Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
How meticulous can the planning be in a six-second combat round?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="KarinsDad" data-source="post: 4980615" data-attributes="member: 2011"><p>I think this is an over-rationalization of a decision to play the game in a given manner.</p><p></p><p>Either a given player knows his PC's capabilities, or he does not. Either he knows the rules, or he does not. Either he understand the capabilities of the other PCs, or he does not. Or some set of middle ground on these. A player can make an excellent decision without a committee meeting.</p><p></p><p>I'm not saying that all tactical decisions need to be made in a vacuum, but I think that it is not unreasonable to put limits on the cross table talk.</p><p></p><p>Let each player play his own PC.</p><p></p><p>The idea that members of the group should comment on or suggest the actions of each PC infers that a player shouldn't be roleplaying (and tactical decisions are a form of roleplaying) his PC without advice from his fellow players. I don't buy this model.</p><p></p><p>I prefer the model where everyone does what he wants to do (including the possibility of a quick in character command or suggestion on a PC's turn) and the players find out through experience of playing with each other how to be tactically capable. It's not always unfun to have someone jump in front of your area effect, forcing your PC to either include that PC in the blast, or come up with an alternative idea. This also encourages the players to have the PCs interact verbally with each other in combat:</p><p></p><p>"Florin you idiot! You jumped in front of my shot."</p><p></p><p>This level of roleplaying is mostly lost if the group can cross table talk tactical decisions whenever they want.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Also, even though the PCs have these abilities doesn't imply that they actually know how to use them together as a team effectively. That's a desired goal, but that doesn't mean that they have this skill. Cross table talk by definition gives them a teamwork quality that the group did not gain by adventuring and hence the players learning.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="KarinsDad, post: 4980615, member: 2011"] I think this is an over-rationalization of a decision to play the game in a given manner. Either a given player knows his PC's capabilities, or he does not. Either he knows the rules, or he does not. Either he understand the capabilities of the other PCs, or he does not. Or some set of middle ground on these. A player can make an excellent decision without a committee meeting. I'm not saying that all tactical decisions need to be made in a vacuum, but I think that it is not unreasonable to put limits on the cross table talk. Let each player play his own PC. The idea that members of the group should comment on or suggest the actions of each PC infers that a player shouldn't be roleplaying (and tactical decisions are a form of roleplaying) his PC without advice from his fellow players. I don't buy this model. I prefer the model where everyone does what he wants to do (including the possibility of a quick in character command or suggestion on a PC's turn) and the players find out through experience of playing with each other how to be tactically capable. It's not always unfun to have someone jump in front of your area effect, forcing your PC to either include that PC in the blast, or come up with an alternative idea. This also encourages the players to have the PCs interact verbally with each other in combat: "Florin you idiot! You jumped in front of my shot." This level of roleplaying is mostly lost if the group can cross table talk tactical decisions whenever they want. Also, even though the PCs have these abilities doesn't imply that they actually know how to use them together as a team effectively. That's a desired goal, but that doesn't mean that they have this skill. Cross table talk by definition gives them a teamwork quality that the group did not gain by adventuring and hence the players learning. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
How meticulous can the planning be in a six-second combat round?
Top