Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Xorn" data-source="post: 4132876" data-attributes="member: 61231">I've run five fan playtest/demos now, and I haven't had any notable problems with marks.  I will state that the most complicated part of running a 4E combat has been tracking creature marks--I just didn't find it to be of enough consequence to call it annoying.When I ran my face-to-face game, the party was facing hobgoblins (2 soldiers, 1 archer, 1 warcaster) and my steno-pad looked like this on one round:Kathra: init#, HP#, A (marked by A), LoF (lance of faith)Corrin: init#, HP#, B (marked by B), bolster (bolstering strike)Skamos: init#, HP#, AP (action point used)Erais: init#, HP#, 1x WoH (word of healing used once)Soldier A: init#, HP#, kathra (marked by fighter)Soldier B: init#, HP#, corrin (marked by paladin)Archer: init #, HP#Warcaster: init#, HP#, pulse, lance (pulse & lance recharging)This is remarkably similar to what my stenopad looks like when running 3.5 face-to-face, only no durations.When running over a VTT, it was even simpler, as I just put the letter of the soldier that was marking the character next to them in my "character status" window.  But since tracking stuff in a VTT is so much simpler, I didn't think that was a fair comparison.  Anyway, my point is that yes, marking seems like the least "elegant" of the rules, but I don't find it warranting the term "annoying" or "concerning", in my case.I also think it's a good point that because it's "clunky" marking for creatures might actually mean, "-2 to attack rolls that don't include a target of this type" as that is performing the function of marking--to penalize attacks not made on the meatshields.</blockquote>

Verification