The future of AEUD

This topic stems a great deal from Rich Baker's post about it in a pre-Christmas Rule of Three column, found here.  wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4ro3/... .  " 'AEDU' stands for the basic types powers a character can have—At-will, Encounter, Daily, and Utility."

To summarize, in pre-4.0 editions, you had a set of progressions in most classes that caused you to gain "stuff" at every odd level.  The "stuff" you gained was mostly dependent on your class.  In some cases, that "stuff" was integrated into a system that you already had; the best examples are a wizard's spell book or extra feats for fighters.  In other cases, the "stuff" was just an added ability piled on top of your other abilities.  You gained something specific from being a member of a specific class at a specific level.  You and everyone else who was that specific class at that specific level gained the same thing.

In 4.0, non-essentials version, WoTC took a step away from automatic "stuff".  You gain a bunch of abilities from your class at 1st level, but after that, nothing is standardized.  Everything you get after level 1 is chosen by you from a group of options.  Additionally, there are very few class powers that are persistent (in the sense of being "always on").  Most things with persistent effects are sustained through minor actions.

Then, essentials came along, as a version that either tries to play with that theme, or correct that flaw, depending on your perspective.  Some classes were incredibly straight-forward about it; for example, all essentials clerics get Raise Dead at level 8.  Other classes had attempts at "always on" effects, particularly in fighter stances and defender auras.  This brought about questions from players about persistent effects.  The mechanics were still married to the AEUD formula and ended up as At-Will Minor actions.  Reasonable people were asking "Why can't I start combat in my stance?"  Often (in my experience) DMs let them.  It didn't make intuitive sense for a fighter to react to a combat situation, mechanically represented by rolling initiative, but not assume a prepared stance to fight.  It would be like a boxer walking out into the ring the same way he walks down the street, with his hands at his side.  Trained fighters just don't do that.

My hope is that the next edition of D&D will take what they've learned about the AEUD formula and apply it.  Specifically, I hope that the realize that they can not use AEUD for everything.  Mechanically, there's no reason why AEUD has to be used to everything.  There's also no reason to scrap it, because AEUD does provide solid advantages over previous editions.  It's ok to get persistent effects at level 2+.  It's also ok to have powers that you can't use more than once.

However, I realize that this is just my opinion.  I do want to hear other people's thoughts about this.  What do you think about the AEUD formula?  Do you want to see it included in the game going forward?  To what extend?
I like At-Wills, but I don't like Encounter and Daily powers the way they work currently-- I want a deeper pool of Encounter and Daily Powers that are powered by a point-based system, so a character knows so many E and D powers but can use them multiple times in an encounter or day, limited by his supply of E or D power points.

Utilities should fit into the AED structure. 
I've been tinkering with that for a bit now with Fantasy Craft for over a year. Works surprisingly well.
I'd like to see AEDU entirely removed from the core system.

I think it's worthy of an entire book of its own - have a thousand powers in that book, each power having its full coding - implement, damage, etc - but no fluff.

In this AEDU book introduce the idea of combat roles. Mark each of your thousand powers with which role it's appropriate for. Controller, Striker, Defender, Leader.

The thousand powers should include at least 250 powers for each role, of course. These should be separated into: Feat-based powers, item-based powers, class-based powers (with appropriate level codes), racial abilities, and class special abilities.

Have pre-built classes for fighter, wizard, cleric, thief included - use these if someone drops in for a session with a core character, and your campaign is AEDU. 

Otherwise, the AEDU book is a full set of instructions for building classes, races,  items, monsters, and powers using the system, along with 1000 or more generic powers taken from 4E, with the fluff pulled off.

Basically, have the AEDU book be the '4E emulator'.
I happen to horribly dislike the AEDU system. It is the main reason I dislike 4th ed.

That being said. At-Will can stay, and Daily can stay but needs help. Utility can stay if it is reworked. Encouter needs to die.

At-Will works fine and has been around for a long time in D&D. Power attack, the feat, is a great example. It existed for a long time in D&D and you could use it an unlimited number of times per day. But, until 4th ed it was never called an at will power, it was just something that you could do. So I can see how calling it an at will power can help new players.

Daily is basically Vancian spell casting but re-worked. Now the Wizard has Daily powers instead of daily spells. Well that works, but I need to be able to choose these every day, not just have the same 3 every day. Take the wizard, make most/all of his power from dailies and let him choose which he is using that day, problem solved. For other things this works great. Monsters have long had abilities that they can only use once per day. Call them Daily powers, meh. Tomato tomato. 

Utility Basically these are just non-combat things. You can classify them as Utility but I don't know why, calling every non-combat thing a utility seems like a waist of ink, there are a lot of them (or their should be). If the player can't figure out shape stone is not good in combat, but is great for other things, then they are not smart enough to play D&D.

Encounter. If this exists in D&D 5th, then I will NEVER play D&D 5th. It is that simple.
To replace this I would say this. Keep the short/quick rest that exists in 4th. Make all of the "encounter" powers refresh after a short rest, like normal. But, you must NOT restrict when I can use these abilites. If I want to shoot a fireball at a tree, then I beter be able to do it. Whether or not I'm in combat does not matter. Basically make a bunch of abilites that gives you ability fatigued after using them, and make the short rest recover ability fatigue. Ability fatigue does not apply negatives to the character, they just can't use that ability again until they rest. Hell then you could even give a number of uses/charges to an ability that says how many times they can use it before ability fatigue sets in.

Do this and you will go a long way to repairing the relationship with old players.
Im sorry but ADEU is a French word for goodbye, not a combat system. You say, "Encounter Power" and I stop listening to you. [spoiler Have Played/Run] D&D 1st ed D&D 3.5 ed D&D 4th ed Shadowrun Star Wars SAGA Cyberpunk Interlock Unlimited Run.Net [/spoiler] I know my games, don't try to argue about them. [spoiler Alignment Explained] This is a very simple problem and I will outline it below. Their are two types of people Type 1: a lot of people (not all, but a lot) who play see alignment as "I am lawful good thus I must play lawful good" Type 2: a lot of people (not all, but a lot) who play see alignment as "My previous actions have made people and the gods view me as lawful good. The difference is subtle but it is the source of the misunderstanding. Alignment does not dictate how you play your character. All it does is tell you, the player, how the rest of the world views you, and your previous actions. Any future actions will be judged by their own merits. Say you're a baby eating pyromaniac. You are most likely chaotic evil. But one day you decide, "Hey all I really need is love." So you get a wife, have a kid, and get a kitten named Mr. Snook'ems. You become a member of the PTA and help build houses for the homeless. You are no longer chaotic evil. And just because you were once chaotic evil it does not mean that you have to stay chaotic evil. Alignment never dictates what you can do, it only says what you have done. Now that is cleared up here is a simple test. What is the alignment of... A Police officer: The average Citizen: A Vigilante: The answer is simple. The Police officer is lawful good. He uses the laws of the country and city to arrest people and make them pay their debt to society. The Citizen is Neutral good. He wants to live is a place that is Good and follows moral and ethical principle, but he sometimes finds the laws impedes him, and he wonders why we spend so much on poor people. The Vigilante is Chaotic Good. He wants to uphold the morals and ethics of society but finds that the bad guys often slip through the cracks in the law. He takes it upon himself to protect the people from these criminals. That is the basic breakdown of the good alignment axis. What needs to be remembered is that any one of these people can change alignments, easily. The Police officer could be bought off by a local gang, and suddenly he drops to lawful neutral. The average citizen might find that his neighbors dog is annoying, barking at night and keeping him up. So he poisons its food, now he is no longer good, he is stepping towards true neutral. Maybe the citizen really goes crazy also kills the neighbor, hello neutral evil. It is possible that the Vigilante realizes that the cops are actually doing a pretty good job and decides to become an officer himself, leaving his masked crime fighting days behind him. Now he is Lawful good. Your alignment is not carved in stone, it is malleable and will change to reflect your actions.[/spoiler]
I like the AEDU system and look forward to its return. I've played 3.x and 4.x, and I don't see why supernatural and extraordinary abilities cannot be assimilated into the AEDU system. It's colorful and easy to understand.

I don't know if anyone has noticed but 3.x began going this route. The classes began recieving new options but on a small scale. You had to comb through many book in order to find options you wanted. And if a class didn't have your prefered option then you found it though multiclassing. This suggest to me that players are looking for more options and are willing to go outside of there class to do so.

The AEDU system is a great way to supply multiple options to classes. 
I happen to horribly dislike the AEDU system. It is the main reason I dislike 4th ed.

That being said. At-Will can stay, and Daily can stay but needs help. Utility can stay if it is reworked. Encouter needs to die.

At-Will works fine and has been around for a long time in D&D. Power attack, the feat, is a great example. It existed for a long time in D&D and you could use it an unlimited number of times per day. But, until 4th ed it was never called an at will power, it was just something that you could do. So I can see how calling it an at will power can help new players.

Daily is basically Vancian spell casting but re-worked. Now the Wizard has Daily powers instead of daily spells. Well that works, but I need to be able to choose these every day, not just have the same 3 every day. Take the wizard, make most/all of his power from dailies and let him choose which he is using that day, problem solved. For other things this works great. Monsters have long had abilities that they can only use once per day. Call them Daily powers, meh. Tomato tomato. 

Utility Basically these are just non-combat things. You can classify them as Utility but I don't know why, calling every non-combat thing a utility seems like a waist of ink, there are a lot of them (or their should be). If the player can't figure out shape stone is not good in combat, but is great for other things, then they are not smart enough to play D&D.

Encounter. If this exists in D&D 5th, then I will NEVER play D&D 5th. It is that simple.
To replace this I would say this. Keep the short/quick rest that exists in 4th. Make all of the "encounter" powers refresh after a short rest, like normal. But, you must NOT restrict when I can use these abilites. If I want to shoot a fireball at a tree, then I beter be able to do it. Whether or not I'm in combat does not matter. Basically make a bunch of abilites that gives you ability fatigued after using them, and make the short rest recover ability fatigue. Ability fatigue does not apply negatives to the character, they just can't use that ability again until they rest. Hell then you could even give a number of uses/charges to an ability that says how many times they can use it before ability fatigue sets in.

Do this and you will go a long way to repairing the relationship with old players.



I'm siding with Master Drow on this one. AEDU system turned the wizard into a archer, in my opinion. The only exception, MD, is that I disagree with you on which spells are used for combat, and which are utility. StoneShape, is very effective in combat, in the right situation. Or the stone to mud, for the Druids. Bam! Instant hole in the castle wall. Now the siegers can get into the castle/keep/city/whatever easy as pie. point is, Utility powers are simply unique ways of dealing with the problems at hand. I vote Backstab to be a utility power in the AEDU system. An At-Will Utility power. Just requires you to be behind the enemy. That's it.

AEDU, in my opinion, along with replacing feet with squares, makes the game too much like a board game. It's like taking Mordheim, (skirmish level Wargame by Games workshop) and mixing it with Strategy or Stratego, or whatever that boardgame is called. 
Alignments are Fluid, meaning that they are based off of your actions, not your actions being based of the alignment.
Utility Basically these are just non-combat things. You can classify them as Utility but I don't know why, calling every non-combat thing a utility seems like a waist of ink, there are a lot of them (or their should be). If the player can't figure out shape stone is not good in combat, but is great for other things, then they are not smart enough to play D&D.

Encounter. If this exists in D&D 5th, then I will NEVER play D&D 5th. It is that simple.
To replace this I would say this. Keep the short/quick rest that exists in 4th. Make all of the "encounter" powers refresh after a short rest, like normal. But, you must NOT restrict when I can use these abilites. If I want to shoot a fireball at a tree, then I beter be able to do it. Whether or not I'm in combat does not matter.



I agree with this completely.  I also hate that attack powers were bound to combat and utilities were (for the most part) restricted to non-combat encounters.  I've run into enough situations where a player wanted to use something for the effect rather than the attack, and couldn't, because of the stupid, arbitrary division between the two things.

I had a skill challenge which was austensibly "The bridge is out / figure out how to cross the river."  The Wizard wanted to use Icy Terrain to freeze the river temporarily and walk across.  I also had a challenge where players were trying to retrieve an object from atop a ledge.  The Druid wanted to use Thorn Whip to pull it down.  They should be able to do those things.

As players of a game, these types of stories are really enjoyable.  I want to play a game that rewards creativity, problem-solving and good ideas.  The mechanics shouldn't punish people for getting too far into character, or for doing something unexpected.  Experiencing the unexpected is why we're playing a living game instead of a computer game.
@ Chimerstry: Exactly.
Alignments are Fluid, meaning that they are based off of your actions, not your actions being based of the alignment.
I like some of the ideas in this thread.

Take Kaldric's book of powers. I think it could stay in the core book, but every class does not need its own unique powers. Earlier editions had spell lists available to the class, and many spells were available to many casting classes (Read magic, Light, Teleport, Dispell Magic, etc.). The same idea could be applied to all classes. Several melee classes could have access to Cleave as an At-Will (or basic attack or whatever its going to be called). Several caster-ish classes could have access to Magic Missle or various summoning spells. I could go on with a dozen more examples if needed.

I agree with Master Drows thoughts on encounters and dailies. I don't know if the solution is through more frequent retraining or a point sytem or something else, but while the powers were intended to give more flavor to combat, things still get old after 100+ battles.

The only exception, MD, is that I disagree with you on which spells are used for combat, and which are utility. StoneShape, is very effective in combat, in the right situation. Or the stone to mud, for the Druids. Bam! Instant hole in the castle wall. Now the siegers can get into the castle/keep/city/whatever easy as pie. Point is, Utility powers are simply unique ways of dealing with the problems at hand. I vote Backstab to be a utility power in the AEDU system. An At-Will Utility power. Just requires you to be behind the enemy. That's it.



I knew an old gamer would call me out on this. Yes, stone shape can be used in combat to great effect. I was just thinking of the time I had a gamer try to use stone shape to stab a dragon with a spire of stone, despite the fact that the spell said, "The stone grows to slowly to be used as a weapon". It was to this type of person that I was referring.
But yes you are correct, I was just hoping that no one would notice. 
Im sorry but ADEU is a French word for goodbye, not a combat system. You say, "Encounter Power" and I stop listening to you. [spoiler Have Played/Run] D&D 1st ed D&D 3.5 ed D&D 4th ed Shadowrun Star Wars SAGA Cyberpunk Interlock Unlimited Run.Net [/spoiler] I know my games, don't try to argue about them. [spoiler Alignment Explained] This is a very simple problem and I will outline it below. Their are two types of people Type 1: a lot of people (not all, but a lot) who play see alignment as "I am lawful good thus I must play lawful good" Type 2: a lot of people (not all, but a lot) who play see alignment as "My previous actions have made people and the gods view me as lawful good. The difference is subtle but it is the source of the misunderstanding. Alignment does not dictate how you play your character. All it does is tell you, the player, how the rest of the world views you, and your previous actions. Any future actions will be judged by their own merits. Say you're a baby eating pyromaniac. You are most likely chaotic evil. But one day you decide, "Hey all I really need is love." So you get a wife, have a kid, and get a kitten named Mr. Snook'ems. You become a member of the PTA and help build houses for the homeless. You are no longer chaotic evil. And just because you were once chaotic evil it does not mean that you have to stay chaotic evil. Alignment never dictates what you can do, it only says what you have done. Now that is cleared up here is a simple test. What is the alignment of... A Police officer: The average Citizen: A Vigilante: The answer is simple. The Police officer is lawful good. He uses the laws of the country and city to arrest people and make them pay their debt to society. The Citizen is Neutral good. He wants to live is a place that is Good and follows moral and ethical principle, but he sometimes finds the laws impedes him, and he wonders why we spend so much on poor people. The Vigilante is Chaotic Good. He wants to uphold the morals and ethics of society but finds that the bad guys often slip through the cracks in the law. He takes it upon himself to protect the people from these criminals. That is the basic breakdown of the good alignment axis. What needs to be remembered is that any one of these people can change alignments, easily. The Police officer could be bought off by a local gang, and suddenly he drops to lawful neutral. The average citizen might find that his neighbors dog is annoying, barking at night and keeping him up. So he poisons its food, now he is no longer good, he is stepping towards true neutral. Maybe the citizen really goes crazy also kills the neighbor, hello neutral evil. It is possible that the Vigilante realizes that the cops are actually doing a pretty good job and decides to become an officer himself, leaving his masked crime fighting days behind him. Now he is Lawful good. Your alignment is not carved in stone, it is malleable and will change to reflect your actions.[/spoiler]
That would fall under my arguement of "A Player needs to be properly prepared." 
I've see a few players who were like that.
The first one, would multiclass like crazy, with the most random feats, because he would only read the fluff, and expected the DM and other players to let him play by the fluff, instead of the mechanics.
The second one, she always insisted on playing a magic caster, and then her husband, and the DM would have to help her choose which spell to cast, or what to do, because she didn't even spend time to learn the most basic of the rules of the game, failing even to learn the basics of 4E.
The third player that I saw, would try to power game, and would even cheat, trying to replace the mechanics with fluff that he would misread, just so that he could have the most "Bad-@$$" PC, even trying to pass us with a 5'6" Dwarf, and act like he's a human in RP, but with the mechanical abilities of a dwarf. He also cheated in his dice rolls, and we eventually booted him completely from the group. 
Alignments are Fluid, meaning that they are based off of your actions, not your actions being based of the alignment.
Personally I enjoy the AEUD system. Nothing in-game restricts the player from using combat abilites in non-combat scenarios except for the DM. Now this does typically give a bit of an advantage to more magical classes since there fluff consists of much more then martial types but that isn't a major issue.

This is all opinion but spamming at-wills is boring, hence why I am not a huge fan of essential classes, feats just don't add enough stuff powers to make them interesting. Dailys are far to powerful to be something that can be used every encounter. Encounter powers are just right, they are in between power levels for whats needs to be done with out resorting to "oh im gonna make an MBA/RBA/Twin-Strike/Magic Missle etc." 

The only problem that the AEUD system currently has is how much more support some classes (fighter/wizard) get over other classes (runepriest/seeker) In 5th edition this must be addressed so, for example, the runepriest gets less then 100 powers from 1-30, while the fighter gets more then that in levels 1-3.

If I can make another suggestion, I would limited encounter powers to only 2 instead of 3, or have the third be a mandatory minor, immediate, OA, or free action. Since with paragon paths and themes you can have quite a bit more then average encounter powers and run into situations where you never use some of your powers.
> But, you must NOT restrict when I can use these abilites. If I want
> to shoot a fireball at a tree, then I beter be able to do it.
> Whether or not I'm in combat does not matter.

Wait, what?

4E encounter attack powers do not require that you be in combat to use them. Nor are encounter utility powers restricted to out-of-combat use.
Where did he get the impression that was the case? What could he have read that caused that impression?


Allow for encounter powers to be duplicated.
If a character can use 3 different powers in an encounter, he/she may now use 3 times the same one instead of having to use a different one each time.

Regarding Dailies: once a day, BUT...if you want to use another time (in another encounter, that same day): it should cost a number of healing surges, as it is extremely testing/tiring [how many I don't know yet].


Do I need to site the book and page? Ok I will.

4th edition PHB.
Page 54
"An encounter power can be used once per encounter." 

Page 266
"The beginning of a combat encounter, when combatants roll initiative."


So, if you are a rogue who sneaks up on an orc and tries to assassinate him, were sorry but you can't use encounter powers, you have not rolled initiative yet, thus the encounter has not started.


You have to roll initiative in order to use your encounter powers. Now there are non-combat encounters but you don't often assassinate things during non-combat, most of us define that as a combat encounter.

Or say I want to attack that tree. Do I have to roll initiative? Do I get a surprise round on the unaware tree? Does the rest of my party that is next to me also have to roll initiative? In 4th ed, the answer is yes to all of these, and that is why the edition is silly. 

Now if you excuse me I need to read a better RPG before I go blind. 
Im sorry but ADEU is a French word for goodbye, not a combat system. You say, "Encounter Power" and I stop listening to you. [spoiler Have Played/Run] D&D 1st ed D&D 3.5 ed D&D 4th ed Shadowrun Star Wars SAGA Cyberpunk Interlock Unlimited Run.Net [/spoiler] I know my games, don't try to argue about them. [spoiler Alignment Explained] This is a very simple problem and I will outline it below. Their are two types of people Type 1: a lot of people (not all, but a lot) who play see alignment as "I am lawful good thus I must play lawful good" Type 2: a lot of people (not all, but a lot) who play see alignment as "My previous actions have made people and the gods view me as lawful good. The difference is subtle but it is the source of the misunderstanding. Alignment does not dictate how you play your character. All it does is tell you, the player, how the rest of the world views you, and your previous actions. Any future actions will be judged by their own merits. Say you're a baby eating pyromaniac. You are most likely chaotic evil. But one day you decide, "Hey all I really need is love." So you get a wife, have a kid, and get a kitten named Mr. Snook'ems. You become a member of the PTA and help build houses for the homeless. You are no longer chaotic evil. And just because you were once chaotic evil it does not mean that you have to stay chaotic evil. Alignment never dictates what you can do, it only says what you have done. Now that is cleared up here is a simple test. What is the alignment of... A Police officer: The average Citizen: A Vigilante: The answer is simple. The Police officer is lawful good. He uses the laws of the country and city to arrest people and make them pay their debt to society. The Citizen is Neutral good. He wants to live is a place that is Good and follows moral and ethical principle, but he sometimes finds the laws impedes him, and he wonders why we spend so much on poor people. The Vigilante is Chaotic Good. He wants to uphold the morals and ethics of society but finds that the bad guys often slip through the cracks in the law. He takes it upon himself to protect the people from these criminals. That is the basic breakdown of the good alignment axis. What needs to be remembered is that any one of these people can change alignments, easily. The Police officer could be bought off by a local gang, and suddenly he drops to lawful neutral. The average citizen might find that his neighbors dog is annoying, barking at night and keeping him up. So he poisons its food, now he is no longer good, he is stepping towards true neutral. Maybe the citizen really goes crazy also kills the neighbor, hello neutral evil. It is possible that the Vigilante realizes that the cops are actually doing a pretty good job and decides to become an officer himself, leaving his masked crime fighting days behind him. Now he is Lawful good. Your alignment is not carved in stone, it is malleable and will change to reflect your actions.[/spoiler]
Master_Drow with that reasoning you can not use utilities encounter powers that were made for skill challenges since it is not an encounter according to RAW. Following that I can apparently fix your qualms about encounter powers by calling skill challenges skill encounters and hey-presto! they can be used no matter the encounter.
I've never understood the hate for AEDU system.  It existed in previous editions; it just wasn't labeled as such: So your 1st level Barbarian can Rage 1/day?  Sounds like a Daily power to me.  What about when he levels up a bit, and he can use it more often?  Well, then it basically becomes an Encounter power; Same thing applies to Bardic Music -- at 1st level, it's a Daily, but quickly turns into an Encounter power as the character levels up.  And since he has Bardic Music options, like Inspire Courage, Counter-Song, etc, that character is essentially picking his Encounter powers, the same way a 4th Edition Bard would; Same thing applies to the spell system -- So, a Wizard has to pick which spells he gains as he increases in level, right?  Sounds to me like what a 4th Edition Wizard does.  He might only be able to use his 3rd level spell once per day (so that's essentially a Daily), but at that same point, he can cast 1st level spells almost At-Will.

It's all the same stuff, man.  They just didn't wrap it up in a nice pretty package for you.

And please, savor the taste of that realization for a moment before you spit it back out.
Do I need to site the book and page? Ok I will.

4th edition PHB.
Page 54
"An encounter power can be used once per encounter." 

Page 266
"The beginning of a combat encounter, when combatants roll initiative."


So, if you are a rogue who sneaks up on an orc and tries to assassinate him, were sorry but you can't use encounter powers, you have not rolled initiative yet, thus the encounter has not started.


You have to roll initiative in order to use your encounter powers. Now there are non-combat encounters but you don't often assassinate things during non-combat, most of us define that as a combat encounter.

Or say I want to attack that tree. Do I have to roll initiative? Do I get a surprise round on the unaware tree? Does the rest of my party that is next to me also have to roll initiative? In 4th ed, the answer is yes to all of these, and that is why the edition is silly. 

Now if you excuse me I need to read a better RPG before I go blind. 




If I understand Master Drow's gripe against encounter powers, it's not the refresh rate that bother him, it's the fact that it limits the ability to being used in combat. Not so for several reasons. 

If we have to quote rulebooks, how about p. 9 of the PHB: "Encounters come in two types. Combat encounters ... Noncombat encounters include deadly traps, difficult puzzles, and other obstacles to overcome." ... or "Encounters are where the action of the D&D game takes place, whether the encounter is a life-or-death battle against monstrous foes, a high-stakes negotiation with a duke and his vizier, or a death-defying  climb up the Cliffs of Desolation." (PHB p. 258).

Even if encounters were only combats (and they aren't), it would hardly be a fatal flaw in the system. Every 4E table and DM I know allows creative use of powers. Maybe there are some jerky DMs that don't allow creativity but how a DM handles improvisation by the players is the hallmark of a good or bad DM - not a good or bad version. Using the above example about a druid wanting to use Thorn Whip to pull something off a ledge, if Chris Perkins were the DM, do you think he says, "Awesome" or "Sorry, not in 4E man."?
    
Actually during the giggle fit that followed browsing through the three core 4th books, we had a different response to encounter based anything... though we applied it to healing surges.

Did you know, that as the rules stand, having a cheering squad is the most viable combat tactic?

Go talk to a groupie *enter encounter*

Go talk to groupie 2 *enter a second encounter*....

you get the idea. We started laughing ourselves silly with the idea of every single adventurer having a four person cheering squad with them just so they could do/use/refresh encounter powers.

Between that and the lack of tradeskills which eventually led to the theory that every campaign setting must have a central sweatshop that did nothing but pump out goods magical and mundane, only to send them out to stock dungeons with.....


Yeah, we got a lot of laughs out of those books. For the two weeks it took somewhere to unload them again.


Two issues. I can only use most of my abilities in an encounter, whether it be combat or non-combat. So if I want to shoot that tree with that fireball, that is suddenly an encounter. So sure, I guess I can define any interaction I do with the world as an encounter, and thus be allowed to use my encounter powers but that just seem very very silly. I am not having an encounter with a tree, I am having fun burning down the forest. By labeling my tree interaction as an encounter it makes the game very combat focused, very mechanical, and very cold. None of the fun that the old system had.

Second. The idea of powers is based on a fatigue system. I happen to like fatigue systems, but encounter powers just don't work. I mean if an encounter power is supposed to be a use of some of my energy and that expenditure causes me to be winded and need a short rest I can get behind that. But then it needs to be mechanically sound in all areas. Why is it that I can use one encounter power and then a different encounter power, but not the same one twice? Why is it that I can cast hundreds of encounter powers per day, but a single daily can only be used once? Is a daily a hundred times better or more exhausting than an encounter power? These questions arise.
I am all behind at-will powers, they have existed for a while, and Dailies as well. As I said tomato tomato. But when it comes down to encounter powers they just don't work, and the fact that people try to justify them as "replacing a daily power you can use three times per day" is just laughable. One requires me to manage my resources effectively so I can be effective when needed, the other is press key 1 followed by key 2 until either A) The enemy disappears, or B) I run out of keys at which point press "at-will" until condition A occurs.
Another thing. Say you can use Rage per encounter. Now that is supposed to be a substitution of my 3.5 ability to Rage 3 times per day. But wait what if I get into four encounters in a day? Now I have become more powerful than my 3.5 cousin. I could even rage 5, 6, or 7 times in a day. I can actually rage 288 times per day now. Talk about a power boost. But hey, maybe the barbarian needed that boost. Lets look at the over powered 3.5 wizard. If we want to talk about power lets look at this.

[spoiler Level 5 Wizard fight]
Level 5 wizard. In the overpowered 3.5 he gets 3 magic missiles, 2 melf's acid arrow, and a single fireball. If I do my math right that is about 94 damage per day or 94 in a single encounter if he spellgasms, if he rolls max.
But the 4th ed version gets 3 encounter power and 2 dailies? (I'm not really sure, after 20 minutes I can't find the information) so Icy rays (1d10, 2 targets), Shock sphere (2d6), and Fire shroud (1d8, 5 continuous damage), plus a Fireball (3d6) and a Bigby's Icy Grasp (2d8+1d8 per turn, unlimited turns) so that is 40 damage by encounter powers alone, plus 5 continuous damage. And the Dailies do 34 plus 1d8 a round. So that is 74 total plus 1d8+5 per round, if each spell is only used once, and we ignore the extra damage from the 2d4 magic missile (every turn). Sure the 4th ed is less powerful right? Actually no, see this is a single combat where two wizards slug it out, and the 3.5 wizards does a grand total of 20 dmg more (not counting the 4th ed continuos effects)? But that is at the cost of no spells left. Meanwhile the 4th ed gets 60% of his spells back in 5 minutes. So here the 4th ed wizard gets the damage cake. 
People argue the 3.5 wizard can just use scrolls and wands to increase in long term power. But so can EVERY class in 3.5, it is a skill (sure some are not good at it), so I guess the most powerful magic class is the rogue who has a bunch of wands?
Oh fun fact if the 4th ed wizard only uses Shock sphere and only hits one target every time, that is between 576 and 3,456 damage per day.[/spoiler]
See this is where I don't like encounters, the barbarian no long cares when he enters a rage, the wizard can spellgams a lot more damage per day, by somehow this is more balanced? Just give me a number of uses per day and let me choose how I spend them. Don't say I have to use them in some inside of some arbitrary thing called an encounter, or that I can use them a huge number of times per day, so much so I just spam them. I mean come on this is a game of intellectuals, not button smashing 5th graders.




Side Complaint:
Probably the worst is how the spells had to be targeted at a creature over 80% of the time, so if you want to use your power then you have to find an enemy. 

Side note:
In a fatigue system you have two options to balance, you can either make the spells powerful and have a high fatigue, or you can make then pathetic with low fatigue. You can see where I put encounter powers.

[off topic]
Maybe I am just angry at how WoTC just restricted my options of how to play. I know everyone plays the game differently, but the old editions handled this by giving very broad open rules and said, "Don't like it, change it" 4th ed gave a lot less options with the same saying. But now in order to change the game I have to rewrite half the book. A lot more work than just going back to 3.5 and using the 6 or 7 house rules that my group uses to balance, especially since these rules only take up about half a page.
[/off topic]
Im sorry but ADEU is a French word for goodbye, not a combat system. You say, "Encounter Power" and I stop listening to you. [spoiler Have Played/Run] D&D 1st ed D&D 3.5 ed D&D 4th ed Shadowrun Star Wars SAGA Cyberpunk Interlock Unlimited Run.Net [/spoiler] I know my games, don't try to argue about them. [spoiler Alignment Explained] This is a very simple problem and I will outline it below. Their are two types of people Type 1: a lot of people (not all, but a lot) who play see alignment as "I am lawful good thus I must play lawful good" Type 2: a lot of people (not all, but a lot) who play see alignment as "My previous actions have made people and the gods view me as lawful good. The difference is subtle but it is the source of the misunderstanding. Alignment does not dictate how you play your character. All it does is tell you, the player, how the rest of the world views you, and your previous actions. Any future actions will be judged by their own merits. Say you're a baby eating pyromaniac. You are most likely chaotic evil. But one day you decide, "Hey all I really need is love." So you get a wife, have a kid, and get a kitten named Mr. Snook'ems. You become a member of the PTA and help build houses for the homeless. You are no longer chaotic evil. And just because you were once chaotic evil it does not mean that you have to stay chaotic evil. Alignment never dictates what you can do, it only says what you have done. Now that is cleared up here is a simple test. What is the alignment of... A Police officer: The average Citizen: A Vigilante: The answer is simple. The Police officer is lawful good. He uses the laws of the country and city to arrest people and make them pay their debt to society. The Citizen is Neutral good. He wants to live is a place that is Good and follows moral and ethical principle, but he sometimes finds the laws impedes him, and he wonders why we spend so much on poor people. The Vigilante is Chaotic Good. He wants to uphold the morals and ethics of society but finds that the bad guys often slip through the cracks in the law. He takes it upon himself to protect the people from these criminals. That is the basic breakdown of the good alignment axis. What needs to be remembered is that any one of these people can change alignments, easily. The Police officer could be bought off by a local gang, and suddenly he drops to lawful neutral. The average citizen might find that his neighbors dog is annoying, barking at night and keeping him up. So he poisons its food, now he is no longer good, he is stepping towards true neutral. Maybe the citizen really goes crazy also kills the neighbor, hello neutral evil. It is possible that the Vigilante realizes that the cops are actually doing a pretty good job and decides to become an officer himself, leaving his masked crime fighting days behind him. Now he is Lawful good. Your alignment is not carved in stone, it is malleable and will change to reflect your actions.[/spoiler]
Lets say your level 5 is in a few tough fights. There is no where to rest the night and you have used all your preparred spells for the day. Your wizard has now become dead weight to the group. Pelting people with a sling or xbow isn't very exciting. The encounter system solves this. At wills are just a replacement for what ever ranged weapon your wizard resorted to once he ceased being a productive member of the party.
Not allowing a PC to use a power outside of initiate seems to me a harsh and unneccessary adherance to the rules. If it really matters, the player could roll initiative. If initiative count doesn't matter, then the player should be allowed to use it anyways.
Lets say your level 5 is in a few tough fights. There is no where to rest the night and you have used all your preparred spells for the day. Your wizard has now become dead weight to the group. Pelting people with a sling or xbow isn't very exciting. The encounter system solves this. At wills are just a replacement for what ever ranged weapon your wizard resorted to once he ceased being a productive member of the party.


Lets say your fighter is in a few though fights, he is low on HP but the rest of the party is fine. There is no where to rest the night. Now he has now become dead weight to the group. Standing in the back away from enemies pelting things with a bow is not very exciting...
Oh wait. Maybe the fighter should have been smarter with his HP and not charged into that group of goblins earlier...

People playing badly is not a reason to change a combat system, it just hurts the rest of us who don't do stupid things, like use our most powerful spell to solve a simple problem.

I see this argument a lot. The wizard uses all of his spells to fast and becomes a burden to the party. But, the wizards is also too powerful and should be powered down so the rest of the party can do things. The wizard fulfills all of the party rolls, who needs a rogue? ... It seems like you have a stupid player, not a problem with core mechanics.
Sure the wizard can use knock to get through a door, but what if there are two locked doors? How many knocks does he have prepaired? Some will say that then the wizard will just have a wand of knock. But, can't a rogue use a wand just as easily?

Player incompitence is not a reason to change the rules for the rest of the planet.
Im sorry but ADEU is a French word for goodbye, not a combat system. You say, "Encounter Power" and I stop listening to you. [spoiler Have Played/Run] D&D 1st ed D&D 3.5 ed D&D 4th ed Shadowrun Star Wars SAGA Cyberpunk Interlock Unlimited Run.Net [/spoiler] I know my games, don't try to argue about them. [spoiler Alignment Explained] This is a very simple problem and I will outline it below. Their are two types of people Type 1: a lot of people (not all, but a lot) who play see alignment as "I am lawful good thus I must play lawful good" Type 2: a lot of people (not all, but a lot) who play see alignment as "My previous actions have made people and the gods view me as lawful good. The difference is subtle but it is the source of the misunderstanding. Alignment does not dictate how you play your character. All it does is tell you, the player, how the rest of the world views you, and your previous actions. Any future actions will be judged by their own merits. Say you're a baby eating pyromaniac. You are most likely chaotic evil. But one day you decide, "Hey all I really need is love." So you get a wife, have a kid, and get a kitten named Mr. Snook'ems. You become a member of the PTA and help build houses for the homeless. You are no longer chaotic evil. And just because you were once chaotic evil it does not mean that you have to stay chaotic evil. Alignment never dictates what you can do, it only says what you have done. Now that is cleared up here is a simple test. What is the alignment of... A Police officer: The average Citizen: A Vigilante: The answer is simple. The Police officer is lawful good. He uses the laws of the country and city to arrest people and make them pay their debt to society. The Citizen is Neutral good. He wants to live is a place that is Good and follows moral and ethical principle, but he sometimes finds the laws impedes him, and he wonders why we spend so much on poor people. The Vigilante is Chaotic Good. He wants to uphold the morals and ethics of society but finds that the bad guys often slip through the cracks in the law. He takes it upon himself to protect the people from these criminals. That is the basic breakdown of the good alignment axis. What needs to be remembered is that any one of these people can change alignments, easily. The Police officer could be bought off by a local gang, and suddenly he drops to lawful neutral. The average citizen might find that his neighbors dog is annoying, barking at night and keeping him up. So he poisons its food, now he is no longer good, he is stepping towards true neutral. Maybe the citizen really goes crazy also kills the neighbor, hello neutral evil. It is possible that the Vigilante realizes that the cops are actually doing a pretty good job and decides to become an officer himself, leaving his masked crime fighting days behind him. Now he is Lawful good. Your alignment is not carved in stone, it is malleable and will change to reflect your actions.[/spoiler]
Lets say your level 5 is in a few tough fights. There is no where to rest the night and you have used all your preparred spells for the day. Your wizard has now become dead weight to the group. Pelting people with a sling or xbow isn't very exciting. The encounter system solves this. At wills are just a replacement for what ever ranged weapon your wizard resorted to once he ceased being a productive member of the party.


Lets say your fighter is in a few though fights, he is low on HP but the rest of the party is fine. There is no where to rest the night. Now he has now become dead weight to the group. Standing in the back away from enemies pelting things with a bow is not very exciting...
Oh wait. Maybe the fighter should have been smarter with his HP and not charged into that group of goblins earlier...

People playing badly is not a reason to change a combat system, it just hurts the rest of us who don't do stupid things, like use our most powerful spell to solve a simple problem.

I see this argument a lot. The wizard uses all of his spells to fast and becomes a burden to the party. But, the wizards is also too powerful and should be powered down so the rest of the party can do things. The wizard fulfills all of the party rolls, who needs a rogue? ... It seems like you have a stupid player, not a problem with core mechanics.
Sure the wizard can use knock to get through a door, but what if there are two locked doors? How many knocks does he have prepaired? Some will say that then the wizard will just have a wand of knock. But, can't a rogue use a wand just as easily?

Player incompitence is not a reason to change the rules for the rest of the planet.

...and there we are, back in the edition wars.

Look, 4e was not created by the devil.  And it IS a version of D&D, despite being heretical to suggest this in some quarters.

Some of the things people are most upset about are misconceptions.  

Yes, you can use your powers outside of combat.  Even if you believe the rules read otherwise (which they don't) - make a decision and houserule it!  It's not like houseruling is verboten, people have been doing it for years in all versions. 

AEDU does fix the "I've used all my spells now I'm useless" scenario.

Class balancing does mean a more fulfilling career for those in non-spellcasting professions.

You may not like the aesthetics of these fixes.  Maybe there are better ways to handle them.  Let's hope 5e provides us with something that will make us all happy.
Does anyone remember the old days when defeating an at level monster, or when suprassing an at level challenge you were supposed to have used 25% of the parties resources. HP, Spells, Powers, etc.?

That is the thing with 4th. You can pass just about any encounter with using effectivly ZERO resources. 60% of your resources can be recovered with a short rest, a five minute break. If you don't use a daily or utility you never really use a resource. Even healing surges made HP less of a resource. But if I had to trade a healing spell for some of my health, now I have a resource loss.

See us old guard liked the fact we had to use resources. Sounds odd right? But to not use resources would be like one shotting the boss. Just walk into the room, bang he is dead. Yeah that might be cool the first time, but 10, 30, a hundred times? Yeah I was board at 3.

Success has no meaning to it anymore.
Im sorry but ADEU is a French word for goodbye, not a combat system. You say, "Encounter Power" and I stop listening to you. [spoiler Have Played/Run] D&D 1st ed D&D 3.5 ed D&D 4th ed Shadowrun Star Wars SAGA Cyberpunk Interlock Unlimited Run.Net [/spoiler] I know my games, don't try to argue about them. [spoiler Alignment Explained] This is a very simple problem and I will outline it below. Their are two types of people Type 1: a lot of people (not all, but a lot) who play see alignment as "I am lawful good thus I must play lawful good" Type 2: a lot of people (not all, but a lot) who play see alignment as "My previous actions have made people and the gods view me as lawful good. The difference is subtle but it is the source of the misunderstanding. Alignment does not dictate how you play your character. All it does is tell you, the player, how the rest of the world views you, and your previous actions. Any future actions will be judged by their own merits. Say you're a baby eating pyromaniac. You are most likely chaotic evil. But one day you decide, "Hey all I really need is love." So you get a wife, have a kid, and get a kitten named Mr. Snook'ems. You become a member of the PTA and help build houses for the homeless. You are no longer chaotic evil. And just because you were once chaotic evil it does not mean that you have to stay chaotic evil. Alignment never dictates what you can do, it only says what you have done. Now that is cleared up here is a simple test. What is the alignment of... A Police officer: The average Citizen: A Vigilante: The answer is simple. The Police officer is lawful good. He uses the laws of the country and city to arrest people and make them pay their debt to society. The Citizen is Neutral good. He wants to live is a place that is Good and follows moral and ethical principle, but he sometimes finds the laws impedes him, and he wonders why we spend so much on poor people. The Vigilante is Chaotic Good. He wants to uphold the morals and ethics of society but finds that the bad guys often slip through the cracks in the law. He takes it upon himself to protect the people from these criminals. That is the basic breakdown of the good alignment axis. What needs to be remembered is that any one of these people can change alignments, easily. The Police officer could be bought off by a local gang, and suddenly he drops to lawful neutral. The average citizen might find that his neighbors dog is annoying, barking at night and keeping him up. So he poisons its food, now he is no longer good, he is stepping towards true neutral. Maybe the citizen really goes crazy also kills the neighbor, hello neutral evil. It is possible that the Vigilante realizes that the cops are actually doing a pretty good job and decides to become an officer himself, leaving his masked crime fighting days behind him. Now he is Lawful good. Your alignment is not carved in stone, it is malleable and will change to reflect your actions.[/spoiler]
 Even healing surges made HP less of a resource. But if I had to trade a healing spell for some of my health, now I have a resource loss.


Huh, Healing surges are an interlocked part of the same exact resource as hit pts ... and further they are a limit on how much healing you can recieve from most every source.
  Creative Character Build Collection and The Magic of King's and Heros  also Can Martial Characters Fly? 

Improvisation in 4e: Fave 4E Improvisations - also Wrecans Guides to improvisation beyond page 42
The Non-combatant Adventurer (aka Princess build Warlord or LazyLord)
Reality is unrealistic - and even monkeys protest unfairness
Reflavoring the Fighter : The Wizard : The Swordmage - Creative Character Collection: Bloodwright (Darksun Character) 

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

 

Does anyone remember the old days when defeating an at level monster, or when suprassing an at level challenge you were supposed to have used 25% of the parties resources. HP, Spells, Powers, etc.?

That is the thing with 4th. You can pass just about any encounter with using effectivly ZERO resources. 60% of your resources can be recovered with a short rest, a five minute break. If you don't use a daily or utility you never really use a resource. Even healing surges made HP less of a resource. But if I had to trade a healing spell for some of my health, now I have a resource loss.

See us old guard liked the fact we had to use resources. Sounds odd right? But to not use resources would be like one shotting the boss. Just walk into the room, bang he is dead. Yeah that might be cool the first time, but 10, 30, a hundred times? Yeah I was board at 3.

Success has no meaning to it anymore.

Mate, you don't get much more old guard than me.  And one of the things I have grown to hate about RPGs is accounting.

As a DM, trying to work out whether people had correctly assigned skill points to their 3e/3.5e multiclassed characters was a nightmare.

My guiding principle is keep it simple.  Reduce the potential for confusion, reduce the maths.  This helps also with onboarding newbies.

Resource management is fine to a point, but when it gets in the way of a smooth game it is an irritant.
 

If I understand Master Drow's gripe against encounter powers, it's not the refresh rate that bother him, it's the fact that it limits the ability to being used in combat. Not so for several reasons. 

If we have to quote rulebooks, how about p. 9 of the PHB: "Encounters come in two types. Combat encounters ... Noncombat encounters include deadly traps, difficult puzzles, and other obstacles to overcome." ... or "Encounters are where the action of the D&D game takes place, whether the encounter is a life-or-death battle against monstrous foes, a high-stakes negotiation with a duke and his vizier, or a death-defying  climb up the Cliffs of Desolation." (PHB p. 258).

Even if encounters were only combats (and they aren't), it would hardly be a fatal flaw in the system. Every 4E table and DM I know allows creative use of powers. Maybe there are some jerky DMs that don't allow creativity but how a DM handles improvisation by the players is the hallmark of a good or bad DM - not a good or bad version. Using the above example about a druid wanting to use Thorn Whip to pull something off a ledge, if Chris Perkins were the DM, do you think he says, "Awesome" or "Sorry, not in 4E man."?
    



Yeh its called ignorant ranting mixed with a touch of literalism... They could be called scene powers and match there broader meaning better. They sure as hell dont have to involve combat or an initiative check.
 
  Creative Character Build Collection and The Magic of King's and Heros  also Can Martial Characters Fly? 

Improvisation in 4e: Fave 4E Improvisations - also Wrecans Guides to improvisation beyond page 42
The Non-combatant Adventurer (aka Princess build Warlord or LazyLord)
Reality is unrealistic - and even monkeys protest unfairness
Reflavoring the Fighter : The Wizard : The Swordmage - Creative Character Collection: Bloodwright (Darksun Character) 

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

 

Does anyone remember the old days when defeating an at level monster, or when suprassing an at level challenge you were supposed to have used 25% of the parties resources. HP, Spells, Powers, etc.?

That is the thing with 4th. You can pass just about any encounter with using effectivly ZERO resources. 60% of your resources can be recovered with a short rest, a five minute break. If you don't use a daily or utility you never really use a resource. Even healing surges made HP less of a resource. But if I had to trade a healing spell for some of my health, now I have a resource loss.

See us old guard liked the fact we had to use resources. Sounds odd right? But to not use resources would be like one shotting the boss. Just walk into the room, bang he is dead. Yeah that might be cool the first time, but 10, 30, a hundred times? Yeah I was board at 3.

Success has no meaning to it anymore.



I am unaware of any power, spell, skill, item or combination of such that can one shot a boss in 4e. 4e opens up extreme optimization and with the proper party you are invincible. When you get to that level success means everything. But most all of the players in 4e are extreme char opers. In 3.x there are ways to instantly defeat monsters and easy one is portable hole and bag of holding that is a one shot to any boss. 

The rant about healing surges seems to imply that they are not in itself a resource, when in fact they are the most important one. Healing surges stretch out the adventuring day so it doesn't become 5 minute work days. As well if your healer runs out of cure light wounds your day is over, it is make a camp and rest or die. 

Furthermore how much resources are used in a battle is no indication of a system failure. [With the sole exception of being early 4e with the pitful damage MM1 monsters did, but has since been fixed in MM2 and MM3] I have had easy fights in both 3.x and 4e and I've had hard fights that take most of the resources in 3.x and 4e.
I am curious and I actually want to know. Have any of you that dislike bookkeeping every tried a diceless RPG? Less paperwork, less dice rolling. More fun, less mechanics.



Also Limond, I was not saying that in 4th you could one shot a boss. I was just saying that to me it was a similar feeling. The feeling that "I can kill anything from here till the end of time". I am saying that the encounter power system made all of the specialness, all of the hard work, the toil, the right spell at the right time. It made all of these amazing moments something run of the mill. I played 4th for the first 6 months it came out. And I felt board after most games, which is odd because in 3.5, cyberpunk, shadowrun, etc. I always am so excited during and after the game that I can't sleep for hours.  I just got board in 4th, it was not exciting. Their was no adventure, it was just advance, shoot, rest, advance, shoot, rest... repeat ad nauseum. The roleplaying was even toned down so much that I just could not really care.
I know people will say that my Dm was the problem, but I have played with this guy several other times in different games. I never felt it was him. I always felt it was the game. 
Im sorry but ADEU is a French word for goodbye, not a combat system. You say, "Encounter Power" and I stop listening to you. [spoiler Have Played/Run] D&D 1st ed D&D 3.5 ed D&D 4th ed Shadowrun Star Wars SAGA Cyberpunk Interlock Unlimited Run.Net [/spoiler] I know my games, don't try to argue about them. [spoiler Alignment Explained] This is a very simple problem and I will outline it below. Their are two types of people Type 1: a lot of people (not all, but a lot) who play see alignment as "I am lawful good thus I must play lawful good" Type 2: a lot of people (not all, but a lot) who play see alignment as "My previous actions have made people and the gods view me as lawful good. The difference is subtle but it is the source of the misunderstanding. Alignment does not dictate how you play your character. All it does is tell you, the player, how the rest of the world views you, and your previous actions. Any future actions will be judged by their own merits. Say you're a baby eating pyromaniac. You are most likely chaotic evil. But one day you decide, "Hey all I really need is love." So you get a wife, have a kid, and get a kitten named Mr. Snook'ems. You become a member of the PTA and help build houses for the homeless. You are no longer chaotic evil. And just because you were once chaotic evil it does not mean that you have to stay chaotic evil. Alignment never dictates what you can do, it only says what you have done. Now that is cleared up here is a simple test. What is the alignment of... A Police officer: The average Citizen: A Vigilante: The answer is simple. The Police officer is lawful good. He uses the laws of the country and city to arrest people and make them pay their debt to society. The Citizen is Neutral good. He wants to live is a place that is Good and follows moral and ethical principle, but he sometimes finds the laws impedes him, and he wonders why we spend so much on poor people. The Vigilante is Chaotic Good. He wants to uphold the morals and ethics of society but finds that the bad guys often slip through the cracks in the law. He takes it upon himself to protect the people from these criminals. That is the basic breakdown of the good alignment axis. What needs to be remembered is that any one of these people can change alignments, easily. The Police officer could be bought off by a local gang, and suddenly he drops to lawful neutral. The average citizen might find that his neighbors dog is annoying, barking at night and keeping him up. So he poisons its food, now he is no longer good, he is stepping towards true neutral. Maybe the citizen really goes crazy also kills the neighbor, hello neutral evil. It is possible that the Vigilante realizes that the cops are actually doing a pretty good job and decides to become an officer himself, leaving his masked crime fighting days behind him. Now he is Lawful good. Your alignment is not carved in stone, it is malleable and will change to reflect your actions.[/spoiler]
 
I know people will say that my Dm was the problem, but I have played with this guy several other times in different games. I never felt it was him. I always felt it was the game. 


 
Right another we cant roleplay because the system wont let us...  crap post....  pardon me while I block you.
  Creative Character Build Collection and The Magic of King's and Heros  also Can Martial Characters Fly? 

Improvisation in 4e: Fave 4E Improvisations - also Wrecans Guides to improvisation beyond page 42
The Non-combatant Adventurer (aka Princess build Warlord or LazyLord)
Reality is unrealistic - and even monkeys protest unfairness
Reflavoring the Fighter : The Wizard : The Swordmage - Creative Character Collection: Bloodwright (Darksun Character) 

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

 

 
I know people will say that my Dm was the problem, but I have played with this guy several other times in different games. I never felt it was him. I always felt it was the game. 


 
Right another we cant roleplay because the system wont let us...  crap post....  pardon me while I block you.




I thought this was funny. Sorry. A friend of mine would say something like this and would be very enthusiastic about it. 

Roleplaying is what you make of it. The rules are there for combat. You don't need rules to role play! And you don't need to fight all the time. In fact, my group still role plays while we fight. We taunt, joke, and mess around during combat all the time. If someone messes up, the character s might move over to help out, and make a joke about why they had to do it. 
I am curious and I actually want to know. Have any of you that dislike bookkeeping every tried a diceless RPG? Less paperwork, less dice rolling. More fun, less mechanics.



Also Limond, I was not saying that in 4th you could one shot a boss. I was just saying that to me it was a similar feeling. The feeling that "I can kill anything from here till the end of time". I am saying that the encounter power system made all of the specialness, all of the hard work, the toil, the right spell at the right time. It made all of these amazing moments something run of the mill. I played 4th for the first 6 months it came out. And I felt board after most games, which is odd because in 3.5, cyberpunk, shadowrun, etc. I always am so excited during and after the game that I can't sleep for hours.  I just got board in 4th, it was not exciting. Their was no adventure, it was just advance, shoot, rest, advance, shoot, rest... repeat ad nauseum. The roleplaying was even toned down so much that I just could not really care.
I know people will say that my Dm was the problem, but I have played with this guy several other times in different games. I never felt it was him. I always felt it was the game. 



Only real Diceless RPG I have played is Fiasco, not a typical RPG but still very fun. Solely focused on RPing.

But to adderss your other point. I want to know more about how encounter powers seem to take all the work out of the game for you. It is a concept that I can simply not understand. Next you state how there was no adventure. Just advance, shoot, rest and repeat. In another thread on these forums you state that you played 3.x as a 5 min work day. Taking 8 long rests in a dungeon with 13 rooms. That is something worse then what you are saying encounter powers bring, you completely trivlize daily powers at that point, when you do that you take all the work, tactics, and risk from the game. Since you seem to imply that the DM was the DM for all your 4e time it looks like that he was the problem, maybe him just learning how to work with the system, or maybe he shares the same opinion that all players of 4e are WoW addicted, no attention span, tween window lickers.


Next you state how there was no adventure. Just advance, shoot, rest and repeat. In another thread on these forums you state that you played 3.x as a 5 min work day. Taking 8 long rests in a dungeon with 13 rooms. That is something worse then what you are saying encounter powers bring, you completely trivlize daily powers at that point, when you do that you take all the work, tactics, and risk from the game. 



You mean this quote? I think the skipped the second paragraph by mistake.

In the beginning when I was first starting out my party had the 5 minute work day. We would find a group of enemies, the wizards would cast most of his spells, the fighter would whack a few things, and then we would rest. In our second ever dungeon we rested eight times. Their were only 13 rooms.

However within a few months of starting D&D my party had played many different campaigns, and with a party of the same level we were able to budget out spells, HP, and resources.





But to adderss your other point. I want to know more about how encounter powers seem to take all the work out of the game for you. It is a concept that I can simply not understand.



They seem cheap. Things that I just throw away at my enemies with little disregard. I found in 3.5 I would take the time to read the spell, think about it, try to use it various odd ways. But encounter powers lacked that ability. 90% of encounter powers had to be targeted at an enemy. But I loved to target anything that was not an enemy so I had a problem. Sure in 3.5 Fireball or magic missile was the same thing. But I rarely use those spells.

I even felt the at will powers were cheap, I mean they really are. I get infinite magic missile? Then why is magic missile special? Sure it was nice to not run out of spells, personally I never really had that problem in 3.5, except before level 3. But if I can cast magic missile all the time then how is that different from me using a bow when I ran out of spells in 3.5? The magic missile was the new bow.
But as I got past level 3 I found that I still had to use magic missile. As I said before, after level 3 in 3.5 I did not often have this problem. So then I felt useless in 4th. And I suddenly understood why people disliked the 3.5 casting, they would run out of spells and fall back to plinking the enemy with a bow. I will admit this was a problem for low level casters in 3.5, I agree it needed to be fixed. But 4th did not do it, to me it made it worse.
I played up to 7th or 8th level in 4th, and I never really broke away from the magic missile. Actually as I rose in level I came across another problem. I found that I did not want to use my 2d6 damage encounter powers on the minions. If it has 1 hp why am I using something that can do way more damage than 1 hp? So I started plinking them with magic missile. If their were 20 or so of them I would use one of my encounter powers and cut that number down to half, then back to plinking. Plink, plink, plink... My fighter had no trouble killing the minions, he was actually better than me at it, which was odd because I was the controller. Between me, the fighter, the cleric, and the rogue I never had to worry about minions getting close, if they every bunched up in groups of 10 or so I would use one of my encounter powers, or a daily and then back to plinking. I rarely found the minions were close enough together to justify a use of an encounter or daily, I never felt that I was doing much. The fighter and rogue would get all of the boss and lieutenant kills, me I was the cannon for the cannon fodder. And I was one board cannon.

I was a magical archer, nothing more.

And since minions had improved evasion it was actually harder to hit them with magic than it was to hit them with a bow. 
Im sorry but ADEU is a French word for goodbye, not a combat system. You say, "Encounter Power" and I stop listening to you. [spoiler Have Played/Run] D&D 1st ed D&D 3.5 ed D&D 4th ed Shadowrun Star Wars SAGA Cyberpunk Interlock Unlimited Run.Net [/spoiler] I know my games, don't try to argue about them. [spoiler Alignment Explained] This is a very simple problem and I will outline it below. Their are two types of people Type 1: a lot of people (not all, but a lot) who play see alignment as "I am lawful good thus I must play lawful good" Type 2: a lot of people (not all, but a lot) who play see alignment as "My previous actions have made people and the gods view me as lawful good. The difference is subtle but it is the source of the misunderstanding. Alignment does not dictate how you play your character. All it does is tell you, the player, how the rest of the world views you, and your previous actions. Any future actions will be judged by their own merits. Say you're a baby eating pyromaniac. You are most likely chaotic evil. But one day you decide, "Hey all I really need is love." So you get a wife, have a kid, and get a kitten named Mr. Snook'ems. You become a member of the PTA and help build houses for the homeless. You are no longer chaotic evil. And just because you were once chaotic evil it does not mean that you have to stay chaotic evil. Alignment never dictates what you can do, it only says what you have done. Now that is cleared up here is a simple test. What is the alignment of... A Police officer: The average Citizen: A Vigilante: The answer is simple. The Police officer is lawful good. He uses the laws of the country and city to arrest people and make them pay their debt to society. The Citizen is Neutral good. He wants to live is a place that is Good and follows moral and ethical principle, but he sometimes finds the laws impedes him, and he wonders why we spend so much on poor people. The Vigilante is Chaotic Good. He wants to uphold the morals and ethics of society but finds that the bad guys often slip through the cracks in the law. He takes it upon himself to protect the people from these criminals. That is the basic breakdown of the good alignment axis. What needs to be remembered is that any one of these people can change alignments, easily. The Police officer could be bought off by a local gang, and suddenly he drops to lawful neutral. The average citizen might find that his neighbors dog is annoying, barking at night and keeping him up. So he poisons its food, now he is no longer good, he is stepping towards true neutral. Maybe the citizen really goes crazy also kills the neighbor, hello neutral evil. It is possible that the Vigilante realizes that the cops are actually doing a pretty good job and decides to become an officer himself, leaving his masked crime fighting days behind him. Now he is Lawful good. Your alignment is not carved in stone, it is malleable and will change to reflect your actions.[/spoiler]
Sign In to post comments