Idea on keeping Vancian casters from novaing

[ZombieRoboNinja]

Alternative solution to this "problem": You could not worry about what happens in campaigns you aren't in.

Is it a really a problem that some people run harder campaigns and some run easier campaigns? Is it wrongbadfun if I want to sometimes allow the players to set the pace, and other times put them in a time-bound situation where they can't set the pace? If I think it's fun to have resource management challenges like limited spell casting, encumbrance rules, and ammo counting in my game?

It seems like the bar for arguing "everyone must always conform to my vision of the appropriate number of encounters per pay" should be really high.

Grr... this is actually my exact point! With the rule I suggested in the OP, ideally, Bob can let his group face one encounter a day without having the wizard dominate the combat. Class balance would no longer be completely dependent on the seemingly unrelated factor of how many encounters the party faces between rests.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

*scratches his head* I can't even imagine how it would happen in about half of the RPGs out there.

Especially if you look at non-fantasy games and games that weren't D&D derivative (a surprisingly tough restriction, I realize).

Any RPG with ablative resources- ammo, spells, whatever- can run afoul of the 15 minute workday if the game master puts the game world on hold so the PCs can rest & recuperate without penalty.

The first non-D&D example that I heard of was in a mundane Special-Ops type game some guys were in. Whenever the demolitions guy ran out of stuff, they retreated and camped until he could replenish his stock. They would absolutely not advance unless the guy with the most potential punch had something significant to contribute beyond using his Colt .45 or combat knife.

In a Supers game I heard of, it cropped up when the team gadgeteer was kitted out with entirely the wrong set of stuff and had to find a lab to swap out gizmos. The party sidetracked the entire day of gaming to get him the resources he needed to be fully contributory, so nothing was accomplished in terms of achieving the mission that session.

In a space opera campaign, what controlled the PCs progress was the number of energy packs they had for their weapons. Since the big weapons drained the packs the fastest, they would retreat when they only had enough packs to power the small arms for a couple of combats.

 

[keterys]

I think I haven't played enough games where ammo was a real thing (as opposed to the 'Make sure you grab lots and lots and we're good' style). Or where you had a couple rocket launcher type things, but could replace them trivially, and not as part of a mission.

For example, I don't think I've played a Spec Ops game that wasn't almost defined entirely by mission. You figure out your mission, you spec your gear out, you go in. You don't hop out mid-mission for another grenade.

Even then, _consumables_ are usually a different beast from renewable time based resources. Like if folks are burning potions and charges from a wand, that's quite a different thing than just resting after every combat.

I've never played a Supers game that let you rearrange your abilities by spending notable amounts of time, though I have played flexible power pool ones.

I have played games where people spent time to secure resources in terms of allies, arranging tactical advantage, etc. But not at all in the 15-minute day style.

And some of that may be system choice, again. For example, in HERO you set your abilities with points. Heading off with time doesn't really buy you much. In FATE penalties largely go away in thematic time, and you spend the same resource to generate an advantage during a combat as you do ahead of time.

Palladium? Well, yeah, people cared about gear. And their powers. And it's clearly influenced by early D&D, too. Rolemaster? Yep. Earthdawn? Less so, which is interesting. Shadowrun? Same mission thing as mentioned before, but less so as well. GURPs? Not so much. Replace a destroyed armor or need to get healed cause of a bad fight I've seen, but nothing like 'Well, I can fire two shots a day, so I go home after the first battle I fire in'

 

[Elf Witch]

Alternative solution to this "problem": You could not worry about what happens in campaigns you aren't in.

Is it a really a problem that some people run harder campaigns and some run easier campaigns? Is it wrongbadfun if I want to sometimes allow the players to set the pace, and other times put them in a time-bound situation where they can't set the pace? If I think it's fun to have resource management challenges like limited spell casting, encumbrance rules, and ammo counting in my game?

It seems like the bar for arguing "everyone must always conform to my vision of the appropriate number of encounters per pay" should be really high.

For the record I don't think there is a hard fast rule to any of this. Sometimes it is okay to let them nova rest and go from there.

Random encounters are great for pacing or if the players seem to be getting antsy or bored. But you don't have use them if you don't want to and there is no hard fast rule of how many. I roll every watch but I am not a slave to it a lot of times I roll and just ignore it. I like to keep my players on their toes. You always have their attention when you start rolling dice.

I think being varied in what you do makes the game more interesting for everyone.


Not every campaign needs a you have X amount of time to accomplish the goals are the world ends.

And you can use more organic ways to light a fire under a slow moving party's rump. Simple things like weather can be useful. The caves of dragons sit in the middle of the burning sands which can only be safely crossed for a few weeks every year. Or winter is coming the mountain passes will become impassable until spring thaw.

Sometimes it can be something like the party does not want to miss the big spring festival and games so they won't get things done as fast as possible.

Another thing I have done is to add in some friendly competition. A rival adventuring party that is after the same goal.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I've never played a Supers game that let you rearrange your abilities by spending notable amounts of time, though I have played flexible power pool ones.

<snip>

And some of that may be system choice, again. For example, in HERO you set your abilities with points. Heading off with time doesn't really buy you much.

Actually, in HERO, a Variable Power Pool with the limitation that its slots can only be changed in your laboratory is a common way to simulate Vancian casters and certain kinds of gear-centered supers. I see it a lot with "Batman" types who can prepare for any threat...with time.

(As I recall, those may have even been the examples they cited when VPPs were first introduced.)

 

[Elf Witch]

Grr... this is actually my exact point! With the rule I suggested in the OP, ideally, Bob can let his group face one encounter a day without having the wizard dominate the combat. Class balance would no longer be completely dependent on the seemingly unrelated factor of how many encounters the party faces between rests.

Your rule which is fine for people who want things like this, it not something I want in my game. I like sometimes pushing a party until they are low on resources and have to be creative with what is left.

I like the organic feel of sometimes the wizards uses up all his spells and sometimes he goes to bed fully armed.

I also think there are different style of playing wizards. Some players like going nova and then using other means to make it through the day some like me like the challenge of what spell to use and when to use them.

If your party likes going nova then resting then let them do that craft the game sound that play style.

 

[billd91]

I've never played a Supers game that let you rearrange your abilities by spending notable amounts of time, though I have played flexible power pool ones.

That's not terribly common since most superheroes have more set abilities. However, some supers games (Champions and Villains and Vigilantes) have ablative health resources that take time to recover (Body and Hit Points, respectively) as well as short term recovery ones (Endurance and Stun for Champions, Power for V&V). You can definitely see a 15 minute day for those games.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Not only that, in HERO, " X uses per day" is a common power limitation for mundane or exotic ammo , battle suit powers, spells, and so forth- especially for agents- at least in part to get around End costs for flashier powers.

 

[keterys]

... and now I find myself remembering Robotech Missile Swarms.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

... and now I find myself remembering Robotech Missile Swarms.

Those were fun, though, weren't they?

I even modeled some HERO PC abilities on that: a small EB or RKA (15-20 points), OIF, "X uses/day" (with X being a big number- 25, 50, 100 depending on campaign point limits), AoE Explosion (with bigger radius), increased KB (or Piercing), autofire, all uses must be fired simultaneously and aimed at same target.

Intentionally bought in such a way as to be woefully inaccurate, that power could cover the entire battlefield field with a huge number of overlapping explosions. The main target might only be directly hit once or twice, but the overlapping explosions would knock the Z-jesus* out of him and his minions...













* "Z-jesus" is far beyond "bejesus"