Positive Conditions

[Will Doyle]

It's interesting that while 4E defined a clear set of negative conditions (dazed, slowed, etc), there isn't a similar set of positive conditions.

I know some people worry about the amount of conditions there are in the game, but when working on my own powers, I often find myself wanting a simple set of these.

For example:

Immovable: You cannot be affected by forced movement.
Inspired: You gain a +1 bonus to attack rolls and saving throws.
Blessed: Untyped damage in your attacks is converted to radiant damage.
Hasted: You gain an extra move action, which you can use on your turn.

Has anyone else looked into something like this before?

 

[RangerWickett]

Something like, "You're Awesome (save continues)"? Awesome characters get a +2 to defenses and attack rolls.

It seems like it could be worked into the system, instead of having more fiddly bonuses like "bonus equal to your wisdom modifier to the PC's next attack against that target before the end of your next turn."

 

[Primitive Screwhead]

I like this idea as well, altho the Hasted condition as read seems a bit overpowered... this coming from a player that did the "hasty charge-fiend druid build". Give him an extra move action and he would be covering over 30 squares per turn without breaking a sweat.

However, I stick to RAW DDI characters in my game and don't do custom PC powers, so not too much use of the idea for me at this time.

 

[Kzach]

Has anyone else looked into something like this before?

Wow, GMTA.

I was quite literally pondering this very thing just yesterday when I was drawing up yet another alternate D&D system based on 4e. I wanted to more clearly define each role by assigning each a set of specific design goals. It was surprisingly difficult because of the very lack of a specific design intent in the current system. Sure, there are some pretty clear goals, strikers get a damage bonus, defenders get more hit points and higher AC, etc. but unlike a controller where you can say, "Affects enemies with debilitating conditions," you can't really say anything like that about the other roles.

So for leaders the first thing I thought was that they should be the counter to controllers, ie. "Affects allies with bolstering conditions."

Defenders should be, "Mitigates incoming damage on self and allies," and striker should be, "Increases damage on enemies by own and allies attacks."

 

[KidSnide]

This system would have the considerable benefit of making stacking easier to calculate. I'm just not sure that there are many positive conditions that make sense with the in-game fiction.

We have "combat advantage" now, which is really a generic positive condition. How many others are there that could be gained from many different sources? Also, is the standardization of powers worth the loss of variety? I'm not sure.

-KS

 

[Will Doyle]

This system would have the considerable benefit of making stacking easier to calculate. I'm just not sure that there are many positive conditions that make sense with the in-game fiction.

We have "combat advantage" now, which is really a generic positive condition. How many others are there that could be gained from many different sources? Also, is the standardization of powers worth the loss of variety? I'm not sure.

Stacking's a good argument for these, but they could also open up feats and powers that ride off positive conditions.

For example:

Shield the Faithful (feat): Whenever you are adjacent to a blessed ally, they benefit from your shield bonus.

Overall, I don't think you'd need too many of these conditions (mainly because, like you say, it's difficult to think of generic ones that'd make sense). But I think lack of variety may not necessarily be a problem, as you'd still have loads of unique powers. Not everything would use these.

 

[Kzach]

Also, is the standardization of powers worth the loss of variety? I'm not sure.

What loss of variety?

We have plenty of negative conditions in 4e and do you see a lack of variety in powers? If a condition doesn't fit, there's nothing in the rules saying you can't just make up a power with it's own internal mechanic. That's the beauty of exception-based design

 

[KidSnide]

I like the point about how positive conditions could complement each other. It also creates an interesting variety in how parties operate. Certain power sources are likely to impose certain conditions (e.g. the "blessed" condition is likely to come from the divine power source). Parties will many different power sources will have the advantage that most of their positive powers stack. However, parties with multiple members from the same power source will find it easier to take advantage of powers that are complementary to existing conditions.

The loss of variety is just a result of powers standardization. I didn't mean to imply that a loss of variety would necessarily lead to a lack of variety.

To use a local analogy, if Dunken Donuts closed 10% of its stores, that would unquestionably consists of a loss of Dunken Donuts locations. However, let me assure those who don't live in the greater Boston area that such a loss would not result in a lack of Dunken Donuts locations...

-KS

 

[Nemesis Destiny]

This is a really cool idea. It could easily be added on to the game without introducing any real headaches. Might be a good candidate for an article submission.

 

[SimonTVesper]

I love it. I'm working on a home version of D&D (v4.5?), and I think I'll incorporate some of these ideas. I, too, would love to see a well thought out article on the subject.

Thoughts: I see the inclusion of positive and negative conditions as opening new mechanics. For example, they could play off each other. Stunned is a condition that represents a temporary rattling of the body or mind. You get hit by something in just the right way that your eyes go blurry, you stutter or drool, and generally can't do much of anything until you recover. What's the opposite of stunned? Something that energizes the body, like a shot of adrenaline. Your vision focuses, your thoughts clear, and everything around you seems to slow down for a moment; you can practically zoom in on your target, and act faster than he can. So that's the fluff (maybe); what does it do? I don't know, but that's not my point. What if there was a condition that opposed stunned? Let's call it hasted. What happens when you're hasted by an ally, after you've been stunned by an enemy? What if they cancel each?

The problem with this lies in level comparison. Say the warlord (or similar leader classes) can inspire heroism. What happens when the level 30 dragon uses its fear aura? Can a heroic-tier heroism effect cancel an epic-tier fear effect? Or do the effects simply stack, like bonuses and penalties normally do? That would work, if the effects in question impart bonuses/penalties.

Mostly, this is just me musing about possibilities. First, I think, there needs to be a clear idea of what positive conditions look like, what they do, and what they're called.