Who is more bothered by the whole per-encoutner thing?

[Gargoyle]

Per encounter abilities primarly help the DM, not the players.

As a DM I like per encounter abilities because it helps me create balanced encounters. When I run a super heroes game or some other game where they have powers usable at will I know how tough they are going to be and don't have to figure out whether they will need to be rested to avoid setting up a pushover encounter in the morning followed by a TPK in the afternoon. It will also be nice to be able to create timed adventures, or at least adventures with some sense of pacing and not have to worry about them resting after each tough fight.

A mix of at will, per encounter, and per day should work nicely and I look forward to it.

 

[Jackelope King]

I mostly DM, but my last two D&D characters were a warlock and a binder, and I love the per-encounter system.

 

[Delta]

I mostly DM, and I don't like per-encounter.

 

[Wombat]

I don't fit your categories.

What bothers me is that it feels to game-centered, rather than world-centered.

Let me explain: having "per encounter" abilities means that every character and/or monster will have powers that only come into play when they actually meet some opponent and do combat. These powers do not come back after a day-cycle, after sleeping, after studying, after eating a magic cookie or anything else -- they are simply a "refresh" with each combat. Thus they cater to the rules and the action rather than any "real world mechanics".

Ultimately they seem ridiculously artificial.

 

[jasin]

What bothers me is that it feels to game-centered, rather than world-centered.

Let me explain: having "per encounter" abilities means that every character and/or monster will have powers that only come into play when they actually meet some opponent and do combat. These powers do not come back after a day-cycle, after sleeping, after studying, after eating a magic cookie or anything else -- they are simply a "refresh" with each combat. Thus they cater to the rules and the action rather than any "real world mechanics".

Ultimately they seem ridiculously artificial.

If you imagine them as ridiculous, they seem ridiculous.

But I see nothing inherently ridiculous in having being able to shoot a magical bolt of fire, and then not being able to shoot a magical bolt of fire until you take 30 seconds to refocus/meditate/relax/realign you chi flow/whatever you want to call it.

At least no more ridiculous than being able to shoot a magical bolt of fire in the first place.

 

[Mallus]

Ultimately they seem ridiculously artificial.

Both per-day and per-encounter refresh schemes are artificial. Whether one is more so than the other is a matter of personal preference. Neither are about simulating or modeling anything in a fictional world, they are just different methods used to make a 'gameable' magic system.

There's nothing inherently more realistic about needing a full nights sleep to recover the power to blast a mountain to flinders, then say, a short sit down and perhaps a nice cup of tea. The awesomely restorative power of eight hours of sleep is a just a D&D-ism.

 

[BryonD]

Per encounter abilities primarly help the DM, not the players.

As a DM I like per encounter abilities because it helps me create balanced encounters. When I run a super heroes game or some other game where they have powers usable at will I know how tough they are going to be and don't have to figure out whether they will need to be rested to avoid setting up a pushover encounter in the morning followed by a TPK in the afternoon. It will also be nice to be able to create timed adventures, or at least adventures with some sense of pacing and not have to worry about them resting after each tough fight.

A mix of at will, per encounter, and per day should work nicely and I look forward to it.

I mostly agree. But with some reservations.
I like to balance against a series of encounters, rather than one by one.

So expecting the players to stay on their toes and consider their options as to whether or not a specific encounter is worth using an abiltity is an important part of the fun. Obviously a per encounter approach takes away from this. However, we know that per-day is still in play. So until shown otherwise I'll remain optimistic that I'll get the best of both worlds.

 

[solkan_uk]

After last session (1st ed actually) where we went down a corridor, triggered a trap and then had to retreat back the surface to rest (literally about 10 minutes IC & OOC) I'm all for per-encounter abilities.
And I mostly play non-spellcasters, but only due to a disatisfaction with the magic system, particularly at low level (which we usually play at).

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

it feels to game-centered, rather than world-centered.

...

Ultimately they seem ridiculously artificial.

Only if you haven't followed any WotC per-encounter rules systems.

In both the Bo9S and Star Wars Saga, "Per Encounter" means "Regain all such resources after 1 minute of rest / meditation."

"Per Encounter" is just a useful shorthand.

 

[Greg K]

Only if you haven't followed any WotC per-encounter rules systems.

In both the Bo9S and Star Wars Saga, "Per Encounter" means "Regain all such resources after 1 minute of rest / meditation."

"Per Encounter" is just a useful shorthand.

Still doesn't make it any more palatable in my opinon.