|
5 months ago ::
Jan 14, 2013 - 8:51AM
#21
|
|
|
Something that keeps poping up is the need for more DMing if you are doing the same thing over and over again, an example from my group is we have a wizard who will do the whole 1-2 importaint spells per encounter, but then when its time to ray 'o frost gun them, he instead breaks out the minor illusion and starts playing with the creatures mind, creating coppies of allies, coppies of enemies who attack them, giant brick walls blocking creatures paths, at one point he created a huge Ice elemental and used ray 'o frost to simulate it striking enemies.
Perhaps its a case of, sure you CAN just shoot off your Frost gun but why not try a little harder?
When it comes to other classes however it can get a little harder, for example as a bow using fighter I have said I volly x,y, and z about a hundred times, sometimes I wish I could run out of spell slots as it were and be forced to do something intresting, rather then doing pretty decent damage to three targets.
"Death by a thousand paper-cuts" This shall be all my decks name and theme from now on.
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 14, 2013 - 10:49AM
#22
|
|
|
I don't get the problem. If a fighter is trying to kill a monster, logic dictates that he should hit it with his sword until it dies. Attacking several turns in a row shouldn't seem unusual nor should it be discouraged.
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 18, 2013 - 11:32AM
#23
|
Date Joined:
May 31, 2012
|
Dardstar: While you do have a point about allowing creativity (something that I DEFINITELY encourage in players, no matter the edition), the biggest problem with that is actually having players that are creative. If you're playing in a closed group and often it's a lot easier to teach eachother how to really invest in it and get people to be creative. On thing that I "hinted" at a player was that the enemy had really good armor on, but armor has straps that can be cut. He went after those and roled a disadvantage to hit and cut the straps. But then you've got public groups at gaming stores with people that can show up and just play. It's less personal and they don't tend to invest in the game and get creative. It's just, "I swing/shoot/ray gun" and that's it. The fact that the rules seem to funnel people into this choices just makes matters even worse.
So you have a good point, but it's not a realistic point for many groups.
Karnos: Your right, a warrior would swing a sword at something until it dies. But how many ways are there to swing, react, counteract, and dodge in sword fighting? These rules give those options, but like what a previous poster stated, it's usually more worth it to simple bash the enemy then spend the points on parrying or doing other tactics. Wizards are the same way. Yes, they have spell selection, but no slots. So a player will be FAR more likely picking an attack spell every time just to do decent damage to stay alive. And the biggest difference between a wizard and a warrior is that the wizard has extremely limited extra options to choose beside his ray gun, while the warrior can decided on what he wants to do every turn for an infinite number of turns. That's were the biggest imbalance comes in.
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 18, 2013 - 12:08PM
#24
|
|
|
As it is, you can spend all your martial damage dice on the attack and then use them again to parry, so there isn't even a debate about that.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 22, 2013 - 4:08PM
#25
|
Date Joined:
Jun 15, 2008
|
The problem with resource systems is that they are defining features of the class. So if everyone has points or ability slots, than nobody feels special. This is a fairly common complaint about 4E and it is also an issue with MMOs, though obviously some people prefer it that way.
They already have this with manuevers that scale with the number of martial dice you spend, so I don't really see the point. It sounds like they might be moving away from martial dice as a resource and having it be a pure damage bonus with manuevers being an unrelated add-on to your actions. If they do that, then I could see a reason to add in more scalable effects... but for now I think they have it covered. I guess it would be cool if some of the feat activated abilities scaled as well... but that is more complex since any class can choose a feat and might not have the resource to activate it.
It's a weakness to need contrived mechanics to feel special. What goes in the slot should matter not the fact that everyone has slots.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 22, 2013 - 5:04PM
#26
|
Date Joined:
May 25, 2009
|
When it comes to other classes however it can get a little harder, for example as a bow using fighter I have said I volly x,y, and z about a hundred times, sometimes I wish I could run out of spell slots as it were and be forced to do something intresting, rather then doing pretty decent damage to three targets.
An easy fix for this is to hand out a fe magic arrows. The ranger in my campaign has 6 +1 arrows and a 4 fire arrows.
The +1 arrows are recoverable, but the fire arrows are destroyed when used. The fire arrows aren't in the magic item guide, but I ported them from the AD&D Encyclopedia Magica (which is an awesome resource for DND next magic items).
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Feb 02, 2013 - 10:08AM
#27
|
Date Joined:
Jan 15, 2009
|
I too found that the current system has a degree of limitation in action if you are trying to grab the "special ability" feel. The maneuvers are not worth converting martial damage die for in most cases. I like the direction of cantrips contributing to damage stability for casters over time but it is even harder to narrate a spell effect differently then a Fighter's swing of his weapon so it can be redundant.
I want you to check out this ... feel free to ignore a few of the outliers but read this - about magic missile
community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/758...
And that doesnt even count improvisation
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 18, 2013 - 2:14PM
#28
|
|
|
I don't get the problem. If a fighter is trying to kill a monster, logic dictates that he should hit it with his sword until it dies. Attacking several turns in a row shouldn't seem unusual nor should it be discouraged.
And this attitude to how martial combat actually works, ladies and gentlemen, is why D&D has a boring, stiff, lifeless martial combat system. "It's just some dudes swingin' swords, right?" Tactics? Techniques? Quick thinking, willpower, exploiting weaknesses? None of that exists. It's all just swingin' a sword, because it's not like they are expertly trained professionals or anything.
EVERY DAY IS HORRIBLE POST DAY ON THE D&D FORUMS.
Everything makes me ANGRY (ESPECIALLY you, reader)
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 27, 2013 - 12:22PM
#29
|
Date Joined:
Feb 16, 2008
|
I actually think things like Manuevers or a Power that dictates to a player what their character is doing is over repetitive/redundant. The Idea that a Player is imagining what they are doing or trying something creative (with the DM working with them) lends itself to more spirited gaming. If that is not happening perhaps it should be suggested before the game.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 28, 2013 - 9:38AM
#30
|
|
|
I actually think things like Manuevers or a Power that dictates to a player what their character is doing is over repetitive/redundant. The Idea that a Player is imagining what they are doing or trying something creative (with the DM working with them) lends itself to more spirited gaming. If that is not happening perhaps it should be suggested before the game.
In my experience, this works one of the following ways:
1) The DM doesn't know what he is doing balance wise and he allows improvisations that are drastically out of whack with the game math,
2) The DM does know what he is doing but the penalties are such that rather than the player doing the improvisation, he relies on either the bog standard attack (earlier editions) or sticks with his codified powers (4th).
3) The player is the gambler type so when DM #2 gives him his penalties, he's willing to try for the 'cool factor'. This player will forget the many times it fails and only remember the few times it works.
|
|
|
