Confusion

[small pumpkin man]

But you already assuming characters need to rest to recover powers. They don't need it in Bo9S. What if they follow BO9S concepts and say that encounter based powers are recovered at the end of the encounter.

Actually, if you crack open your copy of ToB to page 40 and read the rest of that paragraph, when it defines the "end of an encounter" what it says is "assume that if a character makes no attacks of any kind, initiates no new maneuvers and is not targeted by enemy attacks for one full minute he can recover all expended maneuvers". This is where people are getting "one minute of rest" and it works fine, I would consider that a "solved problem" and assume that's pretty much what we can expect to see in 4e.

The "buffs last for the encounter" however, "may" end up being a problem, since the only similar ability I've seen from ToB (Blood in the Water) was subject to a lot of metagameyness, so I guess we'll just have to wait and see how that turns out.

 

[Rechan]

So long as it is written as: 1 minutes (10 consecutive standard/full round actions).

Eh?

As it stands, rest in 3e means 'not doing anything strenuous'. A wizard who is 'resting' to get his spells back can ride on horseback at a casual pace, walk, make tea, etc for 8 hours.

A spelclaster who doesn't have to sleep (Warforged, spellcaster with a Ring of Sustenance) just needs to 'Be at rest'.

So if defining what 'rest' is for a spellcaster for 8 hours isn't a problem, then defining what rest is for a single minute shouldn't be any harder.

 

[Silvergriffon]

I am of the opinion (in the absence of any rules information) that encounters will begin with determining initiative order and end when initiative is no longer important, as ainatan also suggested above. Furthermore, any time you are doing something important enough to merit a roll, you are in an encounter. This may be a combat encounter, a social encounter, an encounter with a trap, a chance meeting with an animal in a secluded glen, picking a lock, or even shooting some fruit out of a tree. If only a single character is acting in an encounter and there is no opponent that will be taking any actions, the first step of the encounter was still the determination of initiative order, but an initiative check was not necessary and is simply assumed.

I don't think its a good idea to rigidly define how long you have to rest to recharge per encounter abilities. In some campaigns one encounter often happens right on the heels of another. If you have to wait 1 minute, for example, then there will be many times that these powers that are supposed to be available once during every encounter actually won't be. If they are "per encounter" abilities, then I stongly believe that the characters should have the option to use them in each and every encounter. Sure, there will be some instances when a given encounter ability just isn't applicable, but that's a far cry from saying that you have to wait to use it again just because you are playing in a fast-paced campaign.

For example, the party finishes killing a group of bandits and turn their attention to tending their wounds and looting the bodies. But before they can search the first corpse, some beasties attracted by the smell of fresh blood show up. The DM calls for initiative checks again, and everyone can use their encounter abilities again.

That would be my preference, anyway.

 

[Rechan]

Using Per-encounter abilities outside of an encounter - Sure, that's fine. One minute a part, that's fine.

I don't find the Elf-Competition situation 'funny'. Has anyone here been in a tournament? You don't just fire endlessly. "Person A, go. Now, Person B, go. Now, person C, go. Okay, person A and C are the winner of this round. (Five minutes later). Proceed to the next round. Person A, go. Person C, go." If the Elf is person A, he'd have the time to rest after using his per-encounter ability in the first tier of the competition, and then on the second tier of the competition, because he was resting while the other guys were shooting. Even playing a game of darts with two people, when you're done throwing your hand of darts, you sit there while the other guy is going.

Unless you the DM say 'No, it's still the same encounter', and put your foot down.

I don't think people had much problem with the explanations for taking 10 and taking 20, did they? Yes, no? That's equally as metagamey and equally as 'requiring explanation', and yet, no comment.

How about a full round action? What if someone does it outside of combat? It doesn't matter if it's a standard action or a full round action - if you're not counting rounds, then it doesn't really cause anything to slow down. What's the difference between a spell that takes a round, a minute, ten minutes, or an hour to cast, if time doesn't matter? It just means 'one takes longer' or 'one lasts longer' than the other.

Looser rules opens the possibility of argument and hurt feelings.

And looser rules opens up the flexibility of allowing DMs ot make their own decisions. Stricter rules step on the DM's toes.

 

[Rechan]

I don't think its a good idea to rigidly define how long you have to rest to recharge per encounter abilities. In some campaigns one encounter often happens right on the heels of another. If you have to wait 1 minute, for example, then there will be many times that these powers that are supposed to be available once during every encounter actually won't be. If they are "per encounter" abilities, then I stongly believe that the characters should have the option to use them in each and every encounter. Sure, there will be some instances when a given encounter ability just isn't applicable, but that's a far cry from saying that you have to wait to use it again just because you are playing in a fast-paced campaign.

For example, the party finishes killing a group of bandits and turn their attention to tending their wounds and looting the bodies. But before they can search the first corpse, some beasties attracted by the smell of fresh blood show up. The DM calls for initiative checks again, and everyone can use their encounter abilities again.

Let me give a counter example.

The party has killed some bandits. During the fight, the noise attracted a displacer beast. The beast waits until the bandits die, but attacks before the party can start healing themselves.

Is the displacer beast still in the encounter with the Bandits, or is it a separate encounter?

My instinct is to say 'It's in the Bandit's encounter'. This way, extending the encounter beyond the bandits means that the PCs don't have their Per-Encounter abilities, and now it's tenser because they're less powerful, they've got to think fast, flee, or rough it out.

It would be the same if a monster jumped a 3e party before they've healed, or jumped them in the middle of the night before the mages have recharged their spells.

Now, you could say 'well, it's not the Bandit's encounter, but the party hasn't had time to rest, so even though it's a new encounter, they're still in trouble'.

Either way, when there is a round or three between one enemy and the next, just saying 'nope, you guys haven't recovered your powers' allows for a lot more tension and dangerous encounters, which is part of the point. Running battles, and enemies in waves, should give the characters pause and make them ration out their abilities.

And I honestly think the above is one of the reasons for the Per-Encounter mechanic in the first place.

 

[Silvergriffon]

Let me give a counter example.

The party has killed some bandits. During the fight, the noise attracted a displacer beast. The beast waits until the bandits die, but attacks before the party can start healing themselves.

Is the displacer beast still in the encounter with the Bandits, or is it a separate encounter?

My instinct is to say 'It's in the Bandit's encounter'. This way, extending the encounter beyond the bandits means that the PCs don't have their Per-Encounter abilities, and now it's tenser because they're less powerful, they've got to think fast, flee, or rough it out.

It would be the same if a monster jumped a 3e party before they've healed, or jumped them in the middle of the night before the mages have recharged their spells.

Now, you could say 'well, it's not the Bandit's encounter, but the party hasn't had time to rest, so even though it's a new encounter, they're still in trouble'.

Either way, when there is a round or three between one enemy and the next, just saying 'nope, you guys haven't recovered your powers' allows for a lot more tension and dangerous encounters, which is part of the point. Running battles, and enemies in waves, should give the characters pause and make them ration out their abilities.

And I honestly think this is the point, or part of the point.

Aboslutely. And I see this as something that should be firmly in the hands of the DM. Its a matter of taste. For example, I would probably let them have their encounter abilities back.

But, then again, it depends on alot of factors. At what point in the game session does this take place? Do I want to have that life or death tension right now, or do I want to just remind the party that its a dangerous world? Does one of the characters have a particularly troublesome encounter power that I simply don't want him to use against this displacer beast?

That's why I don't want a defined time to recharge. It should be up to the DM. It should be another tool to control the flow of the adventure.

As far as resource management goes, I agree that it should be an important consideration. But I think that's part of how the at-will, encounter, and per day powers are going to be separated. Resource management will be irrelevant to at-will powers, important for encounter powers only in the context of a given encounter, and of utmost importance to per day powers.

 

[Cryptos]

It makes sense if you consider my other idea, that "per encounter" powers can be used freely outside combat, but while in combat, they can be used only once.

It really doesn't make any sense in conjuction with your 1 minute recharge rules.
Meanwhile, at the King's Archery Contest...
-You still have other 2 arrow to fire, come on elf!
-I know, just let me rest for 1 minute...

Also, I don't like the 1 minute recharge rule, though I suggested it so many times before, because I can easily see characters counting rounds for every "per encounter" power they used so they can use it again, and counting rounds is cumbersome. If you raise the recharge time to 5 mintes, there's also a problem. What if 3 minutes after the end of the combat the group is attacked, those "per encounter" power are not really "per encounter" anymore.

See, to me, it would just seem like the most obvious thing to do is consider the entire thing the character's encounter with the archery target / in the archery competition.

So, if the elf can reroll a ranged attack, and has a feat to add +2 to that reroll, and all of that is per encounter, he saves it for when he needs it, whether he's encountering trolls in the forest or a static target at a fair in front of a large group of people.

That per encounter ability for accuracy, in my mind, would be the equivalent of your opponent hitting the bullseye, and then you doing a 'Robin Hood' and splitting his arrow down the middle. Not something you'd stop and wait to recharge and do with each of three arrows but rather something you pull off when you absolutely need to. It's something special that you do when you need to bring yourself over the top. It shouldn't be used for every single thing, just because you're not technically in combat.

'Per encounter' to me implies that you are encountering something but not necessarily in combat. There might be a 'per encounter' ability that helps you bluff an opponent and avoid a fight completely. I don't think you should be able to try it over and over just because you're not technically in combat. You're encountering someone or something, you get to use it once. Whether you fail and just want to try again, or someone else comes along and wants to fight you while you're still encountering the first group, it isn't refreshed. It's the equivalent of that first guy turning to the second guy and saying, "Hey, he just tried to use that same line on me!"

If it said "Per combat encounter," then I think there would be more room for confusion but it only says "per encounter." While you are encountering something, you can use this X number of times, whether it's combat or not. That would be my interpretation.

You're no longer in an encounter with that thing, it refreshes. Cheesy things like running out of the room, and then running right back in to 'encounter' something again for a cheap refresh would be just that - cheesy and cheap. I don't think it will or should work like that. I can see a rules lawyer trying it. I can also see any decent GM giving them a good smack for it. It's the equivalent of putting your hands over your eyes and saying "Can't see me!"

Keep in mind that while they are talking about 'per encounter' abilities, they're also talking about how kinetic combat will be - constantly moving, repositioning, knocking back foes, and so forth. If a moment's reprieve from combat recharged everything, fights could potentially become never ending. Think about how ridiculous it would be to say, "Ha! I pushed the ogre into the ravine and can no longer see him! Now when he climbs out in the next round, I will encounter him again!"

Maybe it's just because I'm used to games where durations such as "one scene" are common, but this doesn't seem as horrifying or mysterious to me.

 

[Kraydak]

...

Cheesy things like running out of the room, and then running right back in to 'encounter' something again for a cheap refresh would be just that - cheesy and cheap. I don't think it will or should work like that. I can see a rules lawyer trying it. I can also see any decent GM giving them a good smack for it. It's the equivalent of putting your hands over your eyes and saying "Can't see me!"

...

So you send in a first (cannon-fodder) wave with an important guy. The important guy casts invis and leaves (or maybe he hangs around, it isn't as if you can tell). When does the "encounter" end? Does the ending give away information about the invisble person's actions or intentions? According to you, simple leaving an encounter doesn't end it... Note that *both* options are open to use/abuse.

 

[Rechan]

So you send in a first (cannon-fodder) wave with an important guy. The important guy casts invis and leaves (or maybe he hangs around, it isn't as if you can tell). When does the "encounter" end?

When the DM says it ends.

Note that *both* options are open to use/abuse.

A DM can abuse the CR/EL system by not adding conditions that make an EL harder to the EL, or not changing a monster's CR despite adding abilities to the monster. He can abuse the treasure system by not giving you magical weapons when he "should". He can not give you the wealth you should get at this level. He could not give you the full amount of Xp you should get for said CR/EL. He could abuse the "Spells-per-day after rest" mechanic by barely if ever letting a spellcaster rest. He could abuse the Making Magical Item rules by not giving you enough down time to make magical items. He could abuse spell-component rules by not letting you find the spell component needed for a spell.

If you're worried about "DMs could abuse the Encounter rule", then I would advise not playing D&D because the DM could abuse any rule.

Maybe it's just because I'm used to games where durations such as "one scene" are common, but this doesn't seem as horrifying or mysterious to me.

Tell me about it.

 

[Cryptos]

So you send in a first (cannon-fodder) wave with an important guy. The important guy casts invis and leaves (or maybe he hangs around, it isn't as if you can tell). When does the "encounter" end? Does the ending give away information about the invisble person's actions or intentions? According to you, simple leaving an encounter doesn't end it... Note that *both* options are open to use/abuse.

It would really have to depend on what the invisible mastermind actually does.

If he sticks around and just makes the PCs think he left, so that once they are tired out from fighting his minions he pops out and backstabs them, then they're still in the encounter.

If he just stands back and watches what happens so he can observe his foes, to use that knowledge at a later date, then unless the PCs spot him somehow during their encounter with the minions, the encounter is over when they finish the minions.

If he actually does leave, then the encounter is over for him. Whether the PCs chase him down five minutes later, or he locks himself inside a safe room behind a secret door down the corridor, or he goes outside, hops on his horse, and goes to the next town.

If he runs out of the room to grab a weapon (or for the metagame purpose of refreshing his abilities) and then runs back in, it's the same encounter. He's still part of the action, just "off camera."

It all comes down to whether or not that invisible mastermind is going to continue to be part of the scene/encounter or not as to whether his abilities would refresh. It's the narrative or tactical intent of the GM in terms of the story/adventure that determines when an encounter - or a scene - ends.

As I said, it seems to me that it would be a lot like dealing with 'per scene' mechanics, which is a lot like dealing with a scene in a book or a movie. "Is this part of the same action sequence?" would be the question, and for me it's not one that is all that difficult to determine. That might be from habit or experience.