D&D 4E lack of non-combat crunch is my biggest gripe with 4e atm

[Plane Sailing]

What in particular do you feel was noncombat about 3rd edition that has been lost in 4th.

I think he was more concerned about comparing 4e with other role playing games that have robust support for non-combat stuff, rather than comparing it with 3e which had D&D's, uh, traditional level of support

What this thread is mostly about is that I miss the good kind of RP-mechanics that I know exists in other roleplaying games

 

[duke_Qa]

thanks for the replies everyone, think I'll start from the end and go back.

Don't get me wrong, I had the same feeling when I first read the books, now, I come to think about it you have as much to do outside combat as you had before (if not more).

Stalker already gave the example of the Rogue.

Now think about the Fighter. (I won't do that for you...)

I can agree that the rogue and fighter have not really been any more non-combat oriented in 3e. But I might not have made this point; I can't stand 3e(well I'm no big fan, I'll play it if my friends want to play it since its more about the social situation than the game). Find a generic thread on the flaws of 3e and i can probably agree on 90% of them. What I'm looking for is most likely something that has not been focused on alot in D&D before.


Maybe it can be done with skills. I'm not saying "add more skills". what I'm looking for would work together with the core 4e skill rules, but it would give you bonuses in more specific cases(like "sharp ears" would give you bonus to listen-based perceptions).

Maybe utility powers are the way to go. I agree that great leap and beguiling tongue are powers that are spot-on what I imagine you could see in such non-combat powers. Although we would then enter the problem-area of non-combat powers being used/abused in combat. And of course the problem with utility powers being in the combat-silo, making it tricky to choose between aggressive/non-aggressive powers.

More feats might be very close to what I want. It is seemingly the easiest way to add these rules to the game. "you gain 3 non-combat feats at 1st lvl, and one every 3rd lvl after that. Certain non-combat feats costs more than one feat, and can be pumped up with more feats later on". It would work pretty damn well. And if you take inspiration from the 'channel divinity' feats that gives divine people access to deity specific powers, you pretty much have access to everything.

Anyways, there are two ways I could possibly think for you to do what you want:

1) You got some basic list of "non-combat" powers that every class could dip in.
2) You got one list per class/power source.

If you go with (1) you'll risk turning the game too silly, or, really you won't change a damn thing because we already got Feats & Skills, and they work pretty good. Most of the "non-combat" abilities from 3.X that we don't see anymore are either part of some skill or made into a feat.

If you go with (2) you'll have the problem of getting things unbalanced, some classes would get some obvious powerful (and more useful) stuff while some others would get some trivial stuff (Think Wizards vs. Fighters).

And that's where Rituals come in. With a simple feat or two you have access to them, no matter how dumb you might be. Even though Wizards gets them for free, it's not something out of reach for anyone.

My advice, play the game for a few more sessions, you'll realize there's nothing wrong the way it is

(1) definitely. the restrictions to getting a background would probably be things like ability scores, x powersource/'ability to use x powersource', trained in certain skills, stuff that you can get around with training.

Problem with rituals is that they are still pretty much external. a ritual does not a character make imo. but I think that the devs talked about the possibility of non-arcane/divine rituals, which would probably make it more useful.

yeah, I'm going to keep playing the game. As of yet this is just a thought in my head of what I would like to see more of. if i once get to Play the game aswell i might change my opinion completely(the ones that i play 4e with are either too fresh to DM or "haters" that won't DM)

I think the nerfing of the spell issue is a response to inconsistent DM handling of creative use of spells in 3.5. I feel that 4e tries to standardize everything to make it easier to DM - at least with the core books. Unfortunately, this comes at the cost of some really cool spells - ( I loved transmute rock to mud and wonder if I will ever see it again in combat )

I think over time, we will slowly see these options return in other books, but the true range of the 3.5 magic system will likely always be absent - and with it a large part of the creativity of the game many players were used to (until they learn to adapt).

EDIT : on the plus side, this does eliminate to some extent the Scry, teleport, nuke routine that many high level parties use.

yeah, the vancian system allowed for everything, but it was alot of work. i believe that 4e can be just as "open", but we need to see more rules for it first. (hehe, I can see the paradox of "having more rules to enhance roleplaying" that people probably are thinking of when reading this. I can agree with that to an extent, but I feel these are potential rules to be used as 'guidelines'/inspiration )

hopefully we will either learn to adapt or get a modular add on of rules that can be used. Whats great about such modules is that they can be removed without hassle if someone doesn't like them.

Really, how much non-combat stuff did any edition of D&D really have before 3e? sure, AD&D had 'non weapon proficencies', and RC may have had something similar, but really... not much in the way of non-combat stuff, yet, somehow, people still managed to RP.

I really don't mind that non-combat stuff is more freeform now. in a way, it lets you use your imagination more rather than having to rely on a lot of rules.

ymmv

Naturally, most games that have the core needs covered can encourage roleplaying. It's just that at certain times rules that encourage rping adds an extra oomph to the game.

Freeform is great, but certain non-combat situations can get messy if you don't have certain limitations on what you can do. And sometimes its great to know that a special ability you got saved the day beyond you personally thinking of a way(maybe a way that your character normally wouldnt follow either) to get out of an situation.

for example, having a non-combat feat that gave you sharper hearing skills, don't you think such a feat would be pointed at during roleplay? such small bonuses are hooks for players to build their character upon.

What in particular do you feel was noncombat about 3rd edition that has been lost in 4th.

3e was not my favorite game. but you could if you wanted the scolding, take non-combat feats. 4e is better on evening out combat, but I still feel that non-combat is left out in the cold. The background bonuses in the forgotten realms players handbook is a development in the right direction though. Everyone can get a background bonus and it doesn't really hurt your combat optimization.

(post getting big, trying to keep things short )

I have to say that I'd rather have less rules for non-combat encounters than more because it gives me as the DM or player a lot more flexibility ("you want to be a chef turned adventurer, you're a chef!") it would be great if they came out with a book with all that non-combat fluff (and crunch) that is present in earlier books. Things that pop to my mind right away are things like keeps, midevel professions, sample npcs, random treasure and encounters. Things that would help me as a player or DM flesh out my character or world. I know that a lot of these things have been published already and can be modified from previous rule sets, but I would prefer that they are tied in with the current rule set.

And i like the idea of having a seperate power "silo" at certain levels that give you more non-combat options. Every time I have to choose between a non-combat power and a combat power as a player, I'm going to pick the combat power, because at least in the games I play in, you'll use the combat powers a lot more.

I once had a wizard which was a baker, great times. Those sort of backgrounds is not what I'm primarily thinking about. Special backgrounds like "mind-reader" and generic ones like "sharp ears" is probably what I'm looking for. Small quirks that isn't a character-in-a-nutshell but gives bonuses or special powers depending on how much you've spent on getting it.
Oh what I would give for a monster manual with no monsters but humanoids. the evil guy behind the throne, the local assassins guild, the knight templars of the paranoid paladins. people with motives and style

Non-combat silo not connected to combat is a must for these rules to work well with 4e. It might cause power-creep, but I feel that it would most likely be so little that you as a DM shouldnt have to worry that much about it beyond raising the DC's on skills with a few points.



had some more text here but it got eaten, so to craw hammerfist:

Thanks for feeling . get a game up and running and try it out. I agree that 4e has done great things for combat but is still too blank in the area of non-combat. skill challenges is interesting but i've yet managed to run it flawlessly, but the theory itself is great for inspiration.

if we got non-combat rules in the future, i don't see any reason why we shouldn't use them the same way that we've been using skill-challenges: modified and with houserules.



Sorry for the long reply, I'll have to sacrifice replies later on to be shorter. And now I see Plane Sailing replied as well: And yes, its pretty true. 3e is not a good example of non-combat mechanics and other rpgs should be looked at for inspiration here.

 

[LostSoul]

So you're looking for things like:

Inspirational
This character innervates and motivates other people by his mere presence.
Once per day, when making a Diplomacy check, roll twice and take the higher result.

edit: Or even something like:

Mind Reader General Utility 5
Encounter ♦ Arcane
Minor Action Close burst 5
Prerequisite: You must be trained in Insight.
Target: One creature.
Effect: Make an Insight check with a -5 penalty. If successful, you can read the surface thoughts of the target.

 

[ExploderWizard]

When you refer to other roleplaying games, which ones are you talking about? Are they other action focused fantasy games, generic systems, or another genre altogether. This important because there are mechanics that work great in some genres that hinder others. For example if I decided to use fright check mechanics for spooky stuff in a heroic fantasy game it would spoil the play of the genre. The brave party of heroes enters a haunted crypt to face down an evil wraith and all run away like frightened children. It works in horror, not so well in D&D.

The thing that makes D&D so great for me actually is the lack of mechanics for noncombat stuff. Skill challenges are a wonderful concept that can be run freeform by a DM with a little preparation but the crunchy mechanics behind the idea are clunky and don't quite live up to the idea.
Roleplaying encounters are a great time to rely less on the dice and enjoy some dialogue with the players. You can toss in some rolls to judge the effects of the characters skills and attributes on the outcome but reducing the entire process to mathmatical formula removes or at best waters down the human element in the game.

If a game gets to a point where social ecounters can be resolved solely by whats on the character sheet it has reached a point where it no longer requires players. I don't have a use for such a game.

 

[duke_Qa]

ExploderWizard: Mostly World of Darkness, although I guess GURPS can be inspiring as well. Dark Heresy is interesting aswell, but thats a system that is way too rigid in what you can pick or not. Also, fear-checks can be fancy when used rarely and when the consequences are pretty foreseeable, but yeah, they can mess up an heroic game.

skill challenges is an interesting concept. but keeping initiative in situations where there is no time pressure makes it feel clunky.



LostSoul: yes that is a few possible ways of doing it. As long as the requirements are not class based and it does not steal from your combat powers, it should work well.

I also imagine that there are different levels and costs of these powers/abilities. for example, if you spent 3 non-combat-whatevers that you get on 1st lvl on one background, you would get a much better version than one you got for only one non-combat-whatever. start with a +1 or somthing. twice the costs gives you a encounter-power to re-roll related checks with that. another + and you gain brutal 4 on the dice etc etc. and other abilities like mind-reading you could gain new powers or more powerful effects and or more rapid use of it.

 

[mlund]

I've played a fair chunk of "New" World Of Darkness.

Frankly, I'm just as happy that D&D doesn't bog itself down with a lot of codified "crunch" for non-combat encounters. It encourages Cooperative rather than Confrontational role-playing. When getting what you want in a non-combat scenario is more about formulating your plan and less about hitting your Target Number (DC, # of successes, whatever) I think you have a better game on your hands.

Detailed crunch is there to moderate the age old Cops-and-Robbers dispute of "I got you! / Nuh uh! You missed me!" - not to replace discussions with the local farmers to learn about bandits or wooing the fair princes at the royal ball. The more codified crunch you put into the rules for a particular scenario the less free-form role-playing is perceived as "fair."

- Marty Lund

 

[eamon]

It's not just "crunch" - it's just the general lack of abilities which call out to be used creatively.

Scry-Teleport-Nuke make be boring, but there were much more such things which were fun to contemplate.

Have a familiar? It can talk, and you could convince it to spy on your enemies, or perhaps to steal a small item. A druid could become a dog to infiltrate a town. A simple net had a amusing combat potential, and a lot of low-level equipment was readily available and usable for interesting purposes.

And of course, spellcasters had untold versatility:
- speak with animals, detect poison, reduce person, tree shape, water breathing, transmute mud to rock and vice-versa, Tree Stride, Mark of Justice, Jump, Hide from (Animals, Undead, etc), Alarm, Message, Mending, Arcane Mark, Spider Climb, Detect Thoughts, Locate Object, Tenser's Floating Disk, Gentle Repose, Leomund's Tiny Hut, Sepia Snake Sigil, Arcane Eye, Illusory Wall...

The point isn't just that these things are useful or powerful, it's also that they can be inspirational tools, and character hooks. Stuff like speak with dead is just great for a plot hook. Maybe it's a bit cheap, but it both rewards the player's for thinking of it, and it allows a bit of spooky atmostphere and to inject information which might be otherwise difficult to pass along.

The point of these effects and abilities is also to serve as a certain magical baseline, if you will - effects which you can expect to see and use around the world. Rituals could be a part of this - but they're much and much and much too expensive, and in any case some variety between the classes would be nice.

How about the druid's pass without trace, or the bard's knowledge? How about Woodland Stride, Animal companions, and Wild empathy?

I think it's nice having some fluffy rules. 4e loses a bit of flavor for the lack.

 

[LostSoul]

I would suggest looking at the holes in the rules - stuff that's spelled out that you can't do, like reading minds with Insight - and filling them with powers or whatever.

 

[burntgerbil]

perhaps developing a "Character quirks, traits and flaws" ruleset independent of feats might suit your needs. You could perhaps begin to model this off of both feats (like channel divinity) and the backgrounds like we've seen for the FRPG character backgrounds and the "Characters of War" article.

 

[Plane Sailing]

Have you seen Star Wars Saga Edition?

SWSE has lots of talents for the use of 'soft' skills in situations which include combat and out of combat. They might give you some useful inspiration (the noble class for starters is chock full of such talents)

Cheers