Traditional Games Chat Thread 2020: The Tyranny of Fun

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Traditional Games > Traditional Games Chat Thread 2020: The Tyranny of Fun

«‹›213 »

Zeerust: May 1, 2008; They must have guessed, once or twice - guessed and refused to believe - that everything, always, collectively, had been moving toward that purified shape latent in the sky, that shape of no surprise, no second chance, no return.

And to be fair, a lot of d20 engine melee combat absolutely is chaotic in the mechanical sense, because you're gating a meaningful hit behind two flat randomisers. And, depending on the version you have to shoot your chances of hitting / dealing damage in the foot to do literally anything interesting.

# ? Feb 14, 2020 17:31

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 13, 2024 01:22

hyphz: Aug 5, 2003; Number 1 Nerd Tear Farmer 2022.

Keep it up, champ.

Also you're a skeleton warrior now. Kree.; Unlockable Ben

The main thing I was basing that on is that when you present a group that's used to d20 with a simpler flat number based system like the one described in the article (and this isn't just my group, I've seen this repeated over and over on forums), the reaction generally isn't "cool, this will be more like a battle because it will be faster". Their reaction is much more commonly "so I can never get a better weapon? so it doesn't matter if we ambush them? so it doesn't matter where I stand?" etc.

It's easy to dismiss this as "muh verisimilitude" but universally it's about control over the situation. Being in control of circumstances is probably a much more appealing fantasy projection than simple blind competence. It would be interesting to test this because I have a strong feeling that there are players who would much prefer a system where you have to roll a 15 to hit but you can stack up to +5 worth of modifiers by doing the right things, to a system where you have to roll only a 10 to hit.

And although D&D is "supposed to represent" a chaotic melee I'm not sure that people actually want to play one; in the same way that players will say they want realistic gunfights but actually play systems that don't give that at all, because actually realistically simulated gunfights aren't really any fun, or say that they want the persistent risk of death but complain when they have to save or die.

# ? Feb 14, 2020 19:28

Meinberg: Oct 9, 2011; inspired by but legally distinct from CATS (2019)

hyphz posted:

The main thing I was basing that on is that when you present a group that's used to d20 with a simpler flat number based system like the one described in the article (and this isn't just my group, I've seen this repeated over and over on forums), the reaction generally isn't "cool, this will be more like a battle because it will be faster". Their reaction is much more commonly "so I can never get a better weapon? so it doesn't matter if we ambush them? so it doesn't matter where I stand?" etc.

It's easy to dismiss this as "muh verisimilitude" but universally it's about control over the situation. Being in control of circumstances is probably a much more appealing fantasy projection than simple blind competence. It would be interesting to test this because I have a strong feeling that there are players who would much prefer a system where you have to roll a 15 to hit but you can stack up to +5 worth of modifiers by doing the right things, to a system where you have to roll only a 10 to hit.

And although D&D is "supposed to represent" a chaotic melee I'm not sure that people actually want to play one; in the same way that players will say they want realistic gunfights but actually play systems that don't give that at all, because actually realistically simulated gunfights aren't really any fun, or say that they want the persistent risk of death but complain when they have to save or die.

Very few people actually enjoys tallying up all of their nickel and dime bonuses in the middle of an encounter. People like accumulating them and like being able to express greater power, but the way that it is expressed with a wide array of small bonuses is inherently tedious.

And again, I'm not talking about realism. I'm not even talking about verisimilitude, I'm talking about gamefeel, which is a very different thing.

But also, player choices should have an impact on things, which is why that mechanic I presented is just one mechanic, rather than a full rules system. A full rules system would have to include meaningful choices. Any game that does not have meaningful choices in the beat-to-beat moments is a bad game. This is why 4e is the best edition of D&D and perhaps even the only good one.

# ? Feb 14, 2020 22:22

Gobbeldygook: May 13, 2009; Hates Native American people and tries to justify their genocides.

Put this racist on ignore immediately!

Meinberg posted:

Very few people actually enjoys tallying up all of their nickel and dime bonuses in the middle of an encounter. People like accumulating them and like being able to express greater power, but the way that it is expressed with a wide array of small bonuses is inherently tedious.

In practice, D&D's bullshit +2 bonuses everywhere are an incentive to pay attention on other people's turns. They get hit, BUT then you remind them that you give a +2 deflection bonus to AC vs evil attacks made against allies within 20' of you and now it's a miss.

# ? Feb 14, 2020 23:27

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

hyphz posted:

The main thing I was basing that on is that when you present a group that's used to d20 with a simpler flat number based system like the one described in the article (and this isn't just my group, I've seen this repeated over and over on forums), the reaction generally isn't "cool, this will be more like a battle because it will be faster". Their reaction is much more commonly "so I can never get a better weapon? so it doesn't matter if we ambush them? so it doesn't matter where I stand?" etc.

It's easy to dismiss this as "muh verisimilitude" but universally it's about control over the situation. Being in control of circumstances is probably a much more appealing fantasy projection than simple blind competence. It would be interesting to test this because I have a strong feeling that there are players who would much prefer a system where you have to roll a 15 to hit but you can stack up to +5 worth of modifiers by doing the right things, to a system where you have to roll only a 10 to hit.

And although D&D is "supposed to represent" a chaotic melee I'm not sure that people actually want to play one; in the same way that players will say they want realistic gunfights but actually play systems that don't give that at all, because actually realistically simulated gunfights aren't really any fun, or say that they want the persistent risk of death but complain when they have to save or die.

Nickel and dimeing +2 bonuses are the worst way to do this though

# ? Feb 14, 2020 23:50

potatocubed: Jul 26, 2012; *rathian noises*

Meinberg posted:

And again, I'm not talking about realism. I'm not even talking about verisimilitude, I'm talking about gamefeel, which is a very different thing.

I think hyphz is aiming at the slightly tangential point that you're making some assumptions about how D&D combat should feel, and how D&D players want combat to feel, which may not be true.

None of which undermines your basic point, I think, but at the same time he's not wrong.

# ? Feb 15, 2020 00:05

Vox Valentine: May 31, 2013; Solving all of life's problems through enhanced casting of Occam's Razor. Reward yourself with an imaginary chalice.

Attacks of Opportunity is the worst gamefeel nickle and dime thing from D&D.

# ? Feb 15, 2020 02:45

WorldIndustries: Dec 21, 2004

Meinberg posted:

Very few people actually enjoys tallying up all of their nickel and dime bonuses in the middle of an encounter. People like accumulating them and like being able to express greater power, but the way that it is expressed with a wide array of small bonuses is inherently tedious.

And again, I'm not talking about realism. I'm not even talking about verisimilitude, I'm talking about gamefeel, which is a very different thing.

But also, player choices should have an impact on things, which is why that mechanic I presented is just one mechanic, rather than a full rules system. A full rules system would have to include meaningful choices. Any game that does not have meaningful choices in the beat-to-beat moments is a bad game. This is why 4e is the best edition of D&D and perhaps even the only good one.

I really like your article. So if I understand correctly, you can adjust the game-feel of d20 combat by rolling damage at the same time right? Being rolled all at once, it feels more like each attack is taking a swipe into a brawling combat that may or may not be effective.

# ? Feb 15, 2020 08:38

Darwinism: Jan 6, 2008

I started rolling damage dice at the same time as attack dice just kind of because it removed a pointless administrative task and I've never noticed how it changed the feel of my play

# ? Feb 15, 2020 09:05

UnCO3: Feb 11, 2010; Ye gods!; College Slice

I posted before in this thread about this game:

Well, now it's unlocked on itch! Like Skyscrapers Blotting Out The Sun a 2-player writing game where one person writes a story line-by-line and the other person writes translation footnotes that may or may not be informed by their own beliefs about the writer character, their history, and their work... until they clash in the middle of the page.

It's part of a monthly series I'm starting up on my Patreon, which'll also include other game content (material for existing games, previews of longer-term projects etc.). These monthly games get released there a month before they come out on itch.

# ? Feb 15, 2020 09:34

Elfgames: Sep 11, 2011; Fun Shoe

Booyah- posted:

I really like your article. So if I understand correctly, you can adjust the game-feel of d20 combat by rolling damage at the same time right? Being rolled all at once, it feels more like each attack is taking a swipe into a brawling combat that may or may not be effective.

disagree, even if you roll them at the same time you're still checking the d20 and adding bonuses to see if you hit then checking damage dice and adding bonuses to see if you kill

# ? Feb 15, 2020 11:07

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Roll 2d12 instead of 1d20 (because d10s suck). Increase all DCs by 2. Crit on doubles (or rolling a 12).

All weapons do base X damage and an additional Y damage for each die that rolls over Z. Adjust X, Y, Z, to give weapons different numberfeel. Give varied crit effects to give them different effectfeel.

Splicer fucked around with this message at 12:43 on Feb 15, 2020

# ? Feb 15, 2020 12:34

SkySteak: Sep 9, 2010

Hey this is a gigantic long shot but would anyone happen to have that picture of a table/sub heading which described alternatives to fighting a losing battle, including options you could look for? I swear it was part of a Shadowrun or other Sci Fi systems book but it's been years now I think.

# ? Feb 15, 2020 13:37

GimpInBlack: Sep 27, 2012; That's right, kids, take lots of drugs, leave the universe behind, and pilot Enlightenment Voltron out into the cosmos to meet Alien Jesus.

SkySteak posted:

Hey this is a gigantic long shot but would anyone happen to have that picture of a table/sub heading which described alternatives to fighting a losing battle, including options you could look for? I swear it was part of a Shadowrun or other Sci Fi systems book but it's been years now I think.

I don't have a screengrab handy, but it was Unknown Armies if that helps you find it. The section is called "10 Ways to Stop a Fight."

# ? Feb 15, 2020 13:48

hyphz: Aug 5, 2003; Number 1 Nerd Tear Farmer 2022.

Keep it up, champ.

Also you're a skeleton warrior now. Kree.; Unlockable Ben

Splicer posted:

Roll 2d12 instead of 1d20 (because d10s suck). Increase all DCs by 2. Crit on doubles (or rolling a 12).

All weapons do base X damage and an additional Y damage for each die that rolls over Z. Adjust X, Y, Z, to give weapons different numberfeel. Give varied crit effects to give them different effectfeel.

All of these still give the player very little agency. I don�t necessarily disagree that �nickle and dime +2s� is a bad way to provide this, but that doesn�t mean it can just not be provided.

As for the differing expectations, I think of it a bit like a fantasy movie; the cinematography might give the impression of a pitched chaotic melee, but the fight choreography will be of one defined by clear controlled actions by the major characters. No matter how visceral the crowd looks, they still seem to attack the hero one at a time.

# ? Feb 15, 2020 14:38

Leraika: Jun 14, 2015; Luckily, I *did* save your old avatar. Fucked around and found out indeed.

quote:

Somewhere out there is someone who had loving parents, watched clouds on a summer's day, fell in love, lost a friend, is kind to small animals, and knows how to say "please" and "thank you," and yet somehow the two of you are going to end up in a dirty little room with one knife between you and you are going to have to kill that human being.

It's a terrible thing. Not just because he's come to the same realization and wants to survive just as much as you do, meaning he's going to try and puncture your internal organs to set off a cascading trauma effect that ends with you voiding your bowels, dying alone and removed from everything you've ever loved. No, it's a terrible thing because somewhere along the way you could have made a different choice. You could have avoided that knife, that room, and maybe even found some kind of common ground between the two of you. Or at least, you might have divvied up some turf and left each other alone. That would've been a lot smarter, wouldn't it? Even dogs are smart enough to do that. Now you're staring into the eyes of a fellow human and in a couple minutes one of you is going to be vomiting to the rhythm of a fading heartbeat. The survivor is going to remember this night for the rest of his or her life.

Six Ways To Stop A Fight

So before you make a grab for that knife, you should maybe think about a few things. This moment is frozen in time. You can still make better choices.

Surrender. Is your pride really worth a human life? Drop your weapon, put up your hands, and tell them you're ready to cut a deal. You walk, and in exchange you give them something they need. Sidestep the current agenda. Offer them something unrelated to your dispute, and negociate to find a solution.

Disarm. Knife on the table? Throw it out the window. Opponent with a gun? Dodge until he's out of bullets. Deescalate the situation to fists, if possible. You can settle your differences with some brawling and still walk away, plus neither one of you has to face a murder charge or a criminal investigation.

Rechannel. So you have a conflict. Settle it in a smarter way. Arm wrestle, play cards, have a scavenger hunt, a drinking contest, anything that lets you establish a winner and a loser. Smart gamblers bet nothing they aren't willing to lose. Why put your life on the line?

Pass the Buck. Is there somebody more powerful then either one of you who is going to be angry that you two are coming to blows? Pretend you're all in the mafia and you can't just kill each other without kicking your dispute upstairs first. Let that symbolic superior make a decision. You both gain clout for not spilling blood.

Call the Cops. If you've got a grievance against somebody, let the police do your dirty work. File charges. Get a restraining order. Sue him in civil court for wrongful harm. You can beat him down without throwing a punch.

Run Away. The hell with it. Who needs this kind of heat? Blow town, get a job some place else, build a new power base. Is the world really too small for the both of you? It's a big planet out there.

# ? Feb 15, 2020 15:51

hyphz: Aug 5, 2003; Number 1 Nerd Tear Farmer 2022.

Keep it up, champ.

Also you're a skeleton warrior now. Kree.; Unlockable Ben

UA�s attitude to and feel in combat is totally different to DnD�s, though.

# ? Feb 15, 2020 21:56

Lemon-Lime: Aug 6, 2009

hyphz posted:

UA�s attitude to and feel in combat is totally different to DnD�s, though.

Do you have a point?

# ? Feb 15, 2020 22:02

Alaois: Feb 7, 2012

the point is hyphzposting

the point is always hyphzposting

# ? Feb 15, 2020 22:21

Otherkinsey Scale: Jul 17, 2012; Just a little bit of sunshine!

Yeah, that's clearly more of a philosophical guide than anything dependent on specific mechanics.

(Well, except for the part where it just casually says "he has a gun? dodge all the bullets and he'll have to give up and go home," I guess.)

# ? Feb 15, 2020 22:23

Humbug Scoolbus: Apr 25, 2008; The scarlet letter was her passport into regions where other women dared not tread. Shame, Despair, Solitude! These had been her teachers, stern and wild ones, and they had made her strong, but taught her much amiss.; Clapping Larry

Meinberg posted:

Very few people actually enjoys tallying up all of their nickel and dime bonuses in the middle of an encounter. People like accumulating them and like being able to express greater power, but the way that it is expressed with a wide array of small bonuses is inherently tedious.

And again, I'm not talking about realism. I'm not even talking about verisimilitude, I'm talking about gamefeel, which is a very different thing.

But also, player choices should have an impact on things, which is why that mechanic I presented is just one mechanic, rather than a full rules system. A full rules system would have to include meaningful choices. Any game that does not have meaningful choices in the beat-to-beat moments is a bad game. This is why 4e is the best edition of D&D and perhaps even the only good one.

My gaming group is absolutely one where we enjoy the fiddly adding of bonuses. I don't agree with a lot of your points, but I credit that with different preferences in what we each are looking for in a game. I am looking for entertainment/fun for example.

# ? Feb 16, 2020 00:39

Meinberg: Oct 9, 2011; inspired by but legally distinct from CATS (2019)

Humbug Scoolbus posted:

My gaming group is absolutely one where we enjoy the fiddly adding of bonuses. I don't agree with a lot of your points, but I credit that with different preferences in what we each are looking for in a game. I am looking for entertainment/fun for example.

Ah yes the tidal wave of fun that is taking five minutes to resolve a single action.

# ? Feb 16, 2020 01:31

senrath: Nov 4, 2009; Look Professor, a destruct switch!

I personally like adding up all those small bonuses but I will very gladly give that up because 99% of the people I have ever played with cannot do it quickly or reliably and it just slows everything down.

# ? Feb 16, 2020 01:39

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

hyphz posted:

All of these still give the player very little agency. I don�t necessarily disagree that �nickle and dime +2s� is a bad way to provide this, but that doesn�t mean it can just not be provided.

Oh, no, this was in response to the whole "rolling attack and damage at the same time" deal. A while back someone mentioned a d20 system where it's flat damage + a modifier based off the attack roll, I was riffing off that while indulging in my d12 fetish. How you determine whether you hit or not would be a different conversation entirely, but yeah in context I see why I looked like I was talking about that as well.

# ? Feb 16, 2020 01:49

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Humbug Scoolbus posted:

My gaming group is absolutely one where we enjoy the fiddly adding of bonuses. I don't agree with a lot of your points, but I credit that with different preferences in what we each are looking for in a game. I am looking for entertainment/fun for example.

I used to be one of those people and now I haaaaaaate playing with people like that. What did you roll? 16? Yeah you loving hit roll your damage already stop counting nobody cares

It's one of the reasons I love the FFG funny dice so much, all the fun (not sarcasm) of a bunch of +1s but each +1 has an actual in-game meaning and result and impact commensurate with their fiddlyness.

# ? Feb 16, 2020 01:55

Humbug Scoolbus: Apr 25, 2008; The scarlet letter was her passport into regions where other women dared not tread. Shame, Despair, Solitude! These had been her teachers, stern and wild ones, and they had made her strong, but taught her much amiss.; Clapping Larry

Meinberg posted:

Ah yes the tidal wave of fun that is taking five minutes to resolve a single action.

For us, yes.

# ? Feb 16, 2020 04:24

SkySteak: Sep 9, 2010

Belated reply but thank you for dredging that text up. I didn't quite remember the text but I remember it being stark and emotional in its own way.

# ? Feb 16, 2020 14:12

hyphz: Aug 5, 2003; Number 1 Nerd Tear Farmer 2022.

Keep it up, champ.

Also you're a skeleton warrior now. Kree.; Unlockable Ben

Meinberg posted:

Ah yes the tidal wave of fun that is taking five minutes to resolve a single action.

But there's also the tidal wave of satisfaction when that +2 for flanking turns a hit into a miss (or in PF2, a hit into a crit). Certainly I can say that my group doesn't enjoy adding the bonuses, but does very much enjoy when they make a difference.

# ? Feb 16, 2020 16:15

neonchameleon: Nov 14, 2012

Hostile V posted:

Attacks of Opportunity is the worst gamefeel nickle and dime thing from D&D.

Hard disagree. It beats both "You can't turn your back on your enemy in combat at all" and "You can conga line your way past enemies with no penalty" which is what removing them takes out. That said 5e's "You may use ranged attacks in melee but at disadvantage" beats the 3.5 and 4e "You may shoot in melee but take an AoO" which in turn beats the "You may not shoot in melee" of AD&D. And if only it also gave advantage on saves rather than just disadvantage to attacks 5e would have the best approach to ranged spells in melee.

# ? Feb 16, 2020 18:51

WorldIndustries: Dec 21, 2004

Is anyone else playing the Ironsworn Delve expansion? It just released officially on Friday, though the playtest version has been around for several months.

It's very good, the new moves and oracles really round out the game for the solo experience.

# ? Feb 16, 2020 19:20

Gort: Aug 18, 2003; Good day what ho cup of tea

I liked how Strike did damage and attacks of opportunity.

Damage is just rolled into the attack roll - mediocre hits do normal damage, good ones do normal damage and an effect (which may be more damage depending on what attack you did) and really good hits do double damage and an effect. Halving the number of dice rolls really speeds up play.

Attacks of opportunity don't involve a dice roll. So if you turn your back on someone you might take 20% of your HP in damage, automatically. Certain opponents have nastier hits in this situation, ones who are meant to be "sticky". Again, speeds up play significantly.

# ? Feb 16, 2020 21:41

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

It's hard to find the right balance of randomness. I had some words here but they boiled down to "every version of binary success vs fail is trash (binary success vs success with consequences isn't the same thing)"

Gort posted:

I liked how Strike did damage and attacks of opportunity.

Damage is just rolled into the attack roll - mediocre hits do normal damage, good ones do normal damage and an effect (which may be more damage depending on what attack you did) and really good hits do double damage and an effect. Halving the number of dice rolls really speeds up play.

Attacks of opportunity don't involve a dice roll. So if you turn your back on someone you might take 20% of your HP in damage, automatically. Certain opponents have nastier hits in this situation, ones who are meant to be "sticky". Again, speeds up play significantly.

I don't like single d6 (or pile of d6s each above X is a success) systems for game feel reasons. Roll X d6s and add them is not ideal, but fine.

# ? Feb 16, 2020 23:38

Arivia: Mar 17, 2011

Meinberg posted:

Ah yes the tidal wave of fun that is taking five minutes to resolve a single action.

This is one thing I'm worried about with Pathfinder 2e: three actions is great, but they each have to be resolved separately and in order, which does slow things down. Having to go action 1, resolve, action 2, resolve, action 3, resolve is very likely going to be slow at mid to high level play. But hey the high level play at least works!

# ? Feb 17, 2020 00:01

Ego Trip: Aug 28, 2012; A tenacious little mouse!

Gort posted:

Damage is just rolled into the attack roll - mediocre hits do normal damage, good ones do normal damage and an effect (which may be more damage depending on what attack you did) and really good hits do double damage and an effect. Halving the number of dice rolls really speeds up play.

Only slightly related, but I'm reminded of how Alternity did it. Normal/good/great results could have completely different dice for damage, so you would have no idea what to role until you resolved the attack. Thanks 90s game design.

# ? Feb 17, 2020 00:13

Gort: Aug 18, 2003; Good day what ho cup of tea

Splicer posted:

I don't like single d6 (or pile of d6s each above X is a success) systems for game feel reasons. Roll X d6s and add them is not ideal, but fine.

Why's that?

# ? Feb 17, 2020 00:41

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Gort posted:

Why's that?

You know when you're playing a d20 system and you'll have a session where it feels like you've rolled the same low number for half your rolls? I hate that feeling. With a single d6 there's so few possible results (well, exactly 6) that confirmation bias means every slightly bad session is a "welp there's another loving 2" session.

I'm not trying to drop an objective truth here it's just a personal dislike. I could argue about the disproportionate impact of a biased d6 vs a higher die but it'd be (accurate!) post hoc justification.

Splicer fucked around with this message at 00:58 on Feb 17, 2020

# ? Feb 17, 2020 00:56

BattleMaster: Aug 14, 2000

I like bell curves like you get from FATE's 4dF or GURPS' 3d6 because they provide more consistent and predictable results. They still have a chance to hit it big or whiff really badly, just not as often as with a flat 1dx roll, which IMO makes big successes more special and big failures less frustrating. Also, bonuses or penalties of small numbers make more of a difference than with a flat roll, especially in situations where the expected outcome is more ambiguous (i.e. when the chance of success is closer to 50-50).

I'm not a fan of dice pool systems, because while they have a bell curve-like character to their results, some games don't restrain their numbers and have you roll huge handfuls of dice. I guess tossing buckets of dice can be fun for some, but I like to minimize time between rolling dice and knowing if there was a success or not.

edit: I mean dice pool systems as in "roll a bunch of one type of numerical polydice and count how many are higher than x", not FFG's custom dice systems like in Genesys or their Star Wars games. I actually really like how those dice work and they keep the numbers you roll at a time fairly low.

BattleMaster fucked around with this message at 01:18 on Feb 17, 2020

# ? Feb 17, 2020 01:07

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

BattleMaster posted:

I like bell curves like you get from FATE's 4dF or GURPS' 3d6 because they provide more consistent and predictable results. They still have a chance to hit it big or whiff really badly, just not as often as with a flat 1dx roll, which IMO makes big successes more special and big failures less frustrating.

Yeah 3d6 is less bad because I'll be paying more attention to the total than the individual die, but still if every roll that night has had a 1 in it then I'm going to start wondering if I'm killing my guy with a loaded die, even though I know objectively that rolling at least one 1 a bunch of times in succession is statistically not unusual.

# ? Feb 17, 2020 01:13

BattleMaster: Aug 14, 2000

Speaking of FFG's crazy dice, what ended up happening with their RPG department? I love those dice and I'm worried about the future of them.

# ? Feb 17, 2020 01:20

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 13, 2024 01:22

Tricky: Jun 12, 2007; after a great meal i like to lie on the ground and feel like garbage

Arivia posted:

This is one thing I'm worried about with Pathfinder 2e: three actions is great, but they each have to be resolved separately and in order, which does slow things down. Having to go action 1, resolve, action 2, resolve, action 3, resolve is very likely going to be slow at mid to high level play. But hey the high level play at least works!

I think the way that they limit more complex actions (eg things tagged with Flourish, Press, etc) should keep most of your turns flowing pretty well. Spellcasters do have a lot of variance in terms of considering what to cast, but the multiple action cost for most spells and the action cost for metamagic feats should keep their turns from ballooning out of control. I've been theorycrafting my Rogue (MC Ranger) build out as my group works through AoA and, largely, I think my turns only get a notable bump in terms of decision points once we hit level 9-10 and I need to think about Debilitating Strike effects on hit.

# ? Feb 17, 2020 09:15

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Traditional Games > Traditional Games Chat Thread 2020: The Tyranny of Fun

«‹›213 »