The "real" reason the game has changed.

[pemerton]

Role play defines events and THEN mechanics resolve the outcome

is very different from

Mechanics defines the events and THEN the player provides narrative to connect the dots.

Two things.

First, AD&D has elements of the latter - it is quite explicity in the 1st ed DMG that a saving throw is to be rolled - a purely mechanica process and then, depending on the outcome, a narrative is provided to join the dots.

Second, 4e has elements of the former - it is quite explicity in the 4th ed PHB and DMG that in a skill challenge the GM describes the scene and the players describe how their PCs are responding to it, and then skill checks are worked out, DCs assigned, and rolls made.

AD&D combat can be (and in my experience frequently was) played in the second mode - players announce moves, attacks etc all in mechanical terms, deliver and take hit points etc, and only at the end are the dots joined - the narrative becomes one of "we won the combat" or "we lost the combat".

4e can also be played in the second mode, with one exception - because movement is so mechanically integrated into combat, there is at least one aspect of the ficiton with which players (or, at least, my players) remain initimately engaged, namely, the position of PCs, enemies, terrain etc.

I'm a very firm proponent of the notion that there are big differences between AD&D and 4e. But this notion of the priority of fiction to mechanics or vice versa is (in my opinion) mostly a red herring as far as those differences are concerned, because it mostly concerns players' initiation of action for their PCs - and in this respect I don't think 4e is radically different from more traditional RPGs.

Rather, the differences obtain in what is understood to be the relationship between ingame causation and actual causation in the mechanical system. But (i) this is more obvious to the GM than the players, and (ii) it happens much more at the encounter design state - setting DCs, choosing enemies etc - and at the conflict resolution stage - how many successes are enought for victory?

These aren't differences connected to player initiation of action.

And as far as actual play experience - I'm still waiting for someone to respond to my actual play example and tell me where I violated the rules, guidelines, or standard practices of 4e.

 

[shadzar]

<short novel>

Um....so much stuff some seems disconnected when taken from various posts, but to try to reply to it as parts.....

I will read that play report later as I have time and see what I have to say about it, or how it relates to what I was asking for, since that was a while ago.

Health playing a part, I will read in the play report and review later when I have more time to go back and see where this threads discussion was at that time. I like anecdotal evidence, because it gives things to think about.

Not interest in RQ or RM, as I can do what I want with D&D without being constrained by an overly metagame edition, and add what I want into another addition. I am not a RAW player, and as a DM must be able to adapt things to suit the needs of my players, so suggesting another game to me is just a meh moment. I would rather focus on D&D changes within itself mostly, as opposed to it changing based on other RPGs, as the reasons for change sem to MOSTLY be dealing with competing with larger markets, of which until recently, no other TTRPG could compete with D&D until the recent Pathfinder matching it in sales/market share or whatever.

Eye-patch just used as an example of a long lasting effect. ANY D&D edition could have someone with an eye-patch and that NOT product a difficulty in terms of mechanics, but you COULD represent it by the character having a lost eye, but in 4th the mechanics seem more aligned to never losing the eye in the way the entirety of the "healing" system works. The damage would not be lasting enough for the eye to have been lost. Even if only thematically as opposed to mechanically, 4th jsut doesn't seem to want to make sense when you go about wanting to have a character lose an eye as to its natural healing mechanics.

Not the 4e posters, but to relate what I was saying to the threads topic. How things have changed based on what people were looking for out of the game, if I am remembering my post context from that quoted portion and overall meaning. The changes to the game were in part due to changes in priority of narrative and mechanics.

Thieving as a skill and things associated with the connotation of "thieving" bring with it baggage. If that baggage wasn't wanted, then getting better at it may go against someones character concept. If that person feels that the thieving arts arent something their character would partake in, then why do they keep getting better at it, when then do not directly and purposefully engage in it, or go out of their way to avoid it? Changing the name, or jsut saying think about it another way doesnt work from a psychological standpoint, so why even force this increase of a skill on someone mechanically? It is to be able to help other in skill challenges and such to make the game "balance" as opposed to being able to have your character concept work. So the mechanics are built for the purpose of the mechanics first, rather than a player having a CHOICE in what they want their character to be. Note: choice I not only lists of things to choose from the games mechanics, but attitudes for the character that makes them a character such as Fineas the Bard rather than being CyberMech #187.

I'm going to read it, hold on! Got food to eat and other stuff and want to have a clear frame of mind so I can see what your play report shows.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

Not sure if it was you or another in regards to porting surges backwards, but just increase the hit points by 300% was the response.

Except that isn't how surges work, and claiming it does make it painfully obvious that you are fairly ignorant of the mechanic.

When you look at the healing surges it gives a false perception. When you look at previous HP you could see what there was. Looking in two places already means more metagaming to take you out of the game itself.

Again, that's not how surges work.

ALL games when healing options are exhausted and "natural" healing takes place, is where the BIG problem lies.

There is no exhaustion of healing options in earlier editions though. You can always heal HP damage.

What happens prior to 4th when all forms of healing have been exhausted and you still do not have full HP, as opposed to what happens in 4th? Recovery time in previous editions means a chance for long lasting effects from the loss of HP, while 4th edition removes ANY chance of long lasting effects since you are healed as soon as you wake up, AND have all your surges back.

That is why 4th doesn't lend itself to long lasting damage representable by HP loss, because as part of that abstract injury is removed due to the metagame "lifebar" in 4th as opposed to previous editions.

Except previous editions were no better because, once again, there was never a point in which HP damage could not be regained. In 4e, your body reaches a point where it's had too much and you need to rest it out. In previous editions, that never comes.

It is an intended function of the game for its design, but that design in turn changes the possibilities of things and those changes were most likely taken into consideration and ignore in order to promote the style of play supported by 4th.

Which would be, being injured and unable to fight is not as fun as just ignoring such and just being ready to fight each day.

This mechanic change, also changed the story telling/narrative capabilities in accordance with the overall design goals.

It works for those looking for those changes set forth by the design goals, but not those that have other goals in mind when they play.

Flat out, I've never seen or heard of anyone using "natural healing rates" in any edition of D&D. As Hussar said, there's always someone jumping on the "Cleric Grenade." 4e actually has a point in which people NEED to rest, that their boody has taken too much. 4e actually enforces the need to sit down and let your body rest up a bit. Previous editions do not.

And again, I ask - have you played 4e? Do you really know how surges work? Because by your commentary and the commentary of others here, it would appear you do not.

 

[Hussar]

I just have to ask - what rule would you have been violating in 3.xE?

From the SRD:

Thieves’ Tools This kit contains the tools you need to use the Disable Device and Open Lock skills. Without these tools, you must improvise tools, and you take a -2 circumstance penalty on Disable Device and Open Lock checks

You cannot open a lock in 3e without thieves tools. A spoon does not count as thieves tools AFAIK.

 

[shadzar]

Except that isn't how surges work, and claiming it does make it painfully obvious that you are fairly ignorant of the mechanic.

Again, that's not how surges work.

You have a set number of HP.
You have a set number of surges.
Healing surges grant a set portion of your HP.

So you have a finite number, per day, of HP via surges, correct?

You CAN calculate a single number of HP for the group total, or individual characters based on permanent HP (not temp HP effects), and surges.

Therefore you have a set number of HP just like previous editions, EXCEPT, and this is the big part; in 4th you get all those back each day.

With HP and surges, ALL characters have a set maximum HP they can expend during a day. I am not talking about magical healing via rituals or anything that increase this, just as a representation of total HP per character. This is the same as other editions.

The problem with the healing is that part where you get them again the next day as opposed to them taking longer in previous editions that look less magical.

Basically changing the focus of what is abstracted.

So have I got the function of surges understood or not? If not then tell me how it is NOT possible to calculate the total HP expendable by a character per day.

 

[Imaro]

From the SRD:



You cannot open a lock in 3e without thieves tools. A spoon does not count as thieves tools AFAIK.

Uhm, are you sure that's what that passage says. My understanding of it is that it says without thieve's tools you have to use improvised thieve's tools... so technically you can use items (such as the spoon if your DM agrees) as improvised thieve's tools with a -2 penalty. Or am I mistaken?

 

[carmachu]

Sorry, while 1dt edition was great, 2nd edition did not, in your words, rock. I found it kinda sucked actually, and was the start of the arms race with various books.

 

[pemerton]

ANY D&D edition could have someone with an eye-patch and that NOT product a difficulty in terms of mechanics, but you COULD represent it by the character having a lost eye, but in 4th the mechanics seem more aligned to never losing the eye in the way the entirety of the "healing" system works. The damage would not be lasting enough for the eye to have been lost.

I don't understand this.

In 1st ed AD&D hp damage is not lasting enough for an eye to be lost, because hp heal at 1/day, and the typical pirate has 1d6 hit points -meaning that the typical pilot heals from "on his last legs" to "all better now" in less than a week of bed rest.

If you want an AD&D pirate to have an eye patch, you have to add a narrative layer over the top of the mechanics of the combat system. The same is true in 4e, except (as I pointed out) it options for the mechanical consequences of reducing a monster/NPC to 0 ph make this task easier - all the player has to do, when dropping a foe to 0 hp, is declare "I slash across his face, blinding him as he falls unconscious".

 

[ProfessorCirno]

Healing surges grant a set portion of your HP.

Incorrect.

Healing Surges are used for a lot of things outside of pure damage.

For starters, different healing effects cure you for different amounts. While your healing surge has a set number, the healing effects add to that. Just using a second wind gives you your healing surge. A cleric using a healing spell gives you that and more. A shaman using their healing spell might give you a different amount. And some classes like the Artificer can move healing surges from one person to another.

That's just for healing. Certain effects that drain life can also expend healing surges. In the 4e game I'm in now, my psion has a staff which can drain the life from my allies and give me power points in return - two power points (one encounter power) for draining one healing surge.

Failing a skill challenge or going through harsh environment or other situations also drain healing surges. Dark Sun especially notes this.

Lastly, and this is important, healing surges cannot be healed. With HP, it's infinite, so long as you have healing. Wand of Lesser Vigor or a Wand of Cure Wounds means you will literally never run out of HP unless you die. HP in previous editions is entirely binary - you either have it or you don't. HP in 3.x is even more binary - you either lose all of it in a fight, or you most likely gain all of it back.

Once again, you very clearly have little to no experience with the mechanic you are discussing. As I said before - when I talk about 3e, I do so with years of experience on dealing with the issues. When so many people talk about 4e, it's with something they heard about that was in a book they think.

 

[pemerton]

So have I got the function of surges understood or not? If not then tell me how it is NOT possible to calculate the total HP expendable by a character per day.

The number of surges a PC has is a rough guide to the maximum number of hit points that PC can loose in a day. It is only a rough guide because there are a range of mechanics that permit healing in addition to, or in stead of, surge expenditure (eg the bonus to Inspiring/Healing Word, a paladin's Lay on Hands etc).

The number of surges is an even roughter guide to the actual number of hp a PC can lose in a day - because a PC who loses current hp, plus half max hp, is dead regardless of surges remaining. Likewise, a PC who failes 3 death saves is dead, regardless of surges remaining.

Like I said upthread, the function of surges is to introduce a dynamic into combat whereby PCs can be on the ropes in a given combat, yet still win, and be in a position to fight more combats in which they also will find themselves on the ropes. This, in turn, introduces further tactical dynamics into each combat, because when the PCs are on the ropes the tactical options are much richer than simply "hit harder" (because of the movement rules, the action economy, etc).

The least interesting aspect of healing surges is that they all come back after an extended rest. If you changed this in your game - and you've just posted that you like to houserule D&D - perhaps to 1 HS recovered per rest - it would have almost no impact on the way 4e combats play out. It would have an effect on adventure pacing, but presumably this an effect you and your players would be wanting to experience, if you adopted such a rule.

I believe that LostSoul is using a rule something like the above in his 4e sandbox.