Low Damage, High HP ... How is this "Faster"?

[Stalker0]

Ah. Yes, you're right; the new system is meant to discourage instakills, and rightly so. Still, I think you can support the idea of a character who deals large gobs of damage in concentrated chunks, without going all the way to that extreme. Typically spike damage is achieved at the cost of sustained DPS, so you could have, for example, someone who gives up their action(s) for 1 round to deal extra damage in the next round. The idea is similar to aiming to hit a critical point, or sizing up the target.

A fine idea, but again it comes down to the fact that the assassin archetype (which is 1 shot one kill) clashes with the notion that a party wants to have a chance to defend against encounters.

For example, let's say the assassin has an ability where he can add +2d6 damage to an attack if he studies a person for one round. Now he will certain do more damage on that surprise attack, but he is unlikely to kill any pcs with that.

Now what if we make it +5d6 damage. Now he has a very nice chance of taking out a player in one hit, but the player had no chance to defend, and if probably feeling a bit pissed off.

If we say the assassin should be taking out players in 2 hits, then that's simply an upgrade of the "striker" concept we've already seen in 4e.


Now we could go with another 4e idea, and use per day abilities to represent the surprise assault of the assassin. But then this clashes with the idea that a 4e characters power level shouldn't swing too much based on per day abilities. If the assassin is based a chump striker when he's per day abilities are gone, then it just encourages the party to heal more. For an npc, per day management doesn't matter...which makes npc assassin's all the more dangerous for PCs.

 

[hong]

A fine idea, but again it comes down to the fact that the assassin archetype (which is 1 shot one kill) clashes with the notion that a party wants to have a chance to defend against encounters.

For example, let's say the assassin has an ability where he can add +2d6 damage to an attack if he studies a person for one round. Now he will certain do more damage on that surprise attack, but he is unlikely to kill any pcs with that.

Now what if we make it +5d6 damage. Now he has a very nice chance of taking out a player in one hit, but the player had no chance to defend, and if probably feeling a bit pissed off.

If we say the assassin should be taking out players in 2 hits, then that's simply an upgrade of the "striker" concept we've already seen in 4e.


Now we could go with another 4e idea, and use per day abilities to represent the surprise assault of the assassin. But then this clashes with the idea that a 4e characters power level shouldn't swing too much based on per day abilities. If the assassin is based a chump striker when he's per day abilities are gone, then it just encourages the party to heal more. For an npc, per day management doesn't matter...which makes npc assassin's all the more dangerous for PCs.

I'm not talking about assassin NPCs. I'm talking about assassin PCs. And yes, I'm basically talking about making sure the striker isn't just extra sustained DPS.

 

[Zimri]

I was going to use the comparison chart in this thread to simulate the amount of time player 1 and player 2 spent sitting around waiting for the other player to make decisions and resolve combat. However seeing as how those numbers would have been pulled from "the dairy air" let's just ignore them all together.

If I spend less time between decision points waiting on team mates figuring out how to eek the last bit of damage/to hit from each of 7 rolls, confirming criticals, deciding which Bo9S manuever or stance to use, etcetera then the combat will feel faster to me.

The downside of course being I'll actually have to ask for a pause in the game to go get mountain dew, order pizza, and use the bathroom.

 

[Derren]

4E combat will (theoretically) be faster because players have much less options in combat that 3E. What slowed down combat in 3E was not iterative attacks or 1-2-1 diagonals, but players who had no clue what to do (typically the wizard who started to look at his spell list only after his turn already started).
If players planned what to do while others were still taking their turns 3E combat would be quite fast, but as most players don't do this and its not a good business strategy to exclude those people (or tell them not to shut down their brains when it is not their turn) WotC simply reduced the number of combat options in 4E.
Two at will powers, two encounter powers and a daily power (I think). That is all you can do in combat and it takes much less time to decide what to do with that few options.

 

[Zimri]

4E combat will (theoretically) be faster because players have much less options in combat that 3E. What slowed down combat in 3E was not iterative attacks or 1-2-1 diagonals, but players who had no clue what to do (typically the wizard who started to look at his spell list only after his turn already started).
If players planned what to do while others were still taking their turns 3E combat would be quite fast, but as most players don't do this and its not a good business strategy to exclude those people (or tell them not to shut down their brains when it is not their turn) WotC simply reduced the number of combat options in 4E.
Two at will powers, two encounter powers and a daily power (I think). That is all you can do in combat and it takes much less time to decide what to do with that few options.

Even with what actions they will take being decided between rounds implementing those actions in 3.5 takes more time because there are (seemingly) more of them, with boni or penalties that need determined and applied. 4e appears to have less math and less options to apply said math. This will speed up the feel of my game greatly. Maybe I don't game with the most "efficient" group in the world, but this will help streamline our fun even if according to some our fun is both "bad" and "wrong"

 

[WhatGravitas]

A fine idea, but again it comes down to the fact that the assassin archetype (which is 1 shot one kill) clashes with the notion that a party wants to have a chance to defend against encounters.

For NPC assassins, this may be a reason to use poisoned weapons, probably with a rider effect (like a poison eating up a healing surge every round or denying second winds). The extra poison damage would add pressure to the whole thing, making the assassin attack dangerous, while giving the PC a chance to avoid 1-shot-kills. This would make spike damage similarly viable as pressure damage - but very different in style and feel.

For PC assassins, this point is probably moot, as most NPCs won't have healing surges.

Cheers, LT.

 

[Hussar]

I seem to remember reading on the front page news here that Jason Buhlman (sp) had a 40 round fight during his play test against the black dragon.

FORTY FREAKING ROUNDS.

Now, stop and think about that for a second. In that playtest, that encounter came at the end of the adventure. So, say he burned a couple of hours getting through the initial stuff. The playtests were 5 hours (I think), so that leaves him 3 hours. Six players, 40 rounds, in 3 hours? Try doing that in 3e. Good luck.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

WHY DOES NOONE LISTEN




Ah. Yes, you're right; the new system is meant to discourage instakills, and rightly so. Still, I think you can support the idea of a character who deals large gobs of damage in concentrated chunks, without going all the way to that extreme. Typically spike damage is achieved at the cost of sustained DPS, so you could have, for example, someone who gives up their action(s) for 1 round to deal extra damage in the next round. The idea is similar to aiming to hit a critical point, or sizing up the target.

It's also great for kill stealing, but we're all friends here, right?

This might not a be an idea for everyone, but... maybe rhe skill challenge mechanics should actually be used to set up an "assassination" attempt, instead of the normal combat rules. Basically, all the activities on an assassin have to do with figuring out how to attack his target in a safe manner. Which to me sounds like using a lot of skills (Streetwise/Gather Information, Spot, Stealth, Thievery, Bluff, Insight and similar stuff).

So an assassination is decided by a sequence of skill checks that get the Assassin in a position to strike. You could use the number of failures & successes to design the final encounter. A "flawless" assassination encounter would mean that at the end, the target lies dead on the floor and the assassin is gone. No attacks roll asked for.

A lesser success increases the chance of some enemy along the way noticing the Assassin, possibly leading to a combat-confrontation with the target (possibly still rigged in favor of the Assassin. In case of an NPC, the NPC might be treated more like a Minion, or is just badly equipped or otherwise in bad shape.). The Assassins retreat after the success will not go as easy as he hoped for.

A failed assassination encounter means the Assassin has trouble even before he ever can approach his target. Even now, he might still be able to escape the guards and get to his target, but it's really a brute force approach now, and his friends at the Assassin's guild will laugh about him...

 

[Patlin]

A little thought experiment.

Just looking at the Crimson Edge power, I'm seeing a lot of damage potential there.

Assumptions:
• a 25th lvl "brute" rogue with 20 Dex and 20 Str (which I think will be conservative, since it's suspected ability increases will happen more often than 3E)
• short sword does 1d6 damage
• short sword is +3 (again, conservative)
• rogue has combat advantage on his turn

So, a hit with Crimson Edge will do 2d6+3 for short sword, +5 for dex, +5d6 sneak attack, for an average of 32.5 points of damage. The target then begins taking 10 points of automatic damage per round until he saves, and until he does, he's susceptible to at-will Deft Strike Sneak Attacks from the rogue for another 6d6+8 (average 29) points of damage per round.

Doesn't the Brute add Dex and Str to damage?

Also, I may be wrong on this, but doesn't the whole attribute modifier get a +1 per 2 levels? Maybe only attacks do, but if there's another 10 points of attribute modifier (each?) due solely to level, that'll up the numbers a lot.

Perhaps I should say "probably wrong" instead of just may be.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

4E combat will (theoretically) be faster because players have much less options in combat that 3E. What slowed down combat in 3E was not iterative attacks or 1-2-1 diagonals, but players who had no clue what to do (typically the wizard who started to look at his spell list only after his turn already started).
If players planned what to do while others were still taking their turns 3E combat would be quite fast, but as most players don't do this and its not a good business strategy to exclude those people (or tell them not to shut down their brains when it is not their turn) WotC simply reduced the number of combat options in 4E.
Two at will powers, two encounter powers and a daily power (I think). That is all you can do in combat and it takes much less time to decide what to do with that few options.

you can´t really predict your actions in 3.e... with 4 iterative attacks, spells which kill or doesn´t harm anyone, you need to plan a lot for each turn. Also you have to pay attention to what happens before your turn or you look really really stupid.

In 4e, planning ahead is easier...

2 different points i want to address:
1) if you can see that you will lose the battle, there is nothing you can do about that in 3.x. the attack/AC and the damage/HP ratio is so unbalanced, that most characters will die anyway.
2) Assassination type characters could be still valid:

imagine a power like:

rogue utility 1:
Ambush
encounter (3 rounds, 5 squares)
target: all enemies in line of sight
Attack: stealth vs passive perception
combat advantage grants +4 to attack vs that enemy and sneak dice are doubled. Lasts until you lose combat advantage.
miss: you are spotted.

rogue attack 2:
Assasins strike
small blade or crossbow
Encounter (1 full round)
target: one enemy with ambush active on him
attack: dex vs AC
hit: you bloody the foe and then you deal your [w]+dex damage (don´t forget sneak attack), receives ongoing damage 5 and is weakened (save ends) and if he fails his first saving throw he becomes unconscious (save ends)
miss: zap...