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

[billd91]

[video=youtube;6_c2AKaK4EE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6_c2AKaK4EE[/video]

First 30 seconds of this classic Anderson Silva vs Forest Griffin knockout. Looks a lot like Come and Get It, doesn't it? Anderson Silva definitely hasn't truly lowered his guard such that he can't defend himself or counterattack, yes? No "mind control" there, yes? Anderson Silva defeating Forest Griffin's Will defense causing him to recklessly move forward and engage, setting him up for a devastating counterattack? Oh yes.

It may look like CaGI, but the target of the effect is already intending to come into hand to hand combat with the perpetrator of the move. Now picture the sword-wielding Arab in the Egyptian bazaar in Raiders of the Lost Ark. He draws a direct response out of Indiana Jones - who proceeds to shoot the guy with his revolver rather than move in to take his lumps.

It's easy to find analogies to illustrate how CaGI might work with hand to hand combatants (or tackling football players - who have the exact same intent - to come into physical contact with the ball or ball carrier). But how well do they map to targets who don't intend to get into physical contact.

 

[Garthanos]

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.

And that is so innadequate.
4e has brash strike and another one for Warlords. Brash strike does 2 points of armor class with a fairly substantial boost to damage particluarly with an endbalanced wieapon its an at-will.... and is nice.

The premise of a deception is it appears to the subject to be a much bigger inducement than it really is.... that will never happen with your model and we will only get tame and lame results especially without some sort of rarification. Repetition penalties to open up more extreme results appropriate for an encounter intensity power ok great not a problem I like that idea... having it take more than one round might even be interesting if managed right.

 

[Garthanos]

But how well do they map to targets who don't intend to get into physical contact.

Like Bilbo inducing web slingers to chase him...

 

[Garthanos]

Powers dont necessarily represent the exact same thing every use its a significant thing - just as a basic attack isnt even necessarily being implemented the same way every time... if the circumstances involve a ranged enemy perhaps you are leaving an opening that is reachable up close ... but which leaves you actually better defended against ranged attacks, (thats actually in the mechanics off going prone in 4e).

 

[Hussar]

I understand your position, as it is one other posters have already stated. i just find that you are still controlling the character not actually luring them in. My Approach is more incentive based and would be less immersion breaking for me. Still it isnt a mechanic I think the game needs, but if you are going to do it, for me it works better if it is something likeing taking an AC penalty and getting a bonus to attack. Again, as I have said to others if come nd get it works for your sense of belivability, that is fine. I am not saying it is objectively disruptive. Just that I find it so as do many others.

Actually, by the power you are luring them in. There is no forced movement in the power. The target shifts to whatever adjacent square it wants to, not where the fighter wants. The fighter has granted free movement to the target that does not, in any way, take away from the target's actions.

So, pretty much by definition, the target is lured.

 

[Guest 85555]

Actually, by the power you are luring them in. There is no forced movement in the power. The target shifts to whatever adjacent square it wants to, not where the fighter wants. The fighter has granted free movement to the target that does not, in any way, take away from the target's actions.

So, pretty much by definition, the target is lured.

the point is it has to move to an adjacent square. I get that it is a shift and offturn but that doesnt change the fact that you are the one making it go to a space next to your character. It is being forced to move to a spot next to you. You are dictating that it must do so. That is forced movement. And my understanding is the post errata version gives the player even more direct control (though I could be wrong).

 

[Hussar]

It doesn't have to reject them. I used boxing as an analogy because its a sport I understand well to basically say I am not so sure what people say is going on in tge fencing example is necessarily the case. but either way, 4E certainly doesnt feel like being immersed in combat for me. I just don't feel come and get it captures the things people are describing well, largely because you can only do it once per encounter and it forces the opponent to move adjacent to you. If it works for you, by all means continue using it. Just not the sort of mechanic I am interested in for fighters. YMMV.

Wow. Way to move those goalposts. Now it isn't actually cagi that is the probem but AEDU?

 

[Guest 85555]

Wow. Way to move those goalposts. Now it isn't actually cagi that is the probem but AEDU?

I didn't move the goal post. CAGI on its own is a problem because it gives you control of another pc. It is made worse by the fact that it is a martial encounter lower. Both of these aspects to it break my immersion. And as I have said elsewhere, I find martial dailies and encounters immersion breaking in general.

 

[Garthanos]

I didn't move the goal post. CAGI on its own is a problem because it gives you control of another pc. .

NPCs

 

[Guest 85555]

NPCs

Yes. My mistake