D&D 5E "But Wizards Can Fly, Teleport and Turn People Into Frogs!"

[Guest 85555]

I do like mechanics like Marking which induce the dm behavior with a combination of damned if you do and damned if you dont and interference with the enemy attacks against your allies...

And I would like to see more of it brought in to next but I am not seeing any of the tricks we are talking about working via that mechanism or feeling like a deception.

It sounds to me like we just have very different taste and react to mechanics in different ways. That is cool. That is why we have different game systems to choose from. Hopefully when next comes out there will be things in it both of us can like.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I never said a boxing match was more deadly, it was just an analogy. I would think in a sword fight you can get that kind of trick off as much as your opponent falls for it. Like I said if you don't want people to spam it give a penalty, but timing if so they can try certain moves once per encounter just feels very artificial to me. Not everybody does feel that way but that is my reaction to martial encounter powers in practice. If you can't accept that this is my opinion or experience, I won't try to convince you otherwise.

Yeah, I just got tired of the mechanically awkward attempts that D&D made in the past by trying to be literalistic. 2e has a bunch of rules for parry, counter, fake, etc, but they work poorly at best IME, and generally the result was some sort of gimmicky one instead of what you wanted. TO ME the 4e approach JUST WORKS because it literally up front just dictates what you want to be the result. You don't want the PCs spamming disarm and Knockout Blow, and guess what, it NEVER HAPPENS in 4e, no matter what bizarro-world combo of kits and feats and whatnot the player tries to get away with. If as the DM there's a specific instance where I think things should work out differently, well then I'll make that happen. I can count the number of times I've wanted to do that in 4+ years of 4e DMing on one hand.

I think you might find it more enjoyable than you imagine with the right group.

 

[Garthanos]

I never said a boxing match was more deadly, it was just an analogy. I would think in a sword fight you can get that kind of trick off as much as your opponent falls for it.

really in thirty seconds? Fool me once shame on you ...

Like I said if you don't want people to spam it give a penalty

Did you miss me saying I thought that could be an acceptable type of limit for discouraging repeating of martial tricks?
or that a minor disadvantage on defense while performing that particular trick might be appropriate (we are agreeing on elements here) ... I think the inducement is not a good simulation for tricks because I am tricking the npc not the DM and the dm has way more information.

 

[Guest 85555]

I think you might find it more enjoyable than you imagine with the right group.

I have tried 4E many times with different groups (all great players and ZgMs) but it just isn't for me. Definitely gave it a chance. On a number of levels the game didn't appeal to me. But that is just me, my business's partner and co-designer had a much more positive reaction to 4E. I don't hold liking 4E against people and I honestly don't think others need to share my thoughts on it (I have even said many time WoTC should have tried to please the fans they have and make Next 4.5).

 

[Guest 85555]

really in thirty seconds? Fool me once shame on you ...
......
Did you miss me saying I thought that could be an acceptable type of limit for discouraging repeating of martial tricks?
or that a minor disadvantage on defense while performing that particular trick might be appropriate (we are agreeing on elements here) ... I think the inducement is not a good simulation for tricks because I am tricking the npc not the DM and the dm has way more information.

fair enough. For me it is an adequate emulation of opening your guard. As for other tricks, I am open to mechanics that are not encounter or daily powers and don't give me control of other characters.

 

[Garthanos]

and don't give me control of other characters.

I need to be able to induce behaviors.. the trickster archetype especially needs them

Bilbo simply must induce the irrational charging of giant sentient spiders.

 

[Guest 85555]

I need to be able to induce behaviors.. the trickster archetype especially needs them

Bilbo simply must induce the irrational charging of giant sentient spiders.

Okay. I think we just want very different things in an rpg.

 

[Garthanos]

fair enough. For me it is an adequate emulation of opening your guard.

Remember I am appearing to open my guard... without doing so in a major fashion its not going to induce a DM who can see the real mechanics..

 

[Garthanos]

Old fat spider spinning in a tree!
Old fat spider can't see me!
Attercop! Attercop!
Won't you stop,
Stop your spinning and look at me!
Old Tomnoddy, all big body,
Old Tomnoddy can't spy me!
Attercop! Attercop!
Down you drop!
You'll never catch me up your tree!

 

[Guest 85555]

Remember I am appearing to open my guard... without doing so in a major fashion its not going to induce a DM who can see the real mechanics..

Using the method I described you would just take the -1 AC for the +1 to attack to represent not doing it in a major fashion. It doesn't matter if the the GM can see the real mechanics because they are designed to give him an incentive. This is not a perfect representation of what you are describing bug for me it is close enough and far better than cagi. If you want something more tricky I am open like I said but not if it is a daily/encounter or if it gives me control of another character.