Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Enrahim2" data-source="post: 8999264" data-attributes="member: 7039850">Cool! I can see that this is a design tradeoff a game might take to improve split group experience. If you are accepting as a premise of your game that there will be significant amount of time where there are situations where a player cannot actively affect happens in the now, then falling back on the tried and true one turn each with equal parts action on each turn game concept seem like something most would be willing to accept (after all combat in D&D 5ed doesn't allow for much interaction on a different player's turn even if your character is present).As long as characters are known to certanly not be interacting in any of the relevant timescales, dissolving synchronise of time over distance is quite safe, as there will likely be oportunities to resynchronize (traveler appear to be a great example of this due to the wastness of space.The big challenge with this I can see arises if we are in a situation where there are some established observationability between the characters, allong with a likelihood that they will interact.For instance A and B is close to a safe camp when they observes an enemy raiding party. A decides to investigate further while B go to camp. Turn go back and forth with A doing various fast paced prodding and distractions of the raiding party, while B do some obviously more time consuming shopping activity. Then suddenly A decides to lead the enemy straight to the safe camp. This would clearly cause trouble with consistency with Bs action, in particular if the outcome would be that the raiders destroy the camp.Do the games that allow for flexible turn timescale across distance have a good solution to the above kind of scenarios? I can imagine that the problems would be a lot less common in games with larger default scales of time and distance like traveler's astronomic scale. With the timescale of "baseline" D&D these kind of issues seem very likely to crop up. Hence it seem inadvisable to deviate from synchronous time unless at the time operating on a different scale.As such I am still not certain these games are indeed solving a problem that is hard to solve in D&D. While they might have explicit guidelines on how to handle split party, that appear to possibly be handled on timescales that matches downtime scale in typical D&D nomenclature. Splitting the party is indeed an unproblematic norm also in D&D during "downtime" (Which for some groups can include full sessions of rich play). What would indeed be highly interesting would be if they manage the situation with split party that indeed often cause trouble in D&D: Where the distance is significant enough that they can't immediately interact or communicate with each other, but short enough that at least ripple effects of one character's decissions are likely to be seen in short notice by the other character?</blockquote>

Verification