|
Actually I get the "Tyranny of the wallclock", and have seen it in action, though mainly in looser games. e.g. recently I was invited to play in a one shot of Lasers and Feelings (which was fun), but at the same time, it was obvious that the gaming slot was from 6-10 in the evening, so that's how long the game was going to take; so in that respect it didn't matter what our characters did, because it would all be resolved for good or ill by 10pm, and because it was all being improved in a game that's all most all player facing rules (it's a one page game to be fair), that just meant that situations would continue to happen. It's entertaining as a bit of guided improv, and in no way wasted time, but unsatisfying as a game-game.
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2020 08:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 03:26 |
|
|
It's an inherent problem when running one shots, but in ongoing games I've never really seen it as an issue. There are only really four ways you can end a session: 1. After a climax - you've saved the town, defeated an important NPC, returned the lost goblet, met the King for the first time etc. - a natural closing of a narrative chapter allowing the next session to start fresh. 2. After a success - you haven't finished the quest, but you've just had a win and it's clear what you need to do next. Provides momentum to the start of the next session. 3. After a failure - you've suffered a setback or you aren't sure what to do next. Allows everyone to take a break and come back next week with a new approach or a revelation they thought of in the shower or whatever. 4. On a cliffhanger - in the middle of a fight, an infiltration, a social engagement, a party, a chase... whatever it is the outcome is in the balance so you start the next session with some exciting narrative tension, and give everyone time to imagine what could happen in the week between sessions. I guess in D&D/Pathfinder et al where even a trivial combat can take an hour to run then you are somewhat hamstrung if there's twenty minutes left and the players are about to break into the goblin barracks. But as long as the combat is challenging, interesting and exciting, then breaking it up across sessions isn't a big deal - it can even increase expectation and excitement about coming next week for some players. And if the combat isn't challenging, interesting or exciting enough to sustain that interest then why are you running this combat at all in the first place?
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2020 09:08
|
|
|
tanglewood1420 posted:It's an inherent problem when running one shots, but in ongoing games I've never really seen it as an issue. Yeah, it's not so much an issue with with ongoing; I usually try to end my sessions at a clean break point, or when the next part is likely to run long past the usual stopping time. But I also tend to have a fair idea of how long each thing will take based on what the players have said they were going to do last session and assuming that they were still going to do that this session.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2020 10:46
|
|
|
Would it be possible to solve the one-shot Tyranny of the Clock issue by playing in real time? You have a 4 hour session length so make the story about solving some pressing issue in 4 hours (minus whatever setup time you need) and have all the indecision and arguing about what to do actually take away the time you need to do stuff. Would that be fun for most people or alienating if it’s your first experience with a system?
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2020 14:23
|
|
|
I think you'd need to pause the clock for interactions with the system.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2020 14:29
|
|
|
Xiahou Dun posted:No poo poo it's not gonna out of the box be a good simulator of Sense and Sensibilty*, just like a shovel isn't a good tool for chopping firewood. Good news ! https://ufopress.co.uk/our-games/what-ho-world/
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2020 15:02
|
|
|
CitizenKeen posted:Yes, if
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2020 15:59
|
|
|
hyphz posted:
mllaneza posted:Goon game designer Erika Chappell did one of these in her The Way Home, a PbtA based on Over the Garden Wall. Your stats are Cowardice, Distrust, Ignorance, Indulgence and Anger. You array is -2, -1, 0, +1, and +3. Ha, very nice. I believe the Dying Earth RPG (and its genericized sequel Skulduggery) does similar, the idea being that the real struggle to your character is whether they can stay on-task and accomplish their goals or be side-tracked by the temptation to indulge their gluttony, envy, pedantry, etc.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2020 17:17
|
|
|
Hyphz, I just wanna say that I love the idea of a guy whose idea of "Real Roleplaying (TM)" is when he goes "Okay, I roll 2d20 and take the highest, plus 2 from advantage, plus a d6 from Feat A, plus 36. That's a 50. Do I hit?" "Lol, you don't have to answer that. I know I hit. I've optimized my DEX so high that I only miss if I roll a 3 or less." "Now for damage, I'm rolling 4d10 plus 5d8 for sneak attack, plus an extra d8 for Feat B, plus 2d6 for this conditional bonus." "Now I reroll all the 1s and 2s." "Okay, that's, hmm... let's see... 67, plus 18 for DEX and proficiency, so 85 damage." (My friend's epic level 4e rogue was basically this. We would just move on to the next person's turn while he added up all his poo poo.)
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2020 21:46
|
|
|
garthoneeye posted:Would it be possible to solve the one-shot Tyranny of the Clock issue by playing in real time? Puppetland does the opposite - games can only last an hour, and the characters (Puppets come to life) are aware of this ticking clock. But time doesn't pass at the same rate in the game, its entirely a storytelling conceit. Also players are forbidden from speaking out of character, even to describe what they're doing. Everything must be said in character voice, so the whole thing ends up sounding like a bedtime story. "I'm really strong, of course I can smash through this gate!" etc
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2020 22:20
|
|
|
I'd love to see someone actually play Puppetland. It's such a strange beast.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2020 22:30
|
|
|
Serf posted:that's a real stupid thing to say, just so you know. utterly bizarre. macros are a timesaving feature, not some fundamental shift in how you play roleplaying games ooh i'm gonna say this isn't completely true. while i actually agree with you i've been told many times that the feeling of rolling dice is important so if that's true i can see that the feeling of adding up your bullshit can be important to someone especially in a VTT situation
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2020 12:16
|
|
|
Jimbozig posted:Hyphz, I just wanna say that I love the idea of a guy whose idea of "Real Roleplaying (TM)" is when he goes It's not adding up static bonuses, but dynamic ones. "Ok, +26 to hit, +1 for the Bard song, +3 for Embiggen, +2 for flanking.." But I'm not sure why he said this was important. The only vague thought I have is that having to remember to add, say +1 for the Bard song, also acts as a reminder to imagine a Bard singing; whereas if it's automatically rolled into a +1 that's managed by a macro it disappears.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2020 12:22
|
|
|
I can see that being a thing when the bonuses are something you "worked" for. When I played a 4e Rogue there were times where I got stupid stacks of bonuses and I really wanted to emphasise how extremely much I just hit that guy, especially when that guy was a jerk. These were exceptions though and in general I'm of the "I got at least 16 does it hit" school of rolling in binary systems
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2020 14:20
|
|
|
Splicer posted:I can see that being a thing when the bonuses are something you "worked" for. When I played a 4e Rogue there were times where I got stupid stacks of bonuses and I really wanted to emphasise how extremely much I just hit that guy, especially when that guy was a jerk. These were exceptions though and in general I'm of the "I got at least 16 does it hit" school of rolling in binary systems That's the trick - Pathfinder 2e isn't a binary system. Any roll of 10 over the DC counts as a crit, as well as a roll of 20. So stacking those bonuses high on to-hits can have a real effect, especially for The Warrior who built his character around crit-fishing (a very effective strategy in that system)
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2020 14:29
|
|
|
hyphz posted:That's the trick - Pathfinder 2e isn't a binary system. Any roll of 10 over the DC counts as a crit, as well as a roll of 20. So stacking those bonuses high on to-hits can have a real effect, especially for The Warrior who built his character around crit-fishing (a very effective strategy in that system)
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2020 14:35
|
|
|
Elfgames posted:ooh i'm gonna say this isn't completely true. while i actually agree with you i've been told many times that the feeling of rolling dice is important so if that's true i can see that the feeling of adding up your bullshit can be important to someone especially in a VTT situation i get that there's nothing better than the tactile feeling of rolling the dice. but adding everything up is a pain. especially when playing online where everything moves just a little slower than an in-person game due to the natural delay in audio and the awkward pauses as people try not to talk over one another. its small stuff but it adds up. so i'm in favor of automating everything that can be automated when playing online
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2020 14:59
|
|
|
Roll20 shows that you rolled a 47 on a d20, so how hard you hit the jerk is still right there. Some people drink coffee for the caffeine, some drink it as part of their ritual with the morning paper and special pancakes or whatever the hell and decaf is equally good, as long as they get to do All The Things in the Ritual. Many people are somewhere in the middle.The RPG versions of these people talk past each other all the time. I don't care much at all about rolling dice. If I could have one or two game sessions a week for the rest of my life on the condition that I never touch dice again (let alone add up all the modifiers), I wouldn't have to think twice about agreeing. Some people buy games just because they have a lot of dice, or unusual dice in them (!!).
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2020 16:54
|
|
|
I don't have a problem with macros making things more convenient to play. But I do worry that it could lead to some players just clicking the button but having no understanding of how any of the underlying game mechanics work. I don't know if this theoretical lack of understanding is actually even a problem, but something about it doesn't sit right with me.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2020 06:43
|
|
|
“Clicking a button and having no idea how the underlying game mechanics work” is, in my experience, very similar to how a lot of players play PnP games — just replace “clicking a button” with “rolling some dice and asking what happens.”
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2020 06:54
|
|
|
I think my hottest take for this particular line of discourse is: This is a situation in which Thac0 is actually superior to systems that use an ascending armour class, since the order of operations forces you to take your modifiers into account before you make the roll. Although, really, it's just an argument against having dozens of floating attack modifiers in your game.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2020 07:20
|
|
|
e: nm
Absurd Alhazred fucked around with this message at 20:18 on Jul 22, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2020 07:23
|
|
|
I definitely like systems where you work out the target number before rolling so you know if there's a success as soon as the die is rolled. That doesn't work with both positive modifiers and high rolls being good, unless there's some trick I've never seen. Low rolls good/positive mods good (like GURPS and all the D100 systems I've ever seen) or high rolls good/negative mods good (uhhh... Battletech and Mechwarrior 2E??? Anything else???) both let you do math then roll instead of roll then math. admanb posted:“Clicking a button and having no idea how the underlying game mechanics work” is, in my experience, very similar to how a lot of players play PnP games — just replace “clicking a button” with “rolling some dice and asking what happens.” I had a player like that in an in-person D&D campaign I was running before the pandemic. I inherited him when I took over for another GM who had to quit and for several sessions would roll the D20 and then it would be "okay then what" "add your attack modifier" "where's that" *player next to him leans over and points it out on the character sheet* I was going to have a gentle talk with him that he needs to at least read the rules cheat sheet I gave him because things shouldn't keep going on like that but he had to quit when his work schedule changed so problem solved. I've taught raw newbies who showed up for one shot nights how to play and they required less help than this guy after 15 minutes and I'm not even sure how that can happen. BattleMaster fucked around with this message at 08:55 on Jun 4, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2020 08:48
|
|
|
BattleMaster posted:I've taught raw newbies who showed up for one shot nights how to play and they required less help than this guy after 15 minutes and I'm not even sure how that can happen. quote:Muad'Dib learned rapidly because his first training was in how to learn. And the first lesson of all was the basic trust that he could learn. It's shocking to find how many people do not believe they can learn, and how many more believe learning to be difficult. Muad'Dib knew that every experience carries its lesson.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2020 08:59
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:Not really, because you could just subtract the attack modifiers from an ascending AC, so that higher numbers are still always better. I'm not totally sure what you mean by this. Higher numbers are always better with Thac0 as well, it's just that the enemy armour class is phrased as a modifier to your attack instead of a target number, so you want to work out your target number before you try to roll anything. BattleMaster posted:I definitely like systems where you work out the target number before rolling so you know if there's a success as soon as the die is rolled. That doesn't work with both positive modifiers and high rolls being good, unless there's some trick I've never seen. Technically, AD&D does high rolls good / negative mods good, because attack bonuses reduce your Thac0, but it's often phrased as a plus with the implicit understanding that plus means it's easier for you to hit, or that you can just add the bonus to the die roll instead of reducing the target number. It's much less consistent when talking about Armour Class, though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2020 09:10
|
|
|
Colonel Cool posted:I don't have a problem with macros making things more convenient to play. But I do worry that it could lead to some players just clicking the button but having no understanding of how any of the underlying game mechanics work. I don't know if this theoretical lack of understanding is actually even a problem, but something about it doesn't sit right with me. Having a perfect understanding of underlying game mechanics is in no way required to play a table top rpg. In fact, I'm willing to say that focusing too much on the underlying mechanics can cause issues as it steers your play towards what is "optimal" instead of what your character would do. Also, unless you've got the best memory I've ever seen I can say with complete confidence that you're playing *some* part of your system wrong, and that you've probably also changed some part of it on purpose. In general I'm willing to bet that a lot of people don't even have great grasps of the underlying systems, they just trust that things aren't traps, and that the super nerd in the group will keep them from messing something up or the GM won't be a dick and let them re-do stuff if its just not working. It may not sit right with you because system mastery is sort of like a puzzle, and it feels like they're just throwing the pieces in a pile, shuffling them a bit and saying "good enough!". Also Thac0 is dumb.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2020 09:21
|
|
|
BattleMaster posted:I had a player like that in an in-person D&D campaign I was running before the pandemic. I inherited him when I took over for another GM who had to quit and for several sessions would roll the D20 and then it would be "okay then what" "add your attack modifier" "where's that" *player next to him leans over and points it out on the character sheet* I put a call out on my FB for people to play Troika! and one of the responders was someone who when I last ran a game for them was like this. I am not, at the moment, running Troika! because it was an actively unfun gaming experience.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2020 09:52
|
|
|
BattleMaster posted:I've taught raw newbies who showed up for one shot nights how to play and they required less help than this guy after 15 minutes and I'm not even sure how that can happen. Doesn't matter how small the minimum effort is, someone will somehow want to play without expending quite that much effort.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2020 11:08
|
|
|
Elector_Nerdlingen posted:Doesn't matter how small the minimum effort is, someone will somehow want to play without expending quite that much effort. Then, to be quite blunt, they can gently caress off, because everyone else is putting effort in.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2020 11:18
|
|
|
Absolutely, yes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2020 11:34
|
|
|
In my experience macros accelerate learning game systems, not stymie it. Pressing a button and having a complete readout of what an ability does gives everyone at the "table" an immediate refresher on what your character is capable of, which is generally going to cement that information pretty quickly for a lot of players.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2020 12:10
|
|
|
Countblanc posted:In my experience macros accelerate learning game systems, not stymie it. Pressing a button and having a complete readout of what an ability does gives everyone at the "table" an immediate refresher on what your character is capable of, which is generally going to cement that information pretty quickly for a lot of players. The spell ones are great for just pasting the text of the spell in chat. The die roll ones usually just give you a total modifier and a final result from what I remember.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2020 13:17
|
|
|
Countblanc posted:In my experience macros accelerate learning game systems, not stymie it. Pressing a button and having a complete readout of what an ability does gives everyone at the "table" an immediate refresher on what your character is capable of, which is generally going to cement that information pretty quickly for a lot of players. This and hoverable tooltips on the character sheet are what finally got the one guy in my main group who only plays D&D to not only play, but enjoy and understand, FitD games. I know from past experience that he'd just kinda fail to hold the system (any system other than D&D or a derivative) in his memory, and keep searching for things in the book and going ahhhhhh ummmmmm I, ummmmm while gazing at a cheat sheet, but having it all up on the screen to click let him be a bit more confident that he was doing it right, and after a few sessions it stuck and he's negotiating position and effect like a champ. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 14:28 on Jun 4, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2020 14:25
|
|
|
e: nm
Absurd Alhazred fucked around with this message at 20:18 on Jul 22, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2020 15:39
|
|
|
I kind of loved how Stars Without Number 1st edition did it. d20 + target's armour class + combat skill + stat modifier + attack bonus. If the result is 20+ then you hit.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2020 15:47
|
|
|
Elector_Nerdlingen posted:This and hoverable tooltips on the character sheet are what finally got the one guy in my main group who only plays D&D to not only play, but enjoy and understand, FitD games.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2020 15:47
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:No, they're not. If your AC is higher in AD&D2 and before, you are easier to hit, which is bad for you. That is why ascending AC is better, because it goes with everything else being better for you if it is higher, like HP, ability scores, attack modifiers, damage modifiers, most if not all other aspects of the game. Oh, right, I thought we were talking about attack rolls, rather than AC. 2e kept it consistent in that everything except HP and damage rolls were better the lower they were, but I agree that higher numbers being better is more intuitive.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2020 16:06
|
|
|
e: nm
Absurd Alhazred fucked around with this message at 20:18 on Jul 22, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2020 16:09
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:What else was better lower? I know AD&D 1E had a billion weird tables you rolled on for things like saving throws and bending bars and whatever, but I think it would be in ascending percentiles, so you'd have to roll under to succeed, which still meant that bigger was better.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2020 16:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 03:26 |
|
|
e: nm
Absurd Alhazred fucked around with this message at 20:18 on Jul 22, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2020 16:21
|
|