Discussing 4e Subsystems: Conditions

Stalker0

Legend
Conditions
I hope this article will “stun” the audience. Okay, bad puns aside, along with the powers that carry them, conditions have become a cornerstone of the new edition. Almost every major attack most characters do carries some rider effect that hinders their enemies. Let us take a look it this system, but first we begin with a history lesson.

Conditions in 3rd Edition
While there were more conditions in 3rd edition than there are now, they tended to be seen with less frequency. Generally spellcasters got most of the conditions, with fighter types left with combat maneuvers like tripping to get their conditions in.

Spellcaster conditions tended to get stronger as the levels increased. At first level you could daze someone for a 1 round. By 15th you could stun an opponent for the entire fight. That’s an important note, not only did the conditions get stronger, but they also got longer. This was the hallmark of high level casters. Why bother with damage when you could simply take a monster out of the fight? Of course, the ultimate condition was death, and so “save or dies” played a large part in high level play. As a counter to this, many monsters and magic items provided immunities to these conditions. The fight came down to figuring out what blanket protections the enemy didn’t have, and destroying them.

For fighter types, combat maneuvers treaded a fine line between “too hard to use” and “too good to pass up”. The trip fighter is a common example. A general fighter didn’t have a lot of use for trip. The possible advantages of knocking someone prone didn’t usually outweigh the loss of attacks. However, give the fighter some tripping feats and a good tripping weapon, and suddenly every attack from the fighter was a trip attack. In this sense, combat maneuvers were not options, they were builds. You didn’t make a fighter that tripped once in a while, you made a tripping fighter, a disarming fighter, a bullrushing fighter, etc.

Against the players, the monsters had a host of abilities that did conditions on their own. Many required alteration in player stats, such as level draining. Others like stunning would knock them out of the fight completely. Conditions were something to be truly feared, as they often meant complete loss in a fight.

The New Mantra of 4th edition
If the condition system had a mantra, I think it would be this: “Conditions are easily applied, short lasting, and hindering…not debilitating.”

While prone used to give a massive -4 to attack and AC, now it provides -2. Further, conditions do not compound like they used to, a character that is prone and flanked has no more penalties than if he was simply prone.
However, characters are no longer forced to give up attacks or take special actions to perform conditions. You get your damage and your condition cake as well. The conditions have been designed so that there penalties are simply to apply, and no recalculation of a creature’s stats is every required. However, with the number of conditions to apply, bookmarking has greatly increased in most fights.

The last major change about conditions is that they tend to last a very short time in the fight. Fights are generally 6+ more rounds, and conditions will often last 1 or 2 of those. This increases the dynamic nature of combat, one moment the fighter is prone, the next he’s knocking someone back 3 squares, etc. The phenomenon continues into high levels. While the conditions do get stronger (dazed replaced with stun, slow replaced with immobilize) they don’t get longer, which keeps the dynamic effect.

The “Realism” of Conditions
One thing about conditions in 3rd edition, especially the fighter ones, is that there effectiveness was heavily dependent on what you were fighting. A fighter could grapple a small creature and render it nigh helpless, while they had no chance in Hades to trip a storm giant, etc. This made a lot of sense flavorwise, though it did mean that many combat techniques became less and less useful at higher levels, which tended to have a plethora of “big” monsters.

In 4e, this is a big change. A fighter can trip a small Halfling or a Titan with almost equal ease, and this has caused a lot of concern in the community that the realism is gone. I can sympathize with this, while the titan might have a slightly higher fort defense than an equivalent level Halfling warrior, there’s not that big a difference to the fighter’s ability to trip. However, I will counter with this argument, for a long long time now players have gotten comfortable with the fact that a fighter carrying a piece of metal about the equivalent size to a toothpick when compared to the titan is able to consistently kill him with it. If we can accept that, is the tripping part so out there? Can’t we believe that a fighter’s magic weapon releases a force that magnifies the fighter’s strength, giving him the ability to trip? Or that the fighter cuts the titan in a vulnerable spot on his leg and knocks him down, etc. Ultimately I think the realism of conditions is a facet of the player’s ability to imagine and describe his actions, and imagination is a lot of what this game is about.

The Final Word….Is the 4e Condition System Better?

I think everyone can agree that the condition system in 4e is radically different than 3e’s, but the ultimate question….is it better?
People are going to have varying opinions on that, but for the most part, my answer is yes. As a player, I don’t like it when my character is out of an entire combat. As a player, I enjoy getting to daze a guy, immobilize him, or knock him prone once in a while.

I do think 4e went overboard on the frequency of its conditions. I’m fine with fighters knocking a guy prone, but when its prone, next round daze, next round immobilize, etc it starts to stretch any specialness conditions have and greatly increases the amount of bookkeeping required by the Dm. In that light, I’d prefer to see more future powers that do more damage and give more general buffs than ones that keep slapping on conditions.
Overall though, I think the new condition system produces more dynamic combats, allows players to participate in more combats and for longer, and limits some of the high level problems 3rd edition saw. In that light I think it is a solid step forward in game design.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Stalker0:

Once again, totally on track, and reasonably explained in a way that is pretty neutral.

I agree, but if I had to explain it, I would probably use more expletives.

I might quibble with the "realism" aspect, but meh. The post is too good to bother quibbling. :)
 

Good post, and I am not going to disagree much.

There is one thing I am wondering about, though:
Are the conditions really too much, too often sometimes? Or is this actually something we "need" for an "interesting" combat? (As long as we are at all interested in running combat)

It was already in 3E compared to other games that I noticed that using stuff like miniatures enhances the "interestingness" of combat, there are more variations and more tactical combinations.

Going further to 4E I noticed that the core system of the game could work fine without minis - assuming you were willing to write new powers that use conditions instead of positional effects (slide, push, pull, move, shift). And I noticed that the combat grid is giving us a way to express conditions that are easier to understand because we can literally see them.

So a gridless, mini-less game that provides a similar degree of "tactical complexity" might need even more conditions!

So, overall, offers 4E combat too much mechanical variety overall, so much that it becomes cumbersome? Or are there ways to make this better without reducing complexity?
 

Very good article!

My biggest concern is the ability to take advantage of the system, and have it spiral out of control. The heavy frequency of conditions, as you pointed out, can kind of present "stunlock" situations that really are more about optimizing than exiting combat. This isn't a problem in my games, however, and I think the smooth implementation of these conditions is well worth the risk of the occasional exploitation that's going to come of rigorous playtesting eventually anyway. I love the way they play, and from a DM's perspective, they allow me to narrate things happening without me being able to provide any ingame evidence (ie: much like the nature of powers in general, their specificity helps me guide my narration in a way that's condusive to spontinaety.)
 

Nice analysis. I agree that they way they work in 4E makes sense. The constant shuffling of paperwork or cards to track them? That's where I agree that they could change a little more for the better.
 

I think that fighter 3e 'options' turning into 'builds' was largely a factor of additional feats and prestige classes which were added on to the core (apart from spiked chain trip monkey of doom, of course!). It remains to be seen what will happen with 4e conditions over time.

I personally find that the multiplicity of conditions in 4e make managing combat more of a headache than it used to be in 3e (or any other RPG), and I'm disappointed by that - I had hoped that 4e would be able to reduce the bookkeeping in game as well as in prep time.

I think that some people raise the complaint that in the process of democratising access to condition-causing powers, 4e has made the various caster classes less special, and there may be something in that. It might have been nice to have seen perhaps one or two conditions which remained unique to casters.

Cheers
 

:twocents:

I think the conditions resemble the minis game too closely in rules and are way too wonky and too much accounting for them. The only time they don't need the constant "save check ends" accounting is because they didn't really last that long to be worthy of being included in the first place.


[/end of line]
 

:twocents:

I think the conditions resemble the minis game too closely in rules and are way too wonky and too much accounting for them. The only time they don't need the constant "save check ends" accounting is because they didn't really last that long to be worthy of being included in the first place.


[/end of line]

I have the opposite opinion. Once you get all the conditions down by rote (and since they're so plentiful, it's hard not to), they don't feel wonky at all. And most effects that aren't Save Ends are usually Until End of Character's Next Turn, which is PLENTY of time for the condition to affect the battle. At the very least, the character that applied the condition can now take advantage of it, even if his/her allies can't. (shrug)
 

I have the opposite opinion. Once you get all the conditions down by rote (and since they're so plentiful, it's hard not to), they don't feel wonky at all. And most effects that aren't Save Ends are usually Until End of Character's Next Turn, which is PLENTY of time for the condition to affect the battle. At the very least, the character that applied the condition can now take advantage of it, even if his/her allies can't. (shrug)

I mean the wonky-ness of the extra accounting. I would prefer to be hit with a save or die, rather than hire a halfling accountant (see another thread) than try to keep straight the powers cards, and little status cards during combat.

Just let me hit things with my axe!

I prefer to leave the "stack" to MtG and out of D&D...

So not that the status conditions are wonky, but the accounting for them makes playing and combat wonky.
 

The Conditions aspect of 4e is the one (and perhaps the 'only') part of 4e that all of my players agree has been markedly improved. Even my 3e spellcaster grognards nod their heads with respect to 4e Conditions.

The problem, in my opinion (since it's illegal to make a post without having something to complain about), is that there are too few of them. I never thought I'd say that, coming from a 3e mindset wherein conditions and modifiers killed me with accounting, but it's true.

This "too few" gripe resonates throughout the game: too few builds, too few powers, and - yes- too few conditions.

The Powers - partly because there aren't enough of 'em, and partly because there aren't enough Conditions - are somewhat repetitive. Strike that: very repetitive. One guy slides someone with a Power and another guy Pushes someone with a power. Whippty do.

I had hoped the Powers - and Conditions imposed by such - would really show some creativity and distinction (amongst classes and within the same class).

An example: There's a warlock power (I forget it's name) that immobilizes a guy - but does so with him hovering 5' above the battlefield. That's a simple change to the effect that makes a world of difference when it comes to distinction. We should see more of that, and I hope that we do as the splat tsunami begins to wash over us.

Lastly, by 'more Conditions' I'm not simply talking a bunch of other modifiers; no thanks, had enough of that in previous editions. I'm talking cool, evocative, descriptive aspects that are married to mechanics.

WP

Edit: Great analysis Stalker. As usual, you are spot on when it comes to comparing and contrasting without wallowing in the typical drama of message boards.
 

Remove ads

Top