D&D 4E New 4e Info! GAMA Tradeshow Scoop

[The Little Raven]

But see that explanation is different from the one you originally gave, which was essentially, "Dave, your character was inspired by my character's heroic deeds whether you wanted him to be or not ... oh, and by the way, you get some temporary hit points." Yes, in a spirit of cooperation, most players will simply go "Oh. Sweet! Thanks!" and move on ...

It looks like you're just playing semantic games with what I'm saying. You asked for an in-game explanation, and I gave you an example. Then you turn and try to say that I'm dictating how other people's characters are responding, when you don't realize that my explanation could from the person who is being healed. I don't appreciate being asked for examples of explanations, then being accusing of dictating other people's behavior to them based on those examples.

 

[The Little Raven]

"Bahamut, give me the strength to smite my enemies! Oh ... and, by the way, could you please give my friend over there a temporary boost? I'm such a considerate friend, am I not?"

If that's your idea of roleplaying a prayer, I can see why you wouldn't allow it.

 

[hong]

It might help in terms of conceptualisation to see this as "Somatic component: hit one enemy".

 

[DandD]

Nah, pukunui just wants to screw with Mourn, so nothing he will say will be accepted.

 

[Wiman]

I prayed to my lord Bahamut to bring down a rain of holy fire upon our foes, such that my ally might be bolstered by my show of divine fury with renewed purpose and vigor. To which my lord Bahamut replied "Sorry, you need to attack with your sword to get that effect. How about an AC bonus instead?"

That's what I'm talking about.

Are you writing the new edition of OOTS because I can visualize what you have written very easy in a cartoon format.

I agree with you by the way (it just dosn't bother me that much), just found it funny.

 

[Wiman]

Ok this one has nothing to do with the thread.

Hong I just looked closely at your picture for the first time, I for one welcome our new giant kitten overlords.

As for effects not making much sense with abilties this is far from a new problem, I think what bothers people is the fact that it is included in the core books...which are considered to be able to hold up to a higher degree of scrutiny from a fluff/effect standpoint.

Cheers,

 

[cangrejoide]

How about this instead?

PC1: Hey paladin buddy! My strength is failing ... can you get your god to give me a boost?
PC2: Sure thing, comrade! I just need to attack one of our enemies first and then you'll be sweet ...

I am pretty sure the paladin will have other abilities to cover this ( Lay on hands?), so the above example is null.

 

[pukunui]

It looks like you're just playing semantic games with what I'm saying. You asked for an in-game explanation, and I gave you an example. Then you turn and try to say that I'm dictating how other people's characters are responding, when you don't realize that my explanation could from the person who is being healed. I don't appreciate being asked for examples of explanations, then being accusing of dictating other people's behavior to them based on those examples.

Sorry. I have a weakness for playing semantic games. It was not my intention to accuse you of anything. Please accept my apologies for any offense given.

If that's your idea of roleplaying a prayer, I can see why you wouldn't allow it.

No, that's not how I would roleplay a prayer. That's just my snarky reaction to these metagamey attack/buff powers.

It might help in terms of conceptualisation to see this as "Somatic component: hit one enemy".

Not really but thanks anyway for trying.

 

[hong]

Hong I just looked closely at your picture for the first time, I for one welcome our new giant kitten overlords.

Giant kitten?

 

[pukunui]

As for effects not making much sense with abilties this is far from a new problem, I think what bothers people is the fact that it is included in the core books...which are considered to be able to hold up to a higher degree of scrutiny from a fluff/effect standpoint.

That and WotC keeps giving us these grand design tenets along with examples that (potentially) violate them ...

1) We want to do away with needless symmetry. By the way, we're introducing some new metallic dragons, one of which is the metallics' dumb brute counterpart to the chromatics' white dragon.

2) We want to make it clear that Hit Points really don't just mean physical damage. While you're here, check out this cool new monsters we came up with -- it's a goblin that impales people on a harpoon and then drags them around!

3) We want mechanics to make sense from a fluff perspective. We also don't want people to get stuck playing a walking band-aid, and since this new edition is an exception-based ruleset, we're going to create an exception to the fluff-mechanic rule so that players of divine characters can do something cool (attack an enemy) and buff their friends at the same time.

I am pretty sure the paladin will have other abilities to cover this ( Lay on hands?), so the above example is null.

Lay on Hands covers the hit points healing. Will the paladin (or cleric, for that matter) have utility powers for buffs other than hit point healing? This is why I'm saying that I really want to wait until I've got the actual game in front of me and have played it properly (as opposed to just using all the preview stuff) for a while before making a final judgement on this sort of thing. For all we know, there could be a great explanation as to why they made divine powers this way in the core rules. There could also be plenty of utility powers that let divine characters buff their friends without having to hit someone.