-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Banning Versatile Expertise makes for more lively combats?
- Thread starter Solvarn
- Start date
RangerWickett
Legend
I actually had this house rule. Whenever you perform an action, if you describe it and make it sound interesting, cool, awesome, or just something more involved than "I use power X," you get a +2 bonus.
It helped, though one player kept saying stuff like, "Okay, so I throw out my hands, and lift the earth beneath him into spikes that impale him. Is . . . is that cool? Do I need to say more?"
It helped, though one player kept saying stuff like, "Okay, so I throw out my hands, and lift the earth beneath him into spikes that impale him. Is . . . is that cool? Do I need to say more?"
Mapache
Explorer
Frankly, I think it would make combats take longer as people struggled to come up with florid ways to say "I hit the orcs with my Scorching Burst" which the other players would ignore anyway, and slowing things down would make people pay less attention, not more. Stunting works great in Exalted, in but there's several differences at work. First, it's not assumed that you'll be doing it on every single attack, and, more importantly, Exalted has an abstract positioning system (with the tactics being about timing, not physical position) and movement speeds that effectively let characters dance all over the battlefield and invoke interesting terrain as they wish. D&D 4E has an absolute positioning system with a little battlemap in front of you, greatly reducing the amount of available descriptive text you can throw in there. They're fundamentally different games, and 4E combat is a lot of fun, but I don't think that spending time coming up with synonyms would improve it.
There's a lot of variables to consider. What tier is your game at and how long do the combats generally last? Is there a need to remove Expertise feats when implementing this house rule?
You should just try a house rule of "+1 to descriptive attacks" to start. See how that works with your player base first. In particularly long combats, sometimes there is nothing left but a "tired, haphazard swing", i.e. it could weigh down combats also. Experiment with just that first part, then if it responds well, consider removing the feat from your game.
You should just try a house rule of "+1 to descriptive attacks" to start. See how that works with your player base first. In particularly long combats, sometimes there is nothing left but a "tired, haphazard swing", i.e. it could weigh down combats also. Experiment with just that first part, then if it responds well, consider removing the feat from your game.
DracoSuave
First Post
Imagine you're at work, and every so often, someone works a bit harder just to get a better quality of work. The company prospers, and all is good. Now, your boss comes to you and says 'Alright guys, I want to encourage people to work harder like that!' Now, there's nothing wrong with that. So he says 'So, everyone who works that hard gets a 20% bonus every day they do so!' Not bad, not bad at all! Then he finishes with 'Awesome! So, that's why everyone gets a 20% paycut!' Now... that's a boss being a douchebag.
Removing a feat so you can make them earn the bonus feels a lot less like you're earning a bonus and more like you're doing a chore for something you already got.
If you're starting a game up and said 'Don't use expertise' but then later you started handing out bonuses for descriptive play, that'd work awesome.
But if you've already got expertise in the game... then you do run the risk of the players catching on that you're really just making them work for what they already got. And they'd be right... that IS exactly what you are doing. And they'd be right to feel put out... this isn't their job. This is a game, not business.
The reality here is you want them to work harder... and are stripping away stuff to motivate them to do it. Expect it to not go over very well. If they work harder, they should expect to receive more than what they had.
Do I recommend implementing the bonus? Yes. It's a great idea. Don't even say it's a new houserule, just -do- it from time to time.
Do I recommend using that bonus as an excuse to strip away expertise? No. The two things are not related... you're just taking away a feat many players enjoy. A five year old kid would see that for what it really is, I doubt your players will be any different.
Removing a feat so you can make them earn the bonus feels a lot less like you're earning a bonus and more like you're doing a chore for something you already got.
If you're starting a game up and said 'Don't use expertise' but then later you started handing out bonuses for descriptive play, that'd work awesome.
But if you've already got expertise in the game... then you do run the risk of the players catching on that you're really just making them work for what they already got. And they'd be right... that IS exactly what you are doing. And they'd be right to feel put out... this isn't their job. This is a game, not business.
The reality here is you want them to work harder... and are stripping away stuff to motivate them to do it. Expect it to not go over very well. If they work harder, they should expect to receive more than what they had.
Do I recommend implementing the bonus? Yes. It's a great idea. Don't even say it's a new houserule, just -do- it from time to time.
Do I recommend using that bonus as an excuse to strip away expertise? No. The two things are not related... you're just taking away a feat many players enjoy. A five year old kid would see that for what it really is, I doubt your players will be any different.
Last edited:
About what I expected
I agree that the bonus provided moves away from being a positive reinforcer if it becomes necessary at higher tier to hit.
I wanted to throw this idea out and see what people thought, and also what people do in their campaign and how much narration there is.
I agree that the bonus provided moves away from being a positive reinforcer if it becomes necessary at higher tier to hit.
I wanted to throw this idea out and see what people thought, and also what people do in their campaign and how much narration there is.
Artoomis
First Post
Cool narration is nice, but should not be required. Rewarding cool narration is the same as penalizing those without as much imagination, and that's a bad thing.
The rewards for cool narration should be minor and not really affect the game greatly.
Argyle King
Legend
Thoughts?
I'd use a frost weapon so all of my attacks would be as cool as possible.
I'd use a frost weapon so all of my attacks would be as cool as possible.
Ryujin
Legend
Descriptive roleplay is a good idea, in theory, but mechanical benefits need to remain mechanical benefits. If you eliminate something like Versatile Expertise then people simply migrate to something else, like Weapon Expertise, and acquire the necessary feats to lump everything into the one item-slash-implement. People will work for that mechanical benefit, no matter what you do with roleplay.
Firstly, I would suggest keeping Expertise feats (hell, I give them out for free typically).
If you do plan to use bonuses for descriptive play, I would suggest keeping them "bonuses" and not a replacement for a feat a player might want/need.
Secondly, I would set up a clear guideline with your players beforehand about what is expected of them to be "cool". I think you'll find that what some players think is cool is different from others.
I would suggest simply saying something like, "If you describe your attack without using the name of the power in the description."
For example, if I use "magic missile", I could say, "My wizard aims his staff at the two pirates and blue bolts shoot out..." *rattle of dice* "....and hit! slamming into them."
If a newer player is struggling, help them by suggesting they use the "flavor text" of the power as a starting point and modifying it to the situation/targets.
Thirdly, make sure you're providing solid description for your players to riff off of. Set an example by giving excellent descriptions of monster powers (never speak a monster's powers name - instead use the same rule above), but naturally the monsters don't get the +1 bonus. Ask your players thought provoking questions, "When you use magic missile, does the color of the missile change depending on your mood?"
Fourth, apply this to skill checks too.
These added descriptions provide immersion, fictional weight, and memorable scenes that would otherwise be a battlemat and a power sheet. So, I think it's an excellent idea.
For me, those are things I remember about D&D campaigns. Not how much damage I did when I did power X, but when Balthazar did a front flip over a squad of goons and took them out in one swipe.
Good luck.
If you do plan to use bonuses for descriptive play, I would suggest keeping them "bonuses" and not a replacement for a feat a player might want/need.
Secondly, I would set up a clear guideline with your players beforehand about what is expected of them to be "cool". I think you'll find that what some players think is cool is different from others.
I would suggest simply saying something like, "If you describe your attack without using the name of the power in the description."
For example, if I use "magic missile", I could say, "My wizard aims his staff at the two pirates and blue bolts shoot out..." *rattle of dice* "....and hit! slamming into them."
If a newer player is struggling, help them by suggesting they use the "flavor text" of the power as a starting point and modifying it to the situation/targets.
Thirdly, make sure you're providing solid description for your players to riff off of. Set an example by giving excellent descriptions of monster powers (never speak a monster's powers name - instead use the same rule above), but naturally the monsters don't get the +1 bonus. Ask your players thought provoking questions, "When you use magic missile, does the color of the missile change depending on your mood?"
Fourth, apply this to skill checks too.
These added descriptions provide immersion, fictional weight, and memorable scenes that would otherwise be a battlemat and a power sheet. So, I think it's an excellent idea.
For me, those are things I remember about D&D campaigns. Not how much damage I did when I did power X, but when Balthazar did a front flip over a squad of goons and took them out in one swipe.
Good luck.
Similar Threads
