Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="C4" data-source="post: 6156305" data-attributes="member: 93857">The 4e golden standard for durations is 'until end of next turn' for at-will and encounter powers, and (save ends) for recharge and daily powers. (There are exceptions, but that's the gist of it.) For my PoL clone, I'm considering making '(save ends)' the golden standard for at-will and encounter durations too, and I'd like to know what 4e fans think. Pros I can think of...1. Durations are even simpler than I've already made them.* No &quot;Wait, does this Slowed condition end automatically or do I save against it?&quot; moments.2. Combat is a bit more swingy. You might save against that Slowed condition the first time, or you might be Slowed the entire encounter.3. Extra saves are more valuable. Have lots of powers that grant extra saves? They'll rarely go to waste!&nbsp;*I've already changed the standard duration from '...until the end of your next turn' to '...until the end of the target's next turn (save ends).' So if you Slow an enemy with Ray of Frost, the condition lasts only until the target ends its next turn. (Or until it successfully saves via some miscellaneous extra save.) This already cuts down on condition tracking (no more &quot;Wait, who Slowed me? When does it end?&quot;), and makes definite durations just as vulnerable to extra saves as (save ends) durations.Now, the cons I can think of...1. Combat is a bit more swingy. You might save against that Dominated condition the first time, or you might be Dominated for the entire encounter.2. Extra saves are more valuable, possibly even an 'option tax.' I honestly don't know though if it would turn out this way though.Stunlocking solos more easily is NOT a con, because it isn't possible in PoL. Elites and solos have a standardized trait that downgrades hindering conditions, so even if the PCs stun Orcus (save ends) and stick him with a -20 save penalty, he'll be Dazed at worst.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="C4, post: 6156305, member: 93857"] The 4e golden standard for durations is 'until end of next turn' for at-will and encounter powers, and (save ends) for recharge and daily powers. (There are exceptions, but that's the gist of it.) For my PoL clone, I'm considering making '(save ends)' the golden standard for at-will and encounter durations too, and I'd like to know what 4e fans think. Pros I can think of... 1. Durations are even simpler than I've already made them.* No "Wait, does this Slowed condition end automatically or do I save against it?" moments. 2. Combat is a bit more swingy. You might save against that Slowed condition the first time, or you might be Slowed the entire encounter. 3. Extra saves are more valuable. Have lots of powers that grant extra saves? They'll rarely go to waste! *I've already changed the standard duration from '...until the end of your next turn' to '...until the end of the target's next turn (save ends).' So if you Slow an enemy with Ray of Frost, the condition lasts only until the target ends its next turn. (Or until it successfully saves via some miscellaneous extra save.) This already cuts down on condition tracking (no more "Wait, who Slowed me? When does it end?"), and makes definite durations just as vulnerable to extra saves as (save ends) durations. Now, the cons I can think of... 1. Combat is a bit more swingy. You might save against that Dominated condition the first time, or you might be Dominated for the entire encounter. 2. Extra saves are more valuable, possibly even an 'option tax.' I honestly don't know though if it would turn out this way though. Stunlocking solos more easily is NOT a con, because it isn't possible in PoL. Elites and solos have a standardized trait that downgrades hindering conditions, so even if the PCs stun Orcus (save ends) and stick him with a -20 save penalty, he'll be Dazed at worst. [/QUOTE]

Verification