Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ShadowX" data-source="post: 3859583" data-attributes="member: 3720">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?</blockquote>

Verification