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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Aenghus" data-source="post: 6153262" data-attributes="member: 2656">Yes, but the philosphy of 4e isn't to pin down powers as working in a single hard-coded way - they specify effects, suggest but don't enforce the typical appearance of the powers use with flavour text, and leave it up to the referee, player concerned and the group in general  to come up with a plausible explanation for how the power worked. For instance, in the case of automata, instinctively feeling a momentary flaw in the programming of the automata. making their movement predictable, and exploiting it might explain a use of Come and Get It. As for an explanation why this can't be repeated, the real reason is that it's boring to spam a power, which is why Come and get it is an encounter power. The group can come up with an in-game explanation why the power can only be used once an encounter if they want, some won't bother. And some players and referees dislike powers like this for various reasons, while others really like them.Which is a problem. The more situational a power is the less attractive it is. If my feeling as a player is "this power will seldom if work on any important NPC, the referee will always make an excuse or hike the difficulty up till it's likely to fail" I'm much less likely to pick that power.The problem with infinitely repeatable powers with a low chance of success is that either they traps for the unwary, underpowered or no better than improvised actions, or they are overpowered when successful, and encourage the player to hyperspecialise and keep mashing the boring but effective power button (e.g. trippers in 3.x).That said, I'm not a gambler and prefer reliability to swinginess, YMMV.</blockquote>

Verification