Even more Mike Mearls

[3catcircus]

Whether you buy it or not, it is an extra step. You can debate the effort involved in the step and/or the intrusiveness of the step, but hardly its existence. :\

But if it is transparent to the observer, then it effectively *isn't* an extra step. If I can subtract a number in my head (or on my fingers) while the game continues without interruption, then, to the rest of the group, the step doesn't exist.

Alternatively, how often have you seen the one player who holds up combat while figuring out what his attack roll is going to be if he uses power attack. Power attack adds extra steps to the game, yet Mearls doesn't seem to be in favor of jettisoning it (at least not the postings listed in this thread).

More importantly - so what if armor as DR adds a few extra seconds? It doesn't change the fact that, overall, combat in 3.x takes eons to resolve - with high-level encounters taking hours for a single combat.

 

[Oldtimer]

But if it is transparent to the observer, then it effectively *isn't* an extra step. If I can subtract a number in my head (or on my fingers) while the game continues without interruption, then, to the rest of the group, the step doesn't exist.

Ah, I wasn't aware that you were talking about a subjective existence.

However, you surely cannot refute that it, objectively, is an extra step in the process? That you consider it not worth mentioning and that Mr Mearls seems to consider it the straw that broke the camel's back, is a difference of value - not existence.

 

[med stud]

2. Armor as DR is too hard because it slows down play? Subtraction is too hard?!?!?

I'm pretty sure his main reason for not including armour as DR was that it would be hard to work with from a desinger POV.

 

[Mortellan]

Feh on design POV. In SWS they apparently removed DR for armor(perhaps for the same reasons they are employing in 4E?) and tried to fix survivability at low level by throwing more HP's at beginning characters and giving them the 'second wind'. So far in my limited playing of this system I haven't seen any advantage to more HP, especially when you consider criticals are automatic on a 20 (as it will be for 4e i assume). In the overall course of getting hit I would think DR should save your neck more than a handful of extra HP's. But clearly they did the math so what do I know?

 

[La Bete]

But clearly they did the math so what do I know?

Thats the more relevant point. They crunched the numbers, and found that any reasonable implementation of Armour-as-DR didn't work from a maths/mechanical perspective.

That said ANYTHING that cuts the number of steps and mental calculations involved in combat = good thing.

 

[Merlin the Tuna]

Something that bears mentioning regarding DR slowing down the game...

DR is just a simple check and a single subtraction operation. In a computer, this step would be completely negligible. "Attack --> Hit --> Damage --> DR." Not a big deal. In my experience though, that isn't what happens at the table. The DM rarely says "He hits you with his claw for 8 damage, his other claw for 4 more damage, his bite for 13 damage, and his tail for 2 damage." Rather, it tends to be "He [blah blah description]. You take 27 damage." At that point, the player needs to cut in to ask the DM how many attacks that was and the damage of each one. (You can't just multiply the DR by 4, because in the case of DR 3/-, doing so would actually heal the tail's damage.) The DM, whose mind has already started to move on to the next task, then needs to jump back, figure out whether he's moved his dice yet, and relay it back to the player, who can THEN do the simple calculation.

And even in situations that don't involve multiple attacks, the player is always going to ask "Did you factor in my damage reduction yet?" because the DM will remember it some times and forget it other times. Again, if all of this were being done in the same context (such as a computer processor), there'd be nothing to take care of here. A single DR sequence might only take 10 seconds even with all of these problems at their worst, but making an attack roll isn't a huge time-waster either, and we still make sure that players take care of that before their turns, too.

 

[Mortellan]

Thats the more relevant point. They crunched the numbers, and found that any reasonable implementation of Armour-as-DR didn't work from a maths/mechanical perspective.

That said ANYTHING that cuts the number of steps and mental calculations involved in combat = good thing.

I won't deny that, but there are aspects of 3.x that are just as time hogging as DR for armor, mainly mentioning feats that require just as much mental calculation/subtraction to arrive at a damage or attack number. They aren't dumping these AFAIK.

 

[Fifth Element]

More importantly - so what if armor as DR adds a few extra seconds? It doesn't change the fact that, overall, combat in 3.x takes eons to resolve - with high-level encounters taking hours for a single combat.

You're still arguing the strawman. The extra seconds are not the only reason they decided against DR. Mearls also discussed the difficulty from a game design perspective, at some length. Please stop ignoring the other reasons.

 

[Fifth Element]

Feh on design POV.

I don't think this is a very constructive response. Please be civil, as the mods have requested.

 

[Fifth Element]

I'm sorry guys, while I trust your opinions I'm still not seeing it. If the design rules work in regard to monsters why are they so vexxing for PCs?

Because a monster survives an average of 4-5 rounds in a single fight, and is never seen again. The PCs survive many fights over long periods of time. They are very different beasts, so it's not surprising that different mechanics are appropriate for each.