Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sadrik" data-source="post: 4684078" data-attributes="member: 14506">If it is not known this is a discussion about at-will class powers. Specifically we are talking about what the game would do if we removed them completely. My argument is that it would actually be a good thing. Others have argued that removing them would affect the game in a harsh and negative way.As a trade off, to removing the at-will powers, I thought that increasing the number of encounter powers by 2 (make the 2 lost at-wills 1st level encounters basically) would be a good way to offset. My arguments come from this assumption so don’t think I am giving nothing back to my players.I will try and elaborate some of the more pertinent discussions relating to the point at hand. Just like the system some of the effects of this change are good some are bad. So I don’t want there to be an assumption that - I think that everything is perfect with a cherry on top. I do believe the good effects outweigh the bad. First of all, having at-will powers in the game removes the need to be decent at basic attacks. How do you become decent at a basic attack? You pump your dexterity and or strength at character creation. Strength allows for basic melee and heavy thrown weapon attacks and dexterity allows for basic ranged and light thrown weapon attacks.The concern is that if this fundamental is altered, it may collapse the game and no one will hit or do a proper amount of damage to contribute in a meaningful way.I am not sure this would be the case. You would have 2 additional encounter powers. Encounter powers are much more powerful and would quickly knock out a lot more creatures. A controller for instance would actually be pretty good under this system imo. They could hit multiple creatures with spells that actually do more than scratch them. So despite the wizards INT based limitation they are actually contributing more with three encounter powers than they would with a myriad of crap at-wills. This could revitalize the controller role.Another important factor is, in 4e a character’s vanilla attacks are their at-will attacks. Having a special attack at will is not very special. They are not very interesting after doing them ten times every combat. It is like a one trick pony that is given a bunch of tools that can only be used in two ways. It removes imagination because when you have a cool thing like reaping strike of eldritch blast why would you ever pull out a bow throw a dagger or do anything of the sort? Also if all you have to do is rely on a basic attack you are more likely to try a “DMG page 42 trick”.Removing at-will powers opens up design space for character types that are currently sub-par by the RAW.  It doesn't matter if you are martial, arcane, divine, primal, elemental, shadow, ki or whatever other power sources they are going to come up with. Characters are limited by the at-wills that they are tied to at character creation. This makes having characters that do not fit the mold of those prefab at-wills outside the ability for the RAW to deal with and a limitation of the game system. The perfect example is the elf cleric archer of correlon. This character is not a very viable build. I mean, what would a cleric be doing with a bow let alone a high dex. A ranged cleric is a lazer cleric pure and simple and that only requires uni-pumped wisdom to be effective. With making basic attacks the standard instead of lazers it says, "Ok I can make an archer cleric because I am not losing anything for doing it." Thus it opens up many more character concepts that were previously unavailable.A large portion of this discussion has revolved around stats-Forcing players to spend stat points at character creation on dexterity or strength forces them to lower their ultra high bloated uni-stat. If they do not do this they will either be good at their powers or good at basic attacks. This has a number of effects, five out of twelve of the PHB classes/builds will be effected by this because their primary stats are not strength or dexterity.STRPrimary for FightersPrimary for two-weapon RangersPrimary for melee ClericsPrimary for WarlordsPrimary for strength PaladinsDEXPrimary for RoguesPrimary for archer RangersCONPrimary for infernal WarlocksINTPrimary for WizardsWISPrimary for lazer ClericsCHAPrimary for charisma PaladinsPrimary for fey Warlocks4e makes a lot of assumptions about your stats. They are hard coded into the system. Chiefly, you will always be attacking with your highest stat, always (unless you made poor character creation choices). There is a 50% attack roll assumption and much of that assumption is based off of having a high stat by my estimation. You need an 18 or 20 to be competent. Feats provide only a minor boost to the power of your stat’s game effect so it is innately more effective to boost a stat than to select a feat. So the system forcibly directs you into having an uber stat, most notably the 50% attack assumption.In previous editions, base attacks were based upon strength or dexterity only. So you knew that if you were going to be shooting a bow or swinging a sword you needed strength or dexterity at least a little. Additionally, you know that the "to-hit" rate for your spells was much higher than it is now (saving throws were relatively easily failed). You could afford a compromise on your stat line and spread it out and take two 16's or even a 16 and several 14's and still be competent.Now if you want to be good in a class you need to invest in its primary stat and one of its secondary ones and you are done. By lowering the stats it does the following. Potentially lowers the stats arms race between characters, if it ok for a character to have a 16 then it might be ok for the fighter to have a 16 too. This is a relative and flighty change but it does change perception on what you need.</blockquote>

Verification