Discussion of DMG page 42

[Zsig]

On the other hand, if you make it so that the reward is way better than the alternative, you'll bog down the game alot since everyone and their mothers will be wasting 5 or so minutes every freaking round trying to figure how to improvise and play creatively, just so that they could exploit the rules.


Also, the easy/moderate/hard DCs shouldn't imply whether the damage values follow the same line low/ moderate/ high (respectively).

Sometimes an easy/small (easy DC) thing could activate a big/heavy (high damage) reaction.

As a DM it's your job to adjucate whether and how effectively such things work, always keeping in mind that the more creative the action, the more it should reward the player.

 

[FourthBear]

I think for the vast majority of proposed spontaneous actions, something like page 42 is appropriate. Fantasy novels and movies have the advantage of the characters and situations being under the complete control of the author. Conan can kill the God of the Black Jewel with a single action by impaling it on its own idol's fangs. However, Conan's author doesn't have to worry about Conan then attempting to push every darn enemy into spiked objects and asking if that instantly kills it. Or Conan's four friends who accompanied him who never got a chance to show off their abilities when he declared an instant win action.

I do think there's a place for actions that completely circumvent traditional battles and encounters. But I think a DM has to consider very carefully these on a case by case basis. I know lots of players like to spend their time thinking of ways to avoid traditional heroic challenges entirely or make every combat encounter into a no risk sniper session. If everyone around the table enjoys that consistently, that's fine.

And, of course, such instant win movements are quite common in video games, after all. I know point and click adventure games are filled with "set up a specific booby trap for the monster and kill it" style puzzle combat.

 

[Imaro]

On the other hand, if you make it so that the reward is way better than the alternative, you'll bog down the game alot since everyone and their mothers will be wasting 5 or so minutes every freaking round trying to figure how to improvise and play creatively, just so that they could exploit the rules.

Eh, not too concerned about this, personally. I think this can happen with powers as well, especially when players are trying to choose the best power for the current situation.

Also, the easy/moderate/hard DCs shouldn't imply whether the damage values follow the same line low/ moderate/ high (respectively).

Sometimes an easy/small (easy DC) thing could activate a big/heavy (high damage) reaction.

Personally, and I may be off base here...I'm not going to let most skill checks, cause damage...it would have to be some type of attack vs. an opponents/objects defense in order to cause damage... so no I don't think skill DC's have anything to do with the damage. Now, on the rare chance that I would allow a skill check to directly cause damage...I would probably lean more towards higher checks = more damage as a general guideline...but it wouldn't be set in stone.

As a DM it's your job to adjucate whether and how effectively such things work, always keeping in mind that the more creative the action, the more it should reward the player.

Okay, but I'm talking more about the incentive a player has, especially after his encounter and dailies are spent to do something besides spam his at-will's...not about the DM using his judgment correctly. Personally I think that will fall into place (even if it takes a DM a little while to determine the feel he wants as far as improvised actions) but he will start with how the book presents it and as far as I can tell page 42, much as it has been lauded, really gives little incentive for getting players to try anything besides powers...Even though alot of people cite it as great for encouraging PC's to try other things.

NOTE: I also feel it is lacking as far as judging how to implement movement and conditions in improvised actions.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

Quote:
Originally Posted by ardoughter
Because once you have him sitting in the brazier you spend and action point and still have you encounter power to hit him with. And if his initiative was before yours he is still sitting in the brasier at the start of his round and takes ongoing fire damage.
And even if you did not use the action point you still have your encounter and daily powers in reserve.
So by use of your imagination and a bit of wit you get to do encounter power type damage without spending that valuble encounter power. That is still available and can be spent on any round but the swinging from the chandeler does not set its self up as often and by creating an environment where it is possible a clever DM can allow the party punch above their weight in an encounter.

Maybe I'm confused by what you are trying to convey here...but you could use an action point to get an extra attack regardless, I mean if you use Riposte Strike you could possibly get 3 attacks, instead of 2. And again CA and superior weapons offset most of the "extra damage", and I've shown the maneuver does (at high damage) only average damage on par with an at-will.

Yes, I agree it's a much more interesting story (and this is really near the crux of what I'm getting at.)...until the PC's start trying to implement these "traps" and their chance to hit and damage is so low it hardly makes it worth the effort.

2d6 +3 with a push effect is comparable to an encounter power for first level characters. Thunderwave a first level at will with a push effect is 1d6 + int for damage. If the monster is still sitting in that brazier at the beginning of his round I would rule that he takes ongoing fire damage and is now on fire. So then it could be worth more than the encounter. Depending on how the pc set it up.

 

[Imaro]

2d6 +3 with a push effect is comparable to an encounter power for first level characters. Thunderwave a first level at will with a push effect is 1d6 + int for damage. If the monster is still sitting in that brazier at the beginning of his round I would rule that he takes ongoing fire damage and is now on fire. So then it could be worth more than the encounter. Depending on how the pc set it up.

I guess I'm looking at it from the perspective that the "push" is not a separate effect from damage, but actually necessary to cause the damage. So it's not like you get to cause damage and then push him wherever you want him to go... you have to push him into the position of the fire...in order to do damage, so it's movement power is definitely more limited than Thunderwave. Also as a side note, Thunderwave is a ranged power...so you can create this effect and damage from relative safety...so again Thunderwave, IMHO is a safer bet than this trick when you look at it from a tactical perspective.

I actually think Tide of Iron is a better comparison (because it's not a ranged power...just like the stunt kicking the Bugbear isn't a ranged attack). Now as I look at it Tide of Iron is better than this stunt in every way...especially if the Fighter in question is using a high damage weapon, such as a Great Sword or Greataxe. With a greatsword, he gets the push (only anywhere he wants)...does 1d10+4(Str) and has a total +7 to hit...again a .5 point of damage vs. +15% increase in chance to hit.)

With a Greataxe...it's a 1d12+4(Str) with a total to hit of +6... so average damage of 10 and a +10% chance to hit vs. the improvised move.

 

[malraux]

I don't tend to combine the skill checks directly to the damage sets (possibly because my players don't try stuff like that often). But I do find the limited and unlimited damage expressions very useful for improvising questions like how much damage is done when a monster is pushed into the inter-dimensional fire column.

Similarly, the skill DCs are useful. If a trap immobilizes a character, what should the strength check to move him be? Well, I can use the DC chart to figure that out.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

I guess I'm looking at it from the perspective that the "push" is not a separate effect from damage, but actually necessary to cause the damage. So it's not like you get to cause damage and then push him wherever you want him to go... you have to push him into the position of the fire...in order to do damage, so it's movement power is definitely more limited than Thunderwave. Also as a side note, Thunderwave is a ranged power...so you can create this effect and damage from relative safety...so again Thunderwave, IMHO is a safer bet than this trick when you look at it from a tactical perspective.

I actually think Tide of Iron is a better comparison (because it's not a ranged power...just like the stunt kicking the Bugbear isn't a ranged attack). Now as I look at it Tide of Iron is better than this stunt in every way...especially if the Fighter in question is using a high damage weapon, such as a Great Sword or Greataxe. With a greatsword, he gets the push (only anywhere he wants)...does 1d10+4(Str) and has a total +7 to hit...again a .5 point of damage vs. +15% increase in chance to hit.)

With a Greataxe...it's a 1d12+4(Str) with a total to hit of +6... so average damage of 10 and a +10% chance to hit vs. the improvised move.

First your need to decide if its a rogue or a fighter I pulled thunderwave into the discussion because I knew the number off the top of my head. Also the stunt could be dooable where the at will could not.
If the bugbear is out of normal movement the chandaler thing could still be viable when a normal move is not. So now it is still worth it and a damn sight better than charge and a basic.
Now if you want you can always come up with scenarios that trump the stunt. In fact normally you should because otherwise the powers have little or no value. The powers are good because they are reliable and not circumstantial, stunts are circumstantial. If you don't see value in them fair enough.
I'm off to the pub for a few pints.

 

[pawsplay]

On the other hand, if you make it so that the reward is way better than the alternative, you'll bog down the game alot since everyone and their mothers will be wasting 5 or so minutes every freaking round trying to figure how to improvise and play creatively, just so that they could exploit the rules.

That's why the advantage should be modest. It's ok if it's reliably better, but it shouldn't be radically better. Besides, if D&D were all about elaborate narrative structures and skill challenges in order to overpower opponents, you wouldn't use the existing power system, you would start with a simpler core and build a game around the stunt rules.

 

[Ourph]

I actually think Tide of Iron is a better comparison (because it's not a ranged power...just like the stunt kicking the Bugbear isn't a ranged attack). Now as I look at it Tide of Iron is better than this stunt in every way...especially if the Fighter in question is using a high damage weapon, such as a Great Sword or Greataxe. With a greatsword, he gets the push (only anywhere he wants)...does 1d10+4(Str) and has a total +7 to hit...again a .5 point of damage vs. +15% increase in chance to hit.)

With a Greataxe...it's a 1d12+4(Str) with a total to hit of +6... so average damage of 10 and a +10% chance to hit vs. the improvised move.

Tide of Iron requires the Fighter to be using a shield, so using the damage output for Great weapons isn't really a valid comparison.

 

[LostSoul]

Let me start out by saying that I don't see nearly enough of this sort of thing in my game. I'd like to see one of these 42 stunts at least once a round.

I also think the guidelines could be better, but page 42 is a good start.

I also also think that if the player can use the environment it should be better than a power, given the right circumstances.

I used to think a condition with no damage was fair, but now I think that you can deal damage and do a condition and it's fine. Some effects (like Stun, Blinded, Unconcious) should be handled with care and maybe shouldn't deal damage as well. I think it would have been better if they had dealt with conditions on page 42.

Here are some simple examples:

"I bash him with the butt of my blade. I want to stun him."
"Improvised Weapon vs. Fort, Hit = 1[W] + Str and he's Dazed (save ends)."

"I cut the rope holding up the chandelier and drop it on him. I want to pin him under it."
"Dex + 2 vs. Ref, Hit = Medium Limited Damage (2d10+3) and he's Prone and Restrained until the end of your next turn."

"I swing on the chandelier and kick him into the fire. I want to push him."
"Acrobatics check for CA, failure you fall prone. Str/Dex vs. Fort, Hit = Low Normal Damage (1d6) + Dex/Str and Push 1. The fire deals 1d10 damage to anyone that enters that square or starts their turn there."

"I pick up the table and pin him to the wall with it."
"Str +2 vs. Fort, Hit = Medium Normal Damage and he's Grabbed."