Design & Development: Elite Bulette

[Gloombunny]

Fighter wards off the dirt with his shield = shield now gives some bonus to Ref score (whether by feat or class ability)? Sounds like even AoEs need an attack roll to hit in 4e, which means that there is no need for 3e evasion: they either miss, hit, or crit. There is no ref for half/none with evasion anymore.

That doesn't follow. There will probably be area attacks that deal half damage when they "miss", and evasion will negate that half damage.

Sounds like the shield gives the Fighter a Ref bonus so he was missed by the attack and being prone gave all the other characters a Ref negative, so they were hit. Sweet if this is the case; shields give bonuses to more than just AC, making them very worthwhile!

Or it could be an area attack that goes against AC rather than Reflex. I mean, if the attack is a bunch of rocks and dirt flying around, then it makes sense that wearing armor would help protect you from that.

 

[Rechan]

As for wiping off his shield, check out this new tidbit:

Regarding the Shield: The shield will offer protection against spells, such as fireball: No discussion of armor is complete without mentioning the humble shield, capable of turning away spear-thrust, arrow-shaft and fireball alike, this slab of wood or steel .... [snip]

 

[Sir Brennen]

As for wiping off his shield, check out this new tidbit:

Where are you quoting that from?

 

[Rechan]

Where are you quoting that from?

http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=214059

 

[jaer]

That doesn't follow. There will probably be area attacks that deal half damage when they "miss", and evasion will negate that half damage.

Curious as to why you think that is the option. If a fireball rolls for an attack, why would a miss = half damage, a hit = full damage, and a crit = extra damage? Even if you are coming from 3e rule-set, there are 3 options: Evasion = no damage, ref save = half damage, failed save is full damage. It would seem more logical to allow for those same 3 options and allow for everyone to not be hit or everyone to take crit damage. A fireball can be aimed so poorly that even the slow, plodding bullette (generally easily hit by such a thing since it cannot get out of the way) is missed entirely.

Of course, there could be some caster ability that states "even when a spell misses, it does X damage." I recall from a pod cast (I think) that someone mentioned thier Barbarian could (or would eventually) to do some small amount of damage even when their attack missed. But I would assume that, at it's base, a miss is a miss and does no damage, whether it be a sword or a fireball that missed.

If there was an Evasion ability, it would seem more fit to have a hit do half damage from evasion (more similar to Imp Evasion).

Or it could be an area attack that goes against AC rather than Reflex. I mean, if the attack is a bunch of rocks and dirt flying around, then it makes sense that wearing armor would help protect you from that.

This, of course, is potentially the case. Being a physically attack rather than a spell, it might attack AC.

 

[JohnSnow]

Curious as to why you think that is the option. If a fireball rolls for an attack, why would a miss = half damage, a hit = full damage, and a crit = extra damage? Even if you are coming from 3e rule-set, there are 3 options: Evasion = no damage, ref save = half damage, failed save is full damage. It would seem more logical to allow for those same 3 options and allow for everyone to not be hit or everyone to take crit damage. A fireball can be aimed so poorly that even the slow, plodding bullette (generally easily hit by such a thing since it cannot get out of the way) is missed entirely.

Of course, there could be some caster ability that states "even when a spell misses, it does X damage." I recall from a pod cast (I think) that someone mentioned thier Barbarian could (or would eventually) to do some small amount of damage even when their attack missed. But I would assume that, at it's base, a miss is a miss and does no damage, whether it be a sword or a fireball that missed.

If there was an Evasion ability, it would seem more fit to have a hit do half damage from evasion (more similar to Imp Evasion).

He assumes that's the case because that's how it works in Star Wars Saga Edition. Area attacks do full damage on a hit and half damage on a miss. Evasion is a talent available to Scouts that reduces the damage to half on a hit and none on a miss. Jedi have a similar ability in "Deflect" - but that only applies to blasters set on autofire, as opposed to all area-effect attacks.

Naturally, people are assuming that since we've been told that Saga is a "significant preview" of 4e, it is likely this will be how it works in 4e as well.

It's perfectly realistic - most area effect attacks don't have to be direct hits to do some damage - and it's very familiar to D&D players, being mechanically identical to the saving throw.

As a side note, it would be perfectly reasonable to offer a fighter ability similar to "deflect" (and its melee correspondent, "block") that would require a shield. And that ability would dovetail nicely with the fighter flavor text.

 

[jaer]

He assumes that's the case because that's how it works in Star Wars Saga Edition. Area attacks do full damage on a hit and half damage on a miss. Evasion is a talent available to Scouts that reduces the damage to half on a hit and none on a miss. Jedi have a similar ability in "Deflect" - but that only applies to blasters set on autofire, as opposed to all area-effect attacks.

Naturally, people are assuming that since we've been told that Saga is a "significant preview" of 4e, it is likely this will be how it works in 4e as well.

It's perfectly realistic - most area effect attacks don't have to be direct hits to do some damage - and it's very familiar to D&D players, being mechanically identical to the saving throw.

Thanks for that clarification - knowing nothing of the Star Wars mechanics, I found that an odd assumption to make, but now I see where he was coming from. And I agree, it does make sense that most area of effect spells don't need to hit in order to do some damage, but it also makes sense that a poorly throw gernade does nothing more than make a small hole in the ground. But perhaps that is better relegated to critical misses...

 

[Frostmarrow]

As far as I understand it, the designers are working on the basis that four monsters of, say, level 6 are an appropriate challenge to a 6th level party.

However, two elite verisions of that same monster would be an equivalent challenge.

Presumably, by the math, eight minions or one solo version of the creature would also be appropriate. I can see this working quite well:

A couple of minion fights (You're attacked by eight minion goblins!)
Then a more serious fight (Four goblins!)
The boss fight - (Two elite goblins!)
And the unpleasant surprise moment to cap it all (A solo goblin steps out and draws his flaming sword!)

As I understand it, all of those encounters (individually) would be the same as a CR6 encounter now. Of course, I don't know how it would work to be attacked by two of those encounters at the same time...

They're all GOBLINS. But the different challenges involved in being attacked by different numbers of goblins makes each sort of encounter feel different, and give different sorts of challenges. I really like it - it'll make it easier to set up multiple versions of the same creature with different abilities.

This means that there will not be a neat table of advancement for monsters. For this to work they need to playtest every instance until they get it right. Which they presumably have all the time in the world to do. This is the way GW works when balancing one army list against all previously released ones. Part of being a games-designer I guess.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Thanks for that clarification - knowing nothing of the Star Wars mechanics, I found that an odd assumption to make, but now I see where he was coming from. And I agree, it does make sense that most area of effect spells don't need to hit in order to do some damage, but it also makes sense that a poorly throw gernade does nothing more than make a small hole in the ground. But perhaps that is better relegated to critical misses...

IIRC, a miss is possible with the Saga Errata - failing to get at least a 10 negates all damage.

 

[Frostmarrow]

IIRC, a miss is possible with the Saga Errata - failing to get at least a 10 negates all damage.

Are you saying 1-10 hp damage is 0 hp damage in this context? If so, it's lousy design that does more damage than good.