Can someoone explain the "Daily Hate" for me?

[MarkB]

I hate Daily used as a noun.


"How many Dailies do you have left?"

"I'm gonna blow a Daily!"

it's just awful language.

It's just standard verbal shorthand, as used by anyone sharing a set of common references who use them frequently. It crops up in all walks of life, and is a natural part of language use.

 

[Steely_Dan]

It's just standard verbal shorthand, as used by anyone sharing a set of common references who use them frequently.

Not really, IMO/IME, just garbage-talk.

 

[MarkB]

Not really, IMO/IME, just garbage-talk.

YMMV, of course.

 

[Lord Mhoram]

Dailies as a concept do not bother me, as long as they don't negatively impact character (not player) decisions or connection to the world - if there is an in game reason, that is not dependent on the player having "dramatic editing" power to use it, the I don't mind them.


Example -
A wizard has 2 Daily spells - the character knows that he has 2 spells. That works.
A martial type has 2 dailies. The normal in game expectation is that he gets just the right opening for each one once a day. The character does not know that he only gets each once a day. How can the character plan for their use the way a wizard could. The other issue is player editing. I as a player decide that I want to use the daily, so I am decided that the enemy has left that opening at that moment to use the daily - it is a character resource though - so I, the player, am deciding to use a character resource that the character does not know is going to be used.

As a player, I'm one of those that want the only impact I have on the game world is through the actions of the character (not the player, although the player does the acting) - the character cannot choose that the opening is there (and if he could, why couldn't he do it more often?) that is the player deciding on that.

I'm using a martial and arcane distinction here - but any Daily from any stripe/power source that is not a formal "you can use this once and your resource is expended" within game fiction, and that this information is knowledge the character knows and plans for and uses, then I dislike it.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Dailies as a concept do not bother me, as long as they don't negatively impact character (not player) decisions or connection to the world - if there is an in game reason, that is not dependent on the player having "dramatic editing" power to use it, the I don't mind them.


Example -
A wizard has 2 Daily spells - the character knows that he has 2 spells. That works.
A martial type has 2 dailies. The normal in game expectation is that he gets just the right opening for each one once a day. The character does not know that he only gets each once a day. How can the character plan for their use the way a wizard could. The other issue is player editing. I as a player decide that I want to use the daily, so I am decided that the enemy has left that opening at that moment to use the daily - it is a character resource though - so I, the player, am deciding to use a character resource that the character does not know is going to be used.

As a player, I'm one of those that want the only impact I have on the game world is through the actions of the character (not the player, although the player does the acting) - the character cannot choose that the opening is there (and if he could, why couldn't he do it more often?) that is the player deciding on that.

I'm using a martial and arcane distinction here - but any Daily from any stripe/power source that is not a formal "you can use this once and your resource is expended" within game fiction, and that this information is knowledge the character knows and plans for and uses, then I dislike it.

Actually, it works just fine - as long as you still have the Daily, your characters ees that opening. Once the player decided to actually use it, he no longer sees it.

But wait, there is more - just because you used the Daily power doesn't mean you don't get a similar effect again. For example, a daily that inflicts 40 damage to one enemy may look exactly the same as a critical hit that deals 40 damage to one enemy. THey could also look very different -the rules are too abstract to really tell, but it can be important for the character - he isn't aware that he's using a Daily or a regular attack, just as he isn't aware whether he rolled a 20 and gets critical hit damage or rolled high on a normal damage role. These are all game constructs that don't generally have a strict 1:1 relation to the game world. Even if you describe critical as hits to vital organs or some such - I bet you'd also describe a killing blow as hitting something vital, because people don't die from a tiny bruise or scratch (well, at lest not after they succumbed to Tetanus or similar wound-related infections long after the wound was incurred).

And then there's also a good chance that players pick "thematic" powers for their character - so you may have a Daily that deals 3[W]+STR damage and knocks a foe prone, and an encounter power that deals 1[W]+STR damage and knocks a foe prone - likely that the PC wouldn't really be able to tell the difference between these, considering the variance of damage rolls and the effects otherwise being similar. So even if he were to track precisely how often he, say, knocks someone prone, he'd probably never notice that he can only do it never more than twice per combat - in some combats he use the ability and miss, in some combats he doesn't even have an opportunity to use, in others he'll use both - and if he did, he'd probably conclude that the likelihood of knocking someone prone is x % and so sometimes he's lucky and can do it twice in a combat and sometimes he'll may be able to do it only once or not at all. He may speculate 3 times should be possible as well, but only the game rules will tell us he can't regularly - but he probably actually counted a few times where he did it 3 or even 4 times - because every killing hit ends with the enemy being knocked prone (barring enemies that explode and stuff like that). There are so many false positives for him to register that he cannot really figure out that he has only two actual knock-prone abilities, and he can use one once per day and one once per 5 minutes.

 

[MarkB]

Actually, it works just fine - as long as you still have the Daily, your characters ees that opening. Once the player decided to actually use it, he no longer sees it.

But it's not just happening to see an opening. Dailies tend to do something special, so you don't just unleash them at a given opportunity - you plan for them, in some cases direct your allies' tactics around them.

So when a character has a daily he can use, he incorporates it into his party's tactics - and when he doesn't, he does not attempt to do so, despite not knowing in-character that the tactic would be ineffective on this occasion.

 

[FireLance]

But wait, there is more - just because you used the Daily power doesn't mean you don't get a similar effect again. For example, a daily that inflicts 40 damage to one enemy may look exactly the same as a critical hit that deals 40 damage to one enemy. THey could also look very different -the rules are too abstract to really tell, but it can be important for the character - he isn't aware that he's using a Daily or a regular attack, just as he isn't aware whether he rolled a 20 and gets critical hit damage or rolled high on a normal damage role. These are all game constructs that don't generally have a strict 1:1 relation to the game world.

This is actually the fundamental complaint for some gamers who prefer a process-based approach to an outcome-based approach since it actually makes a difference to them whether or not the character is aware that he has used a daily power or scored a critical hit. As mentioned, when it comes to spells, a character knows that he has a spell prepared, that he is casting it, and that he can no longer use the spell after it has been cast.

Even though the lack of process simulation isn't a dealbreaker for me, I must admit that it's somehow more satisfying when a game element allows the player's decison-making process to parallel the character's. That's why I personally tend to prefer explanations for martial daily abilities along the lines of "this martial exploit tires out this specific muscle and you can't use it again until you take a long rest".

 

[Lord Mhoram]

Actually, it works just fine - as long as you still have the Daily, your characters ees that opening. Once the player decided to actually use it, he no longer sees it.

Why? Why does he no longer see it, just because he used it once, why can't he see it again. Again that is player run, not character run - the player decided " I am going to use my daily" that isn't the character thinking "I have this thing I can do only once- better use it, so I make use of this opening" - to me (and I know am an outlier here with my playstyle) if the character can do it once, and only once - there has to be a in character, in fiction reasons the character can only do it once - not "only see opening once" not "he is tired out" a specific in story reason, when the choice to use that ability is in character (not player) choice that this thing he does can only be done once.

They could also look very different -the rules are too abstract to really tell, but it can be important for the character - he isn't aware that he's using a Daily or a regular attack, just as he isn't aware whether he rolled a 20 and gets critical hit damage or rolled high on a normal damage role.

That is my other disconnect - the character needs to be aware - if I am making my choice in character in response to in game events (rather than as a player playing a piece in a game) there has to be some way he knows that this 1/day thing is used.

As for your second point - when we play a critical is described by the GM as one thing, and a crit as another. They are not the same thing in story. That is the way we player. Every single mechanic has an in-world explanation for that mechanic, and each mechanic has a different in game explanation.

Not saying that how you describe it is bad or anything, but it doesn't work for me. When I play I make all my decisions in character - if an ability or resource is being used I chose to do it as a player, because my character decided in game to use that resource. Dailies without an in-game reason that the character knows and understands just doesn't fly with me. Anything else takes me out of character and thinking like the player at a table, and getting into the mind of the character is the whole reason I game.

If you can give me how the character would describe in world using in world speak how that daily is being used, I'll be happy to listen. One could say "I cast a fireball" in game. One could say "I pull out my holy symbol and turn the undead" in character. How does a daily fighter say what he is doing - in game - for a daily that is using "only sees it once" or "is too tired afterwords" for their justification. Notably without stepping on the GMs side and saying "he has an opening I exploit" the character cannot create said opening by use of the power. And if he can, why can he only do it once.

That is also a problem with the "too tired" thing - if he is "too tired" to use the daily, but has another ability with same in game effects, then why is he too tired for one, but not the other?

For me it is all about in game realism - the kind of abstraction necessary for the player to control the character in game without in game justification pulls me out of character and makes playing less fun.


I love a fighter to do cool things - I really like the concept of the combat superiority dice to give fighters in game toys, but I've never been able to gel non-in-fiction limited resource with out-of-fiction limited resource. I see the rules as the rules of the world - if something only happens once a day, it is physical law of the world that it only happens once day. I just can't mentally bring that together with dailies that don't rely on in game fiction to explain the limited resource.


I realize I come off a bit argumentative for which I apologize*, but if you can actually solve my dilemma I'd love for it to be done. My playstyle is very much in fiction/in character - I've had games where this kind of thing has kept me from enjoying it.


* It's an approach to gaming I feel passionately about so I tend to get intense.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Why? Why does he no longer see it, just because he used it once, why can't he see it again.

Because PCs take up five foot cubes and daggers are at least as fast as two handed swords. Seriously, the rules don't provide that level of zoom. Beyond At Will powers, there is for martial characters either a level of psyching yourself up to use a power (Barbarian's Rage would be a good example - most of these are daily powers)

I've been discussing with [MENTION=6698278]Emerikol[/MENTION] how not having limited use powers shatters my immersion starting here. How if I want a fighter to be able to behave the way even I do in combat, some sort of limited use powers are essential.

Again that is player run, not character run - the player decided " I am going to use my daily" that isn't the character thinking "I have this thing I can do only once- better use it, so I make use of this opening"

No. He's not. He's thinking "I can do this to really upset my enemies." If he were to even start dwelling on what he can't do then he'd be dithering long enough to take a sword through the gut or through the throat. Keeping your OODA loop tight means not wasting time thinking about bad choices. It means discarding what you don't think is worth it as soon as you realise isn't worth it.

That is my other disconnect - the character needs to be aware - if I am making my choice in character in response to in game events (rather than as a player playing a piece in a game) there has to be some way he knows that this 1/day thing is used.

No there doesn't. In tight melee combat stopping to think is a good way to get yourself run through. What he needs to be aware of is what he can do. And to not think about what won't work. Combat is six second abstractions.

Notably without stepping on the GMs side and saying "he has an opening I exploit" the character cannot create said opening by use of the power. And if he can, why can he only do it once.

If the GM ever bothered to show exactly where the arms, legs, and heads were at any given second of every monster then this would worry me. Especially as I've forced openings in reenactment combat using my shield aggressively. But the DM doesn't give me that finely detailed information because it would take forever. Monsters take up the whole of a five foot square. Which means that two monsters can either be shoulder to shoulder in a shieldwall or two gnomes about eight foot apart while being in adjacent squares. And the gap between them is going to vary over the course of six seconds unless they stay in shieldwall. The map is not the whole of the territory.

 

[Mircoles]

Limitations without a reasonable explanation is why.

Obviously the daily takes more effort to use and would have more of a tiring effect then an encounter ability.

But, if I have three dailies available, why can't i do the same one three times instead of just once? The same with encounters, why can't I spam the same one over again?

It conflicts too much with how we know skills to work in reality and yes D&D is not reality, but reality is our fallback in being able to understand how things work.

If a person is capable of doing something, they can usually try to do it as often as they want until they're too tired to attempt it any longer.

But. in D&D, I'm told I can do something only once and not given a rational reason as to why. I guess that it bothers some people.