How do you guys role-play power cards, without simply announcing the card to the room?
Thanks,
-Dave
1d20+4 vs Reflex
1d6+4+1d6 fire damage
My DM found an interesting solution. We have to say what we want to do without using the name of the power. If we use the name of the power, it automatically misses. That way combat does not feel repetitive.
Great idea. I might have to snag it, though (some of) my players do this anyways, and i don't neccicaraly want to punish the newbies.
That way combat does not feel repetitive.
That seems too intimidating to me. There's only so many different ways I can say I attack a guy with fire before I get bored of it and just want to move on.
I'm with Manion; just describe what you do, what defense you target and what the damage and effects are. Anything else is not needed.
I'm with Manion; just describe what you do, what defense you target and what the damage and effects are. Anything else is not needed.
Bingo. You want to say a little short descriptor before you attack? Just say it.
Skipping the names of the powers only works if you're certain your players know what they're doing and can use their powers correctly. One player in my group was using a Warden, and after an opponent belted another PC, he waited until his next turn to walk over to him and use one of his immediate action powers on him ... and he had not marked the bad guy.
Combat in 4E takes a bit of time. I'll roleplay my character, not my powers.
In other words, some things are more interesting to roleplay than others. I have no problem with players who just name their powers and roll to hit. However, I've always held that role-playing is its own reward, and there is no need to force it on those who aren't as comfortable getting into character as I am.
Let me tell you a little story about a little man... a little gnome, in fact, named Jingle Jangle. He was a bard at heart, with the training of a warlord. He'd sing, and he'd shout. He'd soothe, and he'd command. On his journeys, he came across Gath, a barbarian of the tallest sort, a goliath that towered over goliaths.
Now, the difference between three feet and eight feet is quite significant, but Jingle Jangle was never the sort to be intimidated by tall folk. Unfortunately, this barbarian fellow was quite the daring one, and as such, he tended to get hurt quite often.
Jingle Jangle was a caring little gnome; or at least, he certainly had a caring side. This nature was shown even in the heat of battle, when blows had to be struck, lest the foes conquer all. When Jingle Jangle's shorter companions became injured, he would assuringly give them a hard pat on the back, offering them encouraging words.
Two problems arose during one fateful day when Jingle Jangle's hulking companion was struck by an unseen enemy from the darkness. The gnome had to think quickly, and two things were on his mind. The first, to reassure his companion. The second, to draw a sunrod so that light may shine forth.
He prepared to draw out his sunrod, illuminating the area for all, but first offered encouragement to the wounded barbarian. With Jingle Jangle being short for a gnome, and Gath being tall for a goliath, the strong pat on the back... well, it did not quite reach the back. And thus, a legendary phrase was born:
"I smack Gath's ass and whip out my rod!"
Nah.
Combat in 4E takes a bit of time. I'll roleplay my character, not my powers.
One of the reasons my DM is trying to encourage more role playing in combat is that 4E combat tends to take you out of the role playing moment of the game and then switches gears to a tactical board game. The intent of role playing through combat is to keep players immersed into the role playing even through combat. Since combat does take a long time, we can end up pulling ourselves out of character and out of that role playing mode for a long time and then it takes some more time to feel immersed again.
I personally love the 4E combat system, but I do see what my DM is saying about 4E combat. The added complexity of 4E combat makes combat more interesting, but then I do feel myself changing into some chess player instead of remaining in character sometimes.
Recently in my home campaign our group were facing Azers. They only speak Primordial and no one could understand them. Fortunately our Warlord had reading spectales and much hilarity ensued with writing notes back and forth while getting waylaid by demons.
One of the reasons my DM is trying to encourage more role playing in combat is that 4E combat tends to take you out of the role playing moment of the game and then switches gears to a tactical board game. The intent of role playing through combat is to keep players immersed into the role playing even through combat. Since combat does take a long time, we can end up pulling ourselves out of character and out of that role playing mode for a long time and then it takes some more time to feel immersed again.
I personally love the 4E combat system, but I do see what my DM is saying about 4E combat. The added complexity of 4E combat makes combat more interesting, but then I do feel myself changing into some chess player instead of remaining in character sometimes.
It only pulls you out of the role if you let it. I personnally find 4e much more immersive in combat that any of the previous editions. Here every character has cool powers that they can use, and they can choose to roleplay those powers to whatever degree they want. It's much better than, 'I, the fighter, go up to the monster and swing my (weapon) at him.' which is pretty much all you did as a fighter.
Another option is to try to not break character when assessing the combat situation. Refer to players by their character names, and give your strategic input in a manner that reflects your character.
Yes, 4e combats take much longer, and are more stategically oreinted, but they offer more diverse options, and are a lot more fun to RP, imo.
Ramius
It only pulls you out of the role if you let it. I personnally find 4e much more immersive in combat that any of the previous editions. Here every character has cool powers that they can use, and they can choose to roleplay those powers to whatever degree they want. It's much better than, 'I, the fighter, go up to the monster and swing my (weapon) at him.' which is pretty much all you did as a fighter
True. It could be pretty much the same in 3.0. "I do a full round attack" is about the same as "I do twin strike".
Still i agree with the previous NO POWER NAMES ALLOWS idea. Though i'm sort of against the penalty.
Set aside the power card, roll and describe your hit or miss, flip over the card (as proof), and give damage results.
As for actually describing your power it can get a little tedious some time. I use Leaping Shade a lot, which basically means I stab at them and my invisible shadow powers dig into their flesh. It's sort of hard to explain. However, when I use Inescapable Blade I love describing it.
"I swing my greatspear in a huge upward arc and its shadow leaps forth, arcing elegantly around the huge pile of garbage, and slashes up across the thugs chest into his throat."
3 damage! :-)
For most daily and encounter powers you pretty much have to say what they are, especially when they are very similar visually and have similar effect.
What I have tried to do is stuff like "Using twin strike I lash out with my chain [roll dice] which unfortunately clangs as it rebounds off the shield, but with the momentum of the first blow, the other end of the chain [roll] gouges deeply into the side of my enemy with a satisfying sploortch"!
But honestly, my group doesn't really play that way, and our combat encounters take so long anyway that our role-playing in combat is limited at best.
I actually think this is a weakness of 4e. There's so much going on in combat that requires strict awareness and adherence to rules, situations and powers used, that it can easily devolve into a straight recitation of powers and effects, and STILL take an hour to complete one fight.
If not, you could write down the power on a sheet of paper, or announce the power you're using OOC after the description (though this might not be a perfect solution for those that feel it impacts immersion to speak out-of-character too often).
There's absolutely no problem with calling out attacks consistently all the time. What matters is the roleplaying heart behind it. A newbie might flip out his Bigby's Icy Hand card and say, "Bigby's Icy Hand!" A more experienced player who's playing a beam-themed blaster wizard might instead say, "Binding Blizzard Buster!" Mechanically, they behave in identical fashion. Thematically, they are not.
I don't care how many times he shouts "Binding Blizzard Buster." He's probably going to have to change it out in 10 levels or so, anyway, so it's not like it's going to be forever. And it creates more character around the PCs', um, characters.
I'm finding the Powers / Power Cards to be a little cumbersome during battle. Everyone at the table (including myself) is constantly flipping thru papers to try and figure out which Power to play. I kind of miss just using some simple descriptors before I attack. Now I feel a little bit like I'm reading my actions from cue cards.
How do you guys role-play power cards, without simply announcing the card to the room?
There's nothing wrong with calling your attacks. Not every power use needs a grand description. But if powers are getting boring at your table, spice them up every once in a while.
Any time you feel that simply declaring your attacks is getting stale, show, don't tell. Imagine what your character is doing as he uses his powers. How he is doing that. What he is saying while doing that. And imagine what effect that has on not only the target, both physically and emotionally, as well as the effects on the environment, the bystanders, and the mood of the encounter. Use your favorite shows and movies for inspiration if that helps. And once you got that image, describe it to your group. With FEELING!!!
But even a little exposition can breath new life into your power. Again, it helps to show, not tell. But its perfectly fine to do both (or do either). Whatever gets your point across and heightens the scene. For example:
"I use SCORCHING BLAST to verb the orcs into adj noun.
"I charge my charka point with class power source energy, blasting him for nd6's."
"I maneuver his attack, leaving him open to my REAVING STRIKE."
"I use TWIN STRIKE to verb the orc a new orifice. "
"Feel my extreme emotion. DAILY! ATTACK!! POWER!!!"
"My name is name. You killed my significant relation. Prepare to verb."
Sprinkle a little description whenever the moment moves you.
And for dailies, feel free to ham it up a little if it fits the mood and your character. You have plenty of time. And while you're at it, be sure to tell your target exactly how you feel. Be flexible. Let it flow. And remember, you're telling a (cooperative) story, so make it a story you'd like to hear.
This post is brought to you by tvtropes. Domon Kasshu. And the number 9000!!!
I actually LOLed at that.
For example my revenant assassin I try to be as dramatic as possible. If I can help it, I do not simply walk over to my enemy. I teleport. Leaping Shade, the at-will I almost always use, suddenly becomes more interesting when I disappear and suddenly leap out of the enemy's own shadow.
When there's minions to be killed, I'll study an enemy as I teleport around the battlemat, killing minions. I typically say something to the effect of "still looking at the chieftain, I slash out at the orc drudge with my broadsword." Suddenly "Leaping Shade" becomes something else.
Executioner's Noose is described in various formats of "I reach into my own shadow and suddenly I pull out a strand of black shadows. I tie it into a noose before throwing it around the chieftain's neck." It's the standard flavour text, but given a much more graphic description.
In a past life my character was an Avenger. So when I use my "Targeted for Death" power, I'm in fact swearing an oath of enmity.
In contrast I'm much more subdued with my descriptions of my Barbarian's attacks. I typically just slash out with my axes. Although again, I don't name the power, I simply say something to the effect of "I slash out at the orc drudge with my waraxe."
And yet when I use my Whirling Frenzy power, its a memorable moment of the combat. Once the enemies start lineup in an advantageous position I start saying to people "I'd move away from me, I'm about to go crazy here" or "I can't keep control of myself for much longer, you'd better move!" Instead of saying "I use a close burst 1 power, targeting all creatures" I make it sound like I'm going to explode and there is nothing I can do to stop myself, so people step out of the way. And thus, people do move out of the way.
My daily rage isn't roleplayed much (I do start laughing uncontrollably whilever in a rage). When I go into the Thunder Hooves Rage I start using Pressing Strike every turn. This turns a 1[W] power into a 2[W] power. So instead of saying "I use pressing strike" I describe it as "I barge into the orc chieftain and slash out once with my waraxe, as I step away I chop at him once more."
That way combat does not feel repetitive.
That seems too intimidating to me. There's only so many different ways I can say I attack a guy with fire before I get bored of it and just want to move on.
"Fire Shoots out of my hands" vs "I use burning hands."
"Fire suddenly erupts from within them" vs "I use scorching burst"
"I slash at him" vs "crushing surge"
You can be as brief or verbose as you like. You can be as repetitive or creative as you like. There's really no difference between "I slash at you" then "wicked strike"
Combat in 4E takes a bit of time. I'll roleplay my character, not my powers.
I don't stop roleplaying just because initiative has been rolled. My "oath of enmity" is used not on the most powerful mob, or the mob with the most hit points. Its used on someone who has truly angered my character enough to seek vengeance on him. I also don't do subdual damage to my oath of enmity. Once I've sworn to kill someone, nothing short of the Raven Queen herself can deter me. Same with my barbarian. Once I rage, I go out of control. I have enough presence of mind to not attack allies, but that's it. The Wizard called out and asked me not to kill a cultleader so we could question her. I killed the cultleader, and then afterwards I went over to the Wizard and asked if he'd told me not to kill her. When he said he did, my character apologised.
But different strokes for different folks.
One of the reasons my DM is trying to encourage more role playing in combat is that 4E combat tends to take you out of the role playing moment of the game and then switches gears to a tactical board game.
Roleplaying needs to come from all parties at the table or else people won't bother. One of my fellow players said this in a thread about a Chaos Scar adventure.
I second the great impression the adventure left!
Of course (as with every adventure) the DM and players make it or break it. If you have a DM that is role-playing the bullywugs (including putting on a weird acceptance and lots of 'ribbiiiit') instead of using monsters as strategic figurines and cares to really describe the whole scenery to create a great atmosphere, you can have fun in even the worst written adventure.
And if your group is in sync with said DM (describing their character's actions and having them act in character instead of 'wargaming'), you'll have a blast.
Our DM for the Chaos Scar adventures is hardly experienced. I believe that was her 3rd adventure she'd run. Ever. And yet this fluff-light adventure with only a tenuous position in an overall campaign was a genuine joy.
In another adventure the same DM had us face some Myconids. But instead of saying "some myconids push up a ladder and start climbing up to you", here is an excerpt of a synopsis of the adventure. It includes how she described the scene:
At that point our Wizard saw the fungus and mushrooms start doing strange and terrible things.
They had moved over to the side of the chasm and were vommiting onto the wall. It became apparent after some watching that the were fashioning their projectile vomit into a ladder to climb up to kill us. This was awesome imagery and extremely freaky as our DM had put quite a few mushroom miniatures onto the mat. We had the image of the entire chasm floor being covered in these mushrooms that were vommiting a ladder into formation before they started climbing.
Now this naturally elicited a different response from us then had she simply said "Some myconids start climbing the walls of the chasm." The response to that would have been "we roll initiative."
Instead, everyone rushed into the building and I grabbed some pitons and hammered them into the door's edges to try to jam the door shut. We then rushed deeper into the building as we sought out a secret exit. We still had to fight a single enemy. It was a standard monster, not a solo or elite. And yet because of the plant creatures banging on the door, it was filled with tension.
The added complexity of 4E combat makes combat more interesting, but then I do feel myself changing into some chess player instead of remaining in character sometimes.
I noticed I had the habit of being very tactical and would often tell people what to do. So I made Lord Rangrim. He's a lawful good nobleman who in combat can, on occassion, lose his self-control and go into beserker mode. When he does, he starts laughing uncontrollably. If you've read Katherine Kerr's Deverry books the character was inspired by Rhodry.
Problem fixed. Because I can't order people around or suggest tactics when I'm laughing without pause. The next character I'm going to make will be a kobold swarm druid that concentrates on beast form powers. Although the fluff says you can talk while in beast form, I've made the choice not to. So once more I won't be able to organise tactics a lot of the time.
That said, good tactics can still be roleplaying well. Sometimes it just makes sense. When you move adjacent to someone, ready for a flank.
Also, try to play up player ignorance. Lord Rangrim recently fought a gnoll. However upon seeing the gnoll he cried out "look out! Its a werewolf!" Now everytime he tells people about that adventure, he proudly describes how he defeated a werewolf. During the combat someone suggested subduing the gnoll to question it, but Lord Rangrim quickly pointed out "its a damn werewolf! We can't try to keep that under control! We have to kill it quickly!"
By the time the combat was over, the party cleric actually said "We just defeated a werewolf? Wow!"
Also! Do crazy stuff that isn't in the rules. We were fighting a spiretop drake. The damn thing was in the middle of a chasm and we were a rather range poor party (range 5 was our absolute limit). Instead of everyone readying actions, the player of our goblin fighter said "I pull out my rope and throw one end to the halfling." On the halflings turn the goblin announced he was going to charge the stirge who was in the middle of the canyon.
The goblin was successful and so the halfling (who weighed less than the goblin) had to make an athletics check. She was successful enough that she only slid 1 square to the edge of the canyon. Fortunately our 600lb minotaur went over on his turn and stepped on the rope and was the new anchor for the goblin.
But what was a rather neat maneuver simply meant the goblin was dangling a few foot directly below the minotaur. We still had the same problem. So the minotaur started swinging the goblin towards the spiretop drake, using the goblin as an improvised weapon.
Was this the optimal thing to do? Heck no. I piped up and said on the spiretop drake's turn "the spiretop drak should probably have combat advantage against a goblin dangling from a rope" and the DM agreed. So it was decidedly less optimal then readying actions. The minotaur also had to spend standard actions moving the goblin into position instead of attacking separately, so he was effectively out of the combat from a mechanical point of view.
And yet, it was a heck of a lot more fun
Though i'm sort of against the penalty.
Agreed. I'm accustomed to "emoting" everything I do (that is, providing a sentence or two description of my character's actions in relation to the environment around them). I'd been doing it for 7 years before I came to D&D, so I simply continued doing it without even thinking about it. But other players who have a stronger background in D&D aren't accustomed to "emoting" as much so they do it less. But they are getting better, with our DM sometimes prompting them by asking "what happens with your power?"
For most daily and encounter powers you pretty much have to say what they are
Why? Its 2010, 4th ed came out in 2008. We should all be more than comfortable with the rules. If you can't trust your fellow players to play their characters properly, who can you trust?
I actually think this is a weakness of 4e. There's so much going on in combat that requires strict awareness and adherence to rules, situations and powers used, that it can easily devolve into a straight recitation of powers and effects, and STILL take an hour to complete one fight.
I've got a Level 13 Wizard. I started playing him at Level 12 (for Revenge of the Giants). About half of my powers come from recent issues of Dragon magazine. I don't think I've ever described "Winged Horde" as "Winged Horde." I typically describe it as summoning sprites or spirits from the feywild. If I need to be brief I say "I summon my fey spirits". Charm of Misplaced Wrath and Charm of the Defender are almost identical, I called one of them by power once when a player said "oh that power's neat. What's that called?"
I do not find power names to be any quicker then a description of the power.
For most daily and encounter powers you pretty much have to say what they are
Why? Its 2010, 4th ed came out in 2008. We should all be more than comfortable with the rules. If you can't trust your fellow players to play their characters properly, who can you trust?I actually think this is a weakness of 4e. There's so much going on in combat that requires strict awareness and adherence to rules, situations and powers used, that it can easily devolve into a straight recitation of powers and effects, and STILL take an hour to complete one fight.
I've got a Level 13 Wizard. I started playing him at Level 12 (for Revenge of the Giants). About half of my powers come from recent issues of Dragon magazine. I don't think I've ever described "Winged Horde" as "Winged Horde." I typically describe it as summoning sprites or spirits from the feywild. If I need to be brief I say "I summon my fey spirits". Charm of Misplaced Wrath and Charm of the Defender are almost identical, I called one of them by power once when a player said "oh that power's neat. What's that called?"
I do not find power names to be any quicker then a description of the power.
It's not a matter of "trust" it's a matter of "OK, so exactly what power did you use?" I don't care when 4e "came out" some of us only started playing recently, and (hopefully) new players will be joining all the time.
Comparison:
My turn: "OK, twin strikes."
or
My turn: "I make two attacks."
OK, sure you can pretty much say something else than "twin strikes" but nothing that is remotely as concise as "twin strikes" is going to qualify as "role playing" any more than saying "twin strikes" does.
I am just relating my observations in actual game play. I'm sure everyone has their own experiences. Mine have been that 4e tends to make role playing in combat less frequent for all the reasons that have been stated. Your mileage may vary.