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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="KidSnide" data-source="post: 5751833" data-attributes="member: 54710">This is a good point, but I think there is some design space between asking every GM to interpret the fiction from scratch and providing advanced rules hooks to the fiction.One of the things that 4e moved away from is situational bonuses and penalties.  I think that's a good thing on balance, if just to avoid the rangers who's favored enemy bonuses were useless or overpowered, depending on the match between character and adventure.  (And worse, the poor rogues facing an adventure full of constructs and the undead...)That having been said, I think there is room on a power-by-power basis (instead of a class-by-class basis), to create powers that are more or less effective depending on the situation, opponent and terrain.  I understand that rogues are the primary consumers of combat advantage, but shouldn't most melee classes have some powers that are more effective when used against a target granting CA?  I wouldn't want a Call Lightning power that requires an open sky and a convenient rainstorm, but I think there is room for a primal lightning power that provides a significant bonus if used - say - outside in a rainstorm.  Practically any specialist in a particular form of elemental magic could/should get some powers that work especially well if the caster is surrounded by the appropriate energy or terrain.You could also imagine giving many martial powers (and, presumably, a minority of powers from other sources) the "precision" or "brutal" keyword.  This would allow monsters designers to build in resistances and vulnerabilities to these types of powers.  For example, skeletons or zombies might have a resistance to precision damage and a vulnerability to brutal damage.  Small flying targets might have a defense bonus against brutal and a defense penalty against precision.You could also have monsters with explicit vulnerabilities in the stat block for the PCs to figure out, like a giant golem with a vulnerable crystal in its chest.  Such a monster could have a +2 (or +5) bonus to all defenses until the PCs figure out the vulnerability and say that they are aiming for it.  (Presumably, a monster manual entry would provide a list of possible vulnerabilities, so the players would have to figure out what it was on this particular creature...)Another way to get the PCs to think about the in-game fiction would be to add a guideline that characters who make "good use of terrain" and succeed at a easy or moderate athletics/acrobatics check could gain combat advantage or some other bonus.Obviously, adding everything mentioned in this thread would create a hopeless mash of complexity.  The point posited here is that there are ways to increase the relevance of the in-game fiction within the existing powers structure.-KS</blockquote>

Verification