Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="lutecius" data-source="post: 4314707" data-attributes="member: 60332">I know, this is one of the reasons i hate it, actually. It feels forced.To me, the variety of tactics should arise from a variety of adversaries and situations (ie designers and dm creativity) and diversity of options, not artificial restrictions.Precisely, reusable powers would make a secondary ability score more useful, without too many powers relying on it (which would penalize players who didn't boost that particular score.) I'm sure there will be more of these 'weapons matter' powers anyway. As I understand it, secondary ability bonuses are meant to differentiate the various builds or tone down some powers by making them more costly.  I haven't noticed that many powers perfectly fitting a particular type of encounter. Most seem fairly generic to me, especially since immunities have been drastically reduced in 4e. I may be wrong, but even then, it's the DM's job to come up with diverse encounters and situations, like in every rpg. If anything, power points might encourage players to pick some specialized powers rather than just the most generic and useful ones, because they won't be penalized if they don't get to use every one of their powers during an encounter.I'm more concerned about actual power disparities. I'm trying to identify broken powers and combos, even though I'm hoping the "can't use the same power twice" rule is not just a lazy cop-out and that they did give each power some serious thought and playtesting before assigning levels.Thanks. I didn't start this thread in house rules because at this point, i don't have a house rule. I just wanted as much input as possible on how powers were balanced to see what is worth trying.</blockquote>

Verification