Looks like I'm Banning Rogues from My Games

So this is the relevant part of the legend and lore article."You can think of these as nonmagical effects that would still require a saving throw or an ability contest to resist. For instance, Shalandra the rogue might contest her Charisma against an ogre's Wisdom. If Shalandra wins, she can trick the ogre into charging forward and blundering into a trap."

This is okay for non intellegant creatures, but there is no valid reason an intellegant creature should have to fall for such a thing. Nor do I like the idea of such a creaturing being tricked into having to charge forward and into a trap. This should be part of the roleplaying part of the game. Anything like magic shouldn't be given to martial classes and forcing a monster/npc to act in a certain way without being magically compelled is just a breakdown in logic.

This makes the third time the rogue has been messed up, going from bad to worse to somehow even worse. And would also make the first time I have ever banned a class from a game, but I have no desire to deal with a non-magical hypnotist while running a game. If my villian wants to attack the wizard cuase the wizard just burned him with burning hands, he should have the complete option (as an intellegent creature) to completely ignore the rogue no matter what. 

I think this would also qualify as my first "ragequit" for Next, though it is caused by the issue occuring three times in a row with the rogue always causing problems. 


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

So this is the relevant part of the legend and lore article."You can think of these as nonmagical effects that would still require a saving throw or an ability contest to resist. For instance, Shalandra the rogue might contest her Charisma against an ogre's Wisdom. If Shalandra wins, she can trick the ogre into charging forward and blundering into a trap."

This is okay for non intellegant creatures, but there is no valid reason an intellegant creature should have to fall for such a thing. Nor do I like the idea of such a creaturing being tricked into having to charge forward and into a trap. This should be part of the roleplaying part of the game. Anything like magic shouldn't be given to martial classes and forcing a monster/npc to act in a certain way without being magically compelled is just a breakdown in logic.

This makes the third time the rogue has been messed up, going from bad to worse to somehow even worse. And would also make the first time I have ever banned a class from a game, but I have no desire to deal with a non-magical hypnotist while running a game. If my villian wants to attack the wizard cuase the wizard just burned him with burning hands, he should have the complete option (as an intellegent creature) to completely ignore the rogue no matter what. 

I think this would also qualify as my first "ragequit" for Next, though it is caused by the issue occuring three times in a row with the rogue always causing problems. 


Clearly unfamiliar with the concept of trolling.



Is that what this is? If so....bravo to the OP.



Yep, because anything you disagree with is obviously trolling...
"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.
If it can make somone do the impossible, it's mind control.  For instance, I will not murder someone and there's nothing anyone can do with mere words to make that happen.  It's simply not possible for anyone to do that to me.



Please watch this:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=oC9J6O6soHA

Granted, it takes time and a lot of planning. But in the end, it is mere words that do the trick. And it would be a perfect social encounter in an RPG as well. In 4E, this would make a great skill challenge.
I want my rogues to be able to do stuff like this.
Words carry grat power, sometimes better than any physical weapon. I don't see how pissing an enemy off to make them charge you is magical. hell, it happens in...well, damn near any video game you fight a large monster that attacks you with charging.
If it can make somone do the impossible, it's mind control.  For instance, I will not murder someone and there's nothing anyone can do with mere words to make that happen.  It's simply not possible for anyone to do that to me.



Please watch this:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=oC9J6O6soHA

Granted, it takes time and a lot of planning. But in the end, it is mere words that do the trick. And it would be a perfect social encounter in an RPG as well. In 4E, this would make a great skill challenge.
I want my rogues to be able to do stuff like this.



I'll look at it when I get home, but I will go into it a skeptic.  It's too easy to set up fake encounters when it comes to youtube and the like.
 It's too easy to set up fake encounters when it comes to youtube and the like.

It doesn't matter if it's fake. The question is, is it believable?

Romeo and Juliet have committed suicide on stage quite a few times. It's all fake (or almost all, and I hope all). But it's believable, and suicide by both poison and knife really happen.

"The world does not work the way you have been taught it does. We are not real as such; we exist within The Story. Unfortunately for you, you have inherited a condition from your mother known as Primary Protagonist Syndrome, which means The Story is interested in you. It will find you, and if you are not ready for the narrative strands it will throw at you..." - from Footloose
EnglishLanguage You are taking the same approach a lot of other people are. I never said the rogue could not do this. I just said I didn't want it as an ability that the rogue gains the monopoly on the ability to for so.
I see it as magical because it overrides an npc freewill and could make him do something he would never do. like run into the pit trap he spotted five rounds ago
I see it as magical because it overrides an npc freewill and could make him do something he would never do. like run into the pit trap he spotted five rounds ago


It doesn't make him run knowingly into a pit trap.  It makes him rush the rogue in a blind rage.  There's a huge difference.  The former is just suicidal, while the latter is not only feasable but very possible.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

But not in all cases. A lawful archlinch who has a personal vendetta against the fighter however shouldn't ever blindly charge against the rogue
I think it's all fine and dandy when we are using it against NPCs, but what's going to happen when the abilities get used on players? I think you will see a good amount of people complaining about being forced to do things they wouldn't do.
My two copper.
Goading a creature into doing something that they KNOW will cause them harm or death automatically gives them advantage to their opposed check.


Creature is well trained and will not leave his post +4
Creature is aware of dangers in the area of the chase +8
etc.

It's pretty simple to do things like this, not exact numbers but a simple bonus system can be put into place.
But not in all cases. A lawful archlinch who has a personal vendetta against the fighter however shouldn't ever blindly charge against the rogue


Look, you can "special circumstance" anything to death.  Disarm shouldn't work against people who lash their weapon to their hand/wrist with a leather chord.  That doesn't mean the ability shouldn't exist.  It means congratulations, you found a niche where it doesn't work.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

I think it's all fine and dandy when we are using it against NPCs, but what's going to happen when the abilities get used on players? I think you will see a good amount of people complaining about being forced to do things they wouldn't do.


Not anymore than we see it already.
Seriously, though, you should check out the PbP Haven. You might also like Real Adventures, IF you're cool.
Knights of W.T.F.- Silver Spur Winner
4enclave, a place where 4e fans can talk 4e in peace.
I think it's all fine and dandy when we are using it against NPCs, but what's going to happen when the abilities get used on players? I think you will see a good amount of people complaining about being forced to do things they wouldn't do.



See Charm, or Compusion, or any of those other spells that make you lose control of your character.
I think it's all fine and dandy when we are using it against NPCs, but what's going to happen when the abilities get used on players? I think you will see a good amount of people complaining about being forced to do things they wouldn't do.


I doubt it.  That's why it has the save mechanic as part of it.  People are used to having much worse things happen to them because of failing a save.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

The other thing is that a fighter can taunt a creature just as well as a rogue can. Perhaps if the fighter has killed the villans brother then the fighter should be able to taunt the villan more than the rogue.



I don't see taunting is something inherently roguish.  At least not rogue the class.  Rogue the background perhaps.  Any class should be able to taunt really well if that's the way the character is set up.



Anybody can lie, just like anyone can make a basic attack with an improvised weapon, but the Rogue did the equivalent of that show "lie to me" and studied and practiced lying, cheating, stealing, and bluffing. They have a higher understanding of human nature when it comes to truth and deceit.

So while the Wizard can fire that crossbow, the Fighter can fire that same crossbow and hit a bulls eye at 100 yards.

So while the Wizard can lie to someone, the Rogue can expertly manipulate that person into doing exactly what they want. If you don't think its a science more than an art, check out Derren Brown, "The Experiments". He gets a guy to confess to a murder when no murder was committed.

I see no problem with a heroic scaled manipulative Rogue being able to manipulate people into doing what they want. It must have a failure chance and it must be based on how well the target can gauge the Rogue and how much effort the Rogue has put into it. For instance if the Rogue as a free action for three rounds heckles a target, and then as a final insult they try to make the target charge at them, sure I can see that. If they can try to make things charge at them every round there is a problem...Smile
"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.
I think there's some confusion on what the article says. "Shalandra the rogue might contest her Charisma against an ogre's Wisdom. If Shalandra wins, she can trick the ogre into charging forward and blundering into a trap."

It does NOT say "Shalandra tells the ogre to charge into the trap." The trap is only mentioned there to tell YOU the reader there is a trap. The actual trick might be something like "Shalandra says to the Ogre, 'Do you smell that? It smells like there's some tasty elves being cooked! We'd better hurry and get some before it's all gone! You go first!"

THAT is where your "roleplaying" is. Making the roll indicates the ploy will be successful, but the player has to put some effort behind it.

Besides, Doctor Who talks his way out of all sorts of situations, and nobody gripes about that!
Show
Of the two approaches to hobby games today, one is best defined as the realism-simulation school and the other as the game school. AD&D is assuredly an adherent of the latter school. It does not stress any realism (in the author's opinon an absurd effort at best considering the topic!). It does little to attempt to simulate anything either. (AD&D) is first and foremost a game for the fun and enjoyment of those who seek the use of imagination and creativity.... In all cases, however, the reader should understand that AD&D is designed to be an amusing and diverting pastime, something which an fill a few hours or consume endless days, as the participants desire, but in no case something to be taken too seriously. For fun, excitement and captivating fantasy, AD&D is unsurpassed.As a realistic simulation of things from the realm of make-believe or even as a reflection of midieval or ancient warfare or culture or society, it can be deemed only a dismal failure. Readers who seek the later must search elsewhere. - Gary Gygax. 1e DMG.
Here is how I would handle bluff.

A rogue walks up to a farmer and tries to convince the farmer he is a town guard. I would require a bluff check. Now say the rogue was wearing a guard uniform and the farmer had no reason so suspect a lie, Id probably go with an autosuccess. Now say the farmer knows the captain of the guard and potentially every guard in town. I would either say a bluff roll or autofailure. (telling the player to roll anyways) But what if the farmer is really the captain of the guard pretending to be a farmer. That would be an auto failure in my game.
Here is how I would handle bluff. A rogue walks up to a farmer and tries to convince the farmer he is a town guard. I would require a bluff check. Now say the rogue was wearing a guard uniform and the farmer had no reason so suspect a lie, Id probably go with an autosuccess. Now say the farmer knows the captain of the guard and potentially every guard in town. I would either say a bluff roll or autofailure. (telling the player to roll anyways) But what if the farmer is really the captain of the guard pretending to be a farmer. That would be an auto failure in my game.


Like I said, niche situations.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

But not in all cases. A lawful archlinch who has a personal vendetta against the fighter however shouldn't ever blindly charge against the rogue



I don't think the rogue's ability is meant to override DM common sense.  Certainly if you're in the ultra-rare situation in which there's *no way* the rogue could possibly taunt that villain into attacking, because of their laser-like focus and iron will, just set the 'success' condition at critical-only, or simply roll behind the screen and say "too bad, so sad, you failed."  The DM's job is to help the narrative along.  This not-at-all-new ability of the rogue is simply making explicit an already existant ability every PC has, apparently for those who hadn't already figured out years ago how fun it is to lay traps for the monsters for a change.
   
Rogues need a few more traps though...

guides
List of no-action attacks.
Dynamic vs Static Bonuses
Phalanx tactics and builds
Crivens! A Pictsies Guide Good
Power
s to intentionally miss with
Mr. Cellophane: How to be unnoticed
Way's to fire around corners
Crits: what their really worth
Retroactive bonus vs Static bonus.
Runepriest handbook & discussion thread
Holy Symbols to hang around your neck
Ways to Gain or Downgrade Actions
List of bonuses to saving throws
The Ghost with the Most (revenant handbook)
my builds
F-111 Interdictor Long (200+ squares) distance ally teleporter. With some warlord stuff. Broken in a plot way, not a power way.

Thought Switch Higher level build that grants upto 14 attacks on turn 1. If your allies play along, it's broken.

Elven Critters Crit op with crit generation. 5 of these will end anything. Broken.

King Fisher Optimized net user.  Moderate.

Boominator Fun catch-22 booming blade build with either strong or completely broken damage depending on your reading.

Very Distracting Warlock Lot's of dazing and major penalties to hit. Overpowered.

Pocket Protector Pixie Stealth Knight. Maximizing the defender's aura by being in an ally's/enemy's square.

Yakuza NinjIntimiAdin: Perma-stealth Striker that offers a little protection for ally's, and can intimidate bloodied enemies. Very Strong.

Chargeburgler with cheese Ranged attacks at the end of a charge along with perma-stealth. Solid, could be overpowered if tweaked.

Void Defender Defends giving a penalty to hit anyone but him, then removing himself from play. Can get somewhat broken in epic.

Scry and Die Attacking from around corners, while staying hidden. Moderate to broken, depending on the situation.

Skimisher Fly in, attack, and fly away. Also prevents enemies from coming close. Moderate to Broken depending on the enemy, but shouldn't make the game un-fun, as the rest of your team is at risk, and you have enough weaknesses.

Indestructible Simply won't die, even if you sleep though combat.  One of THE most abusive character in 4e.

Sir Robin (Bravely Charge Away) He automatically slows and pushes an enemy (5 squares), while charging away. Hard to rate it's power level, since it's terrain dependent.

Death's Gatekeeper A fun twist on a healic, making your party "unkillable". Overpowered to Broken, but shouldn't actually make the game un-fun, just TPK proof.

Death's Gatekeeper mk2, (Stealth Edition) Make your party "unkillable", and you hidden, while doing solid damage. Stronger then the above, but also easier for a DM to shut down. Broken, until your DM get's enough of it.

Domination and Death Dominate everything then kill them quickly. Only works @ 30, but is broken multiple ways.

Battlemind Mc Prone-Daze Protecting your allies by keeping enemies away. Quite powerful.

The Retaliator Getting hit deals more damage to the enemy then you receive yourself, and you can take plenty of hits. Heavy item dependency, Broken.

Dead Kobold Transit Teleports 98 squares a turn, and can bring someone along for the ride. Not fully built, so i can't judge the power.

Psilent Guardian Protect your allies, while being invisible. Overpowered, possibly broken.

Rune of Vengance Do lot's of damage while boosting your teams. Strong to slightly overpowered.

Charedent BarrageA charging ardent. Fine in a normal team, overpowered if there are 2 together, and easily broken in teams of 5.

Super Knight A tough, sticky, high damage knight. Strong.

Super Duper Knight Basically the same as super knight with items, making it far more broken.

Mora, the unkillable avenger Solid damage, while being neigh indestuctable. Overpowered, but not broken.

Swordburst Maximus At-Will Close Burst 3 that slide and prones. Protects allies with off actions. Strong, possibly over powered with the right party.

But not in all cases. A lawful archlinch who has a personal vendetta against the fighter however shouldn't ever blindly charge against the rogue



I don't think the rogue's ability is meant to override DM common sense.  Certainly if you're in the ultra-rare situation in which there's *no way* the rogue could possibly taunt that villain into attacking, because of their laser-like focus and iron will, just set the 'success' condition at critical-only, or simply roll behind the screen and say "too bad, so sad, you failed."  The DM's job is to help the narrative along.  This not-at-all-new ability of the rogue is simply making explicit an already existant ability every PC has, apparently for those who hadn't already figured out years ago how fun it is to lay traps for the monsters for a change.
   


In all fairness, it also appears that a number of people seem to think it's quazi-magical mind control and likely would've told their players no on that basis.  That was part of what was so great about the codified abilities in 4e, you could rely on generally being able to do them consistently (or at least attempting them), except for when DMs found reasons that you couldn't.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

If it can make somone do the impossible, it's mind control.  For instance, I will not murder someone and there's nothing anyone can do with mere words to make that happen.  It's simply not possible for anyone to do that to me.



Please watch this:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=oC9J6O6soHA

Granted, it takes time and a lot of planning. But in the end, it is mere words that do the trick. And it would be a perfect social encounter in an RPG as well. In 4E, this would make a great skill challenge.
I want my rogues to be able to do stuff like this.



I'll look at it when I get home, but I will go into it a skeptic.  It's too easy to set up fake encounters when it comes to youtube and the like.



I've seen it. Its a commercial TV show where a hypnotist spends about a week turning a guy into a sleeper assassin and then hands him a fake gun that looks and acts real and has him kill a famous actor during a speech. They did a lie detector test at the end to make sure he wasn't faking and they also did an autonomic response test to prove he was under hypnosis. This is real interesting and proves conclusively that sleeper assassins may be a completely real thing, however it doesn't really have a bearing on this conversation about a Rogue taunting an Ogre to charge them. I'd suggest watching some of the other episodes where through specific wordings over the course of a few minutes he is able to manipulate someone into taking a specific course of action. However that falls into the problem of needing 20 round combats before you can manipulate them into charging you...Smile
"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.
lokiare my communications professor called lie to me fake. You cant really do what they do in the show
I see it as magical because it overrides an npc freewill and could make him do something he would never do. like run into the pit trap he spotted five rounds ago


It doesn't make him run knowingly into a pit trap.  It makes him rush the rogue in a blind rage.  There's a huge difference.  The former is just suicidal, while the latter is not only feasable but very possible.



I would be fine with it if it took a number of rounds and the target wasn't forced to do anything that they knew would hurt them. So if they knew the trap was there they would move around it. If they didn't they could be manipulated to charge the trap.

How about if it went like this:

"The Rogue makes a bluff check and adds the highest skill dice roll to the check. The Rogue may only add more than one skill dice if they use an action to taunt the same target over the course of multiple rounds, one per skill dice added. The target makes an opposed Wisdom check and may add their number of hit dice to the roll. If they fail they are manipulated into doing one action they don't think will harm them. They can't be manipulated again by the same Rogue for at least a number of days equal to their Wisdom score."Smile
"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.
also i am not saying this is impossible to do. Just I don't like it as a rogue ability.
I see it as magical because it overrides an npc freewill and could make him do something he would never do. like run into the pit trap he spotted five rounds ago


It doesn't make him run knowingly into a pit trap.  It makes him rush the rogue in a blind rage.  There's a huge difference.  The former is just suicidal, while the latter is not only feasable but very possible.



I would be fine with it if it took a number of rounds and the target wasn't forced to do anything that they knew would hurt them. So if they knew the trap was there they would move around it. If they didn't they could be manipulated to charge the trap.

How about if it went like this:

"The Rogue makes a bluff check and adds the highest skill dice roll to the check. The Rogue may only add more than one skill dice if they use an action to taunt the same target over the course of multiple rounds, one per skill dice added. The target makes an opposed Wisdom check and may add their number of hit dice to the roll. If they fail they are manipulated into doing one action they don't think will harm them. They can't be manipulated again by the same Rogue for at least a number of days equal to their Wisdom score."


If it happens over a number of rounds, it's not going to get used.  Not in a system that advertises faster combats.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

also i am not saying this is impossible to do. Just I don't like it as a rogue ability.


For better or worse, the rogue's schtick is tricksy fighting.  Who else is it a better fit for?

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

lokiare my communications professor called lie to me fake. You cant really do what they do in the show



Your teacher was factually wrong. Now they exaggerate in that show, but the science behind it is real. The idea is you look for particular things, but you only make a percentage determination based on the number of things you see.

So if someone has a fake smile on it doesn't automatically mean they are lying. If they have a fake smile, keep looking to their left, have a twitch in their hand, and have a forced look to the skin around the eyes, as well as having over exaggerated or incorrect word signals there's a good chance they are lying.

Here is a Popular Mechanics article on the subject. You may want to email that to your communications professor...Smile
"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.
I see it as magical because it overrides an npc freewill and could make him do something he would never do. like run into the pit trap he spotted five rounds ago


It doesn't make him run knowingly into a pit trap.  It makes him rush the rogue in a blind rage.  There's a huge difference.  The former is just suicidal, while the latter is not only feasable but very possible.



I would be fine with it if it took a number of rounds and the target wasn't forced to do anything that they knew would hurt them. So if they knew the trap was there they would move around it. If they didn't they could be manipulated to charge the trap.

How about if it went like this:

"The Rogue makes a bluff check and adds the highest skill dice roll to the check. The Rogue may only add more than one skill dice if they use an action to taunt the same target over the course of multiple rounds, one per skill dice added. The target makes an opposed Wisdom check and may add their number of hit dice to the roll. If they fail they are manipulated into doing one action they don't think will harm them. They can't be manipulated again by the same Rogue for at least a number of days equal to their Wisdom score."


If it happens over a number of rounds, it's not going to get used.  Not in a system that advertises faster combats.



Faster combat doesn't necessarily mean less rounds. Besides if combats are supposed to be 4-5 rounds each then the Rogue spending 3 rounds to shout insults at one target to get them to do something one time as a free action is not that bad of an idea. You'll notice that it only takes one round, but it gets enhanced if they take more rounds in my suggestion...Smile
"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.
I see it as magical because it overrides an npc freewill and could make him do something he would never do. like run into the pit trap he spotted five rounds ago


It doesn't make him run knowingly into a pit trap.  It makes him rush the rogue in a blind rage.  There's a huge difference.  The former is just suicidal, while the latter is not only feasable but very possible.



I would be fine with it if it took a number of rounds and the target wasn't forced to do anything that they knew would hurt them. So if they knew the trap was there they would move around it. If they didn't they could be manipulated to charge the trap.

How about if it went like this:

"The Rogue makes a bluff check and adds the highest skill dice roll to the check. The Rogue may only add more than one skill dice if they use an action to taunt the same target over the course of multiple rounds, one per skill dice added. The target makes an opposed Wisdom check and may add their number of hit dice to the roll. If they fail they are manipulated into doing one action they don't think will harm them. They can't be manipulated again by the same Rogue for at least a number of days equal to their Wisdom score."


If it happens over a number of rounds, it's not going to get used.  Not in a system that advertises faster combats.



Faster combat doesn't necessarily mean less rounds. Besides if combats are supposed to be 4-5 rounds each then the Rogue spending 3 rounds to shout insults at one target to get them to do something one time as a free action is not that bad of an idea. You'll notice that it only takes one round, but it gets enhanced if they take more rounds in my suggestion...


Yeah, it's bad.  I could see the 3 rounds if the rogue was setting up a trap the enemy would blunder into, or if the rogue moved into a position where the enemy would provoke one or more OAs en route to the rogue, but 3 rounds of doing nothing just to provoke a single charge (and we're not guaranteeing any kind of trap being present, either)?  Bad.  It'll almost never get used.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

I see it as magical because it overrides an npc freewill and could make him do something he would never do. like run into the pit trap he spotted five rounds ago



People get disoriented in fights all the time (the more enemies and the scarier they are the better but also weaknesses can be enticing), they hit allies and do things they didnt mean to do, fear, anger and seeing what looks like the perfect opening cloud judgement in general induced mistakes hit from more than one side. Its called the fog of war. Also that leaving an opening to induce enemy behavior is a normal fencing move, its called an Invitation. 
  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 see it as magical because it overrides an npc freewill and could make him do something he would never do if he were thinking straight. like run into the pit trap he spotted five rounds ago



Bolded for added text.  The point is that the rogue makes him not think straight, not behave rationally, not still be governed by his non-Rogue intelligence.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
I see it as magical because it overrides an npc freewill and could make him do something he would never do. like run into the pit trap he spotted five rounds ago



People get disoriented in fights all the time hit allies and things they didnt mean to do, anger and seeing what looks like the perfect opening cloud judgement... in general induced mistakes hit from more than one side. Its called the fog of war. Also that leaving an opening to induce enemy behavior is a normal fencing move.


I agree.  Also, the "make him do something he would never do" thing is totally fallacious.  A hostile opponent in the heat of battle would NEVER charge his enemy?

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

The best part about all of this: we are arguing about things that we haven't even seen!

Meh.  You're right.  Mearls commment on allowing a roll for it got me assuming that it would be like a spell or DC ability with success simply always happening if the save is failed or the DC was achieved.  My bad.  I'll wait and see if it can become mind control as written or not. ;)

You just admitted that you had taken things too far!  I tip my hat to you, sir.

Also, everyone should take some time and read Webster's post from a few pages back.  It perfectly explains my own feelings on this.

Mr Mearls was telling a story, and everyone is trying to fit their own mechanics to it without knowing the details and then getting angry because the mechanics they have chosen don't match their own view of what should be.

It would be as if I told the following story from a playtest session, "Then the fighter cleaved the ogre's head right off!" and people complained that fighter's shouldn't have instant kill powers.  In game, all that happened was that the fighter got a critical hit which did enough damage to kill the ogre!

How often, in a book, movie or TV show, have we seen the terrible monster (dinosaur, dragon, zombie, whatever) about to chomp down on a defenseless someone? But before it does, the "hero" tosses a rock at it and/or waves their hands and yells, "Hey, [monster]! Over here! Come eat me instead!", then runs off? Said hero then proceeds to lure the monster into a tough/advantageous situation, defeating (or otherwise thwarting) it?

Are we done with this debate now?
Chris- Heh, let's not forget all the trolls on this very board who start Edition Wars. One comment and usually reasonable, "intelligent" players get all foamy at the mouth.

Show
Of the two approaches to hobby games today, one is best defined as the realism-simulation school and the other as the game school. AD&D is assuredly an adherent of the latter school. It does not stress any realism (in the author's opinon an absurd effort at best considering the topic!). It does little to attempt to simulate anything either. (AD&D) is first and foremost a game for the fun and enjoyment of those who seek the use of imagination and creativity.... In all cases, however, the reader should understand that AD&D is designed to be an amusing and diverting pastime, something which an fill a few hours or consume endless days, as the participants desire, but in no case something to be taken too seriously. For fun, excitement and captivating fantasy, AD&D is unsurpassed.As a realistic simulation of things from the realm of make-believe or even as a reflection of midieval or ancient warfare or culture or society, it can be deemed only a dismal failure. Readers who seek the later must search elsewhere. - Gary Gygax. 1e DMG.
Maybe I'm different but doesn't failing a save or contest remove immediate control of the character fo a duration.

I mean the character did fail.

I mean if mud splashes in my face and I don't blink fast enough, I get mud in  my eye and cannot.
I can't say "No, I can see!"

As long as the DC, action, and effect are all appropriate, fine.

This text is not red.

Orzel, Halfelven son of Zel, Mystic Ranger, Bane to Dragons, Death to Undeath, Killer of Abyssals, King of the Wilds. Constitution Based Class for Next!

Maybe I'm different but doesn't failing a save or contest remove immediate control of the character fo a duration.

QFT>

I decide to arm wrestling an ogre. We roll contested strength checks. But then I decide my arm does not get bent backwards. Because, after all, I do not wish it to. Who is the ogre to tell me how my arm moves? He's not the boss of me...

Maybe I'm different but doesn't failing a save or contest remove immediate control of the character fo a duration.

QFT>

I decide to arm wrestling an ogre. We roll contested strength checks. But then I decide my arm does not get bent backwards. Because, after all, I do not wish it to. Who is the ogre to tell me how my arm moves? He's not the boss of me...




I took 20 damage and died? No, I didn't.
I don't wanna be dead so my PC is not dead.

Orzel, Halfelven son of Zel, Mystic Ranger, Bane to Dragons, Death to Undeath, Killer of Abyssals, King of the Wilds. Constitution Based Class for Next!