Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="JamesonCourage" data-source="post: 5861843" data-attributes="member: 6668292">I agree. My RPG has 9 different stances that warriors can adopt, and maneuvers you can use tied to those stances. One stance, Domination, if the more bodyguard-ish of the stances, giving people attacking allies nearby penalties, as you get in the way, distract, etc.There needs to be a reason why it works that way, like I said. I think that there should be an example reason why, and it should be superficially viable to the majority of people that read it.Agreed, which is why I said " 'well, don't turn your back on the guy with the sword next to you!', then why don't all melee warriors (like rogues, who have backstab!) have marks, too?"You need a reason, and it can't be "because he has a weapon." It has to be based on fighting style, for example. Personally, I like "auras" a little bit better: if someone you threaten attacks someone other than you, they take a penalty on the attack/damage roll. Easy to remember, no forgetting marks, and you're making life tough on them when they ignore you.I'm also a fan of more varied mechanics to help break up the homogeneous feel that people seem to get. Warriors interact with the system mainly via stances, maneuvers, and attack rolls, while magicians interact with the system mainly via spell slots or spellcasting checks, while experts interact with the system mainly via skill checks. But, I do understand why people like a more uniform approach.Anyways, as someone who dislikes powers as implemented, I've had success with stances/maneuvers than anyone can use as long as they qualify (fairly low prerequisites: 16 attribute score, a feat, one skill). There's no real big investment (a feat is about a fifth of a level in my RPG), so people have a lot of options early on, and can ignore them if they want to.But, that's just my preference. I was just chiming in to say that 4e, with marks, is much closer to what I want than taunts are (if a taunt forces a creature to attack). As always, play what you like <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification