Is it ever a good idea to hit the party?

[Majoru Oakheart]

That's an... interesting interpretation, but it does lead to some very significant problems. If I coat my blade with contact poison, does the poison take effect when I beat my opponent's AC, or when I reduce them to 0 hit points?

It's abstract. It's a combination of barely missing and hitting in a way that causes insignificant damage. Your poison attack likely hit. In that you managed to barely connect with the guys arm, causing a small cut. But enough to pass the poison on. The cut will likely heal on its own and is no big deal.

In any case, it still hit my big problem: a sufficiently high-level character can throw himself off a 100 foot cliff and walk away sufficiently unharmed that taking an "extended rest" cures all his injuries - and he can do so reliably, not just as a statistical blip.

Yeah, jumping from extremely unrealistic heights has been the one blip in the rules since the beginning. It's probably the ONLY time I'll step in and say "Yeah, your character doesn't to jump 100 feet down there, he's afraid he'll die." But even that is debatable. If the choice is between jumping and a rampaging Balor coming up the stairs, and the character wants to jump, I'll let them. And they'll survive due to the rules.

so don't go throwing yourself off cliffs on a daily basis, and don't casually ignore those crossbows the bandits are pointing at you, and don't ask the wizard to deliberately fireball you. Yes, the rules say you can, but it's just poor form.

I agree with the cliffs thing. But I want to simulate the really big action heroes. I can't count the number of times that heroes in movies have guns pointed at them(which should scare the crap out of them and make them not want to take any offensive actions at all) but they run as soon as the person holding the gun is slightly distracted(counting on them to miss...which they always do), or they run towards the guy and kick the gun out of his hands before he gets a shot off, or they dodge the bullet by rolling or whatever.

They often jump from airplanes, sky scrapers, helicopters, boats at high speed, and so on and so forth. Most of the time, they hit the ground, they roll and they are completely unharmed.

The point is, they are big, bad heroes. They survive stuff that seems certain death for everyone else. And they often act like it.

 

[Engilbrand]

I don't have a problem with characters jumping from heights. They're awesome. That's all that matters. If they weren't, they wouldn't do the things they do. By higher levels, they're infused with magic. That's why they can make ridiculous jumps in plate armor and survive a crit from a giant or a dragon. They live in a hero reality. Think of a cartoon, or a comic, or certain types of action movies. That's how I view these guys. Can everyone in Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon "fly"? No. But the heroes and villains can. Why? They're awesome!

 

[Obryn]

In any case, it still hit my big problem: a sufficiently high-level character can throw himself off a 100 foot cliff and walk away sufficiently unharmed that taking an "extended rest" cures all his injuries - and he can do so reliably, not just as a statistical blip.

Now, I get why the rules work as they do. And, if I squint a bit and don't look too close, then it all kinda-sorta works. But bring too much attention to it and my suspension of disbelief goes, and with it much of my interest in playing the game. But that does rely on the players not engaging in shenanigans of this sort - so don't go throwing yourself off cliffs on a daily basis, and don't casually ignore those crossbows the bandits are pointing at you, and don't ask the wizard to deliberately fireball you. Yes, the rules say you can, but it's just poor form.

(In my game, in my opinion, and YMMV, of course.)

I think the clearest solution would be for the rules to work in a way you think reflects reality. It's not that the players are breaking immersion by fireballing each other - it's that they're actually immersed in the physics of the fantasy world as they work according to the rules, not in the physics of the real world as you expect they'd work in fantasy.

So, have fireballs kill instantly and make falls more deadly. Problem solved!

-O

 

[Kzach]

With people saying that the caster knows his damage isn't that big of a deal to the melee, have you considered crits?

4e has a lot of bonus damage on crits that can change a regular attack into a really nasty hit. A scorching burst for instance is usually just 1d6+Int mod+implement. So max 12 damage at 5th-10th level with a +2 implement. But on a crit, that's now 12+2d6 or even 2d8. What if they roll max or close to max on that? So now instead of a 12 hit point possibility, they've hit for up to 24 or 28.

At 5th to 10th the first represents roughly one healing surge. The second represents roughly bloodied. That then uses up healing resources of either the leader or the friend who was hit, meaning they have less actions to deal with the threat, and less healing options should the dice turn bad.

And quite frankly, I think most people are going to feel social pressure to say yes when someone asks. Myself, given that I rarely care what people think of me, I'm quite happy to tell someone to get stuffed and keep their attacks aimed at the enemy, but others might not want to cause waves. I'd be willing to bet a lot of the people who say they're fine with it are still miffed when their characters are killed by friendly fire.

Why generate the ill-will by asking at all? If you're only options are hitting your friends, then make up a new character.

 

[Obryn]

With people saying that the caster knows his damage isn't that big of a deal to the melee, have you considered crits?

Yep. And it happens, too.

-O

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

With people saying that the caster knows his damage isn't that big of a deal to the melee, have you considered crits?

Oh, I've considered them. Which is why I don't say yes every time someone asks. In fact, I rarely say yes because I still feel it's up to the casters to find a better place to put their bursts instead of on top of me. It's only when the difference is clearly overwhelming between centering it on me and somewhere else or the battle is that desperate that I'll say yes.

Well, that...and my Dwarf Warden has way too many hitpoints and very low intelligence. He'll say yes almost every time.

 

[Kzach]

Obviously I've been thinking on this matter a fair bit lately and I think I've nailed down the reason why it bothers me so much that someone would target a party member.

Whether or not a valid tactic, a part of me assumes that this is a group activity and therefore certain social rules apply. As a group, you're 'in it together' so that part of me feels... betrayed I guess is the closest word I can think of to the feeling it invokes.

So even though it may be an intelligent tactic and even though the math might work in the groups favour, there's this core part of me that is angered by this behaviour. Logic, reason and rationality have little to do with it, it's simply an emotion evoked by another person's actions. I can't help but feel that way.

 

[Allenchan]

In my gaming group (mostly 3.5), friendly fire was A-okay, though there tended to be a few unspoken rules:

1) Its fine to beat the crap of the barbarian or fighter that is mind controlled
2) Its ok to fireball the rogue or wizard's familiar (improved evasion FTW)
3) Its okay to color spray the cleric (BUT DONT FIREBALL HIM)
4) put a fort save cloud around the fighter.

Basically, if you're targeting their good save/traits, it was acceptable, if not mandatory as a good strategy. Not sure if that would hold up in 4e as well as it has for us.

 

[Vegepygmy]

Whether or not a valid tactic, a part of me assumes that this is a group activity and therefore certain social rules apply. As a group, you're 'in it together' so that part of me feels... betrayed I guess is the closest word I can think of to the feeling it invokes.

It all depends on how you look at it, though. "Taking one for the team" is part of being "in it together," too.

 

[DrunkonDuty]

OH. I thought this thread was going to be about keeping unruly players in line. In which case I would say "Yes." And use a big stick. But I digress.

Basically it depends on the players doesn't it? If everyone is cool with it, hell, go for it. But make sure it's OK out of character. My monk was recently in a fight with a drow. Neither of us could hit the other (I couldn't roll in double digits, the drow need a 20) everyone was bored and and I called out: fireball me! Drow died, I lived. But get permission from your parents first.