Excerpt: powers (merged)

[hong]

Deck of cards? Real powergamers use a rolodex.

Rolodex? 21st century powergamers use a PDA!

 

[abyssaldeath]

Deck of cards? Real powergamers use a rolodex.

I think powergamer is going to have a new meaning.

 

[Voss]

Because acting as if stupid metagaming rules-lawyering behavior is normal and commonplace - and that DMs are helpless in the face of such tactics - is one of the principle debate techniques employed in arguments about D&D. Any edition.

It's also a sure bet that the person trotting it out has already lost the argument, but don't tell them that . . .

Its a thought experiment, like Schroedinger's Cat. Its a way of testing rules out to see if they meet a certain criteria. Its particularly useful in the design stages of a game to see if the rules you are writing have stupid side effects.


Honestly, if someone is actually pulling it out at the table, its a little sad. Almost anything else they could do would actually be more effective, so its not something you actually have to worry about.

 

[Voss]

Deck of cards? Real powergamers use a rolodex.

You know, I actually ran into this at a game run at GenCon back around 1990. The DM handed over a rolodex full of the wizards spells along with the character sheet. It was a pretty decent reference.

Its seems somewhat unnecessary for 4e though, since even at level 30, you'll have less than 20 powers.

 

[Evilhalfling]

Well, enemy is subset of creature, so that doesn't actually do anything. But yes, since I don't want Galahad the pure to be able to heal people by killing puppies, I don't intend to allow this either.

thats where you rez Dr Evil and his bag of zombie puppies TM
"Im evil so you don't have to be!"

 

[gizmo33]

"But what about <patently absurd corner-case ridiculous hypothetical example>? If the book doesn't contain rules specifically preventing it, the game is clearly broken and the designers are incompetent."

Humans (and probably dwarves) are tool using creatures. IMO it's a bad idea to somehow think that it's sufficient to rely on DM blustering and guilt-trips to keep characters from acting intelligently. If a bag of rats, handful of pebbles, long stick, etc. is sufficient to cause some undesired effect in a rule then the rule is badly designed.

That being said, an entire game isn't broken, nor are designers incompetent just because there is a badly conceived rule somewhere in the game system. Game systems are huge and complicated IMO, and DMs need to be given respect (and should count on it) if they need to modify a rule on the fly when they feel that the spirit of the rule and it's text don't match. However, game designers (and DMs) should take these things seriously. If you design a "magic wall" spell, for example, that vanishes when an "object strikes it" and it surprises you that a character throws a pebble at the wall, then you need to try harder or should spend some more time DMing. In any case, focusing your wrath at the player that's following the rules IMO is unwise.

 

[davethegame]

The hierarchy of hell forces them to consent?
If they aren't willing it never happens so the power couldn't exist, so the powers very existence means he can blow up his subordinates

I can just see the D&D Rules citing philosophical texts to try to come up with a working definition of "willing".

 

[hong]

Humans (and probably dwarves) are tool using creatures. IMO it's a bad idea to somehow think that it's sufficient to rely on DM blustering and guilt-trips to keep characters from acting intelligently.

The characters act perfectly intelligently. The constraints on their behaviour just happen not to be all written down in a 2-column, 9-point serif font.

 

[eleran]

Ever try to pick a squirming rat from a bag of rats while someone is swinging a mallet at your head. Me neither, I doubt it would end well.

Between OAs and biting rats, that is if they haven't not died of suffocation, starvation or at each others furry paws, is the tiny bonus you get from this worth it? I really doubt it.

Not to mention the fact that Rats, being rodents would likely chew themselves right out of the bag before you even got to the dungeon.

 

[Wolfwood2]

After reading this post it got me to thinking... would charm make sense if a person knew that they were charmed?
A: "You've been acting weird lately, why?"
B: "Oh, I dunno. I was charmed by a pretty-looking (guy or gal) the other day."

...seems like mind-influencing effects shouldn't be so obvious.

If a particular mind-influencing effect needs to be not obvious, then it should say so in the text for that particular power. Exception-based design.