Starting without equipment

[Mad Hamish]

Are you sure you are talking about 4e? All classes are affected in exactly the same way if they don't have their weapons or implements.

Nope,
For a start some classes are always attacking AC which is higher than the NADs, proficiency bonuses on the weapons makes up for that.
Then there's the point that implement attacks mostly (I can't think of exceptions but there might be some) do fixed dice of damage which weapon attacks do [W] damage

A typical two weapon ranger would go from D10/D10 for twin strike to D4/D4
a sorceror won't be affected at all.

Then there's the point that some classes (e.g. rogues) require particular weapon types to use their powers.

 

[Jhaelen]

It's not a case of damage or accuracy. It's a case of the powers flat-out not working without the right weapon. Every single rogue power has the rider "you must be wielding a light blade/crossbow/sling".

Hmm, how difficult would it be to improvise a sling?

But if you're running a "you're nekkid" scenario and you DON'T specifically tell the rogue player these things, he's going to assume he can't do squat in a fight, and the rules back him up on that.

Umm. A player assuming he can't do squat in a fight isn't thinking and also apparently either doesn't have an ounce of imagination or has absolutely no trust in her DM!

Even by RAW, every pc can always try use stunts, spontaneous combat maneuvers, or their environment in combat situations (page 42). So, even a tunnel-sighted rules lawyer should know that he can try stuff beyond the things written on her power cards.

I think what you're forgetting is this:
A DM putting the pcs in a situation where they don't have access to their equipment will also have thought about a number of ways that will allow them to deal with the situation. as someone else mentioned, it will be only temporary anyway. It would probably be a simple skill challenge to overwhelm an npc to get at her equipment.

Nope,
For a start some classes are always attacking AC which is higher than the NADs, proficiency bonuses on the weapons makes up for that.

I know. But all of the classes that typically attack AC also have a number of power choices that don't target AC. If they pick those and don't have a weapon, their chance of hitting is identical to an implement user.

Then there's the point that implement attacks mostly (I can't think of exceptions but there might be some) do fixed dice of damage which weapon attacks do [W] damage

A typical two weapon ranger would go from D10/D10 for twin strike to D4/D4
a sorceror won't be affected at all.

I know exactly why you picked twin strike as an example
Twin strike is one of the few powers that don't add an attribute modifier to damage. So, obviously it's damage will take a big hit.
Most powers add an attribute modifier, though, and some even add two attribute modifiers. For these powers it's not that bad a hit.

Then there's the point that some classes (e.g. rogues) require particular weapon types to use their powers.

True. But as mentioned above, a DM interested in playing that kind of scenario will make sure none of the players are completely hosed.

 

[Delgar]

Doesn't anyone care about the story anymore?

I mean the characters are prisoners, they don't have stuff.

Oh no, the wizard and monk are at an advantage whatever shall the players do? Sit there and whine? Or try and find a way out of the situation there in?

As I said before it's only a temporary situation, and it's either one you're in at the start of a campaign or worse you FAILED earlier and were captured. Man gamers these days want everything on a silver platter.

As I said before, it's only a temporary situation, so really who cares if one player shines brightly than another. In my experience, different character classes shine in different situations and in my books that's okay.

 

[Shin Okada]

Doesn't anyone care about the story anymore?

Well, of course we do. But it is also true that players tend to be frustrated when their PCs are handicapped because of "DM's story". Especially when his PC becomes almost useless when others don't.

I don't say we should not use such a situation in an adventure. But IMHO it is also true that as DMs, we should know better how such a situation affects on various PCs, to make a game an enjoyable one.

As I said before it's only a temporary situation, and it's either one you're in at the start of a campaign or worse you FAILED earlier and were captured. Man gamers these days want everything on a silver platter.

Yep. Such a change of pace works from time to time. But that is a big gamble for a DM. Your players may just enjoy the situation, or get frustrated. You need very careful manipulation.

IMHO, it will be safe to make it REALLY temporary or many players start to get frustrated than to enjoy the game.

Also, stripping down all the gears and giving replacements may displease some players. Sometimes, not just their character's own abilities, but also some gears are the part of the "history" of that character. Say, a fighter has his signature longsword, which is a legacy from his lost lover, upgrading it's property as he levels up instead of buying a new one or replacing to a new found treasure. Removing this sword from the fighter and just giving "replacement" will cause a big effect. Of course, a creative DM can make it a chance for a new interesting story arch.

As I said before, it's only a temporary situation, so really who cares if one player shines brightly than another. In my experience, different character classes shine in different situations and in my books that's okay.

IMHO, partially true, but partially not.

Different character classes shine in different situations, was quite natural in older RPGs.

But 4e is a game system which trying to lesson the situations when "some PC shines but others have nothing to do."

Now, unlike pre-3e editions, and more than 3.Xe D&D, all the PCs can shine in both combat and non-combat encounters. Rogue class used to be a skill monkey but not always useful in combat. In 4e, on the other hand, sneak attack is always useful. At the same time, most skill challenges, at least well-made ones, are either incorporated in a combat encounter or allows almost all the PCs to contribute somehow.

Thus, "different character classes shine in different situations" is somewhat rare in 4e gaming experience. So, if a DM is trying to make such a situation intentionally, he should determine well how that will affect the gaming experiences of each players.

Finally, if, a DM have confidence to let all the players enjoy the game, even with all of those effects, he should do it. It may make a great game.

 

[Cergorach]

Players wake up buck naked in room.

Weapons found: Potato peeler, very small sowing scissors, and about twenty sowing needles.

No clothing found, fight ensues over the single handkerchief. Half Orc looses proudly, due to the handkerchief not being big enough to cover it all. Halfling hairy enough to not need handkerchief...

Most wieldable furniture destroyed trying to open the door, thief uses needles and nails as lockpicking tools.

Large toad stools used as fig leafs, Adam style.

Jump the first Kobold they encounter. Needed clarification on what exactly they meant by 'jump'... One downed Kobold, only later realizing that Kobold is using the 'facilities' and is unarmed/armored. Half Orc Barbarian is now armed with Kobold...

It's cold in the dungeon, shrinkage is an early warning system for hypothermia.

Encounter two armed goblins with spears, those things are nasty when unarmed and naked.

Half Orc Barbarian uses Kobold missile to take out one guard, wizard throws a fit about not waiting for the two of them to line up.

Thief suggest backstabbing the second Kobold guard with the potato peeler, gets gazed down by the rest of the party.

Half Orc makes a few suggestive gestures and comments in Orcish... Kobold runs away screaming "Rape!"...

Now armed with a Half spear, a dagger, two Kobolds and potato peeler they picklock the door (a very lucky roll) and find the Kobold treasury. For some reason the Kobolds piled their coins in a single big pile, no containers at all. Halfling tries to fit in the Kobold armor, has some trouble and now has a very squicky voice.

Half Orc Barbarian now wield dual Stuffed Kobolds, those coins had to go somewhere...

And that is only the beginning of the story ;-)

 

[jonesy]

I started a 3E campaign like this, as the characters were all late-teens, early 20s townsfolk in a fishing village that was down the coast from a pirate camp. They all started equipment-less, as they were just young adults and not yet "adventurers"...

I really like this setup.

And I'd like to see more inventive ways to start in the spirit of the topic, instead of the 'in jail', 'as slaves', or 'robbed blind' versions. Those aren't bad, the very first time, but I think they're getting really old. I mean, even CRPG's have them as a standard.

Surely there are other reasons for not being fully decked? Right? How about starting in a spa?

 

[Mad Hamish]

Hmm, how difficult would it be to improvise a sling?
Umm. A player assuming he can't do squat in a fight isn't thinking and also apparently either doesn't have an ounce of imagination or has absolutely no trust in her DM!

or is a new player or has tried things before and been shut down...

Even by RAW, every pc can always try use stunts, spontaneous combat maneuvers, or their environment in combat situations (page 42). So, even a tunnel-sighted rules lawyer should know that he can try stuff beyond the things written on her power cards.

which is highly dependent upon the GM style and the rules are in the DMG

I think what you're forgetting is this:
A DM putting the pcs in a situation where they don't have access to their equipment will also have thought about a number of ways that will allow them to deal with the situation. as someone else mentioned, it will be only temporary anyway. It would probably be a simple skill challenge to overwhelm an npc to get at her equipment.

I know. But all of the classes that typically attack AC also have a number of power choices that don't target AC. If they pick those and don't have a weapon, their chance of hitting is identical to an implement user.

a) that assumes that you know you're going to be without gear when you design the character.
b) There aren't many Ranger powers that attack anything other than AC, I don't think Fighters or Barbarians have all that much either.

I know exactly why you picked twin strike as an example
Twin strike is one of the few powers that don't add an attribute modifier to damage. So, obviously it's damage will take a big hit.
Most powers add an attribute modifier, though, and some even add two attribute modifiers. For these powers it's not that bad a hit.

Twin Strike doesn't have an attribute added but other powers still lose a fair amount of damage, combined with the reduced chance to hit...

True. But as mentioned above, a DM interested in playing that kind of
scenario will make sure none of the players are completely hosed.

how do you compensate for your defender being down at AC10 instead of 20?

 

[TikkchikFenTikktikk]

It's a more interesting exercise if you houserule that powers with the Weapon keyword can't be used without wielding a weapon from the equipment list with which they have proficiency. Ditto for powers with the Implement keyword.

 

[Mengu]

how do you compensate for your defender being down at AC10 instead of 20?

The DM will. Without armor, you could be looking at a party with AC 10 Fighter, AC 10 Cleric, AC 12 Warlock, and AC 10 Invoker. Or also without armor, you might be looking at AC 17 Swordmage, AC 19 avenger, AC 14 Shaman, and AC 18 Wizard. Or some combination of these. Your defenders are still likely to have more hit points and surges than anyone else, so they will still be decent up front, but if the AC 14 Shaman is the highest AC you've got, him and his spirit companion might be taking point for an encounter. And the AC 10 fighter may just not mark for an encounter.

It really doesn't matter. DM can lower attack bonus of creatures vs AC, or design the encounter so most things attack non-AC defenses, or a combination of things. Maybe use low damage creatures with no or few status effects. It's just going to be a few such encounters, it's not like we're running a campaign in this fashion.

Life of an adventurer is not meant to be easy and straight forward, everything working within the mechanical boundaries of a game system. Sometimes they'll be underequipped, sometimes they have to worry about innocent people getting in the way, or joining the wrong side with good but misguided intentions. Sometimes they will be overwhelmed, and fail, be forced to retreat or surrender. Without failure, success means very little. Getting out of a sticky situation is half the fun.

If a story element tosses the group in an area where arcane spells can go awry, the arcane casters in the group aren't going to just up and quit. They'll deal with it. If an ongoing enemy ritual is suppressing or diminishing healing powers in an area, the PC's will just have to tough it out until they can disrupt the ritual. If some transformation causes PC's to lose access to their daily powers and racial powers for an encounter, again, they just deal with it.

The rules are not meant to be a straight jacket for the DM. The rules are simply a method of conflict resolution. Sometimes we get so engrossed on system and balance, and encounter levels, and combat rules, and skill challenges, we forget the big picture. We are playing characters in an adventure.

 

[Saeviomagy]

Hmm, how difficult would it be to improvise a sling?

Entirely dependant upon the DM. Which is why I'm saying "keep it in mind"

Umm. A player assuming he can't do squat in a fight isn't thinking and also apparently either doesn't have an ounce of imagination or has absolutely no trust in her DM!

I have seen at least 4 threads on these boards to the effect of "my players don't look past their power cards, how can I get them to try X?"

Even by RAW, every pc can always try use stunts, spontaneous combat maneuvers, or their environment in combat situations (page 42). So, even a tunnel-sighted rules lawyer should know that he can try stuff beyond the things written on her power cards.

... can try, can have fail or be ineffective. It still means that most classes get all their class abilities PLUS improvised ones, while the rogue and swordmage get few to none. A rogue without his specific weapons may as well not have a class: that's really how bad it is.

I think what you're forgetting is this:
A DM putting the pcs in a situation where they don't have access to their equipment will also have thought about a number of ways that will allow them to deal with the situation.

Which is what this thread is for: to help DMs work through the issues. It's really counterproductive to say "lets not discuss this, because clearly anyone interested in reading this thread will have already solved the problem"

as someone else mentioned, it will be only temporary anyway.

If temporary is 3 encounters, then that could easily be two sessions of "I'm sorry rogue, but you don't have a class today! Wooo!"

It would probably be a simple skill challenge to overwhelm an npc to get at her equipment.

...overwhelm a non-combat NPC to get weapons?

I mean sure, looting the kitchen to get some weapons is fine - the point to any DM who's intending on running this scenario is that some characters will perform much better/worse than others.

I know. But all of the classes that typically attack AC also have a number of power choices that don't target AC. If they pick those and don't have a weapon, their chance of hitting is identical to an implement user.

Unless they're a rogue, in which case they can't attack using their powers at all...

But as mentioned above, a DM interested in playing that kind of scenario will make sure none of the players are completely hosed.

And he'll find out how to do that by reading information like this thread where people address the issues instead of assuming that their readers already know everything.