Fewer conditions?

[Stalker0]

My understanding of the thread was to discuss whether there were too many conditions, and what could be done about it.

Then my summary would be this.

1) The number of formal conditions is just fine. One of the more elegant 4e design decisions.

2) Number 1 is only a small part of the actual number of conditions. There are many more small buffs/debuffs that don't fall into the same category.

3) Conditions are often applied very liberally. Its number the number of categories of conditions, its simply the number of times you have to track conditions.

 

[Tzarevitch]

The DM better provide a credible alternative then

 

[Siberys]

I don't have a problem with conditions, but with the niggling bonuses. There are a TON of those. This seems to be the consensus from skimming the thread.

What of a modified Condition Track, a la Saga Edition? Could there be a way to codify those niggling bonuses into some kind of easy-to-track hierarchy?

EDIT: Damn, now I'm going to be mulling this over WAY TOO MUCH. I expect a thread in house rules within a week...

 

[Dr_Ruminahui]

I'm in the same boat - I have no problem with the list of conditions in PH1 - I think that each is different enough and there are few enought to easily remember what each of them does.

Rather, I have 2 issues with condition tracking:

1. The various "niggling conditions"; and
2. The varied condition durations - save ends, end of target's next turn, end of "casters" next turn, start of target's next turn, start of "casters" next turn.

Remembering to save for conditions was also a bit of a pain (what with saving for a condition being split from applying its effects) - however, in the group I DM we now roll saves against all save ends conditions at the beginning of the turn, but with the actual condition ending at the end of the turn. This does potentially cause the problem of the PC knowing that he will save before he actually does (as the save is applied at the end of the turn), but that hasn't been a problem so far. That said, if you have a group that redies a charge action for when they are no longer immobilized, this wouldn't work so well. It also makes items/powers that a PC can use on himself for a minor/move/standard action to give himself a save/end a condition more powerful, the player doesn't have to worry about expending it on a turn where he might have passed his save anyway.

So, what I would like to see is:
1. Standardized "niggling" conditions;
2. More standardized durations; and
3. Rolling saves at the time the condition affects the player in his turn.

 

[Solvarn]

What would you remove? What conditions do you feel are unimportant enough that they could be taken out without harming the overall system? (Or are you referring to non-specific conditions, like -2 to defenses--which, IMO, really fall more into the category of "penalties" than "conditions"?)

I'd like stun to go, but I don't know exactly what I would replace it with. I know that for a dragon, for example, I'd just give them another action point and some more HP.

I just don't think it's that fun for your character to be completely capacitated. They included the death saving throw mechanic to give something for unconscious characters to roll each turn. Stun seems to go against grain for me, always has.

 

[Dr_Ruminahui]

Also relating to conditions, and as I ranted about in this thread (http://www.enworld.org/forum/4e-discussion/277821-lolth-4.html#post5208171) WotC needs to give some thought as to which is meant to be a better condition - save ends or end of next turn. Frankly, as the PCs gain experience, "end of next turn" is simply a better condition to inflict, which makes powers that are "save ends" on a hit and "end of next turn" on a miss somewhat exasperating - hoping to miss just seems wrong.

 

[Nichwee]

3. Rolling saves at the time the condition affects the player in his turn.

But when do they effect you?
If I had the conditions Dazed and Immobilised and Weakened:
Option 1)
I start my go so Dazed has curtailed my turn - roll it.
I choose to use a move action to run out of danger if I can - So Immobilised stopped be - roll it.
I can't get away so swing. Attack deals damage so Weakened effectted me - roll it.
Option 2)
If however I just chose to use Second Wind then only Dazed effectted me - so just roll that?

Most conditions effect your whole turn so they would effect you at no particular moment - so rolling when they first effect you is pointless unless this save could end the effect at that time which would be too powerful as you could do Option 1 to get Immobilised and Weakened fixed early just by 'trying' to do something you know wouldn't be allowed.

If the conditions still end at the end of turn however (when the save should be rolled) then this idea simply has no difference than rolling the saves whenever you remember to - so hardly needs a rule change to allow it,

 

[Ryujin]

I'm fine with the number of conditions. A couple could use clearer definitions (immobilized/restrained) though. It would also be nice if they were less prevalent, because they tend to drag down combat.

 

[keterys]

The whole 'roll saves at the beginning of your round to see what you succeed on thing' is something I did want to try at one point. The idea being you know what's going away at the end of your turn, and more importantly what isn't - so maybe it's worth using your standard action to try to get yourself a save, or to use that potion of vitality, or whatever.

But, ultimately I decided it wasn't going to help the game to do it that way.

 

[Mesh Hong]

I actually think a lot of the confusion and delay might be removed if all effects were just (save ends) at least then they would be easier to track.

Instead of creatures marking they could inflict a flat -1 or -2 penalty to attack rolls (save ends).

Player marks would probably have to stay the same, but at least they are easier to track (player, not DM based).

From a monster point of view it is the PCs "until the end of their next turn" powers that are the most troubling (especially with creatures that act more than once in a round) so changing them to save ends would be good, or at least predictable.

As for the niggling -1 and -2's the problem with those is that many of them seem to come from at will powers, but I don't think I would have a problem with them all becomming (save ends). Though it might cause problems with the creature being hit with the same power twice and the effect stacking when really it shouldn't.