How is the Wizard vs Warrior Balance Problem Handled in Fantasy Literature?

[Hussar]

On targetting objects - I would point out that D&D, at least WOTC D&D, has always been an evolving game. Three years after the first major WOTC revision of D&D, we got 3.5 edition that made much of the same sort of changes that something like the Rules Compendium does.

If someone brings up a 3.0 rule and talks about 3.5, are they being fair?

Earlier in this thread, a page or two ago, someone talked about lightning bolts making a sort of fireball effect when cast underwater. In 3.0, this is false. (3.5 too) That was an AD&D ruling. In 3.x, electricity spells do not conduct. I can be standing in a pool of salt water, grappling while wearing a platinum bikini, cast shocking grasp on the guy holding on to me, and nothing happens to me whatsoever.

This is one of the reasons why I'm really not such a huge fan of what RC calls "human agency" determining game effects. But, that's neither here nor there.

But, back to the point about discussing rules. 4e is a major revision of the ruleset. It's not particularly surprising when things get forgotten and left out. 3e did it and I'm pretty sure 5e will as well. The targetting thing is recognized as a mistake in the rules and it's been fixed.

So, why fixate ('scuse the pun) on a mistake that has been spotted and corrected and then try to claim this as a reason why 4e's system is too gamist?

 

[Hussar]

Well...my only response to this is that every random encounter I've ever been a part of HAS been based on the content of the adventure and they've been as big a challenge for the non-casters as the casters themselves.

Your milage has obviously varied.

For one, I'm specifically speaking of the random encounter rules in the AD&D DMG.

How have they been as big of a challenge? Other than the most obvious, we gotta kill something now way, what abilities does a fighter lose to random encounters?

Put it another way. If the fighter was not dependent upon the cleric for healing, what does a random encounter actually do? The only reason the fighter cares about random encounters is because it means he won't get the cleric to heal him because the cleric needs his nappy time. If the cleric wasn't needed to heal, then the fighter wouldn't care in the slightest how many random encounters occured.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

How have they been as big of a challenge? Other than the most obvious, we gotta kill something now way, what abilities does a fighter lose to random encounters?

HP, ammo, the opportunity for natural healing, the opportunity for rest (see the fatigue rules), etc.

 

[JamesonCourage]

It strikes me that he is discussing a game (4E, since all examples are directly tied to it) with which he has limited experience, and using extreme examples that are discussed on the internet all the time but don't show up in most people's games.

The underlined section is how I feel about batman wizards, CoDzilla, etc. People talk about them all the time, and while they are surely out there, I do not feel they are in any way common or representative of 3.x.

Yes, 3.x has many problems, in my opinion. I'm sure 4e does, too. I'm sure my own game will, even when I'm done ironing out the wrinkles in it.

Different games have different problems of different levels to different people. In the end, play what you like

 

[Raven Crowking]

See, this is where I disagree. Take 3e for example.

Um....Hussar.....the OP's question pertains to literature.

 

[pemerton]

Like many 4E powers, for me, the title of the spell ('Hypnotism') and the fluff ('Your piercing gaze and whispered word let you seize momentary control of your enemy's mind') hints at marvelous possibilities, but the actual mechanics are a straightjacket. Expectations raised and dashed, promises and lies, all in the same breath.

<snip>

the magic of magic (pun intended) has been smothered, thanks to 4E's fetish for balance ³, codified behavior ⁴, and downplay of human adjudication

I can't comment on Hypnotism, as I don't own the Essentials book in question, and don't have any players whose PC uses that power.

But I don't really agree with the notion of "codified behaviour" and "downplay of human adjudication". Page 42, which in the Essentials Rules Companion and DM book is instead folded into the skill descriptions (which canvass various improvisations, with suggested difficulties), is all about human adjudication that isn't codified in advance (although some parameters, in terms of scaling DCs and damage, are suggested).

My players have had no trouble doing things like using Twist of Space (a 7th level wizard encounter power with the Teleportation keyword) to free a woman magically trapped inside a mirror, or spreading wrestling oil on the ground to increase the slide distance when using Footwork Lure (a fighter at-will with a forced movement component).

The rules text of Hypnotism that you cite shows that it is subject to two basic constraints - no action more powerful or sophisticated than a melee basic attack, and no movement further than slide 3. Keeping those constraints in mind, I don't think I'd have much trouble adjudicating other uses pursuant to page 42.

I have a question... you brought up the rules about targeting objects, because a few people were going back and forth as to whether a ray could target an object or not. Now 4E is almost 3 years old. I was wondering why the answer to target object issue isn't already commonly known to 4e players (assuming those involved in that debate played 4E?).

Search me. I just cited the rules from the core books, noted the tension between them, and suggested what seemed to me to be the natural solution.

But any 4e player who thinks that the game does not contemplate using fire spells to burn down libraries (as one example) must have simply missed the bit I quoted from the DMG that talks about the GM ruling that paper has vulnerable 5 fire.

Or, to come at it in a slightly different fashion - how does a 4e fireball hurt creatures? Because it bathes them in fire (hence, the fire keyword and fire damage). Can it set fire to a library? Yes, because paper bathed in fire will catch alight. What about an attack with an axe? It hurst them because it's a weapon (hence, the weapon keyword). A weapon that, according to the PHB p215, has a "bladed, heavy head" that "deal vicious cuts." Is there any doubt that such a thing can also be used to damage the furniture, or a tree?

Here's some more text from p 10 of the PHB:

While exploring a dungeon or other adventure location, you might try to do any of the following actions:

* Move down a hallway, follow a passage, cross a room
* Listen by a door to determine if you hear anything on the other side
* Try a door to see if it’s locked
* Break down a locked door
* Search a room for treasure
* Pull levers, push statues or furnishings around
* Pick the lock of a treasure chest
* Jury-rig a trap

The Dungeon Master decides whether or not something you try actually works. Some actions automatically succeed (you can move around without trouble, usually), some require one or more die rolls, called checks (breaking down a locked door, for example), and some simply can’t succeed. Your character is capable of any deeds a strong, smart, agile, and well-armed human action hero can pull off. You can’t punch your way through a door of 3-inch-thick iron plate with your bare hands, for example - not unless you have powerful magic to help you out!​

Who, after reading this, really thinks that they need the GM's permission to use an axe to "attack" the furniture (as opposed to adjudicate the outcome of that attack)?

Is it possible that there are a number of 4E players/DMs who have grown so comfortable coloring inside the 4E lines, that it never occured to them to ask "Can I target that object with this ray?".

I have no idea, but I personally find the tone of the question a bit one-sided.

On another thread earlier this year (maybe "Why 4e is not as popular as it could be"), someone was posting that fireball in 3E noted that it set fire to flammable objects, and that the absence of such text in 4e was a radical departure. I replied that such text, while (if I recall correctly) present in AD&D, was absent in original and Basic/Expert D&D. It's also absent in Rolemaster. To the extent that 4e is different from those other RPGs, I think a big part of that is nothing more than formatting. It's not as if Expert D&D actually talked about fireball doing stuff other than killing foes (it mentions "a missile of fire that burst into a ball of fire" doing Xd6 damage "to each creature within the sphere of fire"). All 4e does is present the same information in a more formal/jargon-laden fashion, rather than in a free text description: "Area burst 3 within 20 squares", "Target: Each creature in burst", etc.

I know that some 4e players report that the game lobotomised their players, or lobotimised them as GMs. I haven't had those experiences. Despite its sparse and creature-focused text, my players in Basic/Expert, and Rolemaster, never had trouble using fireball to start fires. And it's not been an issue in 4e either.

 

[Hussar]

HP, ammo, the opportunity for natural healing, the opportunity for rest (see the fatigue rules), etc.

Again, let's look at this though. I totally agree that resource management is part of dungeon crawling. But, there's a big divide in how resources work between the casters and the non-casters.

For example, the non-casters have virtually no way of restoring any of their resources. Ammo can be scavenged, of course, which means that they aren't going to run out so long as they can continue to scavenge, but, there is nothing the player can pro-actively do to replenish his arrows. He has to go back to town (or where ever) and buy more.

Same with hit points. If the group is so harried by random encounters that they cannot even rest to regain spells, how are they possibly going to rest long enough for natural healing? It's never going to happen. At best, you might get a few hp back, and that's about it.

IOW, if the cleric can't get his cure spells back because he keeps getting his sleep interupted, the fighter most definitely isn't going to be able to get any hp back naturally.

OTOH, the casters regain almost all of their resources through their own actions. If they can rest, they can get their resources back.

So, bring this back to the dungeon. The party enters the dungeon, clears a few encounters (however many) and then decides to rest. Why?

Because the cleric is out of healing spells most likely. Otherwise, you continue to push on until the cleric is out of healing spells. If you remove the dependence on the cleric for hit points, the non-casters have zero reason to ever rest. They don't gain anything by resting.

But, if we let the party rest whenever they want to, then the casters get too powerful. So, we have random encounters to force the party to choose to rest or continue with dwindling resources.

IOW, random encounters occur because of the casters. If you had a group of non-casters with rings of regeneration, they'd never rest. They would never need to, other than spending a few minutes here or there to top up their hp. Random encounters serve no purpose in this scenario as far as resource management goes. It's just xp delivery.

If you get away from D&D with it's Vancian casting, other games almost never have (yes, I'm sure there are some that do, but most don't) random encounters. Why not? If random encounters were a verisimilitude thing, then shouldn't nearly all games have rules for random encounters?

In my mind, it's pretty clear. Random encounters are a method for limiting caster resources. Remove Vancian casting and you remove most of the reason for random encounters in the first place.

 

[Hussar]

Y'know Pemerton, I've been rereading my B/X books lately and it stuns me how unbelievably sparse those books really are. There's virtually no details. You want limited casters - wizards get a grand total of 72 spells to choose from TOTAL and clerics get even less.

I mean, in 3.5 edition, just the PHB, wizards have more than 70 spells in the first TWO LEVELS (89 spells to be exact, not counting 0 level spells).

How's that for a massive boost in power?

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Again, let's look at this though. I totally agree that resource management is part of dungeon crawling. But, there's a big divide in how resources work between the casters and the non-casters.

For example, the non-casters have virtually no way of restoring any of their resources. Ammo can be scavenged, of course, which means that they aren't going to run out so long as they can continue to scavenge, but, there is nothing the player can pro-actively do to replenish his arrows. He has to go back to town (or where ever) and buy more.

Same with hit points. If the group is so harried by random encounters that they cannot even rest to regain spells, how are they possibly going to rest long enough for natural healing? It's never going to happen. At best, you might get a few hp back, and that's about it.

IOW, if the cleric can't get his cure spells back because he keeps getting his sleep interupted, the fighter most definitely isn't going to be able to get any hp back naturally.

OTOH, the casters regain almost all of their resources through their own actions. If they can rest, they can get their resources back.

Which all helps prove my point, Hussar, which was that random encounters were just as hard on noncasters- more of their resources are harder to replenish. The more random encounters, the more likely the party is going to be forced to retreat.

Oh yeah- you didn't cover fatigue in your point by point.

So, bring this back to the dungeon. The party enters the dungeon, clears a few encounters (however many) and then decides to rest. Why?

Because the cleric is out of healing spells most likely. Otherwise, you continue to push on until the cleric is out of healing spells. If you remove the dependence on the cleric for hit points, the non-casters have zero reason to ever rest. They don't gain anything by resting.

Hussar, you and I have gone round and round on this many times before: That does not describe my play experience of the last 34 years. Rests are not dictated by when the casters are out of spells, they are gotten when they can be. Many are the times when the party has been advancing when the wizard is using his weapons and the cleric has been moved to point.

It's a rare thing, yes- in part because our casters don't simply cast spells to solve problems, so they tend not to run out of spells- but it does happen.

If what you're saying were universally true, though, it would NEVER happen.

IOW, random encounters occur because of the casters. If you had a group of non-casters with rings of regeneration, they'd never rest. They would never need to, other than spending a few minutes here or there to top up their hp. Random encounters serve no purpose in this scenario as far as resource management goes. It's just xp delivery.

Again, this does not match my play experience at all. Fatigue, ammo, and other factors are as much a concern for our parties as whether the casters are still casting.

Or to put it a different way, it's not the unique caster resources that pressure our group to rest, it's all the other stuff.

 

[NoWayJose]

I can't comment on Hypnotism, as I don't own the Essentials book in question, and don't have any players whose PC uses that power.

FYI, I chose Hypnotism, partially because I would have assumed that Essentials applies the latest in lessons learned. Both Beginning of the End and Hussar have commented that 4E is an evolving game, so I looked at one example of the latest in the evolution of magic powers.

The rules text of Hypnotism that you cite shows that it is subject to two basic constraints - no action more powerful or sophisticated than a melee basic attack, and no movement further than slide 3. Keeping those constraints in mind, I don't think I'd have much trouble adjudicating other uses pursuant to page 42.
<snip>
I know that some 4e players report that the game lobotomised their players, or lobotimised them as GMs. I haven't had those experiences. Despite its sparse and creature-focused text, my players in Basic/Expert, and Rolemaster, never had trouble using fireball to start fires. And it's not been an issue in 4e either.

But these questions DO seem to come up, as have been mentioned beforehand. ^{[error: missing footnotes]}

Your game clearly involves out-of-the-box thinking, which is wonderful, but is it the norm for 4E gamers?

What if many other players and DM read any power mechanics and simply assume that's all they can do with it? That's not a one-sided question -- many people, including myself, read a rule in a rulebook and assume it's the rule, period, whether we personally agree with it or not, especially (as you've pointed out) when the rule is written so succinctly. Some people are very law-abiding that way (excluding anarchists and libertarians who may view D&D rules as guidelines to be broken or bent on a whim).

So I still wonder how many players actively refer to page 42 for alternatives? And of those players that do argue that they should do more with Hypnotism and other powers, how many DMs are in the same mindspace?

My question was not so much how 4E *can* or *should* play out, but how *does* it play out in most games? It's the latter experience that informs a majority consensus, which I think is important to recognize whether one is discussing wizard spells or any other topic. So I didn't mean to ask a one-sided question.

Also, I believe that Hypnotism Essentials is an at-will attack power (someone please correct me if I'm wrong). If some DMs allow Hypnotism to be used more believably as some indicated they would ^{[error: missing footnotes]}, then arguably, you have a very powerful tool that can upset all sorts of balance issues, no? Can Hypnotism be used endlessly at-will outside of combat? If yes, that can be seriously unbalancing. If not, what's the fictional justification for that? Lots of questions, leading me to believe that, for the sake of balance, the designers did not truly intend spells like Hypnotism to be used beyond 'attack or slide up to 3 squares'. If that's true, then the page 42 option may introduce its own problems and then we're back to square one ¹

1. http://www.enworld.org/forum/genera...ndled-fantasy-literature-103.html#post5539325