Stun is Fun

[Saeviomagy]

This is the difference maker between our perspectives; you believe moving to an ally, making a heal check, and then letting them make a pretty serious saving throw is the equivalent of skipping your own turn.

If you take your turn, you are guaranteed to take your turn. Total turns taken: 1

If you help your buddy make his save, you have (usually) a 55% chance of giving your buddy 1 turn extra. Total turns taken: 1 * 0.55 = 0.55.

In essence, it's only worth waking your buddy IF whatever he does will be 180% as effective as whatever you were going to do.

Additionally it is typically NOT a good idea to bunch up in D&D unless you're focus firing a foe.

Now there IS the fact that your granted save has a 55% chance of negating enemies CA against your friend, and so in specific instances there might be a reason to do that, but it's far from a general case.

When you miss an attack is that the same as being stunned? At least when "missing" a saving throw (a pretty easy hit compared to an attack roll) - you don't use up any of your powers.

First: 55% is an unusually high rate of power failure for a competent character attacking a monster's weak defense.

Second: you've also lost your movement. There's a decent chance that you didn't actually want to be next to your ally.

Third: It's a rare daily power that has no effect: line, and if your best choice is to use one of those on a 55% chance to hit, while your buddy has a better power to use, it might... MIGHT be worth bringing him back.


But most of all: there are far more interesting effects to use than stunned. Stunned AT BEST swallows up someones standard action for very little drama, tension or interest. At worst, you end up with the orbizard: every combat ends with the party beating the most powerful foe of the encounter to death while its defenseless and immobile.

 

[unan oranis]

The worst problem with stunned save ends is that getting extra saves doesn't eliminate the chance that you might fail your save. And when 2-3 people in the party get stunned, one of which is the leader, you are looking at a few skipped turns.

3 failed saves from several different monsters will see you skipping all the turns for the rest of your life.

Dazed, immobilized, knocked prone, etc. already do a pretty good job of debilitating PC's. A dazed shaman, rogue, or fighter is usually in dire need of a save to be able to function again. So the usefulness of a bonus save is not diminished by taking away stun.

It is diminished, though I can understand why you would consider it not diminished significantly.
Tis a minor quibble.

Sorry, stun is not fun as a player, and not fun as a DM.

I'm not saying that you find stun fun, I'm saying that as a player you may find it fun if you looked at it from a different perspective.

For the dm's, I hope to inform implementation.

 

[Colmarr]

Fun is (to a certain extent) irrelevant.

Immobilised isn't fun on the greataxe-wielding fighter, the barbarian, or the rogue but no one's suggesting that it be removed from the game. There's no reason to treat Stun any differently.

Stun's purpose is to be the king of conditions (perhaps sharing the throne with dominate and maybe helpless). It is there to act as an "omg!" trigger, and in my experience it does. It's a dramatic device as much as a mechanical device.

However, like all crippling conditions, it should be used appropriately. Any DM who uses it too often is just as bad a DM as one who packs too many immobilises against a melee party. It's just bad encounter design.

In essence, it's only worth waking your buddy IF whatever he does will be 180% as effective as whatever you were going to do.

Coming from the player of a battle cleric in a party with a waraxe-wielding dwarf fighter, an infernal warlock and a boom-focused wizard, I can without hesitation state that there have been more than one occasion in which their actions would be 80% more effective than what I could do with mine.

But the main problem with your assertion is that it fails to take into account 4e roles. Is it wasteful for the striker to run over to use the Heal skill on the controller? Almost certainly. But the reason d'etre of the leader is to maximise the effectiveness of other PCs. There's a reason that my level 9 cleric is yet to get above 2[W]. There's also a reason why the leaders get the powers that grant saves.

 

[unan oranis]

If you take your turn, you are guaranteed to take your turn. Total turns taken: 1

If you help your buddy make his save, you have (usually) a 55% chance of giving your buddy 1 turn extra. Total turns taken: 1 * 0.55 = 0.55.

In essence, it's only worth waking your buddy IF whatever he does will be 180% as effective as whatever you were going to do.

Again, our perspectives have a huge fault line between them:
You consider the turn used to give a save as 100% wasted. You are saying that if your pal makes his save and comes back on-line, he now has to do his turn and make up for your "wasted turn".

I consider all three parts of the turn, the move, the heal check and the saving throw to each have their own risk/reward, and to be a fully functioning and fun way to spend your turn - even if you fail.

Additionally it is typically NOT a good idea to bunch up in D&D unless you're focus firing a foe.

OK, lets throw "bunching up is bad" in the con side of making heal checks. Fair enough.

Now there IS the fact that your granted save has a 55% chance of negating enemies CA against your friend, and so in specific instances there might be a reason to do that, but it's far from a general case.

Hadn't thought of that - lets say it's worth the risk of drawing an AoE attack then and cancel the two points out?

First: 55% is an unusually high rate of power failure for a competent character attacking a monster's weak defense.

I'm pretty sure that most attack rolls, world wide, require higher than a 10 to hit on average. I could be wrong but I'd be surprised.

As far as the ultimate sweet spot goes, well that just means that it isn't always easier to heal your friend... which is good! Ideally you will be confronted by choices on your turn, not just parsing which is the most efficient course.

Second: you've also lost your movement. There's a decent chance that you didn't actually want to be next to your ally.

There's an equally decent chance that you are already next to your ally, and that you still have your move action left after the heal check.

Again, the positioning of your character (as you note; important) qualifies your rescue turn as being as legitimate as the turn where you blast out a power.

Third: It's a rare daily power that has no effect: line, and if your best choice is to use one of those on a 55% chance to hit, while your buddy has a better power to use, it might... MIGHT be worth bringing him back.

Even with a miss effect, you are comparing using a miss effect now, no heal for buddy, no turn for buddy v.s. heal check for buddy, maybe a turn for buddy and having a chance for the hit effect.

In fact if it were possible to call "backsies" to cancel the miss effect and hold onto your daily for next turn, people would do it from time to time.

But most of all: there are far more interesting effects to use than stunned. Stunned AT BEST swallows up someones standard action for very little drama, tension or interest. At worst, you end up with the orbizard: every combat ends with the party beating the most powerful foe of the encounter to death while its defenseless and immobile.

The lack of drama, tension or interest is mostly in the execution, where ever it is to be found in the game for any ability.

Stun is dangerous, yes.

It can suffocate the drama, tension or interest if spammed - but the same could be said of many elements in the game.

As far as the orbizard goes, got one in my campaign. Or had one. 18th level bastard just got smoked permanently this weekend, by the most powerful foe of the encounter.

 

[Ryujin]

Being hit too much = death = not fun?

No...

being stunned (hit too much and unable to respond) = death = not fun

 

[Destil]

Stun being a problem mostly depends on how quickly combat rounds go. It's pretty valid that a player who has no input in the game for half an hour is going to not be happy. But if that's the case I'd be more interested in making the game run faster than fixing the condition. Oddly, LOTS of stuns do speed up combat round. Dragon combats are a good example; usually when frightful presence hits a few players get can get some quick turns.

 

[DracoSuave]

Let's see.

I know that a little stun here and there = challenge = tense situations = leaders get to use their extra saving throw-granting abilities to save a player.

Therefore, a little stun here and there = Good for game.


I also know that too much stun tossed around = players can't do anything = frustration = no one gets to do anything.

Therefore, too much stun = bad for game.


I also am aware that I am the DM and therefore have the responsibility to my players to try to create fun and challenging encounters.

Therefore, I use stun sparingly, but not so much it overshadows the game.


So, why would I want to nerf stun when it does its job perfectly, and I have full control over when and how it is applied against my players?

Don't you change or house rule -problem- mechanics and not ones that work?

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Fun (Making an Attack with a Daily Power + Missing) >= Fun (doing nothing on your turn).

In the first part, you could at least try to do something. And most daily powers actually have some effect on a miss. (And if it's just that they are reliable!)

 

[Neonchameleon]

As I've told one of my DMs, I don't mind big nasty encounters. What I mind is encounters where we can't hit back.

 

[DracoSuave]

Fun (Making an Attack with a Daily Power + Missing) >= Fun (doing nothing on your turn).

In the first part, you could at least try to do something. And most daily powers actually have some effect on a miss. (And if it's just that they are reliable!)

Yeah, but in the second part, players of Leaders and Paladins, and such types (you know, players who take concepts around helping the team out) get to shine by doing something other than the healing word. They get to go 'Saving throw to you!' and you go 'Now I can move' and they go 'What a great use of a minor action!' and you go 'Bully!' and they go 'Yay!' and they feel like they've saved the day.

You -are- aware that there's other players in your team, and one or more of them is likely to have taken a class that revolves around saving -your- ass from peril. So... if you're not in peril, what do -they- do?

Chain stun bad. Stun once in a while is good.

And groups should be ready for it when it happens, in the same way that they're ready for dominated, and the ongoing damage, and the immobilized.....


PS:

Obviously, if your group can't handle conditions, you use conditions less. On the other hand... if your group can't handle conditions, then what monsters have you been using?