4th Ed: Tidbits from PAX

[psychoticbarber]

It's also important to figure what "at will" in combat really means.

What's the longest combat, in rounds, that you've ever been in?

Longest one I can think of was about 12-15 rounds, and that included 3-4 rounds of cleanup.

I once ran a sorcerer who had a Ring of Wizardry I (whether or not this is RAW, we ruled it gave him twice as many 1st level spells), which allowed him to cast 12 level 1 spells/day. Essentially for one long encounter he was "at will" with magic missile.

[Rex Blunder]

What I'm curious about is healing spells. If there are any per-encounter (or per-five minutes) healing spells, then most parties can totally heal up between the majority of encounters. It makes a big difference to the game whether or not hit points are a per-encounter or per-day resource.

That said, just because the 4e developers haven't mentioned this issue doesn't mean they haven't put some reasonably intelligent thought into it.

Edit:

Essentially for one long encounter he was "at will" with magic missile.

That doesn't sound too different from a wand of magic missiles, a relatively cheap item - and not that game-breaking.

[nagora]

Let me just get something straight: you're perfectly for an ability being usable an arbitrary number of times per day?

As a reality Vs game balance issue, I find it acceptable.

And are in favor of such even when offered the ability to more realistically represent how people really are?

I'm not aware of that being offered as an alternative. A totally silly and unrealistic system (per encounter) has been put forward. I thought that was what we were talking about.

That is to say, "per-day" mechanics are an entirely arbitrary designation.

Are they?

"Defensive Roll 2/day", for instance, has always driven me nuts. Why can I only dodge twice a day?

Maybe you can only do it successfully up to twice a day; as you get better you'll be able to pull it off more. Rather than bog things down with all the failed rolls, the game allows you to pick the times when you want to try hardest to get it right. Once you've tried hard twice in one day we can assume the others fail and not bother rolling.

It's not like I can't do it again if I tried. I may require a bit of rest to be able to work up the strength to do it again, but not eight hours of it. More like fifteen minutes.

This is true but if you need rest, in what way does someone unexpectedly attacking you make up for the lack of that rest?

...which, incidentally, is exactly how per-encounter works.

Which is why it's stupid.

For instance, a rogue's internal monologue under per encounter might be: "Dodge! God, that's tiring. Dodge again! Okay, I need to take this guy out quick, because I'm running out of steam. Stab. Victory. Let me rest for a few minutes so I can get back out there."

Much of the thief's rouge's dodging is in their AC and hit points; Dodge is an extra superhuman effort afforded to him/her through additional special training. Ordinary dodging is in fact something they do with every attack against them - "per blow" as it were.

Meanwhile, under a per-day system, it'd be closer to: "Dodge! God, that's tiring. Dodge again! Okay, I need to take this guy out quick, because I'm running out of steam. Stab. Victory. Let me rest for eight hours so we can continue on."

Well, if s/he feels s/he can't possibly risk going on until well rested then that's his/her choice.

Let's compare this to sports players. Perhaps a basketball player.*snip*

Ask any professional sports person to play at the top of their game twice in a single day and see what sort of look they give you. It's true that D&D is not a perfect simulator, but it's good enough in this case. Per encounter would give an appearance of more reality in the short-term (one day), but would actually end up with characters far fitter than your basketball player over longer runs of a week or so. Playing top-class basketball against your equals every day for a week would cripple most teams with injuries and simple fatigue if they had to field the same team every time.

This is remarkably similar to how a per-encounter mechanic works: you are capable of using your abilities as often as you please, but they will fatigue you. Once you are given a moment to catch your breath, you are good to go again and are capable of using all those tricks at your disposal once more.

A "moment" is far too fast to regain the level of ability represented by most of these abilities.

[Tormsskull]

For instance, a rogue's internal monologue under per encounter might be: "Dodge! God, that's tiring. Dodge again! Okay, I need to take this guy out quick, because I'm running out of steam. Stab. Victory. Let me rest for a few minutes so I can get back out there."

Meanwhile, under a per-day system, it'd be closer to: "Dodge! God, that's tiring. Dodge again! Okay, I need to take this guy out quick, because I'm running out of steam. Stab. Victory. Let me rest for eight hours so we can continue on."

This is what drives me bananas. I understand both of these, but I think a lot of people don't look at the underlying cause. If the game is based around the fact that the rogue can only do this ability 2x/day, then the game assumes that there will be times when the rogue cannot use the ability.

So when the player of the rogue burns both of his "Dodge" abilities for the day and then informs the group that they should be resting because he no longer has the capability to dodge, he is trying to circumvent his vulnerabilities, which is bad gaming IMO. This forces the DM to come up with unrealistic reasons why a random encounter happens when the PCs are trying to rest. It would be the same type of bad gaming I would label someone who tries to take Flaw: Never Going to Come Up in Gameplay.

This was always my argument on psionics as well. Everyone seems to agree that when a psion goes nova, he is incredibly potent. Then they say things like "But the game is based around 4 encounters a day, so that psion will be useless in encounters 2, 3, and 4 if he novas in encounter 1." THEN they say things like "This is not fun, I'm useless in encounters 2, 3, and 4."

I guess to me the answer has always been "Well, duh." And I have never been motivated to try to, for the lack of a better word, idiot-proof the system.

Based roughly on 3E as it stands, I'd say combat spells 3 levels below your current maximum should be at will, and 2 levels below your max should be replenished each encounter. So a 9th-level wizard would start every encounter with a few fireballs, and could cast acid arrow all day long.

Hmm, that would be interesting to play-test (after the nerfs as you said of course).

[Starbuck_II]

The odd thing is that the 4 enc per day rule is fine as a guideline for a starting DM (if a bit heavy for 1st level characters), but the fact is that a DM with any experience of their players simply shouldn't need any mechanic for balancing encounters. In fact, how can they, really? If Joe plays a 9th level Wizard but is really crap at managing his spell choices and forgets to rebuy material components then what system can possibly judge the level of encounter to throw at a group with him in it other than his DM?

There are too many examples where "should" or "try this and adjust for your group" are handed down as fiat instead.

Did he forget a spell pouch: it makes infinite components that are not costly.

[nagora]

Let me fix that or you.
First, assuming the trolls have been reaching them every few minutes:

And what if they're holed up in a cave with a barricade with the trolls mounting attacks every couple of minutes. The Slapenhowitzer PC has not now been "running for hours" (which was not in my original scenario anyway) yet, because it's one long encounter s/he can only use the ability once in the time s/he used it four times the day before. Why?

The MU sitting quietly at the back of the cave hoping the fighters can hold the barricade untill she regains her spells through rest and meditation makes far more sense than any of this "per encounter" drivel.

[Dausuul]

This is true but if you need rest, in what way does someone unexpectedly attacking you make up for the lack of that rest?

It doesn't. If you're attacked before you have a chance to get the full 15 minutes' rest (or 10, or 5, or whatever), your per-encounter abilities don't recharge.

At least, that's how I read what 4E is doing. And if WotC doesn't put in such a rule, it's the easiest thing in the world to house-rule it... which is not the case with per-day. Believe me, I've spent years trying to find good ways to house-rule the per-day mechanic out of existence.

[Starsinger]

The MU sitting quietly at the back of the cave hoping the fighters can hold the barricade untill she regains her spells through rest and meditation makes far more sense than any of this "per encounter" drivel.

So the Swordsage sitting behind the fighter waiting for a full round to restore his maneuvers? But that's per encounter drivel! Oh noes! Per encounter could give you what you just said you want...

[nagora]

So the Swordsage sitting behind the fighter waiting for a full round to restore his maneuvers? But that's per encounter drivel! Oh noes! Per encounter could give you what you just said you want...

In what way is waiting a round "per encounter"?

[Starsinger]

In what way is waiting a round "per encounter"?

Your ignorance is showing a little... Tome of Battle characters, who exist for Per Encounter all have ways to recharge their per encounter abilities in combat. Swordsages can wait a full-round to restore a single maneuver.

[Tormsskull]

In what way is waiting a round "per encounter"?

From what I have been able to gather on here, the Tome of Battle classes are able to spend a full-round action taking a deep breath and regaining all of their 'per encounter' abilities that they couldn't use because they were too tired.

[Aximili]

This is true but if you need rest, in what way does someone unexpectedly attacking you make up for the lack of that rest?

It doesn't, it's the time you had to rest before the attack that regains you your maneuvers. If you had really no time to rest, i.e. you were attack one or two rounds after you drop the last foe, than, indeed, your maneuvers will not be recovered.

The tome of battle, for instance, says you start combat with all your readied maneuvers. Later, however, it goes on to say that you need a full minute (or was it 5?) without attacking or being attack in order to be ready when the next encounter comes.

Ask any professional sports person to play at the top of their game twice in a single day and see what sort of look they give you.

Dude, professional sports people get exhausted after one or two games because games go from one and a half to over 5 hours.
Any d&d character who fights for that long should be rolling some serious exhaustion checks.

Actual combat encounters rarely take more than a minute. Now ask a tennis player how many times per day he can send his fastest, strongest, and most curved ball. He probably won't bother to answer, 'cause he can pull it off every other point. You see, every point (or maybe two or three) is a short encounter.

[nagora]

It doesn't. If you're attacked before you have a chance to get the full 15 minutes' rest (or 10, or 5, or whatever), your per-encounter abilities don't recharge.

Then the rule is not "per encounter at all", and is actually just "per day" with "day" shortened to whatever period satisfies the munchkins. The obvous endpoint of that route is "per desire".

At least, that's how I read what 4E is doing. And if WotC doesn't put in such a rule, it's the easiest thing in the world to house-rule it... which is not the case with per-day. Believe me, I've spent years trying to find good ways to house-rule the per-day mechanic out of existence.

To no obvious utility, as far as I can see.

[Grug]

Nagora seems to be confused on exactly what "Per encounter" is. After her (his?) example with the Orcs in Mordor, she has to understand that per encounter means whenever you get a bit of rest and aren't fighting. It's not that the sudden act of fighting (or running, or doding) gives your powers back, it's that they've come back on their own time.

[Matthew]

Nagora is a "he" as can be observed by simply looking at his profile next to every post.

The problem I have with 'per encounter' is when Encounters meld into one another. As discrete entities they are a fine mechanic, but few of my Adventure Sites seem to work like that in practice. I would have a hard time drawing a line between some of them and I would have to be fairly arbitrary about how I did it.

That said, this is obviously simpler than a 'Count Down' mechanic, so I can see why they're doing it. It's not going to be suitable for my games, so I suspect I will be House Ruling on a 'Count Down' mechanic should I ever have the opportunity to run a 4e Adventure where it comes up.

[Starsinger]

That said, this is obviously simpler than a 'Count Down' mechanic, so I can see why they're doing it. It's not going to be suitable for my games, so I suspect I will be House Ruling on a 'Count Down' mechanic should I ever have the opportunity to run a 4e Adventure where it comes up.

Why Matthew, with the online tabletop thingy, I'd be more than interested in playing in a 4e adventure if you desire to run one, I'm curious as to this uhh.. Dynamic Dungeon thingy.. or whatever, the name left my head and I don't feel like searching for it.

[nagora]

Nogora is a "he" as can be observed by simply looking at his profile next to every post.

I actually spent from late level 7 to early level 9 as a woman thanks to the old Girdle of Masculinity/Femininity trick.

Thankfully, that was before I got married.

[Aximili]

And what if they're holed up in a cave with a barricade with the trolls mounting attacks every couple of minutes. The Slapenhowitzer PC has not now been "running for hours" (which was not in my original scenario anyway) yet, because it's one long encounter s/he can only use the ability once in the time s/he used it four times the day before. Why?

Well, if the rules say that it takes 5 minutes of peace in order to regain your abilities, than there's your answer. Because he hasn't been able to stop and breath steady yet.

You are saying that it makes no sense that you can hit an opponent with all your strength 4 times with 15 minutes intervals, while only being able to do it once if you are under constant pressure.

Try running 100 meters as fast as you can. Than again 15 minutes later, and 2 more times after that.

The next day try it once, than run a little slower for a couple of minutes, have 1 minute of rest, and then try dashing 100 meters again. Tell me if you see a difference in your performance.

Better yet. Dash once, than run and walk in intervals of 2 minutes each for a total of 1 hour. After that, dash again. It's the same situation: you dashed 4 times in the same hour without much trouble, you should be able to make two good dashes 1 hour apart even though you've been doing something else for that hour, right?

The MU sitting quietly at the back of the cave hoping the fighters can hold the barricade untill she regains her spells through rest and meditation makes far more sense than any of this "per encounter" drivel.

¬¬If that makes sense to you, than what doesn't make sense about the warrior doing the same as the magic user? Only instead of hours of rest or meditation, he only needs a few minutes of rest.

[nagora]

As an interesting aside:

Robilar brought the dead body of the fighter to Mordenkainen and dropped him at his feet. Mordenkainen smirked, for this summoned memories of a time in Greyhawk Castle where they'd fought an even tougher battle and barely survived. Robilar had guarded the mage for hours after Mordenkainen's spells had been exhausted, withstanding charge after charge of orcs and their ogre leaders. Robilar had piled their foes all about them until a hill of dead flesh existed and the remaining orcs had run away shrieking.

[Aximili]

Then the rule is not "per encounter at all", and is actually just "per day" with "day" shortened to whatever period satisfies the munchkins.

Finally you get it!
Only, replace that last part with: ""day" shortened to an amount of time common to all classes, in order to make it easy to balance and enjoy, and in order to make all the numbers fit right."

And why is per day the less munchkin option?

[nagora]

¬¬If that makes sense to you, than what doesn't make sense about the warrior doing the same as the magic user? Only instead of hours of rest or meditation, he only needs a few minutes of rest.

Well, firstly, the time difference is germane. As I said in a previous post, I see many of these abilities as being akin to a very fit athlete pulling out a special effort which comes close to their personal best. That rarely happens twice a day.

But, secondly, it seems that many here are reading the words "per encounter" as "per time period" - a totally different concept.

If this is actually what WotC are suggesting (and I know of no reason to think it is, in the face of the term they have used) then it's just a matter of taste what time period is chosen - a day, an hour whatever. There's no difference in substance and it is simply a case of bad nomenclature by WotC and I have no objection to it unless it further inflates the game towards PCs-as-superheroes.

[Foolosophy]

nagora as long as you plan on outdoing yourself in trying to come up with the most ridiculous definitions of "encounter" Ithink it's best to just ignore your opinion on "per encounter"-mechanics altogether...


edit: since some more posts appeared after I clicked on the reply button: the same goes for arguing nomenclature...if you refuse to acknowledge the "per encounter" concept used in ToB and the Factotum in Dungeonscape my conclusion applies aswell...

[nagora]

nagora as long as you plan on outdoing yourself in trying to come up with the most ridiculous definitions of "encounter" Ithink it's best to just ignore your opinion on "per encounter"-mechanics altogether...

And your definition is...?

[Reinboom]

Well, firstly, the time difference is germane. As I said in a previous post, I see many of these abilities as being akin to a very fit athlete pulling out a special effort which comes close to their personal best. That rarely happens twice a day.

The athletes aren't doing their 'best' more often under this system... mind the main batch of information for this system is that wizards will still "run out of their mordenkainen's sword".
A professional athlete can be exhausted and not do their best for the day, sure. They are still an athlete however - they can still throw the ball, dribble down the court, and perform as a subpar player overall - but still perform as a player and still be better than the untrained.

[Starsinger]

And your definition is...?

en·coun·ter (ěn-koun'tər) Pronunciation Key
n.

1. A meeting, especially one that is unplanned, unexpected, or brief: a chance encounter in the park.
2. a. A hostile or adversarial confrontation; a contest: a tense naval encounter.
b. An often violent meeting; a clash.


Personally though, I'd say if you can't take 20, you're probably in an encounter.

[Foolosophy]

And your definition is...?

see ToB for my definition of "per encounter"-abilities as opposed to the DM planning term "encounter" used to help structure campaigns under the 3.5 ruleset. Your Ogre (Magi= example was pure bull and, in my not very humbe opinion, carefully constructed to find a way to criticise something that you haven't understood, yet. (Not that anyone can accurately tell how it is going to be, but others have been so sensible to look at past clues such as the Factotum or ToB)

Starsinger has dug up a nice definition.

[Matthew]

Why Matthew, with the online tabletop thingy, I'd be more than interested in playing in a 4e adventure if you desire to run one, I'm curious as to this uhh.. Dynamic Dungeon thingy.. or whatever, the name left my head and I don't feel like searching for it.

I have to admit, I have never run an Online Game, all my experience as a Dungeon Master and Player has been face to face. I don't know whether I will be subscribing to Wizards (somehow, I doubt it, but you never know), but I would certainly be happy to have you as a Player if I do get the opportunity.
Incidently, I have been considering starting a Recruitment Thread for an AD&D Game in a couple of months (too many work commitments at the moment), which would probably feature a 'Dynamic Adventure Site' (a term I have only had to adopt/coin today after reading that article, having never really ran an Adventure Site with Discrete Encounters). If you'd be interested in joining that, I'll PM you when the Recruitment Thread goes up (all things going to plan).

I actually spent from late level 7 to early level 9 as a woman thanks to the old Girdle of Masculinity/Femininity trick.

Thankfully, that was before I got married.

Hmmn, I never really considered the potential of that Girdle for Gender Adventures until you just put the thought into my head.

[nagora]

The athletes aren't doing their 'best' more often under this system... mind the main batch of information for this system is that wizards will still "run out of their mordenkainen's sword".
A professional athlete can be exhausted and not do their best for the day, sure. They are still an athlete however - they can still throw the ball, dribble down the court, and perform as a subpar player overall - but still perform as a player and still be better than the untrained.

Absolutely. Just as the thief rogue who has used her Dodges up will still probably have more hit points and a better armour class than a normal person and be able to do many things they can't. She will simply not be quite able to pull that extra special effort out of the bag again for a while.

[Fax Celestis]

Absolutely. Just as the thief rogue who has used her Dodges up will still probably have more hit points and a better armour class than a normal person and be able to do many things they can't. She will simply not be quite able to pull that extra special effort out of the bag again for a while.

And, pray tell, what is wrong with "for a while" being "fifteen minutes" instead of "tomorrow"?

[nagora]

en·coun·ter (ěn-koun'tər) Pronunciation Key
n.

1. A meeting, especially one that is unplanned, unexpected, or brief: a chance encounter in the park.
2. a. A hostile or adversarial confrontation; a contest: a tense naval encounter.
b. An often violent meeting; a clash.

Thanks for that - sense 2 is the one I'm using (although perhaps not so much the naval part).

Personally though, I'd say if you can't take 20, you're probably in an encounter.

A good rule of thumb.