Allow me to vent this and then share your opinion if you wish.
I detest, I hate with the fiery fury of 1000 suns, 1/day non-magical powers because there is NO rationale whatsoever than can explain how a warrior, ranger or rogue wouldn't be able to use a certain ability more than one per day. I can see perhaps allowing for telling a player that a certain opening needed by his fighter would likely only happen once per encounter...and that is a bit of a stretch IMO depending upon the length of the encounter. But once per day is insane. So non-magical abilities have a recharge time. At least with magic I am able to create a reason why that makes sense within the mytaphysics of the setting or game system.
But once per day no matter how many encounters take place? My players (D&D players for 20+yrs each) thought that the very idea was ridiculous and destructive to the suspension of disbelief. None of us are hard core simulationists, but for god's sake we like to immerse ourselves in the setting and the events of the campaign so a bit of versimilitude is helpful (the more the better).
As a DM, this is way, way too gamist for me. I'm sorry, but the idea of daily non-magical exploits or whatnot is bordering on CRPG territory or boardgame territory where there isn't even an attempt at maintaining the illusion of the "reality" of events in the game.
Allow me to vent this and then share your opinion if you wish.
I detest, I hate with the fiery fury of 1000 suns, 1/day non-magical powers because there is NO rationale whatsoever than can explain how a warrior, ranger or rogue wouldn't be able to use a certain ability more than one per day. I can see perhaps allowing for telling a player that a certain opening needed by his fighter would likely only happen once per encounter...and that is a bit of a stretch IMO depending upon the length of the encounter. But once per day is insane. So non-magical abilities have a recharge time. At least with magic I am able to create a reason why that makes sense within the mytaphysics of the setting or game system.
But once per day no matter how many encounters take place? My players (D&D players for 20+yrs each) thought that the very idea was ridiculous and destructive to the suspension of disbelief. None of us are hard core simulationists, but for god's sake we like to immerse ourselves in the setting and the events of the campaign so a bit of versimilitude is helpful (the more the better).
As a DM, this is way, way too gamist for me. I'm sorry, but the idea of daily non-magical exploits or whatnot is bordering on CRPG territory or boardgame territory where there isn't even an attempt at maintaining the illusion of the "reality" of events in the game.
Can you give us an example?
Allow me to vent this and then share your opinion if you wish.
I detest, I hate with the fiery fury of 1000 suns, 1/day non-magical powers because there is NO rationale whatsoever than can explain how a warrior, ranger or rogue wouldn't be able to use a certain ability more than one per day. I can see perhaps allowing for telling a player that a certain opening needed by his fighter would likely only happen once per encounter...and that is a bit of a stretch IMO depending upon the length of the encounter. But once per day is insane. So non-magical abilities have a recharge time. At least with magic I am able to create a reason why that makes sense within the mytaphysics of the setting or game system.
Well, I don't see much difference between "per encounter" and "per day". Both are restricted by opportunity and luck. But the second just requires a lot more "opportunity and luck" than the previous. It's not that "videogamish" - it happens on movies all the time.
If you want to make things feel more "realist", you may a try house rule such as this:
- As a standard action, the character may attempt to use an encounter or daily power without spending it. Roll a d6; in a roll of 4-6 (6 for a daily power), the character may use the power. Else, no effect happens other than wasting the standard action.
This makes characters able to try the extraordinary stuff whenever they want - but outside the right time and the right place, they aren't likely to be done.
Allow me to vent this and then share your opinion if you wish.
I detest, I hate with the fiery fury of 1000 suns, 1/day non-magical powers because there is NO rationale whatsoever than can explain how a warrior, ranger or rogue wouldn't be able to use a certain ability more than one per day. I can see perhaps allowing for telling a player that a certain opening needed by his fighter would likely only happen once per encounter...and that is a bit of a stretch IMO depending upon the length of the encounter. But once per day is insane. So non-magical abilities have a recharge time. At least with magic I am able to create a reason why that makes sense within the mytaphysics of the setting or game system.
But once per day no matter how many encounters take place? My players (D&D players for 20+yrs each) thought that the very idea was ridiculous and destructive to the suspension of disbelief. None of us are hard core simulationists, but for god's sake we like to immerse ourselves in the setting and the events of the campaign so a bit of versimilitude is helpful (the more the better).
As a DM, this is way, way too gamist for me. I'm sorry, but the idea of daily non-magical exploits or whatnot is bordering on CRPG territory or boardgame territory where there isn't even an attempt at maintaining the illusion of the "reality" of events in the game.
Its too physically taxing to be done more than once a day.
Edit: If you want to add a house rule similar to the person above why not allow the Pc's to spend an action point and a healing surge (from which they gain no hp) to gain another use of a daily power. If you do not like this idea why not have them take half damage from the attack to represent the physical strain on their bodies.
Can you give us an example?
3.5 D&D
1st level BarbarianRage 1/day
|
How special would a move be if you could just do it every round?
What makes for a good action hero, martial arts, or super hero battle? To me it is the constant back and forth with the occasional cool move and topped off with big cool move. Daily powers are supposed to that just right combination of skill and opportunity that lets you pull off something special.
I like the drama it adds to the game.
Its too physically taxing to be done more than once a day.
I'd stay away from trying to rationalize things in this manner. Its a physics attempt to explain something that is not physics.
My feeling is these are not normal day to day moves that the character always has access to, they are essentially another kind of action point.
Of course this assumes you can stomach playing in a game with something as strange as action points. Obviously the AP mechanic essentially throws out the very idea of simulationist gaming by allowing the characters to choose when and where they can perform amazing feats. Still once you've decided you can game with Action Points then I don't see this as being any different. They both represent cinematic licence in the hands of the players.
One mechanic that I loved, but never saw it get much more love, was the use of (in 3.5) the skill Concentration for the purpose of activating a Kensai's (Com Warrior) Power Surge ability (a bonus to strength for a few rounds, technically self stackable). The DC increased by five every time you used it each day.
Since skill checks do not auto-succeed on a 20, there is a finite limit to the number of times you can do it, and since it took a move action to use, there was a cost (no full attack). After a few uses, if the PC needs to roll an 18 or better on the die, he's probably just better off making a full attack, but the possible "get us out of this jam" scenes that can occur with said mechanic are great fun.
Wish they had done more with said mechanic.
To be fair to the OP, the flavor text about "dipping into your deepest reserves of energy" kind of makes you wonder how the fighter can still dip into those reserves for other daily powers but not for the one he just used.
Kelvin: Because power points were a bookkeeping nightmare.
Kelvin: Because power points were a bookkeeping nightmare.
There is also the aspect of play balance. Even the best Daily power can only be used once per day. There is a danger in using power points that players will use the same daily power over and over again once they find one thats mechanically better then the others. Another angle here is its not very interesting to do the exact same thing over and over again when dealing with something as potent as a Daily Power. Better to see some change ups in this part of the game, IMO.
When I used to fight in tournaments there truly were things I could only pull off once a day (twice at best) because I knew people were watching, and that if I used my 'secret move' too much its impact would be lost.
But that's fighting among a group of between 10 and 20 fighter engaged in a round robin competition. They're all watching.
A dungeon is a little different. So I'm sort of half on, half off on this one.
And rage is a special case, because emotion drain and physical energy can explain the limitation of uses per day. It's simply not the same as not being able to use a special striking maneuver once a day.
Despite my comment about rage in general I agree with the OP's critiscism of the 1/day mechanic. Not with the heat of 1000suns though. In 4e it seems to be more of a 1/day you can hit someone in a way that lets your friend run away (I am generalising dont know enough about 4e)which seems a bit odd.
Anyway I make barbarians an NPC class when I play 3.5. best thing about 4e no Barbarian class. I dont think it will last but I like that a 'Barbarian' is just an uncivilized fighter, not a freak which is faster, stronger, more resilient, with uncanny senses.-- sorry for the threadjack.
Kelvin: Because power points were a bookkeeping nightmare.There is also the aspect of play balance. Even the best Daily power can only be used once per day. There is a danger in using power points that players will use the same daily power over and over again once they find one thats mechanically better then the others. Another angle here is its not very interesting to do the exact same thing over and over again when dealing with something as potent as a Daily Power. Better to see some change ups in this part of the game, IMO.
Since it looks like PC damage output doesn't keep up with monster hp, they probably wouldn't have suffered if they'd just let you replace all your previous daily powers with level appropriate ones every time you gained a new daily. Of course, with 4e the big problem is that, even if you force characters to use different powers, they still kind of all look alike: mostly hp damage + move target so many squares. The real keepers are the occasional powers that stun the target in addition to the damage.
|
Can you give us an example?
3.5 D&D
1st level Barbarian
Rage 1/day
That's a good example. Imagine how taxing; a single skirmish for a real-world Berserker.
Even the most physically-fit and mentally-focused warrior would be hard-pressed to exhaust himself more than once a day.
I've got some experience in Krav Maga and Army Combatives (hand-to-hand), but no real martial arts skill--yet I don't find it too hard to believe that a skilled practitioner might have certain moves that, while devastating, require such mental and physical point-focus that they can only be done rarely, say, once per day.
A personal example of what might be called a once-per-day move: last summer I hit a baseball out of the park. I swung so hard that I actually strained my shoulder and couldn't swing the bat again that evening. The next day I was fine and back in form.
Too bad Enworld is down, since you posted the exact same thing there I could just have copied the same answer I gave you to here.
At least you removed your sig this time, so the post is less funny now.
(FYI: The OP posted this on Enworld, but he had a quoted sig that chastised simulationists GMs for not understanding the use of abstraction in DND, and how concepts should not be taken literally. Most people just told him to read his own sig.).
Well, the Barbarian's rage depends on accessing deep innter reserves of psychic ie. mental/emotional power that would drain him/her greatly after its use. The rage ability of the barbarian is based on the historical berserker and not just an issue of getting angry. Historically speaking, berserkers were a terrible sight of frothing madness...this is what the barbarian is based on. Thus rage is sensibly limited to a certain number of times per day to reflect the difficulty of tapping one's deep reserves.
Ok, onto daily exploits:
Here's a smattering of daily powers.
Brute Strike Fighter Attack 1
You shatter armor and bone with a ringing blow.
Comeback Strike Fighter Attack 1
A timely strike against a hated foe invigorates you, giving you the
strength and resolve to fight on.
Crack the Shell Fighter Attack 5
You break through your enemy’s armor and deal a painful bleeding
wound.
Dizzying Blow Fighter Attack 5
You crack your foe upside the head.
Thicket of Blades Fighter Attack 9
You sting and hinder nearby foes with a savage flurry of strikes
aimed at their legs.
Dragon’s Fangs Fighter Attack 15
You strike twice in rapid succession.
There are more from other classes of course but these will serve as an example.
Such exploits are nothing like a barbarian's rage ability because they aren't based on the character's inner fury/chi/etc. but instead are based on circumstances of the battle such as an opening appearing in an enemies defenses or an enemy making a fatal mistake allowing the fighter to take advantage of the situation. None of these exploits are explainable, in regards to versimilitude, in the same manner as a barbarian's rage.
At level 5 mysteriously ONE opening will appear in your enemies defenses that will allow you to bash them upside the head. Unfortunately such an opening will appear only once every 24hrs thus say the gods of battle.
or
You draw upon great inner reserves of power to cause an enemies defenses to fall so you can wack him upside the head. So draining is the effort involved in wacking someone upside the head that you are phsically and emotionally drained for 24hrs.
Either is exceptionally silly.
Can anyone actually tell me that these abilites are anything like a barbarian's rage when one looks at the fundamental assumptions regarding the circumstances involved in using such abilities?
Too bad Enworld is down, since you posted the exact same thing there I could just have copied the same answer I gave you to here.
At least you removed your sig this time, so the post is less funny now.
(FYI: The OP posted this on Enworld, but he had a quoted sig that chastised simulationists GMs for not understanding the use of abstraction in DND, and how concepts should not be taken literally. Most people just told him to read his own sig.).
As I said in my OP I am not a hard core simulationist, but there is a limit. I didn't quote that sig in reference to anything I personally find egregious to versimilitude. Plus the more I examine myriad abstractions, the more I am coming to see them, or their excessive use, as lazy from a game design standpoint (lazy because there isn't even an effort to make sense of these things in the context of the game outside of pure gamism). IME too many abstractions ruin suspension of disbelief.
For those who wish to be nitpicky, I will clarify my position on my sig or with the dawn of 4e's hyperabstraction I might just change it altogether.
As an aside, there is nothing wrong with creating a post in two very different forums. Many do not read both and I want the broadest snapshot of opinions on the issue.
Brute Strike Fighter Attack 1
You shatter armor and bone with a ringing blow.Comeback Strike Fighter Attack 1
A timely strike against a hated foe invigorates you, giving you the
strength and resolve to fight on.Crack the Shell Fighter Attack 5
You break through your enemy’s armor and deal a painful bleeding
wound.Dizzying Blow Fighter Attack 5
You crack your foe upside the head.Thicket of Blades Fighter Attack 9
You sting and hinder nearby foes with a savage flurry of strikes
aimed at their legs.Dragon’s Fangs Fighter Attack 15
You strike twice in rapid succession.There are more from other classes of course but these will serve as an example.
So you can grasp the concept of hit points, but this causes you suspension of disbelief?
Any of those can be explained by a lucky blow, or story element, or an emotionallly plot moment. etc.
Do you remember the old Voltron cartoons? When a monster attacked Voltron he would use every trick he had, but almost all of the time at the end he would just take out his big ass sword and cleave the monster in twain. Why didn't Voltron just take out the sword in the first segment of the cartoon? Because it would have been bloody cheezy and the cartoon would have lasted a total of 10 seconds.
You could say Voltron's needed a lot of energy to use his power, but by 4E terms Big ass sword was a Daily power.
Why does Darth Vader doesn't force choke every enemy he meets? Sure he could have, but that would have been cheezy. Yeah you could say he cannot force choke every individual because some enemies ( mainly jedis) can use the force to protect themselves. Or in 4E Force Choke is a daily power.
In my last game the figther hadn't use his daily power, until he saw the mage fall under the elemental's might. Then he said that seeing his fellow fall filled him with rage and he used his daily power to smite the enemy.
You can justify it anyway you can, and I actually think it encourages for a mroe cinematic combat.(at least a little less cheezy.)
As I said in my OP I am not a hard core simulationist,
So you keep saying.
but there is a limit. I didn't quote that sig in reference to anything I personally find egregious to versimilitude. Plus the more I examine myriad abstractions, the more I am coming to see them, or their excessive use, as lazy from a game design standpoint (lazy because there isn't even an effort to make sense of these things in the context of the game outside of pure gamism). IME too many abstractions ruin suspension of disbelief.
For those who wish to be nitpicky, I will clarify my position on my sig or with the dawn of 4e's hyperabstraction I might just change it altogether.
I dont think they are lazy at all, in fact I think they are a feature of the system.
If suspension of disbelief is such deal breaker for you, how do you handle hit points? What about saving throws?
As an aside, there is nothing wrong with creating a post in two very different forums. Many do not read both and I want the broadest snapshot of opinions on the issue.
There is nothing wrong with it, I just regreted not being able to copy and paste my answer there into here. Or is there a problem with copying and pastin the same answer in different forums?
Its too physically taxing to be done more than once a day.
I'd stay away from trying to rationalize things in this manner. Its a physics attempt to explain something that is not physics.
My feeling is these are not normal day to day moves that the character always has access to, they are essentially another kind of action point.
Of course this assumes you can stomach playing in a game with something as strange as action points. Obviously the AP mechanic essentially throws out the very idea of simulationist gaming by allowing the characters to choose when and where they can perform amazing feats. Still once you've decided you can game with Action Points then I don't see this as being any different. They both represent cinematic licence in the hands of the players.
Don't worry I wasn't using real world physics anyway. The two cases that come prevalently to mind are actually anime characters. These characters rely on thier physical prowess to survive becuase they have nothing else in a world of special magic like abilities.
The obvious one is Rock Lee(and/or Gai) from Naruto. His primary lotus is completed by pushing the human body to its phyiscal limits. I would say that it is an Encounter Power. He can do it a few times a day but he should really take a breather in between. His Second Lotus though is something completely different. It takes a huge amount of physical effort and stamina to be able to do it, and its something he reserves based upon a very special condition. This is truly a good example of a daily power.
Another is Kenshin's Amakakeru Ryū no Hirameki or Heavens Bridging Dragon Spark that is literally so taxing on his body that using it more than once without resting puts his life in danger.
Both are beautiful pieces of fantasy action drama (albiet rendered in anime) that are prime examples of a logical way of describing how something so fantastic can only occur so often.
To be fair to the OP, the flavor text about "dipping into your deepest reserves of energy" kind of makes you wonder how the fighter can still dip into those reserves for other daily powers but not for the one he just used.
This doesnt occur until at least 5th level, when a character is roughly halfway through the heroic tier. This means that the average person certaintly can't do it, as it can only be done by experience.
Heck, even characters that can challenge gods can only do a daily power 4 times before resting (and thats after a lifetime of experience and training).
You know, I've stayed out of the 4ed commentary, not because I don't have an opinion, but because it's just too damn exhausting keeping up with the threads. That said, I really don't like it, and the whole powers thing is a big part of my distaste. To me, it really makes the classes feel much more similar - almost like a program with a different 'skin.' That's to say, on the face they might look a bit different, but underneath, the workings are largely the same.
Powers are for casters, and pointy, sharp objects are for warriors. As I mentioned somewhere else awhile back, Conan didn't need powers, just three feet of cimmerian steel.
If suspension of disbelief is such deal breaker for you, how do you handle hit points? What about saving throws?
Well, duh. Like he said, "too many abstractions". {emphasis mine}
A bit of salt enhances the flavor of just about everything. Too much makes it inedible.
And, for what it's worth, I'm with the OP on this one. Too many daily combat manuevers that can't be rationalized as being particularly taxing really don't make sense to me either. It's one of the problems I have with 4e. I can get behind a lot of encounter powers since using one tends to let the cat out of the bag with respect to surprise maneuvers, but if a power is only usable once per extended rest, it had should be suggestive of reasons why you need a good night's sleep to use it again.
I can accept Azigen's concept of some things being just too taxing. I am reminded of a scene in Mrs. Doubtfire, where Robin Williams asks his make-up artist brother to make him look more like Ma, to which he replies "I don't have the strength!" OK not DnD, but it works for me.
A more drastic movie example is John Boorman's Excalibur. Merlin performed an illusion to allow Uther to sleep with Ygraine and it put him (Merlin) in a slumber for nine moons. Consider that a nearly once a year power.
Of course this assumes you can stomach playing in a game with something as strange as action points. Obviously the AP mechanic essentially throws out the very idea of simulationist gaming by allowing the characters to choose when and where they can perform amazing feats. Still once you've decided you can game with Action Points then I don't see this as being any different. They both represent cinematic licence in the hands of the players.
I think a better way to view it is that the player is choosing to spend the AP ... the character has made no conscious choice, but in striving harder than usual, has exceeded their normal capacities for a moment.
Re: the choice between "too physically taxing" and "an extremely rare opening" I think the best choice is a mix. Some of your daily abilities ARE just too taxing to do without a rest. Muscles strain, bruises set in. It hurts to do. Others require just so much skill and luck it's rare that you get a chance to pull it off.
Re: the fluff text, the book explicitly encourages you to change the fluff text and re-flavor your powers to personalize your character. So I think slamming the fluff text as not conveying something you feel as belivable is missing the point. If you don't like how the action is portrayed by default, describe it differently.
And to repeate a point made, I see this is as really good game design. Last night I used my one daily power, Bastion of Defense, just as the Paladin went down. The temporary HP bestowed to my commrades saved his (and eventually the Warlock's) life, and really made me feel like I had pulled the party through a tight spot.
Cheers! :)
Edit: for over cheeriness.
Looking at this from a storytelling standpoint might help.
You, as a character, have action points, per encounter powers, and daily powers because that's how often you, you as a player, have the possibility to adjust the story the DM's creating to be more to your liking.
When you whip out your Daily Power, in effect you're saying that in this dramatic moment, conditions and timing and mindset and rage and phase of the moon and whatever else, is allowing me to make this one very dramatic attack to change the story.
And you can't do it again this day because you've already taken dramatic control of the story once. Now it's someone else's turn. When you get higher levels, you have more control over the story.
Or, perhaps, even Chuck Norris in Walker Texas Ranger only uses his roundhouse kick once an episode (Daily Power).
Looking at this from a storytelling standpoint might help.
You, as a character, have action points, per encounter powers, and daily powers because that's how often you, you as a player, have the possibility to adjust the story the DM's creating to be more to your liking.
When you whip out your Daily Power, in effect you're saying that in this dramatic moment, conditions and timing and mindset and rage and phase of the moon and whatever else, is allowing me to make this one very dramatic attack to change the story.
And you can't do it again this day because you've already taken dramatic control of the story once. Now it's someone else's turn. When you get higher levels, you have more control over the story.
Or, perhaps, even Chuck Norris in Walker Texas Ranger only uses his roundhouse kick once an episode (Daily Power).
Lol. Love the Chuck Norris example at the end. At its core I agree, these are just gaming tropes designed to create a fun game and offer the players a bit of narrative control. But when someone comes seeking a simulationist explanation, I provide what I can.
Cheers! :)
|
Can you give us an example?
3.5 D&D
1st level Barbarian
Rage 1/day
Sorry, I think this is a poor example. Frothing at the mouth and going insane with rage to the point you are pushing your body past it's limits would be a whole lot more taxing than one, single swordstroke. It makes sense that you can rage only so many times per day, it doesn't make sense that you can use "massive strike" or whatever daily exploit once per day.
Sorry, I think this is a poor example. Frothing at the mouth and going insane with rage to the point you are pushing your body past it's limits would be a whole lot more taxing than one, single swordstroke. It makes sense that you can rage only so many times per day, it doesn't make sense that you can use "massive strike" or whatever daily exploit once per day.
But what if it's a REALLY good swordstroke!
Cheers! ;)
|
|
Well, the Barbarian's rage depends on accessing deep innter reserves of psychic ie. mental/emotional power that would drain him/her greatly after its use. The rage ability of the barbarian is based on the historical berserker and not just an issue of getting angry. Historically speaking, berserkers were a terrible sight of frothing madness...this is what the barbarian is based on. Thus rage is sensibly limited to a certain number of times per day to reflect the difficulty of tapping one's deep reserves.
Ok, onto daily exploits:
Here's a smattering of daily powers.
Brute Strike Fighter Attack 1
You shatter armor and bone with a ringing blow.Comeback Strike Fighter Attack 1
A timely strike against a hated foe invigorates you, giving you the
strength and resolve to fight on.Crack the Shell Fighter Attack 5
You break through your enemy’s armor and deal a painful bleeding
wound.Dizzying Blow Fighter Attack 5
You crack your foe upside the head.Thicket of Blades Fighter Attack 9
You sting and hinder nearby foes with a savage flurry of strikes
aimed at their legs.Dragon’s Fangs Fighter Attack 15
You strike twice in rapid succession.There are more from other classes of course but these will serve as an example.
Such exploits are nothing like a barbarian's rage ability because they aren't based on the character's inner fury/chi/etc. but instead are based on circumstances of the battle such as an opening appearing in an enemies defenses or an enemy making a fatal mistake allowing the fighter to take advantage of the situation. None of these exploits are explainable, in regards to versimilitude, in the same manner as a barbarian's rage.
At level 5 mysteriously ONE opening will appear in your enemies defenses that will allow you to bash them upside the head. Unfortunately such an opening will appear only once every 24hrs thus say the gods of battle.
or
You draw upon great inner reserves of power to cause an enemies defenses to fall so you can wack him upside the head. So...
Not with a straight face.
# Spells / day did the same thing for me from the beginning. All of the ‘explanations’ seemed forced to me.
Now I kind of like the At-Will/Encounter/Daily concept. It certainly feels Simulationist if you are simulating cinema or literature. Watching the good guy use the same maneuver over and over again would get kind of boring.
Sorry, I think this is a poor example. Frothing at the mouth and going insane with rage to the point you are pushing your body past it's limits would be a whole lot more taxing than one, single swordstroke. It makes sense that you can rage only so many times per day, it doesn't make sense that you can use "massive strike" or whatever daily exploit once per day.
But what if to do Massive strike you need to Froth at the mouth and go insane with rage to the point you are pushing your body past it's limits?
If you see it that way It makes sense that you can massive strike only so many times per day.
:P
BTW the Chuck Norris Example is golden. Will be my standard answer for every 'suspension of disbelief/gamist/simulationist' thread from now on.
Sorry, I think this is a poor example. Frothing at the mouth and going insane with rage to the point you are pushing your body past it's limits would be a whole lot more taxing than one, single swordstroke. It makes sense that you can rage only so many times per day, it doesn't make sense that you can use "massive strike" or whatever daily exploit once per day.
Can you give us an example?
3.5 D&D
1st level Barbarian
Rage 1/day
How about the smite evil ability of the 3.5 paladin then?
Well, the class powers can be tough to add flavour to if you only go by what's written. Keep in mind that none of the class features from 3.5 had any flavour text really, they just had an explanation of what they do.
4E went a bit further and just separated the fluff and crunch into 2 different parts of the power "box".
Playing 4E I have found that some players get into the habit of just saying "I use flensing strike" or "I use magic missile". This can make the game a little bit boring for some people.
So when I DM or play as a character, I try to use different flavour for all my powers, be they PC or Monster abilities. Juggling balls of energy and chucking them against a target gives the same damage and end result as a magic missile, but the image you portray to the group is way cooler. Your DM may want you to tell him the power you're using afterwards, but once you get familiar with the powers, this will eventually become unnecessary.
So when I DM or play as a character, I try to use different flavour for all my powers, be they PC or Monster abilities.
Sounds like an Upshift in Truth & Justice to me.
So when I DM or play as a character, I try to use different flavour for all my powers, be they PC or Monster abilities.Sounds like an Upshift in Truth & Justice to me.
And thats a good thing.
# Spells / day did the same thing for me from the beginning. All of the ‘explanations’ seemed forced to me.
Now I kind of like the At-Will/Encounter/Daily concept. It certainly feels Simulationist if you are simulating cinema or literature. Watching the good guy use the same maneuver over and over again would get kind of boring.
But with spells per day, you ultimately had a certain amount of magical energy per day with which you either cast spontaneously or prepped spells for casting. And, more importantly, in either case you could cast the same spell multiple times as long as you had prepped it multiple times and still had the energy devoted. I grant you that the spell-prepping and the spell slots being otherwise non-transferable was a bit queer (for anyone who didn't belong to the Jack Vance/Legion of Superheroes worlds), but you could still repeat as long as you had planned it out.
So, for me, the spells/day issue is very distinct from martial exploits being usable once/day.
The concept of at-will/encounter/daily, I can understand. But I'd be a pretty big stickler on what should count as a truly daily power.
# Spells / day did the same thing for me from the beginning. All of the ‘explanations’ seemed forced to me.
Now I kind of like the At-Will/Encounter/Daily concept. It certainly feels Simulationist if you are simulating cinema or literature. Watching the good guy use the same maneuver over and over again would get kind of boring.
But with spells per day, you ultimately had a certain amount of magical energy per day with which you either cast spontaneously or prepped spells for casting. And, more importantly, in either case you could cast the same spell multiple times as long as you had prepped it multiple times and still had the energy devoted. I grant you that the spell-prepping and the spell slots being otherwise non-transferable was a bit queer (for anyone who didn't belong to the Jack Vance/Legion of Superheroes worlds), but you could still repeat as long as you had planned it out.
So, for me, the spells/day issue is very distinct from martial exploits being usable once/day.
The concept of at-will/encounter/daily, I can understand. But I'd be a pretty big stickler on what should count as a truly daily power.
But Once Daily powers/abilities have been around as long as I have played D&D in almost every edition. This may be the true reason why people are having a problem with the type of powers that daily ones now.
Druid shapechanging was also limited use per day in prior editions.
But with spells per day, you ultimately had a certain amount of magical energy per day with which you either cast spontaneously or prepped spells for casting.
I never read Vance so that is probably why # spells/day never felt right to me. Memorizing and/or slotting a spell just make me go, “huh?”
But Once Daily powers/abilities have been around as long as I have played D&D in almost every edition. This may be the true reason why people are having a problem with the type of powers that daily ones now.
Exactly. Like I said before, encounter-based powers based on martial maneuvers makes sense on one level. Play the trick on the enemy once and he watches out for it happening again, at least in the short term of one encounter time. But daily?
Stuff related to magical energy and exhaustion are easier to rationalize as dailies. But combat maneuvers, fighting stances, and so on? Not so easy to explain why it wouldn't work on a different set of monsters after a 5 minute rest.
I detest, I hate with the fiery fury of 1000 suns, 1/day non-magical powers because there is NO rationale whatsoever than can explain how a warrior, ranger or rogue wouldn't be able to use a certain ability more than one per day.
I agree; there really is no good explanation for per encounter/per day non-magical powers. The best I can come up with is the "you can only 'rise to the occasion' so often" explanation. But even that's not really satisfying.
Whatever. It's not like per day non-magical powers are new to 4e (stunning fist anyone?); 4e just makes them the norm.
TS
I think the x/per day encounters have always been in the system. Thing is we are so used to many of them that we simply overlook the issues they bring to the game as if they made sense even when they don't really.
Whats new here is these kinds of abilities have become accessible to fighters (among other classes). I think its not a coincidence that the fighter gets used almost exclusively as the example of why the powers don't work. Fighters have historically been some kind of a bastion of simulationism in a game where simulationism was real hard to come by. They acted as a kind of anchour where at least one class was supposed to be 'normal'. I'd find teh argument for keeping them more simulationist more compelling if the class seemed more popular in other editions of the game. As it stands I'm willing to give up on Simulationism in return for a better class that more players want to play even into the higher levels.
Oh and the obligatory example of x/per day power used in an older edition.
I'm going to go with the Clerics turns per day.
I can just see a conversation going something like this:
******
Acral the Fighter: "Oh Hell. Its the Vampire Leader of all the Undead that have been attacking the village. Quick, Father Jorgus, turn it!"
Father Jorgus: "No can do I'm all tapped out for the day."
Acral: "All tapped out!?!. You get that f*%~ing holy symbol out and you start praying to your Goddess! These are her worshippers we are defending!"
Father Jorgus: "Sorry but I've already prayed four times today, all out of energy."
Acral: "Out of energy!?! How the Hell can a Goddess be out of Energy?"
Father Jorgus: "Well she's probably not out of energy really. Its more that I am on a strict quota system. I'm only allowed to pray in that way four times a day."
Acral: "Strict Quota system? But your Goddess is Chaotic Good!"
Father Jorgus: "Strict Quota system...."
Acral: [Readies bastard sword and begins to advance on the Vampire Lord] "I swear, if I ever meet your Goddess I'm going to kick her in the ass SO hard."
*****
Now its not that 4E has done away with some of these absurdities. It hasn't. My point is the absurdities are pervasive through out every edition of the game. Its just that we choose to overlook the absurdities in areas of the game in which we are used to seeing them while focusing on the issue if it comes up in a new area of the game.
Wait a minute... clerics could turn undead as often as they liked in 1e and 2e. Then 3.5e introduced a limit and now, as far as I can tell (as I've only played a 1st level cleric in 4e) it's once per encounter *and* more importantly, you may not even get to do that as it's tied into the 'Channel Divinity' power. If you've used it on something else, forget it.
My control over the cleric players in my campaigns has always been a close relationship to their deity. At times I've even prevented the preparation of certain spells, or forced them to prepare a spell that would be useful in the coming battles. I never told them why, just that their deity wills it to be so (or minions of their deity) - but never for low level spells (they're just not that interested in such minor magicks).
Now though, Wizards have told us that clerics don't get their spells from their deity - it's a ritual that they go through that gives them their power. Even if they transgress and go against their deity they don't lose their powers. Eh? Suspension of Disbelief truly broken for me here - house rule coming up.
I like my powers / spells / call-em-what-you-will to have rational (in loose terms, we *are* talking fantasy here ;) ) explanations. I can only go so far. I can accept the at-will and encounter explanations (I do karate and you can only get away with so much in any one fight), the the daily powers are treading a fine line. I can see myself having to rationalise each and every one until I can come up with some kind of catch all.
