Quote from: JongWKYou are >this< close to buy into the Roll Play v. Role Play argument.

This close? He's basically Swine. He's not happy with 4e for ideological reasons.

Seanchai

Quote from: estarIf the fighter blows the roll on his target he still does 3 points of damage. Otherwise he gets to do his normal damage of 2d6+3.

Remember a combat round is 6 second so the roll represents what happens over the course of the round. With Reaping Strike he is attacking with a flurry of jabs and cutting blows that slip through the defenses of the target

You know I love you, but this attempt to somehow write this off as a product of the abstraction of combat seems...well..I'll call it a bit if a stretch.

Because, now matter how much you abstracted combat, a miss was a friggin' miss. If you hit for little, you might write it off as a mere nick. If you hit for a lot, you might describe it as a wound piercing the side and spilling blood across the floor. But when you missed, you...well...described it as a miss; not as "Well, amidst your flurry of blows that missed, some actually got through."

It makes no sense - unless Reaping Strike isn't really an attack, but a "power" that represents something else entirely. That is, it's no longer an abstraction of actual physical attack that can hit or miss, but a power that is "in effect" and does damage every round and if you overcome what would have been a saving throw in previous editions, you do more damage.

Hey! Just like a spell!

I can almost hear the design meeting where someone realizes that by getting rid of the saving throws (and making them, essentially, like other versions of AC - BTW a change I think makes sense on some level) they can have Fighter "powers" like this.

Quote from: jgantsI also agree this is not a "roll play" vs "role play" argument - just that WotC seems to make it quite clear that the game they want to present is just a combination of combat set peices strung together.  Anything outside of combat seems to be either treated like the "talky" parts of a porno (just there to take up time until the next combat), or turned into some strange mini-game of dice rolling (that whole everyone picks any skill, rolls dice, and counts the total successes vs failures abomination they mentioned for handling NCEs).

I disagree, the non combat portions of Shadowfell were written more like old school modules than anything else I seen from TSR/Wizards over the past decade and a half.  The Dungeon was handled through grouping multiple room into a encounter set piece. SO instead of

Note: I am paraphrasing

#4 Kobold Workshop
#5 Kobold Common Room
#6 Quarters for Kobold Commoners
#7 Quarters for Kobold Warriors
#8 Quarters for Kobold King

The dungeon called this Area #4 The Kobold warrens, and explained all five rooms in one go.

Quote from: James J SkachYou know I love you, but this attempt to somehow write this off as a product of the abstraction of combat seems...well..I'll call it a bit if a stretch.

Sorry if I sound like I am advocating 4th edition. I am just trying to explain what it is and what it isn't. I also need learn this because regardless of my system preferences if I want to write professionally I greatly increase my writing opportunities learning 4th edition. So I figure that I would share what I learned with everyone else.

Quote from: James J SkachBecause, now matter how much you abstracted combat, a miss was a friggin' miss. If you hit for little, you might write it off as a mere nick. If you hit for a lot, you might describe it as a wound piercing the side and spilling blood across the floor. But when you missed, you...well...described it as a miss; not as "Well, amidst your flurry of blows that missed, some actually got through."

It makes no sense - unless Reaping Strike isn't really an attack, but a "power" that represents something else entirely. That is, it's no longer an abstraction of actual physical attack that can hit or miss, but a power that is "in effect" and does damage every round and if you overcome what would have been a saving throw in previous editions, you do more damage.

In GURPS no matter how you slice it would be hard to explain a miss as nothing more than a miss. Because in GURPS a single roll equals a single swing or thrust of a weapon.

This very very natural and something that D&D has always struggled with. If you played by in the AD&D 1st edition era that how people talked when they made a roll. Like they where swinging the weapon itself rather resolving a minutes worth of combat.

I think by 3rd edition the idea of abstract combat was largely given up. If you read nearly all the combat feat they read like they are written with the idea that a roll equal a swing or thrust.

4th edition combat has gone back to abstract with a vengeance. The rogue has an encounter ability that allows the rogue to move the target three squares as well as damage. In the text it is written as if the rogue is using his skill with the weapon to maneuver the target around. It is not written as some magic teleport.

So far the 4th edition combat system hangs together as well as the GURPS Advanced Combat system. While GURPS screams low fantasy combat, D&D 4th screams high fantasy combat.  

I believe this and the changes in character customization are going to be big issues for players of 3rd edition. People, like you, are not going to buy into what you can do with the system and others will be turned off because they can't make the characters they want. I don't think 4th edition will fail because it is a bad game where rules are broken and unbalanced.

Between six second rounds, single rolls that represent multiple attacks, and hit points that aren't 100% damage markers but also represent vitality and luck there is plenty of room for an ability that still deals a little bit of "damage" even if you miss your attack roll. I'd need to see the flavor text and rules for it to know if I like it or not.

I get what you're saying - it's a nice attempt. And please don't take the criticism as some kind effort to paint you as a shill for the game. It's really not meant that way and I apologize if it came across as such.

My point is that you've added the ability to miss and still do damage. No matter how you slice the time, whether it is six seconds, six minutes, or six hours, no matter how you write the flavor text, no matter how abstractly you think about it, what you roll represented, at it's base, some set of physical events. If you rolled a miss, those actions missed. This does not seem to be the case in this example.

I'll be interested to see the rules when they actually arrive. But I can tell you I've never seen anyone, in all my years of playing, say "You missed - a fumble! - for 3 point of damage." Without magic being involved, that is. Anyone else? Is there some bizarre concoction of 3e feats and skills and prestige classes that does this?

Now it might work fine for what this game is. As you say, it might be a mechanically tight, well balanced game. But little things like this, when combined with things like 30 HP at first level and healing or teleport, make it a very different D&D. That doesn't make it objectively bad - but it does make it very different.

Quote from: James McMurraystill deals a little bit of "damage" even if you miss your attack roll. I'd need to see the flavor text and rules for it to know if I like it or not.

For the record - there's goblins minions who've got 1 hitpoint each. And there's a special entry in their stat blocks which says that misses can't kill them. Thanks to this thread I know why that's sitting there
Rob, I raised two points in your other KotS thread - hope you get time to answer them. Thanks.

I just got to look at the dwarf's sheet, and the flavor text is basically that you're so good that little nicks get past no matter what. Since minions are immune, and non-minions have 15+ hit points Reaping Strike is more of a consolation prize than a beefy ability.

Also, the paladin's full text gets rid of any fears of him marking someone and then running away. His mark ends if he fails to engage the opponent by attacking it or ending the turn adjacent to it. Unless you're on a wide open plain against a bow wielding paladin, he's probably not going to be able to keep away from you and maintain his mark.

The guy who's going to run it just got his in the mail, so with any luck I'll have a play report for KotS in a couple of weeks.

Quote from: James McMurrayAlso, the paladin's full text gets rid of any fears of him marking someone and then running away. His mark ends if he fails to engage the opponent by attacking it or ending the turn adjacent to it.

Very good.  That could have been an awfully broken system.  Nice to see they've limited it.  Couldn't a Paladin just keep re-marking an opponent each round?  Or does he only do damage if he attacks it or ends the turn adjacent to it, but it attacks someone else?

If he hasn't engaged by the end of his turn, the mark goes away and he can't use the ability the next round (on anyone). At best he could mark someone every other round if he's trying to play keep away. I suppose you could have two paladins tag team someone, but there's a point in almost every system where the GM has to say enough is enough, and that would be one of those points for me in 4e.

Quote from: James McMurrayI just got to look at the dwarf's sheet, and the flavor text is basically that you're so good that little nicks get past no matter what. Since minions are immune, and non-minions have 15+ hit points Reaping Strike is more of a consolation prize than a beefy ability.

First, I don't recall anyone saying it was a "beefy" ability - so that's not up for discussion, really.

Second, as I said, the only way to explain this is to make it something other than a "to-hit" roll (a power) - it's no longer a roll to see if you hit, just whether you did damage, or a lot more damage.

Quote from: James J SkachFirst, I don't recall anyone saying it was a "beefy" ability - so that's not up for discussion, really.

I don't recall saying anyone said that.

If you don't want to discuss it, that's cool. I just threw it out there to make sure folks who haven't seen the ability don't think that it's like 3.x, where a typical opponent for a 1st level party would die to one or two missed Reaping Strikes.

QuoteSecond, as I said, the only way to explain this is to make it something other than a "to-hit" roll (a power) - it's no longer a roll to see if you hit, just whether you did damage, or a lot more damage.

I'm not sure if how they described it fits your definition of the only way it can be done, but it works for me. If it doesn't for you, that's cool.

If it was a lot of damage or an automatic mook killer I'd look twice at it. But as is, you're rarely going to be using this ability if you're playing the fighter, unless it's a PCs-on-one fight. His other at will ability lets him cleave for 3 damage, which actually can kill minions. If you're fighting something that 3 damage is meaningful against, it's probably also something that you'll be able to hit easily. If 3 damage isn't meaningful, then Reaping Strike is just a way to make you feel a little better about yourself when you miss.

It looks like it's keyed off of strength, so if you can get a PC (or a giant(kin)) with really high strength and this ability, it might be kinda scary. But then again, the higher your strength, the higher your to-hit, so the less likely you are to miss.

That said, I haven't seen the monsters in the adventure (and won't until after I've played it), so I could be very wrong. If the adventure doesn't follow the design strategy they've professed and demonstrated in the demo modules people have already reported on.

The problem with the long combat rounds and the fact that your single roll represented the overall effect of the cut and thrust of battle was that other rules were in direct opposition. Particularly exception based rules like mirror image and a cloak of displacement.
Both of these have an effect of making an attack miss. If a round was as depicted a minute or even 6 seconds worth of two and frowing then the images would all be worked through in the first 10 seconds or whatever. So everyone ignored it and made a common sense decision.
Now in 4e these exceptions will probably be removed giving a more consistant approach but for most older players the damaage is as they say done.
 
The problem I have with the reaping strike is that it allows you to hit, with a miss, a creature that you might wel find it bloody hard to hit normally. Now what if you add say a weapon coated in poison. I miss my opponent and the other guy takes 3 damage, but my weapon is poisoned. Now the rule will say something like 'any special effects that are part of the strikes normal damage are not carried forward to the reaping damage', but that means I am missing the guy, not hitting him with my weapon and still doing damage. Or what about creatures that have powers triggered when they are hit, rust monsters or I have used creatures like Alien with acid for blood that attacks your weapons when you hit them. Will this reaping strike trigger these ?
Also remember that this is a 1st level ability  odds to evens there is a super reaping strike that deals 6 or a mega reaping strike that deals 18 or whatever.I would expect if you look at the numbers that the effect will be about 5-10% of the hits of a creature of about the same level (here the effect is 3 hits and the creutures have 36 hits). Now you might say this is a trivial amount of damage but in the example its decisive and if its trivial why create so many of the issues I listed above for no reason?

Quote from: jibbajibbaThe problem I have with the reaping strike is that it allows you to hit, with a miss, a creature that you might wel find it bloody hard to hit normally. Now what if you add say a weapon coated in poison. I miss my opponent and the other guy takes 3 damage, but my weapon is poisoned. Now the rule will say something like 'any special effects that are part of the strikes normal damage are not carried forward to the reaping damage', but that means I am missing the guy, not hitting him with my weapon and still doing damage.

Not necessarily, you could have hit the guy just not pierced the skin with your poisoned weapon, getting hit with a weapon can still hurt even that weapon dosen't actually pierce the skin due to armor.

Quote from: jibbajibbaOr what about creatures that have powers triggered when they are hit, rust monsters or I have used creatures like Alien with acid for blood that attacks your weapons when you hit them. Will this reaping strike trigger these ?

Same as above you hit but didn't cut deep enough to spill the Alien blood, or get tangled by the rust monsters rusting tentacles. We'll know more in a few weeks.

Plus, there is the long-discussed notion that hit points don't all represent physical damage. That's something I've subscribed to since as far back as when I first began gaming. It seemed ludicrous to believe that a character simply became physically tougher as he gained hit points, or that one character could physically absorb a battleaxe blow that outright killed another.

The conception of hit points as more than simple physical damage seems even more true in 4e than previous editions, based on what I've read. That little bit of "damage" could mean a number of different things - the character loses a bit of confidence after witnessing the potential power of such a strike, his stamina is taxed a bit as he twists to avoid the blow, or some of his luck is simply used up. Looking at it like that pretty much obviates a lot of the special case loopholes discussed above.