D
dco
Guest
If I call a fight then I'm doing something wrong.
Do you ever "call" fights?
- Thread starter Bootlebat
- Start date
Garthanos
Arcadian Knight
Short answer is yes... longer answer I was first inspired when reading Amber Diceless Roleplaying. The game had a concept you might call sliding detail. In 4e some fights might be simplified down to a skill challenge. But in a more concrete way just having bad guys decide to cut and run often works fine with my non-murder hobo players.
Eltab
Lord of the Hidden Layer
I have called fights when the PCs were clearly winning and Team Monster had no more tricks up their sleeves.
Or when the PCs were clearly winning and FLGS' Closing Time was approaching fast.
It does end the session on a moderate note rather than the high note of victory.
Or when the PCs were clearly winning and FLGS' Closing Time was approaching fast.
It does end the session on a moderate note rather than the high note of victory.
pming
Legend
Hiya!
Depending on game system, yes, absolutely. In both "ways" as well (e.g., Players win OR Players loose).
In fact, I've used this tactic to great effect to curb "munchkinism" back in the day of 2e (we played that version for about 2 years or little longer). Someone, usually a new player from another game group, would bring in some complete monstrosity that took so many liberties with the rules it should be charged with a crime. You know the type: "Here's my 7th level Paladin. I have +14 to hit and +20 on damage with BOTH my two handed swords...which I can use one-handed and get 2 attacks a round with, each!". Rather than just laugh at him/her, I'd just start "dictating" fights.
DM: "Ok, so that's the round then, next..."
Munchkin Player: "Wait! I didn't go this round!"
DM: "Ohhh, right...Ok, you kill four orcs. Now everyone roll initiative for next round"
Munchkin Player: "Don't I have to roll?"
DM: "Dude, you can't miss except on a one and you can't NOT kill them when you hit. You roll 1d20, 1d20, 1d20, 1d20, and then you roll 1d10, 1d10, 1d10, 1d10. That's a lot of rolling for the almost guaranteed effect of hearing 'it dies'. It's just wasting time"
Munchkin Player: "But...er..."
...then after the game...
Munchkin Player: "I didn't roll a single to-hit roll that session, you know. It was really boring. I want to roll next time. It's more exciting".
DM: "Then make a new character that doesn't have four attacks a round at +14/+20. Make a normal character that has +3/+5 and has, at most, 3/2 for attack rate. Then you'll be rolling all the time"
Seriously had to do this twice (or thrice?) in my DM'ing career. Each time the Player brought in a new PC of reasonable power and each time the player ended up enjoying the game MUCH more and stayed with us for years.
OH, and when I do say "You all die", I will usually follow that up with a question of "Is that ok with you guys?". Then I explain the situation from the DM side of things and the players typically, not always, will say "Yeah, ok...narrate away and then we'll get rolling on new PC's".
^_^
Paul L. Ming
Depending on game system, yes, absolutely. In both "ways" as well (e.g., Players win OR Players loose).
In fact, I've used this tactic to great effect to curb "munchkinism" back in the day of 2e (we played that version for about 2 years or little longer). Someone, usually a new player from another game group, would bring in some complete monstrosity that took so many liberties with the rules it should be charged with a crime. You know the type: "Here's my 7th level Paladin. I have +14 to hit and +20 on damage with BOTH my two handed swords...which I can use one-handed and get 2 attacks a round with, each!". Rather than just laugh at him/her, I'd just start "dictating" fights.
DM: "Ok, so that's the round then, next..."
Munchkin Player: "Wait! I didn't go this round!"
DM: "Ohhh, right...Ok, you kill four orcs. Now everyone roll initiative for next round"
Munchkin Player: "Don't I have to roll?"
DM: "Dude, you can't miss except on a one and you can't NOT kill them when you hit. You roll 1d20, 1d20, 1d20, 1d20, and then you roll 1d10, 1d10, 1d10, 1d10. That's a lot of rolling for the almost guaranteed effect of hearing 'it dies'. It's just wasting time"
Munchkin Player: "But...er..."
...then after the game...
Munchkin Player: "I didn't roll a single to-hit roll that session, you know. It was really boring. I want to roll next time. It's more exciting".
DM: "Then make a new character that doesn't have four attacks a round at +14/+20. Make a normal character that has +3/+5 and has, at most, 3/2 for attack rate. Then you'll be rolling all the time"
Seriously had to do this twice (or thrice?) in my DM'ing career. Each time the Player brought in a new PC of reasonable power and each time the player ended up enjoying the game MUCH more and stayed with us for years.
OH, and when I do say "You all die", I will usually follow that up with a question of "Is that ok with you guys?". Then I explain the situation from the DM side of things and the players typically, not always, will say "Yeah, ok...narrate away and then we'll get rolling on new PC's".
^_^
Paul L. Ming
Kjeran_der_Unheilig
Explorer
I did it the other night. But it would have been pointless to roll it out. Our venue was closing in 15 minutes, the enemy CL5 was down as was his 4 CL2 acolytes, 12 skeletons, and 10 zombies. If 8 PC's can't take down 2 zombies, they're doing something wrong!
Olaf the Stout
Hero
I've done it on occasions. Normally when the combat doesn't have any major implications on the plot and it is obvious what the outcome will be. Seems silly to waste time rolling dice when the outcome is already determined.
I
Immortal Sun
Guest
If the players are already engaged in the fight, no.
If it's something meaningless but what came up on the random encounter chart, yes.
If it's something meaningless but what came up on the random encounter chart, yes.
Yes, I might say - "Days later, after a few brushes with goblins..." but I wouldn't engage the combat mechanics and then disengage them with "ok so you kill the last goblin".
Lanefan
Victoria Rules
Looks like there's two different definitions of "calling fights" going in here.
One is to have the foes disengage and flee. That's not calling a fight, that's just having those creatures do something that seems reasonable given the circumstances. I do this whenever it makes sense.
The other is to just declare "OK, you guys win, no need to play out the rest of the fight." in order to skip the mopping-up phase of a won combat. I never do this. Every swing might fumble, every spell has to be accounted for, and by the way how many arrows or bolts do you use? Yes, resource management is a thing around here.
If the players want to skip the mopping-up phase they could always try to get the clearly-beaten foes to surrender, assuming any intelligence on the foes' part...but this almost never happens, as taking prisoners means the PCs then have to take care of said prisoners as well as guard them - too much of a headache.
One is to have the foes disengage and flee. That's not calling a fight, that's just having those creatures do something that seems reasonable given the circumstances. I do this whenever it makes sense.
The other is to just declare "OK, you guys win, no need to play out the rest of the fight." in order to skip the mopping-up phase of a won combat. I never do this. Every swing might fumble, every spell has to be accounted for, and by the way how many arrows or bolts do you use? Yes, resource management is a thing around here.
If the players want to skip the mopping-up phase they could always try to get the clearly-beaten foes to surrender, assuming any intelligence on the foes' part...but this almost never happens, as taking prisoners means the PCs then have to take care of said prisoners as well as guard them - too much of a headache.
Similar Threads
AD6_gamerati_skyscraper
Recent & Upcoming Releases
-
April 16 2024 -
May 31 2024 -
June 3 2024 -
June 4 2024 -
June 18 2024 -
July 16 2024 -
September 17 2024 -
October 1 2024 -
November 12 2024 -
February 18 2025
