.

You arent forced to use any of them and for your character its clever usage of his trickery when things went south.
Did I not mention.
Light
Prestidigiation
Ghost Sound
Mage Hand
etc yeh...

oh right that pushing em all back boom you do not need to use it at all.

 

[Teemu]

I disagree. Because of the way 4e is set up, I can't make a character that wholly focuses on social encounters or exploration. I am required to be a combat beast. Someone above said something about control spells and a dedicated support for a total pacifist cleric. But I'm talking about a non-combat character. Someone who doesn't fight, heal, support, or control - who, instead, uses trickery to avoid combat.

As I mentioned earlier, you would create a wizard since 4e classes have unique spell/power lists. Your two 1st-level at-will wizard spells would be Howling Wall and Hypnotism, neither which deal damage. You also receive cantrips (wizard-only utilities at level 1), which could be Prestidigitation, Mage Hand, Ghost Sound, and Suggestion. Your 1st-level encounter spell can be Illusory Obstacles, which doesn't deal damage. Your two 1st-level daily spells could be Sleep and Grease, or maybe Slimy Transmutation and Watery Sphere. At level 2 you could learn the utility spells Feather Fall and Memory to Mist, among many other options. They'd also get rituals, which could be Silent Image and Banish Vermin at level 1, for example.

I have no idea how the 5e version will work with the most important pillar in the game, combat. They wouldn't do anything in fights with the other party members? At least the 4e version can do non-damaging trickstery magic.

Now let's switch it up. How do I create a non-magical ranger with a beast companion in 5e? How do I create a shaman who channels all their magical power through their spirit companion (the magic originates from the spirit)? How do I create a sorcerer who doesn't use the same spells as a wizard, and vice versa? How do I get a druid with an animal companion? Why can't I have a druid that can wild shape at-will from level 1? How can I create a character that advances both as a cleric and a paladin at the same time, or fighter and druid? How do I play a vampire at level 1 that's balanced with other characters? Werewolf? How do I make a fighter who can create more and more powerful alchemical items as they advance in levels as a fighter? Can I have a character that has a wolf beast companion, a bear companion, and a hawk companion all at the same time?

In 5e, for example, a valid approach to your encounter would be to scry on the NPC, teleport in, and then teleport out with the NPC on the first turn of combat (or possibly immediately, depending on the number of casters with Teleport and when/whether the DM calls for initiative to be rolled). 4e powers largely don't have that kind of encounter-bypassing utility--instead they're mostly focused on how to win combat after initiative is rolled. (As I discuss in my other posts, rituals add in some extra-encounter strategy capabilities that powers lack, but, in my opinion, not the full range of options available in other editions.)

First, you can literally do the above scenario in 4e. Second, 5e has a bad habit of relegating the rogue and the other classes without strong access to magic yet who are supposed to be good in non-combat situations to the sidelines starting around levels where you can pull off such plans. Teleportation, scrying, etc.; caster tools, and the so-called skill expert rogue has none of that available to them. In 4e, skills and skill challenges are much more important, and the rogue, if they desire, can get that teleportation and scrying and other tools with the cost of one single feat (and 4e characters get a whole lot of feats).

 

[Garthanos]

In 4e, skills and skill challenges are much more important, and the rogue, if they desire, can get that teleportation and scrying and other tools with the cost of one single feat (and 4e characters get a whole lot of feats).

Yes at that level the rogues stealth is on the order of invisibility and distracting the enemy so they don't notice they can by application of non magic basically walk in and out with the rescued npc at the levels Wizards are doing god magic.

 

[Minigiant]

Rituals, honestly, are pretty lame. They are much more limited than spells. The separation between combat and non-combat magic really limits characters and make them samey.

One of my 5e players brought the following characters to a game. How could you approximate them in 4e.

Wild Magic Sorcerer
Spells known
Cantrips: Minor Illusion, Dancing Lights, Prestidigitation, Mage Hand
1st: Disguise Self, Feather Fall

He was a stage illusionist whose tricks had the habit of backfiring. He was coward masquerading as a pacifist who did everything possible to avoid combat.

With a wizard who gets all of those? You just need to pick some attack powers.

D&D assumes you have some level of combat ability. You are sometimes going in dungeons and sometimes encountering dragons. D&D isn't a pacifist roleplaying game. You can force it to be all social and exploration but it assumes you use the third pillar of combat. 4e did the 3 pillars by shoving most high powered exploration and social interaction into the skill system and rituals in order to balance the rules heavy combat. So if you don't like rituals being the S and E pillars, you won't like 4e.

If the designers wanted, they could have divided and make social and exploration into pillars like in PHB3. Then you'd have AEDAEDAED. Or they could have like let you pick attack, explore, and conserve powers freely as long as long as you pick 2 Atwills, 4 Encounters, and 4 Dailiess.

But this just changes preferences. It doesn't make the game more or less samey.

 

[Garthanos]

Because you know only casters get strategic ability (hic) in these other editions
though in 4e it might be using a utility power or a Skill Power instead of a ritual or spell or a martial practice