Jonathan Tweet denounces Power Attack

[Najo]

I am not sure, but I think you misread him, or somehow used the false wording in your post.

The way I read his post, "Magic Online" was one of the things WotC did well (referring only to the electronic and mass media products related to their "traditional" systems)

On the nose Thank you for pointing this out. See Byron, Mustrum got it

 

[BryonD]

You completely misread me. take another read through please and then let me know what you think of my reply.

Sorry, I did indeed misread that line. My bad. I apologize.

 

[Najo]

Sorry, I did indeed misread that line. My bad. I apologize.

No worries. Thanks for the apology. Now you have reread it did you have any comments?

 

[BryonD]

No.

I still think WotC makes mistakes and it is ok to point them out and expect to not be automatically decried as a WotC basher. I don't think WotC having several good products changes that.

I do agree that WotC has numerous good products. And I am not accusing you of calling anyone a basher, that is simply the context of my prior post to which you replied.

 

[Najo]

No.

I still think WotC makes mistakes and it is ok to point them out and expect to not be automatically decried as a WotC basher. I don't think WotC having several good products changes that.

I do agree that WotC has numerous good products. And I am not accusing you of calling anyone a basher, that is simply the context of my prior post to which you replied.

I actually think WOTC is 50/50 with their products. They have alot of stinkers (which I point out in the post) and they have some sleepers that were too niche.

Even within the products they do well with, they do make mistakes. I still do not agree with the mystic theurge approach to multiclassing spellcsaters. I think it was a easy way out and a band aid. That classes like that still are underpowered and now require extra time to prepare their daily spells. In both cases, no fun. Ironically, mr. Tweet was all over the mystic theurge thinking it was the bst thing since sliced bread. I think he was 100% wrong.

Anyrate, I am not looking to call people WOTC bashers and I don't think sliver clouds, sunshine and rainbows fly out of their arses.

All in all, I think that WOTC will do well with 4e though. There are some good designers on the team. The studio has done well with the other d20 projects and at least 80% of D&D. I trust the intelligence of Mearls, Collins, Wyatt, Heisoon <sp> and the rest of their crew. There is a very good foundation put their to work with from Monte, Skip and even Johnathan. 4e has a very good chance of blowing us away.

My WOTC rep told me that the first two times he played 4e as a playtester it frustrated him because it was so different. Things weren't where he was comfortable with them. It was new and different and that made it frightening that the D&D he was comfortable with was gone.

He said after the third time playing, it all clicked and he couldn't imagine going back. That he loved it, and that it was miles of difference between the two games. That 4e made 3.5 look primiative and akward.

So for what it is worth, there you go. He has never lied to me before. I believe him.

 

[glass]

Let me suggest that the smarter your players are, the less they indulge in behavior that bogs down the flow of play, even if it means a slight loss in their own character's effectiveness...

And thus, my group never uses power attack (except as a prereq for cleave), because they are smart enough to realise that without the maths it is a liability.

Do you think that 'bog down the game or suck' is a good choice to be built into the game?


glass.

 

[BryonD]

If you go back to the annoucement you will find posts from me that were completely in support of 4E and for reasons completely consistent with the ideas you state. You don't need to talk me into that.

4E may still be great.
I hate the idea of dumbing down.
No matter how good 4E is, I think it will be better if they avoid dumbing it down.
They may in fact NOT be dumbing it down.
Some people have very actively advocated "simplfying" and then detail the ideas in ways that sum up to "dumbing down".
Some of these people make it clear that any hint of questioning these type changes is a high heresy.
The actual WotC comments have been far to ambiguous to make a statement, but some seem to lend themselves into the dumbing down path.
I like Power Attack.
I am fully open to alternative ways of handling Power Attack.
If a key driver in redoing PA is a need to dumb it down then that is bad.

I'm certain there are insiders that love 4E.
There are people who love WoD and hate 3X.
That doesn't make WoD a better game for what I want.

There have also been claims that one goal of 4E should be to grow the number of players by somehow lowering the bar for entry. I believe this is deeply misguided. Not because I am slightly opposed to more gamers but because I believe the unintended consequences will be substantial and the addition of new players by this approach will be negligible.

I am still right now very enthusiastic about 4E.
I love 3X, but certainly see ways that the mechanics and more abstract lessons learned of the D20 era can be used to re-tool and move the game to a higher level. And while my total support of a few months ago has gained some real shadows of concern now, I remain very optimistic and expect to be happily relieved in a few months. And if (WHEN!!!) I love 4E, I will be very vocal about it here.

In the mean time I'm still going to disagree with claims that dumbing down is good and I'm still going to take each piece of news as it comes and be just as critical of the "wotc does no wrong" types as I am of the "wotc is just grubbing corporate jerks" types.

 

[BryonD]

And thus, my group never uses power attack (except as a prereq for cleave), because they are smart enough to realise that without the maths it is a liability.

Do you think that 'bog down the game or suck' is a good choice to be built into the game?

glass.

You know, I thought some more about the prior comment that my group doesn't increase their damage and I concluded that I 100% disagree with this claim. You can come far short of optimizing PA and still gain a solid advantage from it.

It is really easy to gauge what you need to roll to hit a particular target and adjust over the course of a few rounds. I am certain that they dish out substantially more damage than they would if they never used PA at all. And they don't spend any significant time dwelling on it.

For example, my wife tends to almost always start at 0 PA. If she hits with a 4 or something (or observes that other players are), she will start rolling in some PA. On really obvious easy hits she will do the opposite and start with a lot of PA and work back as needed. Either way the total damage output goes up and she ends up close to optimal just be natural tendency without the slightest need for dwelling on the math. And really, if a player is going to get themselves worked up over perfectly maximizing their damage output over being into the roll of a powerful warrior smashing his foes, then getting rid of the math isn't going to treat the core problem.

Because I will repeat that regardless of how much damage they do, the total amount of fun added by PA is very high in my group.

Be cool without any bogging at all is an awesome addition to the game.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

Because I will repeat that regardless of how much damage they do, the total amount of fun added by PA is very high in my group.

Be cool without any bogging at all is an awesome addition to the game.

True. I think that PA is fun, but it is still a problem. It might not be in your particular group, but it is in general across all groups.

I can tell you from experience having a number of new people join my home game as well as running RPGA conventions at gaming stores where new people are always showing up asking to play that the situation with power attack goes the same way 90% of the time:

New Player: "I don't know how to play this game, but I want to learn!"
Everyone Else: "You should be a fighter, its easy to learn and you get to use a big sword and kill the enemies."
New Player: "That sounds cool. I don't know how to make up a character though."
Someone: "No problem, you are a human fighter with power attack, cleave, and a high strength."
....
New Player: "Ok, I attack the enemy."
Someone: "You should use power attack. It lets you take a minus to your attack and add damage instead."
New Player: "Doing more damage is good. How do I do that?"
Someone: "You just take a minus to your attack and add that much to your damage."
New Player: "So, I rolled at 12....what does that mean?"
Someone: "Well, how much were you power attacking for?"
New Player: "Oh, I didn't know I had to say before I rolled."
Someone: "Yeah, since you need to minus that off your to hit roll."
New Player: "Oh...I think I get it now....so, it says I have plus 7 to hit, so I add that to the 12 and I get...19."
Someone: "Except you are power attacking...for 4 you said."
New Player: "Right, so...then what do I hit?"
Someone: "15. Which is 19 minus 4."
New Player: "Ok, so then I roll the damage listed on the sheet?"
Someone: "Yes."
New Player: "I get 10."
Someone: "That seems wrong, you power attacked for 4 and you rolled 4 on the dice. It seems too low. You added the damage from power attack?"
New Player: "No, I forgot, I was just looking at the numbers on my sheet. Then I get 14."
Someone: "Keep in mind that when you use power attack with a two handed weapon you get double the amount you power attack for to damage."
New Player: "That's 18 then."
DM: "Either way, this discussion is pointless, the enemy has an AC of 16 and 15 misses."
(next round)
Someone: "So, are you going to power attack again?"
New Player: "Sure...how much should I power attack for? I don't want to miss again."
Someone: "That's up to you, it can be anything."
New Player: "I don't know what's best though, what do you think?"
....
etc.

We currently have one player in our group who can't do the math on power attack at all and calculates either the attack roll or the damage roll wrong every time she does it (although she's getting better, she only does it wrong about 30% of the time now).

We have another player who, whenever he does math involving a power attack doubles or triples the length of his turn.

It isn't isolated to just a few groups. I have no doubt that some groups are entirely filled with people that don't have a problem with power attack and therefore don't see it.

However, I can say from experience that dumbing down the game IS a good thing. As a large number of players I've met can't handle the current complexity. At least, not well.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I think it really depends on what you dumb down.

If you dumb down that every class plays the same, just has a different flavour text, I'd say that's not what "good" dumbing down is about.
If you remove all combat maneuvers and leave only the option to hit and deal damage, that's also bad dumbing down.

But changing power attack so that it becomes faster to apply is not really dumbing down negatively.
I think Power Attack requires a little bit to much micro-management, especially because it is associated with a flavour that doesn't imply careful observation or calculations.
Provoking an attack of oppertunity and/or suffering an AC penalty for it sounds more fitting (though these might have problems in the balance department)