"I hate math"

[jeffh]

Wraith 26 [10+3(bracers)+4(dex)+1(ring)+4(mobility)+2(fighting defensively)=26]
The Wraith ignores natural armor, but nothing else (force armor counts).

That adds up to 24, not 26.

 

[Zappo]

I find it humorous that a lot of folks don't blink at 3es convoluted math, but bitch about Thac0 being too hard to figure.

It's not a matter of math complexity; I have already argued that old D&D editions are less complex than 3E. The problem is that 3E's math results in a richer game, while THAC0 and similar contraptions are just a waste of time.

As for your comments about less complicated systems being faster because there are fewer choices to make, all I can say is that my experience diverges from yours in that department. IMO a game can be "simple" without being "simplistic". It's not necessary to have a different numerical modifier detailed in the rules for every choice or combination of choices in order to reward making creative and thoughtful decisions in combat (or anywhere else in the game for that matter).

Yes, I wasn't making a blanket statement. Some systems are simple and allow for good variety of actions. They typically have other issues, though. This isn't a fault of the game or of the designers: simply, there are trade-offs when creating a game and everyone makes his choices. Noone makes miracles.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

Um, let's see. Um, nope. Can't tell you. NDA. Sorry. But there is something in C&C which should simplify some of this. (Or at least it has the potential to I haven't had a chance to try it yet.)
Well, I suppose I can say that you probably won't have such high level characters in C&C. But I can't really say why. But I'm thinking you can guess why....

I'm hoping it has gotten rid of Feats and the variable modifiers that change round by round in combat and give me a headache as a DM.

 

[Joshua Randall]

Very nice! Thank you for sharing this tool. I think it would help things (particularly for those players who will refuse to do the "pre-work" ahead of time).

You're welcome. I made it because I am a lazy player who hates doing the pre-work. Now I just have to make X's in various spots.

I would be curious to see how long your list of "buff" variables down the right side will get when you get to 14th - 16th level, including all the different spell permutations and magic items that could be added in.

Really freakin' long, would be my guess. But the beauty of it is that Excel doesn't care how many variables there are - it will happily crunch thousands of numbers in a minimal amount of time.

I could make the sheet cleaner by using checkboxes or drop-down lists to select which spells are in effect... hmm. As things stand -- even with just the clumsy X's -- it's already a huge time-saver.

Another gaming tool I use are these condition modifier tokens (attached). I stole them from some defunct d20 site and cleaned them up a bit for the 3.5 revision. Make a bunch of copies, cut them out, and keep them in a big stack near the battle mat. Then, whenever a PC or monster is affected by certain condition(s), put the appropriate token(s) near the PC's/monster's mini.

 

[jmucchiello]

I'm hoping it has gotten rid of Feats and the variable modifiers that change round by round in combat and give me a headache as a DM.

I'm still unaware of these "variable modifiers that change round by round". It sounds like you are saying someone gets a +/-1d4 chaotic bonus/penalty to AC each round. (Hey, that sounds cool.... I'm planning on sending the party to Limbo soon....)

[Looks around at enraged "math" haters and ducks.... +4 cover bonus]

 

[WizarDru]

I'm still unaware of these "variable modifiers that change round by round". It sounds like you are saying someone gets a +/-1d4 chaotic bonus/penalty to AC each round. (Hey, that sounds cool.... I'm planning on sending the party to Limbo soon....)

[Looks around at enraged "math" haters and ducks.... +4 cover bonus]

I think Flexor was referring to things like Power Attack, Combat Expertise, and so forth, where the value can and does change per round, at the player's/DM's desire for the PC/NPC.

 

[jmucchiello]

But does anyone actually play those games?

Seriously, do you have a link for RISUS? I've never heard of it, before.

Well, there's always google. RISUS: The Anything RPG is a narrative RPG. Characters are made by assigning 10 dice among a number of cliches (normally 3 or 4). The cliches are anything you want them to be with the idea being everyone will understand what said cliche is capable of. The game is so simple, it fits on 6 nicely-layed out, letter-size pages. S. John also sells a 64 page companion product because some people have a hard time Grokking the game.

Go download the PDF and be amazed at how simple RPGs can be and still be full-bodied enough to work with any genre. Also go look at the links page to see how many people have (over)expanded RISUS to suit their needs. Just look at how many languages it's been translated into!

As those on the mailing list will tell: There is no wrong way to play RISUS. Oh, and the mailing list will also tell you that yes, people do play RISUS games regularly.

 

[jmucchiello]

I think Flexor was referring to things like Power Attack, Combat Expertise, and so forth, where the value can and does change per round, at the player's/DM's desire for the PC/NPC.

But how is that a headache for the DM? It's the player's headache I would think. Whenever I create a NPC with PA, I always include a few lines in the stat block (and I don't mean the normal one) that shows that PAing for 3 and 6 and any other number I expect they might try so I don't have to remember whether or not he's wielding a two-handed weapon, etc. (I should admit I've never used CE. It does affect attack bonus and AC. But then I don't think I've fought defensively either.)

I'm thinking a lot of these problems could be solved with post-it notes. Could those who complain about the problem try using post-its to write down situational modifier and see if it helps with the complexity problem?

 

[Ourph]

That adds up to 24, not 26.

You're right, forgot to subtract Nat. Armor from the total. So Saeviomagy got that one right.

 

[ashockney]

Another gaming tool I use are these condition modifier tokens (attached). I stole them from some defunct d20 site and cleaned them up a bit for the 3.5 revision. Make a bunch of copies, cut them out, and keep them in a big stack near the battle mat. Then, whenever a PC or monster is affected by certain condition(s), put the appropriate token(s) near the PC's/monster's mini.

Again Joshua, kudos! You've COMPLETELY got the spirit! I would love to hear from others on their pitfalls of complexity/math in high level D&D, and love to hear more great creative solutions like this one.

I have downloaded this, and will DEFINITELY be using them along with my players. Terrific stuff.

Might I also suggest some additional tactical considerations? Flying, Levitating, Spider Climbing, Mounted, Climbing, Crawling, Squeezing through Space, Blinking, Cover, Concealment, Prone, Flanking, Charging, Hiding (Stealthing), Moving Silently

Anyone care to take a crack at those?

Note: 45 unique "tactical" considerations to sort out in any combat (low or high level) for each combatant. Each with their own modifiers to the combat. At higher levels, you are far MORE likely to encounter entire strings of these states on a variety of combatants throughout any combat.

Do there need to be this many unique considerations? Do the stat/effects have to vary drastically for each? I think there is SOME coordination of these effects already (ie, cover, concealment, higher ground, grappled/entangled).

Could something similiar be done for feats and class abilities to register when they are "in effect" and "not in effect" more easily?