Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Gorgon Zee" data-source="post: 6288178" data-attributes="member: 75787">Tactical or not ...I'm a veteran of 4e GMing, so I feel pretty confident that I've seen the most tactical of systems in action (When players are using interrupts to maneuver another player into a space for them to be able to interrupt an action ...) and I'm currently running a 13th Age combat.13th Age is less tactical than 4e, definitely, but I would contend it is as tactical as 3.5. This is not to start an edition war, but simply to provide a base for comparison -- please take it as such.Movement=======A critical rule here is the intercept rule. For general players, if one player says they are shielding another, or hiding behind another, or if the placement of minis or game script makes it obvious, then it is *not possible* to engage one combatant without the other intercepting you (p162). There are also fighter abilities that allow them to intercept as an interrupt, adding another tactical layer.Example: In my last game, in a tomb area, the players were being attacked on both sides and the wizard was not excited about being in melee, so stated he was staying behind the fighter. On the other side though, while the first skeleton tried to attack him, but the barbarian was in the way and so intercepted him, the second skeleton was able to break free of the barbarian (using the tactical disengage rules) and get to the wizard. Later int he same area a chaotic ooze thing simply slithered over the ceiling and thus was not able to be intercepted.Also, line-of-sight is still very important. So in a typical combat, each combatant has a state which is: * distance -- near, far, or way-away from each other combatant. Easy to see using minis and a map or whatever. Using zones makes it simple * enagaged -- there is a complex mesh of tactical engagement that is crucial. If you are engaged in combat, you are so more limited * line of sight -- 13th age is less "rule-based tactics" and more "do the obvious thing" tactics. Line of sight is a good example of what you need to think about. If you do not see something,you obviously cannot shoot at it, but do you even know there is something to do?Overall, I would say that whereas you *can* play 13th age non-tactically, the more fun way for our group is with the tactics. In the afore-mentioned encounter we had several tactical situations that were well handled by light rules and common sense: * Bard using powers to allow disengage attempts to wizard could escape * Fighter intercepting through an acid pool. Not good for the boots, but it worked * Characters unaware that others were begin attacked around a corner * Clogging corridors both on purpose to stop enemies and by accident ("there's no room to land when you try and jump the acid pool, so ....)Monster Abilities==========The system of monsters begin able to do things based on their dice roll is genius. It massively reduces the GMs need to ponder each action, while making it possible to have some memorable and very scary fights. The only downside is the swinginess. Examples from my last two sessions:Dinosaurs: Brutal huge 45 damage on a hit, 22 on an even miss (sometimes close is good enough). That can KILL my players on an even miss and a hit. Scary.Skeleton Lord: His attacks dropped players down the initiate order. My rogue hated me as he gets bonuses to hit monsters he is faster than. He also allowed his minions to use the escalation dice, and the combat went 5 rounds ("Are we facing tougher minions? Why are these guys hitting on 10s!)Chaos glorps: Based on the dice rolls, they could disengage and flow around enemies. Easy to run and a very chaotic combatMind-controller: Roll a 18+ hit and you are dominated (hard save). Very nasty if it had ever happened .....Player Abilities=========There are a ton of abilities that are at heart tactical. I confess I have not looked carefully at all classes, but my players have this sort of thing ...* Ability to vanish the first round and appear anywhere nearby next round, with a double-damage attack -- tricky decision this; average damage is the same, but is the better positing worth waiting?* Swashbuckling and Terrain feats -- require the GM to allow a cool tactical effect. Used by my players to collapse a ceiling, lock a door to stop reinforcements, impede water movement, probably several others I've forgotten* The Bard. All about tactics. Between granting disengages and free movement, they can really mess with a GMs ability to KILL THE ANNOYING WIZARD. Not that I'm bitter. I didn't want the skeleton lord to live. Oh no. I *planned* for him to die in that scene. Really.* Fighter gets the intercept that allows him to interrupt movement, also either increasing his defenses or increases his damage most rounds. Just had this as a new addition to the game, but very tactical in nature.Backgrounds========I use these a fair amount in combat. Examples:* My college trained wizard pretty much always knows something about monsters with his backgrounds* Used to see if you can notice that the fight around the corner seems to be much quieter, and not in a good way* "I run through the pool of water .... I don't think I have any backgrounds that would help me ... so is a straight wisdom roll of 9 good enough?  Oh...."* Communicating with a savage tribe to coordinate defenses against dinosaurs.TL;DR====The tactics are less codified, any require more fluidity and common sense. There is definitely less tactical "can you hit him and then shift 5 so I can step there and ...", but I am not sure there is less tactical *thought* overall, and a narration of the scene not using rule terms would likely end up sounding pretty tactical. Also, use the engage/intercept rules.</blockquote>

Verification