Observations on matching "One vs. Many" combat mechanics to cinematic combat

[Bedrockgames]

Speed is good but you're never going to be anywhere near movie speed anyway. So what we're discussing is the difference in slo-mo factor. If a movie fights takes 1 minute, then resolving it in 15 minutes versus 45 minutes is (imho) not that important for the cinematic factor. That said, I like to seeing players take decisions under time pressure.

I would disagree strongly with this. Obviously a table top RPG isn't as fast as a film, and I have no issue with emulating movie action over longer time to emphasize certain elements. But there is a very big difference between 15 minutes combat and 45 minute combat. And I just find personally, that the 15 minute combat usually means I am visualizing something much closer to a film than a 45 minute combat. This is particularly true if the combat is theater of the mind. Once the miniatures come out, then I really begin to lose the cinematic feel. Again, I am not saying this is 100% all the time. One of my own games leans on longer combat, and is meant to be cinematic, but it was a design choice because we were focusing on emulating a particular aspect of cinematic combat (so I didn't mind if it took a bit longer to resolve). But just on average, I think there is a loss of the cinematic vibe the longer the combat goes on for (especially if it is taking people time to pick an action, and if rules have to be looked up frequently).

 

[Alexander Kalinowski]

I would disagree strongly with this. Obviously a table top RPG isn't as fast as a film, and I have no issue with emulating movie action over longer time to emphasize certain elements. But there is a very big difference between 15 minutes combat and 45 minute combat. And I just find personally, that the 15 minute combat usually means I am visualizing something much closer to a film than a 45 minute combat. This is particularly true if the combat is theater of the mind. Once the miniatures come out, then I really begin to lose the cinematic feel. Again, I am not saying this is 100% all the time. One of my own games leans on longer combat, and is meant to be cinematic, but it was a design choice because we were focusing on emulating a particular aspect of cinematic combat (so I didn't mind if it took a bit longer to resolve). But just on average, I think there is a loss of the cinematic vibe the longer the combat goes on for (especially if it is taking people time to pick an action, and if rules have to be looked up frequently).

Everybody is different I guess. The speed isn't that important for me, I'm more focussed on the idea that after the combat is done everybody has a vivid imagination of what just happened. And, since I am more simulationist and less narrativist, that it was largely dictated by the dice with less detail filled in by the GM.

That said, I don't entirely disagree with you but my desire for speed is due to wanting to keep the players under pressure and it just feels nicer if combat doesn't drag on too long.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Everybody is different I guess. The speed isn't that important for me, I'm more focussed on the idea that after the combat is done everybody has a vivid imagination of what just happened. And, since I am more simulationist and less narrativist, that it was largely dictated by the dice with less detail filled in by the GM.

That said, I don't entirely disagree with you but my desire for speed is due to wanting to keep the players under pressure and it just feels nicer if combat doesn't drag on too long.

No, definitely everyone has different aims and different things that will resonate. I'm not particularly 'narrative' in my approach (though I'd also say I'm not particularly 'simulationist' either). But I am very much in favor of a theater of the mind style combat that makes me feel like I am there.

I am not suggesting your are wrong that speed can be ignored as a consideration. I am just saying I think for a lot of folks, it is going to be important in connecting to a cinematic feel (but if your trying to do something else with a game, and you end up going with longer combats to achieve it, I would not hold that against the system as a critique). But I get what you are saying. When I made my wuxia game, I wanted to emulate the specific kung fu techniques that come up in martial arts movies, and was willing to add the rules complexity, look-up time, and organizational drag (if you have a big list of techniques with descriptions, that puts a lot of weight on the GM to organize), in order to get that feel. But it did result in longer combats (at least until you really mastered the system). I've done it from the other angle, going with simpler martial arts for faster combat. Both approaches have trade-offs so I see what you are saying.

 

[Alexander Kalinowski]

I am not suggesting your are wrong that speed can be ignored as a consideration. I am just saying I think for a lot of folks, it is going to be important in connecting to a cinematic feel (but if your trying to do something else with a game, and you end up going with longer combats to achieve it, I would hold that against the system as a critique).

I know, believe me. Personally, I have no issue with the complexity of, say, D&D 3E or Shadowrun (any edition). But I get that not everyone feels the same way, so my current sweet spot is somewhere between D&D 5E and D&D 3E.

 

[Bedrockgames]

I know, believe me. Personally, I have no issue with the complexity of, say, D&D 3E or Shadowrun (any edition). But I get that not everyone feels the same way, so my current sweet spot is somewhere between D&D 5E and D&D 3E.

Just a correction, I meant to type ‘I would NOT hold it against the game”—-edited the original post to fix the typo.