im not sure i like this Per encounter stuff.

116 posts / 0 new
Last post
What makes an encounter? How long is an encounter? What if an encounter is a huge battle that lasts hours? What if its a small battle that lasts minutes?

For spells we had per day, but now if its per encounter.. im not so sure thats gonna set right.
What makes an encounter? How long is an encounter? What if an encounter is a huge battle that lasts hours? What if its a small battle that lasts minutes?

For spells we had per day, but now if its per encounter.. im not so sure thats gonna set right.

The leading theory (by which I mean mine) is that a per encounter "recharges" after a brief rest period (say, five minutes). That way the party can't use shady definitions of "encounter" to gain a weird advantage ("ok, we're moving on to the next goblin. New encounter!"), and it lets the DM wear the party down with a long combat.

In an hours long battle, the PCs would probably be able to recharge their abilities as they move to a new part of the battlefield, but fatigue rules might start setting in if it dragged on too long.
Rhymes with Bruce
Yeah, i hope you are right, and they are well defined. Im really looking towards to 4th .
I would say that a huge battle that lasts hours would actually be broken up into several encounters with strategic/tactical movement in between. Any time the action breaks for a flanking maneuver or a retreat is when I would consider the encounter to end and when the actual fighting starts again would be the first round of the next encounter.

I think it would be rare enough that the PCs are going to actually be fighting non-stop for more than a couple of handfuls of rounds that it won't often be a concern.
Coming from years of playing White Wolf. It's actually much easier to manage than their scene based mechanics.
Per encounter rules are great for changing the dramatic level of the game. Now I can narrate a single battle as if it is covering eons, and the only thing I might have to fudge (for the rules lawyers) is the 1/day spells.

I love them so much, I think WotC should provide an optional per-encounter translation for 1/day spells. Actually, the fact that they haven't so far is the one thing I don't like about per-encounter rules. It suggests that they either haven't really defined "encounter" well enough, or else they are lacking in metrics for how often people use types of abilities. Either seems not so good this late in the game.
Well in 3.5 I use an encounter as defined in ToB. Your in the same encounter until after 10mins (or maybe 10 rounds, I don't have the book in front of me) of not being in danger. No attacks, saves, or traps for that time. With that as my only frame of refrence it applies to factotums as well.
Exp-Free Since 2004! My Fellow Game Masters! Stop giving out exp. Stop having your players roll for stats or wealth. Stop making them build each pick a different role, if they all wanna be rangers let them and don't kill them for it, stop ruining their fun.
Well in 3.5 I use an encounter as defined in ToB. Your in the same encounter until after 10mins (or maybe 10 rounds, I don't have the book in front of me) of not being in danger. No attacks, saves, or traps for that time. With that as my only frame of refrence it applies to factotums as well.

Thank you. That´s the kinda thing I was trying to understand... What is a "per encounter" ability? How can you really classify an encouter? If the PCs are just talking to someone and they use something, was it considered a "per encouter" use? What if they finish talking and start a battle with someone else?

Now, this 10 minutes "rest" makes more sense, now I can get the feeling that it is a very draining ability, one should rest after using it a bit.. you could even use it on the same "encounter" if you could take the time out while you group protected you, maybe? That´d make sense... not this "You can only use it twice in a battle".. Why? How? How can we define where one "combat" ends and another begins.

I was guessing it should be something like this "rest" period anyway, but thanks deviknyte for clearing it up (I know it could be different from ToB but still...).


Oh yes... how can I put that little "spoiler" button in my sig? Or any other button where the writing appears only when you click it?
"sblock=spoilername" and "/sblock" to end with, put inside []'s... i think.


anyway, i'll probably join into this discussion later on, we did alot of talking about it in the Full health every battle? thread.
Thanks Duke! I know nothing of HTML.

I know it's out of the topic, sorry.
I thought Factotum wording was that when an encounter begins they gain inspiration points, not that they regain them after an encounter ends.
IIRC, I believe it was mentioned in an early podcast that an 'encounter' would have guideline meaning for the DM to determine when one ends and another begins. That only makes sense; if we though of it so quickly and easily, I'm sure the playtesters must have asked the same question.

The Piazza A renaissance of the Old Worlds. Where any setting can be explored, any rules system discussed, and any combination of the two brought to life.

Is anyone thinking about the idea of partially recovering from an encounter? I mean, if you weren't able to get full time to rest between two encounters would you partially recover your stuff?

Example: You have 3 Some-Arcane-Ray-Attack per encounter and that the time between encounter is 10 minutes.. if, after an encounter you could only rest for a few 3-4 minutes, could you get at least 1 use of your Some-Arcane-Ray-Attack?

Anyone gave this a thought also?
Is anyone thinking about the idea of partially recovering from an encounter? I mean, if you weren't able to get full time to rest between two encounters would you partially recover your stuff?

Example: You have 3 Some-Arcane-Ray-Attack per encounter and that the time between encounter is 10 minutes.. if, after an encounter you could only rest for a few 3-4 minutes, could you get at least 1 use of your Some-Arcane-Ray-Attack?

Anyone gave this a thought also?

This is why I dislike hard and fast rules.

I'd use the same mechanics as I do for Scenes in World of Darkness and Exalted games; Any Meaningful Period of Rest Where the Narrative Changes Focus or The Characters Can Successfully Collect Their Thoughts And Exchange Meaningful Dialogue In A New Perspective, The Encounter Has Ended.

Ergo, if in those 3-4 minutes, they've calmed down and collected themselves, had time to reseath their swords, and make a thought out, rational decision about something, then yes, they get their Ray back.
While no mechanic is perfect, I like the way that it prevents characters from going NOVA (expending many resources in a single encounter). This distorted game balance as every campaign had different levels of ability to rest (e.g. spend a day of rest) between encounters.

I like this approach more. It seems to work well with SWSE (Star Wars Sage Edition) and Jedi powers as well. If done like that it actually allows MORE character diversity within a single class than we have now which is a good thing.
Now... just a thought that came to my mind; 'per encounter' spells must necessarily be very combat-driven otherwise there´s going to be a lot of abuse; even a Cure Light Wound (CLW) that can be cast 3-4 times per encounter will be sufficient to get the party back to full health after every battle; you know.. it may take a little while but eventually everyone will be healed. What about that ring of sustance, the party will make all eforts to get the cleric something like that asap, while everyone is sleeping the cleric goes about healing everyone.. 3 CLW - 5 minutes rest, 3 CLW - 5 min rest, etc....

Same thing for spells like shield, mage armor, and any other protection spells, they´ll basically be 24 hour spells. "I wake up and cast shield, mage armor, prot vs Evi, etc..." 30 minutes of game time.. "OK, I cast everything all over again"..

Again, thinking about it, this "per encounter" stuff is a very delicate issue to deal with, if they are not careful we´ll se a lot of spell abuse.
Its basically every time you roll initiative = new encounter.

Now for non-combat encounters, 3e way would be... every 5-10 minutes or so as a quick guide.

Basically lets say the Wizard can cast a fireball every encounter. Each time your DM says, "roll initiative" you have your per encounter suite at your disposal.

A good DM will "end" an encounter if you defeat all the critters in the room and nothing needs to be tracked in 6 second intervals. If you get a 5 minute breather (say you defeat a wave of goblins and the others are not in sight) then you get to refresh your per encounter.

Then the next wave of goblins arrive and your DM then again calls for a new initiative roll.

Its not that bad really.
Exactly, like I said, they all must be combat-driven attack spells, otherwise one would just use it all the time when not in combat.

1 fireball per encounter is ok since outside combat you don't have much use for it; but, again, imagine even a once per encounter Cure Light Wounds! If you're not fighting, cure someone, wait 5 minutes, cure another.. 'till everyone is full again.
Exactly, like I said, they all must be combat-driven attack spells, otherwise one would just use it all the time when not in combat.

1 fireball per encounter is ok since outside combat you don't have much use for it; but, again, imagine even a once per encounter Cure Light Wounds! If you're not fighting, cure someone, wait 5 minutes, cure another.. 'till everyone is full again.

What's wrong with having cure spells that easy to cast?

If you want to run your party into the ground, don't stop the encounter. Goblins are said to run in hordes for a reason.
Exactly, like I said, they all must be combat-driven attack spells, otherwise one would just use it all the time when not in combat.

1 fireball per encounter is ok since outside combat you don't have much use for it; but, again, imagine even a once per encounter Cure Light Wounds! If you're not fighting, cure someone, wait 5 minutes, cure another.. 'till everyone is full again.

Yep which is why healing magic should be x/day. It sounds like there will be plenty of class abilities (or /encounter) to bring the PC's up to 1/2 HP. But to 'top it off' with healing should be limited to /day.

I'm more concerned about polymorph, teleport, scry, dominate, etc. out of battle. If these are /encounter or can be used every 5 - 10 minutes imagine what you could do?
What's wrong with having cure spells that easy to cast?

Oh, absolutely nothing, it's gonna be a woooonderful world, extremely low death rates. One 1st level cleric per village, maybe one level 3 in a large town and no one dies by wounds/bleeding anymore.

I'm more concerned about polymorph, teleport, scry, dominate, etc. out of battle. If these are /encounter or can be used every 5 - 10 minutes imagine what you could do?

ouch... yeah.. we can imagine a lot... Teleport every 5 minutes!! Hell of fun at least...
1 fireball per encounter is ok since outside combat you don't have much use for it

You must live in a crazy world if Fireball doesn't have as many uses out of combat as it does in combat.

I'm more concerned about polymorph, teleport, scry, dominate, etc. out of battle. If these are /encounter or can be used every 5 - 10 minutes imagine what you could do?

Long range teleporting is said to be a ritual. I'd suspect that long range scrying is the same. Dominate and Polymorph (and other such "inherently stronger" kinds of spells) are probably a per day ability.

One 1st level cleric per village, maybe one level 3 in a large town and no one dies by wounds/bleeding anymore.

Most commoners don't die in swordfights that can be peacefully mended afterwords in the first place. They probably die of things like disease and famine, which you can't just Cure away. In the case of a raid, the 5 minute cooldown between healings afterwrods means many people will bleed to death. Anyone who was stabilized with the heal skill would have been just as safe in 3.5 anyways (but take longer to recover).
You must live in a crazy world if Fireball doesn't have as many uses out of combat as it does in combat.

If there is something that I find I should throw a fireball at, thats probably an encounter scene.. but still... if you like blowing things up you could do that just fine in any edition.


They probably die of things like disease

Remove disease.

Twice every 5 minutes.. yeah... disease-free land


and famine

that 5-little-berries spell, each one heals 1 hp and is considered as a full meal for the day. A 1st level cleric (or is it a Druid spell? whatever.. take a Druid level) could create hundreds of those in a day... but again, they could do it in 3rd edition too.. I wonder why they didnt, it would surely be a great way to end famine... You know, this discussion just gave me a great idea... hummmm....


In the case of a raid, the 5 minute cooldown between healings afterwrods means many people will bleed to death. Anyone who was stabilized with the heal skill would have been just as safe in 3.5 anyways (but take longer to recover).

Commoners have very low hp, they'll most likely die with one hit, so no good at that... anyway, in this case a lot of people will die, yeah.. but death by the more "simple" wounds (getting stabbed by the burglar, falling from the roof/tree, getting beat up in a tavern, etc....) will surely lower a lot.
Remove disease.

Twice every 5 minutes.. yeah... disease-free land

I think that clerical restoration (and by implication removing disease) was explicitly given as an example of a ritual. This makes sense -- anything that you are not going to do as part of combat can be balanced by a long casting time and/or other requirements of a ritual.

I've never seen restoration used during combat and the use of long range teleport as in an combat option has been problematic in the past . . .
I think that clerical restoration (and by implication removing disease) was explicitly given as an example of a ritual.

Oh really, where did they say it? (no irony, i haven't read this)


That'd be more reasonable..

..but again, we are arguing over a rule we don't even know... well.. I believe that's the point of these forums right? Give ideas...
Oh really, where did they say it? (no irony, i haven't read this)


That'd be more reasonable..

..but again, we are arguing over a rule we don't even know... well.. I believe that's the point of these forums right? Give ideas...

One source was EN World:

# From Wizards Presents: Races & Classes:

* All classes will get some self-healing power (already known). Cleric enhance the self-healing capabilities of nearby allies.
* Bigger spell will be rituals (raise the dead for example). Rituals are different from spells (as of how I do not know).
* Summoning spells are removed along with alignment specific ones (at least for now).
And in turn, EN world got that info from the guy in north east Europe (I forget which specific country) who got the Races and Classes book early, and then posted what he read out of that.
that 5-little-berries spell, each one heals 1 hp and is considered as a full meal for the day. A 1st level cleric (or is it a Druid spell? whatever.. take a Druid level) could create hundreds of those in a day... but again, they could do it in 3rd edition too.. I wonder why they didnt, it would surely be a great way to end famine... You know, this discussion just gave me a great idea... hummmm....

Speaking of which...are there rules for dealing with starvation?
Speaking of which...are there rules for dealing with starvation?

Yes, you don´t eat you die. :P :P :P
MageDance; the economics of the world of D&D already don't make sense.

Fabricate and Wish destroy everything. Period. There's a thread about it on the CO board, I think.
One still must eat.. well... unless of course, he wishes that he does not need it anymore... :P :P :P :P :P

and.. we.. kinda deviated from the topic... we could start another one on D&D economics... and the need to eat..
One still must eat.. well... unless of course, he wishes that he does not need it anymore... :P :P :P :P :P

and.. we.. kinda deviated from the topic... we could start another one on D&D economics... and the need to eat..

"I wish for a vending machine that can create any meal with the push of a single button and never runs out of ingredients"

Or someting similarly strange.

There already is a whole thread examining how broken the D&D economy would be. I'm just not sure where it is.
From what I have heard, Wish spells are gone and perminent spells are gone too.

here's the thread for no more wish spells

[HTML]http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=948548[/HTML]

I forget where i saw the thing on perminent spells.:embarrass
Oh really? I was hoping a 20th level wiz would get a wish per encounter...

just kidding..

Yeah, I saw about that Wish spells are gone, it was beautiful news I tell you.. we can still have wishes in the game, but now its controllable and.. actually mysterious.. you know.. the old genie in the lamp thing.

But going back to the point... does anyone in here have any more info about this "per encounter" stuff? Really.. just about 90% of the spells that you could use "per encounter" are going to see A LOT of abuse.. Magic Missile per Encounter is alright (dont come telling me you use Magic Missile outside combat... and well.. if you do... there´s no set of rules that can help you with your problem..) , but healing spells?? Well, many people here have stated that its probable that "per encounter" healing will have some limites, as of only healing up to "bloodied" or something... It´s still very unclear to me what is "bloodied" though many agree that is about 50% HP.. is that it really or just speculation? Even if its that, it´ll take many battles to wear down the party now...

I dont know... they could reaaaaallly let a bit more info out.. ya know.. not talking about the whole "per encouter list of spells" chapter of the book.. but just an example or something... we are talking about nothing here... this is something (this "at will", "per encouter"...) that is getting a lot of attention lately and we know nothing about it, except that it exists. I know, as some have mentioned, that theres Fighting maneuvers in the Tome of Battle that have "per encounter" (please correct me if I´m wrong), now, some crazy wacko fighting is simple to understand as a "per encounter" thing, seeing it´s just normal, theres no reason to use it 100 times in the air and if you´re using it against someone it´s an encounter... but spells?

Well.. any new thoughts?


Oh.. and before I forget... even the mightiest of warriors, the most powerful of mages, must eat! Unless they got the ring or made a wish, they have to eat or they die.. no save, no matter how high-level.. hahahha.. :D :D
Bloodied is a confirmed 4e game term that equates to "at or below half of your max HP". I think there are some articles on the DnD website that talk about it.

I don't think most of the current spells will survive into 4e encounter abilities. They'll be per day abilities if anything. The current spells are balanced as being per day, so they'll be entirely changed if you balance them to per encounter.

Also, warforged need not eat. Nor do Elans, really.
Thanks for the bloodied insight. :P

So we're guessing that "per encounter" healing will probably heal up to bloodied? What about buff spells? Any "per encounter" buff will basically become 24 hours buffs.


Well.. warforgeds are mechanical so... and Elans... they are just a weird race...
I had written a long text continuing this issue, but this is getting too strange... PHP races need to eat, period! And dragons! And if all PHP AND dragons need to eat, eating is important! And if dragons don't eat they die... ok, stopping now...
What about buff spells?

I believe buffs will last the encounter, none of this:

"Hey, how long ago did I cast barkskin?"

"I think an hour…?"

"No, it was more like an hour and 23 minutes…"
I personally just prefer the guideline that an encounter begins when you roll for initiative and the encounter ends when you move out of round-by-round resolution.
I personally just prefer the guideline that an encounter begins when you roll for initiative and the encounter ends when you move out of round-by-round resolution.

Surely these are game terms for an encounter, but a spell that "lasts for an encounter" just doesn't make sense, why couldn't the wizard cast his shield spell before battle begins? He has to be fighting someone to use it? If so, then the fighter starts a fight with the barbarian, look bad at the wizard who will feel threatened and then his shield spell will be available.. then you move on... That doesn't make sense.
Of course you may say that this is cheap, but the players will have all the right to question "Why can't my wizard cast the damn spell now? What's preventing him? Is there a magical energy that is only released when some creatures in the MM attack me?"
I believe buffs will last the encounter, none of this:
"Hey, how long ago did I cast barkskin?"
"I think an hour…?"
"No, it was more like an hour and 23 minutes…"

Yes, but what is preventing the wiz from casting Barsking before any battle? Why couldn't he cast it before "entering the dungeon"?

This feels waaaaaaaaaay too much like videogame, it's like his "Barskin Spell Icon" is grayed-out, and when the soundtrack changes and critters show up on the screen where the cursor changes to a sword then it becomes available... this is the feeling I'm getting from this...
Yes, but what is preventing the wiz from casting Barsking before any battle?

Nothing, he would just have to cast it again when in battle.