Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon 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 Next
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
*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!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
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
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
L&L 3/05 - Save or Die!
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="howandwhy99" data-source="post: 5843934" data-attributes="member: 3192"><p>You have some insightful posts, so I thought I'd respond to one. Simulation is a concern for some players, but it isn't the be and and end all either. In the past the game did clip off extraordinarily rare odds in its rolls. When games tried to put them back in, like with exploding damage rolls (cumulative max results keep rolling), they invariably limited how long PCs could adventure before the odds caught up to them too, not just dealing it out to the enemy. It would be unheard of for anyone to live to old age from peasant living alone, much less the dangerous business of adventuring (though maybe some prefer that in their games, I don't).</p><p></p><p>However, while I do think the game makes concessions in some places to enable simplicity behind the screen, it can do a fair job of simulating stuff like combat too. A single knife can kill pretty much any creature when not actively defended against. A fall from a horse is 1d6 and a few poor HP rolls early on even for a Fighter means a 10' fall can still drop someone below zero. -10 (a glaring PC-only rule) obviously keeps PCs alive when they would more commonly die due to injury. Will HPs be dropped? Maybe we'll get multiple options with the benefits and drawbacks of each, who knows? But some level of abstraction will live on.</p><p></p><p>My main point is, interesting character challenges should lead to interesting player strategies. Medusa Save or Turn to Stone is pretty classic. It involves shared eye contact, so both creatures must be able to see and have direct line of sight on the other, no cover, no blindfolds, nada. It means arc of vision is accounted for, for humanoids normally 180°, and facing by creatures pointed at each other in that arc. That stuff isn't in the game anymore. They may have never been in many people's games, but bizarre outcomes due to the rules arise like hydra heads needing to be cut off (yeah I went there) when the rules can't account for corner cases.</p><p></p><p>I'd prefer to see players think up ideas like "we're better off negotiating here; what do we have to offer?" or "maybe we could send the monk in blindfolded? Let's test that out first like this..." Hack & Slash play really was about charging in and smacking stuff with one's sword until everything fell. It used to be the odds were on average 50% to do that (so in no one's favor). Changing the odds by thinking outside the box was how we changed that. And IMO creative thinking is really what these glass cannons promote. They're not about ruining the players fun or exiling them from the game table randomly. And I'd rather not see made popular the opinion that 'anything not solely designed for attrition-based play is the problem.' I say we need more diversity of rules, not less. These are the times when the rules need to step in and promote more interesting game play, not less.</p><p></p><p>I'm not Simulation or Nothing. What I see is a design challenge that can be overcome creatively and, if done well, could really amaze people. Rather than bemoaning these difficulties and avoiding them by changing the fiction, why don't we think of means that highlight their uniqueness and really push the players to get creative too?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="howandwhy99, post: 5843934, member: 3192"] You have some insightful posts, so I thought I'd respond to one. Simulation is a concern for some players, but it isn't the be and and end all either. In the past the game did clip off extraordinarily rare odds in its rolls. When games tried to put them back in, like with exploding damage rolls (cumulative max results keep rolling), they invariably limited how long PCs could adventure before the odds caught up to them too, not just dealing it out to the enemy. It would be unheard of for anyone to live to old age from peasant living alone, much less the dangerous business of adventuring (though maybe some prefer that in their games, I don't). However, while I do think the game makes concessions in some places to enable simplicity behind the screen, it can do a fair job of simulating stuff like combat too. A single knife can kill pretty much any creature when not actively defended against. A fall from a horse is 1d6 and a few poor HP rolls early on even for a Fighter means a 10' fall can still drop someone below zero. -10 (a glaring PC-only rule) obviously keeps PCs alive when they would more commonly die due to injury. Will HPs be dropped? Maybe we'll get multiple options with the benefits and drawbacks of each, who knows? But some level of abstraction will live on. My main point is, interesting character challenges should lead to interesting player strategies. Medusa Save or Turn to Stone is pretty classic. It involves shared eye contact, so both creatures must be able to see and have direct line of sight on the other, no cover, no blindfolds, nada. It means arc of vision is accounted for, for humanoids normally 180°, and facing by creatures pointed at each other in that arc. That stuff isn't in the game anymore. They may have never been in many people's games, but bizarre outcomes due to the rules arise like hydra heads needing to be cut off (yeah I went there) when the rules can't account for corner cases. I'd prefer to see players think up ideas like "we're better off negotiating here; what do we have to offer?" or "maybe we could send the monk in blindfolded? Let's test that out first like this..." Hack & Slash play really was about charging in and smacking stuff with one's sword until everything fell. It used to be the odds were on average 50% to do that (so in no one's favor). Changing the odds by thinking outside the box was how we changed that. And IMO creative thinking is really what these glass cannons promote. They're not about ruining the players fun or exiling them from the game table randomly. And I'd rather not see made popular the opinion that 'anything not solely designed for attrition-based play is the problem.' I say we need more diversity of rules, not less. These are the times when the rules need to step in and promote more interesting game play, not less. I'm not Simulation or Nothing. What I see is a design challenge that can be overcome creatively and, if done well, could really amaze people. Rather than bemoaning these difficulties and avoiding them by changing the fiction, why don't we think of means that highlight their uniqueness and really push the players to get creative too? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
L&L 3/05 - Save or Die!
Top