Text

Sarah Darkmagic’s point is well made about the Essentials martial classes (except they aren’t called “builds” anymore, snap). The new powers seem to be deconstructions of the original powers for the 4E Rogue. The previous class construction provided a consistent form for each class: 2 at-wills, X encounter powers, Y daily powers. The same for every class (until the later books dropped). Now, with Essentials, we see variation among the classes in their access to different power types right off the bat. Thieves, for example, don’t get daily powers.

Instead, Thieves have a variety of at-will Tricks up their sleeves, and rely on their basic attacks augmented with their Backstab encounter power for their attacks. If I understand Sarah correctly, she is arguing that this leaves something to be desired on the tactical field of battle. Let’s compare, shall we?

A 5th-level 4E Rogue has a total of seven class powers (2 at-wills, 2 encounters, 2 dailies, and 1 utility), plus the Sneak Attack ability, which augments six of those seven powers with additional damage based on the presence of combat advantage against the Rogue’s target. A 5th-level Essentials Thief has six class powers at a variety of levels, but no daily powers at all. Only encounters and at-wills. The Thief does get two uses of its Backstab encounter power at 5th level, so that gives it approximately seven class powers at 5th level. On the face of it, in quantitative terms, the Thief and Rogue seem even in raw options.

The Thief, on the other hand, has three Tricks. These are all move action powers that give a variety of situational benefits to the Thief. The Thief’s arsenal at the beginning of combat also includes a utility power; the encounter power, Cunning Escape; and two uses of the Backstab encounter power. Only the Backstab power incorporates an attack, so the Thief is free to use its full action as it sees fit: most often a basic attack. The Thief has Sneak Attack too, although it only augments two powers: its two basic attacks. In total, the Thief has six options, discounting the Backstab’s double use. Clearly, the Thief build is no less simple than the Rogue and arguable more complex when taking into account the other features the class gains over the first five levels (including Weapon Finesse, which allows the Thief to optionally use Dexterity or Strength for melee basic attacks; and Skill Mastery, which can be very handy in combined combat-skill challenge encounters).

As the tactical combat plays out, the Thief shines in terms of variety even more. The Rogue has just two at-wills and two encounter powers—4 total options from which to execute at the beginning of combat. Those options decrease as the battle rages on and the Rogue extinguishes its encounter power uses. When the Rogue extinguishes its uses of encounter powers, it is left with just two at-wills and most likely one of them is just an attack with added damage. The Thief, on the other hand, has its same complement of attacks (basics), but three total at-will Tricks. Each class has a utility power that could be either an at-will or an encounter power.

The Rogue does have an advantage over the Thief against monsters with low Reflex defense. A lot of the Rogue’s powers target Reflex; the Thief’s basic attacks always target AC. This seems like a prime place for a series of Feats that change basic attacks to optionally target different defenses.

Now you may be asking about daily powers at this point. Of course you are! How can I discount everyone’s favorite powers? Well, in my experience there are two ways daily powers get deployed: 1) wait till the boss fight to blow all your dailies, or 2) use no more than one an encounter (at 5th level). Daily powers can turn the tide of a given combat and make for very dramatic gameplay situations. I think the core of Sarah’s argument, which she obscures with a lot of tangential evidence, is that the Thief doesn’t have daily powers and those big moments are really important for a lot of players, possibly even her. Certainly a lot of 4E players. I agree. However (there’s always a however), the Thief’s Backstab ability I would argue accounts for some of the loss of big-bang oomph by giving a sizable attack and damage bonus that stacks with the Sneak Attack ability— +3 to-hit/+3d6 damage is nothing to sneeze at, especially when you can do it twice in every encounter!

Is Sarah’s claim a strong one? I don’t know for sure because I haven’t yet played a Thief (and she has). So my argument has to be taken with a grain of salt. But given the construction of the classes, it seems that there is ample complexity in the Thief class waiting to be unleashed on the tactical battlefield. If combats drag out, the situational Tricks of the Thief become more likely to occur and it has more of them, so it tends toward more variety on the face of it. What the Thief gains in tactical usefulness, it loses in big-bang oomph. No daily powers make it seem on average less effective as a striker.

Can we execute cool moments with the Thief like we could with the Rogue? Well, that’s up to the DM and players. The rules have little to say about cool imaginative stuff like kicking bad guys off cliffs other than the golden rule: have fun playing D&D!

Link

rentzsch.tumblr.com: Mail.app Script: Bottom Post

rentzsch:

I’ve made peace with mostly top-posting my email replies in the name of efficiency.

But there are often times when I want to bottom-post my reply to address a specific section.

I finally broke down a wrote a script to automate the transformation of Mail.app’s top-post format to my preferred…

If only there were a way to make this magic work on iOS. Argh.

Source: rentzsch
Link

blog at izs.me: TSA Success Story

izs:

By now, if you haven’t heard the outrage at the TSA’s “enhanced” pat-down procedures, then you don’t use the internet, and you’re not reading this blog.

They grope children. They touch your junk. The procedures are ludicrously ineffective and harmful from a security point of view. And the…

Source: izs
Link

China's own disaster

Not quite the same scale (at least as reported), but interesting to compare the details (however thin) of the response to that of the Gulf spill.

Link

What to do when you're dying

"Twenty-five per cent of all Medicare spending is for the five percent of patients who are in their final year of life, and most of that money goes for care in their last couple months which is of little apparent benefit."

Link

If i had any skills, i'd totally work here.

A bunch of french artisans are building a castle using only local materials and 13th-century building techniques. Tremendously awesome.

Text

A great discussion (Part 1; Part 2) has been going on about sexism and D&D. And i’ve been sort of caught in the middle of it. Here’s my response to @sarahdarkmagic.

I am the author and creator of the pregens for DDE: Dark Sun and also the commenter you quoted. I was given a list of five races and six classes to include and told to make six characters from those. Though i feel like trying to address these concerns is a lose-lose proposition for me (if i defend my actions, i will be further labeled sexist; if i apologize, i will likely be labeled insincere. kind of ironic given the subject matter of this discussion), i’ve decided to speak out anyway.

First, i apologize for my lack of sensitivity to the issue. The decisions on gender and backgrounds were entirely mine and i failed to foresee the importance of including more female characters. In my 20+ years of experience playing with a lot of different people of all walks of life, i’ve never had anyone mention to me that pregenerated characters didn’t match their expectations for diversity. It’s just not something i anticipated.

Second, i think @sarahdarkmagic missed the point of my statement that she quoted. It wasn’t intended to mean “just reskin the pregen PCs”. I meant that a DM and players can bring whatever they want to the table. The pregens are there for convenience. If i were the DM and someone said they really wanted to play something other than the pregens, i would allow it because the point is to have fun. Ultimately, is the burden on Wizards to provide an array of characters that match the desires of their players or is the burden on the players (and DMs) to allow greater flexibility in telling the stories that Wizards provide them? I believe the latter is the case, but you may disagree.

Does Wizards send the wrong message to female or minority gamers by not including an option for everyone? Apparently so. I imagine the answer is to no longer include stories with integrated, pregenerated characters. Most players seem to prefer that anyway. I happen to be in the minority that prefers the challenge of playing a character that was created by someone else once in a while. I guess that means that my desires/preferences will not be met in the future due to the concerns of some other group. That’s the challenge facing identity-driven politics. Everyone has multiple, often conflicting identities that they need to manage.

That also raises the question: Do PCs have to mirror every quality of human life, or is it sufficient for them to merely be an escape from the everyday problems associated with identity politics or other human issues? Of course, i don’t have an answer for that, but it’s an interesting question (to only me, perhaps).

I hope the tone of this post is neither overly defensive nor overly aggressive. That is not my intent at all. The internet isn’t good at translating intentions, so i wanted to state that i’m happy for this discussion and i hope my contribution is useful.

Link

Amazing community mapping tool

This is a really cool project that you can contribute to, if you’re so inclined. Even supports export in a variety of formats.