Gaming with no Powers - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

Gaming with no Powers

Post/Author/DateTime Post
#1
willfuqua
Jan 14, 2009 1:42:26 So I've been playing with the same group every other Sunday since 4th edition came out, and I'm started to get a little tired of the powers. It seems distracting and really just unneeded. I had a ton of fun with 2nd, 3rd, and 3.5 without daily, encounter, and at-will powers. It actually seems that the powers are pulling your focus to combat and away from storyline and character.
Does anyone else feel this way? Has anyone else thought of playing a game without powers for the players and monsters to just see how it feels?

Thanks,
Will
#2
erk_
Jan 14, 2009 8:40:56
So I've been playing with the same group every other Sunday since 4th edition came out, and I'm started to get a little tired of the powers. It seems distracting and really just unneeded. I had a ton of fun with 2nd, 3rd, and 3.5 without daily, encounter, and at-will powers. It actually seems that the powers are pulling your focus to combat and away from storyline and character.
Does anyone else feel this way? Has anyone else thought of playing a game without powers for the players and monsters to just see how it feels?

Thanks,
Will

Why would they pull your focus away from storyline and character? I have heard this argument before and I just can't fathom it.

Rather than remove powers, I suppose you could "deregulate them", take a bunch of at-will powers and make them available to everyone of a given power source, like grab and bull rush and basic attack.

To me this just sounds like a recipe for a really boring game though. "I basic attack the monster." "Good, now it is Joe's turn. Joe?" "I basic attack the monster." "Awesome. Now it is Mike's turn..."

Why not, instead of focusing on combat so much, play a few sessions without fighting?
#3
Stuntman
Jan 14, 2009 11:36:23
It actually seems that the powers are pulling your focus to combat and away from storyline and character.
Does anyone else feel this way?

I receive similar feedback from my group after our first 4E session. One of the players' comment was that when they got into combat, it seems to switch the game away from the role playing to tactical combat mode. The reason for my group was that everyone was learning the 4E rules and the combat capabilities of their characters. Also, I used the Kobold Hall adventure at the back of the DMG which is pretty much just a tactical combat obstacle course.

The group got half way through by the end of our first session. For our second session, I customised the second half of that adventure to add some other elements (prisoners and treaty negotiations) that made it more than just an obstacle course to get to the exit. Also, players were more used to the rules by the second session.

I do not think that removing powers is going to really solve your problem. I generally do not like too much combat. My personal preference is to have a good story build up to a big battle rather than a series of small battles leading to a final battle. I find that a series of small battles that is too long may distract from the overall goal of the adventure.
#4
bastard_dm
Jan 14, 2009 11:42:09 If the focus of your games is being pulled towards more combat, that could be because the players are excited about the cool combat powers their characters have. I don't think taking away their cool powers will make the game more fun...

If you want a less combat-focused game, then have fewer combats.

That's what I do when I feel that combat has become too central to my game, regardless of system.

Just because characters in 4e have a set of cool combat powers doesn't mean they are nothing more than a set of cool combat powers.
#5
rikiji
Jan 14, 2009 12:07:16 I'd have to say it's more learning a new system than any particular fault in the system itself. Aside from being a balancing nightmare, removing powers isn't going to enhance the storyline any - it will just make combats longer and more tedious. Once you get used to the system, the effect will be less pronounced and in the meantime run fewer combat scenarious so you have more time for roleplay.
#6
johnnii
Jan 14, 2009 12:32:11 What's wrong with roleplaying in combat? A climactic conflict is surely part of the storyline and the horrors of killing surely play a part in character development, or the joy of ending the life of an utter villain.

Use free actions for quick in-game combat tactics, goad your opponent, make cheesy inspirational quotes. The same applies to NPCs and monster with a language.

This can't be said enough: description of the attacks! Every single attack doesn't have to be narrated, but those that are important (first hit, bloodying, taking down 0 HP, daily powers, criticals)

You don't need the powers to roleplay combat, but they certainly help the narration if you let them.
#7
echelon_house
Jan 14, 2009 19:40:36 I completely agree. My problem with the entire power system (besides the fact that it is almost impossible for players to keep straight) is that it offers characters no options outside of smashing monsters. Utility powers are few and far between, and generally inconsequential. Giving players all these nifty combat abilities naturally predisposes them to want to use them, and forces DMs into running combat encounters over other kinds of stories to forestall complaints that they're trying to "nerf" the characters. I've been attempting for a while to revamp the classes by removing all of the powers and offering the same kind of scaling abilities the Rogue has. The result so far is something that suggests possibilities for a player, but doesn't define all that they can do - which I find much more satisfying.
#8
mufflon
Jan 14, 2009 21:05:51
So I've been playing with the same group every other Sunday since 4th edition came out, and I'm started to get a little tired of the powers. It seems distracting and really just unneeded. I had a ton of fun with 2nd, 3rd, and 3.5 without daily, encounter, and at-will powers. It actually seems that the powers are pulling your focus to combat and away from storyline and character.
Does anyone else feel this way? Has anyone else thought of playing a game without powers for the players and monsters to just see how it feels?

Thanks,
Will

The "Powers" mechanic is one of the defining features of 4th edition; simply removing it would probably lead to a pretty unsatisfying game. I recommend looking into other systems with less of a focus on combat. There are quite a few of them out there, and many of them handle social and role-playing conflicts better than D&D).
#9
luzeke
Jan 14, 2009 22:42:34
Why would they pull your focus away from storyline and character? I have heard this argument before and I just can't fathom it.

I have the exact same reaction to these kinds of statements.
I believe the same kind of discussions appeared with 3.x and the grid. ( I could be wrong. Wasn't playing at the time)

The rules are there to be rules. Rules are not meant to make you roleplay. They are there to regulate something that would be hard, and possibly confusing, to decide by roleplay alone. Such as combat.
#10
matthewswift
Jan 14, 2009 22:58:47 4e = Fantasy Action movie. Fights are awesome opportunities for characters to fight. RP depends on how well you rp less on your skills.

3.xe = Skills and Spells are king. Fights are limiting in options, but still have a lot of potential because of the skills system. Acrobatics. Amazing skill that gives you potential to do so many martial power equivalents, it alone can convert combat to Kung Fu Hustle meets LOTR.

RP is more skills oriented (the three main skills carry over but spells and other skills give a little more wiggle room. An example could be there is no "cook" type skill in 4.0)

Really, if you want to eliminate powers and remain "balanced" try 3.5 for a couple sessions. Options aren't as limited that way, and players can still be champions of battle if they want.
#11
enlightened
Jan 14, 2009 23:06:17 I also have been toying with the idea of dropping Powers, but I think I only want to drop the non-At Will Powers.

And then I would be VERY VERY lenient about allowing stuff with p.42. I would make it sort of a freewheeling make stuff up on the fly kind of thing.

"You want to slash his forehead to blind him with his own blood? Ok, Dex Vs. Ref. If you make it, he'll be blinded for one round."

"You want to run up the wall and jump over the stupid ogre to confuse him? Ok, Athletics Vs. Will. If you make it, you'll have Combat Advantage over him for your next attack."
#12
erk_
Jan 15, 2009 8:30:45
I also have been toying with the idea of dropping Powers, but I think I only want to drop the non-At Will Powers.

And then I would be VERY VERY lenient about allowing stuff with p.42. I would make it sort of a freewheeling make stuff up on the fly kind of thing.

"You want to slash his forehead to blind him with his own blood? Ok, Dex Vs. Ref. If you make it, he'll be blinded for one round."

"You want to run up the wall and jump over the stupid ogre to confuse him? Ok, Athletics Vs. Will. If you make it, you'll have Combat Advantage over him for your next attack."

And in doing so, you'd basically be recreating the concept of the encounter and daily ability.

"Wicked, that wall jump worked great! I'm going to do it again!" hmm... this could get imbalancing very fast. How to limit it... "Now that he's had that trick tried against him, it becomes a normal attack. You can't get combat advantage if he's expecting it." "You mean I can only use it once per encounter?"

I found getting my players to do the fluff on their abilities worked better than trying to alter their abilities. Maye my group works differently.
#13
enlightened
Jan 15, 2009 14:25:46
And in doing so, you'd basically be recreating the concept of the encounter and daily ability.

"Wicked, that wall jump worked great! I'm going to do it again!" hmm... this could get imbalancing very fast. How to limit it... "Now that he's had that trick tried against him, it becomes a normal attack. You can't get combat advantage if he's expecting it." "You mean I can only use it once per encounter?"

I agree.

The point wouldn't be to do away with Encounter and Daily powers completely, but rather to be able to make up your own on the fly.

It certainly wouldn't work for every group (or maybe even most groups) but I think my group might be able to handle it. Or at least handle it better than having pre-set Powers because with freeform Powers there's nothing that you have to remember (and remembering the mechanics of their characters isn't my player's strong point). ;)
#14
Shiftkitty
Jan 15, 2009 15:20:42 I'm keeping the powers as is, but have toyed with some kind of tweaks such as letting Martial characters draw from any martial power, Arcane characters draw from any arcane powers, and Divine characters draw from any divine powers.

My players wanted to be able to pick what powers were at-will, encounter, or daily, sticking with the prescribed number of those particular power types, but I could see the fighter picking Brute Strike as an at-will and vetoed it immediately. After some discussion, they relented, although the wizard player smiled innocently and swore he'd never do that sort of thing! ;)

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 willfuqua Jan 14, 2009 1:42:26	So I've been playing with the same group every other Sunday since 4th edition came out, and I'm started to get a little tired of the powers. It seems distracting and really just unneeded. I had a ton of fun with 2nd, 3rd, and 3.5 without daily, encounter, and at-will powers. It actually seems that the powers are pulling your focus to combat and away from storyline and character. Does anyone else feel this way? Has anyone else thought of playing a game without powers for the players and monsters to just see how it feels? Thanks, Will
#2 erk_ Jan 14, 2009 8:40:56	So I've been playing with the same group every other Sunday since 4th edition came out, and I'm started to get a little tired of the powers. It seems distracting and really just unneeded. I had a ton of fun with 2nd, 3rd, and 3.5 without daily, encounter, and at-will powers. It actually seems that the powers are pulling your focus to combat and away from storyline and character. Does anyone else feel this way? Has anyone else thought of playing a game without powers for the players and monsters to just see how it feels? Thanks, Will Why would they pull your focus away from storyline and character? I have heard this argument before and I just can't fathom it. Rather than remove powers, I suppose you could "deregulate them", take a bunch of at-will powers and make them available to everyone of a given power source, like grab and bull rush and basic attack. To me this just sounds like a recipe for a really boring game though. "I basic attack the monster." "Good, now it is Joe's turn. Joe?" "I basic attack the monster." "Awesome. Now it is Mike's turn..." Why not, instead of focusing on combat so much, play a few sessions without fighting?
#3 Stuntman Jan 14, 2009 11:36:23	It actually seems that the powers are pulling your focus to combat and away from storyline and character. Does anyone else feel this way? I receive similar feedback from my group after our first 4E session. One of the players' comment was that when they got into combat, it seems to switch the game away from the role playing to tactical combat mode. The reason for my group was that everyone was learning the 4E rules and the combat capabilities of their characters. Also, I used the Kobold Hall adventure at the back of the DMG which is pretty much just a tactical combat obstacle course. The group got half way through by the end of our first session. For our second session, I customised the second half of that adventure to add some other elements (prisoners and treaty negotiations) that made it more than just an obstacle course to get to the exit. Also, players were more used to the rules by the second session. I do not think that removing powers is going to really solve your problem. I generally do not like too much combat. My personal preference is to have a good story build up to a big battle rather than a series of small battles leading to a final battle. I find that a series of small battles that is too long may distract from the overall goal of the adventure.
#4 bastard_dm Jan 14, 2009 11:42:09	If the focus of your games is being pulled towards more combat, that could be because the players are excited about the cool combat powers their characters have. I don't think taking away their cool powers will make the game more fun... If you want a less combat-focused game, then have fewer combats. That's what I do when I feel that combat has become too central to my game, regardless of system. Just because characters in 4e have a set of cool combat powers doesn't mean they are nothing more than a set of cool combat powers.
#5 rikiji Jan 14, 2009 12:07:16	I'd have to say it's more learning a new system than any particular fault in the system itself. Aside from being a balancing nightmare, removing powers isn't going to enhance the storyline any - it will just make combats longer and more tedious. Once you get used to the system, the effect will be less pronounced and in the meantime run fewer combat scenarious so you have more time for roleplay.
#6 johnnii Jan 14, 2009 12:32:11	What's wrong with roleplaying in combat? A climactic conflict is surely part of the storyline and the horrors of killing surely play a part in character development, or the joy of ending the life of an utter villain. Use free actions for quick in-game combat tactics, goad your opponent, make cheesy inspirational quotes. The same applies to NPCs and monster with a language. This can't be said enough: description of the attacks! Every single attack doesn't have to be narrated, but those that are important (first hit, bloodying, taking down 0 HP, daily powers, criticals) You don't need the powers to roleplay combat, but they certainly help the narration if you let them.
#7 echelon_house Jan 14, 2009 19:40:36	I completely agree. My problem with the entire power system (besides the fact that it is almost impossible for players to keep straight) is that it offers characters no options outside of smashing monsters. Utility powers are few and far between, and generally inconsequential. Giving players all these nifty combat abilities naturally predisposes them to want to use them, and forces DMs into running combat encounters over other kinds of stories to forestall complaints that they're trying to "nerf" the characters. I've been attempting for a while to revamp the classes by removing all of the powers and offering the same kind of scaling abilities the Rogue has. The result so far is something that suggests possibilities for a player, but doesn't define all that they can do - which I find much more satisfying.
#8 mufflon Jan 14, 2009 21:05:51	So I've been playing with the same group every other Sunday since 4th edition came out, and I'm started to get a little tired of the powers. It seems distracting and really just unneeded. I had a ton of fun with 2nd, 3rd, and 3.5 without daily, encounter, and at-will powers. It actually seems that the powers are pulling your focus to combat and away from storyline and character. Does anyone else feel this way? Has anyone else thought of playing a game without powers for the players and monsters to just see how it feels? Thanks, Will The "Powers" mechanic is one of the defining features of 4th edition; simply removing it would probably lead to a pretty unsatisfying game. I recommend looking into other systems with less of a focus on combat. There are quite a few of them out there, and many of them handle social and role-playing conflicts better than D&D).
#9 luzeke Jan 14, 2009 22:42:34	Why would they pull your focus away from storyline and character? I have heard this argument before and I just can't fathom it. I have the exact same reaction to these kinds of statements. I believe the same kind of discussions appeared with 3.x and the grid. ( I could be wrong. Wasn't playing at the time) The rules are there to be rules. Rules are not meant to make you roleplay. They are there to regulate something that would be hard, and possibly confusing, to decide by roleplay alone. Such as combat.
#10 matthewswift Jan 14, 2009 22:58:47	4e = Fantasy Action movie. Fights are awesome opportunities for characters to fight. RP depends on how well you rp less on your skills. 3.xe = Skills and Spells are king. Fights are limiting in options, but still have a lot of potential because of the skills system. Acrobatics. Amazing skill that gives you potential to do so many martial power equivalents, it alone can convert combat to Kung Fu Hustle meets LOTR. RP is more skills oriented (the three main skills carry over but spells and other skills give a little more wiggle room. An example could be there is no "cook" type skill in 4.0) Really, if you want to eliminate powers and remain "balanced" try 3.5 for a couple sessions. Options aren't as limited that way, and players can still be champions of battle if they want.
#11 enlightened Jan 14, 2009 23:06:17	I also have been toying with the idea of dropping Powers, but I think I only want to drop the non-At Will Powers. And then I would be VERY VERY lenient about allowing stuff with p.42. I would make it sort of a freewheeling make stuff up on the fly kind of thing. "You want to slash his forehead to blind him with his own blood? Ok, Dex Vs. Ref. If you make it, he'll be blinded for one round." "You want to run up the wall and jump over the stupid ogre to confuse him? Ok, Athletics Vs. Will. If you make it, you'll have Combat Advantage over him for your next attack."
#12 erk_ Jan 15, 2009 8:30:45	I also have been toying with the idea of dropping Powers, but I think I only want to drop the non-At Will Powers. And then I would be VERY VERY lenient about allowing stuff with p.42. I would make it sort of a freewheeling make stuff up on the fly kind of thing. "You want to slash his forehead to blind him with his own blood? Ok, Dex Vs. Ref. If you make it, he'll be blinded for one round." "You want to run up the wall and jump over the stupid ogre to confuse him? Ok, Athletics Vs. Will. If you make it, you'll have Combat Advantage over him for your next attack." And in doing so, you'd basically be recreating the concept of the encounter and daily ability. "Wicked, that wall jump worked great! I'm going to do it again!" hmm... this could get imbalancing very fast. How to limit it... "Now that he's had that trick tried against him, it becomes a normal attack. You can't get combat advantage if he's expecting it." "You mean I can only use it once per encounter?" I found getting my players to do the fluff on their abilities worked better than trying to alter their abilities. Maye my group works differently.
#13 enlightened Jan 15, 2009 14:25:46	And in doing so, you'd basically be recreating the concept of the encounter and daily ability. "Wicked, that wall jump worked great! I'm going to do it again!" hmm... this could get imbalancing very fast. How to limit it... "Now that he's had that trick tried against him, it becomes a normal attack. You can't get combat advantage if he's expecting it." "You mean I can only use it once per encounter?" I agree. The point wouldn't be to do away with Encounter and Daily powers completely, but rather to be able to make up your own on the fly. It certainly wouldn't work for every group (or maybe even most groups) but I think my group might be able to handle it. Or at least handle it better than having pre-set Powers because with freeform Powers there's nothing that you have to remember (and remembering the mechanics of their characters isn't my player's strong point). ;)
#14 Shiftkitty Jan 15, 2009 15:20:42	I'm keeping the powers as is, but have toyed with some kind of tweaks such as letting Martial characters draw from any martial power, Arcane characters draw from any arcane powers, and Divine characters draw from any divine powers. My players wanted to be able to pick what powers were at-will, encounter, or daily, sticking with the prescribed number of those particular power types, but I could see the fighter picking Brute Strike as an at-will and vetoed it immediately. After some discussion, they relented, although the wizard player smiled innocently and swore he'd never do that sort of thing! ;)