D&D 4.5E (Not Essentials)

[Quickleaf]

I'd also like to see more attention given to the possibilities beyond what's written, be it suggestions on what a monster can do that isn't exactly listed but rather implied, or how powers can work in skill challenges or general play- not just combat. The basic nature of the power blocks and stat blocks is extremely convenient for a lot of us as a skeleton to build on, but far too many people saw them as the limits of what could actually be done with a given power or monster. Cut the head off one of the major hate-ons of the edition and draw attention to the freedom of play it actually gives and the convenience/quickness/improvisation aspect of the simplified or organized blocks in conjunction with good math.

I totally second this!

It's also tricky to offer guidelines for monsters/powers that don't themselves become codified into some sort of power stunt list. I mean, beyond some sort of combination of page 42 and the Tutorial: Terrain Powers article, what would that even look like?

 

[Pour]

I totally second this!

It's also tricky to offer guidelines for monsters/powers that don't themselves become codified into some sort of power stunt list. I mean, beyond some sort of combination of page 42 and the Tutorial: Terrain Powers article, what would that even look like?

I think we've stumbled upon the perfect usage of the pseudo-setting and background material that should come with monster manual entries, except instead of giving definitive lore, provide popular conceptions, creative riffs, mythological and folklore references, examples from designer campaigns, even indirect nods to fiction, video games, movies, etc. in a concise, well-written, and non-copyright-infringing way. Have the entries be all about the possibilities for planning stages, and let the stat blocks be the quick, convenient, abridged beauties they are.

In terms of powers, I think they could be treated in a similar way. Instead of the 'meh' flavor text under each power name, expand that into a paragraph visually distinct from the block itself for easy reference. If we take Nemesis's advice about culling and consolidating powers, there should be room. Give powers a monster entry treatment, offering different instances they might be used. Make them short, interesting, thematic, and applicable. Make the entries the seeds players might want to use themselves and, more importantly, a kind of permission to think out of the box with these very user-friendly power blocks. When at all possible, I would also take the name of the power into consideration and work that into the flavorful uses. I mean would it be so terrible if Cloud of Daggers actually cut the rest of the party loose from their bonds in one go (with an Arcana check if you're a stickler)?

 

[Quickleaf]

[MENTION=59411]Pour[/MENTION]
A really good example of what I think you're describing is in Dragon#394, in an article entitled "Unearthed Arcana: The Awakened Psion" by Peter Schaefer & Robert J. Schwalb. It outlines a system for improvising a range of cool effects for a psion's powers, along with potential consequences for when it goes wrong. Maybe it's a bit extreme to be expanded for all psionic power source PCs, but I think it's a good example of a "guidelines for improv" type system.

Another good example I found was the bard power "Versatile Glamour" from one of the PHB2 bard paragon paths. Though it was a bit too defined and combat oriented, I like how it is essentially several powers in one.

Of course, with a spell like "Cloud of Daggers" or psionic powers it's easy to come up with creative noncombat uses. Martial powers, however, are a bit trickier; for example take a fighter power like "Come and Get It"...besides using it to lure enemies into a trap with the forced pull, I don't know how that would be used outside of combat?

 

[Nemesis Destiny]

For stuff like that, perhaps the keyword system could be used to outline situations where power use outside combat could contribute to skill challenges by substituting an auto success or bonus on a roll, or additional successes on a roll.

In the above example, CaGI might substitute for an Intimidate check or provide automatic success.

In that way, each power in 4.5 might have a keyword specifically relating to its use in skill challenges. I'd be ok with said powers even requiring training in that skill.

When you think about it, several keywords already suggest this; Rattling (intimidate) and Invigorating (endurance) come to mind. Bonuses for using them in a non-combat situation could be dependent on the nature of the power. A small bonus for an applicable At-Will, larger for an Encounter power, and even more for a Daily (perhaps even auto success).

Many movement powers could also be used as a resource in non-combat situations; there are quite a few powers that aid jumping, climbing, running, etc. Heck, even for some social skills. I'd allow a low-Charisma fighter that uses Dervish Dance to impress the nobles at the royal ball in place of having to make a check that they'd otherwise likely fail.

This game is so flexible if only people would just think a little bit outside the box (or statblock). The problem is, in a lot of cases, the game of D&D spent 30+ years training people not to think outside the statblock for answers, so I can see how one of 4e's great strengths was overlooked by a significant segment of the community; on the surface it appears more restrictive, when in reality, it is the least constraining to [player] creativity of any edition before it, or since, so far.

 

[sabrinathecat]

I think that by clearly defining what powers are, and what they do and do not do, 4th edition has done pretty well. Sounds to me like people are unhappy with not being able to use Mend or Feather Fall as deadly weapons.
It is a slippery slope from "a little more flexibility" to outright rule-rape.

 

[Brock Landers]

1) Group Powers by Source (would cut down on the bloat), not Class, in fact, ditch Classes, choose a Power Source, a Role, and Features to support your concept.

2) Definitely address all the out of turn actions/effects and conditions/modifiers.

3) Remove the 1/2 level bonus.

4) Completely change Healing Surges.

5) Cut down HP bloat.

 

[steenan]

In order of importance:

1. Remove ability score from attack roll (keep it for damage and riders) to reduce the pressure to max one ability score. Modify riders, class abilities and defense calculation to make every ability score useful for every class (not necessarily equally useful - but there should be neither "must haves" not "dump stats").

2. Keep the math straight. No math-fixing feats, inherent bonuses that work correctly at high levels.

3. Less feats, with more interesting effects. A small numeric bonus is not an interesting effect.

4. Reduce redundancy among powers. It may be better to group them by power source and get rid of classes entirely, keeping power source and role selection.

5. Better encounter pacing, eliminating both first-round alpha-striking and grinding HPs after the fight is decided. Also, solid support for fights that PCs may lose without getting killed.

6. Change the way damage bonuses are calculated to keep multi-attack powers and minor action attacks from dominating.

7. A solid framework for Solos that keeps them from being neutralized with conditions, but keeps controllers useful.

8. Change the scale of roll results from "miss-hit-critical" to "miss-partial hit-full hit-critical". Miss does nothing, but is improbable (10 points below DC or natural 1), partial hit is when most powers do half damage without riders and critical (10 points above DC or natural 20) gives both damage boost and some additional effect.

 

[Pour]

Martial powers, however, are a bit trickier; for example take a fighter power like "Come and Get It"...besides using it to lure enemies into a trap with the forced pull, I don't know how that would be used outside of combat?

I wonder if 4.5e takes the steps to identify powers like Come an Get It, Lamb to the Slaughter, Create a Target, basically all the martial forced movements and pseudo-charms, and then consider on a case-by-case basis whether or not they make sense. Reaver's Hook, for instance, has a straight damage component, but if you're using a pick or axe it also pulls the target. Maybe there's some sense in that as a model. 'Come and Get It' with an Intimidate skill check prerequisite, which if failed still leaves you actions, might make more 'sense'. Then again, Nemesis's Intimidate prerequisite seems cleaner, an attack verses a skill check then attack. Or do you like the idea of sometimes 'getting' it and sometimes not?

Or maybe we leave those powers as they are. They don't particularly bother me, though their use enters into narrative collaboration territory, basically controlling NPCs if just a little. If, out of combat, a player were trying to chastise an enemy or lure someone out, sure I would give him a +2 for using Come and Get It. Maybe power mobility can translate into skill bonuses in certain instances.

I greatly encouraged power use in skill challenges along those lines. The bonus depended on the creativity of their use. Usually, burning a Daily was an automatic success. If it was a genius idea, I usually gave an auto-success as well. Encounters and At-Wills depended, but ranged +2 on a check or the possibility of shifting down the difficulty of the DC for the next person.

 

[herrozerro]

If 4.5 is going to be a revision along the lines of 3.5. I would say that essentials would have been awesome to continue with. I personally do not get the hate for ir.

But if we are doing drastic revisions I would go for something like savage world's with hit points. Generic abilities that can have whatever trappings you want.

Perhaps how the supers book does it. With modifiers for much more customizable powers.

 

[Quickleaf]

[MENTION=98255]Nemesis Destiny[/MENTION]
Keywords strike me as one of the best but least utilized aspects of 4e. In my games I'm often coming up with new keywords or new uses for old keywords that are relevant to other aspects of the adventure ora are referred to in the encounter. For example, tight kobold passageways restricting [great weapon] use, and then describing which weapons have that keyword & having an NPC with that keyword.

As far as monster abilities not in the stat block...It's a great topic!

Some that I know are rules but are not necessarily spelled out (or are just obscure)...

• 1 healing surge per tier: this opens up kinds of possibilities like martial practices, rituals, magic items requiring healing surges, and taking a second wind during a short rest.
• Speaking of rests, it is implied that monsters benefit from them, regaining HP, surges, and action points and daily powers (if any) during an extended rest. What would make an interesting addition to a monster's description is something like "Extended rest: Cyclops sleep with their eye open and take no Perception penalty for sleeping."
• Make skill checks: Do monsters, like adventurers, have a basic level of competence in every skill? It's an good question, and I tend to think yes. When left alone, a tied up goblin without training in Acrobatics scan try to wriggle out of restraints, for example. A DM could also look to the monster's trained skills as inspiration for how the monster responds to threat of adventurers given enough time. Many goblin's are trained in Stealth and Thievery, suggesting they will spy on PCs or try to steal or sabotage things in their camp. Hobgoblins, on the other hand, are often trained in Athletics and Intimidate, suggesting that they will explore new horizons, subjugate others to fight for them, and maybe shake down the PCs contacts.

Anyhow, I just was working on a monster for my campaign called The Faerie Fiddler which is turning into the longest stat block I've ever done because he has several out-of-combat powers (Musician's Challenge & Gambler's Challenge). Normally those kinds of things would be in the adventure text rather than in the monster stat block, I suppose, but I needed rules for them and they're iconic to this monster. It would be really nice to have some guidelines for short-handing this stuff & then improvising it.