Shifty v/ CC: Who Wins?

[Celebrim]

This is why I think 4e combat will not be faster than 3.5 combat.

Based on the rules I've read so far, it will be slower.

The rules I've read so far are written much more like 1st edition, where the exact mechanisms of resolving the situation are at some level assumed to be left up to the DM. Among other things, this is going to bring more rules arguments and DM ajudication by fiat situations to the tables, which means in practice, even if the rules are 'simplier' they will bog the game down.

The PH is going to require a ton of errata. So much so that I can't imagine that an effectual 4.5 edition isn't right around the corner.

 

[D'karr]

Based on the rules I've read so far, it will be slower.

The rules I've read so far are written much more like 1st edition, where the exact mechanisms of resolving the situation are at some level assumed to be left up to the DM. Among other things, this is going to bring more rules arguments and DM ajudication by fiat situations to the tables, which means in practice, even if the rules are 'simplier' they will bog the game down.

The PH is going to require a ton of errata. So much so that I can't imagine that an effectual 4.5 edition isn't right around the corner.

I don't see it. Maybe at first, as people get used to the combat rules. But once that obstacle is crossed I don't see it as less streamlined than 3e.

As a matter of fact during our first DDXP game we asked a bunch of questions and the combat was still more dynamic than combat in other editions. By the second game we were kicking ass and taking names and combat flowed way smoother.

So yes, there will be a learning curve, but it goes away pretty quickly.

 

[Henry]

I'm afraid I still don't see where the question or rules problem was in the first place. Someone mentioned Op-attacks preventing actions? Occurring prior to actions, yes, but preventing them? The 3e rules says it interrupts the action, but then after resolving it you continue with the turn.

In this case, the combat challenge happens off of the kobold's shift, and then the kobold goes on its way -- but the same thing would have happened in 3e if the kobold had simply moved past the fighter, anyway. The only difference is that the kobold's shift is "cheaper" than a shift for another character.

 

[Wormwood]

Based on the rules I've read so far, it will be slower.

We used the first-level playtest characters. 3.5 first-level characters would have run through the same combat in much less time---but we all agree that it would have been significantly less fun.

1. We ran more rounds, so each player had more to do than they normally would.
2. I was able to use 13 monsters of PC level or higher---something I rarely attempt in 3.5 without really bogging down combat (and couldn't even do in 3.5 with a first-level party)

I'm assuming (hoping, actually) that in comparison to 3.5, low-level combat is longer in 4e, while high-level combat is faster.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I'm afraid I still don't see where the question or rules problem was in the first place. Someone mentioned Op-attacks preventing actions? Occurring prior to actions, yes, but preventing them? The 3e rules says it interrupts the action, but then after resolving it you continue with the turn.

In this case, the combat challenge happens off of the kobold's shift, and then the kobold goes on its way -- but the same thing would have happened in 3e if the kobold had simply moved past the fighter, anyway. The only difference is that the kobold's shift is "cheaper" than a shift for another character.

The OP didn't list the second Fighter power that was important in this case - that confused me to. Normally, Opportunity Attacks don't stop anything (unless they kill the opponent, off course ). The Fighter has a power that allows him to stop an opponent if it provokes an opportunity attack and he hits. After a closer look, this won't help in this scenario, since the ability mentioned by the OP grants an immediate attack, which is not the same as an opportunity attack.

Reading the rules fineprint apparently doesn't go away with 4E, either...

 

[Celebrim]

We used the first-level playtest characters. 3.5 first-level characters would have run through the same combat in much less time---but we all agree that it would have been significantly less fun.

Sure I can agree with that. More fun and faster are not directly related. Way back when the notion of 'streamlined combat' was first being talked about, I stated that I'd happily take less streamlined combat which was more fun over faster combat.

If 4e has actually gone that way, that isn't among my problems with 4e. It might be someone elses problem with 4E, if they were hoping that 4E would be 'rules light', but since I never wanted a rules light game it isn't mine problem.

I'm assuming (hoping, actually) that in comparison to 3.5, low-level combat is longer in 4e, while high-level combat is faster.

We haven't seen alot of examples of high level play yet. Superficially, I'm inclined to agree with you, but we won't really know until we play it.

 

[Henry]

The OP didn't list the second Fighter power that was important in this case - that confused me to. Normally, Opportunity Attacks don't stop anything (unless they kill the opponent, off course ). The Fighter has a power that allows him to stop an opponent if it provokes an opportunity attack and he hits. After a closer look, this won't help in this scenario, since the ability mentioned by the OP grants an immediate attack, which is not the same as an opportunity attack.

Reading the rules fineprint apparently doesn't go away with 4E, either...

Thanks! That's the part I was missing. I had seen that ability, but had forgotten about it completely until you brought it up.

 

[jeffh]

The two abilities in question:

SHIFTY (minor; at-will)
The kobold shifts 1 square as a minor action.

COMBAT CHALLENGE
When an adjacent enemy shifts, make an immediate melee basic attack against them.

My dilemma is this; since both abilities exist to give their larger source greater meaning, which one wins when Shifty is employed?

Neither "wins", since there is absolutely no conflict to win. There is no contradiction involved in saying they both work exactly as written; the Kobald can shift as a minor action, but doing so provokes an OA.

 

[jeffh]

The rules I've read so far are written much more like 1st edition, where the exact mechanisms of resolving the situation are at some level assumed to be left up to the DM. Among other things, this is going to bring more rules arguments and DM ajudication by fiat situations to the tables, which means in practice, even if the rules are 'simplier' they will bog the game down.

Are you serious? If anything, they're more like 3E than 3E is. What's open to interpretation? Certainly not the issue brought up in this thread, if you actually read, rather than read things into, the abilities involved.

 

[D'karr]

Neither "wins", since there is absolutely no conflict to win. There is no contradiction involved in saying they both work exactly as written; the Kobald can shift as a minor action, but doing so provokes an OA.

It's a minor point but the shift does not provoke an OA. It simply triggers and immediate action that the fighter can take when people shift around him.

It is a minor point but important in context. If it provoked an OA, the fighter could instead use Combat Superiority and stop the opponent. In addition, the fighter could do it to as many opponents as "provoked". Since it does not provoke he can only do it once.