Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 3738024" data-attributes="member: 4937">You raise so many different points I don't know how to respond.  Let me pick out what I think is your main point, namely that you don't like how in 3rd edition players tend to clear a few rooms between 8:00 am and 10:00 am then hole up somewhere for the 'night' to replenish thier resources.The problem with that is that the problem is not the result of bad mechanics, but the result of bad story design.  In any edition of D&D in particular and in any game system in general, the smartest tactic is almost always hit and run.  Go in, smash up a few things, then get out before the enemy gets organized and before your limited resources run out.  Repeat until necessary.  (In a certain sense, this is a realistic tactic for commando forces, so its hardly surprising to see it in a even the loosest simulations.)  I've seen good players do this 15-20 years before 3rd edition even existed.  I did this in a more ad hoc manner when I first ran through KotB 25 years ago.  "I'm running low on hit points, time to go."  You can't 'fix' this problem if you are having this problem with mechanical changes in any game with resource management.  You may change the meta-game, but you won't invalidate the tactic.  It's still going to be a smart tactic.  Mearls said that wizards that spent all thier daily spells would be at about 80% power.  Smart players will decide that this isn't good enough, and will (perhaps after blowing all of thier daily resources on one big bash) decide to hole up for the night just in case.The problem is not with the game mechanics.  The problem is with the adventure design.  Unless the players are facing a deadline (We have to get the mcguffin before the eclipse occurs!) or are facing a pro-active intelligent enemy, they just don't have a reason to risk going into an encounter with less than 100% of thier resources.  When you play a solo crpg that doesn't have a timeline, you pretty much always rest up to 100% hitpoints whenever you have the chance.  For this reason, computer rpgs are almost always designed so that the plot moves on without you if you don't intervene, to the point that in some of the better designed ones if you don't hustle, then you lose.Well designed pen and paper rpg plots are like this too.  You ask why the orcs don't get organized?  Well, why don't they get organized?  Why don't they set up ambushes?  Why don't they try to counter-attack and hit thier attackers while they are in thier camp?  Why don't they just take the treasure and run away, so that when the PC's show up the next day, they are just gone?  In other words, why don't they act as actively and proactively as the PC's would in the same situation?And why do the PC's have all the time in the world to save the village/country/world/universe?  Smart players are only going to take risks if they have reasons to do so.  They aren't going to take risks because they won't to look cool.  They know that ultimately, the guy that looks cool is the one that isn't a corpse at the end of the day.  This is going to be true regardless of how they change the game system.  Average players might momentarily take a while to adapt to the new meta-game tactics brought about by changes in the mechanics.  They might get carried away with themselves and get in over thier heads a time or two.  But pretty soon, rest assured that everyone is going to be playing in the same way if the dictates of the story allow it.So, once again, trying to fix a problem I don't have with tools like rules that really don't actually get to the root of the problem.</blockquote>

Verification