Core materials: Action Points and Insider

[Wormwood]

"Real risks"?

Blackleaf, we hardly knew you.

 

[wayne62682]

Ironically my problem with action points is that they don't do enough. I've seen more times where you knew it wasn't worth using an AP because you rolled so low that it would be a waste than times where the AP saved the day (although yes, I have seen a few of those). And this was using the easy-to-abuse UA version, not the Eberron one (Who has need for any Sudden Metamagic feat when you can just emulate it as needed with an action point?).

I'd much rather see specific uses outlined (as opposed to a generic "add x to y") and have them function like Willpower (used to?) work(s) in WoD: You spend it and automatically succeed at something.

So, for example: I could burn an action point and be able to take a running jump onto a table, leap from there to a chandelier, swing and drop down behind my archenemy (doing a backflip) and stab him in the back. As part of one action. Or burn one to auto-crit (or similar) for a cinematic finishing blow.

IMO Action Points should enable you to pull off heroic, cinematic stunts and guarantee they succeed. That's why they're A) Rare (and you should get even less than them IMO), and B) Only available to PCs and "mastermind" NPCs (i.e. BBEGs and high-level minions, not mooks). As they stand now, they don't let you pull off anything, just add a paltry die roll where it's probably not going to matter. And that's not heroic at all.

 

[WhimsyTheFae]

Ironically my problem with action points is that they don't do enough. I've seen more times where you knew it wasn't worth using an AP because you rolled so low that it would be a waste than times where the AP saved the day (although yes, I have seen a few of those). And this was using the easy-to-abuse UA version, not the Eberron one (Who has need for any Sudden Metamagic feat when you can just emulate it as needed with an action point?).

I'd much rather see specific uses outlined (as opposed to a generic "add x to y") and have them function like Willpower (used to?) work(s) in WoD: You spend it and automatically succeed at something.

So, for example: I could burn an action point and be able to take a running jump onto a table, leap from there to a chandelier, swing and drop down behind my archenemy (doing a backflip) and stab him in the back. As part of one action. Or burn one to auto-crit (or similar) for a cinematic finishing blow.

IMO Action Points should enable you to pull off heroic, cinematic stunts and guarantee they succeed. That's why they're A) Rare (and you should get even less than them IMO), and B) Only available to PCs and "mastermind" NPCs (i.e. BBEGs and high-level minions, not mooks). As they stand now, they don't let you pull off anything, just add a paltry die roll where it's probably not going to matter. And that's not heroic at all.

I have players that would sympathize with you. I would guess that I have at least three players who believe Action Points are almost worthless, due to poor rolls (adding +1d6 to a roll and almost always rolling a 1 or 2).

 

[Khairn]

So the definition of "core" now includes everything in the DDI? So core rules will be expanding on a monthly (weekly?) basis, depending on when new rulings, revisions, classes, spells etc etc are released? I can't say that I'm surprised, as it seemed clear that was where WotC was going, I'm just surprised that they announced it so soon.

In 3E, everyone I know uses the "core" rules contained in the PHB, DMG and MM. As a GM it was easy to say yes or no (rule 0) to any of the optional books that didn't fit into my games. It was easy to have a core that everyone understood and then only worried about those books I was adding in.

Starting off with a common base and adding to taste is a simple and easy method to use.

But with 4E we'll have a constantly changing base and flavor to the game that we GM's will have to remove elements from? Sure, it can be done. I can (as an example) make a call to subtract the May 08 and June 08 DDI, but include July. In essence it comes out to the same thing.

But it just doesn't seem as simple to me.

 

[Charwoman Gene]

Your point would be that the damage for cats and rats is too high???

Humor? Maybe? Substitute Giant Rat? Kobold. Blind Goblin. Pieless orc.

4E R SRIOUS BIDNESS!

 

[Wormwood]

IMO Action Points should enable you to pull off heroic, cinematic stunts and guarantee they succeed. That's why they're A) Rare (and you should get even less than them IMO), and B) Only available to PCs and "mastermind" NPCs (i.e. BBEGs and high-level minions, not mooks). As they stand now, they don't let you pull off anything, just add a paltry die roll where it's probably not going to matter. And that's not heroic at all.

That's why I'm seriously considering importing the Drama Point system from Eden's Buffy rpg.

 

[Charwoman Gene]

So the definition of "core" now includes everything in the DDI? So core rules will be expanding on a monthly (weekly?) basis, depending on when new rulings, revisions, classes, spells etc etc are released? I can't say that I'm surprised, as it seemed clear that was where WotC was going, I'm just surprised that they announced it so soon.

Dude, no. Apply the Definition in reverse and they would have considered Bo9S and most of Dragon core in 3.5 as it isn't setting specific. They mentioned two definitions of core, and if you want to choose the one that supports your grand conspiracy theory, great, whatever.

Core is 3 books. PH, DMG, MM. Errata will be free.

 

[Jackelope King]

Ironically my problem with action points is that they don't do enough. I've seen more times where you knew it wasn't worth using an AP because you rolled so low that it would be a waste than times where the AP saved the day (although yes, I have seen a few of those). And this was using the easy-to-abuse UA version, not the Eberron one (Who has need for any Sudden Metamagic feat when you can just emulate it as needed with an action point?).

I'd much rather see specific uses outlined (as opposed to a generic "add x to y") and have them function like Willpower (used to?) work(s) in WoD: You spend it and automatically succeed at something.

So, for example: I could burn an action point and be able to take a running jump onto a table, leap from there to a chandelier, swing and drop down behind my archenemy (doing a backflip) and stab him in the back. As part of one action. Or burn one to auto-crit (or similar) for a cinematic finishing blow.

IMO Action Points should enable you to pull off heroic, cinematic stunts and guarantee they succeed. That's why they're A) Rare (and you should get even less than them IMO), and B) Only available to PCs and "mastermind" NPCs (i.e. BBEGs and high-level minions, not mooks). As they stand now, they don't let you pull off anything, just add a paltry die roll where it's probably not going to matter. And that's not heroic at all.

In M&M, hero points let you reroll and add 10 to any roll you get which is below 11, so your effective range of results is 11-20, garunteed after spending a hero point.

In my own version, you get a pool of hero dice instead, and when you want to spend one, you get to roll all the dice at once and pick the best result before you lose the spent die. Mathematically, it works out roughly the same in terms of percentage likelyhood to hit a certain DC, but it adds the little bit of fun of rolling a boatload of dice when it really, really matters.

 

[Imaro]

Dude, no. Apply the Definition in reverse and they would have considered Bo9S and most of Dragon core in 3.5 as it isn't setting specific. They mentioned two definitions of core, and if you want to choose the one that supports your grand conspiracy theory, great, whatever.

Core is 3 books. PH, DMG, MM. Errata will be free.

So, you don't feel like this could be confusing for those just starting with 4e, especially if they decide to go with labelling all these books "core"? Or even those customers who don't frequent message boards to find out what "core" really means. I'm hoping that this type of strategy won't be used, since with 3.0/3.5 WotC coined the term "core" to represent only the three necessary books for play. To switch it to everything that's non-setting specific seems a little disingenious(if they actually label these books as such or have something to the effect of an advertisement in the PHB...for additional core game material go to gleemax.com and subscribe to the DDI.) after the precedent they themselves set with 3.0/3.5e. I still think "Official D&D supplement" is a better term given what most have come to expect. There would be no confusion if there are then official Eberron/Forgotten Realms, etc. material labeled as well.

 

[The_Universe]

I like Action Points (or other, similar mechanics) though I prefer versions that "refresh" independently of when characters level. They help balance out risk over the session, and give players a little more control over when they really are in danger.

D&D Insider can't be any more or less core than Dragon or Dungeon Magazines were...so I perceive no assault on GM prerogative there.