Rule-of-Three: 01/31/12

[UngeheuerLich]

It is very funny:

I was asked on sunday, if D&D 4e is more a tabletop than a roleplaying game. And my answer was really close to the rule of three answer:

The combat part is so balanced and fun, that you use your powers and forget that you are playing a roleplaying game. Part of this is because of the gaming language, part of it however it is because 4e´s efforts to make combats fun and interesting and balanced were successful.

So the most funny part about 4e is: they did it wrong by doing it right... (I still play 4e, because it is the best edition out right now... you just have to constantly remind yourself that thinking out of the box is possible!)

 

[Ainamacar]

That looks like a sober-minded assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of powers, and the challenges facing a skill system. If it had been a post on EN World, I'd have XPed it.

I especially appreciated the part on psychological effects of powers. For some people giving a few specific options gives them enough structure to explore freely. For others it suggests the limits of what is possible. The same issue exists with rules-light or non-existent non-combat rules. For some people that lack suggests total freedom, while for others it suggests that the game can't be used to do it. From my perspective it doesn't matter whether one type of player is "better" than another because both *exist* and a game as big as D&D needs to deal with it.

 

[SlyDoubt]

Well I think he was saying simply what powers are.

What they are is great for top down game design and organization. It makes things much easier on the design end since the structure of powers means they can basically combine xyz and presto, new power. It makes comparing much much more straight forward too.

Those same reasons caused many people to dislike powers though (I think). The sheer amount and similarities between powers was where they maybe went a bit wrong to some people.

 

[Sammael]

This is an excellent article, with good, meaningful analyses and open communication. Good job, Rodney!

There was, however, one bit that I found slightly odd:

...and also has a side effect of requiring the DM to learn when to call for checks with the various skills (as opposed to having everything boil down to one of six ability scores)

When I was starting as a DM (during the 2e era), I never felt like I had to learn which skill check I had to call for. It was all pretty natural and organic, even with the non-weapon proficiencies. Then Skills & Powers came out, and the NWPs became even more detailed - making my job even easier! With 3e and its codification and unified mechanics, it took me all of... one session I think... to learn the skill list and its applications by heart.

In other words, to me, it never felt like the skill system was something complicated that had to be learned. It was natural and straightforward, and much easier than the combat mechanics (particularly grapple, trip, sunder, and all that stuff).

 

[Raith5]

Yep, fair article. While I like powers I do agree with his comment about "tunnel vision": where players only look at their powers and forget other creative options. But I dont think that is wholly the fault of the power mechanics rather an overt lack of encouraging creative play in the rules.

That said I have seen some very creative play in 4th by players (and dms), with players burning martial powers to boost an intimidate checks and arcane powers to assist skill challenges.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I like how he basically said "powers are mostly about formatting," and how he said that some of the valuable takeaways from powers is that they can apply to more than magic spells, and that they're discrete and self-contained.

These are all great things about the powers design.

There's also a question of whether or not that level of granularity is a good thing, or whether the kinds of effects you are giving out should be bigger and more meaningful than simply changing the defense that gets targeted. Additionally, in a highly granular system, it's easy to create mechanical elements simply by mixing and matching; in other words, it's easy to create a lot of powers that boil down to do some damage plus apply some conditions, and have them be mechanically distinct. This increases the volume of material that enters the system, which adds a level of difficulty to building and maintaining characters.

I'll take "4e classes are samey" for 100, Alex.

Actually, I think the "weak effects" is a more general 4e problem, to boot. "300 different ways to deal damage and inflict a condition," but nothing significant.

I think I'm on board with where they're taking powers in the next iteration. Complex, big effects, of which you don't have a half-dozen.

 

[Alaxk Knight of Galt]

I'll take "4e classes are samey" for 100, Alex.

Actually, I think the "weak effects" is a more general 4e problem, to boot. "300 different ways to deal damage and inflict a condition," but nothing significant.

This, a thousand times. You don't need a zillion different attacks that do the same thing (X damage + Condition).

I'd like to see a system where you can apply a condition or effect to normal attacks though, especially for martial characters. Let's look at fighter.

In a world without Powers, Tide of Iron would be a combat maneuver feat. Only one such feat could be used per attack. Tide would let you push + shift. Cleave would let you do splash damage. Power Attack would let you deal extra damage. Hamstring would slow an opponent. Defensive Strike would allow you to gain a bonus to your AC. On each attack, the fighter simply select what single bonus effect to apply to the attack. As the fighter advances, he becomes more versatile instead of more specialized.

These feats would be added to the game by selecting the Tactical Combat Module.

 

[vagabundo]

Mirrors a lot of my own thoughts on 4e powers and some of the problems I've had getting my players to do something different with them - even after offering incentives.

Pushing powers depend so much on having interesting things to push your enemies into, I grew tired of trying to invent interesting battlefields.

I hope they don't get too complex with the power, however, there are a couple of powers I've had to puzzle out for players, sometimes they read more like C++ than an RPG.

Also, as an aside, I read this from the skirmish game question as "Tranny of Goblins", which brought many hideous things to my mind's eye. Damn you DND for my imagination. <shakes fist>