Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
Promotions/Press
4 Elements at the Core of 4e
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Janx" data-source="post: 7652063" data-attributes="member: 8835"><p>Some quibbles first:</p><p></p><p>In the Water section, second paragraph, the last sentence is uncompleted. It simply starts "You can also "</p><p></p><p>Can you confirm (or revise the text to include) that the GM also needs 9+ to-hit players?</p><p></p><p>I raise that, because it seems fishy that declared facts state the players need 9+ and kill monsters on 6 hits, and monsters kill players in 5 hits.</p><p></p><p>It's not explicitly stated what the monsters need to hit, though later text assumes it is also 9+. This would imply the monsters kill the players more often than the players kill monsters, since they both have the same odds of success but the monsters need fewer hits to win.</p><p></p><p>I suspect the monsters actually have a higher to-hit requirement (shooting more like storm troopers). I don't do 4e, so I couldn't say for sure, merely that the article's assessment seemed off.</p><p></p><p>Other than that, it's an interesting article. I see some useful simplified gaming concepts for anybody designing a game. Namely, how hard to make things.</p><p></p><p>Making success be "slightly better" than 50/50 keeps players happy. It also supports James Ernest's design point of making games be mostly luck, with a slight advantage going to somebody who plays smart. Keeping the odds of success near the 50/50 line helps enable that.</p><p></p><p>Keeping a combat (or any other challenge) constrained to 6 rounds on average, helps with pacing. Fights on TV don't last a whole episode either. if your game mechanics don't bog down within the round, then fights will feel fast paced.</p><p></p><p>For my own game designs, I have another rule of thumb. A player doesn't want to wait for more than 4 actions by other players before his own turn. This is why, in even relatively simple games, they feel like they are too slow when there are 6 or more players at that table (that's N-1 actions I have to wait for before I get to act). Complex games with multiple actions, are eating away at this budget of "waiting for my turn."</p><p></p><p>So, taking the lessons from 4elemental here, we could make a very fast-play RPG where each player gets one action per turn, needs 9+ to succeed, and 6 successes to overcome the current encounter challenge.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Janx, post: 7652063, member: 8835"] Some quibbles first: In the Water section, second paragraph, the last sentence is uncompleted. It simply starts "You can also " Can you confirm (or revise the text to include) that the GM also needs 9+ to-hit players? I raise that, because it seems fishy that declared facts state the players need 9+ and kill monsters on 6 hits, and monsters kill players in 5 hits. It's not explicitly stated what the monsters need to hit, though later text assumes it is also 9+. This would imply the monsters kill the players more often than the players kill monsters, since they both have the same odds of success but the monsters need fewer hits to win. I suspect the monsters actually have a higher to-hit requirement (shooting more like storm troopers). I don't do 4e, so I couldn't say for sure, merely that the article's assessment seemed off. Other than that, it's an interesting article. I see some useful simplified gaming concepts for anybody designing a game. Namely, how hard to make things. Making success be "slightly better" than 50/50 keeps players happy. It also supports James Ernest's design point of making games be mostly luck, with a slight advantage going to somebody who plays smart. Keeping the odds of success near the 50/50 line helps enable that. Keeping a combat (or any other challenge) constrained to 6 rounds on average, helps with pacing. Fights on TV don't last a whole episode either. if your game mechanics don't bog down within the round, then fights will feel fast paced. For my own game designs, I have another rule of thumb. A player doesn't want to wait for more than 4 actions by other players before his own turn. This is why, in even relatively simple games, they feel like they are too slow when there are 6 or more players at that table (that's N-1 actions I have to wait for before I get to act). Complex games with multiple actions, are eating away at this budget of "waiting for my turn." So, taking the lessons from 4elemental here, we could make a very fast-play RPG where each player gets one action per turn, needs 9+ to succeed, and 6 successes to overcome the current encounter challenge. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
Promotions/Press
4 Elements at the Core of 4e
Top