Siege Of Bordrin's Watch OOC - Page 9

DEFCON 1 · 16th July 2009, 05:42 PM

Hey folks, I dunno how many of you have done numerous encounters using the 4E rules in PbP... but from what little I've seen, I'm wondering whether encounters might be a little too long using 4E? Because of all the shifting of players/monsters each phase during initiative, the question of whether additional attack bonuses are active due to power use etc... all of which require the PbP DM to post results more frequently during a round of combat than he did in 3E... I have a suspicion that running a 4E encounter in PbP might be longer than is truly interesting for the players.

Does anyone have any opinions on this, and their previous 4E PbP encounter experience?

And just so you are all aware... if we were to decide that combat per encounter was too long, here is precisely what I would use as the house-rule (so you can all take that into account when making your decision). All hit points for monsters *and* players would be cut in half (along with the resultant halving of bloodied and surge values as well).

What this does is make individual weapon swings and spell attacks more important, because they will be taking off a higher proportion of a monster/player's hit points. A critical hit might easily be very critical, as you could conceivably drop someone to bloodied on a single swing (or a bloodied character to unconscious). It will make healing more important, plus it will really put players healing surges to full use.

The most important thing though is that it is the most simple solution (only changing at most three numbers - hit point value, bloodied value, surge value), and which will cut down encounter length by perhaps 50 percent. And as this particular module we are running has a goodly number of combat encounters lined up in a row... speeding the encounters up I believe would be a good thing.

So please let us know your experiences thus far in 4E PbP combat and whether you think we should speed things up. If you are unsure, I am also quite happy to run the first encounter you guys hit as a regular one with standard HP totals, and then we can make a determination after it completes whether or not we want to halve HPs to speed up subsequent ones. It all depends on ease-of-play and what makes for most interesting combat. Thanx guys!

EvolutionKB · 16th July 2009, 07:29 PM

I don't think combats take to long. Bonuses and hp, etc are easy to track if players help out by typing out a combat block. One of the things several DMs do is to put down the stats of the monsters and let init go crazy. In a party of 5 pcs, 3 beat the monsters in init. So those 3 go, resolving actions in posting order, the monsters go, the all the PCs go again, in posting order, then the monsters. That way you don't have to wait around for init. See Charwoman Gene's scales of war game for an example.

renau1g · 16th July 2009, 08:28 PM

As long as the DM & PC's are ok with a bit of knowledge of the monster stats then it's a fine way of doing it, although it does lend itself to choosing the right attack for the monster.

I do agree with Evo that I don't really find combat to be too long but I do suggest group the monster together with 1 init roll for them. I am running a L4W game and I don't find it too long. The first combat took a couple weeks, but that's not long in PbP terms. The only time I find combat takes a while is against a solo (which I'm trying something a bit different but can't yet reveal it)

DEFCON 1 · 16th July 2009, 09:55 PM

I had figured on doing the one init roll for all monsters just for ease-of-use, and since you both also recommend it, I'll definitely be doing it. And I'll probably also do what Evo recommended, which is get the first people taken care of in Round 1 and then the monsters (treating them like a pseudo-Round 0), and then write all subsequent rounds as if the monsters were at the bottom of the init list. That way everyone can easily track who goes when and what they do, all prior to the monsters going. Thanx guys!

EvolutionKB · 17th July 2009, 03:25 PM

No prob! Just wanted to say that I'm enjoying this game so far. I'm ready to see how the monk compared to other strikers in combat.

renau1g · 17th July 2009, 07:32 PM

I know I'm interested in it as well.

Insight · 19th July 2009, 04:39 AM

Just wanted to point out that you get *one* action in a surprise round, not your full slate of actions.

The Digger · 19th July 2009, 05:22 AM

Oops! Good point.

renau1g · 20th July 2009, 04:26 PM

Although that's normally the way it is, I believe Defcon said we get a full set of actions for overcoming the skill challenge

DEFCON 1 · 20th July 2009, 05:43 PM

ren's correct. The skill challenge reward (and choosing the tunnel) gave you all a complete set of surprise round actions, and then you all lucked out by having the orcs roll absolutely horribly om their initiative roll, thereby giving you your complete set of first round actions before they get to act.

The Digger · 20th July 2009, 06:27 PM

Shoot! And I editted out my javelin attack on the first orc...

The Digger · 20th July 2009, 08:46 PM

...or at least I thought I did.

Anyway congrats to Defcon - that combat went swimmingly well I though.

stonegod · 20th July 2009, 09:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Digger

...or at least I thought I did.

Anyway congrats to Defcon - that combat went swimmingly well I though.

Its not over yet.

Post later tonight; gotta work now.

DEFCON 1 · 20th July 2009, 09:23 PM

Heh... you needn't worry, Digger... I got your back! I read the javelin throw previously and knew that was our starting point for the combat. But as stonegod said... it ain't over yet! LOL!

BTW folks... just so you all know how I'm ruling it... descending the staircases are like moving over regular squares... however ascending any staircases will be considered difficult terrain (i.e. 2 squares of movement to go 1 square).

Once stonegod has Dorn go this evening, and then I plug in Insight's round, I'll move us back to the top of the initiative order. Everybody feel free to edit your Round One actions based upon what has happened already and what you expecting will probably occur in the few spots ahead of you.

Oh yeah! And finally... if any of you want to do your own rolling on Invisible Castle (as some of you already have)... that's cool with me. I'm more than happy to roll for you, but if you prefer to see how you do and like to roll your own, I'll just plug your rolls into your spot in the order. However, bear in mind that I'll use the rolls you post even if your action ends up having to change because of what occurs ahead of you (like what happened this time with Tregar, where I used his rolls against the first orc that Henry ended up killing, and plugged them into the secondary target).

Which means if you think you might end up wanting to change some decisions based upon marks, flanks, and statuses that occur before you in the order, don't bother rolling the dice until I've gotten a chance to post everything that occurs up to your point. Just put a placeholder post that says you're waiting for the update, that way I know to write everything out and change the map for you so you can be fully updated to make your decision.

Thanx folks!

Insight · 21st July 2009, 03:43 AM

Feel free to edit Gloomblade's actions depending on what happens earlier in the round. This goes for this combat or any other. I'd much rather have combats go smoothly (and quickly) than wait on me to post an edited action.

Insight · 22nd July 2009, 04:14 AM

oopsie

renau1g · 22nd July 2009, 05:46 AM

I am in the habit of rolling the rolls for my pcs on IC and linking, it allows me to add a bit more to the fluff that way.

EvolutionKB · 22nd July 2009, 06:18 PM

Are we going in post order or init order? Just checking, because you mentioned we might in the ooc thread, but we've been going by init order thus far.

renau1g · 22nd July 2009, 07:29 PM

Not sure, but I'd assume init order (else that wouldn't really matter right?).

P.S. I hope I gave you a breather Evo

P.P.S - anyone else think it's weird that a half-orc might be the best monk of the path they haven't revealed (Str-based) as they get the +2 Str/Dex...just odd to me.

DEFCON 1 · 22nd July 2009, 10:08 PM

I'm posting people in initiative order, but if folks believe their actions will not change or be predicated on what happens during the PC's turns before them, I'm okay with you all posting early. Just bear in mind though that if what you posted earlier still makes sense for the most part when your turn comes up, I'll probably use what you've already done (making small tweaks as necessary), rather than wait on you to "edit" your post once the people in front have gone. Unless of course your action was rendered completely useless, in which case I'll probably post up until your action so you can edit.

But I think for the most part, whatever attack actions you post will usually still be effective.

Quote:

anyone else think it's weird that a half-orc might be the best monk of the path they haven't revealed (Str-based) as they get the +2 Str/Dex...just odd to me.

It's for this reason that for any game I DM, I use the "maximum of 18, including racial bonuses" house-rule. Because that way, every race can have a highest score in their primary stat (although for those who have 'off-stats', they'll just not have as many points left over for their secondary or tertiary abilities).