D&D General D&D Combat is fictionless

[Garthanos]

Good for you, but I don't even need that, so still lighter and quicker for exactly the same outcome.

yeh in a game where huge amounts of progression are not wrapped up by accuracy .... that is a false claim.

 

[Lyxen]

You were using very negative language that implied people who like their tactical choices to be actually viable instead of "fake viable" are cheats....

No, my apologies if you took it that way, but it certainly was not the intent at all, and I'm pretty sure that there is absolutely no hint implying that apart from the negative reading that you took of "gaming the system".

And by the way, the definition that you used has NOTHING to do with actual gaming and in particular TTRPG, it has to do mostly with finance, etc. Add that to the fact that I'm not a native english speaker, and I hope you will forgive me for not seeing the potential derogatory meaning of a few words in a context that has nothing to do with what we are discussing...

and not really roleplaying.

I was extremely careful not to go in that specific direction to avoid another discussion about the so called Stormwind Fallacy as it has little to do with the current thread.

My points are exclusively about the fiction perspective, and there is nothing derogatory about technically playing the game, especially 4e since it was designed with that express purpose in mind, and it's a good thing that people enjoy that aspect of the game as well. It is not my personal preference, and you are absolutely entitled to yours, having differences does not imply the superiority of one approach in general.

I think characters would typically on purpose NOT choose dramatically inferior tactics in that fantasy world just like they don't in the real world.

This is much closer to the subject of the thread.

You know what ? I completely agree with you, a character in a fantasy world using dramatically inferior tactics would be stupid. The problem is again the difference between seeing the world in itself and seeing the world mostly through the system that models it.

Having done a lot of fencing, kendo, LARPing, etc. I can tell you that, in reality (and most likely in fantasy worlds as well), the technical system of multiattack is silly. Saying that, just because you are waiting for the adversary to come to you, he will be able to attack you three times before you counter attacking, and that you are losing opportunity by just preparing for his approach is inherently ridiculous. Actually, if you are stable and prepared for the approach, all other skills being equal, it's completely different factors that will decide who attacks when in range.

This is why, although a tactic might be clear to the player, it does not mean that it would be clear to the character, in particular if the modelling is, for reasons of simplicity, simplistic and not modelling reality or even well written fiction.

And this is why, if you want fiction to be more gripping during combat and to have fewer breaks of SoD, while still not modifying the core system (and actually making it simpler with 5e), you are perfectly allowed (and even within the scope of the RAW) to make any adjustment that you want to that modelling, again if it is what your players are looking for.

 

[Lyxen]

yeh in a game where huge amounts of progression are not wrapped up by accuracy .... that is a false claim.

There is nothing about accuracy here, in either system. 4e is not more accurate than 5e, they just simulate different things. 4e, like 3e, models a world in which heroes become untouchable at high level by weaker creatures. 5e models a world in which, even at high level, heroes still stay vulnerable to any threat, assuming that there are enough of them.

Both are valid paradigms, it all depends on what you want to simulate. If you want demigods, 3e/4e are probably better, if you want heroes which can still be vulnerable and need to be cautious in every day environments, 5e is possibly better.

But coming back to the subject of the thread, I think it's also one of the reasons for which 5e makes fiction easier to simulate. While I hope that we agree that, in the end, high HP, Saves and AC are mostly a type of plot protection, the nigh invulnerability conferred by systems such as 3e and 4e are rarely seen in fiction.

Again, it's not a bad thing, and it's all a question of degree, but even extremely high fantasy like Amber has Corwin succumb quickly to normal swordsmen when he no longer meets them one at the time, and where numbers really count quickly.

 

[Garthanos]

\No, my apologies if you took it that way, but it certainly was not the intent at all, and I'm pretty sure that there is absolutely no hint implying that apart from the negative reading that you took of "gaming the system".

Nods I am probably too stressed recently and over-react.

And by the way, the definition that you used has NOTHING to do with actual gaming and in particular TTRPG, it has to do mostly with finance, etc. Add that to the fact that I'm not a native english speaker, and I hope you will forgive me for not seeing the potential derogatory meaning of a few words in a context that has nothing to do with what we are discussing...

It relates to "systems" in general. But congratulations, for a not-native speaker you do a wonderful approximation

This is much closer to the subject of the thread.

You know what ? I completely agree with you, a character in a fantasy world using dramatically inferior tactics would be stupid. The problem is again the difference between seeing the world in itself and seeing the world mostly through the system that models it.

Having done a lot of fencing, kendo, LARPing, etc. I can tell you that, in reality (and most likely in fantasy worlds as well), the technical system of multiattack is silly.

Agreed on that too. And with similar experience.

Saying that, just because you are waiting for the adversary to come to you, he will be able to attack you three times before you counter attacking, and that you are losing opportunity by just preparing for his approach is inherently ridiculous. Actually, if you are stable and prepared for the approach, all other skills being equal, it's completely different factors that will decide who attacks when in range. This is why, although a tactic might be clear to the player, it does not mean that it would be clear to the character,

Well that is the issue with the Ready the attack being not a good um simulation or good evocation of heroic action either it nerfs... and not encouraging what either of us wants. But I assume the character knows what they are doing and not doing when they use it.

in particular if the modelling is, for reasons of simplicity, simplistic and not modelling reality or even well written fiction.

Every D&D has the advancing hit points system and so on this is a side effect of a D&Dism it is useful and arguably one of the best at heroic games so mechanisms that interact with attacking or defending need to take that into account. Multi-attacking does in stair stepping abrupt fashion but when you take it away then poof ....

If the system had for instance quality of hit roll be the foundation of damage then situational giving benefits on to hit only could be used virtually system wide.

 

[Garthanos]

There is nothing about accuracy here, in either system.

accuracy as in "to hit".

4e is not more accurate than 5e, they just simulate different things.

not as in simulation

 

[Garthanos]

4e, like 3e, models a world in which heroes become untouchable at high level by weaker creatures. 5e models a world in which, even at high level, heroes still stay vulnerable to any threat, assuming that there are enough of them.

Both are valid paradigms, it all depends on what you want to simulate. If you want demigods, 3e/4e are probably better, if you want heroes which can still be vulnerable and need to be cautious in every day environments, 5e is possibly better.

When you have casters that alter reality at a scale and frequency that out matches any of those of actual myth and legend. Having non-caster heros unable to match or even approach the legends seems an imbalanced story. The 5e flavor is too much guy down the block not enough the list of characters described in the 2e PHB as fighters.

This is just an explanation of why I find the 4e story more congruous... and still inspired by earlier D&D. (not just 3e which also had more extremes of progress perhaps)

 

[jmartkdr2]

I wonder how much you would have to change in actual rules to run turns more like movie editing where it's assumed that turns take place one after another, and characters are just not doing anything interesting if it's not their turn / they're not being targeted?

Some durations might need to be meta'd, for one, but that's not hard to handle.

 

[Umbran]

You’ve played d&d before…

The orcs walk in the room, roll initiative.

Yeah, I've played D&D before. So, I can see a mismatch when folks say they want careful tracking of fiction in combat, while at the same time they give short shrift to the fiction setting up the combat. What you describe is poor GM fiat fiction.

The original scenario as stated by Maxperson was thirty orcs. As if your typical thirty orcs are... stealthy? If the answer is...

1) No. The simple, "They walk into to the room," is a failure in crafting the fictional situation. The fighter notices the orcs before they come in, and should be able to react to their presence before the stipulated Round 1. Any choice to stay put then becomes the basis for the fiction that he's not beating them to the door.

2) Yes. The simple, "They walk into the room," is still a failure crafting the fiction - this is a troupe of stealth orcs, and they quickly and silently enter the room, and the fighter, while perhaps not fully surprised, is slow on the uptake. The orcs are using the shadows and the fighter doesn't realize the gravity of his situation until they are already passing him....

If we support Maxperson's argument that combat can start before anyone attacks, then the moment the fighter may have heard/seen the orcs was when we should start Round 1, not after they enter and move into position. So he should at least have had access to a Ready action to move to the door if something above his pay grade came in the chamber.

 

[FrogReaver]

Yeah, I've played D&D before. So, I can see a mismatch when folks say they want careful tracking of fiction in combat, while at the same time they give short shrift to the fiction setting up the combat. What you describe is poor GM fiat fiction.

The original scenario as stated by Maxperson was thirty orcs. As if your typical thirty orcs are... stealthy? If the answer is...

1) No. The simple, "They walk into to the room," is a failure in crafting the fictional situation. The fighter notices the orcs before they come in, and should be able to react to their presence before the stipulated Round 1. Any choice to stay put then becomes the basis for the fiction that he's not beating them to the door.

2) Yes. The simple, "They walk into the room," is still a failure crafting the fiction - this is a troupe of stealth orcs, and they quickly and silently enter the room, and the fighter, while perhaps not fully surprised, is slow on the uptake. The orcs are using the shadows and the fighter doesn't realize the gravity of his situation until they are already passing him....

If we support Maxperson's argument that combat can start before anyone attacks, then the moment the fighter may have heard/seen the orcs was when we should start Round 1, not after they enter and move into position. So he should at least have had access to a Ready action to move to the door if something above his pay grade came in the chamber.

D&D offers no tight rules on when to call for initiative though. So his initiative call was certainly legal and is IME very commonplace.

that said, I speculated before that this particular example could be handled with the current system by calling for initiative at a different moment and likely result in no fictional issues. I stand by that claim. But I also stand by the claim that maxperson wasn’t playing the game wrong or being a bad dm by calling for it when he did.

 

[Umbran]

D&D offers no tight rules on when to call for initiative though. So his initiative call was certainly legal and is IME very commonplace.

It isn't about "legal". It is about expecting good, sensible fiction to come out when you shove crummy fiction in.

"The combat system doesn't correct my own mistakes," isn't a compelling position.