Per Encounter vs. Unlimited

[ShadowX]

Many people seem to dislike the flavor of per encounter abilities, which I can see to an extent. Many have countered that most fantasy magic does not work on a limited resource model like Vancian magic—a character can blast all day, but doing so may have repercussions like fatigue or the loss of your soul—and therefore per encounter abilities are in fact better at mimicking the fantasy we read.

So my question is, why not just switch over to an unlimited use system? What, mechanically separates per encounter from unlimited? Looking at it from a Third Edition perspective, combats are so short that per encounter abilities might as well be unlimited because they wont be executed many times. The playtest reports don't seem to indicate that combats will be any longer in Fourth Edition so the same reasoning stands. I mean look at a sorcerer, after level 5 they can basically cast a blasting spell every round and it doesn't adversely affect balance.

In fact, you balance abilities around unlimited usage and you circumvent certain problems associated with per encounter usage. No longer will you have "attack routines" because you can't rationalize a clearly superior ability as balanced because it can only be utilized once an encounter. Instead you must provide every ability equivalent effectiveness (not necessarily all the time, but in different situations) otherwise players will use the same ability over and over again. It encourages better game design and more accurately portrays fantasy literature.

So, am I missing something? Why is per encounter better than unlimited uses?

 

[Hussar]

A simple answer would be that per encounter abilities means you cannot just do the same thing over and over again. While you can do the same thing in different encounters, you cannot just repeat the same action again and again in the same encounter.

 

[Stone Dog]

A simple answer would be that per encounter abilities means you cannot just do the same thing over and over again. While you can do the same thing in different encounters, you cannot just repeat the same action again and again in the same encounter.

Pretty much what we are noticing with our jedi in SWSE.

Plus it leads to pretty creative uses of the powers that you DO have left, like when somebody is about to fall to their doom and you have run out of "Move Object," but still have a "Force Grip" left you do damage to your friend by crushing their hand around the metal bar that they are about to let go of, buying enough time for them to be properly rescued.

 

[Irda Ranger]

So, am I missing something? Why is per encounter better than unlimited uses?

You do know there will be both At-Will and Per-Encounter abilities in 4E, right? I know some people miss stuff (it's easy to do), so I'm just making sure we're all on the same page.

Anywho, if you ignore the names (powers, spells, abilities, etc.) every class has had an "at will" ability since the OD&D Basic Set: "I swing my sword." By the RAW you can do that At Will all day without getting tired, followed by 8 hours sleep.

Fighters can still do that, and Longswords have been bumped from 1-6 up to 1d8/19-20/x2 in the interim. Crossbows are good too though, and at 1st level when Wizards and Fighters have an attack bonus no more than 4 pts apart, the Wizard's crossbow is worth something. It becomes pretty useless right quick though. So effectively, in 3E, Wizards have no meaningful at will abilities past 4th level.

So by 6th level you have Fighters with 1d8+1d6+5 at will and Wizards with 6d6 twice a day.

Now in 4E they'll still have that, but also Wizards will have 1d8+1d6+5 at will too (Eldrich Blast) and Fighters also get 6d6 twice a day (the "Kill Every Mo'fo in the Room" special whirlwind attack maneuver (totally made this up)).

But there's a middle ground between 6d6 2/day and 2d6+4 at Will. Somewhere around 4d6+2, probably. That's too good to allow people to do that at Will, but maybe once a fight it would be OK. You know, you're chugging along, doing you 2d6+4 with the Pistol or Vibroblade or whatever, and then you need something bigger, so WHAMMO, you take out the repeating shotgun (but not the rocket launcher) and give that Demon Spawn a half-clip of slugs to the face in a hail of shot.

Wait, I'm sorry, what ... was that the wrong genre? MY BAD. I thought I was on a DOOM IV board for second there ...

But you know what I mean. There's a "Momma Bear" amount of damage between your "old reliable" and your "nuke it from orbit" attacks. We call that the "Per Encounter Ability."

 

[Hussar]

Now, I do think there is a possiblity that given encounters might start looking very similar. The PC always leads with ability X followed by ability Y. I've noticed that with the Binder that I play. But, with even a minor changeup of initial conditions, I don't think this will turn into a problem. It might. And it might be something to be aware of as we design adventures, but, I don't think it HAS to play out this way.

 

[Imaro]

Now, I do think there is a possiblity that given encounters might start looking very similar. The PC always leads with ability X followed by ability Y. I've noticed that with the Binder that I play. But, with even a minor changeup of initial conditions, I don't think this will turn into a problem. It might. And it might be something to be aware of as we design adventures, but, I don't think it HAS to play out this way.

Yeah I've expressed my concern over this before...and have encountered it with the jedi group I was running in SW saga edition. You're going to unleash your most powerful per-encounter abilities first, strategically it's a no-brainer in most situations. There was another thread where a designer talked about this being his experience (with a rogue I think) in playtesting D&D 4e with his character. My problem is how quickly this could devolve fights into a boring repetition.

 

[hong]

Counters would be a good way of handling that, especially if the people on both sides don't know exactly how many counters the other side has.

Player: "I use x8 Hit Sword Attack on the lich!"

DM: "He deftly turns aside your blow with Impassable Parry. HAW HAW."

Player: "Crap."

or...

Player: "I use x2 Hit Sword Attack on the lich!"

DM: "He deftly turns aside your blow with Impassable Parry. HAW HAW."

Player: "Okay, NOW I use x8 Hit Sword Attack."

DM: "Crap."

or...

Player: "I use x2 Hit Sword Attack on the lich!"

DM: "Ouch."

Player: "And I use x8 Hit Sword Attack to finish him off!"

DM: "NOW he deftly turns aside your blow with Impassable Parry. HAW HAW."

Player: "Crap."

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Yeah I've expressed my concern over this before...and have encountered it with the jedi group I was running in SW saga edition. You're going to unleash your most powerful per-encounter abilities first, strategically it's a no-brainer in most situations. There was another thread where a designer talked about this being his experience (with a rogue I think) in playtesting D&D 4e with his character. My problem is how quickly this could devolve fights into a boring repetition.

Though on the other hand, it's not that different for today,at least for most characters.

Round 1:
Rogue: Sneak attack Flat-Footed Foe
Fighter: Charge and Attack
Ranger: Rapid Shot

Round 2:
Rogue: Tumble into Flanking Position, Sneak Attack
Fighter: Full Attack
Ranger: Rapid Shot

...

Okay, that's only saying that it's not getting worse, not that things improve.

I hope there are some ways to make special attacks more "conditional". (Sneak Attack as a weak example, Token based abilities like in Iron Heroes as different approach).
Hongs Counters are another option.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

Yeah I've expressed my concern over this before...and have encountered it with the jedi group I was running in SW saga edition. You're going to unleash your most powerful per-encounter abilities first, strategically it's a no-brainer in most situations. There was another thread where a designer talked about this being his experience (with a rogue I think) in playtesting D&D 4e with his character. My problem is how quickly this could devolve fights into a boring repetition.

Yeah, except what other way is there for things to work?

With at will abilities(including the attack action in 3.5e), the best course of action is to simply use your best ability every round. Most of the time the ability that does the most damage is the best one because in D&D, damage is king. Combats become: "I swing at his head, I swing at his head, I swing at his head". Even if there isn't a "biggest damage" attack, there will always be one or two that are clearly the best (if you have an attack that is best against demons, you use it ever single round until the demon is dead).

With per encounter abilities it at least mixes up the rounds so that each round is different from the last and it encourages moving around and tactics a bit. For instance, if you already used your big damage ability and you only have "the one that ignores DR" and "the one that does extra damage unarmed creatures" you might be encouraged to move over to the creature with DR and use the ability on it one round, then move over to the unarmed creature in the battle the next. The battle becomes more dynamic and fluid as you adapt your strategy each round to the abilities you have left. Plus each round gets you closer and closer to having no resources left and being forced to fall back on your at will abilities. There is a sense of urgency to finish the encounter quickly.

I find that Per Day powers create a situation exactly like per encounter ones do, but with the disadvantage that the battles take place a day apart.

 

[Stalker0]

A couple of things to take note:

1) From playtest reports so far, it DOES seem that round time for combats has increased somewhat. So if you blow your awesome abilities in the 1st 2 rounds, you may still have 5 more rounds to go. That's a far different scenario than a 3.5e warlock using eldritch blast 7 times in a row (not that there's anything wrong with that, its just a difference).

2) Monsters are now designed in parties, with the classic defender in front, blaster in back. So are you going to use your awesome ability to take down the defender, or save it for the blaster doing all the damage? With more monsters in a combat, you have to think a bit more on what you want to unload on.

3) If encounters are redefined a bit more, it greatly changes how often you can use abilities out of combat. For example, lets say encounter abilities require at least 1 minute between a fight to recharge your abilities. So lets say the fireball spell is a per encounter ability. If a wizard walked over to a forest, he could release a fireball 1/minute. Versus at will which would be 1/round. That's 1 fireball per minute vs 10. Depending on the situation, that may be no difference, or it could be all the difference.