Why Shouldn't I Ban "Come and Get It"?

[ForbidenMaster]

So ... it's the fighter being really obnoxious?

The fluff makes it look like a goad to me, but really its whatever you want.

 

[Mortellan]

You actually do need one piece of ammunition or light thrown weapon for each enemy as per page 270.

As for "come and get it" its a goad. You're telling me it doesnt make sense for someone who is concentrating on defending other PCs in his party to goad the people arround him into attacking him and not other PCs?

I think the OP means goads are fine but its illogical to use in every situation without save. It reduces BBEG's to the same mentality as minions.

 

[hong]

I think the OP means goads are fine but its illogical to use in every situation without save. It reduces BBEG's to the same mentality as minions.

There is no point to using Come And Get It on a BBEG. You can just move over and smack him with an attack that does more damage. The reason for using CAGI is to clear a big mob of minions, who _should_ be the ones most susceptible to taunting.

 

[Fenes]

Is it used on PCs as well?

 

[Danceofmasks]

What if they have tail strike or some other ability that you can circumvent by making them come to you?

 

[brehobit]

Is it used on PCs as well?

This is one of the key questions. What happens if an NPC uses it on the PCs? How do you describe it?

Ick.

Mark

 

[ForbidenMaster]

What if they have tail strike or some other ability that you can circumvent by making them come to you?

I cant think of a situation where that is possible. Can you please demonstrate.

 

[Danceofmasks]

Err ... dumb example, but ancient red dragon?
Move into a flank (for 2 other party members) and smack ... but set up a flank then pulling the dragon into it?

edit: oops, put a sentence in wrong place. should be:
Move into a flank and smack ... but set up a flank (for 2 other party members) then pulling the dragon into it?

 

[Dave Turner]

Maybe you just need to change your narrative focus. In the case of Exploits, it's sometimes better to assume that the cause of the effect is not the person initiating it.

This is counterintuitive, since many Powers in 4e are easily assumed to be grounded in the character. The character is considered the source of the effect. For Come and Get It, you flip that assumption. When the Fighter invokes the Exploit, you, the DM, come up with a reason why the monsters would decide to attack the fighter. It's not something the fighter actively does, like a taunt, but a change in the battlefield that the monsters initiate. The most obvious example would be for one of the monsters to say something like "This one is weak! Move in to finish him, my brothers!". If they're non-verbal monsters, then they just make the decision to attack the fighter for their own inscrutable reasons. It's nothing that the fighter does, per se, but a monster-based decision.

In other words, the Fighter's player uses the Exploit, but the in-game rationale is that the monsters choose that particular moment to make a terrible tactical decision to focus on the fighter. If the character was describing the battle after the fact, he might wonder aloud what made the monsters choose such a tactical blunder:

"Yeah, they had us on the ropes, but then one of them thought it would be a better idea to focus on me. Can't imagine what they saw, but battle's a tricky thing. Can't say they lived to regret it."

 

[hong]

This is one of the key questions. What happens if an NPC uses it on the PCs? How do you describe it?

You describe it by not using it on PCs. This does not rule out PCs using it on NPCs, because the entire philosophy of 4E is that PCs and NPCs play by different rules.