Implementation of divine powers

[Fifth Element]

Based on the 4E information at hand, the thing that concerns me most are some of the divine powers. I like the implementation of the martial and arcane powers that we've seen, but some of the divine powers are irksome for two reasons.

First, I believe the at-will/encounter/daily power split is elegant and effective. But then, unfortunately, both the cleric's healing power (Healing Word) and the paladin's (Lay on Hands) are exceptions to this, while I don't see any other powers that are. The first is an encounter power usable twice per encounter. The second is an at-will power that can be used only three times per day. It's good that healing was made a minor action, so a healer can both heal and act in the same round, but this seems clumsy to me, to set up categories of powers, then start adding in exceptions. Simplify things, then re-complicate them.

Second is the disconnect between action and result present in a couple of powers. The paladin's Shielding Smite provides an AC bonus to someone up to 25 feet away when the paladin hits in melee. Say what? If it were, say, an adjacent ally like in the cleric's Priest's Shield power it would make more sense. But there's no connection between the paladin's strike and the ally's AC bonus. He just gets it.

On the cleric side, Sacred Flame presents the same problem. The cleric blasts a foe with holy light, and any ally within the cleric's sight gains his choice of 2 hp or a save. Why? The ally can be all the way over there. What does he have to do with the holy flame? And why can't the cleric grant this boon without blasting a foe with holy flame?

I understand the reasoning for this type of power, allowing leaders/defenders to do their things while still being involved directly in combat. But the disconnect and special cases for the number of uses of some powers makes me not want to play a divine class. It's just too much of a strain on my immersion/sense of wonder/suspension of disbelief/whatever.

I realize it sucks to play a cleric and having to spend all of your actions healing others. But I think they overshot the mark here, assuming the previews we have are representative, and created new problems they didn't need to.

 

[pukunui]

I can't confirm it but it's possible the Healing Word and Lay on Hands uses aren't fixed but are rather determined by an ability score modifier or something. Those DDXP character sheets were written in such a way so as to hide some of the underlying mechanics of things by just telling you what each feat/power/etc could do at 1st level for that specific character with their specific ability scores, race, and so on.

I agree that the whole "I can give one of my allies a defensive bonus because I struck one of my enemies" thing is a bit strange too. It wouldn't be so much of an issue of it was an aura type thing that affected all allies in range (this could be imagined/described as a morale boost or inspiration or whatever), but because the cleric/paladin (and possibly warlord too) has to designate a specific ally, it becomes very difficult to imagine/describe in game-world terms. Why only one ally? That's what I don't get about it.

EDIT: Perhaps it's meant to go something like this: "Bahamut, I have smitten one of your hated foes. In return, I would ask a small favor: please protect my ally, [insert PC name here], for a moment ..."

That's pretty lame, though, especially the short duration. If it lasted the rest of the encounter, that would help it make more sense (and I suppose perhaps some of the higher-level powers might), but as it is, it's pretty lame and hard to visualize in-game. These things should either affect all allies within an aura radius or else it should affect one person but last the rest of the encounter (I thought all buffs were supposed to last for the rest of the encounter so you wouldn't have to track them, but it seems like all of these 1st level ones just last for one round or so).

EDIT 2: Having just gone and reread the power descriptions, it seems to me like what they do is allow the cleric and paladin to combine two unrelated actions (attacking a foe and casting a short-duration defensive spell on an ally) into one. This is quite dumb. I can see the point of the piggy-backing but it would definitely be better if the two actions being combined were actually related in some way and thus made sense in context.

 

[fafhrd]

I agree that the whole "I can give one of my allies a defensive bonus because I struck one of my enemies" thing is a bit strange too. It wouldn't be so much of an issue of it was an aura type thing that affected all allies in range (this could be imagined/described as a morale boost or inspiration or whatever), but because the cleric/paladin (and possibly warlord too) has to designate a specific ally, it becomes very difficult to imagine/describe in game-world terms. Why only one ally? That's what I don't get about it.

It would have been nice if they moved all of the attendant effects of these types of powers into the [effect] section instead of the [hit] section. That way you could at least conceptualize it as multi-tasking(taking a swing while throwing up a ward on a buddy), much like a rogue's followup attacks.

 

[MaelStorm]

I agree with you. But there is an important detail to take into account here (I think).

Remember, there was a lot of talk about the Divine Challenge in the Paladin Disappointing thread, the designers has admitted that the powers for the pre-gen characters were done 1 month before the DDXP, and that this power (Divine Challenge) was corrected before being sent to the printing press for the PHB. How many of these powers at DDXP were changed too?

 

[pukunui]

It would have been nice if they moved all of the attendant effects of these types of powers into the [effect] section instead of the [hit] section. That way you could at least conceptualize it as multi-tasking(taking a swing while throwing up a ward on a buddy), much like a rogue's followup attacks.

Yeah, I just added a comment to that effect in my original post. It would be nice if the defensive thing was quite clearly labeled as a "piggy-backing" secondary effect rather than a direct result caused by you hitting a bad guy.

"Oh, Bahamut, as I smite this, your hated foe, please grant my vulnerable ally some protection--albeit of a very limited nature as I am but a lowly servant of yours--from this very same foe!"

Still doesn't quite do it for me.

I agree with you. But there is an important detail to take into account here (I think).

Remember, there was a lot of talk about the Divine Challenge in the Paladin Disappointing thread, the designers has admitted that the powers for the pre-gen characters were done 1 month before the DDXP, and that this power (Divine Challenge) was corrected before being sent to the printing press for the PHB. How many of these powers at DDXP were changed too?

One can only hope these things have been fixed.

 

[mach1.9pants]

I love the clericy bash and help powers. I realise I am in the minority but what really sold it to me (I had no problem mechanically or, really, thematically) was another poster with something like what me bro Pukunui said.
In effect 'Oh mighty Ioun, as I smite the naugty please protect my comrade, as I cannot'. That sort of thing

But I also will be house ruling out the at will but 3 only times rubbish if at all possible.

 

[Fifth Element]

I agree with you. But there is an important detail to take into account here (I think).

Remember, there was a lot of talk about the Divine Challenge in the Paladin Disappointing thread, the designers has admitted that the powers for the pre-gen characters were done 1 month before the DDXP, and that this power (Divine Challenge) was corrected before being sent to the printing press for the PHB. How many of these powers at DDXP were changed too?

Oh, I agree. This is quite possible. But it seems to me the paladin fixes were about debugging, rather than changing the intended effect. The intended effect of these powers is clearly the piggy-backing of unrelated things onto an attack.

 

[Fifth Element]

IEDIT: Perhaps it's meant to go something like this: "Bahamut, I have smitten one of your hated foes. In return, I would ask a small favor: please protect my ally, [insert PC name here], for a moment ..."

I expect that's how it will be framed. But as you said, that's still fairly lame. It appears the cleric is required to hit with an attack to get the bonus effect. Perhaps a good house rule would be to allow the bonus effect without requiring the attack. That way you'd be guaranteed the bonus effect, but forgo the benefit of the attack? Who knows. I'm certainly willing to wait to see the PHB to see how they describe all this for in-game purposes, but it is the one thing that's bugging me about 4E at this point.

 

[pukunui]

Oh, I agree. This is quite possible. But it seems to me the paladin fixes were about debugging, rather than changing the intended effect. The intended effect of these powers is clearly the piggy-backing of unrelated things onto an attack.

Yeah that's what worries me: that they combined two unrelated effects on purpose. I highly doubt they're going to renege on that concept, so all I can do is hope that their reasons for doing it are clearly (and believably) spelled out in the rules, since they haven't told us why they've done it in any of the previews.

 

[MaelStorm]

Oh, I agree. This is quite possible. But it seems to me the paladin fixes were about debugging, rather than changing the intended effect. The intended effect of these powers is clearly the piggy-backing of unrelated things onto an attack.

It is quite possible. (I don't have the time to verify)

On the exception based power design (which I find truly annoying, too) is that the you will have a cap limit of At-Will/Encounter/Daily, and I presume daily powers will be the lowest of the three types. This design is very strict, and if you pick that important slot for a power that everyone will automatically want, then there are no more slot available for this type. So that is why I think they decided to put some exception for powers and chose to put them in other type like at-will or per encounter.