Special abilities should feel radically different from one another.

[B.T.]

Something that I've been pontificating on recently is the distinctiveness of abilities in contemporary D&D. I really don't want to see abilities that are slight modifications of other abilities. The 4e fighter's Precise Strike (in its original format) is something I don't want to see again: a +2 bonus on attack rolls in exchange for a little less damage. Yawn. Might as well bore me to death. A good example of an interesting power is fireball in previous editions: prior to that 3rd-level spell, there is no other way of dealing mass AOE damage, and suddenly here's a power that does a boatload of damage in a huge area. It doesn't need special rider effects on it to make it unique or interesting.

As an example of this, I'm going to take a pretend power called Aimed Shot. The idea, of course, is that you're lining up a perfect shot:

Aimed Shot
You can make a ranged attack with a +2 bonus on the attack roll.

Go away.

Better Power Example:

Aimed Shot, Mk. II
You can make a ranged attack with a +10 bonus on the attack roll.

The bonus is noticeable and almost guarantees success. However, it's still just boring math.

Aimed Shot, Mk. III
You can make a ranged attack, rolling twice on the attack roll and taking the better of the two rolls.

The advantage mechanic from 5e. Rolling 2d20 instead of 1d20 increases your chances of hitting and scoring a crit. It's easier to adjudicate than piling on more math bonuses, too.

Aimed Shot, Mk. IV
You can make a ranged attack, rolling twice on the attack roll and taking the better of the two rolls. If your attack hits, it does an additional +2d6 damage.

Adding damage to the attack is a nice touch, I feel, because the additional two dice of damage are going to make more of an impact in the battle, and they represet hitting a soft spot of an enemy.

This is how I feel a decent power should look. Now, let's talk about the action economy and whatnot. In terms of 4e, this would probably be an encounter power: 1/encounter, the ranger gets to make an aimed shot as a standard action.

Aimed Shot, Mk. IV
Standard Action • Encounter

You can make a ranged attack, rolling twice on the attack roll and taking the better of the two rolls. If your attack hits, it does an additional +2d6 damage.

This feels somewhat lackluster to me. 1/encounter, the ranger (or whoever) gets to do something special with his bow. It doesn't really have a tactical element to it beyond estimating your enemy's AC and remaining hit points.

Aimed Shot, Mk. IV
Full-Round Action • Encounter

You can make a ranged attack, rolling twice on the attack roll and taking the better of the two rolls. If your attack hits, it does an additional +2d6 damage.

A full-round action better represents the time taken to aim, I think. (Yes, I'm aware that 4e doesn't have full-round actions.) Unfortunately, for an encounter power, it's probably a little weak. I can't move and I can only use this 1/encounter? To make using this power a little better, we could always add more damage. Unfortunately, this runs the risk of unabalancing the power, and it doesn't really make the archer's combat style "feel" that different from everyone else. He gets to do his thing 1/encounter. Big whoop. Doesn't much matter. Even enemies aren't really going to care once he uses this power because it's done and gone.

Aimed Shot, Mk. V
Full-Round Action • At-Will

You can make a ranged attack, rolling twice on the attack roll and taking the better of the two rolls. If your attack hits, it does an additional +2d6 damage.

The reason I think that this ability works well is because it makes the archer a very dangerous foe as long as his enemies ignore him. As long as he is not engaged, his attacks are more likely to hit, and they are going to do a considerable amount of damage. Now, the one problem I have with this version of the power is that the archer can simply retreat once an enemy gets close to him. He shoots, the enemy approaches, the archer moves back, and then continues his assault. Of course, within a dungeon, this isn't such a problem, but in an open area, it might be. I would consider revising the power one step further:

Aimed Shot, Mk. VI
Full-Round Action • At-Will

You spend your turn lining up a shot. On your next turn, your first ranged attack does +2d8 damage, and you can roll twice on the attack roll.

Obviously, that's a bit more complicated, but it introduces a more tactical conundrum: the archer has used Aimed Shot and is about to get a significant bonus to his next attack, but the enemy turns and focuses on him. Should he take the shot or retreat?

Anyway, my rambling is done, so discuss.

 

[Stormonu]

Not what I'd care to see. I'd like to avoid the 10,000 powers per class, where every different way to swing a sword or whatnot has to have a entirely distinct mechanical process set up for its implementation.

Yes, there has to be mechanics involved in the activites characters perform. But the interest doesn't have to be in the mechanics themselves. I'm the type of person that enjoys the odd use of a standard ability or delving into the story of how the mechanics are involved. I don't feel the need for the mechanics to tell the story.

In short, Savage (Worlds) the abilities, don't 4E them. If I could get away with it, I would even try to get away from the predefined spells of D&D to a more spell-seed sort of setup (again, like SW's approach to spells).