Displacement - a bit wussy eh? Mirror image too...

[KarinsDad]

I think that while displacement might look at bit shabby at first glance, it'll probably be really good in practice. Immediate action that forces a reroll.. Forcing a reroll was an exceptionally rare ability in 3e for a reason (off the top of my head I can only think of the fatespinner and some of the stuff in Bo9S is reminiscent). It'll be even more potent in 4e, when basically everything has an attack roll. Even if you have to keep the 'worse' result, I still think it'll be very good.

Basically once per encounter you have a chance to really save someones bacon, big time (or your own), that's a pretty solid ability to have imo, especially EVERY encounter and as a immediate action..

Except that as written, it doesn't do that.

As written (based on what we know so far):

1) It can make a result worse. Instead of rolling 19, an opponent can roll 20. If there is a "take the better of the two rolls if an ally forces this, take the worse of the two rolls if an enemy forces this" type of general rule, then this is not an issue. But, we do not know that yet.

2) People are drastically over stating how powerful a single re-roll within an entire combat is. Sure, it might stop one daily or per encounter ability. It might not. It might not do anything. Possibly (as opposed to definitely) changing a single die roll in an encounter out of the 10 to 30 enemy attack rolls (5 to 15 hits at a 50% hit chance) within a single encounter is not really that powerful. Also, the caster has to decide when to use it. If he chooses poorly or uses it too early in an encounter, that particular spell didn't help much at all.

This is probably not very good in practice. There are probably many per encounter powers at lower levels that are a lot more capable of affecting the outcome of an encounter than this.

 

[Plane Sailing]

I do hope that 4e does spell this out, just to be sure. However, you shouldn't be attacking the confusion caused by this interaction before actually reading the book, don't you think? If they have a "rerolls in combat" section, your attack will look sorta silly once the book comes out.

My comments are hardly an attack, and I don't think they will look silly at all.

I'm merely commenting that as it stands there is a lot of potential for interaction of re-rolls which is likely to complicate matters. Even in your attempted explanation you admit confusion! The issue is that the "exception based information" doesn't seem to contain enough information about how it interacts with other similar powers or effects.

I, like you, hope that there is adequate explanation in the book. My examples are purely to point out how complicated a situation may be that they have to adjudicate.

They may go for the simple route and say "No more than one reroll on attacks. Defensive rerolls happen after final attack number is resolved and there can be no more than one reroll forced by defence". Who knows though?

I freely admit that I'm picking on corner cases which are not likely to come up in regular gaming, but that is the point of testing...

Cheers

 

[Stalker0]

It might not do anything. Possibly (as opposed to definitely) changing a single die roll in an encounter out of the 10 to 30 enemy attack rolls (5 to 15 hits at a 50% hit chance) within a single encounter is not really that powerful. Also, the caster has to decide when to use it. If he chooses poorly or uses it too early in an encounter, that particular spell didn't help much at all.

True words, but lets look at the other side of the coin. As an immediate action, I never have to waste time in combat to cast it. Further, I might even be able to put it up when I get ambushed (considering I killed my party's pregen wizard on a surprise round, I consider that useful). Further, a single attack in 4e often does more than just damage. It seems to put on a host of conditions that could be very bad for the wizard.

I definitely think its weaker than its 3.5 counterpart, but lets not call it dead in the water yet.

 

[Lacyon]

This is probably not very good in practice. There are probably many per encounter powers at lower levels that are a lot more capable of affecting the outcome of an encounter than this.

There are almost certainly many encounter powers at lower levels that take a standard action to activate that are a lot more capable of affecting the outcome of an encounter than this.

There probably aren't that many other immediate reactions that are better, though. Just a hunch.

 

[Dausuul]

Except that as written, it doesn't do that.

As written (based on what we know so far):

1) It can make a result worse. Instead of rolling 19, an opponent can roll 20.

This is an outlier, however; there's only a 5% chance that this happens. I don't think this has a big enough impact to worry about. Under all other circumstances--or if the roll was a 20 to begin with--the result is the same or better.

This is probably not very good in practice. There are probably many per encounter powers at lower levels that are a lot more capable of affecting the outcome of an encounter than this.

...Probably? What is this "probably?" Do you have any basis for this statement?

 

[Goreg Skullcrusher]

I think that while displacement might look at bit shabby at first glance, it'll probably be really good in practice. Immediate action that forces a reroll.. Forcing a reroll was an exceptionally rare ability in 3e for a reason (off the top of my head I can only think of the fatespinner and some of the stuff in Bo9S is reminiscent).

Luck domain, Swashbuckler class ability, a good chunk of the Complete Scoundrel feats (and PrC's) that allowed for a half dozen rerolls on virtually any type of roll, and possibly others I might have missed. In 3.5 at least, rerolling wasn't considered all that powerful.

 

[Stalker0]

This is an outlier, however; there's only a 5% chance that this happens. I don't think this has a big enough impact to worry about. Under all other circumstances--or if the roll was a 20 to begin with--the result is the same or better.

However, that's a 5% chance to have a much more powerful effect on you, an effect the wizard did NOT want on him in the first place, else he wouldn't have used his reroll.

For example, let's say the wizard is facing an npc fighter. The fighter uses brutal strike (3d10+5 damage, more of course at 16th level but lets just work with what we've got) and hits. The wizard decides that's way too close to death for him, so he forces a reroll. The fighter rolls a 20 and does 35 damage...which knocks the wizard way into negatives, possibly kills him.

I do agree with Karinsdad and Plane Sailing on this point, a reroll that allows a crit seems wrong.

 

[HeavenShallBurn]

Luck domain, Swashbuckler class ability, a good chunk of the Complete Scoundrel feats (and PrC's) that allowed for a half dozen rerolls on virtually any type of roll, and possibly others I might have missed. In 3.5 at least, rerolling wasn't considered all that powerful.

Rerolls aren't all that powerful or at least not so much as some are making them out to be. On the other hand they're the one mechanical device absolutely ban, and I allow CharOp boards PC builds. If there's anything White Wolf taught me it's that reroll mechanics must die, they eat up game time causing disjunction and delay as actions are retconned and the changes trickle down the board causing everybody else to take longer adjusting their own turns to fit the new chain of events. And this is without the Gordian knot of multiple re-roll powers used on both attacking and defending side of the turn. Once the attacker can re-roll, then the defender can respond by forcing another re-roll it just gets far out of hand.

 

[KarinsDad]

This is an outlier, however; there's only a 5% chance that this happens. I don't think this has a big enough impact to worry about. Under all other circumstances--or if the roll was a 20 to begin with--the result is the same or better.

True. But, the fact that a worse result can occur does not make for a well designed defensive power.

...Probably? What is this "probably?" Do you have any basis for this statement?

I used the word probably because we do not yet have all of the rules.

However, one example based on what we do have:

Paladin's Shielding Smite. Per Encounter power.

1) This power does actual extra damage if it hits (nearly double).

2) This power gives a +3 AC bonus to an ally, even if the attack misses. +3 AC is similar in potency to re-roll (e.g. 50% chance to hit on a re-roll versus 35% chance to hit in the first place, the odds favor Displacement here somewhat). But, the +3 is for all attacks until the end of the Paladin's next turn, not just one attack. So, the odds could easily favor Shielding Smite more, situation depending.

This is a 1st level Per Encounter Power as compared to a 16th level one. They are not directly comparable (Displacement might help against attacks that do not target AC), but Shielding Smite does do more. It's not just a single re-roll. It's possible that Shielding Smite will bloody or kill an opponent and help save an ally from multiple attacks all at the same time. Displacement at best stops one attack. At worse, it makes the attack more deadly.

And, Shielding Smite can be used for the first 15 levels of encounters whereas Displacement cannot. All in all, Shielding Smite is vastly more capable of affecting the outcome of encounters than Displacement is. And, this is just one example.

 

[keterys]

And shielding smite isn't an immediate interrupt.