|
pookel posted:It's either elfgames or Magic, and trust me, if you think 7 people at a table is too many for elfgames, you don't want to see a 7-player EDH game. I've played in a lot of games that were like you're describing. 4e works the smoothest when everyone is keeping up on the game state and thinking about what needs to get done before their turns, but a lot of players aren't really interested in doing that. Other editions work a little better when people are distracted because there's just a lot less to do on your turn. Think back to how many times when you played 2e someone's turn boiled down to "Which of these guys is looking the most beat up? Okay I go smack him and shout 'Take that you jerk!'" or close to it. To compare it to Magic it's the difference between setting down your hand and checking your phone in between turns, and taking the time to figure out what your best plays are. You know what's in your hand and in your deck, it shouldn't really take too much time to execute a turn. If I start the game with a Shock, Raging Goblin, and a Mountain in my hand my first turn shouldn't take 2 minutes. Assuming I built the deck it's reasonable for you to assume that I know what I'm trying to do with it, and it would be reasonable to be frustrated with me if that turn DID take 2 minutes. In 4e when I start the first fight of the day, I should already have a pretty good idea of what I'm going to do. I built my character to do certain things in a fight, after all.
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2016 19:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 17:38 |
|
|
My Lovely Horse posted:Might still want to consider a more casual elfgame that's more tolerant towards getting distracted. This is actually one of my most favourite parts of Dungeon World. In D&D, a combat might be derailed because Bob is going on initiative ten and he's gone to the bathroom, or for pizza, or he's wrangling kids. You can work around it to a degree ("We'll make Bob delay to the bottom of the initiative, next player") but eventually you need to stop the combat and wait for Bob, since the party's significantly disadvantaged if he's missing turns. In Dungeon World, initiative is very fluid. There's no initiative order - the GM or the monster don't get a turn, their turn is rolled into each player's turn. So if a player fucks up performing an action, whether it's an attack or picking a lock or talking to someone, the GM gets to hurt them in an appropriate way, be it handing them damage as a result of a monster attack, having your lockpicks break, or having you lose the favour of the king. Initiative gets passed around the players equally, but not in any order - it's more like a conversation. So if Jeff has a great idea that compliments Mary's plan, he can pipe up with it and take his action after Mary, then Mary can have another go to complete her plan, even though she's now had two goes and Steve hasn't had one yet. The GM should then probably ask Steve what he's doing while they're doing their plan, to keep him engaged. What I'm rambling at though, is that Dungeon World works around a player who's absent occasionally a lot better than traditional Mary-Jeff-Steve-Monsters initiative-system games do, which sounds like a feature your table would benefit from. And the turns are very fast, which helps with a seven-player game. And there's no grid, which addresses your concern about the GM spelling out exactly what risks each square on the board carries.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2016 19:50
|
|
|
Things I would consider:
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2016 20:56
|
|
|
I feel like if I'm playing a game with a shot clock than either the game or the table is too much work and too little game.
Name Change fucked around with this message at 21:39 on Apr 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2016 21:36
|
|
|
OneThousandMonkeys posted:I feel like if I'm playing a game with a shot clock than either the game or the table is too much work and too little game. That said I prefer it to be measured in minutes rather than seconds, and treated loosely to keep things moving.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2016 22:48
|
|
|
OneThousandMonkeys posted:I feel like if I'm playing a game with a shot clock than either the game or the table is too much work and too little game. If you have six players and each player takes 5 minutes per turn, you are looking at more than half an hour per round of combat, which is how you end up with an 8 hour gaming session that consists of 3 fights. That's incredibly slow and that's what shot clocks are there to help with. A 2 minute shot clock should be ample time and it can easily cut that time in half. Additionally, I think they help keep attention focused on the game, because having less time to think on your turn makes it more important to be paying attention on other people's turns. I can't just play with my phone until it's my turn if I only have 90 seconds to come up with an action, because I'll need to be keeping current with what resources other people are using and who got hit and who is where and so forth. You don't have to obey the shot clock strictly, but having it there adds some badly needed structure to the flow of the game, and it is the easiest tool for cutting fights down to manageable periods of time. Granted, 30-60 seconds is probably a little low; I'd probably start with 2 minutes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2016 23:20
|
|
|
Another option is to have a timed bonus. If you know what you're doing and your dice hit the table before a minute has elapsed, you get +2 to hit. Or whatever. Becomes tougher when you have multiple attacks with multiple actions and everyone has interrupts and so on. In fact, that may well be part of the problem. Many classes in 4e absolutely demand constant attention, and the system as a whole is designed to make people pay attention to the combat at all times due to OAs and interrupts etc. It's not a game that you can mentally check out of between turns, and if people are doing, that will inevitably make it take SO much longer.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2016 23:26
|
|
|
pookel posted:I've played Basic. NEVER AGAIN What's your problem with Rules Cyclopedia D&D? It's one of the best editions of D&D, including the AD&Ds, and if you played 2e, THAC0 or whatever shouldn't be an issue.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2016 23:53
|
|
|
There's also Strike!, which I haven't actually played, but if people are suggesting Dungeon World as an alternative then you might want another option.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2016 00:21
|
|
|
Arivia posted:What's your problem with Rules Cyclopedia D&D? It's one of the best editions of D&D, including the AD&Ds, and if you played 2e, THAC0 or whatever shouldn't be an issue. The monster lore was very, very cool, though, I'll grant them that. (Are people seriously reviving Basic rules? And did any of those people play it back when it came out, or is this more of an ironic hipster revival thing?) OK, wait, I googled, and "Rules Cyclopedia D&D" was a thing that came out in 1991? What was I playing in 1985, then? I was pretty sure that was Basic. (Yes, I also played AD&D, but we didn't get the new book right when that came out.) pookel fucked around with this message at 01:16 on Apr 20, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2016 01:11
|
|
|
pookel posted:(Are people seriously reviving Basic rules? And did any of those people play it back when it came out, or is this more of an ironic hipster revival thing?) Yes. And yes. And no. It's a rules-light "essence" of D&D with better class balance than any edition save 4e. I learned to play with it back in 1982 and kinda still played it when I thought I was playing AD&D. It's worth a revisit. quote:OK, wait, I googled, and "Rules Cyclopedia D&D" was a thing that came out in 1991? What was I playing in 1985, then? I was pretty sure that was Basic. (Yes, I also played AD&D, but we didn't get the new book right when that came out.)
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2016 01:22
|
|
|
I don't think anyone really plays vanilla RC these days, because you can just play retroclones that do stuff like flip to-hit maths from ThAC0 to BAB and normalise class hit points so you're not rolling 1d4 for MU HP at level 1 (e.g. DerD gives them 4+Con HP at level 1, and 3+Con every subsequent level), but yes, BECMI-derived games are still played by a few people, since it's the only other edition of D&D that isn't garbage.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2016 01:33
|
|
|
Lemon-Lime posted:I don't think anyone really plays vanilla RC these days, because you can just play retroclones that do stuff like flip to-hit maths from ThAC0 to BAB and normalise class hit points so you're not rolling 1d4 for MU HP at level 1 (e.g. DerD gives them 4+Con HP at level 1, and 3+Con every subsequent level), but yes, BECMI-derived games are still played by a few people, since it's the only other edition of D&D that isn't garbage. I mean 2e was inconsistent as hell, but the extensive lore still made it all worthwhile. If I had a few years of free time to work on it, I'd rather make up my own house rule system for 2e than play any other edition. But basically I don't think any edition is garbage. They all have their good and bad points. Eventually I plan to try 5e just so I can continue to say that I've played every edition.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2016 02:07
|
|
|
you know there are good non D&D games out there right? like if someone says to me "i played every edition of D&D" i don't think "Cool!" i think "oh you poor soul"
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2016 05:16
|
|
|
pookel posted:But basically I don't think any edition is garbage. Every game, taking its good and bad points into account, has a specific set of things that it is good at. People regard 5th Edition poorly because it doesn't do anything particularly well compared to anything else you could be playing, and wanting to play a game with the time and other-people investment inherent in a TRPG for the sake of completionism is a disservice to you and your friends.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2016 05:24
|
|
|
Seriously i would kill to have a group of people that would regularly gather to play rpgs
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2016 05:33
|
|
|
Anyone got any good suggestions about cheapish terrain for 4E? I am super lazy and would prefer to buy something than make stuff by hand, but not totally adverse to the idea. I'm running the Zeitgeist and War of the Burning Sky adventure paths, so need a mix of urban ish and traditional fantasy terrain. I've got an old set of Heroquest so I have a bunch of doors and the like, as well as altars, tables and chests. Was looking at buying a bunch of O scale model railway trees that I could base and use for trees and such, but not sure what is cheap in the crates/barrels end of the market and other generic terrain that could be good to supplement the battlemat with.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2016 05:49
|
|
|
If you look around hard enough, you can still find the 4e Dungeon Tiles for relatively cheap. If nothing else, your local gameshop should have premade flip maps or tiles made by Paizo for Pathfinder. They're all I ever use now, but admittedly I went out of my way to hunt down a bunch of sets.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2016 06:44
|
|
|
Mecha Gojira posted:If you look around hard enough, you can still find the 4e Dungeon Tiles for relatively cheap. If nothing else, your local gameshop should have premade flip maps or tiles made by Paizo for Pathfinder. I was probably thinking three dimensional stuff - so cover feels more natural than just drawing it on the matt. That said, those look like a good idea anyway.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2016 06:45
|
|
|
pookel posted:Eventually I plan to try 5e just so I can continue to say that I've played every edition. You've already played 5e.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2016 11:17
|
|
|
Really Pants posted:You've already played 5e. ^
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2016 11:23
|
|
|
Really Pants posted:You've already played 5e. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2016 11:35
|
|
|
I've been reading up in various venues on the possibility of switching to a different system, and this thread is literally the first place I've seen people trash talk 5th. Everything I've heard about it from other places has been positive. So, yk, taking this with a grain of salt.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2016 16:17
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2016 16:23
|
|
|
5e isn't dire. Arguably it's an improvement on 3rd. It's just a profoundly safe edition that slaps a few patches on people's bellyfeel opinions on 3rd edition or AD&D (depending on who you talk to). The objective for it was to keep D&D in print without rocking the boat too much and it really shows.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2016 16:25
|
|
|
pookel posted:I've been reading up in various venues on the possibility of switching to a different system, and this thread is literally the first place I've seen people trash talk 5th. Everything I've heard about it from other places has been positive. So, yk, taking this with a grain of salt. I'm sure any one of us could give you a list of why we're not 5e fans, but at the end of the day it still boils down to personal preference. So yeah, if you end up trying it best of luck! Hopefully you guys have fun. That's why we're all here anyway.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2016 16:29
|
|
|
I feel like I should note that I co-owned a game store for quite a while (not involved since the divorce) and saw so many teenage nerds whine about every rules change and new card set in their children's card games (tm) that I promised myself I wouldn't let myself get too attached to any particular edition or format, and I should be willing to try any new thing with an open mind. There's probably plenty of stuff in all of the editions for me to whine about, but I try to be positive. I do love the diversity of powers in 4th, and the ability of any class to specialize in interesting ways. I was never a fan of the "I'm a fighter, I hit things" school of thought. I just wish our group ran it a lot faster.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2016 16:35
|
|
|
pookel posted:I've been reading up in various venues on the possibility of switching to a different system, and this thread is literally the first place I've seen people trash talk 5th. Everything I've heard about it from other places has been positive. So, yk, taking this with a grain of salt. It's also a much better game than 3.x/PF, so it has that going for it, at least.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2016 16:35
|
|
|
dwarf74 posted:I mean, I could go into why I think 5e is pretty awful, but it's certainly true that much of the internet finds it to their liking, overall. Much of the Internet also found 3.x to their liking, or any number of other shittily-designed games, because ~my tummyfeels~.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2016 16:39
|
|
|
pookel posted:I feel like I should note that I co-owned a game store for quite a while (not involved since the divorce) and saw so many teenage nerds whine about every rules change and new card set in their children's card games (tm) that I promised myself I wouldn't let myself get too attached to any particular edition or format, and I should be willing to try any new thing with an open mind. There's probably plenty of stuff in all of the editions for me to whine about, but I try to be positive. Every previous D&D rules change was an attempt to add something new, or correct flaws in the old rules. 5e is the first time this isn't true--everything that inspired dumbass memes about 4e has been walked back, and literally nothing new has been added. 5e is not actively terrible, like RIFTS or Synnibarr or all the tacky rapefests that edgy OSR tryhards love so much. What it is, is pointless. It's a system that costs hundreds of dollars, and does nothing that free systems won't do. If you don't like "fighters hit things," you won't enjoy 5e. 4e's class balance, power diversity, and specializations are almost completely gone. Combat will take just as much time if you try to run it RAW, too. Hwurmp fucked around with this message at 16:49 on Apr 20, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2016 16:44
|
|
|
pookel posted:I've been reading up in various venues on the possibility of switching to a different system, and this thread is literally the first place I've seen people trash talk 5th. Everything I've heard about it from other places has been positive. So, yk, taking this with a grain of salt. There is a strong relationship between the change-resistant attitude of the teens in your store and love of 5e. Imagine the teens' reaction if the company had rolled back most of the changes they didn't like. Allow it to simmer for two minutes. Compare to the love of 5e you've seen. Serve at room temperature.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2016 17:03
|
|
|
Really Pants posted:If you don't like "fighters hit things," you won't enjoy 5e. 4e's class balance, power diversity, and specializations are almost completely gone. So if that's a concern you might want to look at the free basic rules on their site before making the jump.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2016 17:26
|
|
|
For the record, no one's saying you can't have fun with 5e, because there's nothing stopping people from enjoying bad games. People are just pointing out that it has atrocious design.
Lemon-Lime fucked around with this message at 18:10 on Apr 20, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2016 17:43
|
|
|
What I'm actually thinking is that even though 5e sounds kind of simplistic to me, it might run better and faster in my particular group. (I really wish I had the time/inclination to homebrew.)
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2016 17:55
|
|
|
Have you considered 13th Age? It's modelled very closely after D&D, made by two designers who worked on 3.5 and 4E respectively, and it's just as complex as it needs to be (okay, with a few concessions to nostalgia). Not as demanding of tactical thinking and attention as 4E is, but with a more defined mechanical combat system than most narrative-focused games, and with lots of opportunities to improvise baked in. I'd give it a try before I turned towards 5th. There's even a rule that governs what happens if there's a fight and one player's absent or busy wrangling kids.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2016 18:03
|
|
|
I've played with groups that went from never having played a tabletop game to having their actions ready before their turn came around with 4E. My experience with 5E is pretty limited, but I don't see how it could possibly be a step towards faster rounds
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2016 19:31
|
|
|
Pharmaskittle posted:I've played with groups that went from never having played a tabletop game to having their actions ready before their turn came around with 4E. My experience with 5E is pretty limited, but I don't see how it could possibly be a step towards faster rounds
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2016 19:36
|
|
|
dwarf74 posted:It happens kinda accidentally when half the table has nothing interesting to do on their turn. And stops happening as the casters' turns start to get longer and longer.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2016 19:55
|
|
|
It'll solve the problem the way that 3.X solves the problem, most of the table has no decisions to make and the encounters end up getting trivialized by a spell or two.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2016 20:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 17:38 |
|
|
djw175 posted:And stops happening as the casters' turns start to get longer and longer.  : "Sorry... flip flip flip ... I need to look up the exact ... flip flip wording of this ... read read read read read hmmmm.... no, I think instead I'll ... flip flip flip-flip-flip flip hmmm, no.... okay. I'll just cast um ... Magic Missile."
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2016 20:20
|
|