D&D 4E SRM Marking Marked and Other 4Eisms

[Lizard]

It leads to splendid inter-party dynamics, I'm sure.

OK, I laughed.

Seriously, stupid, arbitrary rules don't break D&D -- we've lived with "the hole closes by muscular action" for eight years now, after all -- but let's not pretend they're not stupid. Responding to an obvious exploit with "Well, you shouldn't do that!" or "They'll just mandate it can't be done!" shouldn't be considered high praise of a game system. It's indicative of a quick patch tossed in at the last minute.

We can play and have fun with stupid, arbitrary rules. I'd just rather not see people be so determined to bend over backwards to claim they're not stupid or arbitrary.

 

[Stormtower]

I'm not feeling the "faster, more streamlined combat" 4E design paradigm coming through very strongly in this article.

However... WotC, if you are going this route with the game - lots of fiddly bits to track - then for Pelor's sake publish some Official products for me to buy to spruce up my table. I'd totally drop $19.99 plus tax on a big set of "D&D Combat Counters" or whatever. Seriously.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

I'm not feeling the "faster, more streamlined combat" 4E design paradigm coming through very strongly in this article.

However... WotC, if you are going this route with the game - lots of fiddly bits to track - then for Pelor's sake publish some Official products for me to buy to spruce up my table. I'd totally drop $19.99 plus tax on a big set of "D&D Combat Counters" or whatever. Seriously.

More like $7.50, but yeah.

 

[The_Fan]

Why is everyone assuming one mark will replace the previous one?

Personally I think it would make much more sense, be more balanced, and easier to rationalize if you could not mark a target who has already been marked.

 

[Kraydak]

Except that someone with common sense would take into account the fact that intention of the power is to be used on enemies (not friends that you're temporarily calling a foe, in order to game the system), and it's intended to keep you doing your job (fighting foes so your allies aren't getting lumped on by those same foes).

What you're saying is that the paladin is not going to do his job, since he's not not going to be engaging his foes and preventing his allies from being attacked by them (which is what a defender is supposed to do).

So yeah, I'd say this concept lacks in common sense.

No. What you are saying is that the mechanics as the stand (at the level we know them) are at a severe disconnect with what they are intended to produce. If the paladin damage dealing marks are powerful enough to influence opponent's actions, then they are an effective offense in their own right. To use them as an offense, the paladin has to avoid attacks. To do anything else *would be metagaming*. Bad design.

If marks are effective, then having two different people mark someone is overpowered. So you need marks to act as dispels. If marks are powerful though, people *will* mark to dispel. Heck, it probably only costs a 1 level dip. Fighters won't inflict the marks on friendlies with greataxes, of course, they will instead engage in unarmed combat for that. And they won't choose to take their AoOs, either.

Approaching game design from a gamist point of view has several problems. One, your design is more likely to break if people don't treat it seriously. Two, people find it hard to treat your design seriously. The latter is the bigger problem, any system breaks if people don't treat it seriously, so preserving credibility is crucial. Marks, as described (incompletely, granted), make me laugh. I am apparently not alone in that. That is bad.

 

[MaelStorm]

THAT'S IT, you lost me! You have to make you own cards and print them, buy minis, buy magnetic base markers, buy tile maps, and those are just the accessories to play not counting the dice which is essential. Then you have to buy core books, buy splatbooks for players and monsters, buy adventure, buy campaign settings and their splats, buy... I don't have a big wallet. I don't mind the cinematic approach and I think the 4E system will be fun too. But I'm going to find something less expensive, I don't want minis, I want a purely mental game, where you have a sheet of paper and a few dice. Not this. I'm not a kid with tons of disposable income and D&D seems to take this approach too far. I'm switching for something else sorry WotC but I'm going to keep my money in my pocket.

 

[Kraydak]

Why is everyone assuming one mark will replace the previous one?

Personally I think it would make much more sense, be more balanced, and easier to rationalize if you could not mark a target who has already been marked.

In that case you pre-mark your friends. Makes it even easier.

 

[sukael]

Can a blindfolded paladin mark a medusa and save the rest of the party from being targeted by the old turn-to-stone trick?

This actually sounds really cool to me.

 

[hong]

Why is everyone assuming one mark will replace the previous one?

Because it says so in the article.

 

[Incenjucar]

Maelstorm: Dude, relax. Everything here can be done with paper cutouts or a paper and pencil. Some people just like to get more elaborate.