|
Heliotrope posted:I've played and ran Apocalypse World and I can tell you neither I nor my players asked for specific measurement in feet, the exact number of people, or what things are made out. That’s fine. I didn’t, when I played MitW. But if I am trying to form groups, with my existing players or not, there is no guarantee that nobody would. Elector_Nerdlingen posted:Why would an Apocalypse World player ask for a distance in feet and inches, and why would you need to give them one if they did? Because their characters have eyes, and the world is made of Euclidean space, and it is possible to get at least an idea of distances by looking around. If you don’t know the distances you can visualise by guessing, but if it comes out explicitly that distance can not be measured in the game, all visualisation evaporates into fog.
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 03:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 20:39 |
|
|
If someone asks me how close something or someone is, I'll respond with, "What are you trying to do?" Once they answer that, (eg "I want to shoot that fucker") I can tell them either they're either close enough to do that already, or not. And if they want a visual, I can tell them something like, "They're within shouting distance," or "Close enough to see the whites of their eyes," or "A speck on the horizon." Though usually, "Close enough to shoot" seem to be good enough.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 03:34
|
|
|
hyphz posted:Because their characters have eyes, and the world is made of Euclidean space, and it is possible to get at least an idea of distances by looking around. If you don’t know the distances you can visualise by guessing, but if it comes out explicitly that distance can not be measured in the game, all visualisation evaporates into fog. No it doesn't. You failed to address the rest of my post. It was important. This isn't some hypothetical theorycrafting gotcha, it's how you play Apocalypse World. It was: What are the characters doing? Did their actions constitute a move? What move? What does the text of that move tell you, Hyphz, to do about it? They don't get to (or need to) ask for endless specific details in an attempt to figure out what the information you're hiding from them is, because you don't get to hide information from them because the game doesn't ever hinge on whether something was 3 or 2.5 feet away and they're gonna fail if they didn't know that, because the game doesn't work like that. It doesn't matter if it's 6 or 8 feet across to the war rig when a player wants to jump it. The fiction either dictates that it's close enough to jump or not close enough to jump, and if you've been unclear about this then you hosed up a little bit but it's fine because you can just apply be a fan of the characters, which means you want them to get to try to do whatever awesome thing they have in mind so you say it's close enough to jump. e: Or, gently caress, the fiction might be that it's pretty loving far and they're not sure if they can make it! Then when they try, if they succeed it was close enough! If they fail it wasn't close enough! If they partly succeed then it was sorta maybe close enough but not really and now they're dangling in front of a triple bogey spiked wheel set with their heels dragging on the gravel! It works because you never said "it's 6.739 feet" and they compared it to their move(jump(from_vehicle(truck(war_rig)))) number because they don't have one of those. And just because I need to be crystal loving clear about every little thing: "close enough to jump" means "close enough to jump if you succeed on your roll", which is the same as "close enough to try to jump". Not over the horizon. Not to the moon. Not on the road while you're hiding in a cupboard. Not described 2 in-fiction seconds earlier as "way behind" unless you've also described a really fast closing speed. The character knows if they could probably make it or not. The book tells you not to hide this information. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 04:18 on Apr 24, 2020 |
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 03:35
|
|
|
Heliotrope posted:I've played and ran Apocalypse World and I can tell you neither I nor my players asked for specific measurement in feet, the exact number of people, or what things are made out. Running Dungeon World for D&D players I am occasionally running into some of this 'The game must parse like the games I'm used to' situations. Like expecting combat turns/rounds to be everyone goes in order, or for 'It says the monster attacks back, based on my roll, why does a different monster put the other player in danger?' Or 'why does this mean my spear is stuck in its ribs?' I'm also remembering that one group that had a terrible actual play of masks and it flowed how hyphz interprets the game. Complete with the group trying to find the right way to describe the Nova's moves so there was no collateral damage and the GM kinda being an rear end and just railroading things with a 'you didn't parse my sentence so here's the surprise failure!' Coolness Averted fucked around with this message at 04:18 on Apr 24, 2020 |
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 04:08
|
|
|
Coolness Averted posted:Running Dungeon World for D&D players I am occasionally running into some of this 'The game must parse like the games I'm used to' situations. Like expecting combat turns/rounds to be everyone goes in order, or for 'It says the monster attacks back, based on my roll, why does a different monster put the other player in danger?' Or 'why does this mean my spear is stuck in its ribs?' This is where showing them the MC moves list can help. "I have a move list too. It's a little different from yours, but it's still a move list. X is happening because the rules told me to make a move, and I'm making this move, here."
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 04:16
|
|
|
Elector_Nerdlingen posted:This is where showing them the MC moves list can help. "I have a move list too. It's a little different from yours, but it's still a move list. X is happening because the rules told me to make a move, and I'm making this move, here." Yeah and I think that can be helpful for some players who just need to figure out this game has a framework and the GM isn't completely pulling stuff of their rear end to spite them. I just wanted to formally state in this thread I completely agree with the old sentiment that playing certain types of RPGs does cause some weird maladaptive behavior that hurts other games in some folks. The D&D genre is the worst about this.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 04:20
|
|
|
Coolness Averted posted:this game has a framework and the GM isn't completely pulling stuff of their rear end Weird how easy it is to figure this out by reading the books though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 04:32
|
|
|
D&D loving wrecks peoples' brains, there's no doubt about that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 04:33
|
|
|
hyphz posted:I've mentioned it before. It's the fictional properties that give the feeling that Luke could not have hit the exhaust port without using the Force, and even then it was a close thing. all the movie really does to show this is that it has a couple other dudes try and fail. you can easily set this feeling up in an rpg.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 05:17
|
|
|
Sometimes in a PbtA game you need to draw a crude little diagram of where people are or something cause words are an imperfect medium and confusion happens. Very, very rarely something will come up in the fiction that requires actual measurements (in my experience it's usually things like height where we're agreeing on a narrative fiction of something like how tall the ceiling is or something ; rarely has it been if someone is 5 feet or 7 feet away, but stuff like a 10 foot ceiling vs. a 30 foot ceiling or whatever has come up.) If you need more precision than this, and it's not being framed as figuring it out between the table, you done hosed up.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 05:59
|
|
|
Elfgames posted:all the movie really does to show this is that it has a couple other dudes try and fail. you can easily set this feeling up in an rpg. It also has a conversation in which Luke discusses the difficulty of the shot with other pilots, and he talks about bullseying womp rats. So he's confident he can manage the shot while the other pilots aren't. Or at least, he's blustering that he can do it. I think this is important because hyphz keeps wanting to distill the scene down to a success/failure where the GM is deciding by fiat that Luke is always or never going to succeed, or worse, just putting a failure chance in which is really dissatisfying if Luke rolls a 1 and they fail to blow up the death star and everyone dies, the end. But no. The scene is not about whether or not Luke will succeed, and in fact, it's better imagined or played at a table as a scene with no dice involved, and also not much GM fiat involved. What is happening in this scene is Luke's player and the GM have previously talked, out of character, about what the player wants to do with Luke and what kind of story they want to tell. And then both the GM and the player and probably the other players have repeatedly set up story cues to help take the story to that climactic point: Luke's struggle to accept the teaching that Obi Wan is trying to rush him through, his general pattern of easily being discouraged, that's RP by the player. Obi Wan's self-sacrifice just to give the party a chance to escape wasn't the GM arbitrarily murdering Obi Wan, it was Obi Wan's player deciding to intentionally die in this point to create a dramatic moment and also to teach Luke that a true Jedi can trust the force over everything, including a natural sense of self-preservation or even a probably futile but still maybe possible chance to just out-duel Vader and kill him right then and there. Leia challenges Luke to not be like Han, who is self-centered, and in the process she also challenges Han to not be so self-centered too (and he has an arc as well, because he decides not to take the money back to Jabba but instead help attack the Death Star!). And finally Luke has his moment in the trench run where Obi Wan (who died and is now an NPC, so really this is the GM) encourages him to trust the force and the player decides to trust the force. There's no dice there and it's not GM fiat, it's the player realizing this is a good moment for Luke to take the next giant step into becoming a Jedi, becoming an adult, trusting his power: it's an act of faith, that the other characters don't really understand ("luke, why have you turned off your targeting computer?"). Nobody is rolling dice to see if he succeeds at the shot. That'd be absurd. It's the climactic moment of the entire adventure, everything turns on that one moment. Luke trusts the force, and the GM tells him the shot makes it in. No this does not rob the scene or the action of meaning or the victory of its impact, just because the GM "Decided" that the attempt succeeded. The player and the GM and the rest of the party built the story to this point and this is the satisfying narrative outcome. Luke's player is not mad that the GM did whatever work they did to set this moment up, because it's loving awesome; nor is the player mad that previously, Luke failed to: save his uncle and aunt, not get zapped by the light saber training bot, rescue leia without getting anyone in the party killed, escape the death star properly (the empire let them go so they could be tracked!), etc. Maybe some of those things were adjudicated by some dice rolls, after all he did succeed at swinging over a chasm by a belt string while mooks shot at him (and the player playing Leia took the opportunity to do a little roleplay there too, I guess neither of them knew about the brother/sister thing yet, which uhhh, boy did the GM gently caress that up but nevermind). The players are not mad or demanding the GM to explain whether or not they could have done better with rescuing Leia from the death star. It was a partial success but it was also cool and had some cool scenes and they trusted that the story was going somewhere, and definitely used their own creativity to help build the interesting parts of those scenes and perhaps even add description and help build the setting if the system allowed for it. The players are not mad that [escape was inevitable|escape hung on dice rolls they could have failed] because they don't actually care whether either of those things were true, even if they can guess that it was one or the other. These are normal players cooperating with the GM to help build a cool adventure. The player playing Han isn't intentionally trying to undermine the conceits of their game by demanding to see the GM's notes or insisting that the GM shoulda let them just shoot their way out of everything because their character isn't actually good at Bluff rolls ("boring conversation anyway"), they're having fun. Winding up in a garbage compactor was unquestionably due to some failed rolls, but so loving what? It's one of the most memorable and tense scenes in all of Star Wars! They had to get bailed out by droids, who are just NPCs, and again, no they aren't mad that the GM realized they had no chance of survival or escape on their own and had the NPC R2D2 hack the computer and just let them out. That was cool and tense too! The game isn't adversarial like that. The things you roll for are cases where a failure or a success can both lead to interesting outcomes, perhaps different paths through the adventure, perhaps setbacks and loss of resources etc.; the things you don't roll for are the pivotal moment where the character grows by making a hugely consequential decision to TRUST THE FORCE, LUKE and forever alter their destiny. The players and the GM cooperated to make that happen, they loved it, they did not worry or care or bring up on forums later how the GM railroaded them or how it "never actually mattered whether Luke and Leia passed or failed the roll to swing across the chasm because they were always going to survive and come back and succeed at destroying the Death Star" because that's an absurd criticism. Good stories have structure, nobody is mad that the players and/or the GM work to create that narrative structure. Nobody who is honestly trying to help make that happen, anyway. Leperflesh fucked around with this message at 06:13 on Apr 24, 2020 |
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 06:09
|
|
|
Xiahou Dun posted:Sometimes in a PbtA game you need to draw a crude little diagram of where people are or something cause words are an imperfect medium and confusion happens. I've literally never had to do the diagram thing but sometimes I'll push counters into groups for who's in each other's faces right now. For height, the most we've ever had to wrangle on it is something like "...and I drop out of the rafters and loving shank him". "Remember it's like 30 foot high. Are you using anything to break your fall?" "The target." "Awesome. Roll it".
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 06:39
|
|
|
hyphz posted:Well, I tend to think of that because of the risk of a low level cut. As much as the game might think in terms of Fronts and Threats and Clocks, at some point a player will ask for a distance in feet, how many people they see, what a door is made of. Failing to answer just ruins immersion, and making it up tends to trigger contradictions quickly, for me at least. In those cases, you ask them why they want to know. Someone who wants you to be right will tell you what they have in mind when they find out. You have approximate useful measures - hand, close, near, far; a small, medium, or large gang - but if someone who wants you to be right has a plan in mind they'll tell you and you can give them an answer that plays into their plan. Someone who wants you to be wrong is collecting factoids to use at an unexpected moment like Phoenix loving Wright, and when you try to ask them why they want to know they'll deflect or pretend like they can somehow keep secrets from you, the person who controls the universe.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 07:43
|
|
|
Elector_Nerdlingen posted:I've literally never had to do the diagram thing but sometimes I'll push counters into groups for who's in each other's faces right now. O yeah I use it probably more than necessary, not as some tactical map thing but just to make sure the other players are imagining the same fictional space. Just so we're on the same page of "there's a hallway and it has a dude in it and then the big bad's by the fire-place" and that kind of stuff. I'll improvise measurements but "3 meters". is the same thing as saying "distance you could close in a few steps" I'm just using a different vocabulary that we both know because we live in a world and measure things. This might be my own failings as a GM but often times I find I could spend 20 minutes describing something or half a minute doing something on scrap paper and the latter is really easy. I prefer the latter sometimes when it's useful. (I also like detailed map play, but that's a genre issue. ) The reason why height tends to come up at least in my play is player' thinking I meant like a super vaulted ceiling or just a random house ceiling and they want to break through it. It's just a thing that I other don't mention or they don't remember or who cares, but my players love smashing through ceilings so it comes up. It's all just about understanding the fictional space so people can build off of it and preventing miscommunication. If you can do that with just words, good on you.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 08:14
|
|
|
I recently finished a long DW game where I was the rooftops and rafters guy and it just never really crossed my mind to ask how high it was beyond "tall/shadowy enough to hide" and "jump down or need gear", which were the practical constraints, and "how hosed exactly am I if I fall off", which is only really "fine / hurt / dead" , only comes up when it's offered as a consquence, and is practically never going to be the only option.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 08:35
|
|
|
Enh it's come up in terms of fictional positioning about people like breaking through the floor and stuff. Maybe my players are more interested in structure than normal. A solid half of us worked in construction so it might be us who are just aware of yeah if if I have super strength floors are bullshit. To get into actual RPG chat, what was the LARP that used cards for mechanical resolution? I was thinking today about Gloomhaven and how it lets you change the modifiers on your deck and how that might be a really good thing to do in a LARP that both allows advancement organically but is something smaller than like a pack of cigarettes you could keep in your pocket. Seems like a good design space.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 08:43
|
|
|
Xiahou Dun posted:Enh it's come up in terms of fictional positioning about people like breaking through the floor and stuff. Maybe my players are more interested in structure than normal. A solid half of us worked in construction so it might be us who are just aware of yeah if if I have super strength floors are bullshit. e: My bad, it's "Freebase," the World of Reality is its setting. Nessus fucked around with this message at 09:27 on Apr 24, 2020 |
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 09:25
|
|
|
Nessus posted:World of Reality allowed for dispute resolution with cards... maybe that's the game Hyphz should study. "It said memorise this rulebook and swallow these pills but me and my friend figured out that this meant that we should put our dicks in the garbage disposal instead, so I put my dick in the disposal and now I can't reach the rulebook or pills, this game and indeed the concept of games is impossible". Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 09:52 on Apr 24, 2020 |
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 09:49
|
|
|
Zorak of Michigan posted:Other members of my group love strong opposition. When I GM, Blackironheart usually complains that I'm not pushing the PCs hard enough. Only steel sharpens steel, motherfucker. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 12:43
|
|
|
Coolness Averted posted:I'm also remembering that one group that had a terrible actual play of masks and it flowed how hyphz interprets the game. Complete with the group trying to find the right way to describe the Nova's moves so there was no collateral damage and the GM kinda being an rear end and just railroading things with a 'you didn't parse my sentence so here's the surprise failure!' I wonder if you're referring to the Cult Of Tea And Dice, which is actually a local group to me (although not one I'm in), who certainly had (or also had) that problem with Masks. To some extent I can see the GM messed up several times there; in particular when the Nova's power did break out, he described it as "you accidentally hit [ally].." instead of something like "the surge of energy overwhelms your willpower and explodes just in front of you, knocking [ally] backwards" which makes it sound much more like an uncontrolled event instead of incompetence, but of course it's really easy for me to make that kind of comment in hindsight. The one that really made me sad was an actual example play by a game author in which the game was brought to a standstill when the players were at the gates of a city by the players constantly asking the GM questions in an attempt to work out what they could see. The problem was that I could sympathise with both sides there, but the net effect was that what was supposed to be a dramatic scene with the players imagining wide vistas instead turned out to feel like one of those rub-bits-off-with-the-coin pictures. Also, if I'm going to detail re-read Apocalypse World, you can read Game Night. It sums up most of my worries about non-crunchy GMing very effectively. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 15:04
|
|
|
BlackIronHeart posted:Only steel sharpens steel, motherfucker. I sharpen my own kitchen knives and I can testify that you are literally wrong, but I like your spirit!
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 15:41
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:It also has a conversation in which Luke discusses the difficulty of the shot with other pilots, and he talks about bullseying womp rats. So he's confident he can manage the shot while the other pilots aren't. Or at least, he's blustering that he can do it. Sorry - this is really what I'm going for. The audience of course does know that Luke is going to succeed. But at the time you watch that scene, it is still a big deal. The question is how to convey that it was a big deal in an RPG, without creating a ton of dissonance by peeling back the curtain.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 16:45
|
|
|
Glazius posted:In those cases, you ask them why they want to know. They want to know because it's something that their character could see, and they want to imagine what their character sees.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 16:48
|
|
|
hyphz posted:The question is how to convey that it was a big deal in an RPG, without creating a ton of dissonance by peeling back the curtain. Willing suspension of disbelief combined with any or all of the techniques outlined in the post you’re quoting. Because nothing will ever work to make players who don’t want to treat the game world as interesting, treat it as interesting. If someone is already armed and armored against taking the events of the game that way, they won’t, and if they’re already invested in treating their characters and the game world as meaningful and real, even very mediocre GMing will work fine. This won’t promise a good game but it will solve this particular problem. You can also let note hinge on character decisions - will Luke trust the force or will he refuse that call? That’s a far more important element of that scene in terms of the story going forward than whether he’s the one to blow up the Death Star. Also now I’m realizing I want an RPG where a dead PC hanging around as a force ghost or memory with a full mechanical suite like any other PC is viable and fun for the players. I can’t think of any!
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 16:56
|
|
|
There's also nothing inherently wrong with peeling back the curtain a little bit or at the right time. Players know they're in a game, the myth of the GM or game that everyone is so engrossed in the table melts away is made up, every game has the players actively and knowingly engage in their own mechanical "behind the scenes" action and it's not really important that the GMs actions are obstruficated. Despite what you might assume it doesn't really rob your game of much to let players see where your ideas come from, how you constructed the narrative, etc.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 17:26
|
|
|
Joe Slowboat posted:Also now I’m realizing I want an RPG where a dead PC hanging around as a force ghost or memory with a full mechanical suite like any other PC is viable and fun for the players. I can’t think of any!
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 17:31
|
|
|
Ilor posted:You need to play Mountain Witch, friend. Dead characters absolutely hang around in that game. I thought that never came out due to KS woes? Or did I misunderstand that?
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 17:34
|
|
|
Joe Slowboat posted:I thought that never came out due to KS woes? Or did I misunderstand that? First edition came out and is still available in PDF. https://www.indiepressrevolution.com/xcart/The-Mountain-Witch-PDF.html
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 17:36
|
|
|
hyphz posted:They want to know because it's something that their character could see, and they want to imagine what their character sees. Joe Slowboat posted:Also now I’m realizing I want an RPG where a dead PC hanging around as a force ghost or memory with a full mechanical suite like any other PC is viable and fun for the players. I can’t think of any!
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 17:47
|
|
|
This is reminding me of my BSG game using the Solar System / Shadow of Yesterday rules. At first, one player kept asking how many Vipers, exactly, the Battlestar had. I told him it didn't matter. He asked how it could possibly not matter. I said something like, "It's a lot, it's multiple squadrons, in formation they overflow the TV screen. If it's ever few enough that it's going to change how we resolve a situation, I'll specifically tell you. Until then, it just doesn't matter." He didn't get it until a couple sessions had gone by. After that, he still asked, but he admitted that he did so just because he's the sort of grog who wanted to build imaginary TO&E for the flight group. Edit: Which, in retrospect, would have been a smarter thing to do! If I'd told him to make up the rosters and poo poo, he probably would have, and I'd have gotten a ton of world-building for free.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 18:49
|
|
|
Warthur posted:Unless they are playing measurebot, the robot that measures, they're not going to see precise ranges in meters. "About as far away as I am from you now". "About the distance from here to the end of the garden". "About the distance from here to the end of this street", etc. 100% of the time I have answered with anything like this, in multiple groups, someone has pulled out a sheet and started writing down all of the phrases I have used to describe distances in order to put them into order. No, your eyes don't give exact metres, but apart from those there's no good way in language to provide the data your eyes give.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 19:39
|
|
|
hyphz posted:100% of the time I have answered with anything like this, in multiple groups, someone has pulled out a sheet and started writing down all of the phrases I have used to describe distances in order to put them into order. No, your eyes don't give exact metres, but apart from those there's no good way in language to provide the data your eyes give. I have literally never experienced anything even tangentially like this, and I continue to be concerned about your players, who seem to be consistently intruders from the negaverse.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 19:43
|
|
|
hyphz posted:100% of the time I have answered with anything like this, in multiple groups, someone has pulled out a sheet and started writing down all of the phrases I have used to describe distances in order to put them into order. No, your eyes don't give exact metres, but apart from those there's no good way in language to provide the data your eyes give. Or are they actually independent and taken from different communities?
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 19:44
|
|
|
Elector_Nerdlingen posted:They don't get to (or need to) ask for endless specific details in an attempt to figure out what the information you're hiding from them is, because you don't get to hide information from them because the game doesn't ever hinge on whether something was 3 or 2.5 feet away and they're gonna fail if they didn't know that, because the game doesn't work like that. No, but it has range bands, and they're described as actual ranges rather than conceptual ranges, which brings up all the usual problems with those. "Is the room big enough for me to be Far from them?" "Can Bob be Far from them while I Lay Down Fire with a weapon that's Close?" "If I'm standing in the middle of the room and there's a row of people opposite me, are the ones at either end of the row Far?" "Doesn't a Grenade having 'area', but a range of 'hand-to-hand' mean that you always blow yourself up with it?"
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 19:48
|
|
|
hyphz posted:100% of the time I have answered with anything like this, in multiple groups, someone has pulled out a sheet and started writing down all of the phrases I have used to describe distances in order to put them into order. No, your eyes don't give exact metres, but apart from those there's no good way in language to provide the data your eyes give. this is absolutely buck wild. hyphz posted:No, but it has range bands, and they're described as actual ranges rather than conceptual ranges, which brings up all the usual problems with those. The answers to these are really clear tho and obvious. 1) yes or no, depending on the room 2) if you're close and bob is far, yeah. otherwise no 3) yes or no, depending on how big the room is 4) no???? Nemesis Of Moles fucked around with this message at 19:55 on Apr 24, 2020 |
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 19:53
|
|
|
hyphz posted:No, but it has range bands, and they're described as actual ranges rather than conceptual ranges, which brings up all the usual problems with those. I don't know that system, but I am familiar with Modiphius' 2d20 system (as applied in Conan) which uses range bands like this. The answers in Conan are that the scene has Zones of variable, slightly vague size, and if you need to you can just tell players what zone their characters are in. That lets you answer these questions with yes or no, without having to lay out a map with actual specific distances. But I'll just add that it seems like these people are desperately trying to play a tactical combat RPG that takes place on a grid, despite a system intended to abstract from that somewhat and thereby streamline combat. They are rejecting the "theater of the mind" approach to a combat and trying to use careful foot-by-foot positioning and abilities to gain tactical advantage. They might benefit from sitting down and watching an Actual Play of the game, that shows how combat is supposed to work with examples, if they just can't accept that this game doesn't know or care whether you are exactly five feet or exactly ten feet away from a particular enemy. And for the last one, hand-to-hand permits attacking into an adjacent zone, while area allows the grenade to hit everyone in that zone. Or maybe as a thrown weapon, "hand to hand" is strictly an error in the stats for a grenade? Because it sounds like that. Again I don't know that system though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 20:05
|
|
|
This is likely already known by people here, but this panel highlights most of my complaints about picking a good game for roleplaying. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtUgtX3ncTk
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 20:14
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:And for the last one, hand-to-hand permits attacking into an adjacent zone, while area allows the grenade to hit everyone in that zone. Or maybe as a thrown weapon, "hand to hand" is strictly an error in the stats for a grenade? Because it sounds like that. Again I don't know that system though. My interpretation is that the grenade goes as far as you can throw it as defined by the GM, and does harm to everyone in hand-to-hand range of the detonation point.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 20:28
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:And for the last one, hand-to-hand permits attacking into an adjacent zone, while area allows the grenade to hit everyone in that zone. Or maybe as a thrown weapon, "hand to hand" is strictly an error in the stats for a grenade? Because it sounds like that. Again I don't know that system though. You throw the grenade, it goes off, and everyone within hand to hand range of where it exploded takes damage.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 20:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 20:39 |
|
|
hyphz posted:100% of the time I have answered with anything like this, in multiple groups, someone has pulled out a sheet and started writing down all of the phrases I have used to describe distances in order to put them into order. No, your eyes don't give exact metres, but apart from those there's no good way in language to provide the data your eyes give.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 20:33
|
|