Encounter Powers as Encounter Slots

[infax]

I have considered several aspects of the rule and haven't found out yet the answer for a question that has been nagging me for some time now:

Why can't player characters use the same "encounter" power more than once in a given combat?

That is not to say Encounter powers should become at-wills. Suppose a 5th level character has access to 3 Encounter powers. What I'm asking is what would be the impact to the game if instead of being limited to using the renamed Disarm once, renamed Trip once and a power that Slows the opponent for one round the character could use Disarm 3 times.

What is the impact of allowing that to happen. Will it completely unbalance the combat system? If so, why?

If I'm not mistaken, from RAW, it has been determined that PCs shouldn't even be allowed to take a given Encounter or Daily repeatedly.

I understand I can do whatever I want in my games. I was just wondering if anyone else thought of this and if there are negative aspects that I am not perceiving.


Thanks in advance for any insightful comments.

 

[whydirt]

Two things:

1. It will make PCs slightly stronger since they can always use the most beneficial encounter/daily power until they run out of slots, especially since characters typically know powers from a range of power levels at any given time.

2. It will likely make combat have less variety since under the RAW, players will be more likely to find creative uses for their powers since each can only be used once.

 

[Obryn]

It depends on what you're going for.

I'd be reluctant to do this, because my main attraction to 4e is that we could see some great variability in round-to-round tactics.

If you just make encounter powers "slots," and people use the same power every round... well, it loses a lot of its appeal for me.

-O

 

[Obryn]

double-post due to lag...

 

[JohnSnow]

Why can't player characters use the same "encounter" power more than once in a given combat?

That is not to say Encounter powers should become at-wills. Suppose a 5th level character has access to 3 Encounter powers. What I'm asking is what would be the impact to the game if instead of being limited to using the renamed Disarm once, renamed Trip once and a power that Slows the opponent for one round the character could use Disarm 3 times.

What is the impact of allowing that to happen. Will it completely unbalance the combat system? If so, why?

No, it won't completely unbalance the combat system. In fact, it won't unbalance it in the slightest. If there's nothing unbalancing about two separate characters using the same power in an encounter, then there's clearly nothing unbalancing about one character doing the same thing.

What you will lose is variety. Characters will always use the best power they've got for a given situation, even if that's the same encounter power they used 4 rounds ago. Let's say you're fighting in an area with precarious terrain. Assuming you have only one power that "pushes" or "slides" your opponents, you only have to worry about the PC using that once in an encounter. For the rest, he has to come up with creative ways to use the terrain. However, if he can just reuse that same power, then that's exactly what he'll do. Three times. BOrrr-ing.

By contrast, if the character only has 1 push power, but he's got two others that let him do other things, the fight won't turn into "push the bad guy in the pit" and "rinse, lather, repeat."

Different powers forces the PCs to come up with interesting combinations. For instance, I'm sure there are synergistic team combos where one person uses a per-encounter power and the others all use at-wills in order to set up the bad guys for something nasty. That's the essence of fun gaming.

I finally "got" the reasoning when I was discussing the rationale for "per-encounter" force powers with Rodney Thompson in the months leading up to the release of Star Wars Saga Edition. A character using the same ability over and over and over again is, bluntly put, bo-ring. The system is set up the way it is to encourage characters to come up with a variety of tactics, and to come up with new and interesting combos. By the time they're out of new combinations to try, they have gained new powers and a whole new range of tactics opens up. And so on.

No two battles will play the same, and when a favored tactic shows up, it'll be more like your group's version of the X-Men's "Fastball Special" and less like the 3e spiked chain trip monkey.

So you can do it, but your combats will almost certainly lose variety.

 

[infax]

It depends on what you're going for.

I'd be reluctant to do this, because my main attraction to 4e is that we could see some great variability in round-to-round tactics.

If you just make encounter powers "slots," and people use the same power every round... well, it loses a lot of its appeal for me.

I have considered several aspects of the rule and haven't found out yet the answer for a question that has been nagging me for some time now:

Why can't player characters use the same "encounter" power more than once in a given combat?

That is not to say Encounter powers should become at-wills. Suppose a 5th level character has access to 3 Encounter powers. What I'm asking is what would be the impact to the game if instead of being limited to using the renamed Disarm once, renamed Trip once and a power that Slows the opponent for one round the character could use Disarm 3 times.

What is the impact of allowing that to happen. Will it completely unbalance the combat system? If so, why?

If I'm not mistaken, from RAW, it has been determined that PCs shouldn't even be allowed to take a given Encounter or Daily repeatedly.

I understand I can do whatever I want in my games. I was just wondering if anyone else thought of this and if there are negative aspects that I am not perceiving.


Thanks in advance for any insightful comments.

 

[tophu]

It will likely make combat have less variety since under the RAW, players will be more likely to find creative uses for their powers since each can only be used once.

Could somebody tell me what RAW means? I keep seeing that mentioned, but I can't figure out what it means.

 

[Dausuul]

The potential down side is a reduction in combat diversity, as PCs spam the same encounter power rather than using a variety of options.

Whether this will actually occur, however, I don't know. I often play spontaneous casters in 3.X, and I don't usually find myself spamming the same spell; I switch from one to another based on the tactical situation. So this might turn out fine.

It shouldn't have any significant impact on game balance. The PCs will get slightly more powerful simply because they have more options to choose from, but not enough to worry about IMO.

Could somebody tell me what RAW means? I keep seeing that mentioned, but I can't figure out what it means.

RAW = Rules As Written. (See also the less-used and more-controversial RAI, Rules As Intended.)

 

[Pickles JG]

Could somebody tell me what RAW means? I keep seeing that mentioned, but I can't figure out what it means.

Rules As Written

 

[Obryn]

Why can't player characters use the same "encounter" power more than once in a given combat?

Are you looking for game rules/balance reason? Flavor reason? "Realism" reason?

By and large, most things in 4e look at the rules & flavor before worrying about realism. Arguably, realism is largely ignored.

Rules: Tougher for bookkeeping.

Balance: Some encounter powers can become game-breakers if they are used over and over again.

Flavor: It encourages variety in combat and interesting tactics. If you can't spam the same thing over and over again - or it's not ideal to do so - combat becomes more interesting.

"Realism": I can't think of a reason. I think it's a little silly to look for any kind of realism behind exploits, though. It's like trying to figure out where all that energy comes from when a Wizard casts a fireball.

I understand I can do whatever I want in my games. I was just wondering if anyone else thought of this and if there are negative aspects that I am not perceiving.

If it's important to you, give it a shot - nothing's stopping you. I'd encourage going by RAW at first to get a sense for the game's balance and flavor, and see if you really want to do it at all. You might find that the variety enriches combat, or you might find the encounter powers too restrictive.

-O