Powerpuppiesdrinking coffee in themountain cabinRegistered Userregular
Chu answer my gmail you scrubtastic filthpot
@Jacob, Riemann: Would you agree that any DM who can make DnD4e combat not suffer from the problems Chu described is a DM who could also play Exalted with great success?
I'm gonna disagree here and say that Chu has the right impression of the combat in 4th edition D&D.
In combat any real roleplaying or character flavor goes right out the window and is replaced with raw mechanical crunch.
There are systems that are much more about stating whatever it is you want to do and then rolling dice to see what happens, but in 4th edition D&D when you are in combat you can do combat actions X, Y and Z (your powers) and nothing else.
this is not true at all
I guess if you house rule things? I mean, in 4th edition you can't say "oh, well, I'm a pretty dexterous duelist, I'm going to try to disarm my opponent of his weapon" unless you took the disarm encounter power at level 4 or whatever.
uhh, yes you can. Like every other RPG it will then be up to the GM to decide if this is possible and the two of you to hash out what kind of rolls are needed (a laborious process that can really slow down the game).
It's a laborious process in 4th because it's not how 4th is built to play. In some systems it's pretty straight forward.
I'm gonna disagree here and say that Chu has the right impression of the combat in 4th edition D&D.
In combat any real roleplaying or character flavor goes right out the window and is replaced with raw mechanical crunch.
There are systems that are much more about stating whatever it is you want to do and then rolling dice to see what happens, but in 4th edition D&D when you are in combat you can do combat actions X, Y and Z (your powers) and nothing else.
this is not true at all
I guess if you house rule things? I mean, in 4th edition you can't say "oh, well, I'm a pretty dexterous duelist, I'm going to try to disarm my opponent of his weapon" unless you took the disarm encounter power at level 4 or whatever.
uhh, yes you can. Like every other RPG it will then be up to the GM to decide if this is possible and the two of you to hash out what kind of rolls are needed (a laborious process that can really slow down the game).
It's a laborious process in 4th because it's not how 4th is built to play. In some systems it's pretty straight forward.
out of curiosity what systems are you thinking of?
I'm gonna disagree here and say that Chu has the right impression of the combat in 4th edition D&D.
In combat any real roleplaying or character flavor goes right out the window and is replaced with raw mechanical crunch.
There are systems that are much more about stating whatever it is you want to do and then rolling dice to see what happens, but in 4th edition D&D when you are in combat you can do combat actions X, Y and Z (your powers) and nothing else.
this is not true at all
I guess if you house rule things? I mean, in 4th edition you can't say "oh, well, I'm a pretty dexterous duelist, I'm going to try to disarm my opponent of his weapon" unless you took the disarm encounter power at level 4 or whatever.
uhh, yes you can. Like every other RPG it will then be up to the GM to decide if this is possible and the two of you to hash out what kind of rolls are needed (a laborious process that can really slow down the game).
It's a laborious process in 4th because it's not how 4th is built to play. In some systems it's pretty straight forward.
out of curiosity what systems are you thinking of?
I want to say that Vampire the Masquerade is set up like this. There was a system that I played a PbP game of that was similar but I am forgetting its name.
You can also do it more like Call of Cthulhu where you basically say what you want to do and the DM tells you what skill you'll have to roll for that. Though combat really isn't the focus of Call of Cthulhu.
0
Options
Powerpuppiesdrinking coffee in themountain cabinRegistered Userregular
I find CoC fluff magnificent and CoC crunch wholly worthless
Basically what I am saying are some systems are set up so you go:
I want to disarm the enemy with my rapier. And the DM says "Okay, that will be your rapier skill versus their whatever skill." Like, the rule system is set up so you make up what you want to do and then you find the appropriate stats to compare after the fact for most every action.
4th edition is set up so you pick what you want to be able to do in advance from a pool of powers and then in combat select which powers to use when. It's very different.
No, 4e is set up to do exactly what you just described.
You'd probably do either Acrobatics or Bluff vs their REF or WILL defense, as a standard action. Assuming there aren't actually specific disarm rules somewhere that I'm forgetting.
Skill checks are a pretty well-integrated part of 4e.
0
Options
Rear Admiral ChocoI wanna be an owl, Jerry!Owl York CityRegistered Userregular
4e's power system is great
I figure the right approach to disarming would be to give a power that specifically does it with a bonus to the roll and some damage, alternately anyone can try it if they're in melee, no bonus other than basic attack bonus, no damage done. Basically, give a good reason for why the power is a step above and worth taking.
0
Options
Podlyyou unzipped me! it's all coming back! i don't like it!Registered Userregular
Basically what I am saying are some systems are set up so you go:
I want to disarm the enemy with my rapier. And the DM says "Okay, that will be your rapier skill versus their whatever skill." Like, the rule system is set up so you make up what you want to do and then you find the appropriate stats to compare after the fact for most every action.
4th edition is set up so you pick what you want to be able to do in advance from a pool of powers and then in combat select which powers to use when. It's very different.
No, 4e is set up to do exactly what you just described.
You'd probably do either Acrobatics or Bluff vs their REF or WILL defense, as a standard action. Assuming there aren't actually specific disarm rules somewhere that I'm forgetting.
Skill checks are a pretty well-integrated part of 4e.
To my knowledge neither Acrobatics nor Bluff allow for in-combat disarms against opponents. If you want to play the game that way you can, to be certain, but at that point you are playing house-ruled 4th edition. I can't be expected to make statements about a system after it has been houseruled, because literally anything could be true or not true at that point.
Basically what I am saying are some systems are set up so you go:
I want to disarm the enemy with my rapier. And the DM says "Okay, that will be your rapier skill versus their whatever skill." Like, the rule system is set up so you make up what you want to do and then you find the appropriate stats to compare after the fact for most every action.
4th edition is set up so you pick what you want to be able to do in advance from a pool of powers and then in combat select which powers to use when. It's very different.
No, 4e is set up to do exactly what you just described.
You'd probably do either Acrobatics or Bluff vs their REF or WILL defense, as a standard action. Assuming there aren't actually specific disarm rules somewhere that I'm forgetting.
Skill checks are a pretty well-integrated part of 4e.
To my knowledge neither Acrobatics nor Bluff allow for in-combat disarms against opponents. If you want to play the game that way you can, to be certain, but at that point you are playing house-ruled 4th edition. I can't be expected to make statements about a system after it has been houseruled, because literally anything could be true or not true at that point.
"Use skill checks to cover actions not specifically discussed by the rules" hasn't been a houserule since they printed skills
Basically what I am saying are some systems are set up so you go:
I want to disarm the enemy with my rapier. And the DM says "Okay, that will be your rapier skill versus their whatever skill." Like, the rule system is set up so you make up what you want to do and then you find the appropriate stats to compare after the fact for most every action.
4th edition is set up so you pick what you want to be able to do in advance from a pool of powers and then in combat select which powers to use when. It's very different.
No, 4e is set up to do exactly what you just described.
You'd probably do either Acrobatics or Bluff vs their REF or WILL defense, as a standard action. Assuming there aren't actually specific disarm rules somewhere that I'm forgetting.
Skill checks are a pretty well-integrated part of 4e.
To my knowledge neither Acrobatics nor Bluff allow for in-combat disarms against opponents. If you want to play the game that way you can, to be certain, but at that point you are playing house-ruled 4th edition. I can't be expected to make statements about a system after it has been houseruled, because literally anything could be true or not true at that point.
There are example uses of skills in the book but they are not limited only to those example uses.
In the Rules Compendium each skill description has a list of various examples of "Improvising with X" giving you ideas about how they could be applied to unforseen situations.
Basically what I am saying are some systems are set up so you go:
I want to disarm the enemy with my rapier. And the DM says "Okay, that will be your rapier skill versus their whatever skill." Like, the rule system is set up so you make up what you want to do and then you find the appropriate stats to compare after the fact for most every action.
4th edition is set up so you pick what you want to be able to do in advance from a pool of powers and then in combat select which powers to use when. It's very different.
No, 4e is set up to do exactly what you just described.
You'd probably do either Acrobatics or Bluff vs their REF or WILL defense, as a standard action. Assuming there aren't actually specific disarm rules somewhere that I'm forgetting.
Skill checks are a pretty well-integrated part of 4e.
To my knowledge neither Acrobatics nor Bluff allow for in-combat disarms against opponents. If you want to play the game that way you can, to be certain, but at that point you are playing house-ruled 4th edition. I can't be expected to make statements about a system after it has been houseruled, because literally anything could be true or not true at that point.
"Use skill checks to cover actions not specifically discussed by the rules" hasn't been a houserule since they printed skills
It seems to me that disarming someone is pretty clearly covered by the rules of specific powers.
0
Options
Podlyyou unzipped me! it's all coming back! i don't like it!Registered Userregular
Basically what I am saying are some systems are set up so you go:
I want to disarm the enemy with my rapier. And the DM says "Okay, that will be your rapier skill versus their whatever skill." Like, the rule system is set up so you make up what you want to do and then you find the appropriate stats to compare after the fact for most every action.
4th edition is set up so you pick what you want to be able to do in advance from a pool of powers and then in combat select which powers to use when. It's very different.
No, 4e is set up to do exactly what you just described.
You'd probably do either Acrobatics or Bluff vs their REF or WILL defense, as a standard action. Assuming there aren't actually specific disarm rules somewhere that I'm forgetting.
Skill checks are a pretty well-integrated part of 4e.
To my knowledge neither Acrobatics nor Bluff allow for in-combat disarms against opponents. If you want to play the game that way you can, to be certain, but at that point you are playing house-ruled 4th edition. I can't be expected to make statements about a system after it has been houseruled, because literally anything could be true or not true at that point.
4e, like all other versions of D&D, allows the DM to work out rules and systems to match the clever ideas of the players. This is explicitly stated in the rules. This is not a house-rule.
You are essentially saying that DMing is just houseruling.
I figure I could take a bear.
0
Options
JacobkoshGamble a stamp.I can show you how to be a real man!Moderatormod
I'm gonna disagree here and say that Chu has the right impression of the combat in 4th edition D&D.
In combat any real roleplaying or character flavor goes right out the window and is replaced with raw mechanical crunch.
There are systems that are much more about stating whatever it is you want to do and then rolling dice to see what happens, but in 4th edition D&D when you are in combat you can do combat actions X, Y and Z (your powers) and nothing else.
this is not true at all
I guess if you house rule things? I mean, in 4th edition you can't say "oh, well, I'm a pretty dexterous duelist, I'm going to try to disarm my opponent of his weapon" unless you took the disarm encounter power at level 4 or whatever.
there are guidelines in the dungeon master's guide explicitly for arbitrating non-standard stunts and damage on the fly
if we go down the road of needing a rule to do everything, that leads us to HERO System, GURPS, and Advanced Squad Leader
0
Options
Powerpuppiesdrinking coffee in themountain cabinRegistered Userregular
Basically what I am saying are some systems are set up so you go:
I want to disarm the enemy with my rapier. And the DM says "Okay, that will be your rapier skill versus their whatever skill." Like, the rule system is set up so you make up what you want to do and then you find the appropriate stats to compare after the fact for most every action.
4th edition is set up so you pick what you want to be able to do in advance from a pool of powers and then in combat select which powers to use when. It's very different.
No, 4e is set up to do exactly what you just described.
You'd probably do either Acrobatics or Bluff vs their REF or WILL defense, as a standard action. Assuming there aren't actually specific disarm rules somewhere that I'm forgetting.
Skill checks are a pretty well-integrated part of 4e.
To my knowledge neither Acrobatics nor Bluff allow for in-combat disarms against opponents. If you want to play the game that way you can, to be certain, but at that point you are playing house-ruled 4th edition. I can't be expected to make statements about a system after it has been houseruled, because literally anything could be true or not true at that point.
"Use skill checks to cover actions not specifically discussed by the rules" hasn't been a houserule since they printed skills
You could make that the only rule of the system and claim your system can do anything. If you and the DM have to hash out what the rolls are going to be and what you need to succeed, you're at the mercy of the DM as much as if you were playing a game without dice in which the DM told you whether your attack succeeded or not. If you're seeking to play a game like that, Exalted will give you much more interesting fluff to do it with. There's a susbtantial difference in DnD4e for the rules support involving the things your powers do and the rules support involving anything else.
0
Options
Podlyyou unzipped me! it's all coming back! i don't like it!Registered Userregular
Basically my point is I will be the biggest baby of a player with all my quirky, indulgent, time hogging ideas... and the DM will accommodate me or I feed.
I'm gonna disagree here and say that Chu has the right impression of the combat in 4th edition D&D.
In combat any real roleplaying or character flavor goes right out the window and is replaced with raw mechanical crunch.
There are systems that are much more about stating whatever it is you want to do and then rolling dice to see what happens, but in 4th edition D&D when you are in combat you can do combat actions X, Y and Z (your powers) and nothing else.
this is not true at all
I guess if you house rule things? I mean, in 4th edition you can't say "oh, well, I'm a pretty dexterous duelist, I'm going to try to disarm my opponent of his weapon" unless you took the disarm encounter power at level 4 or whatever.
there are guidelines in the dungeon master's guide explicitly for arbitrating non-standard stunts and damage on the fly
if we go down the road of needing a rule to do everything, that leads us to HERO System, GURPS, and Advanced Squad Leader
That is of course true. But I still feel like in 4th edition D&D if someone wants to do something in combat they are generally, if we are following the rules, allowed to do specifically what their skills say they can do and what their powers say they can do. I mean, if we just decide that I can use bluff to disarm someone in combat, why am I ever going to take a power that disarms when I can take a power that does something that we decided my skill checks can't do?
But this is starting to get way into weird specifics.
I feel like the focus of combat in 4th edition is NOT roleplaying, it's number crunchy turn based strategy.
I feel like in some roleplaying games, like ones that don't bother with grids etc., the focus in combat is still much more on the roleplaying.
Basically what I am saying are some systems are set up so you go:
I want to disarm the enemy with my rapier. And the DM says "Okay, that will be your rapier skill versus their whatever skill." Like, the rule system is set up so you make up what you want to do and then you find the appropriate stats to compare after the fact for most every action.
4th edition is set up so you pick what you want to be able to do in advance from a pool of powers and then in combat select which powers to use when. It's very different.
No, 4e is set up to do exactly what you just described.
You'd probably do either Acrobatics or Bluff vs their REF or WILL defense, as a standard action. Assuming there aren't actually specific disarm rules somewhere that I'm forgetting.
Skill checks are a pretty well-integrated part of 4e.
To my knowledge neither Acrobatics nor Bluff allow for in-combat disarms against opponents. If you want to play the game that way you can, to be certain, but at that point you are playing house-ruled 4th edition. I can't be expected to make statements about a system after it has been houseruled, because literally anything could be true or not true at that point.
"Use skill checks to cover actions not specifically discussed by the rules" hasn't been a houserule since they printed skills
It seems to me that disarming someone is pretty clearly covered by the rules of specific powers.
The difference between an improvised disarm and a warrior with training and a special disarming skill.
Some of the Barbarian powers are 'Run at dude screaming'. Anyone can do that, it's just the Barbarian is better.
All of the Martial Powers are going to be the same - anyone can do them, but if you don't have the proper power - i.e. training - it's going to be difficult and not particularly effective.
Basically my point is I will be the biggest baby of a player with all my quirky, indulgent, time hogging ideas... and the DM will accommodate me or I feed.
If you ever get a chance, there are other games, such as FATE or Burning Wheel, that allow you to be more about the narration and where combat is nothing whatsoever like a miniatures wargame.
I figure I could take a bear.
0
Options
Apothe0sisHave you ever questioned the nature of your reality?Registered Userregular
In high school, before I developed an allergy to PnP RPGs I spent a lot of time organizing my chums for a Heroes Unlimited game.
That had some whacky skill selection/random die rolling options.
Congratulations, you are an alien from a low gravity world, meaning you are 30% taller but 20% weaker than the average human. You are 50lbs overweight, composed entirely of rock and have radioactivity and telekinetic powers. You are covered in fur and have fleshy horns that when struck cause you intense pain, as well as making regular humans uncomfortable with your appearance. You are highly vulnerable to cold. Your skills are cross country skiing, you are a virtuoso in the instrument of your choice, sewing and driving semi-rigid lorries.
Basically my point is I will be the biggest baby of a player with all my quirky, indulgent, time hogging ideas... and the DM will accommodate me or I feed.
If you ever get a chance, there are other games, such as FATE or Burning Wheel, that allow you to be more about the narration and where combat is nothing whatsoever like a miniatures wargame.
This is what I was basically trying to convey but did not succeed in conveying.
I'm gonna disagree here and say that Chu has the right impression of the combat in 4th edition D&D.
In combat any real roleplaying or character flavor goes right out the window and is replaced with raw mechanical crunch.
There are systems that are much more about stating whatever it is you want to do and then rolling dice to see what happens, but in 4th edition D&D when you are in combat you can do combat actions X, Y and Z (your powers) and nothing else.
this is not true at all
I guess if you house rule things? I mean, in 4th edition you can't say "oh, well, I'm a pretty dexterous duelist, I'm going to try to disarm my opponent of his weapon" unless you took the disarm encounter power at level 4 or whatever.
there are guidelines in the dungeon master's guide explicitly for arbitrating non-standard stunts and damage on the fly
if we go down the road of needing a rule to do everything, that leads us to HERO System, GURPS, and Advanced Squad Leader
That is of course true. But I still feel like in 4th edition D&D if someone wants to do something in combat they are generally, if we are following the rules, allowed to do specifically what their skills say they can do and what their powers say they can do. I mean, if we just decide that I can use bluff to disarm someone in combat, why am I ever going to take a power that disarms when I can take a power that does something that we decided my skill checks can't do?
But this is starting to get way into weird specifics.
I feel like the focus of combat in 4th edition is NOT roleplaying, it's number crunchy turn based strategy.
I feel like in some roleplaying games, like ones that don't bother with grids etc., the focus in combat is still much more on the roleplaying.
I completely agree with you about focus, but not about your earlier can/can't.
In fact, I don't like 4e that much because the focus of the rules is so much on combat. I prefer stuff like that new LOTR RPG (by the guy who made War of the Ring).
I figure I could take a bear.
0
Options
Rear Admiral ChocoI wanna be an owl, Jerry!Owl York CityRegistered Userregular
I'm gonna disagree here and say that Chu has the right impression of the combat in 4th edition D&D.
In combat any real roleplaying or character flavor goes right out the window and is replaced with raw mechanical crunch.
There are systems that are much more about stating whatever it is you want to do and then rolling dice to see what happens, but in 4th edition D&D when you are in combat you can do combat actions X, Y and Z (your powers) and nothing else.
this is not true at all
I guess if you house rule things? I mean, in 4th edition you can't say "oh, well, I'm a pretty dexterous duelist, I'm going to try to disarm my opponent of his weapon" unless you took the disarm encounter power at level 4 or whatever.
there are guidelines in the dungeon master's guide explicitly for arbitrating non-standard stunts and damage on the fly
if we go down the road of needing a rule to do everything, that leads us to HERO System, GURPS, and Advanced Squad Leader
That is of course true. But I still feel like in 4th edition D&D if someone wants to do something in combat they are generally, if we are following the rules, allowed to do specifically what their skills say they can do and what their powers say they can do. I mean, if we just decide that I can use bluff to disarm someone in combat, why am I ever going to take a power that disarms when I can take a power that does something that we decided my skill checks can't do?
But this is starting to get way into weird specifics.
I feel like the focus of combat in 4th edition is NOT roleplaying, it's number crunchy turn based strategy.
I feel like in some roleplaying games, like ones that don't bother with grids etc., the focus in combat is still much more on the roleplaying.
You would take a Disarm power because maybe it'd have the specific advantage of letting you counter an opponent with it, like disarming them midstrike, or perhaps it'd provide an additional +4 to the dice roll as opposed to going with a flat attack roll
I don't know specifically which power you're talking about but I do very much doubt it's just a Strength vs. Reflex (or whatever) roll, considering every power beyond basic attacks has at least some sort of advantage to it
I'm gonna disagree here and say that Chu has the right impression of the combat in 4th edition D&D.
In combat any real roleplaying or character flavor goes right out the window and is replaced with raw mechanical crunch.
There are systems that are much more about stating whatever it is you want to do and then rolling dice to see what happens, but in 4th edition D&D when you are in combat you can do combat actions X, Y and Z (your powers) and nothing else.
this is not true at all
I guess if you house rule things? I mean, in 4th edition you can't say "oh, well, I'm a pretty dexterous duelist, I'm going to try to disarm my opponent of his weapon" unless you took the disarm encounter power at level 4 or whatever.
there are guidelines in the dungeon master's guide explicitly for arbitrating non-standard stunts and damage on the fly
if we go down the road of needing a rule to do everything, that leads us to HERO System, GURPS, and Advanced Squad Leader
That is of course true. But I still feel like in 4th edition D&D if someone wants to do something in combat they are generally, if we are following the rules, allowed to do specifically what their skills say they can do and what their powers say they can do. I mean, if we just decide that I can use bluff to disarm someone in combat, why am I ever going to take a power that disarms when I can take a power that does something that we decided my skill checks can't do?
But this is starting to get way into weird specifics.
I feel like the focus of combat in 4th edition is NOT roleplaying, it's number crunchy turn based strategy.
I feel like in some roleplaying games, like ones that don't bother with grids etc., the focus in combat is still much more on the roleplaying.
I completely agree with you about focus, but not about your earlier can/can't.
In fact, I don't like 4e that much because the focus of the rules is so much on combat. I prefer stuff like that new LOTR RPG (by the guy who made War of the Ring).
It's what I get for speaking in absolutes. :P
That said, if I was playing a game of 4th edition and said I wanted to disarm someone, and the DM asked if I had a disarm power, and I told him no, and he told me that I couldn't disarm my opponent, I wouldn't feel like he was being overly strict or unfun, just perhaps taking the rules more literally than some might personally.
and that, ladies and gents, is why I like the Exalted stunt system
I would be very interested in playing the Exalted system with a dedicated DM and a group of talented and exquisitely courteous players.
But I'm not sure I'm a talented player so i might not be able to keep up
0
Options
Apothe0sisHave you ever questioned the nature of your reality?Registered Userregular
Is it just me or is every White Wolf RPG game the exact same formula in both story and mechanics?
X are <adjective> beings in a mundane world. Their powers are based on Y but using them too much causes Z. Can the X's resist the Z, while preventing the mundanes from discovering their existence, and defeat the !Xs (Xs who have succumbed to Z)?
Posts
http://www.buzzfeed.com/whitneyjefferson/highlights-from-the-premiere-of-mamas-boys-of-th?sub=1507473_219153
@Jacob, Riemann: Would you agree that any DM who can make DnD4e combat not suffer from the problems Chu described is a DM who could also play Exalted with great success?
It's a laborious process in 4th because it's not how 4th is built to play. In some systems it's pretty straight forward.
out of curiosity what systems are you thinking of?
I want to say that Vampire the Masquerade is set up like this. There was a system that I played a PbP game of that was similar but I am forgetting its name.
You can also do it more like Call of Cthulhu where you basically say what you want to do and the DM tells you what skill you'll have to roll for that. Though combat really isn't the focus of Call of Cthulhu.
No, 4e is set up to do exactly what you just described.
You'd probably do either Acrobatics or Bluff vs their REF or WILL defense, as a standard action. Assuming there aren't actually specific disarm rules somewhere that I'm forgetting.
Skill checks are a pretty well-integrated part of 4e.
I figure the right approach to disarming would be to give a power that specifically does it with a bonus to the roll and some damage, alternately anyone can try it if they're in melee, no bonus other than basic attack bonus, no damage done. Basically, give a good reason for why the power is a step above and worth taking.
I MUST POST MY NEW FAVORITE THING!!!!!!!
http://www.buzzfeed.com/whitneyjefferson/highlights-from-the-premiere-of-mamas-boys-of-th?sub=1507473_219153
To my knowledge neither Acrobatics nor Bluff allow for in-combat disarms against opponents. If you want to play the game that way you can, to be certain, but at that point you are playing house-ruled 4th edition. I can't be expected to make statements about a system after it has been houseruled, because literally anything could be true or not true at that point.
"Use skill checks to cover actions not specifically discussed by the rules" hasn't been a houserule since they printed skills
There are example uses of skills in the book but they are not limited only to those example uses.
In the Rules Compendium each skill description has a list of various examples of "Improvising with X" giving you ideas about how they could be applied to unforseen situations.
It seems to me that disarming someone is pretty clearly covered by the rules of specific powers.
WHEN'S THE SUNDAY GRAVY GONNA BE READY?!
AND SLICE UP SOME GABAGOOL
4e, like all other versions of D&D, allows the DM to work out rules and systems to match the clever ideas of the players. This is explicitly stated in the rules. This is not a house-rule.
You are essentially saying that DMing is just houseruling.
there are guidelines in the dungeon master's guide explicitly for arbitrating non-standard stunts and damage on the fly
if we go down the road of needing a rule to do everything, that leads us to HERO System, GURPS, and Advanced Squad Leader
You could make that the only rule of the system and claim your system can do anything. If you and the DM have to hash out what the rolls are going to be and what you need to succeed, you're at the mercy of the DM as much as if you were playing a game without dice in which the DM told you whether your attack succeeded or not. If you're seeking to play a game like that, Exalted will give you much more interesting fluff to do it with. There's a susbtantial difference in DnD4e for the rules support involving the things your powers do and the rules support involving anything else.
back in a sec
That is of course true. But I still feel like in 4th edition D&D if someone wants to do something in combat they are generally, if we are following the rules, allowed to do specifically what their skills say they can do and what their powers say they can do. I mean, if we just decide that I can use bluff to disarm someone in combat, why am I ever going to take a power that disarms when I can take a power that does something that we decided my skill checks can't do?
But this is starting to get way into weird specifics.
I feel like the focus of combat in 4th edition is NOT roleplaying, it's number crunchy turn based strategy.
I feel like in some roleplaying games, like ones that don't bother with grids etc., the focus in combat is still much more on the roleplaying.
The difference between an improvised disarm and a warrior with training and a special disarming skill.
Some of the Barbarian powers are 'Run at dude screaming'. Anyone can do that, it's just the Barbarian is better.
All of the Martial Powers are going to be the same - anyone can do them, but if you don't have the proper power - i.e. training - it's going to be difficult and not particularly effective.
If you ever get a chance, there are other games, such as FATE or Burning Wheel, that allow you to be more about the narration and where combat is nothing whatsoever like a miniatures wargame.
That had some whacky skill selection/random die rolling options.
Congratulations, you are an alien from a low gravity world, meaning you are 30% taller but 20% weaker than the average human. You are 50lbs overweight, composed entirely of rock and have radioactivity and telekinetic powers. You are covered in fur and have fleshy horns that when struck cause you intense pain, as well as making regular humans uncomfortable with your appearance. You are highly vulnerable to cold. Your skills are cross country skiing, you are a virtuoso in the instrument of your choice, sewing and driving semi-rigid lorries.
This is what I was basically trying to convey but did not succeed in conveying.
I completely agree with you about focus, but not about your earlier can/can't.
In fact, I don't like 4e that much because the focus of the rules is so much on combat. I prefer stuff like that new LOTR RPG (by the guy who made War of the Ring).
You would take a Disarm power because maybe it'd have the specific advantage of letting you counter an opponent with it, like disarming them midstrike, or perhaps it'd provide an additional +4 to the dice roll as opposed to going with a flat attack roll
I don't know specifically which power you're talking about but I do very much doubt it's just a Strength vs. Reflex (or whatever) roll, considering every power beyond basic attacks has at least some sort of advantage to it
It's what I get for speaking in absolutes. :P
That said, if I was playing a game of 4th edition and said I wanted to disarm someone, and the DM asked if I had a disarm power, and I told him no, and he told me that I couldn't disarm my opponent, I wouldn't feel like he was being overly strict or unfun, just perhaps taking the rules more literally than some might personally.
All shakes are basically a meal in caloric value
I would be very interested in playing the Exalted system with a dedicated DM and a group of talented and exquisitely courteous players.
But I'm not sure I'm a talented player so i might not be able to keep up
X are <adjective> beings in a mundane world. Their powers are based on Y but using them too much causes Z. Can the X's resist the Z, while preventing the mundanes from discovering their existence, and defeat the !Xs (Xs who have succumbed to Z)?
I am scared of defining a neckline.
I am knowledgeable about my own, and the soup I find in it.
Unless you mean beard as in fake partner to cover up my gayness.
i mean, if your "programming" is any indication...