Core materials: Action Points and Insider

[an_idol_mind]

I use action points in my current game because it means I can use save or die effects and the like without PCs automatically being screwed by a bad die roll. They're also there as a way of low-level characters surviving major hits at each level (my house rules allow action points to be traded in for extra hit points). Seeing as save or die effects are likely to be nixed and low-level characters will get toughened up, that makes action points as I use them now pretty useless. It will be interesting to see ho their use changes in 4th edition.

As to WotC's definition of core, it's basically the equivalent of someone saying, "We're going to call apples bananas now." The three books needed to play are core; the rest is not, no matter how many people say otherwise. The only way I can see WotC actually making those products core is if they start heavily referencing material from D&D Insider and the like in their products without providing any explanation for readers who don't own "core" supplement X. If they do that, it will simply mean I stop buying WotC products, because I don't have any interest in buying a library of books to keep up with the game. That happened to me in 2nd edition, and I will never go back to that.

 

[charlesatan]

The implications that the Insider will be core worries me much more. I would much rather it be optional but official material and feel this can only serve to divide the player base into those who play purely by the books and those who play w/books+insider. Another question this brings up is what supercedes wnat? I mean if a new rule is introduced on DI does it trump my PHB rule/spell/feat whatever. Home play won't really matter, unless you form a group that is split as far as access to DI, but what about online play and convention play? Eh, I become more and more leery of how "necessary" the DI will be.

The context in which "D&D Insider and other supplements are core" is said quite differently in the podcast. The designers meant that if for you, D&D "core" meant non-setting specific books, then Race XX or Class XX which is not in the PHB/DMG/MM will most likely be available in other non-setting specific publications like the D&D Insider and other supplements.

Also, there is also a good chance that D&D Insider material will make it to future 4E supplements.

Online Play shouldn't be any different from face-to-face play. The players and the GM will have to agree on what supplements to include. At the end of the day, if you're the GM, you can opt to simply not run the game at one extreme. If by conventional play you mean something like the RPGA or some form of organized play, I don't think all the supplements will be accessible immediately and will probably follow the same path of the existing RPGA (you "unlock" certain feats/classes/magic items outsid of the 3 initial books) but that's speculation on my part.

 

[Mouseferatu]

Big fan of action points myself, though I, too, am waiting until I hear what the "new" APs are like before making a final judgment.

That said, these seem to me to be a perfect example of a "Don't like 'em? Don't use 'em" rule. It's not as though something appearing in a core book means that the DM cannot choose not to use it.

 

[shilsen]

Big fan of action points myself, though I, too, am waiting until I hear what the "new" APs are like before making a final judgment.

That said, these seem to me to be a perfect example of a "Don't like 'em? Don't use 'em" rule. It's not as though something appearing in a core book means that the DM cannot choose not to use it.

As ever, listen to the Mouse. The Mouse is wise.

Plus, if you don't listen to it, then you have to lie awake at night fearing the flapping of little rodent wings, and who wants that?

 

[drothgery]

That said, these seem to me to be a perfect example of a "Don't like 'em? Don't use 'em" rule. It's not as though something appearing in a core book means that the DM cannot choose not to use it.

If I didn't like APs, I'd argue the point there; in SWSE and other games where AP-esque mechanics are core, lots of abilities run off of them. They don't drop nicely out of the system. 4e may be different, but that doesn't seem likely to me.

On the other hand, I rather like APs, and I'm glad they're standard now.

 

[charlesatan]

Plus, if you don't listen to it, then you have to lie awake at night fearing the flapping of little rodent wings, and who wants that?

Does that mean Ari will come visit me at home? Can I get him to sign my books?

 

[Psion]

From the news item:

(quoting podcast, I assume):
Apparently there are people who were under the delusion that 3e could not possibly be improved!

Apparently some designers are under the delusion that every change they make will be perceived as an "improvement"!

Re: Action points. I do like this sort of resource, but I have to say, of variations I have seen of this (action dice, hero points, etc.), action points are about the worst. I don't like the way that they were awarded and never really felt they were significant enough in actual play.

This is a somewhat player dependent thing. Some players take to them great. I don't think some people include them in their D&D mindset, though. Though I like them, I'm honestly dubious about their inclusion as core elements.

 

[Shade]

I <3 action points.

 

[Grymar]

My random, uninformed and usually wrong, guess is that the new APs will allow for a reroll rather than a bonus to a roll. More of the recent products have featured luck feats...my guess is that APs will replace these.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I just wonder something about something other posters wrote:
If Action Points are used to protect from a bad die roll, for example against a Instant Death effect, don't they essentially become Hit Points, just different?

Basically, Hitpoints are there to protect PCs from nasty things happening to them. Instant Death effects bypass hit points. Therefore we need a new mechanic that can protect them from these effects...

Why not just make Instant Death effect hit points dependend in the first place?


All that said, I still like Action Points. Especially because they give you a tool to say "I want to try something awesomely difficult, but it would also just look awesome. Can I spent an action point to make it possible?" "Yes!!!"
And it could also serve for so many other purposes.
What's important to keep in mind is that Mearls(?) state in the podcast that "They are not your fathers action points" and that they wouldn't want to go back there. This indicates to me that they work differently than Starwars Force Points and D20 Modern Action Points. So, maybe they will even be fine for those that didn't like th first ones...