Disappointed in 4e

[LostSoul]

I suppose I should have been clearer that some exceptions now exist: Again though, if hit points are an odd amalgam of grit and determination with luck and divine favor, why can't you use them to overcome fear and mental control or to dodge a poisoned dart, etc.?

You can. What do you think keeps you on your feet, fighting against the mental control or the poison? It's only when you hit 0 HP that you've really succumbed to the effect.

And if a morale-boosting rallying cry from your inspiring leader can "heal" hit points, why doesn't anything and everything that's scary or demoralizing do "damage" to hit points?

You can do this, too. Page 42 tells you how much damage you can be expected to do with, say, an Intimidate check.

 

[SpydersWebbing]

I don't know about the current debate about HP and such, but I do know there aren't too many HP built into the system. Apparently no one here has considered what a surprise round can do to people in 4th edition. I just got out of a 6th level session where ghouls got the drop on the PC's and dealt out a TOTAL of 50 damage to two of the four PC's. The rest of the fight was a desperate scrambling to keep them alive while the rest of the party had to carry their weight, since the those two characters had only about 10 hp left, and one more hit from the ghouls would have done that easily.

The sheer amount of damage that can come out of 4th edition (if you're a good DM) necessitates higher HP. I'm glad Wizards did what they did there.

 

[mmadsen]

If hit points are an odd amalgam of grit and determination with luck and divine favor, why can't you use them to overcome fear and mental control or to dodge a poisoned dart, etc.?

You can. What do you think keeps you on your feet, fighting against the mental control or the poison?

I won't profess to be an expert on 4E, so perhaps you can explain to me how hit points help you overcome fear and mental control or to dodge a poisoned dart.

Hit points can't be used to resist an Intimidate check, can they? Is there a cause fear spell that fails if it doesn't do enough "damage" to its victim? A poisoned dart "hits" regardless of hit points, right? That's purely a question of armor class.

Page 42 tells you how much damage you can be expected to do with, say, an Intimidate check.

Page 42? Of what book? The skill listing for Intimidate suggests that a success should cause bloodied opponents to flee or captured prisoners to give up valuable information. It doesn't suggest damage.

 

[The Little Raven]

Hit points can't be used to resist an Intimidate check, can they?

Yes. Page 42, DMG. You can do an Intimidate-based action that would deal psychic damage to your target. Unless you get reduced to 0 hp by it, your hit points have been used to resist it, since it's intention was to reduce you to ineffectiveness.

 

[Imaro]

Yes. Page 42, DMG. You can do an Intimidate-based action that would deal psychic damage to your target. Unless you get reduced to 0 hp by it, your hit points have been used to resist it, since it's intention was to reduce you to ineffectiveness.

So...I can intimidate someone to death if I choose to??

 

[mmadsen]

Yes. Page 42, DMG. You can do an Intimidate-based action that would deal psychic damage to your target. Unless you get reduced to 0 hp by it, your hit points have been used to resist it, since it's intention was to reduce you to ineffectiveness.

From my reading, page 42 of the DMG in no way suggests that an Intimidate check could or should cause psychic damage. It suggests DCs and damage amounts for things like using acrobatics to knock an ogre into a brazier of burning coals.

And I don't know how you'd explain an attempt to intimidate someone that does not make them scared in any measurable way -- except that they take damage.

But, if that's how you want to run your game... I just wouldn't consider it 4E RAW.

 

[Mallus]

So...I can intimidate someone to death if I choose to??

More like "if the DM allows it". Players have to ask for stunt uses of a skill like that. However, with the right circumstances, I'd allow a player to Intimidate an NPC to death. I'd described it as a heart attack.

 

[The Little Raven]

So...I can intimidate someone to death if I choose to??

Indeed. Real life is full of situations in which people suffer fatal heart attacks due to stress or fear caused by another person, such as during a mugging, assault, or even breaking up with no physical contact being made. In a world where dragons fly and sorcerers cast eldritch rituals, it's much more likely that a hero could have such an effect on others.

 

[Mallus]

From my reading, page 42 of the DMG in no way suggests that an Intimidate check could or should cause psychic damage. It suggests DCs and damage amounts for things like using acrobatics to knock an ogre into a brazier of burning coals.

The infamous page 42 establishes a relationship between skills and combat powers. I think it's a perfect fair reading to see that as the general cases, with the Acrobatics and Athletics being specific examples.

So you could use a Religion check to create an ad-hoc attack power, 'a blue bolt from Heaven' while on holy ground, or a Knowledge Arcana check to make a magical artifact blow up in the BBEG hands. The only requirement I see is some kind of special circumstance for the character to take advantage of.

At least, this is how I read it, mainly because it makes 4e more interesting.

 

[Shazman]

I too have been quite disappointed in 4E. One of my groups tried it for a while, and we really found it to not feel like D&D. I was ready to give it a fair shake, but the DM decided he couldn't stomach it anymore, so we are moving on to Pathfinder. To be honest, I am way more excited about playing Pathfinder than I was about playing 4E.