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

[dm4hire]

Reminder: We haven't seen everything yet. Also my examples will be working only with the example previously mentioned.

Leader classes (I believe) have been mentioned as having abilities which will enhance attacks. It is possible these enhancements might increase damage as well, especially at high levels. Given the angle the game is taking toward mimicking online games, where classes played have similar abilities, it is highly likely enhancements will modify damage somehow. I wouldn't be surprised if an enhancement increases damage by either extra dice, by straight multiplier, or increase the base die of the weapons one category.

Using the mentioned example of (2d6+3 for short sword, +5 for dex, +5d6 sneak attack=15 to 50) as a base let's take a look with these possibilities in play.

Extra dice option (I'll use a bonus of +2d8 in this example to distinguish the bonus):
2d6+3 for short sword, +5 for dex, +5d6 sneak attack +2d8 enhancement from leadership ability=7d6+8+2d8=17 to 66

Straight Multiplier option assuming it works only on the weapon damage:
4d6+6 (x2 Leadership ability (2d6+3 for short sword)), +5 for dex, +5d6 sneak attack=9d6+11=20 to 65

Increase of base die option:
2d6+3 for short sword, +5 for dex, +5d6 sneak attack before modifier
2d8+3 for short sword, +5 for dex, +5d6 sneak attack after modifier =2d8+8+5d6=15 to 54

As you can see those changes add 4 to 16 point increase on max damage without a critical being added in. Doesn't seem like much but when that bonus is then added across the party you would probably be looking at a potential gain that will be quite significant for the group, especially when placed on fighters and higher damage dealers. This hinges that the abilities mentioned work as stated.

If the modifier effects all damage using just the last two modifications then damage has the potential to go through the roof.

Straight Multiplier option:
x2 Leadership ability (2d6+3 for short sword, +5 for dex, +5d6 sneak attack)=14d6+16=30 to 100

This seems way over powering but for a 30th lvl character it would be realistic however it would mean the pit fiend wouldn't last more than three rounds, if not one round. Remember these modifications would be applying to all PCs so I doubt it would work this way.

Increase of base die option now applied to all base dice in the attack:
2d6+3 for short sword, +5 for dex, +5d6 sneak attack before modifier
2d8+3 for short sword, +5 for dex, +5d8 sneak attack after modifier =7d8+8=15 to 64

This last one is very feasible and doesn't change the minimum damage dealt, increasing the maximum damage a reasonable amount. This is a possible option which would fit with the first three I listed.

If the boost abilities work as I described or some variation then combat falls back into a more manageable range of rounds. It also places importance of having at least one leader in the party. Going against the Pit Fiend suddenly isn't quite as bad and combat doesn't take as long once the whole party gets in on the action, assuming everyone succeeds in their attacks.

 

[HP Dreadnought]

I think you're missing the point on the combat being "faster."

I don't think there was ever a goal to make combat take fewer rounds to complete. Furthermore I'll even say many people don't actually have a desire to make a combat take less clock time as well.

I think the problem with "long" combats in 3.x is the combat process taking too long. This means lots of sitting around time while somebody else takes their actions for the round.

By a "faster" system, each persons actions take less time to resolve, therefore the pace of play is faster and less time is spent doing nothing but waiting on others. If people are engaged, busy and having a good time, then the number of rounds, or even the clock time to a certain extent becomes irrelevant.

 

[Zelc]

The at will/per encounter/per day system could reduce the time it takes for players to make their decisions. Instead of "Gee, I have 20 unique spells memorized, which one should I cast this round?" it's "I have 5 at will powers I can use. If things get tough, I'll use one of my two per encounter powers. If things are really bad, I have two per day powers I can use". The tiering system is a hint as to when to use the power (everything under control, look just at your at will powers, brown matter hits the fan, use a per day power), and the low number of powers per tier means there are fewer options to choose from.

Of course, this is more options than a fighter usually has, but then there are fewer attacks to roll, and it's all one person rolling them.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

We also have no idea that the weapon damage is the same or wether [W] represents simply the weapon's damage die or not.

It's very possible that the damage dice are a bit higher. This would also allow for a little more variation, instead of almost everything doing 1D8 like in 3e.

As I'm sure it's been stated the OP seems to be judging it based on a low level rogue witha 1D6 weapon only doing at-will attacks with no help. Personally I think the designers know what they are doing.

Fitz

 

[frankthedm]

Is that really an improvement? Not so much, IMO - it may lend itself more to drawn-out swashbuckling, but it makes ambushes and assassinations somewhat nonsensical.

That is part of what the HP system is supposed to do. Level based HP is supposed to prevent “One Shot-One Kill”.

Assassinations and ambushes are supposed to eliminate victims BEFORE a defense can be presented. In d20, the low level aristocrat is in danger from such attacks, not players. The player is throwing “Mr High Value & Low HP” behind total cover, eating a hit to the shoulder and then returning fire.

 

[ki11erDM]

I would rather have longer fun combats than much faster combats that aren't as much fun.

Yeps.

I would rather have a battle with a epic god like being that takes longer than 24 secs of game time while taking 5 hours of real world time.

 

[IceFractal]

Just to clarify a couple of points:

But how much damage a Dragonborn Fighter with a two-handed axe will he inflict on a roll of 20?

From everything they've said about 4E, a Fighter (Defender) will be doing less damage than a Rogue (Striker).

The Sneak Attack portion in the class description is a freebie. It is literally applied once per round if you have combat advantage no matter which power or attack you're using. It's pure extra damage that, so far, no other classes get. I have a feeling warlocks' curses will be similar.

Yes, and in 3E it was literally applied up to 6+ times per round no matter which power or attack you're using. And it was about twice as many dice. So this is, by any definition, considerably less damage than before.

I is a bit like looking at a 3E Wizard class description and a couple of 1st level spells and saying a 3E Wiz cannot dish out the damage. The Rogue (and I would imagine all other classes) will get his major damage from his powers, not his sneak attack.

True. However, we have seen several Rogue powers, including a 9th level "daily" power - and it does considerably less than a 3E 9th level Rogue's "at will" power (Sneak Attack). Unless the power scale goes rapidly exponential after 9th level (something they said they were avoiding), then we end up with "daily" powers that are weaker than a 3E rogue's normal sneak attacks.


And as far as round speed - round speed is irrelevant in terms of how long a battle takes to run. The relevant factors are how many attacks are required, and how long each attack takes to resolve. And it's looking like this could easily be slower than 3E.

Which is faster? This:
Player 1: 5' step, attack, attack, attack
Player 2: move, attack, attack (Manyshot )
Monster: attack, attack, attack

Or this?
Player 1: 5' step, attack
Player 2: move, attack
Monster: attack
Player 1: attack, swift action
Player 2: move, attack
Monster: attack, swift action
Player 1: attack, move
Player 2: move, attack, swift action
Monster: move, attack

One attack per round only speeds things up if you combine that with less total attacks being required. Otherwise, it's as if you could move and use swift actions between each attack of a full-attack action. And when it actually takes more total attacks, it's hard to see how it won't be slower.

 

[Fifth Element]

One attack per round only speeds things up if you combine that with less total attacks being required. Otherwise, it's as if you could move and use swift actions between each attack of a full-attack action. And when it actually takes more total attacks, it's hard to see how it won't be slower.

Once again, we're not talking about taking fewer rounds. We may not even be talking about taking less real-world time. We're talking about players spending less time sitting around, waiting for everyone else's actions to be done so they can act again.

 

[Deep Blue 9000]

I think you make some good points Ice Fractal. However, I believe we haven't seen enough to guess how much damage a rogue is doing per attack. In 3.5, most of a melee type's damage came from feats. If this is the case in 4e, rogues could actually have better per attack damage output than in 3.5.

 

[Doug McCrae]

Fewer buffs will be a factor. My present PC has power attack, leap attack, and a couple of class specific abilities that increase his damage at certain times. He's in a party with a marshal who gives all sorts of different boosts depending on auras and which of several different magic items he's using. The marshal just got a bard cohort this session...

Seriously, it feels like three quarters of each round is spent working out what damage I currently do.