Why the Encounter Powers hate? (Maneuvers = Encounter)

[BASHMAN]

As long as it stays an OPTION, I'm cool with them having some Bo9S style maneuvers. Let somebody choose to be a straight and simple fighter with sword specialization if they want to, though, too.

And don't make this a "you are an IDIOT for not choosing the maneuvers because they are so much BETTER than everything else" kind of choice either. Make them both be useful, just in different ways.

I see the typical fighter as a specialist in a certain weapon (actually picking up multiple specializations as time goes on). He gets consistantly better hit / damage with that weapon than anybody else of his level.

I see the Bo9S style fighter as a wuxia character with some tricks up his sleeve. He knows some flashy maneuvers, but his hit/damage are not quite as good as the typical fighter mentioned above. But some of those tricks he has are really useful, like being able to jump as a free action as part of the attack, getting to parry attacks instead of relying on AC alone, or being able to bypass certain special defenses.

 

[Drowbane]

I haven't (yet) read the entire thread, so if this has already been said... excuse me.

Maneuvers (Bo9S) are not "encounter" abilities. Each of the three classes has a method of regaining their Maneuvers. Warblades can regain their entire suite in a round. Crusader's cycle through their maneuvers randomly. Swordsages get boned, but can recover like Warblades with a feat slot (never heard of a SS without Adaptive Style).

In short: Maneuvers =/= Encounters.

 

[erleni]

I agree with Drowbane. BotNS maneuvers are not really encounters. I played a Swordsage and would have never thought of doing that without Adaptive Style. (Actually it was a Swordsage/Master of The Nine/Bloodclaw Master with an impressive array of maneuvers).

Anyway I think that BotNS has been the best D&D supplement ever. The Warblade was what the fighter should have been from the beginning (there was nothing really "magic" about it) and the Swordsage the best "gish" around. I liked the Crusader too and preferred it to the Paladin, except for the recharge mechanic that was quite awkward.

The maneuver selection was also better than in 4e. In 4e you can select any power of your level or lower, while in BotNS you need to have some prerequisites (usually a certain number of powers of the same school) that lead to more coherent characters.
if they do something similar for the warrior classes I'll probably be in for D&DN.

 

[Zaphling]

I haven't (yet) read the entire thread, so if this has already been said... excuse me.

Maneuvers (Bo9S) are not "encounter" abilities. Each of the three classes has a method of regaining their Maneuvers. Warblades can regain their entire suite in a round. Crusader's cycle through their maneuvers randomly. Swordsages get boned, but can recover like Warblades with a feat slot (never heard of a SS without Adaptive Style).

In short: Maneuvers =/= Encounters.

I would not say that 'Encounter =/= Maneuvers'

Maybe, 'Encounters : Maneuvers'

':' stands for similar

 

[Zustiur]

See my rationale on page 2. If you take Encounter and Daily powers to represent player agency to declare when the combination of skill and environment makes it possible to do the action, then I think it holds up pretty well.

I'll concede that point, but simply add that I don't personally like that explanation.

As Pemerton pointed out, I typically think in a "every player decision should correspond to a PC decision" kind of way. If I'm playing, I try to think like my character and immerse myself in the world. If I'm DMing I expect to sit at a higher level and tell the world what to do. Having the 'tell the world what to do' moments as a player is off-putting (for me).

 

[bert1000]

I'll concede that point, but simply add that I don't personally like that explanation.

As Pemerton pointed out, I typically think in a "every player decision should correspond to a PC decision" kind of way. If I'm playing, I try to think like my character and immerse myself in the world. If I'm DMing I expect to sit at a higher level and tell the world what to do. Having the 'tell the world what to do' moments as a player is off-putting (for me).

Cool, I understand and respect that position. Thanks for having a rational discussion and helping get to the real meat behind the different perspectives.

I do believe that this is the main difference in preference.

#1 perspective: If you are ok with player agency and player decisions that don't correspond to character decisions then you tend to find 4e style martial encounter/daily powers actually quite helpful in supporting your in-game fiction and roleplaying (by making sure certain genre supporting things happen).

# 2 perspective: If this game technique is too disconnected for you, then it takes you out of the in-game fiction and roleplaying.

It will be interesting to see how 5e deals with these two pretty different perspectives on RPGs.

 

[Herschel]

It's great as an option, but the mechanics don't lend themselves to all styles of play or campaign settings. Why would a thug with a big sword have spell-like powers?

Edit: Or are you meaning, have them as an option for certain classes? As I say, they make a great option with a good reason behind them.

It's not a "spell-like power", it's a combo move or trick that an enemy would recognize after seeing it because it's distinctive. It's like tells in a poker game or football. A guy may bluff you once, but if you pay attention and he gives away he's bluffing you won't get fooled by it twice.

 

[Herschel]

I know I'm opening a can of worms here, but I've heard that explanation before, but the mechanics of encounters powers don't really support it. Your ability to use a clever trick on opponent has nothing to do with when you're able to take a rest. In theory, you should be able to use that ability as many times as you like, it just may not work a second time against any opponent who saw you.

The "rest" is just the re-set point where you take a breather, bind any wounds, grab a bite/drink, etc. Generally, any enemy who sees your combo move isn't going to have a chance to see it again because it's dead. If enemies come in waves, tracking who has seen what is a biznitch so it just simplifies it, as does assuming enemies with levels are actually bright enough to learn because they've actually lived a while.

 

[CleverNickName]

Edition has nothing to do with it.

I read the Tome of Battle: Book of Nine Swords again (this is a 3.5 book, mind you).

(snip)

I don't hate 3.5. I still play it. although most of my games are 4e.
But i think that the maneuvers or encounter powers should go to the warrior classes like in the Book of Nine Swords. They were intended for warriors only.

I know that "powers" is one of those 4E buzzwords that immediately gets everyones' cockles up...like "roles" or "surges." And I know that a lot of the discussions about them are actually thinly-veiled edition wars.

Not everyone who played 3.5E likes the idea of encounter powers and maneuvers, though. For some of us, it is not a "3E vs. 4E" thing. It's a "classic" vs. "new" thing.

See, it doesn't matter to me what edition the idea was first released in...I didn't care for it then, I didn't like it in 4E, and I'm not happy about the possibility of it showing up in D&DNext. It's not because I hate everything 4E; I just don't like comic book superhero-style combat. It's a matter of preference, that's all.

 

[Agamon]

It's not a "spell-like power", it's a combo move or trick that an enemy would recognize after seeing it because it's distinctive. It's like tells in a poker game or football. A guy may bluff you once, but if you pay attention and he gives away he's bluffing you won't get fooled by it twice.

As a poker player, I have to tell you this is not a good metaphor. Bluffing is not that easy to pick off. Levelling and false tells make poker a much deeper game than that.

A poor fighter might give away his intentions, a good one shouldn't be so easy to read.

Also, I'm not talking about 4e powers, I'm replying to the OP's post about Bo9S:

the three classes presented here (crusader, swordsage, and warblade), referred as maneuver adepts, use a "spell-like" combat system called 'maneuvers', aka 'blade magic'.