David Noonan on D&D Complexity

[mhensley]

Doing the prep work doesn't bother me. In fact, I really like the fact that d20 definately does reward DM preparation.

But what I hate with a passion is wasted effort. And spending an hour generating stats for four rounds of combat is a whole lot of wasted effort. Once that's the sort of time that's required, something has gone badly wrong.

But isn't four rounds of combat with something this big going to last at least an hour? If true, then the hour of prep for an hour of combat is about right.

 

[ShinHakkaider]

The question is: Why should a game require that much "processor load?" Or prep time, for that matter?

What Noonan is talking about here is NOT prep-time, but just the sheer amount of info that a DM needs to have on hand without looking at sheets in order to have a smooth game experience. I could have a fully-statted out 1-page sheet of a dragon in front of me, and STILL forget in mid-play that he has an unholy aura that should have been strength-damaging the fighters, because it's buried in with the 9 other abilities that he's got going on that might or might not be up because the Sorcerer dropped a greater Dispel on him.

Here's the thing though, part of my prep time is laying out the dragons abilities and when theyre going to use them. Like I said before for me the BIG BATTLES are pretty much kitted out in some detail. There's usually enough leeway for me to change things up abit, but for the most part, I have a range of options set up. If I know that one of my PC's is going to be trying to dispel magic alot I have something set up for that, because I assume highly intelligent creature like a dragon who has probably survived MANY attempts on its life by adventurers, would have encountered these same tactics before. OR maybe it was scrying the PC's. OR maybe it used spies. There are a lot of things that factor into the end encounter and how it's played. The main thing is that I don't play the boss creature as if it's tactically defcient or stupid. Especially when I know what my players are capable of. The idea is to challenge my players, not specifically counter everymove that they make but make it interesting enough for them to realize that the big bad isnt just going to keel over after 2-3 rounds.

Alot of the stuff Noonan suggests doing is stuff I've been doing for a while now. Including making notes to not forget a creatures special abilities. That's just from years of DM'ing and playing where too many times I've forgotten something that could have prolonged or changed the course of a battle. Maybe it's a little easier for me than it is for some people or maybe it's not and I just have a system down either way it's not something that wrecks my enjoyment of the game.

 

[ShinHakkaider]

Doing the prep work doesn't bother me. In fact, I really like the fact that d20 definately does reward DM preparation.

But what I hate with a passion is wasted effort. And spending an hour generating stats for four rounds of combat is a whole lot of wasted effort. Once that's the sort of time that's required, something has gone badly wrong.

I hear you, I really do and I dont want it to sound like I'm just discarding what youre saying, it's just that I dont really run into that problem that much any more. Granted, from what we've both stated I probably put in a little more prep time and reseach into my combat encounters than you do though so that could be a factor.

 

[delericho]

But isn't four rounds of combat with something this big going to last at least an hour?

I rather hope not. I would expect to get through a round of combat (with 4 PCs and one big creature like that) in less than 5 minutes. If any round of any combat takes much more than 10 minutes, something is badly out of place.

If true, then the hour of prep for an hour of combat is about right.

An hour just for the stat-block. More time to set up the combat arena, any other conditions that are applicable, and so on. Besides, I don't agree that preparation should be on a 1-for-1 ratio. 1-for-2 or even 1-for-4 seems more appropriate.

 

[Henry]

Alot of the stuff Noonan suggests doing is stuff I've been doing for a while now. Including making notes to not forget a creatures special abilities. That's just from years of DM'ing and playing where too many times I've forgotten something that could have prolonged or changed the course of a battle.

He's the first one I've seen, though, who posts it in an instructive manner that helps other DM's. I'd love to see more of these tips for managing a ton of abilities, myself, because the only tips I've seen from others pretty much boil down to, "well, don't use so many abilities, or use them straight out of the book," and that's not very helpful when you're trying to challenge four or five people who have spent the past six months optimizing their PCs for maximum carnage, and blow through the opponents with only core abilities like a hot knife through butter.

I've all-but written off high-level DM'ing from now on (above 11-12th level), because of the actual headache in running all these huge-block-of-text monsters and NPC's. One thing I did start using, and will continue to do so for any abilites over 8 dice or so, is using average damage for the result. I was using average damage completely, but I like Dave's tactic of 1/3rd dice and 2/3rd's average value, which is one I believe I'll be sticking with; it still gives an organic feel without wasting too much time.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I find the notion that we should expect a dragon to die in 24 seconds of combat to be deeply, deeply disappointing.

 

[Gold Roger]

This is where I'm starting to get fed up with 3E. I don't mind complexity. Heck, I'm thinking about moving to Fantasy Hero.

What I mind is having to have all these lists of abilities and knowing exactly which book they are in. Math and logic are easy. Memorizing the Encyclopedia Dungeonica is a royal pain in the butt.

Thing is, the Rules Encyclopedia is optional. There's a lot of people playing Core only, small Encyclopedia (Core + Completes or similar), Setting only, Core plus choice options etc. It's optional.

But even a Core only game has the, for far to many people mind boggling, complexity of multiple continous and short time effects flying around and overladen Monsters as early as mid level.

 

[Gold Roger]

Like I said, then you might want to start looking at another game with less prep time.

As for me I tend to run pretty streamlined combats as well. I find that one of things that slows down combat is players not knowing what thier own abilities and spells do. But I try to cut that down by using spell cards and having them jot down what thier feats do on index cards. As for prep time I'm sure youre busy as am I. I work full time and on off nights while my wife is in class at grad school I take care of my 4 year old son. Not to mention the typical day of child rearing is busy at best. I still find the time to prep for both a Mutants and Masterminds game and a D&D game that I run.

Even if I prep for 4 hours and the the PC's run through whatever I put in thier way (and lets be honest depending on your players there's always a chance of that happening, whether you prep for 1 hour or 8), it's still worth it to actually be prepared. I'm of the school of 'better to have it and not need it , than to need it and not have it'. As for rather focusing on characterization and plot depending on the type of game youre running those might just be more important, but then that's a choice, your choice, on what to focus on. I like a balance and honestly plot and characterization are easier and take less time for me to nail down than stat crunching.

So, I shouldn't play a game I totally love, that has almost everything I want in favor of one that doesn't, because of one chink in the spell and monster design that makes it impossible to run without a massive amount of prep time and an accountands mind from a certain point on?

I'm not one of the guys that only ever look at D&D and want it to perfectly match my narrow wishes. But this a genuine problem.

Maybe it's no problem for you, but do you really want to tell me the game is more fun to you with all the extra weight?

D&D isn't something exclusive, it's the worlds largest RPG and should be open. High rules complexety sadly means that level 10+ are pretty exclusive to people that can actually handle all that load, no matter how much the other aspects of higher level gaming may appeal to us.

 

[eyebeams]

I have only seen a DM voluntarily run a dragon in a game twice since 1e -- and I've played a lot of D&D. Ever since dragons were singled out for improvement (because they were kind of pushovers in 1e if you played high level PCs) they've been a pain in the butt to run.

I think Rules Cyclopedia D&D dragons are the best designed, as they progress in power and complexity without being too bogged down. Plus, the categories don't make you feel lame for killing a baby red dragon.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

I find the notion that we should expect a dragon to die in 24 seconds of combat to be deeply, deeply disappointing.

In the Goode Olde Days it took at least 4 minutes.