Making powers reliable

[Zinovia]

In my D&D game...
"...all the interesting people are missing." Friedrich Nietzsche

Granted the above quote has been cut so I changed its meaning a bit, but it sums up the issue that is causing me to consider a rules change. The characters in any game are the "interesting people". They are the ones that matter. So when they pull out their red and black cards and try to do something awesome and cool, not only does rolling badly suck, it sucks a whole lot.

Naturally the players are not so incompetent or so benighted of the fates that they miss all, or even most of the time. I suspect our warlock must have been cruel to her dice in a past life, racking up some serious bad karma, because they turn against her when it matters. She hits plenty often with her powers, with the exception of her level 1 encounter, which misses more often than not. (the group is level 6, soon to be 7). Picking up that level 7 encounter power will help by giving her three to choose from, but it still isn't any fun to miss with your cool powers.

Now missing is a part of the game, and it's expected to happen quite a bit. In order to lessen its sting, I have allowed the use of action points for a reroll on any d20. That has certainly helped.

A complicating factor is that we have a player who will cheat on die rolls when they can get away with it. So *that* character never misses with encounters or dailies, but everyone else does. I don't want to come out and accuse a friend of mine of cheating in a game, although I know it is the only way to really end it. This individual is otherwise a great person and the potential damage to the friendship isn't worth it. For the most part, keeping a close eye on the dice has helped quite a bit, but there are still those times when the dice are rolled in the shadow of a pile of books and snatched up quickly to be read - the typical signs of a cheater. I'll continue to work on minimizing that by leaning over and reading the dice whenever possible. However, in order to make things more fair to those who aren't fudging rolls, I was considering the following house rule.

• Encounter and single-target Daily powers all gain the Reliable keyword. Single-target powers with a miss effect can either be treated as reliable with no effect on a miss, or used as written, at the player's option. Multi-target daily powers that do half damage on a miss work as written.

Reasoning: Missing every target with a power will waste a turn, but not expend the power. You have a "do-over". Multi-target dailies often have half-damage on a miss, and even when you miss all targets, you still do something worthwhile. Single target dailies with miss effects are often so far inferior to what you get when you hit, that people would rather attack again on another round than take the miss effect. i.e. Lead the Attack - either 3[W] and a huge bonus against the target for the rest of the fight, or no damage and a +1 vs. the target. Our warlord would rather try again to hit instead of using that miss effect - he has told me as much. Encounter powers don't generally do anything on a miss (although I haven't made an exhaustive search).

As a corollary, to make up for those powers that already have the Reliable keyword, I would add something like:

• Powers that have the Reliable keyword gain the Brutal property (as per Brutal weapons in AV).

I'm not sure how much to give - I could make it Brutal 1/2/3 for Heroic/ Paragon/ Epic. Or just make it all Brutal 1 or 2. I don't mind the damage going up a tad. The rogue rolled a total of 6 on four d8's last fight - not once, but twice. Sad really. It also contributed to making a tough fight into a grindy one.

So what are the likely consequences of these changes? Should I make a corresponding change to monster encounter powers? The cheating is a separate issue, and I will continue to give thought to what if anything to do about it. I know I'm a wimp, but there are things more important than a game, so long as I reduce the unfairness to the other players. The other idea I am considering is adding some kind of fate points, which can be used to add to die rolls or perhaps for a reroll. Additionally, since I already allow action points to be spent for rerolls, I could allow the use of more than one AP per encounter, and could allow the action point bonus granted by the TacLord to apply to the reroll. Currently it doesn't, because it says "When you use your action point to gain another action..."

Your thoughts are appreciated before I suggest any potential changes to the player group. Thanks.

 

[Fanaelialae]

One potential issue that I noticed was that you probably shouldn't allow the miss-or-reliable rule to apply to powers with Effect lines (alternately, if the player chooses the reliable option when using such a power, the Effect line is ignored). There are, at least, a few powers where the Effect line is far more potent than the Hit line.

I'm not so sure about applying brutal x to powers that are already reliable. For starters, there's a fairly significant difference in the value of brutal 1 when attacking with either a 1d12 or a 2d6 weapon. Second, the new property is effectively useless to someone who is already using a brutal weapon. I'd recommend a new property that anyone can benefit from, and that has a reasonably predictable value.

Though I can't say that I'm certain I like it, the first thing that comes to mind is granting powers that already have the reliable property an additional die of damage. In other words, a 3[w] reliable power would become 4[w], while a 3d6 reliable spell would become 4d6.

Though it seems you're aware of it, I will point out that this change will make your group overall more powerful. With the current system, if you miss with your 2[w] attack, you may have no choice but to attack with a 1[w] attack next round. Under your proposal, that 2[w] attack will likely be repeated until it hits.

 

[BobTheNob]

The Reliabel property is a "power defining" property. One of those things that makes an average power worth taking. If you were to place your change in the game, you will definately need to boost current reliable powers by something a bit more significant than brutal....

The brutal idea will only really play to the damage factor of the power, but what if the purpose of the power is not damage output, but the effect that comes with the power? Look at "Comeback Strike". Its reliable, but that power is not really about the damage, its about the ability to spend a healing surge.

If you had to do this, I would say make the current reliable property a re-roll on miss. Sounds big, but then again, the relaible property (in its official form) is a real head turner.

Another thing to consider in this is that on miss properties are also a factor in a powers efficacy. Everyone poo-poo's fireball, yet our wizard LOVES the spell simply for the half damage on miss, because it can significantly effect the outcome. What happens to powers who's attractiveness is reliant on on-miss effects? Under what you are proposing players will almost never elect for the miss condition and these powers will fall onto the "why bother" scrap heap.

Thats if you had to go ahead with this change. I understand your motivation, and my players feel the sting too, and they live with it and work around it. Frankly at times it gives me goosebumps how well these guys play the game and the maturity they display. I had a daily miss by one last night, the player shrugged his shoulder and considered what to do with his next move. He knew he had picked a power with no backup option, that represented occasional glory, and he accepted his decision.

Perhaps your players need to think about their attitude to how the game works and the basis upon which they have selected and composed their characters, and that they have to accept the decisions they have made. Sometimes an effective character is one that succeeds when the roll's are for AND against him, and they should be considering this in their character design.

(p.s. The dice cheater...put a table in the middle of the room, keep it clear of all books, and insist that the only rolls you will accept are rolls on the table witnessed by everyone. I did that years ago, and our cheaters luck mysteriously ran out )

 

[Zinovia]

You both made some good points there. Doing something like this would definitely mess around with a number of existing rules. Thanks for the responses.

At this stage I think I may do something different, such as introducing aspects and fate points. I'd like to make combats more descriptive, and help break down the perceived dichotomy between the roleplay and combat aspects of the game. Since one of the suggested uses for fate points is recharging powers, that could accomplish my goals with fewer weirdnesses in the rules than the proposal I made in this thread.

 

[john112364]

I was actually thinking about a houserule concerning reliable powers. Since you already allow the use of action points for a re-roll, what about this:

Spend an action point, as an immediate action, to give an encounter or daily power that has just missed all targets the reliable keyword for the rest of the encounter. If you do so the power does nothing on a miss and any effect line activates only on a hit.

This way there is an associated cost for making a power reliable and no need to modify powers that are already reliable. And it still makes for a tense game because you can only do this so often. Because as BobTheNob said (and I agree) sometimes you just have to suck it up and move on. (OK that's not exactly what he said but I think that's the gist of it )

 

[BobTheNob]

Having a framework that allows re-rolls does sound a more solid approach. It allows players a way of calling on resources to really make sure that all important attack hits, but does so whilst maintaining current power mechanics. It enhances, rather than replaces.

Good luck with it.

 

[Saeviomagy]

I don't see a problem with adding reliable to everything, except for the following:

What are you going to do about powers that are already reliable (which also rolls into powers that have effect: lines)?

I'd also probably add it to monster powers too.

It sounds like a great idea all round.

 

[Zinovia]

Since you already allow the use of action points for a re-roll, what about this:

Spend an action point, as an immediate action, to give an encounter or daily power that has just missed all targets the reliable keyword for the rest of the encounter. If you do so the power does nothing on a miss and any effect line activates only on a hit.

Hmm, I like it. Thanks for the suggestion!

 

[Naszir]

I like this idea too but am going to try a modification of it. I'd like to make daily powers all considered reliable but they cannot be recovered within the same encounter they are used.

If a character uses a daily and misses they get the daily back in the next encounter.

 

[Amaroq]

I do figure "missing" is a key part of the game but we have two things in play that are somewhat similar.

First, we're using a house-ruled Fumble table for a 1 rolled on the first attack die of a power. A typical fumble reads something like "The attack misses all targets. The Effect: and Miss: entries of the power do not occur. If the power is an encounter power or a daily power, it is not expended. The character grants Combat Advantage to all enemies until the start of her next turn."

That's similar to what you're proposing, only it gives a Fumble both a cost to the player (CA) and a benefit (power not expended).

Second, we award "Awesome Points" for good role playing, epic awesome-osity in a session, etc. One can redeem Awesome Points to turn a Miss into a Hit, or a Hit into a Critical. (As well as to succeed on a skill check, and a few other items.)

I think both of those balance out pretty well - they address some of what you're talking about, without going so far as to make every power Reliable, which really is a big change in power.

If you do decide to go Reliable .. I'd suggest you make your monsters' recharge, encounter, and daily powers Reliable also, under the same rules. (In fact, if you offered that trade to your players, your players might turn it down!)