Why all the ritual hate?

[Nightson]

When I am looking to assign my players treasure, I look at the part of the DMG that tells me what treasure to give out, and it says "here are some treasure parcels," and I give those out.

I could add books, scrolls, and components to the list. That is me going above and beyond the RAW, where I am told, as a DM, to assign treasure based on the parcels.

At the very least, the casual suggestion in the PHB doesn't match the actual text of the DMG -- the actual rules of the game.

You are honestly suggesting that replacing gold in a parcel with ritual components is a houserule? I think I've figured out why rituals don't work for you at all.

 

[I'm A Banana]

It's extra effort and extra prep time that I ain't got.

Which, yeah, I don't want to have to spend extra effort to get to something I want in a game. Most people don't. Part of why rituals are under-used. Most people don't want to spend extra effort to use them in the game.

 

[GSHamster]

basically, make a skill check, do the ritual much faster, and in theory be able to take a couple rounds and even do them in combat (though this wouldn't be useful most of the time) - it gives a lot more options.

This seems to defeat the purpose of rituals, in my opinion. As I recall, rituals were introduced in order to allow magic to accomplish many varied goals, while not overshadowing the abilities of other characters. The trade-off is that magic can do a lot, but does it slowly.

If you agree with that concept, it's probably better to not add a back-door through which ritual magic can be used in combat.

If you don't agree with that concept, it might be better to just skip rituals all together and convert them into regular spells.

Adding an extra layer of complexity just doesn't seem worth it to me, regardless of which side of the issue you fall on.

 

[AllisterH]

That's my main problem with any "suggestions/fixes" to the ritual system.

I *LIKE* the fact that the default response to situations is the skill system and not magic.

 

[MrGrenadine]

That's my main problem with any "suggestions/fixes" to the ritual system.

I *LIKE* the fact that the default response to situations is the skill system and not magic.

My problem with rituals is that the ones that are most useful to me are the ones that can't be satisfied with a skill check, and don't step on any other class' role...and they still take way too long to cast in any situation where they might be needed.

For instance, one of our party scouted ahead and was waylaid in a room that was filled with water. My cleric had Water Walk, which would have been really useful in catching up to the water creatures who were dragging our compadre away, but he would've been cut to ribbons in the ten minutes it takes to cast it.

So we jumped in, got wet, struggled, floundered, and eventually had to raise him anyway.


I can see some rituals, like Knock, taking a while to cast MOST of the time, to discourage making another character's skills moot, but there should be a way to cast a ritual quickly when in dire straits. I know I'd use rituals way more often if that was the case.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Just think about the knock ritual this way: How time and money expensive is it use an exposive on the door to get it open and how much effort it costs.

Yes, 10 mins are long, but not too long in an adventuring day. Something has to consume time. Combat doesn´t. I liked the abstarction of ADnD where a round is one minute, it allows for reinforcements. Rituals and 5 min breaks allow it in 4e. 3rd edition is terrible in this regard. Having sent for reinforcments is a waste of time as everyone has been slaughtered beforehand.

So as i believe rituals do take a bit too long to perform, its not so bad actually. Also 35 gold as components is not too much. A wizard however needs some means to make use of rituals easier. Hey, he is the wizard, he should know.

@kamikaze midget: Rituals are fine from the book. It just doesn´t do what you want them to do. Your ideas of mix them with skill challenges is a good idea however. I don´t believe they are meant for regular use. Just for situations where it can make life more convenient. The DM is in responibility to have it have an affect in your game. As always.

@MrGrenadine: agreed... water walk and feather fall are rituals which need an instant cast. (i know feather fall is a utility, but it realy should not be)

 

[LostSoul]

I think it's an adventure design question.

Are the spaces between encounters meaningful? If so, rituals become important.

 

[GSHamster]

Well, Water Walk and Feather Fall generally negate Swimming and Climbing respectively.

There's no drama in scrabbling down a cliffside while being shot at by goblin archers if you can just Feather Fall your way down.

 

[awesomeocalypse]

[quteo]Rituals need to have an affect on the game. This is a philosophical change more than anything. 4e's main way of doing anything is via encounters (mostly combat encounters) and rituals are inherently isolated from encounters, so you don't ever need to use a ritual for anything, so anything you invest in a ritual is pointless unless your DM makes a special exception just for you. This is a deep divide that affects the structure of the game, the number of assumed combats, the nature of XP, even the powers system itself.[/quote]

This.

4e is built around the encounter, and by design very little of true importance to the game takes place outside of encounters, because in encounters every character gets to contribute. If something is genuinely important to the party as a whole, the 4e philosophy is that it should be handled in a balanced encounter that everyone can contribute to. If it isn't important to the party as a whole, then it should not be especially important to the game.

Rituals are, by rigid design, completely dissociated from encounters, which makes them seem fairly incidental to the game overall. They are never necessary to accomplishing anything, except when the DM specifically tailors a use for them.

To be honest, I'm not really sure what the fix is here.

 

[SkidAce]

4e is built around the encounter, and by design very little of true importance to the game takes place outside of encounters...

I don't agree with that that statement. Built around the encounter...sure. "very little of true importance" outside of encounters. Nope. They can't even get TO an encounter without talking or something to get their adventure started. Encounters do not occur in a vaccum.

If you are saying we have to have a framework of combat or skill challanges (i.e. encounters) in order to have anything important happen, then our gaming styles and philosophy are widely divergent.

Just my opinion...no insult intended.