Flavour First vs Game First - a comparison

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Or just house rule it until it works for you. I don't really get why people complain about something they can easily change - especially with now 4 editions and their sub-editions to mine for ideas and mechanics.

I still don't know how we could here, anwayway. It's obvious that 3E is to lethal for some, hence they prefer 4E.

But how did flavour first vs game first or healing surge mechanics play into this? Or how does this play into that?

I am confused, but I can't shake off the feeling it's my own fault.

 

[Raven Crowking]

This may not be everyone's style. Whats wrong with tea and small talk?
[sarcasm off]

Ok this does bring up a fine point. Assuming the party did parley with the orc, and the conflict came to combat, the same thing could happen.

In a flavor vs game sense D&D is supposed to be a game with (hopefully) some flavor. If we see hit points as an abstraction and "hits" taken as a gradual wearing down of moxie and not wounds per se, then WHY do we need critical HITS!

Because they are FUN!!?

I don't think critical hits or bloated hit point totals are needed for fun gameplay.

As far as "save or suck" effects go, thier impact on having fun is proportionate to the time it takes to play out a combat.

If the combat takes the whole friggin session because everything has a ton of HP of course its unfun to rendered "ineffective" for the fight.

If combats are resolved in thirty minutes of real time or less, being held, paralyzed, ect for a good portion of that fight isn't so terrible and its FUN to be able to do the same to the bad guys.

You might want to check out my free, all-or-mostly OGC game when it's done.

RC

 

[Raven Crowking]

Nope. I think it's a pretty safe assumption, though.

But it is an assumption.

"If the situation looks dire, the slinger shrieks, "Irontooth must be warned!" and runs into the lair to alert those within. If the PCs are unable to kill the kobold before it enters the lair, the slinger succeeds at warning the kobolds inside."

Nice of the slinger to shriek a warning to the PCs so that they know what is expected of them. You're right, nothing artificial here.

If he needs to get into the lair to warn them, I don't think they can see or hear through it.

So, they can neither see nor hear through the waterfall, no matter how loud the combat, no matter how loud the shrieking slinger (who the PCs, presumably, can automatically hear). Again, nothing artificial here.

Moreover, knowing that they cannot see or hear through the waterfall, they have no one stationed to alert them as soon as something happens? I miss the days when orcs used gongs to warn the complex of approaching enemies, and then took appropriate steps to defeat them/run away.

I did miss the box that says that "The creatures inside the lair ... do not emerge to engage the PCs, believing the outside guards can handle them." It goes on to say that they will attack if PCs enter.

So, the creatures inside the lair believe that the outside guards can handle the PCs, and also do not know about the PCs?



Maybe not so safe an assumption after all.....

This doesn't seem too stupid to me; I can buy it.

Whatever floats your boat, man. But that sounds very 2e-modulish to me.

RC

 

[ExploderWizard]

You might want to check out my free, all-or-mostly OGC game when it's done.

RC

Sounds good. I am working on my own system too. I am taking the Basic D&D engine and going to town playing with it. Maybe we can fork this over to a " Design your own D&D" thread where folks can discuss reworking game mechanics and getting feedback on ideas? Any interest?

 

[tomBitonti]

Sounds good. I am working on my own system too. I am taking the Basic D&D engine and going to town playing with it. Maybe we can fork this over to a " Design your own D&D" thread where folks can discuss reworking game mechanics and getting feedback on ideas? Any interest?

I'm all for that!

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Sounds good. I am working on my own system too. I am taking the Basic D&D engine and going to town playing with it. Maybe we can fork this over to a " Design your own D&D" thread where folks can discuss reworking game mechanics and getting feedback on ideas? Any interest?

Dude, it's an entire forum - D&D House Rules! I'd suggest working more goal-oriented. If you start with "Design your own D&D", you'll never agree on anything. At least a mission statement, like "Goal of this thread is to discuss a "simulationist/tactician" variant of D&D that features short, possibly dangerous combats.

That would warn people like me: "Oh, short combats? I like combats! How am I supposed to fill an entire session with so many combats? No thanks...". And don't be afraid to do shameless plugs, if topics like this come up and you identify people of your mind, link to your thread/blog...

 

[Raven Crowking]

Sounds good. I am working on my own system too. I am taking the Basic D&D engine and going to town playing with it. Maybe we can fork this over to a " Design your own D&D" thread where folks can discuss reworking game mechanics and getting feedback on ideas? Any interest?

Link it when you do it.


Oh, and due to a forked thread by MerricB, just to be clear:

I am not sure how what I said turned into the "startling suggestion that 4e has been designed so that characters won't die".

I certainly said that I don't find healing surges to be a good mechanic, due to simulation problems, and I offered some alternatives. And I certainly responded to Hussar's outrage that he should have to have his "fun" abrogated by the consequences of his decisions.

Saying that the game he seems to want seems to be Candyland =/= saying 4e is Candyland.

If you examine my posts concerning the 4e combat system, even going back before the release, based upon what was revealed as it was revealed, you will see that I have said that I expect (once the initial shine of 4e wears off) that it will be deadlier than 3e. This is because the shift in paradigm narrows the window of what a "challenging" fight is. Once players get used to the system, they are bound to see that anything outside that window is meaningless in terms of the game, pushing the DM to create ever more deadly encounters to engage them.

Conversely, 4e hasn't gotten rid of the "prop the players up" meme that appeared in 2e. Like 3e, the design paradigm seems to have goals that are sometimes in conflict with each other. The result is that it is quite easy (in either system) to create games that offer no real challenge to the players.

The binary nature of "Really deadly or really easy" is made worse by a move away from the attrition-based paradigm, which limits the amount to which less dire consequences than death affect the PCs. Likewise, clear-cut encounters (as opposed to the chance of wandering monsters extending an encounter beyond PC expectations) limit the amount to which less dire encounters affect the PCs.

Ultimately, I believe that once the "shine" has worn off 4e, it will tend to produce campaigns that are either overwhelmingly deadly or overwhelmingly safe. The design seems (IMHO) to offer very little middle ground between these extremes.

Of course, I may be wrong. The future will tell. It always does.


RC


Oh, yeah, and Aaarrrr! It be talk like a scurvy pirate day, ye boyos!

 

[Mallus]

I certainly said that I don't find healing surges to be a good mechanic, due to simulation problems... snip

Let me ask you this RC...

What are you simulating with D&D? (should we fork this?)

Personally, when I play RPG's, I'm simulating the world inside certain kinds of fiction/film/television. The kind full of high adventure, ass-kicking, and wild contrivance. So Healing Surges -- in all there John McClane glory -- actually allow me to simulate the thing I'm trying to simulate better.

 

[Greg K]

Hot Pursuit is a nice package, though, for running chase scenes in 3e, if that helps.

And, it only costs a $1 for the pdf (as does it's companion, Hot Pursuit:On Foot!). Great stuff. Although, I am disapointed that Adamant has decided to discontinue these items rather than update these products to be OGL as the books are useful in other d20 based games.

 

[GlaziusF]

On the other hand, this is partly a problem of players not really thinking through the possibilties of an encounter. If you are facing off with a strong looking dude with a x3 critical damage weapon, you should be afraid, and should be ready to run away.

No, you shouldn't.

You might be, but you shouldn't.

Why?

What are the odds the orc's going to roll a 20, confirm the crit, and do enough damage to drop you?

1/32? 1/64? 1/128? To be generous?

On the other hand what are the odds he won't?

Back to HIP. The orc has a pretty much 0-bit chance not to drop you and a 6-bit, 7-bit chance to? So thinking about the consequences for what might happen if the orc drops you is going to start with 3 or 4 seconds of speculation - in fact, it's so rare that you may already have moved on to other trains of thought by the time you figure out how rare it is.

People are bad at dealing with and planning for long odds. That's why they react so much better to their character's critical hits than critical fumbles (or enemy critical hits) - neither one is something they explicitly planned for, and a pleasant surprise is better than an unforseen complication.

If something bad has a rare chance of happening, it's better to make sure it can be easily dealt with, because many people won't even consider the possibility, and those who do will have to grind mental gears for a while to give it proper weight.

As far as Irontooth goes, well, the waterfall covers sight and the spray covers sound, and it's perfectly reasonable for the kobolds to be taking 10 on perception and completely failing to make anything out. That's why the guards are out there - Irontooth believes they're either capable enough to back off intruders or at least survive to warn him, and if somebody interrupts his skull-bashing practice for another damn stray horse he's going to use THEIR skull next.