The Impasse

[catsclaw227]

But this kind of "stunting on the fly" requires a lot more adjudication from the GM and a lot more creativity from the players. Not all GMs are skilled or comfortable with that amount of adjudication and not all players are that creative. Especially if you require this level of adjudication and creativity in every single battle.

I think that the structure of 4e is such that you've got the powers as the "bread and butter" of the combat system while still allowing for stunts for those special creative moments.

And this is the perfect moment for Rel to show us the goods behind his Power Stunts mechanic.

 

[Harlekin]

Yes, and those kind of stunts should do more than powers. The brazier stunt should do more than the best daily a character has. Otherwise players are discouraged from using stunts - a lesson we learned in MMOGs.

I disagree. The fact that you only have a limited number of daily/ encounter powers are more than enough encouragement to do stunts. After all, there will be combat left after you have used all those powers. Stunts do have to be better than At-will powers to be encouraged, that is all.

 

[Rel]

You need to look no further than the reward mechanics for a game to determine what type of game it is intended to be.

D&D reward mechanics are: loot, XP for killing monsters, renewed action points after killing monsters twice, and some XP thrown in after killing a series of monsters.

...and XP for Quests. And XP for Skill Challenges that might have nothing to do with combat.

 

[xechnao]

...and XP for Quests. And XP for Skill Challenges that might have nothing to do with combat.

I would accept this the day a character could reach level 30 by mostly these stuff and say that he is having fun with these rules provided to him. Unfortunately Sadrik is right on this one.

 

[Harlekin]

I think that the structure of 4e is such that you've got the powers as the "bread and butter" of the combat system while still allowing for stunts for those special creative moments.

Honestly, I see powers and stunts as two sides of the same thing.

After all you could interpret Encounter- and Daily powers as pre-packaged stunts. If you actually read the description of most of these powers, they sound pretty stunty to me. And if you get your players to actually describe what they do, rather than just say I use Power X, you will have the cool effect of a stunt as well.

The advantage of powers as stunts is that the player can do cool stuff without having to think to hard or asking the DMs permission. The disadvantage is that the cool stuff they do is somewhat repetitive.

So adding ad hoc stunts adds variability to the game, but requires certain levels of pixel-bitching by the players.

 

[Obryn]

You seem to keep saying that I think that they should have publicly announced 4th edition the instant they started working on it. I never said such a thing. I also never said that they should have announced 4E when they were asked about it. All I am saying is a simple "We are not going to discuss rumors about 4th edition." or something to that effect would have been better than using deception to strongly imply that they weren't even considering working on 4th edition when they, in fact, had already been working on it for approximately two years. Your insistance on twisting my words to say something I did not say seems far more irrational, than anything I have said.

And all I've been saying from the very beginning is that changing your wording from "No, we're not working on 4e" to "We won't comment on 4e" is exactly the same as an announcement that they are, in fact, working on 4e. Yes, there's wiggle-room, but frankly, the gig is up at this point. Come on, you know this even from talking with your friends.

So, what it comes down to is a matter of timing, not of wording. Hence, my concentration on timing.

-O

 

[Rechan]

Anyone else notice that the last eight pages has been everyone arguing with two posters?

Talk about The Impasse.

 

[Fenes]

I disagree. The fact that you only have a limited number of daily/ encounter powers are more than enough encouragement to do stunts. After all, there will be combat left after you have used all those powers. Stunts do have to be better than At-will powers to be encouraged, that is all.

Well, it goes without saying that without long detailed lists of limited powers we'd not have dailies or encounter powers either.

Yes, I want unlimited stunts instead of limited powers.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Yes, and those kind of stunts should do more than powers. The brazier stunt should do more than the best daily a character has. Otherwise players are discouraged from using stunts - a lesson we learned in MMOGs.

Which is what I stated: The focus should have been not on dozens of very limited powers, but on dozens of examples of stunts that foster creativity and use the freedom P&P offers to the fullest.

They don't need to be stronger as dailies or encounter powers. (Though in fact, the DMG example of a stunt goes on to say that this stunt would have a similar effect to an encounter power and that wouldn't be a problem, so they are already en par with encounter powers).

The trick with dailies and encounter powers are that they have a system limit on how often and how many you are allowed to use them. And many powers are also not best used at first opportunity, but at the right opportunity. So you will have enough rounds where you'd just want to use an At-Will power - or try a stunt that is as powerful or better than an at-will, with the added benefit of being cool and giving you the effect you want in the scenario.
Of course, stunts are also limited, but not by system, only by your creativity (and your DMs willingness to "say yes" to your creativity).

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

I disagree. The fact that you only have a limited number of daily/ encounter powers are more than enough encouragement to do stunts. After all, there will be combat left after you have used all those powers. Stunts do have to be better than At-will powers to be encouraged, that is all.

I agree. The thing I found was difficult about running 2e was that the ONLY attack you could make was just...attack. Because of that, people would either:
a) get bored and try "stunts"
b) try "stunts", not knowing there were no rules for them.

Then, the game slowed to a halt as I'd have to think about a rule that seemed balanced, finish the resulting argument about whether that rule was "realistic" enough, and eventually resolve the action.

The arguments pretty much always went like this:
Player: "I attempt to leap off the ledge an on to the Ogre's back and hold on to him."
DM: "Alright, make me a Dex check to see if you can grab on to the Ogre."
Player: "Dex check? But I have a 6 Dex. Shouldn't it be a Strength check? It's not like the Ogre is very small or anything. I can easily hit it, it's just a matter of holding on."
DM: "No, you need to first aim correctly while it is moving around and you are jumping, it requires a lot of coordination."
Player: "Then I don't want to try it."
DM: "Too bad, you said you were doing it, you don't know the chance of success before you try something."
Player: "Woo hoo, I rolled a 2, I made it by 4!"
DM: "Sure, you are holding on to its back, and it can't hit you since it can't reach back there. You'll need to make a Dex check to hold on every round, though. You can attack as normal."
Rogue Player: "So, if I succeed in a Dex check, I can grab on to the back of enemies and they can't hit me? And I can backstab them every round? I have an 18 Dex, that's awesome."
DM: "Umm, yeah...that's what I just ruled....mind you, I wasn't really thinking of an 18 Dex rogue doing it in every combat when I ruled that....maybe this wasn't such a good idea. I can't think of a better way of doing it. Sorry, I'm going to have to rule that the Ogre is moving around too much, it's just impossible to grab on to him."
Player: "Fine, I just attack him."

And that was one of the simple ones. If you got a couple of players who had a vested interest in making sure a new rule worked well for them, an argument could easily take 2-3 hours. I remember one argument where 4 people and the DM were out of their chairs demonstrating a stunt to prove to their DM that it wasn't impossible and the DM pointing out reasons they weren't doing it right for hours.