Hit and run

[SphereOfFeetMan]

Hey. With many 4e powers becoming usable 1/encounter I was wondering if hit and run tactics would become a huge aspect of the game. For example, a 4e mind flayer can use mind blast and dominate both once an encounter.

So do you foresee groups of pc's/monsters with 1/encounter abilities ambushing their enemies, blowing their power, retreating, and ambusing again, repeatedly? I suppose that if it is also a new encounter then the opposing group would also recoup their 1/encounter resources however.

I can think of three ways in which hit and run tactics could possibly dominate the game:
1) Some monsters have 1/encounter abilities and some don't. The mind flayer does, but what about an Owlbear? All animals? Will some creature types have proportionally many more 1/encounter abilities than other creature types?
2) Some 1/encounter abilities are offensively impressive and can end a fight while others are impressive defensively but are more passive. So a mind flayer pops in and mind blasts for his 1/encounter while his enemy's (a pc?) 1/encounter ability is something like a dwarven defenders loser stance.
3) Creating different encounter lengths for the same groups. For example, there are three groups Pc's, Enemies, and Henchmen*. Pc's attacks Enemies. Henchmen enters battlefield and attacks Enemies. Pc's retreat and have a short tea party. They come back and it is a new encounter. Pc's can now shoot their 1/encounter again because it is a new encounter for them, but their enemies can't because they have been constantly fighting.

I am also wondering how encounters are defined. At what point does the DM say "No" (like in the tea party example) and at what point is the encounter definition a part of the reality of the gameworld that defines how creatures can interact with each other?

*(Henchmen could be charmed creatures, summons, hirelings, the necromancers horde, etc)

Thoughts?

[Fwib]

Either they'll define the rules properly so that stupid stuff can't happen, or Hell will continue to be ice-free and lacking in flying pork.

[RandomCasualty]

Yeah it's balanced because it assumes that both sides get their per encounter abilities back, so you start even.

Also we're not sure how healing works yet... so it might be hit point attrition that stays. I don't know.

[Voss]

Attack, retreat and regroup can be a very sensible tactic, and in game terms, there shouldn't be some overarching 'you just can't do that shit, because its mean' rule.

A chase would probably be part of the same encounter, but if you manage to kill or lose your pursuers, and take a moment to recover, I'd guess that you're in new encounter territory.

It certainly fits certain cultures. Elves are often described as pulling this shit. Popping out of the woods, peppering people with arrows, then running away again. They don't have the numbers to fight like Real Orcs Do.

Oh course, that doesn't mean that it should automatically successful. Losing men during guerilla raids is always a real risk, particularly if you're spreading out and attacking from multiple directions. And there are always consequences. The second or third time the party tries to raid the Orc fort this way, there should be a lot of shit waiting for them.

But if you manage to kill their shaman and their witch doctor in the first raid or two, you'll likely be at an advantage.

[K]

This just means that Mind Flayers will cast once per encounter SoDs, and then run.

You'll die, and they won't because you can't kill them in one turn. Basically, it just bones PC who are expected to live to the next encounter.

It also means that every encounter is about popping your biggest power and then running. Good times.

[Voss]

Except, in theory, there aren't any SoDs.

Actually, there's been some info on mind flayers. If true, they got a serious smack with the nerf bat. Mind blast is 1/encounter and only dazes.

[Koumei]

Poor mind flayers...

Still, how is daze not a SoD? You can't do anything, so either the fight is over (in the case of PCs Dazing guards and stuff) or they can proceed to beat you to death with a lead pipe, or proceed to step 4: Eat brains.

[Crissa]

Well, the old daze was merely you waste an action to make someone else waste an action.

It looks like they're really making a game for grognards to go around saying, "Why, in my day ... was dangerous!'

-Crissa

[TavishArtair]

Unless the mind blast is still an area. In which case you have a power which is quite effective if you can get a bunch of mind flayers to chain it together, one of them keeping opponents dazed on each round while the others attack, and once they've all used up their mind blast, they run off.

Sure, it's unlikely that you'll meet six mind flayers who all want to use their mind blast on you, but it's still fairly terrifying, or at least damn inconvenient.

[Username17]

There are no Save or Dies because you don't get Saves. There are, however, attacks that take you out of the fight if they "hit" which is pretty much exactly the same thing.

So yes, people whose 1/encounter abilities are "Damage Burst: Something Fvcking Dies." or "Cloud of Not Getting Turns: Your Enemy Doesn't get any Fvcking Turns until the combat is over." are going to use them and then run away if there's anything left or the attack "missed" (re: Opponent made save).

Now the Mind Flayer and Beholder are in fact going to have abilities that are just like that, so they'll be all over your nuts. And various player characters will have abilities like that as well, and other classes won't. And that means that the classes designed with "staying power" are going to suck hard, because only an idiot is actually going to fight that way.

-Username17

[Koumei]

Which means that, unless you're wrong there, WotC managed to learn....

NOTHING

from 3rd Edition and the complaints received.

[the_taken]

1200664484[/unixtime]]Which means that, unless you're wrong there, WotC managed to learn....

NOTHING

from 3rd Edition and the complaints received.

I am now on the verge of tears. I'd probably be balling my eyes out if a piece of me wasn't already an undead abomination.

[JonSetanta]

Don't count your BAWWWs yet. 4e ain't done.

[Absentminded_Wizard]

The way the designers are talking, everything is going to have a combination of at will, 1/encounter, and 1/day abilities. So this whole scheme can theoretically be balanced if one of two things happens:

1. Everybody has 1/encounter powers that immobilize or kill at the level when they'll be facing mind flayers.

2. They specifically define what an encounter is. Preferably, this would involve a stipulation that you have to be away from the enemy for a certain period of time before you can trigger a new encounter. This period should be long enough that you can't pop into the treeline and back and declare a new encounter, but short enough that guerilla tactics are plausible.

Unfortunately, I get the feeling that they'll leave the word "encounter" undefined, as they did in 3.x. That will leave it up to the DM's common sense to determine when a new encounter begins. On the one hand, this approach allows for a more nuanced assessment of the situation. OTOH, your mileage varies *greatly* with different DMs.

[virgil]

If they took the inspiration from Star Wars Saga, then it wasn't exactly per encounter, it just took about 5 minutes of rest before they could use their special abilities again; at least for the Jedi stuff.

[JonSetanta]

1 minute rest should be fine.

[Username17]

Everybody has 1/encounter powers that immobilize or kill at the level when they'll be facing mind flayers.

I'm pretty sure this ain't happening.

They've shown us the Paladin Smites. And while those are impressive by 3e standards, they are also probably insufficient to drop enemies in one hit without a crit. However, Paladins are a "defender" which is the type that sucks.

It seems a reasonable guess that Strikers will do "more damage" with their bursts (which will probably one shot a lot of things considering how close the smite comes to doing just that), and if a "controller" can't juggle you off the field with a 1/encounter ability I will eat a hat.

So basically it seems to come down to Leaders and Defenders not pulling their weight. But you knew that was going to happen. The Defender and the Leader are defined defensively while the Controller and the Striker ae defined offensively. Offense is better than defense because you choose when it is used and thus it always applies maximum benefit. Choosing to inflict Fire or Cold damage is fundamentally superior to choosing to be immune to fire or cold.

-Username17

[Bigode]

The cleric not pulling its weight? I really doubt that, but it should be fun to see the "their faith should make them better than everyone else" crowd cry ...

[RandomCasualty]

If leaders get stuff like white raven tactics and other initiative manipulations, they'll be all about the win. Sure, they won't be the guys actually winning, but maybe having one on your team means the wizard gets to act twice in a round or something, and then they're certainly tactically useful.

As far as the wizard, I think we can expect him to be awesome. At some point, the designers decided that fireball was an iconic controller power, so that basically means that the wizard can probably do everything except probably buffing. He's got area attacks, single target attacks and battlefield control. So he's going to actually end up being a controller and a striker at the same time. Of course, I'm not entirely surprised.

Depending on how sneak attack is done in the new edition, rogues will either be awesome or the suck, because apparently almost everything is supposed to be sneak attackable in 4E. Though of course it may get a heavy nerf, or it might not. Who knows.

[SunTzuWarmaster]

You always turn to the wizard for the Fireball, Hold Monster, Fly, Levitate, Walk Through Walls, Sleep in Safety, Build Giant Castles, Build Giant Flying Castles, Teleportation, Make Enemies Smaller, Make People Stronger and EVERYTHING ELSE.

The iconic Fireball, Enlarge Person, Alarm, Tensers Disk, Fly, Teleport, Charm, Invisibility, and Illusions all are on the wizard side. Taking ANY of it away is a step back from the iconic wizard (which seems something that WoTC is trying not to do). Let's face it: the wizard is good and has always been good, so much so that their defined character role is 'kick ass at everything, have bad hitpoints, don't swing swords'.

[Absentminded_Wizard]

1200761452[/unixtime]]The cleric not pulling its weight? I really doubt that, but it should be fun to see the "their faith should make them better than everyone else" crowd cry ...

I'm not sure if they'll actually pull their weight, but they'll at least come closer than the Defender. Apparently, there's a Leader power that heals one of your allies every time you damage an opponent. If there's a whole series of such abilities, the Leader might contribute to group success without doing much individually. Since the concept of the Leader seems to be support oriented, that's probably what's going to happen.

[Voss]

Keep in mind that that everybody can take the class training feat (and considering that the other feats we've seen have totally sucked ass, there isn't any reason not to) and steal the OMG!Fucking!Win powers from the classes that have them.

So everybody will be made of win, they'll just have different starting BAB & defense modifiers, skill sets and flavor abilities that won't even matter.

And actually, the wizard is apparently losing a lot of shit. He's getting stripped down to primarily evocations and illusions, with a handful of low level enchantments and utility things. Enchantments made of win are definitely gone, necromancy seems to be gone, conjuration stolen by the warlock, and polymorph/shape change and related shit are definitely not in the first book.

And of course, due to the limited and fucktastically stupid nature of the previews, there has been no mention of any actual non-combat abilities at all. If the monsters are any indication, it may all go away.

[Koumei]

Do we yet know that the "Steal class features" feat is actually that good? For all we know, it could be utter shit like the rest of them, and give you specific powers (as in, you don't get to choose) of the worst possible variety, or even level-inappropriate ones.

[Absentminded_Wizard]

So everybody will be made of win, they'll just have different starting BAB & defense modifiers, skill sets and flavor abilities that won't even matter.

I read something somewhere that seemed to say they were getting rid of the concept of BAB and that class powers were the only way you got to increase your attack bonus.

[Voss]

Nope. BAB is definitely still in. It and defenses will increase at a rate of 1 point for every two levels regardless of class. The main differentiation will be the starting bonuses that the classes get. And possibly other bonuses you can pick up later through your class talents (or possibly, feats, but that seems less likely given the way they want to marginalize feats)

@Koumei- No, actually. It could have all sorts of limitations that make it fairly crappy. But even if it is fairly shitty, I still expect combinations and synergies that they didn't bother to playtest that will be flat-out better than anything they do for a single class. Its got to be better than 'spend a feat to be able to spend action points to not be surprised, if on the off chance that you didn't train Perception and actually got surprised'. Or, Toughness, aka you can take enough extra damage to... still die to a level appropriate encounter.

On the other side, I hope they're smart enough to put some sort of hard limit on per encounter powers, otherwise people are just going to be able to build characters that can flat out win.