Is it time for 5E?

[shadzar]

For the most part, this is true. But one example I remember from C1 - Hidden Shrine in Tamoachan, there's a series of jumps you have to make across 4" wide beams spaced 7' apart (a sort of jump/balance combo). It uses a Dex check, but on 4d6 (I remember this because I converted it for use in 3E some time back, and replacing the little subsystem with 3E skill checks stuck out in my mind). Again, without having the books handy, I have to wonder back how S2 - White Plume Mountain handled vaulting from one swinging disk to another in the mud room; I know it had the rules in that section somewhere, but I wouldn't be surprised if they were quite different from the rules for C1.

Considering Hidden Shrine is an RPGA convention adventure, I am just going to throw that out as representative, because everyone didnt have access to it, not everyone went to conventions, and will just stick with something using more core rules. So it having a strange way to do thing isn't uncommon for RPGA material as tournaments at cons had to be ran within time limits and such rather than just playing at home.

So to White Plume and will try to compare it to revised that was online so we have two side by side ways of doing it to look at.

Original had only a strength check to hang onto the muddy wooden disks of fall into the lethal mud, with various modifiers.

Revised uses the DC system for "stepping (or leaping)" to cross the cavern.

NWPs first mention prof checks, but saw nothing really in 1st during that quick look through that said anything about it. We always did a "skill check" just figuring what was done in relation to the ability scores and went from there. Just as the NWPs picked a stat to align with to use and that has been used ever since.

I hope this is ok, but I can't really take RPGA material seriously, since it could have easily been made with the confines of being run during an RPGA event, so not really an example of "normal play".

All this said, a streamlined system would get rid of all that new crap and make ability scores useful again as something other than jsut a palce to grab bonuses, and use the former system that is similar to the DC system, where the DM sets some modifier to make things easier or more difficult, and 5e can just let people use the ability scores, but that would mean confusing when you are trying to roll UNDER the number when it is "more intutitive" to have a higher roll be better.

 

[Mallus]

Considering Hidden Shrine is an RPGA convention adventure, I am just going to throw that out as representative, because everyone didnt have access to it, not everyone went to conventions, and will just stick with something using more core rules.

The Hidden Shrine of Tamoachan was published. Most of the classic published AD&D adventures began their life-cycle as tournament modules.

 

[shadzar]

The Hidden Shrine of Tamoachan was published. Most of the classic published AD&D adventures began their life-cycle as tournament modules.

OK, so what does it say and do they both do it the same way?

I wasnt too much into buying adventures since I could make them up just as easy except for one I wanted to take parts from.

Still White Plume doesnt have a thing for "jumping" as a mechanic, just telling how to not fall, which goes along with using the ability most associated with it. They chose STR, since you were trying to hold on as opposed to DEX to prevent from falling by losing a foothold.

Really the players may try to cross in a fashion that could require either to be used, or maybe even neither to actually get across the disks. Therein lies the problem with "railroady" built in solutions. So even White Plume isnt representative of how to do it, as it tries to offer only one solution.

 

[Nagol]

From C1 The Hidden Shrine of Tamochan (c) 1980

A character may attempt to cross this pit by leaping from one bar to the next. There are a total of 8 bars. For a character to successfully cross the pit he must roll his or her dexterity or less 2 times on 3d6. If the character should stop to regain balance on any bar in the pit, he or she must save vs. his dexterity one more time. If a character fails a save, he or she will fall into the pit. It takes 2 rounds to cross the pit. Bars #3 and #6 are corroded and will break 1 chance in 4 each time weight is placed on them.

The White Plume Mountain room with the suspended disks doesn't have a jumping system. The disks are 4' across, 3' apart, teetering, and very slippery. THe big dangers in the room are mud geyser that require a STR check to avoid being swept off of specific disks.

 

[shadzar]

From C1 The Hidden Shrine of Tamochan (c) 1980



The White Plume Mountain room with the suspended disks doesn't have a jumping system. The disks are 4' across, 3' apart, teetering, and very slippery. THe big dangers in the room are mud geyser that require a STR check to avoid being swept off of specific disks.

Thanks.

So they use the same dice as creating the ability scores instead of jsut a d20 to change the probability a bit.

They still use a series of checks based on the ability score to do it.

Now that we know this, what were we using it to discuss again?

 

[pemerton]

Here are some quotes from the 4e PHB, pp 18, 54, 259:

Your choice of class powers defines how your character functions in and out of combat.

Every class has access to a mix of attack powers (used to harm your enemies in combat, more or less directly) and utility powers (used to overcome a variety of obstacles both in and out of combat).

Noncombat encounters focus on skills, utility powers, and your own wits (not your character’s), although sometimes attack powers can come in handy as well. Such encounters include dealing with traps and hazards, solving puzzles, and a broad category of situations called skill challenges. . . Chapter 5 describes the sorts of things you can attempt with your skills in a skill challenge. You can use a wide variety of skills, from Acrobatics and Athletics to Nature and Stealth. You might also use combat powers and ability checks.​

On what basis is it being asserted that 4e does not encourage non-combat activity, or out-of-combat use of attack powers?

 

[shadzar]

Here are some quotes from the 4e PHB, pp 18, 54, 259:

Your choice of class powers defines how your character functions in and out of combat.

Every class has access to a mix of attack powers (used to harm your enemies in combat, more or less directly) and utility powers (used to overcome a variety of obstacles both in and out of combat).

Noncombat encounters focus on skills, utility powers, and your own wits (not your character’s), although sometimes attack powers can come in handy as well. Such encounters include dealing with traps and hazards, solving puzzles, and a broad category of situations called skill challenges. . . Chapter 5 describes the sorts of things you can attempt with your skills in a skill challenge. You can use a wide variety of skills, from Acrobatics and Athletics to Nature and Stealth. You might also use combat powers and ability checks.​

On what basis is it being asserted that 4e does not encourage non-combat activity, or out-of-combat use of attack powers?

So two sentences describing their areas, and one paragraph out of a 300+ page book.

I don't really call that encouragement and thus why the presentation can quite easily lead people to not see the outside uses, once they grasp those things presented.

I would sum it up to this...

pg 18: You get some "cool" powers no matter what class you are, now go read all those lovely powers and know you get to choose some of them.

Easily forgotten. Again they are called attack and utility, and have specific targets bases around a system of keywords. Thus not having the keyword means a player would think that keyword mising make it not a viable target with such a streamlined system one does not have much to worry about since ALL things were planned for....

pg 54: Every power can be used in combat.

Easily forgoten that slight mention of "out of combat".

pg 259: Skill challenges are not combat. You arent fighting a living creature, but some trap or something.

Maybe this might lead way for someone to think about using powers or doing things outside of the box, until the skill challenge system screws them up. "Oh I roll some numbers and my friends can give me bonuses helping and pass or fail depends on best 2 out of 3."

That doesn't really say using a fireball CAN burn down a house, when the power says what it targets/affects.

Seriously, it is a LOT of mixed signals going on, and doesn't inspire or really encourage me to try to do something else. Luckily I do what I want and try what I want with the game no matter what it is, so doesn't affect me, but can see others reading it and getting confused or less encouraged to try other things.

The PHB just fails to deliver anything other than, here is a bunch of rules for the combat in the game.

If I were to put the D&D 4th edition PHB alongside of the Warhammer 40k 2nd/3rd edition rulebook; Warhammer 40k inspires me more to want to get into that world, more than 4th edition D&D PHB does.

Funny how the RPG book reads and inspires miniature based combat gaming best, while the WH40k book has stuff in it to inspire the opposite, when they are doing the thing the other should be doing.

Not to mention both books have the same kinds of info save for the more "fluff" in WH40k that leads to the inspiration.

4th edition PHB jsut isn't inspiring, nor leads to believe the powers deviate from their written precise rules.

Page 42 of the DMG might should have been in the PHB.

Maybe they figured since 3rd edition things the players had to look for info form the DMG, so they read it, and previous edition thought the DMG held some well guarded secret, so they read it, that 4th edition the players all read the DMG, so the way the PHB is so dry wouldn't have been an obstacle?

 

[ProfessorCirno]

Dude, you said that sort of line didn't exist, and he quoted it for you. You can't suddenly claim it doesn't matter after spending so much time talking about how it wasn't there and how 4e kills out of the box thinking. Meanwhile, your proof is to take more lines that disagree with you and word by word dissect them to try and prove they also don't matter.

 

[shadzar]

I said what sort of line didnt exist? Im not going back through all the pages of this thread to guess what post was being replied to if any of mine were.

 

[pemerton]

So two sentences describing their areas, and one paragraph out of a 300+ page book.

<snip>

I don't really call that encouragement

<snip>

The PHB just fails to deliver anything other than, here is a bunch of rules for the combat in the game.

It's a book. It "delivers" by containing sentences. I quoted some sentences, including a (elided) paragraph (the actual paragraph, without ellision, is about half-a-column). If you look to see where those sentences are contained, they're under pretty important headings, like "Powers" and "Encounters". They're not hidden in sidebars, under misleading or irrelevant headings, or under rocks.

And now you're saying the book fails to deliver. Maybe some players failed to read it? I don't know.

Seriously, it is a LOT of mixed signals going on

The only mix I see is that the rulebook explains that my PC has a mix of powers useful in combat and outside, and may encounter a mix of both combat and non-combat encounters. Ie I'm playing a typical fantasy RPG.

pg 18: You get some "cool" powers no matter what class you are, now go read all those lovely powers and know you get to choose some of them.

Easily forgotten.

Why would anyone forget to read up on and choose their "cool" powers?

Again they are called attack and utility, and have specific targets bases around a system of keywords.

I don't see why targets are objectionable. Spells in AD&D have targets or areas of effect.

Upthread I listed a whole lot of non-combat spells (Warlock and Wizard utility powers) from the PHB. Most have either no target (because they're Personal) or a target of "you or one ally". I don't see how this encourages players to forget what they can be used for.

pg 54: Every power can be used in combat.

It doesn't say this. It says that utility powers can be used in and out of combat. I think this is intended as a distributed rather than a collective predication ie some can be used in combat, some out of combat, and some both.

pg 259: Skill challenges are not combat. You arent fighting a living creature, but some trap or something.

The paragraph occurs under a heading "non-combat encounters". It descibes non-combat encounters in this way:

Such encounters include dealing with traps and hazards, solving puzzles, and a broad category of situations called skill challenges.

A skill challenge occurs when exploration (page 260) or social interaction becomes an encounter, with serious consequences for success or failure.​

How does this discourage players from thinking about a broad range of non-combat uses for powers?

Maybe this might lead way for someone to think about using powers or doing things outside of the box, until the skill challenge system screws them up. "Oh I roll some numbers and my friends can give me bonuses helping and pass or fail depends on best 2 out of 3."

This bears no connection to the actual rules for skill challenges in the PHB and DMG:

PHB pp 179, 259

Your DM sets the stage for a skill challenge by describing the obstacle you face and giving you some idea of the options you have in the encounter. Then you describe your actions and make checks until you either successfully complete the challenge or fail…

Whatever the details of a skill challenge, the basic structure of a skill challenge is straightforward. Your goal is to accumulate a specific number of victories (usually in the form of successful skill checks) before you get too many defeats (failed checks). It’s up to you to think of ways you can use your skills to meet the challenges you face.

DMG pp 72–75

More so than perhaps any other kind of encounter, a skill challenge is defined by its context in an adventure…

Begin by describing the situation and defining the challenge. . . You describe the environment, listen to the players’ responses, let them make their skill checks, and narrate the results...

When a player’s turn comes up in a skill challenge, let that player’s character use any skill the player wants. As long as the player or you can come up with a way to let this secondary skill play a part in the challenge, go for it…

In skill challenges, players will come up with uses for skills that you didn’t expect to play a role. Try not to say no. . . This encourages players to think about the challenge in more depth…

However, it’s particularly important to make sure these checks are grounded in actions that make sense in the adventure and the situation. If a player asks, “Can I use Diplomacy?” you should ask what exactly the character might be doing … Don’t say no too often, but don’t say yes if it doesn’t make sense in the context of the challenge.​

How does any of this discourage players from thinking about how they can use their PC's powers and other abilities to engage the fiction?

That doesn't really say using a fireball CAN burn down a house, when the power says what it targets/affects.

This is from page 10 of the PHB, explaining what "exploration" involves when playing the game:

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​

I don't see this as keeping it secret that, in the game, PCs can affect the environment, just like people do in the real world.

Here is the flavour text for fireball (PHB p 161): "A globe of orange flame coalesces in your hand. You hurl it at your enemies, and it explodes on impact."

It's true that fireball lists as targets "each creature in burst" - but the rules on reading a power make it clear that the main function of this text is not to limit the effect to creatures (in contrast to objects) but to broaden the effect to creatures (in contrast to enemies only).

Would the PHB have been improved by including the rules from the DMG on attacking objects, mounted combat, aquatic combat, exhaustion etc (heavens! players who read the PHB, including the rules on using Athletics to swim, might think that they can't fight in water! or that they can't fight while riding horses!)? Yes.

Does the PHB give the impression that PCs can't do anything useful or interesting out of combat, or that PCs can't use their powers, including attack powers, out of combat? No - I've quoted the text where it expressly says the exact opposite.