Quote from: Votan;683561I am unfamiliar with this feat, but based on the way it is being talked about I wonder if this (with the approach function) isn't close:



Or does the fighter power have a different function.  I am not a 4E expert, and while I played it for a couple of years I definitely did not learn classes other than the one I was playing (rogue)

Here's Come and Get It

QuoteCome and Get It                           Fighter Attack 7
You brandish your weapon and call out to your foes,
luring them close through their overconfidence, and
then deliver a spinning strike against them all.
Encounter        Martial, Weapon
Standard Action      Close burst 3
Target: Each enemy you can see in the burst
Attack: Strength vs. Will
Hit: You pull the target up to 2 squares, but only if it
can end the pull adjacent to you. If the target is adjacent
to you after the pull, it takes 1[W] damage.

It's similar but I wouldn't call it the same. Come and Get It isn't language-dependent, it's not a mind-control effect (like I said, it's more of a narrative-necessity thing, which one can definitely call bullshit and I wouldn't fault them, but I'd think of it as being a different line of thinking because mind-affecting spells are forcing the opponent's hand diegetically. To put it another way, with Greater Command, the Cleric is forcing his opponents to approach him, with Come and Get It, the fighter's player is forcing his opponents to approach him.), and Greater Command doesn't end with the caster automatically smacking everyone who ended up in his reach. Similar, but I don't think I'd call them equivalent, you know?

To me that's the crucial difference, one is describing what happened, the other is describing why it happened.

I think the analogy I used upthread was a Finger of Death spell vs. shooting someone with a poisoned arrow. They have a comparable effect (The target saves vs fortitude or poison/death ray depending on the edition, if the save fails it dies) but few would say they're equivalent.

Quote from: Mistwell;683574Surely there was a version of Traveler that was your favorite, until at some point you moved on to liking a different version of Traveler?

No, I've never liked Traveler.

Traveller, on the other hand, I view as a tool. Certain versions are a better fitting tool for the campaign ideas that I have. Each has its advantages and disadvantages. It is a very good tool, but still a tool for playing RPGs.

That is like 4E. If I wanted to play a version of D&D that resembles WoW and provides a good boardgame miniatures version of that with a twink wushu flavor reminiscant of Exalted - then 4E is the version of D&D I would use. It is just that the playstyle of 4E does not appeal to me.

The rabid 4E fanatics are a turn-off as well. Not the fans, the fanatics (why I keep using the terms 4venger and 4ron).

Quote from: Sacrosanct;682042Most of them haven't done any professional testing.  From day 1, they keep saying the test fails because it doesn't give them what they want.  That's not the point of testing.  The point of testing is to see if it's working how it was designed, not how you personally want it.

I'll give you an example.  The whole DC debacle about a month or so ago.  They kept crying that the math was broken because a high level character shouldn't have a chance at failing at something like a tightrope walk.  Nothing in the math was broken.  The DC system worked great.  The only issue was whether or not your personal preference of what the DC should be for a tightrope act.

I think the usual suspects over there seem to think their subjectivity means objectivity to everyone else.

I figured that if, at some point, the TBP gang suddenly started liking DDN universally then that would be a clear sign that DDN had gone horribly, horribly wrong. The fact that the hate continues to percolate is a good sign.

Quote from: LibraryLass;683578Here's Come and Get It



It's similar but I wouldn't call it the same. Come and Get It isn't language-dependent, it's not a mind-control effect (like I said, it's more of a narrative-necessity thing, which one can definitely call bullshit and I wouldn't fault them, but I'd think of it as being a different line of thinking because mind-affecting spells are forcing the opponent's hand diegetically. To put it another way, with Greater Command, the Cleric is forcing his opponents to approach him, with Come and Get It, the fighter's player is forcing his opponents to approach him.), and Greater Command doesn't end with the caster automatically smacking everyone who ended up in his reach. Similar, but I don't think I'd call them equivalent, you know?

To me that's the crucial difference, one is describing what happened, the other is describing why it happened.

I think the analogy I used upthread was a Finger of Death spell vs. shooting someone with a poisoned arrow. They have a comparable effect (The target saves vs fortitude or poison/death ray depending on the edition, if the save fails it dies) but few would say they're equivalent.

I have years of 4e experience; I play it, and gm it, both, currently.

I hate 'Come and Get it'  because no matter how much a warrior insults a mages mother, or calls him a coward, the mage is NOT going to walk over and get stabbed. period.

Well, most mages anyway.

Some 4E martial powers cross the line from martial to mystical in my opinion, and I don't usually like that.

Unless its a mystic warrior

Quote from: camazotz;683580I figured that if, at some point, the TBP gang suddenly started liking DDN universally then that would be a clear sign that DDN had gone horribly, horribly wrong. The fact that the hate continues to percolate is a good sign.

The best news about them announcing the end of the playtest?  Because it's that much closer to when Next becomes official, then is protected by their "edition war" rule.


Supposedly anyway.

Quote from: Bill;683586I have years of 4e experience; I play it, and gm it, both, currently.

I hate 'Come and Get it'  because no matter how much a warrior insults a mages mother, or calls him a coward, the mage is NOT going to walk over and get stabbed. period.

Well, most mages anyway.

Some 4E martial powers cross the line from martial to mystical in my opinion, and I don't usually like that.

Unless its a mystic warrior

I like Come and Get It but it's certainly at the far end of what a martial character should be able to do. I think it was a deliberate gesture by WotC to fighter players (such as myself) who had maybe had a shitty time of it during 3e, a sign to say 'hey fighters can be cool again'. You might say this was an overreaction on their part but I appreciated the thought. In any event it is one of a small number of outliers in hundreds of much more mundane martial powers.

I do think though that with powers like that there is a responsibility on the part of the player to come up with a good description that really sells the effect. 'Uh I come and get it and he walks over' is bad play plain and simple. My fighter has had CAGI throughout the life of 4e and I've come up with a lot of good explanations, including imitating a roar of challenge against werehyena things, using my undead-slaying magic sword to emanate holy energy and present the biggest threat to a bunch of sword wraiths, and of course doing various bluffs, tricks, and feigned injuries to orcs, soldiers, and enemy spellcasters.

Quote from: soviet;683597I do think though that with powers like that there is a responsibility on the part of the player to come up with a good description that really sells the effect. 'Uh I come and get it and he walks over' is bad play plain and simple. My fighter has had CAGI throughout the life of 4e and I've come up with a lot of good explanations, including imitating a roar of challenge against werehyena things, using my undead-slaying magic sword to emanate holy energy and present the biggest threat to a bunch of sword wraiths, and of course doing various bluffs, tricks, and feigned injuries to orcs, soldiers, and enemy spellcasters.

For the mindless constructs and oozes I suppose you just invited them over for a BBQ?

Quote from: soviet;683597I like Come and Get It but it's certainly at the far end of what a martial character should be able to do. I think it was a deliberate gesture by WotC to fighter players (such as myself) who had maybe had a shitty time of it during 3e, a sign to say 'hey fighters can be cool again'. You might say this was an overreaction on their part but I appreciated the thought. In any event it is one of a small number of outliers in hundreds of much more mundane martial powers.

I do think though that with powers like that there is a responsibility on the part of the player to come up with a good description that really sells the effect. 'Uh I come and get it and he walks over' is bad play plain and simple. My fighter has had CAGI throughout the life of 4e and I've come up with a lot of good explanations, including imitating a roar of challenge against werehyena things, using my undead-slaying magic sword to emanate holy energy and present the biggest threat to a bunch of sword wraiths, and of course doing various bluffs, tricks, and feigned injuries to orcs, soldiers, and enemy spellcasters.

Its a stretch that a wizard who is a non Mellie type would ever move toward a fighter and get stabbed.

If you were playing a wizard, would you do that?

When I gm 4e I leave the power as it is written, but it bends believability at times.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;683602For the mindless constructs and oozes I suppose you just invited them over for a BBQ?

Seduction attempt actually - a spray of sex panther and it's all over

Come And Get It

Material Component: AXE Body Spray

(Not that there is anything funny about soviet wanting to seduce mindless constructs or oozes....)

Quote from: soviet;683607Seduction attempt actually - a spray of sex panther and it's all over

Once you go Grey Ooze nothing else can ever satisfy.

Quote from: jeff37923;683611Come And Get It

Material Component: AXE Body Spray

(Not that there is anything funny about soviet wanting to seduce mindless constructs or oozes....)

You seem nervous... which do you think you are? :-)

Quote from: Exploderwizard;683602For the mindless constructs and oozes I suppose you just invited them over for a BBQ?

Quote from: Bill;683606Its a stretch that a wizard who is a non Mellie type would ever move toward a fighter and get stabbed.

Some of it's supposed to be your ability to provoke and piss off your opponent so they're not thinking rationally - I've seen people do *very* stupid things when pissed off, and done some *very* stupid things when pissed off.  And if you think people think rationally and coolly when in the middle of anything resembling a fight, then you probably haven't been in one.

But, yeah, there are times when it (and the general 4e policy of 'powers *work*, but the justification may be different') stretch believability.  So if you're going to play 4e, you just have to kind of come to terms with the fact that there are things in it that don't make total sense if you deconstruct them, accept it, and get on with the game because you like the other things it does well enough.

For me, that's no different than hp in any version of D&D, or lots of other things that are embedded into the game.  They work well enough in most cases, and in most cases you can come up with some kind of justification (even if it's not always the same one), but there are some edges that are just insane.  So if I'm playing D&D (any edition), I just shrug my shoulders, turn my suspension of disbelief to eleven, and get on with the things in the game that make it fun.

I may have an easier time with it, ironically, from my years playing GURPS.  I'm so used to a more realistic injury/damage/etc. system that I have to crank my suspension of disbelief up to get past hp, and so some of the illogical bits in 4e don't bug me as much.  If I was primarily a D&D player all along, and had really well internalized hp to the point where I *didn't* notice them, I could see the *new* illogical bits in 4e (as opposed to the old illogical bits from 3.x and before) seriously bugging me.

I don't think that "Come and Get It" is really the problem people have with 4e.  I think if they liked the game as a whole, they could get over it.  I think it's mainly that 4e is a different game that targets and satisfies different 'needs', and de-emphasizes some of the needs that 3.x satisfied very, very well.

Since one would assume that after close to ten years of 3.x, there would have been some self-selection in the playerbase for people *with* those needs, it's easy to see where there'd be a disconnect and disgust from 3.x fans going to 4e.

The fact that they smacked into the uncanny valley with the game mechanics (things are 'kinda like' earlier D&D, but different - see:  Saving Throws), it's not surprising to me at all that the game got such a visceral reaction.  Again, the uncanny valley effect probably hit me less because most of my gaming history *wasn't* D&D.

Quote from: soviet;683618You seem nervous... which do you think you are? :-)

Ooze, of course. I am only a mindless construct when in my sporangia phase.

I'm just worried that I might be sitting across the table from this should we meet.

Quote from: Mistwell;683551It did not make enough money to please the Hasbro corporate masters.

4E didn't appeal to enough existing players, and didn't attract enough new players, to meet WotC's goals. Not making enough money to please Hasbro was a side-effect of that unpopularity.

You just have to listen to the comments by the Next developers. We lost track of what D&D fans really wanted. WotC sees everyone who has ever played D&D and everyone who has ever been curious about playing D&D as their target market. Whatever the merits of 4E as a game or the profits it generated for WotC, it did not appeal to enough of that market. The design principals of 5E make that unerringly clear.

Quote from: camazotz;683580I figured that if, at some point, the TBP gang suddenly started liking DDN universally then that would be a clear sign that DDN had gone horribly, horribly wrong. The fact that the hate continues to percolate is a good sign.

Yep. It drives them nuts that the biggest RPG publisher in the world, by far, has utterly rejected their design principles. Since those principles are largely nonsense, that can only be a good thing.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;683591The best news about them announcing the end of the playtest?  Because it's that much closer to when Next becomes official, then is protected by their "edition war" rule.


Supposedly anyway.

I expect to see a final conflagration of rage, hysteria, and bannings of Next fans in the days immediately before publication. Kind of a Gotterdamerung of the 4E system-first zealots. And of course, I expect insurgents will continue to snipe in 5E threads with impunity, tolerated by sympathetic mods.