D&D 4E Are powers samey?

[FrogReaver]

Imagine if every class with a Extra attack had Martial Takedown, Grab and Strike and Pressing Attack. As cantrips
You have to use the samey words remember

Exact same vs samey. There is a difference.

 

[Garthanos]

Exact same vs samey. There is a difference.

Yes my samey grab and strike is only available to a specialist ... where as your same every sword monkey has it. The classes are all samey instead.

 

[Garthanos]

To be honest I find short rest mechanics far more similar in 5e to long rest mechanics than 4e encounter and daily,

 

[FrogReaver]

To be honest I find short rest mechanics far more similar in 5e to long rest mechanics than 4e encounter and daily,

Interesting. Didn't 4e encounter powers require a rest to get back as well? So is it mostly the duration of the rest?

 

[FrogReaver]

Yes my samey grab and strike is only available to a specialist ... where as your same every sword monkey has it. The classes are all samey instead.

K. Still sounds like you are trying to talk about saminess of classes based on individual powers/abilites instead of as an aggregate of all their abilities.

 

[FrogReaver]

Imagine if 5e presented itself like 4e did. Where every overlapping spell was presented separately with each class - healing word appearing six times in exactly the same form. Well, really, virtually every single spell and combat style in the game appears in at least two classes. We'd see the exact same criticisms of saminess in 5e. But, because 5e is written in such a way that you don't really see just how similar the classes are, all we really see are the differences because those differences are so strongly highlighted, we avoid the criticism.

That idea has been presented numerous times. Have you ever had one person on the other side actually agree with it?

We keep getting told - the only reason we think something is because X. We keep on saying no X doesn't matter in our assessment and yet you keep on coming back to "it's X I know it..."

 

[FrogReaver]

So, I wonder just how much this criticism of sameyness is simply based on reading and not on actual play. Which, frankly, is something that 4e suffers from a LOT. It does get back to presentation. After all, if there are ten different powers with the same effect, then the game is samey, no? Well, not really. Because, sure, there are similar effect powers, but, the likelihood of actually seeing that at the table is very small because of the sheer number of powers that aren't similar.

I liked 4e. I played 4e. In fact when 4e came out - it's sameyness was one of the bigger drawpoints to me - as it implied they had balanced the game which is a big selling point to me. But years later and having seen other ways to achieve balance without that sameyness - it's no longer a feature but a criticism from me. One of my arguments at that time would have been - you just want OP wizards to anyone complaining about the sameyness as in my mind (at the time) that sameyness was the only way to achieve non-OP wizards.

As another example: I like the band Disturbed. Their music is very samey though. I suppose it might be said that one can like something despite identifying it as samey.

 

[Garthanos]

Interesting. Didn't 4e encounter powers require a rest to get back as well? So is it mostly the duration of the rest?

A short rest is "about" 5 minutes long note could be less too of course and actually works fine even if more arbitrary like the fight has changed scene to a striking degree. I have seen plenty of DM advice which simply has that scene change as a trigger and allowed the players recovery as a way to make bigger encounters more interesting (I am now trying to remember where I read it). But let's say you decide to be stringent the impact is distinct even from the DM side. In 4e another encounter right after the first? is mechanically just treated and usually designed as 1 encounter the recovers immediately afterwards is pretty much a done deal in most contexts the DM has to go out of their way to avoid a breather and if he does see what I just said about it really being a single encounter. This can have an impact in flavor on the player side too one it is extremely easy to not picture the reason one is unable to use the power again in distinct ways with the 4e model to me its not just about resting. I think the tricks/quick exertions/mini-rituals etc are a better explanation by far. Tell me again how great it is to have me delay trying a disarm attempt till I get an hour rest? No in the game play dynamic the hour break makes short rests something I might have to remember what was done several fights ago ie protracted tracking in that fashion it's pretty much just a daily resource. To me your 5e BM fighters have small dailies (and every short rest character in the game too) and how exactly does that make it a more distinct? I generally think from the very beginning of D&D it has been assumed a slight breather would occur after most fights where you bind your wounds etc. And now that takes an hours dinner break to do well ummm ok sounds more than a bit over blown and doesn't really gain me anything except making any class with any resource more the same.
And isn't resource management being samey the trigger for samey?

K. Still sounds like you are trying to talk about saminess of classes based on individual powers/abilites instead of as an aggregate of all their abilities.

Look who is taking things in isolation. Most seem to be calling powers samey without paying attention to the full picture for all I can tell for instance the fighter getting a marking mechanic and things which spark of it which can vary from fighter to fighter one increases mobility when an enemy triggers it including many many more feats than 5e to adjust those powers. My cleave does ongoing damage almost always when I use it because I have a feat and choose to maneuver to attack more isolated enemies. My ally another fighter has neither cleave nor a way to generate ongoing damage but can really deal significant amounts of damage while granting combat advantage and buffing his con (he has reaping strike and brash strike). These difference came about because of both basic at-will powers which are distinct and varying within the same class and how we play the characters (another might even have that same feat I picked and often get two enemies to hit because he wants to but recognizes he cannot always or because he is worse at maneuvering).

Giving them all Twin Strike, Grab and Strike, Martial Takedown and Pressing Attack might just be useless not just samey. OR pardon... the same and thus indistinct from each other.

And remember while you are at the above you are removing Brash Strike, (Cleave who needs it with Twin Strike) and my deep cut cleave no ongoing damage because we are shortening the fights to three simplistic rounds. And gone is reaping strike and threatening rush (and others like that which are great defender support). And this is just the at-wills.

 

[Garthanos]

And as far as the mundane vs magical distinction is concerned: there’s still a difference in 4e. You can’t polymorph with ”mundane” powers, or summon creatures. It’s not as if all the power sources cover identical effects.

Martial abilities also rarely if ever create zone of effect ...

 

[Xetheral]

Here’s the thing. You weren’t aware of the full extent of 4e ritual magic. I and others have also pointed out powers that are very varied and provide all kinds of effects. Could it be possible that your impression is faulty because you simply are not aware of all the things published 4e powers (there are literally thousands) can accomplish?

No, for three reasons.

First, even though you don't agree, I still think that 4e rituals are not a complete substitute for the strategic-layer character abilities found in other editions and that are missing from 4e powers. (Note, I am using the definition of "character abilities" I described here, and thus am not including ad-hoc enhancements to the printed descriptions of rituals.) Illustrative examples include:

1. the comparative lack of long-range attacks
2. the comparative lack of quick-cast, long-range teleports
3. the comparative lack of quick-cast, permanent landscape alteration
4. the comparative lack of quick-cast, long-duration flight
5. the comparative lack of powerful summons
6. the comparative lack of authoritative divinations
7. the comparative lack of buff stacking
8. the comparative lack of long-range scrying
9. the comparative lack of long-duration invisibility
10. the comparative lack of quick-cast long-range communication
11. the comparatively higher component cost of casting (esp. with repeated casting)

Sure, 4e rituals can accomplish many of these things, but often at a higher level, greater cost, and/or longer casting time than in other editions. Also, because I don't have an encyclopedic knowledge of 4e rituals, it's possible that in some of these categories, 4e might have a ritual that is available sooner, costs less to cast, and is faster to cast than the best equivalents in other editions. In other cases there may be tradeoffs where reasonable minds can disagree on which ability has more utility. For example, as a ritual, Sending in 4e is more spammable than Sending in 5e, but it also costs more and takes 100 times longer to cast.

Second, even if I had more extensive knowledge of 4e rituals and agreed that rituals cover the full scope of strategic-layer abilities found in other editions, that would only mean I'd find it less problematic that 4e powers feel "samey" to me. It wouldn't change how I feel about the powers themselves.

Third, my impression that 4e powers feel samey can't be "faulty" unless I am lying to you about what my impression is. It's certainly possible that I'm not introspective enough to accurately identify the source of my impression, but that wouldn't change the impression itself. (Also, I don't think anyone on this forum knows me well enough to be in a position to second-guess the accuracy of my introspection.)

I fully acknowledge that you (or anyone else) may opt to discount the value of my impression on the grounds that it insufficiently informed. The posters in this thread who have requested an explanation of why some people find 4e's powers feel "samey", however, did not specify that they were only interested in hearing from people who know all the rituals.

At this point, across many posts, I think I've adequately explained both of the reasons why I find that 4e's powers feel samey to me. Hopefully some people find my perspective interesting or useful. I'm starting to feel like the validity of my opinion is being attacked, so I'm going to go ahead and bow out of this thread. Thanks for the discussion!