Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Argyle King" data-source="post: 6949101" data-attributes="member: 58416">It's&nbsp; been my experience with D&amp;D that -due to how the system tends to&nbsp; work- it's difficult to look at things from a character perspective (or&nbsp; even a player perspective sometimes really) and have a clear idea of&nbsp; what the situation is in terms of survivability.For example, it wasn't long ago that I played through the Strahd adventure for 5th Edition.&nbsp; In&nbsp; one encounter, the party was unbelievably outnumbered by some sort of&nbsp; needle plant-creature things.&nbsp; We thought it would be a tough encounter&nbsp; based on how things looked.&nbsp; Instead, it was was a massacre.&nbsp; ...like&nbsp; not even close.&nbsp; The party easily killed them all.&nbsp; In a&nbsp; different encounter, we were going into what I think was the Amber&nbsp; Temple.&nbsp; One magic spell from one creature hiding in a statue nearly&nbsp; killed half of the party.Both were due to what you mention in&nbsp; the other post I quoted.&nbsp; In the plant encounter, it was virtually&nbsp; impossible for us to miss the enemy.&nbsp; Likewise, it was virtually&nbsp; impossible for the enemy to save against any spells or area effects the&nbsp; party had going.In the encounter against the demon in the&nbsp; temple, the same was true in reverse.&nbsp; If I were targeted by something,&nbsp; my defenses were borderline worthless.&nbsp; I had no way to react to what&nbsp; was going on around me.&nbsp; Sure, the enemy needed to make a roll to hit,&nbsp; but rolling was little more than a formality.&nbsp; I did not like feeling as though I was just sorta standing there.Also,&nbsp; the other thing I take away from that is that -for me- there's little&nbsp; for me to base my decisions on when trying to look at a situation&nbsp; through the eyes of my character.&nbsp; Is it smart to run from a large hoard&nbsp; of creatures?&nbsp; Does one lone creature risk TPK?The line between&nbsp; one and the other seems to be very small, and, in my opinion, learning&nbsp; that you're in the latter situation can be a rough thing to escape from&nbsp; and survive in a system where I have no active options for defending&nbsp; myself.&nbsp; Sure, I'm not getting crippled by HP loss or losing a limb, but&nbsp; I also have a smaller window of variance between safe and not safe&nbsp; while also having a smaller number of ways to respond to getting hit in a&nbsp; system where I'm just standing there while a creature rolls dice&nbsp; against me.While losing HP in a system like GURPS actually does&nbsp; translate into physical harm for my character, I have opportunities to&nbsp; defend myself.&nbsp; I can try to block, parry, or (likely less successfully)&nbsp; dodge and give myself an opportunity to get out of the situation.&nbsp; I&nbsp; can also make tactical choices such as aiming for a less armored part of&nbsp; the opponent or such as fighting in formation to limit how many&nbsp; directions the enemy can attack me from.&nbsp; While I understand that the&nbsp; added granularity is a turn off for some gamers, I personally prefer&nbsp; it.&nbsp; My experience with GURPS has been different thus far.Margin&nbsp; of success and skill level do matter.&nbsp; The chance to score a critical&nbsp; is higher for a more skilled character.&nbsp; Margin of success (and failure)&nbsp; comes into play when it comes to opposed checks (such as grappling*,&nbsp; spells, and a variety of other things.)&nbsp; *I do have a few gripes&nbsp; about the default grappling system, but they only bug me because I've&nbsp; seen how much better things can work by using some of the optional rules&nbsp; from a splat that I own.Different folks like different things.&nbsp;&nbsp; In your case, you dislike that you can have high skill and someone with&nbsp; low skill can still defend.&nbsp; I can see how that is bothersome.&nbsp; For me,&nbsp; I like that for a few reasons.&nbsp; The two main ones are 1) that it&nbsp; prevents someone from just dumping all their character points into&nbsp; knowing how to use a sword and suddenly becoming virtually immune to&nbsp; actions taken by other combatants, and 2) I feel like my actions matter&nbsp; regardless of whether I'm the one attacking or defending.&nbsp; It's&nbsp; worth noting that skill does still actually matter though.&nbsp; The lesser&nbsp; skilled combatant is going to have a much tougher time dealing with&nbsp; multiple attackers, penalties from environmental conditions, feints, and&nbsp; many other things.&nbsp; The lesser skilled combatant will likely have a&nbsp; tougher time defending against attacks from being flanked (attacks from&nbsp; behind and side hexes) as well.&nbsp; Those things will be easier for a more&nbsp; skilled character to deal with, and the more skilled character can&nbsp; voluntarily take penalties to do things like rapid strike, make a&nbsp; deceptive attack, target body parts, and etc.&nbsp; Personally, I like that, but I can understand why others might not.&nbsp; I&nbsp; also like that combat has more of a sliding scale to determine&nbsp; results.&nbsp; Being hits hurts more, but, for me, it feels less like rocket&nbsp; tag, and I feel more involved in what my character is doing.I've&nbsp; found a few ways to make GURPS combat a little more cinematic as well,&nbsp; but I don't want to derail the thread any more than I likely already&nbsp; have.&nbsp; Suffice to say that I've successfully run a game which was based&nbsp; around Pro-Wrestling.No system is perfect.&nbsp; Even in GURPS, there&nbsp; are things that bug me, but I feel confident that the Dungeon Fantasy&nbsp; book coming out next year will address most of my personal gripes.I'm glad different systems have different approaches.&nbsp; What works for me may not work for someone else.I&nbsp; will say that I tend to like wound tracks and conditions as a nice&nbsp; middle ground between D&amp;D style HP and more granular systems.&nbsp; I&nbsp; liked that D&amp;D 4th Edition added the Bloodied condition and keyed&nbsp; things off of it.&nbsp; I also liked the idea behind the 4th Edition Disease&nbsp; Track; I wish they had used that idea for more things in D&amp;D 4E.There are a few things I'd change about GURPS 4E, but -for me&nbsp; personally- I found the game to be a lot more intuitive than I assumed&nbsp; it would be when I first looked at GURPS books.My experience with Savage Worlds was brief and a long time ago.&nbsp; I liked a lot of the concepts in the system, but I didn't always like how things worked in actual play.&nbsp; A lot of the things mentioned in the original post of this thread echo what I remember my feelings being.I'm not familiar enough with the game to give what I feel is valuable feedback.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Argyle King, post: 6949101, member: 58416"] It's been my experience with D&D that -due to how the system tends to work- it's difficult to look at things from a character perspective (or even a player perspective sometimes really) and have a clear idea of what the situation is in terms of survivability. For example, it wasn't long ago that I played through the Strahd adventure for 5th Edition. In one encounter, the party was unbelievably outnumbered by some sort of needle plant-creature things. We thought it would be a tough encounter based on how things looked. Instead, it was was a massacre. ...like not even close. The party easily killed them all. In a different encounter, we were going into what I think was the Amber Temple. One magic spell from one creature hiding in a statue nearly killed half of the party. Both were due to what you mention in the other post I quoted. In the plant encounter, it was virtually impossible for us to miss the enemy. Likewise, it was virtually impossible for the enemy to save against any spells or area effects the party had going. In the encounter against the demon in the temple, the same was true in reverse. If I were targeted by something, my defenses were borderline worthless. I had no way to react to what was going on around me. Sure, the enemy needed to make a roll to hit, but rolling was little more than a formality. I did not like feeling as though I was just sorta standing there. Also, the other thing I take away from that is that -for me- there's little for me to base my decisions on when trying to look at a situation through the eyes of my character. Is it smart to run from a large hoard of creatures? Does one lone creature risk TPK? The line between one and the other seems to be very small, and, in my opinion, learning that you're in the latter situation can be a rough thing to escape from and survive in a system where I have no active options for defending myself. Sure, I'm not getting crippled by HP loss or losing a limb, but I also have a smaller window of variance between safe and not safe while also having a smaller number of ways to respond to getting hit in a system where I'm just standing there while a creature rolls dice against me. While losing HP in a system like GURPS actually does translate into physical harm for my character, I have opportunities to defend myself. I can try to block, parry, or (likely less successfully) dodge and give myself an opportunity to get out of the situation. I can also make tactical choices such as aiming for a less armored part of the opponent or such as fighting in formation to limit how many directions the enemy can attack me from. While I understand that the added granularity is a turn off for some gamers, I personally prefer it. My experience with GURPS has been different thus far. Margin of success and skill level do matter. The chance to score a critical is higher for a more skilled character. Margin of success (and failure) comes into play when it comes to opposed checks (such as grappling*, spells, and a variety of other things.) *I do have a few gripes about the default grappling system, but they only bug me because I've seen how much better things can work by using some of the optional rules from a splat that I own. Different folks like different things. In your case, you dislike that you can have high skill and someone with low skill can still defend. I can see how that is bothersome. For me, I like that for a few reasons. The two main ones are 1) that it prevents someone from just dumping all their character points into knowing how to use a sword and suddenly becoming virtually immune to actions taken by other combatants, and 2) I feel like my actions matter regardless of whether I'm the one attacking or defending. It's worth noting that skill does still actually matter though. The lesser skilled combatant is going to have a much tougher time dealing with multiple attackers, penalties from environmental conditions, feints, and many other things. The lesser skilled combatant will likely have a tougher time defending against attacks from being flanked (attacks from behind and side hexes) as well. Those things will be easier for a more skilled character to deal with, and the more skilled character can voluntarily take penalties to do things like rapid strike, make a deceptive attack, target body parts, and etc. Personally, I like that, but I can understand why others might not. I also like that combat has more of a sliding scale to determine results. Being hits hurts more, but, for me, it feels less like rocket tag, and I feel more involved in what my character is doing. I've found a few ways to make GURPS combat a little more cinematic as well, but I don't want to derail the thread any more than I likely already have. Suffice to say that I've successfully run a game which was based around Pro-Wrestling. No system is perfect. Even in GURPS, there are things that bug me, but I feel confident that the Dungeon Fantasy book coming out next year will address most of my personal gripes. I'm glad different systems have different approaches. What works for me may not work for someone else. I will say that I tend to like wound tracks and conditions as a nice middle ground between D&D style HP and more granular systems. I liked that D&D 4th Edition added the Bloodied condition and keyed things off of it. I also liked the idea behind the 4th Edition Disease Track; I wish they had used that idea for more things in D&D 4E. There are a few things I'd change about GURPS 4E, but -for me personally- I found the game to be a lot more intuitive than I assumed it would be when I first looked at GURPS books. My experience with Savage Worlds was brief and a long time ago. I liked a lot of the concepts in the system, but I didn't always like how things worked in actual play. A lot of the things mentioned in the original post of this thread echo what I remember my feelings being. I'm not familiar enough with the game to give what I feel is valuable feedback. [/QUOTE]

Verification