Fighter Power: Come and Get it

34 posts / 0 new
Last post
I have to say, I just don't get it.

I understand its mechanics, but not how it makes any sense what-so-ever.

Basically you "taunt" enemies within a burst 3 of you to come in and fight, forcing them to move 2 squares and end adjacent to you. Then you get to attack.

Great. What if those enemies are a bunch of ranged attackers or soft easily killable magic-users?

Why the hell would any of those types just drop what they are doing and rush towards you? Especially if they are intelligent opponents?

If anything, if you used that power on magic-users they would *shift away* from you.

It is my opinion that this power either needs to be removed, or receive immediate errata to have the burst effect to have a strength vs. will (intimidate effect to *convince* or *trick* enemies to approach). The automatic shifting makes no sense.

what have others done about this?
Logical? No it's not. But as I said when addressing this very question in other forums (and using a real-world combat example of it), when battle begins logic has a tendency to fly out the window. The power forces the Fighter's nearby opponents to abandon reason in an effort to 'teach the braggart a lesson.' It is as simple as that. The real world is full of examples of this happening, and cinema is even more full of it. Particularly in martial arts movies.

Working as intended.
To err is human. To fail a Fear save is unforgivable! IMAGE(http://statcdn.worldoftanks.com/comcom_v2/uploads/signatures/wotuserbar04.jpg)
Just use your imagnation and come up with something. Can't be that hard.

You create a false opening to lure them in. The invitation is just that hard to resist.

You fake a charge attack. The soft easily killable magic-user thought that you were going to circle around and flank him so he decided to run "this way" toward you, straight into your blade.

"As planned." You have been setting this attack up ever since the battle began with series of attacks, guiding the easily killable magic-user with your massive hammer toward their doom, and it's finally the pay day. The confused and scared easily killable magic-user fell into your trap and took a single wrong step - BANG! A hammer right in his head.

Etc etc.
I know this doesn't fit the classic definition of martial powers, but my dwarf fighter gets his exploits from Maradin. Sorta like a Martial Paladin. I have no trouble with Maradin forcing his enemies to his mighty hammer.

Explained for me. lol
Oh, come on... of course even the "softies" and "casters" would advance! There's like 6 of them and only one "puny [insert race here] with an [insert weapon here]" that is irritating them to no end...

Of course, that only works as an explanation if you give your fighter character enough credit to issue a threat/challenge in a way that works against intelligent enemies...

Anything from insulting something's mother, to feigning weakness, or exploiting the emotional instability of angry/crazy people is a great explanation too.

It isn't just the fighter says "come over here cuz I wanna kill you" and everything listens... it's that amazing spider-man style battle banter that makes the enemy mad/crazy/irritated/confident enough that they think they can take the fighter down.

Note: not all "intelligent creatures" respond to a free opportunity to surround an opponent by thinking "it's a trap, I'd better stay away from him." and the definition of arrogant (which is a great thing for bad guys to be in my opinion) shows us that "He thinks he can take me and all my friends at once? Let's tear him apart!" is just as likely.

ATTENTION:  If while reading my post you find yourself thinking "Either this guy is being sarcastic, or he is an idiot," do please assume that I am an idiot. It makes reading your replies more entertaining. If, however, you find yourself hoping that I am not being even remotely serious then you are very likely correct as I find irreverence and being ridiculous to be relaxing.

Attacking all at once has been a hinge-pin of successful confrontation throughout the entire history of life.

It's a good idea usually. Once per encounter, the Fighter is ready for it.
I'm sorry, but all of the suggestions still don't make any sense.

*yes* they make sense if the fighter is surrounded by a bunch of thugs who think they have him beat because of numbers, but what about being surrounded by highly intelligent wizards?

If three wizards had a fighter surrounded would they get close? No way. They would stand a couple paces away then zap him to death.

What if those surrounding the fighter were unarmed? More than likely they'd all just run away rather than get run through.

Consider this:

A perfectly healthy fighter in plate mail is surrounded by three bloodied wizards. He uses come and get it. Now, do they jump in..no! That's suicidal! They all run away! The fighter wins!

The power as written is completely nonsensical.

The fact of the matter is, the intelligence of the opponents needs to be considered. The power *NEEDS* the fighter to best the will of the ones he calls in.
Stated before, and stated again. Logic and 'smartiness' can and often does fly right out the window/door/airhole when the blood gets flowing. Those highly intelligent but bloodied wizards might well think each one is going to step in and burn down the offending fighter from right up close and personal. So they can see the look of suffering on his face as he dies. You can come up with dozens if not hundreds of psychological reasons for them to react the way the power indicates.

I'm not saying that a saving throw of some form would be completely out of the question. I am saying that the power as it stands does fine.
To err is human. To fail a Fear save is unforgivable! IMAGE(http://statcdn.worldoftanks.com/comcom_v2/uploads/signatures/wotuserbar04.jpg)
I think the problem here is that using this ability forces the DM to abandon the strategy the enemy was planning to use and giving the control - momentarily - to the PC. Even though the game is not DM vs. the players, and we don't play to "win", roleplaying (and especially 4e) is an exercise in logic and strategy, and Come and Get It does force some weird situations.

4e is introducing (or at least expanding on) a new paradigm for combat, where the DM and the players work together to provide the fluff that results in the result dictated by the rules. This can lead to highly entertaining, visual, cinematic action, but it does take a leap away from personal strategy and towards mutual storytelling.

I know our DM loves this and I'm encouraged to explain some of my fighter's exploits as the enemy making mistakes or exposing vulnerabilities - and this has traditionally been the DM's job and domain. The difficulty is, of course, when the DM would like for an NPC enemy to have a certain image or strategy, the players might take too many liberties in describing their actions.

With a flexible DM, there's no issue, but I can see why some DM's dislike situations where they're forced to come up with unlikely explanations for unusual situations, prompted by the players.
I thought the same thing... but hey its a game... and it works the way they intended... that's the important part.

Edition wars kill players,Dungeons and Dragons needs every player it can get.

I'm not saying that a saving throw of some form would be completely out of the question. I am saying that the power as it stands does fine.

The power requires at times that your opponents, of considerable ability by the way, behave like absolute fools and contrary to everything they have learned and believe. It also requires you to somehow believe such a thing is other than the obvious nonsense it seems.
Please explain just how this is "fine".
With a little imagination this is easily justifiable. Just like many members explained right now, with proper examples.
If you don't like their examples, just change them to better suit your needs. I find absolutely no flaws in the reasonment: if a wizard (especially an evil one) is highly intelligent, he's likely to be very arrogant (so he'll underestimate the fighter) or very proud (so he'll take the taunts very seriously).
In my games it is likely that a raging wizard will charge his enemy with bolts all around his right arm, just to scorch him bad and give him a lesson. No, this is not logic but... You know, he's raging. I haven't seen someone in anger acting like a stone-cold assassin for a veeeery loooong time.
This is even more justified if the wizards are more than one or they have some big ally.
You know, they are characters, they are supposed to feel real. Saying "Naah, it's a wizard, he should be acting totally different" is just meta-gaming at its worse.
You could argue this behaviour for coward characters and enemies: they are not likely to jump on the big fighter that is taunting them.
But then again, it's an encounter power. This means that your coward enemies won't be charging on your fighter all the day long, it's just that even coward people can be seriously outraged once in a while.

It's simple to find a role-playing justification even for the worst case scenario: a wizard, alone, coward, against a single fighter.
"Y-y-you will s-s-suffer for all this, you f-fool!"
"C-c-come and say it here, mommie's baby." <-- Fighter's taunt, that jokes about the way the Wizard's talking, thus angering him even more.
"I'll kill you now!" *charges*

I think that someone is just imposing limits to their own fantasy because they like to whine even about things that are just ok the way they are.
Uh, how about this explanation, its a damn game, don't think on it to hard.
I agree with the person who created this post, no matter how you plan your opponent to be lured in, your opponent could be intelligent enough to see 5 or 6 moves ahead. The point is, there should be at least somekind of a die roll vs will, nothing is automatic. Look at the point I made in my thread regarding the warlord's "commander's strike" at-will power. Warlord cannot force an ally to attack, it remains a choice. Freedom of choice should be respected.
The enemies do have a choice. They have a choice as to how they start to glam on to you, if possible.

Regardless, it depends on how exploits are done in your world that determines a lot of the flavor of it.

In FR, for example, exploits -are- magical, altho not flashily so, and therefore, your enemies are affected magically by it.

In Eberron, luring a bunch of enemies to pile on to you is very fitting the pulp nature of the setting, so it'd be hard NOT to let it happen as is.
I have to say, I just don't get it.

I understand its mechanics, but not how it makes any sense what-so-ever.

Basically you "taunt" enemies within a burst 3 of you to come in and fight, forcing them to move 2 squares and end adjacent to you. Then you get to attack.

Great. What if those enemies are a bunch of ranged attackers or soft easily killable magic-users?

Why the hell would any of those types just drop what they are doing and rush towards you? Especially if they are intelligent opponents?

My fighter has a bow, a shield, a double-move option, and other party members. We're great at what we do, we're not overlords of power.

But when I say great, I really do mean my level one fighter crit on a comeback strike, strung up 25 damage off a halberd and healed himself seven. Go ahead, wizards - have fun trying that out.
Okay, so if it's only when "highly intelligent" wizards get pulled in by this power that it becomes a problem for you...

I ask this: What are all those wizards doing 3 squares from the fighter at the same in the first place?

You don't "casters" and "Ranged softies" getting pulled in by this type of power... keep them at least 6 squares away from the fighter as long as they can manage.

ATTENTION:  If while reading my post you find yourself thinking "Either this guy is being sarcastic, or he is an idiot," do please assume that I am an idiot. It makes reading your replies more entertaining. If, however, you find yourself hoping that I am not being even remotely serious then you are very likely correct as I find irreverence and being ridiculous to be relaxing.

[deleted]
D&D rules were never meant to exist without the presence of a DM. RAW is a lie.
While I see the point of the OP, and I could easily come up with reasons of my own to side with that view, I disagree for a few reasons. My reasons follow and maybe they will help make the game more fun for those who dislike this power as written.

But first, snippets of two conversations I've had regarding high intelligence.

When the movie "Signs" came out, a friend of mine went off on a tirade about how ridiculous the movie was, and how it was completely unrealistic. Were aliens unreal? Was the faith in a Supreme Being unreal? No. His complaint was that "no hyper intelligent being would come to a planet like Earth if they reacted to water like that." His complaint was that the aliens in the film weren't written to act smart enough because they were intentionally placing themselves near a harmful substance or in harms way. I asked him if he felt that he was more intelligent than most people. In fact, he did. He was much smarter than most people, in his estimation. So I asked him, "Then why are you smoking that cigarette?"

The second conversation was this morning, with my 10 year old daughter. It went like this:

"Let me ask you something. If someone was really, really, smart. Smarter than most people, does that mean they are always in control of their emotions?" She said no.

"Does it mean that they never, ever, make mistakes?" Again, she said no.

"Does it mean that they never make stupid mistakes?" Again, a no.

"So, you think that even really smart people, exceptionally smart people, can make stupid mistakes when their emotions are out of control, like when they're angry?"

She said, "Of course, Dad."

That said, let's look at Come and Get it again.

By checking the DDi Compendium (it works!), I notice first that this is a 7th level Encounter Power for Fighters. That means that the fighter using this power is experienced in combat. She knows her stuff. She's been in a few battles, to say the least, and knows how to posture, move and talk to give whatever impression she wants regarding her fighting style and capabilities. So, let's keep in mind that we're talking about a well developed combatant, and not someone green.

It's a Close burst 3. That means that the targets in question are already within 3 squares of the fighter. Since this is a Standard action, they were either already that close at the start of the fighter's turn or the fighter moved first, but didn't get close enough to engage them (intentionally or not...let's remember the battle posturing.) If they were already close enough, the argument that they would just go farther away falls apart. They were confident enough to remain that close to the fighter in the first place, where she was within striking range. So, smart or not, they didn't perceive her as so great a threat that they had to be far away. If she moved first, that means she didn't get close enough to attack them, and she seems a bit reckless or incapable because she's charging ineffectively, or holding back.

The fighter taunts. She says something boastful, or mean, or insulting, or otherwise intended to get people emotionally entangled in the fight with her, rather than thinking straight. That's the goal of a taunt. To get your opponent to stop thinking, even momentarily. So, the opponents now see either someone who wasn't a big threat in the first place, or someone who couldn't gauge distances well (charge without contact), taunting them as if they were big and bad. It very well may look like simple arrogance on the part of the fighter. She's apparently making up for her lack of skill in combat with simple posturing and verbal banter. And she's annoying you. Getting rid of her now, quickly, would shut her up. And nothing is quite so satisfying as beating the wannabe at her own game...melee. Go smack her down.

Or, fancy this. The fighter taunts after already engaging you in combat. You're the bloodied wizard in a group of three. Your two compatriots are bloodied, too. You're trying to get away when the fighter in question starts calling you cowards and that wizards can't hold their own in combat, and when you turn, in desperation and anger and see that not only is she close, but that she seems hurt or weakened, or out of breath, herself (7th level fighter...experienced posturing), you figure you and your friends can take her together, and try to take her out. After all, she's right there, within striking range. She would have just killed you if she could.

Then, she suddenly strikes you and maybe a couple of your friends with what is technically a basic melee attack each. (Str vs. AC, 1[W]+Str mod) Well, forget that. You're not gonna fall for that again. But then, it's only an Encounter Power. Maybe that's why the fighter can only pull it off once per Encounter.

None of this requires any bit of extra fluff. It's just the way the rules are. She's a 7th level fighter or she wouldn't get the power. The Standard action type and the Close Burst 3 mean she can't attack you from where she's at, either intentionally or unintentionally, and the fact that it's a taunt means your emotions just overtook your intellect.

The downside: Even Wizards aren't as squishy as all that. They don't have just 4 HP anymore, they can take Second Winds like everyone else, and with a Staff of Defense, they get a second chance against an attack roll. And the targets of Come and Get It will act before the fighter gets her next turn. They either went before her in initiative or after her in initiative, but either way, their turn is next. One shift and they are all flanking her.

All that said, and it's a LOT, we're actually discussing realism in a setting with magical spells, monsters, elves and other nonsense. It is, in the end, a game.

If, however, none of this makes a difference for you, then fine. In your game, make the power Cha vs Will and have the effect read that each affected target moves into position and then you get a Basic Melee attack against each of them. Then the Wizards you are so absolutely certain would never make a tactical error will have a game mechanic to show that they might, indeed, make an error in judgment if a power says so.
People in this conversation are using 2 ideas interchangeably. This is normal, people do it all the time. It is the difference between Intelligence and Wisdom. An Intelligent person will lose their temper and not be able to control their emotions, but a Wise person is much more in control.

But, the OP is calling for a Will save. And Will is based off of Wisdom! And what do you know? Wizards also have high Wisdom scores generally. It is completely reasonable and justifiable to call for this alteration because the power doesn't make sense as written. For minions sure you can drop the save and say it is automatic. For monsters, maybe. But for a Wizard, a cleric? I somewhat doubt those that say its fine. Things should intrinsically make sense within the system and rules provided by the game, whether it involves magic, combat, or whatever. I just don't see an angry Wizard carrying a dagger moving toward a Fighter wearing big thick armor and bearing a shield and sword. No, the angry Wizard will not move in close, instead he will step back and BLAST him.

As for the previous poster that asked why a Wizard might be that close to the fighter... The flow of the fight might bring the fighter and Wizard close. Battle is unpredictable. Or the Wizard might have thought to aid an ally with a Thunderwave.

Yes it should require a check of some sort. As written, the power only makes sense with regards to minions. Should require an Intimidate check or Cha v will save.
There are some more difficult cases aside from cowardly wizards - how about invisible enemies or enemies that are already so wounded they just want to escape? The fighter might be totally immune to the attacks of some enemies, why would they decide to attack him?
The power requires at times that your opponents, of considerable ability by the way, behave like absolute fools and contrary to everything they have learned and believe. It also requires you to somehow believe such a thing is other than the obvious nonsense it seems.
Please explain just how this is "fine".

Because as much as you believe that you would never act rashly or foolishly in the chaos of a fight, I can guarantee you with the backing of thousands of years of real history that in the heat of the moment you can be goaded/tricked/fooled into doing things that anyone outside of that moment will consider you a blind idiot for. It's the psychology of battle, and logic plays only a tiny role within it. As difficult as it is to imagine, it is nonetheless true.
To err is human. To fail a Fear save is unforgivable! IMAGE(http://statcdn.worldoftanks.com/comcom_v2/uploads/signatures/wotuserbar04.jpg)
By checking the DDi Compendium (it works!), I notice first that this is a 7th level Encounter Power for Fighters. That means that the fighter using this power is experienced in combat. She knows her stuff. She's been in a few battles, to say the least, and knows how to posture, move and talk to give whatever impression she wants regarding her fighting style and capabilities. So, let's keep in mind that we're talking about a well developed combatant, and not someone green.

Problem one. What if you're up against *more experienced* opponents? Especially other fighters that know this trick already? Why would it automatically work on them?

It's a Close burst 3. That means that the targets in question are already within 3 squares of the fighter. Since this is a Standard action, they were either already that close at the start of the fighter's turn or the fighter moved first, but didn't get close enough to engage them (intentionally or not...let's remember the battle posturing.) If they were already close enough, the argument that they would just go farther away falls apart. They were confident enough to remain that close to the fighter in the first place, where she was within striking range.
Your argument fails here. What if the fighter was pursuing a fleeing opponent and got close enough on his turn to use this power? Why would the fleeing opponent suddenly turn around? What if the battle starts close and the ranged opponents didn't have time to back off yet? Why would they *always* abandon their tactics? (see below for why sometimes they would)

The fighter taunts. She says something boastful, or mean, or insulting, or otherwise intended to get people emotionally entangled in the fight with her, rather than thinking straight. That's the goal of a taunt. To get your opponent to stop thinking, even momentarily.

Exactly! Sounds like an attack against your will to me! I mean, my character class has a bonus to will defense and I took that iron will feat, and I have a huge wisdom so I can easily read people. Why would I just automatically fall for this taunt? Again, the key is *automatically.* I have no problem with the power, I have a problem that is *automatically* always works!

So, the opponents now see either someone who wasn't a big threat in the first place, or someone who couldn't gauge distances well (charge without contact), taunting them as if they were big and bad. It very well may look like simple arrogance on the part of the fighter. She's apparently making up for her lack of skill in combat with simple posturing and verbal banter. And she's annoying you. Getting rid of her now, quickly, would shut her up. And nothing is quite so satisfying as beating the wannabe at her own game...melee. Go smack her down.

But you're in a bathrobe holding a little twig and she is encased in armor with a giant axe. You don't even have a *way* to hurt her.


None of this requires any bit of extra fluff. It's just the way the rules are.

Which doesn't mean the rules are right. Remember how much had to be fixed between 3.0 and 3.5?

She's a 7th level fighter or she wouldn't get the power. The Standard action type and the Close Burst 3 mean she can't attack you from where she's at, either intentionally or unintentionally, and the fact that it's a taunt means your emotions just overtook your intellect.

But that's an attack against my will, where I invested tons of bonuses into being in control. Shouldn't I get a chance to see through the taunt?


Then the Wizards you are so absolutely certain would never make a tactical error will have a game mechanic to show that they might, indeed, make an error in judgment if a power says so.

That is an unfair assessment. I didn't say that they would *never* make a tactical error, but a supra-genius military tactician character should probably not *autofail* against taunts in combat.

This power needs attack vs. will.
I swirl my mighty sword in the air with such velocity that I create a mini-tornado that pulls enemies close to me.

or

I smash my hammer into the ground with such might that the earth quakes and nearby enemies fall towards me.
:D A couple of problems.

One, Wizards are no longer just dagger wielding weaklings in robes. They aren't Raistlin (sp?). They're Gandalf. They might wear robes, but there is nothing preventing a Wizard from carrying a longsword (or that staff I mentioned). You don't get a penalty for not being proficient any longer. These days you get a bonus for being proficient. In the end, the spread between proficient or non-proficient is roughly similar to what it used to be, but thematically, it's quite different. Wizards aren't limited to daggers, darts, and teeny tiny little sticks. People keep using the "Weak wizard with a pointy stick" excuse for not attacking.

But more importantly, if you look back at my unedited post, you'll note that at the bottom, I gave a suggestion to fix the power to make is vs. Will and still have the same effect, but was that quoted? No, it was conveniently ignored. ;)

Anyway, I don't think it's broken. I think it works as written. As far as someone running and the fighter getting there and being right behind them, it might be wiser to turn and face your pursuer rather than just show them your unprotected and unchallenging backside. Turn and fight. Particularly if they're spewing forth vitriol about how they're going to tan your hide for being such a coward.

But hey, that's me. That's my game. For your game, if it seems broken, then "fix" it! :D If that makes it more fun for you and your group, you probably should fix it and make that homebrew rule. Seems to me that it's one of those things we can argue about all day and not really resolve anything.

Oh, and my saying that it was without fluff and just the rules, I didn't mean that as in "It's the rules, so it's right" but more like "It makes sense with just the rules mechanics, without any added fluff". I'm not the sort to follow rules just because they're rules. I'll change them when I think they don't work how I like.
That is an unfair assessment. I didn't say that they would *never* make a tactical error, but a supra-genius military tactician character should probably not *autofail* against taunts in combat.

This power needs attack vs. will.

Well there's yet another way to think of this that works out fine still. Consider what the Fighter has been trying to do for this entire fight? He wants those wizards to come close and get pounded. So you can honestly say that every round he's been trying this power and failing each and every time. . . except one. One time in any given combat he CAN succeed where otherwise HE is always an *auto-fail*. But it only works once.
To err is human. To fail a Fear save is unforgivable! IMAGE(http://statcdn.worldoftanks.com/comcom_v2/uploads/signatures/wotuserbar04.jpg)
My question is if a fighter is next to a minion but misses with the pull component of the come and get it does it still take the damage and die on the damage component as it is next to the fighter?  Are the pull and damage seperate from one another?  to me it looks like they are seperate effects of the same power.
Nowadays, the "takes [W] damage" part and everything else is on the Hit: line, so you need to hit to deal the damage.

Enemy being adjacent to you is not sufficient to deal damage to it.

Compare this to the pre-errata version, where you didn't need to hit with the pull component, it just happened.

Really, CaGI is like any other close burst attack, with an extra criteria for dealing the damage - you need to pull the enemy adjacent.

Other than that, there's not much to say.
I really just don't see the issue here. I played a fighter until level 21 and used this power frequently and to great effect. Many of you already provided great flavor options for justifying the power. I always chose to believe my character was appearing to be making a tactical error that his enemies would then try to take advantage of.

In the end, though, it doesn't matter. If anything in the game strikes you as unreasonable or just plain wrong--get rid of it.

For example, a party-mate and I had both just increased a level. We both chose a feat (I don't recall what the name was) that made it impossible for our characters to grant combat advantage when we were flanked. The DM thought on this for a bit and said, "Guys, I'm sorry, but that feat is B.S. and just way to much of an advantage. I'm not going to allow it."  We agreed and then chose other feats.

I don't think it's out-of-line for the DM to disallow options, powers, etc. that somehow take away from the game.  Personally, I don't see any problem with Come and Get It, but you do. Fine, toss it.


D&D Home Page - What Class Are You? - Build A Character - D&D Compendium

src="http://www.wizards.com/dnd/monster/images/banners/13.jpg"/>
D&D Home Page - What Monster Are You? - D&D Compendium

 

Am I imagining things or did they modify come and get it to have a Will Save ?
it attacks vs Will, but there's no save component to it

INSIDE SCOOP, GAMERS: In the new version of D&D, it will no longer be "Edition Wars." It will be "Edition Lair Assault." - dungeonbastard

My question is if a fighter is next to a minion but misses with the pull component of the come and get it does it still take the damage and die on the damage component as it is next to the fighter?  Are the pull and damage seperate from one another?  to me it looks like they are seperate effects of the same power.

In the current version, you only do damage if you hit with the Will attack /and/ the pull brings the target adjacent to you (for instance, if the target reduces pulls, or if blocking terrain or the presence of other creatures prevent you from pulling it to an adjacent square).

 

 

Oops, looks like this request tried to create an infinite loop. We do not allow such things here. We are a professional website!

Come and Get It was recently used in my Scales of War game.

The group was trying to rescue a friend from their hometown from a group of bandits who held her at ransom in an abandoned temple of Pelor.

They party knows the meeting is a trap, so they infiltrate their Executioner among the mercenaries and thugs the bandits are employing, and go to the meeting.


Long story short, the Fighter charges in, throwing the door down with his shoulder... and he's met with a volley of crossbow bolts from the dozen minions waiting for him.

At this point he's bloodied, quarrels stuck in his arm and leg. He takes a few steps forward, puts his fullblade over his shoulder, and after a few choice words about the profession of the bandit's mothers, he motions them to attack him with his left hand. The bandits are enraged, and they see an opening. The guy isn't even in a fighting stance. Their crossbows are not loaded, so they drop them, draw their weapons and rush in.
Queue 10 dead guys on the floor.

It was majestic. Come and get it is awesome.
The current version of CAGI requires an attack vs. Will. This frames the power as a somewhat mind-affecting effect as in "taunt" (maybe like the kender in DL). However, in 4E, you fluff the power as you seem fit for the table you are playing at and the people you play with. If you are not happy with a pure taunt: mind-affecting effect, use a different approach. Maybe the fighter pulled her opponents by using feints with her weapon or shield. Maybe she deliberately left an open spot in her defense that tricked the enemy into a move towards her. Maybe she used her arms, legs and weapon to simply pull all opponents close to her.
You can even make up other reasons that have nothing to do with the fighter herself that would make an opponent move towards her. As in: opponents make simple mistakes. The old version of CAGI did not call for an attack vs. Will, after all.
I can understand that this power is problematic for a lot of people, though, because it puts so much scene-framing power into the hands of the players. A player describes what NPCs are doing. Not everybody likes that. I, however, think it is grand. I love CAGI.
Sign In to post comments