Community

Ongorth wrote:

That's not what I said at all. I said they were picking ones that could be effective most often (as opposed to most potentially effective, but won't come up as often). I said nothing about whether or not they take into account their team in the op, and later clarified that they do take into their team:

They are obviously not taking their team into account. With a varied team, just about whatever situation is necessary for the most potentially effective power to be used can be set up very reliably. The fact that your players feel it necessary to take those powers that require the fewest preconditions shows that they have not considered the possibilities of teamwork.

I mean, using your team is the gameplay of 4e. If you aren't doing that, it seems hard to imagine enjoying or even wanting to play it.

If you're working together and using your team, you should be able to make use of all of your encounter powers almost every combat, no matter how restrictive or situational they are, assuming the power was designed well.

Anyway, since you've asked 10 times, I'll give an example. I didn't want to, because examples never help, but I feel I owe you for your feedback and dedication.

You're countering our points by insisting that you are right and we are wrong, over and over again. At some point you need to show that using an example. Otherwise this whole thread was a waste of time and space.

Let's say I have a level 1 cleric. For his encounter power, I think Healing Strike, because I think I'll be able to use it most often and most effectively. However, in my party make up it seems that Cause Fear would be great in some great combinations, but I can't see picking it because of all the times it won't be very useful, especially if my Strength exceeds my Wisdom.

I'm not seeing why cause fear wouldn't be useful. It's as simple as flanking the enemy and casting it so that he charges into your party, taking three or four or more opportunity attacks. That's not even a difficult one to use. If it is less useful than healing strike because it is less likely to hit, that won't change by allowing you to take two encounter powers. If your strength is 16 and your wisdom is 14, you'll most likely take Wrathful Thunder as your second power, anyway.

Healing strike is only useful when you have an ally who needs healing and when you are healthy enough to take an attack yourself. That situation is likely to come up all on its own. But Cause Fear may let you kill an enemy in a single round, provided you work with your teammates to set up the OAs. There should be no problem doing that if you are working tactically with your allies. Like, at all.

The choice of which to take is interesting and should change the abilities your allies will take, but its purely a strategic choice, with the tactical element of getting the most use out of it on the map. If you have to pick between the two during combat, its still a strategic choice (as their are more then two encounter powers to chose from), but but much more of a tactical choice of how to best approach the situations. You can't merely chose "which of my powers is best for the situation?", but rather "which combination of all the characters in the party's powers are best for the situation". And then you still of the tactical element of getting the most use out of it on the map. To me, that's delicious, the exact kind of elements that make 4e a potentially great game.

But this dynamic is already in play, so I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish. Players with two choices of encounter power can be more reactive, which means there is less incentive to work out careful strategies because each individual is more adaptive. If you haven't managed to get yourself into position to cast Cause Fear yet and an ally is damaged, you can use healing strike. It just means it's less important to work together to make cause fear useful, which is all I've been trying to say.

If you value that adaptability over tactical precision, that's fine. As I said earlier, if you are joining a party and you don't know the other characters or other players, that adaptability may well save your life. It's not really necessary if you work closely with your team, though, because you should be able to manipulate the board to get the most out of whichever power you prefer.

Ongorth wrote:

That's a neat idea. Unfortunately, it requires a lot more work then my solution (which requires no work), so I might not try it any time soon. I'll have to look at the Psion one day as well.

Here's hoping they keep trying to stretch the design space out as the edition continues!

While I applaud you in your effort to make your game better for you I still dont understand your problem. I probably wont because I feel comfortable with the Atwill, Encounter and daily powers and I havent heard a peep out of our entire group.

So, like i said. No I wouldn't use your method, I personally see it as fussy, a bit powergamerish and unnecessary.

But whatever floats your boat.

lofgren wrote:

If you're working together and using your team, you should be able to make use of all of your encounter powers almost every combat, no matter how restrictive or situational they are, assuming the power was designed well.

Of course you can make use of them. But I'm talking about a difference between use and best use. More options means its harder to find the best use because not only does the character have more options, the party has more combinations of options to mull over.

You're countering our points by insisting that you are right and we are wrong, over and over again. At some point you need to show that using an example. Otherwise this whole thread was a waste of time and space.

Two major things here. First, I am right. This is a problem for me. It might not be a problem for anyone else in the universe, but it is for me. Trying to tell me I'm wrong for trying to address a problem that isn't there is fruitless. Whether the problem is based on reality or completely in delusion and emotion is irrelevant to me.

Secondly, I'm not countering any points. I'm clarifying mine. What do I gain by countering points? Prestige?

Anyway, thanks to the people who gave suggestions!

Herrozerro wrote:

So, like i said. No I wouldn't use your method, I personally see it as fussy, a bit powergamerish and unnecessary.

Well, I've never been called powergamerish before, but fussy and unnecessary do sound a lot like me!

Ongorth wrote:

Well, I've never been called powergamerish before, but fussy and unnecessary do sound a lot like me!

Well, choosing two powers where there should only be one to gain a striking advantage over the written rules because you think they are limiting... That sounds like a powergamer whom doesnt like having his wings trimmed.