[Points of Light] Static Damage an Improvement?

[WhatGravitas]

That's true, but maybe the thought is that more of the game is spent in states in which gambling on variable damage is viable, whereas less would be spent in states in which these fixed thresholds matter.

With a hp system, that is only an issue if you're close to 0 hp anyway. Additionally, monsters usually have limited powers - which (in 4E) can refresh on a recharge roll and hit harder, that keeps unpredictability in the game as well.

In fact, I think the semblance of predictability is nice, it means a PC can confidently say "I can take it!" - they're well-experienced combatants, though know their own limits... until the dragon unleashes his dragon fire. Oops.

 

[captpike]

one thing worth considering is that you should limit how random the damage can be, in high level 4e too much of the damage is in the dice, it makes it so that a hit can do almost nothing or can put you close to 0.

for example one LFR mod (I think high paragon, might be wrong) has 2d20 ongoing damage, that is way too random, I think something like 1/3/1/2 of the damage is random would be a good rule of thumb

 

[WhatGravitas]

one thing worth considering is that you should limit how random the damage can be, in high level 4e too much of the damage is in the dice, it makes it so that a hit can do almost nothing or can put you close to 0.

for example one LFR mod (I think high paragon, might be wrong) has 2d20 ongoing damage, that is way too random, I think something like 1/3/1/2 of the damage is random would be a good rule of thumb

Though, interestingly, you run into a weird effect at high-level 4E: You roll more and more dice, so the damage becomes more and more bell curve-shaped, meaning it's starting to average itself out anyway.

For example:
- 5d10 damage effect will do 27.5 damage on average - with a standard deviation of 6.42, that's 23% of the average - and you'll roll maximum damage in 0.001% of all rolls.
- 1d10 damage effect will do 5.5 damage on average - with a standard deviation of 2.87, that's 52% of the average - and you'll roll maximum damage in 10% of all rolls!

Add to that that the static component of high level 4E also increases and you end up in the weird spot that the higher the level, the more you have to roll, but the less the roll means.

This is another reason why I like average damage, at low level, it takes out some swingy-ness, at high level it cuts down on the "clutter" of rolls without even having a big impact, due to the natural "averaging" of large dice expressions.

 

[Ajar]

Yeah, I love static damage. Just double it on a crit for mooks/grunts, triple it for elites/solos, and you're good to go.

 

[C4]

for example one LFR mod (I think high paragon, might be wrong) has 2d20 ongoing damage, that is way too random, I think something like 1/3/1/2 of the damage is random would be a good rule of thumb

That's very odd. Was this ongoing damage from a monster?

 

[captpike]

That's very odd. Was this ongoing damage from a monster?

I think so and yes it was odd, I doubt that was from a monster book, probably something whoever made the mod though was cool.

it was just annoying because it could be low enough to hardly be worth recording, or it could be a surge+ per round.

at least in LFR that kind of variance is rare (2-40) but when you have like 2d12+5 it means that you never know if the next hit will take you down or will just scratch you.

 

[pemerton]

Though, interestingly, you run into a weird effect at high-level 4E: You roll more and more dice, so the damage becomes more and more bell curve-shaped, meaning it's starting to average itself out anyway.

Yes.

one LFR mod (I think high paragon, might be wrong) has 2d20 ongoing damage, that is way too random

That's very odd. Was this ongoing damage from a monster?

That's the ongoing damage from a beholder disintegration ray. I actually thought it was pretty awesome when I had 3 PCs subject to it.

 

[Argyle King]

How do you prevent PCs from becoming effectively immune to the damage of monsters? I game with a few players who already build toward this when it comes to minions. Admittedly, it's been a long time since I've played 4th Edition, so a lot may have changed, but I worry that going with static damage would lead to similar problems with non-minion monsters. I like the idea in theory, I'm just trying to hash it out in my head while comparing it to what I remember from previous campaigns.

 

[Mishihari Lord]

I'm on the fence on this one. It makes combat more predictable, of course. On the one hand it's less exciting. On the other, as a DM it's much easier to make sure a PC doesn't die to dumb luck.

 

[Argyle King]

I think the idea would speed up play -which is certainly a good thing. I'm curious what the impact is on some other aspects of the game.