Martial Dailies - How so?

[Stilvan]

The odds of the double shot working are so low, it almost always fails. Allow your players to use double-shot at will. Then only give them one attack roll, as the second arrow flies off in a random direction.

There's just that one, rare, time when it actually works as intended.

PS

Its a bit narrativist to have the character decide after-the-fact that "this was the shot of the day that came closest to working!". But as a moderate simulationist I kinda like it.

 

[GnomeWorks]

No. There's a chance it works once a day. You still have to make your attack rolls.

Yes, but you are now rolling the attack rolls for both arrows, whereas - prior to this one time - you have been rolling for one and just saying the other misses.

Clearly there is something different going on now, is there not? The player's actions are different. IMO, this represents the character doing something different.

 

[TwoSix]

Sorry, I don't buy the narrativist reasoning, either. The mechanics are an abstracted representation of the game world, and while it does not necessarily always have to be a perfect representation, actions you take at the table should reflect actions taken by the character.

But they don't. At least, not anymore. If you can buy into the new paradigm, 4e will be for you. If not, you can always raid it for houserules for homebrewed 3e.

 

[OgreBane99]

One of my players, who has a simulationist bent, is going to have these players coming from a a power source. I.e. there is something out there, not divine or arcane or primal but mmartial providing him with his powers..he normally plays fighter. As DM I am OK to have differing views amongst the players even within the campaign. I am perfectly happy with the 'right circumstances only come up once a day' with the players deciding when the right circumstances come up. My players will be describing their characters attempting these powers more than once a day, if it enhances the combat description, but only using the game effect once

I like this response best. It's a "power." Something no other person could normally do... maybe not arcane/divine/primal/whatever, but it is more supernaturally oriented than normal.

I think feats are a better way to describe super-human stuff in sports. And maybe crits are a better reference for that 3-pointer at the end of a BBall game to win it.

 

[GnomeWorks]

But they don't. At least, not anymore. If you can buy into the new paradigm, 4e will be for you. If not, you can always raid it for houserules for homebrewed 3e.

I am aware that 4e is not directed at me, and I have little intention of moving to it. However, I am rather happy with several design decisions made in 4e - including the at-will/encounter/daily power paradigm - and am interested in implementing it in whatever system I devise. Before I do so, though, I would like rationalization for some of the more problematic aspects that suits the simulationist style.

 

[catsclaw]

The mechanics are an abstracted representation of the game world, and while it does not necessarily always have to be a perfect representation, actions you take at the table should reflect actions taken by the character.

I believe this is called "LARPing".

 

[TwoSix]

I am aware that 4e is not directed at me, and I have little intention of moving to it. However, I am rather happy with several design decisions made in 4e - including the at-will/encounter/daily power paradigm - and am interested in implementing it in whatever system I devise. Before I do so, though, I would like rationalization for some of the more problematic aspects that suits the simulationist style.

That's perfectly fine, I just wouldn't expect that rationale to be included in the ruleset. It's going to have be applied, probably forcefully, from the outside.

If you want a slightly easier way to use dailies in a rational manner, requiring an action point to use them might be the way to go. Then they're "once every other encounter" powers, representing extreme focus and exertion.

 

[Doug McCrae]

Did you have a problem with barbarian rage as a daily power in 3e?

 

[Storminator]

Yes, but you are now rolling the attack rolls for both arrows, whereas - prior to this one time - you have been rolling for one and just saying the other misses.

Clearly there is something different going on now, is there not? The player's actions are different. IMO, this represents the character doing something different.

Nope. Nothing different.

PS

 

[marune]

GnomeWorks did bring the "simulationism" tag, so my comment will use "GNS/BigModel" terms.

First and foremost, it's not a "simulationism" issue but a "realism" one, where "realism" is a specific style of "simuliatinism" where the fictional world share most of its properties with ours (the reality).

To show my point: Imagine a game world where each of the super-heroes has a "daily" power. Why? We don't know, they are born like that. You could play in this world with a very "simulationist" mindset.

In D&D 4E, the daily powers come from a "gamist" design and we all know it.

More important, we also know that D&D4E will be again (like 1E/2E/3.xE) a S/G RPG, BUT you are right, it will be much less a "realist" RPG.

My question is, what do you really expect to hear ?