Conditions against PCs

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Yesterday, we played our first epic level 4E game. We noticed this already earlier, but having a player with less experience in 4E but long 3E experience highlighted this issue again:

There are a lot of conditions applied to PCs that greatly affect your combat options. While the PCs have still a good chance to overcome their opposition, it often feels the players are just not in control over their characters and can't really use their abilities in a "cool" way.

In one combat, we had enemies that:
- Created a zone that immobilized (save ends) anyone starting their turn in it. (How can you get out of that one?)
- Dominated PCs and then disappeared from the battlefield.
- Dazed the PCs.

The Barbarian for example often had the problem of being unable to engage anyone at all, since he was standing immobilized in the wrong place. At other times he was dazed (or even dominated) and couldn't use his immediate action powers. The barbarian was played by the aforementioned "guest" player, and he had a very similar experience in a 16th level encounter with a similar character in an online campaign. He also plays in a online game of 4th level players, and he had differences experiences there and clearly enjoyed that more.
I suspect that this character is particularly susceptible to these effects, since his defenses just weren't that great against these monsters.

But I also remember other encounters with different characters where there sometimes just felt to be too many conditions around. So it is just not an experience by a single player with a single character.

I think this is somewhat problematic. Again, in a way as a player you feel the loss of control. The enemies dictate a lot of your possible actions. This of course makes it more important to be able to improvise and adapt, which is a good thing, but still - sometimes it would be nice to get more chance to force the same on the NPCs and have more freedom to act.

My worry overall is not the tracking of conditions. Some people might have issues with that, too, but it's not really that important to me and this discussion.

It's more about choice of actions. I noticed at Paragon Levels and Epic Levels it often feels it is not about what you can deal out, but what you can take and survive. Maybe Epic Destinies with "once per day, if you die" emphasize this best, but there is just more than death there... And some fates might again feel worse than death to the players.

Is it possible that, for future monster design and future encounter design, one has to take care of not overdoing conditions against the PCs?

The conditions can probably be considered into the following 3 broad types:
- Heightening Damage Conditions:
Anything that causes the party to take more damage, ongoing damage, losing resistance, gaining vulnerabilities, granting combat advantage, granting other monsters attack or damage bonuses.
- Suggestive conditions:
Anything that changes the typical benefits of actions. Marked is a good example for that. You can attack whoever you like, but if you don't attack the guy marking you, you take a few penalties. So you have to take that into account to determine what's the best course of action. Zones that inflict damage or some conditions can also do this. Stay here you take damage. Or leave and you take another condition.
- Denying Conditions_
That's all what Dazed, Dominated or Immobilized do. You just cannot take the action you might want to take. These conditions are pretty much exclusively "bad" if they are applied too easily.

Example "Good" Conditions (suggestive or heightening damage conditions)
Heightened Damage
- Ongoing Damage
- PC Grants Combat Advantage
- Defense Penalties (other than combat advantage)
- Enemies gain attack/damage bonuses against PC (not necessarily a condition on a PC but instead a bonus granted to an enemy)
- Take Damage/suffer attack when attacking particular target (or not attacking a particular target)
- Apply Vulnerabilities
- Losing Resistances
Heightened Damage and Suggestive Conditions
- Damaging Auras and Zones
Suggestive Conditions
- Auras or Zone that apply penalties if inside, or leaving, or entering.
- Slowed
- Marked
- Attack Penalties against certain targets

"Bad" Conditions:
Denying Conditions
- Blinded
- Dazed
- Dominated (Though at least when my Invoker was dominated, this was kinda fun - I just used "Hand of Radiance" against the rest of the party. )
- Grabbed
- Immobilized
- Restrained
- Stunned

I think the "bad" conditions are interesting if they work as penalties when the PCs don't act "correctly", e.g. as the Controller or Soldiers among enemies line demand. For example:
- Leave a zone and you are immobilized (save ends)
- Attack the wrong target, you get punished with blindness
- If you attack this round, you don't get a save against a minor condition (ongoing damage, defense penalty)

I think the denying conditions need to be harder to use for the monsters:
- They should be encounter powers or recharge powers. If encounter powers, they can safely affect a large number of targets. If recharge, be less generous.
- They should almost never be applied with an at-will power.
- They can be used as a "threat" for the suggestive conditions. But preferably they shouldn't automatically negate it, either. (If an attack roll is required, that might be enough to avoid the "automatic" nature).

---

So, how do others feel about this? Do you share the experiences? Do you have to offer some counter points? Do you think this is something WotC itself should look into in MM3, DMG 3 and future adventures?

 

[fba827]

Qualifiying statement: I don't have experience at epic teir yet (or even with paragon teir as of yet, just heroic teir).

Having said that, I am okay with pretty much all the conditions except for stun.

For bypassing some stuff, it appears that by higher levels PCs will all have access to stuff to fly and teleport and things like that, which makes it easier to bypass -some- zones. Or even slide/push/pull effects that can be used on allies to yank them around of a bad position that they can't escape.

And these other conditions are all about adding in variables for PCs to figure out how to deal with and change things up so that one encounter doesn't run exactly like the others. (( of course, when it gets to the issue of too many conditions to need to track, that would be a headache from a meta perspective))

In the case of stun, I (unofficially) have taken it out of my game for monster powers. I had used it once but after seeing the effects of making a PC (and therefore player) unable to do -anything- after waiting patiently for their turn just seemed like a joy-kill. So now, any monster that does stun (for one round) now does daze (save ends). Any monster that does stun (save ends) is now dazed ((save ends with -2 penalty); and After Effect: dazed (save ends)). I may still toss in stun once or twice to keep the players on their toes and/or if appropriate to a given situation, but otherwise i don't really expect to use it for the monsters anymore. The PCs however are free to still use it against monsters.

By all the other ones you listed as bad? Well, they do limit choices (and therefore shouldn't be used every single encounter) but the pc (and therefore player) still has some options/way to participate/etc even if just a skill check to escape a grab or a single action from the daze. They might get frustrating if they happen but to me it is just part of the 'suprise' vaiability that the PCs need to figure out how to overcome.

 

[Stalker0]

Mustrum I completely agree with you.

If your not carefully in your DMing, 4e can become a condition fest, and I have found that is not very fun for the players.

In 3e if a player of mine got stunned for the fight, they would either go do something else, or watch scared as they could be coup de graced and taken down.

4e can do the same thing (though stunned doesn't leave you as vulnerable) but its a more nickel and dime approach. This round...your stunned! Next round...yep your still stunned. Third round, you saved against the stun...but you got hit again, your stunned. I have seen that this is more frustrating for players than the 3e situation.

Dms have to manage their condition throwing monsters to prevent that. I never try to throw more than one monster per fight that is heavy on the conditions. It makes sure they aren't dominant in teh fight, or it gives the players a target to kill. If they don't kill it, and keep taking lots of conditions then its their fault in a way and they recognize that. If all the monsters throw conditions, their is nothing they can do.

 

[fba827]

Dms have to manage their condition throwing monsters to prevent that. I never try to throw more than one monster per fight that is heavy on the conditions.

I had to quote that pair of sentences -- that is a very important point.

For the players, it'd be annoyingly frustrating (rather than obstacles to change tactics) if that were not the case. .. and, as a DM, well, it's less to keep track of which is also a huge boon

 

[Rechan]

While I too have not played Epic, I think that this is not as much of a problem.

Why? PCs have a lot of things at their disposal to address this.

Take for instance the Bard at low Heroic. Level 2 utility: Slide an ally 4 squares. A Cunning bard can slide an ally 1 square as a free action every turn. And any time he heals, he can slide that ally 1 square. I also once used Allegro (Level 6 Utility, Close Burst 10) to move ALL my allies out of grappling terrain. That can easily move your immobilized ally around to a degree.

I now point to the Cleric who has an At-Will that grants an ally a saving throw on a hit.

A character in my game also has an amulet that grants a free saving throw if he misses one.

And then there's the Warden, who gets a save at the BEGINNING of his turn, and one at the end.

These are just ones that I could remember without looking up. I am certain that Epic-tier characters have many options to get out of their current situation.

 

[Rechan]

For the players, it'd be annoyingly frustrating (rather than obstacles to change tactics) if that were not the case. .. and, as a DM, well, it's less to keep track of which is also a huge boon

The same is true for PCs.

If they layer the conditions on your solo, it gets really boring really fast.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

While I too have not played Epic, I think that this is not as much of a problem.

Why? PCs have a lot of things at their disposal to address this.

Take for instance the Bard at low Heroic. Level 2 utility: Slide an ally 4 squares. A Cunning bard can slide an ally 1 square as a free action every turn. And any time he heals, he can slide that ally 1 square. I also once used Allegro (Level 6 Utility, Close Burst 10) to move ALL my allies out of grappling terrain. That can easily move your immobilized ally around to a degree.

I now point to the Cleric who has an At-Will that grants an ally a saving throw on a hit.

A character in my game also has an amulet that grants a free saving throw if he misses one.

And then there's the Warden, who gets a save at the BEGINNING of his turn, and one at the end.

These are just ones that I could remember without looking up. I am certain that Epic-tier characters have many options to get out of their current situation.

I think a problem is that for every Bard that has the ability to help you there are dozens of characters in the same role that can't help you. And that is true for every class and role combination. And we don't really want to add up with a situation where the only viable builds are those specialized in condition-circumvention. At least I don't want to end there.

- Free extra or rather "out-of-turn" saves are great - but not all monsters have powers that grant a save.
- A granted save is not the same as an automatic success, either.
- Most save granting abilities are encounter or daily powers. Those that aren't are still conditional on successful attacks, usually.
- It doesn't help if the monster can repeatedly apply the same condition. Especially when it can apply them to multiple members of the group and/or the Leader.

I think the latter might be the biggest killer. A monster with an encounter power that stuns the entire party is not as bad as an at-will attack power that stuns a single party member for one turn. The first typically creates big excitement and worry - because the party doesn't know when they snap out of it and has to see how they get molested by monsters. The encounter might start slow and frustrating, but in the end, the party really can turn the tide. But the second frustrates the individual player character that is consistently subject to this power. If multiple enemies can do the same or at least similar things, there is also no clear way to turn the tide - you just have to struggle through the entire encounter.

Many monsters have reach or range at their disposal so that even the "weaker" conditions like daze or immobilize benefit them considerably more than as if the PC apply them to the monsters.
It also tends to hit classes focusing on melee harder than those focusing on range. Most conditions - except stunned basically - allow you to keep attacking in some way - as long as you get to your enemy. Maybe that is a kind of unintentional or intentional balancing factor for the often higher damage output generated with weapon use. But it's not really an enjoyable one.

 

[Rechan]

I think a problem is that for every Bard that has the ability to help you there are dozens of characters in the same role that can't help you. And that is true for every class and role combination. And we don't really want to add up with a situation where the only viable builds are those specialized in condition-circumvention. At least I don't want to end there.

I'm pretty sure that all the leaders can help with saves to some degree.. As I said, I made that post purely by memory. I am certain that if I look through the Cleric section of the PHB alone, there's going to be lots of options to obliterate conditions.

But it just depends on the build vs. the type of condition. Bards beat the pants off any movement limitations, but they're not so great against other problems like weakened or dazed, etc. I've seen quite a few powers from other classes (the Psion I believe) which addresses powers effecting the will defense or at least dazed/dominated stuff.

It doesn't help if the monster can repeatedly apply the same condition. Especially when it can apply them to multiple members of the group and/or the Leader.


I think the latter might be the biggest killer. A monster with an encounter power that stuns the entire party is not as bad as an at-will attack power that stuns a single party member for one turn. The first typically creates big excitement and worry - because the party doesn't know when they snap out of it and has to see how they get molested by monsters. The encounter might start slow and frustrating, but in the end, the party really can turn the tide. But the second frustrates the individual player character that is consistently subject to this power. If multiple enemies can do the same or at least similar things, there is also no clear way to turn the tide - you just have to struggle through the entire encounter.

Two things.

1) I don't like stun as a condition anyways. But a monster that can, say, daze as an at-will for a round IMO isn't bad. As long as, for instance, you're not just shooting the Fighter every round with the daze power. If one round you hit one player, the next round you hit another, then everyone is sharing the pain, as opposed to you putting a bucket over the head of one player for the entire encounter.

Not to mention that if the monster has the condition on just an AW, in my experience the monster isn't using that AW all that often. Because you, the DM, want to use its encounter powers, and monsters typically have more than one. So for at least half of its life span, it's not using those AWs.

The problem (at least for me) are (save ends) conditions. I've had encounters where the Fighter is weakened for 4 consecutive rounds. That massively sucks. It really effects the pace of the battle because you're only doing half damage, and it's just frustrating the condition stays.

2) As pointed out above, the bolded portion is as much a part of encounter design as anything. You don't want all your enemies to do the same thing, no matter if that's conditions or if it's an encounter of all Soldiers Variety is important, no matter what, and with conditions this is especially true.

Many monsters have reach or range at their disposal so that even the "weaker" conditions like daze or immobilize benefit them considerably more than as if the PC apply them to the monsters.[/quote]
Disagree there. See the comment on solos. A solo typically has several minor action powers and something on a move, so a Daze really crimps its style. Immobilziation is going to nuke a skirmisher unless it's a teleporter. And many monsters do have minor action powers.

Hell, the DM in one game HATES our fighter because of his Combat Superiority power - any time a monster tries to MOVE away, a hit from the fighter stops it. The fighter has locked down multiple skirmishers and a beholder in our game, just by being able to do that every round.

Also, the secondary effects of conditions are rather important. Immobilization and slowed means a monster can't run away to get his friends, or run away period. That's important, story wise, even if it's not effecting the actual combat. That is massively in the player's advantage, as they rarely have reinforcements to run to.

Not to mention that Dazed also means that the enemy grants CA. With the multitude of powers that have CA requirements, this m eans that Dazed is more important to PCs more frequently than it is to monsters.

 

[wayne62682]

I'm inclined to agree with this. My paragon-level group had a recent fight with a group of Bodak Reavers, Ghoul Devourers and a Cambion Hellfire Magus and IMO what made the fight very brutal is that the Bodak's had an at-will that dazed + weakened (and their death gaze, also an at-will, dropped you to 0 when used on someone that was weakened; so between the two of them they could drop a PC a round; luckily I think the DM didn't notice this because he didn't use it in tandem), the Ghouls had an at-will that immobilized, and we were fighting on a spiderweb bridge where you took hazard damage if you didn't move, and the Cambion had an at-will that knocked you prone. For most of the fight my Fighter was prone, dazed and weakened so I had to spend my entire turn getting up. It was not fun at all for me.

 

[Jack99]

While we haven't played epic yet (players are level 19), we are getting there, and the accumulation of daze/stun/immobilize effects are definitely noticeable already towards the end of the paragon tier.

So when I make my encounters, I am very careful to not stack those too much. Since I already tweak all monsters' hit points and damage output, it's fairly easy to tweak a few powers as well.

Anyway, considering the DMG2 also advices you to be careful with those powers (also those who drain surges), I think you make a good point