Laptop DM - What do I need?

[evildmguy]

My group looks up rules all the time, and we've been playing consistently since 3rd edition was released. We can't remember every little modifier, spell or combat rule. Maybe we're just a little slow on the uptake.

As for notes, I like using MS Word on the notebook, but sometimes just fall back to printed pages for convenience.

I am not trying to talk down to any group. Perhaps I needed a few more "imo" spread around my post.

My point was merely that I prefer the story elements, not the wargaming elements. Therefore, I would rather the GM fake the numbers while we are at the table to keep things moving and perhaps more cinematic, rather than spend any amount of time flipping through the books. Sure, it happens when everyone is new to the game, as I am finding out, but I don't feel the need to do that while playing. I want to tell my story!

That's me, though. I could be wrong.

edg

 

[mafisto]

I am not trying to talk down to any group. Perhaps I needed a few more "imo" spread around my post.

My point was merely that I prefer the story elements, not the wargaming elements. Therefore, I would rather the GM fake the numbers while we are at the table to keep things moving and perhaps more cinematic, rather than spend any amount of time flipping through the books. Sure, it happens when everyone is new to the game, as I am finding out, but I don't feel the need to do that while playing. I want to tell my story!

That's me, though. I could be wrong.

edg

Meh. You're not wrong, it's just a matter of preference. My players take combat and rules very seriously, and they actually *like* seeing me look things up when there's even a hint of discord. And, as I said before, there's no longer any 'flipping through books'. It's right there in front of me with a few mouse clicks.

I have to say, the above paragraph not withstanding, that book scanning can be very disruptive. I personally do not like it -- but I guess it's more about what the majority of players like.

 

[WingOver]

I am not trying to talk down to any group. Perhaps I needed a few more "imo" spread around my post.

edg

Hey it's cool! No offense taken. We used to fudge more in 1st and 2nd edition when the rules were "looser". 3rd edition rules are pretty consistent and well defined and our group likes to play by them. It's not unusual for someone to bring up a +1 modifier here or there from some obscure rule.

 

[Luke]

Rules lookup

First of all, I don't think rules should be looked up at the table. Unless the group is a made of new players and a new GM, the rules should be used at a minimum AT THE TABLE.

I have a pretty different take on that. I sit at the table with my laptop running RolePlayingMaster, and I do very accurate play with my character. I resolve issues very quickly, and whilst others struggle a little too much with the numbers, I get instant results, and get to focus more on actual roleplaying.

Some examples:

3 mouse clicks and I'm looking at the full breakdown of my attempt to do a climbing check.
Easy? There's a plus number to my Climb on my statblock, and I just add that to my d20 roll? Not quite.

My ranks bonus, Str bonus (which automatically changed due to a Bull's Strength just cast on me), armor check and possible use of a climber's kit are all laid out before me in a list.

Just below that are the possible DC modifiers for bracing opposite walls, bracing perpendicular walls, and whether or not its slippery. A mouse click can activate anything that applies.

Also I have the standard dropdown box showing the various DC options for skill checks. Of the 8 options that apply to climb, I choose "uneven surface with narrow handholds", which tells me its a DC 20.

So 3 mouse clicks, and a possibly a couple more to tailor to the situation, and I have the outcome - completely and accurately described by the rules. If I felt the need, then I could have pressed the "Desc" tab to get the full handbook description.

Now, climb is pretty common, but I'll bet that very few people know the DC for "Overhang or ceiling with handholds but no footholds" - without a lookup of some kind.

Much the same situation, with my character doing a will save.
If you noticed the conditions from the previous example (Cat's Grace, Bull's Strength, Bless and Magic Vestment), I get much the same screen, except the will base, wis mod, possible elf racial bonus vs enchantment and the morale bonus for a bless spell are all mentioned. Too easy, and nothing forgotten.

This situation was pretty taken from our gaming session last week. We expected big trouble behind a certain big double door, and the party cleric and wizard did much work on us with spells like magic vestment, cat's grace, bulls strength, bless, invisibility etc.
A few mouse clicks and I had all these spells entered as conditions against my character. All the adjustments for Str, Dex, attacks, damage, saves AC (incl. consideration of max dex wearing heavy armor) etc all just popped out automatically - with any possible stacking rules for bonuses correctly applied.
I can tell you that we got pretty bogged down with the changes to the other characters where a program like RolePlayingMaster was not used.

Making an attack. 3 mouse clicks and I have the full breakdown of my attempt to make an attack. Note that I did elsewhere indicate (quickly and easily) my preferences for my expertise, power attack feat options.

Its all there, and its all correct. If I pick up a dagger in my other hand it'll still be correct, with the possibility of a 2 weapon fighting feat being considered as well.

Ordinarily I just get the result of what AC I would hit, and how much damage I would cause if I do (possibilities of criticals, sneak damage etc all taken into account). I this case I pictured a "full combat" example as might be controlled by the DM, where targeting is used and the opponents AC breakdown is also given.

I guess that this is actually well beyond rules lookup, since its actually all done for you without even a lookup. Still there are plenty of cases when you need to lookup.
What about the specific details on a particular spell in your spell list of 20 different spells???
How about the poor old DM trying to play an NPC encounter correctly, where he is effecttively trying to correctly manage the different feats, classes, racial traits, spells and special abilities of a group where every member has the complexity of a full player character???

So, in such cases you want to be able to simply double click on any item in a list of feats, spells, special abilities etc, and get all the lookup details.

If you're a DM, a laptop can give you effectively, at worst, the best DM's screen you can have!

 

[evildmguy]

Greetings!

There have been some very good responses here!

I think, going back to the OP, the important question is what does your group like? What does your group want out of gaming?

Some people like the wargaming and the minute details. The players like being able to use the rules to get all of the advantages they can. While these are game terms, they can be translated into game mechanics. (Surprise, taking aim, getting an advantage in some way.) If this the type of game you play, then I agree getting RPM, DMF, hyperlinked SRD, etc. is exactly what you want.

I personally don't like all of those details. Combat is the place, imo, where DND (d20) really slows down. I found that after having a thrilling combat, that took half of the gaming time, I forgot why it was important and why it happened! I did get caught up in the excitement of the fight, don't get me wrong, but the fight itself is usually only one part of the story. For me, it isn't the story itself.

[btw, I am not implying that the above programs can't be scaled down to the level I talk about. I don't have any experience using them, so I can't comment as to whether they can do that or not.]

Therefore, I used, and I couldn't find it on ENWorld anymore, Alessio Pauri's Combat Manager. It was a very simple, straight forward program that tracked combat, spells, and options. I would say it speeded up my d20 combat by 33%+! In fact, combat was going so fast, my players were complaining they didn't have time to think about what they wanted to do! That, to me, was nice because we went from being able to do at most one combat per session to being able to do three or four and still have a lot of time to role play. That was my goal. (This program, in showing me the to hit and damage at the same time, also allowed me to add more description into combat, by knowing these things all at once. Again, something that I wanted to do.)

My other goal was to add more detail, but to have it in the background. Instead of needing to spend hours creating weather systems, using WM I was able to let that create the weather and I merely added it into my description. It allowed me to be more consistent and add more important details in without letting those details take up more time than they should. That's also where BLAZONS! and the other programs came in as well.

Therefore, all of the programs I listed helped me reach my goals, as I stated above. As I said, it wasn't important to me to know all of the modifiers in any particular situation. I am lucky in that my players are willing to trust my judgement calls for the modifiers. If it is in question, I look it up after the game, see how close I was, tell everyone and next time we discuss, briefly before the game, what everyone wants to do.

Hopefully, my advice, as well as the good advice of others, can help the OP reach their goal as well!

Good discussion! Thanks!

edg

 

[Luke]

Some people like the wargaming and the minute details. The players like being able to use the rules to get all of the advantages they can.
...
I personally don't like all of those details. Combat is the place, imo, where DND (d20) really slows down. I found that after having a thrilling combat, that took half of the gaming time, I forgot why it was important and why it happened!

As always, whatever the gaming style, the most important thing is that the group enjoys it, and hopefully that its consistent.

In over 20 years of gaming, I've had a wide range of gaming style experiences.
At one end of the spectrum I've been in games that get really bogged down in the detail of game mechanics, and it takes forever to get through any kind of encounter.
At the other end of the spectrum, I've been involved in a game where the person taking a turn at DMing was not very strong on rules at all. It was interesting as an exercise in versimilitude and DMed storytelling - but it did go down very badly with the group who ultimately became quite bored, because it degenerated essentially into the DM "telling the story" since the player stats and dice rolls didn't actually count for much.

Now I'll grant you that 3rd edition improved vastly on 2nd edition - but with a double-edged sword. On the positive side, the rules are varied, comprehensive an well structured - to the point where the DM doesn't have to place too much personal interpretation on how to play and adjudicate - *very important*.
On the negative side, there is much, much greater complexity than there was in 2nd edition. My personal view is that its quite difficult to correctly play characters (once spell effects and situations start changing stats and all the follow-on effects to AC, attacks and damage come in), and its *extremely* difficult for DMs to correctly play an entire encounter group (where NPCs and even monsters can carry the full complexity of player characters). Don't forget the stacking rules for all the changing modifiers!

Please note that I personally develop RolePlayingMaster (so I'm biased), and that the issues above is the reason that I developed it.

My take is that RolePlayingMaster let a player put together a character, and play it correctly, almost without understanding the rules, and especially without having to manually do all the calculations.
This is even better for DMs, who can randomly (later applying manual edits), put entire encounters together - with race levels, class levels, templates added, and spell lists, feats and equipment all instantly generated. When that happens, the weapons and armor can be generated as magical, and *everything* just comes out right.

To my mind, that lets you play the game with the rules you got in the books you bought, and it still lets you play quickly, as if you were playing a scaled down rules light fashion.
If the program you use doesn't take all the right things into account, then its not actually a D&D/D20 game that you're playing - just something hopefully fairly close.
Of course, there's nothing wrong with that, but its nice to know that you can get something to let you play the actual game that you purchased, enjoying the richness and full flavour of 3rd edition - without paying the penalty for complexity.

Lastly, my personal take is that there's nothing wrong with knowing the rules to get all the advantages. In real life, we focus with training and education to maximise our success - be it a professional career, or martial arts training. Why wouldn't the same outlook apply to a fantasy character? The main thing is to be fair and assist with those rules you're aware of being applied both ways. My gaming group often ends up rolling their eyes when I remind a DM that his monster isn't actually susceptible to the critical hit a player has just delivered

 

[DMFTodd]

Some people like the wargaming and the minute details. If this the type of game you play, then I agree getting RPM, DMF, hyperlinked SRD, etc. is exactly what you want.

You've admitted you haven't used any of these programs but you know exactly who they benefit? Interesting.

I understand what you mean about not looking up rules at the table. Bogging down the game with rules lookups is no fun. There are 3 solutions to this problem that I can think of:
1) The DM memorizes everything so no lookups are needed. I'm sure there's some people who can play that way.
2) The DM just makes it up as he goes. I'm sure there are some people who can play that way successfully.
3) The rule gets looked up.

If you're a category (1) or a category (2) DM, then yes I agree, a laptop isn't gong to help you. If you're a category (3) DM, or partially a (3), then a laptop is a great aid. A laptop and a good program can let you look up things very quickly to minimize the distraction to the game.

I would say it speeded up my d20 combat by 33%+!

That's the important point. A good combat management program is going to make combat go much faster. That leaves more game time for whatever you want - whether it be storytelling, roleplaying or more combat. I think it can speed up combat more than the 33%.

This program, in showing me the to hit and damage at the same time, also allowed me to add more description into combat,

Another very good point. Each thing the laptop can do for you is one less thing the DM has to think about. Which means the DM can use that part of his brain to do other things. I found the same thing you did - with the laptop doing all the math for me, my brain was freed up to provide more narrative for the combat and to think more about the monsters tactics.

btw, I am not implying that the above programs can't be scaled down to the level I talk about.

Actually, the 3 main combat managers (DMF, RPM, DM Genie) take different approaches. (Hoping I don't step on Luke or Janik's toes, but here goes):

Roleplaying Master, as Luke's screenshots show, tries to do everthing for you. It tries to do all of the math and handle all of the modifiers.

My program, DM's Familiar, does not try to do everything. I try to handle the 20% of things that a DM spends 90% of his time doing during combat. If the PC is flanked, I leave it to the DM to add +2 to the attack rolls whereas in RPM, you check a box for "flanked" and it does the math for you.

DM Genie comes in somewhere between the two but leans towards the RPM side of things rather than the DMF way.

So, depending on your game style, you may find one or the other program more approriate. All of the programs have free demos. Take a look and decide what works best for you.

The sure thing is that a laptop is a great aid at the game table. Find software that matches your style and you'll run faster, more organized, more interesting games.

 

[Luke]

Actually, the 3 main combat managers (DMF, RPM, DM Genie) take different approaches. (Hoping I don't step on Luke or Janik's toes, but here goes):

Roleplaying Master, as Luke's screenshots show, tries to do everthing for you. It tries to do all of the math and handle all of the modifiers.

No problem Todd.

RolePlayingMaster actually does pretty much all you can hope for from a program. You can do more if you have a fully worked 3D world (like NeverWinter Nights, except you lose badly in other ways).
From the images above, there's obviously a very large database of feats, items, classes, abilities, conditions etc which can point the way fairly clearly to automating your work for you.

Nevertheless, RPM does absolutely everything that it can to avoid forcing a gaming style on you, at every possible opportunity.
Experience has shown that trying to play from manually entered statblock-type figures quickly becomes inaccurate once the current situation starts involving conditions, spell effects and other things (such as poison - which changes Str or dex, and all the things that subsequently depend on it - which is an awful lot).
It becomes a particular problem once you start to realize that the *type* of modifier is almost as important as its value, since stacking rules can mean that the true results are quite different from what you expect.

Given all that, its still up to the individual to decide how much automation they want. If you want, don't bother to enter in conditions and spell effects as they happen. You then get what the other combat managers typically give you (DMF, DMGenie?) which is a set of numbers per a static statblock. In that case, you try to juggle the effects in your head, hopefully keeping the stacking rules in mind as you go.
An interesting example of stacking rules is what you're supposed to do when you're wearing gauntlets of ogre power and somebody casts bull's strength on you. It actually takes a careful reading of the manufacturing prerequisites of the ogre power gauntlets before you can determine what *type* of bonus it gives your strength - which means that combining the two isn't nearly as good as what you would hope for. Its great to just have a program that has already considered all that, and just pops out the right numbers for you.
At the start of creating RPM, I considered that many people would accept a program that would manage things inaccurately for them, and just accept what it spat out, even if it was actually not very accurate. I *love* 3rd edition, and went the extra miles to actually make that accuracy a very viable option for those that want it.

I really don't think that ignoring this is a case of "the other 10% of the time". Any creature (be it a PC, NPC or monster), can easily undergo a bewildering set of stat changes from relatively simple and common game effects. This is about getting the basics right - as described by the rules.

I find that is actually quite inflammatory for many people. We (this community) love our 3rd edition fairly unconditionally, and many people understand and *love* the 3rd edition they read about in the rule books - but they really don't want to know about how inaccurately it gets played out around the table. My own gaming group includes a bunch of people who rate their intellects very highly. This includes the individual who scored the top high school marks in my state, warranting a congratulatory letter from our premier (read "governor" if you are American - and no, thats nothing like a Russian premier of old ).
Yet, to a man (without a laptop), frequent mistakes are made (includes referenced super-brain).

Hey, bottom line: Whatever works for you, and is good fun - works!!
Still, if you can manage a laptop, give some good D&D in-game software serious consideration. Actually play the game that you love reading about in the books!

 

[DMFTodd]

You then get what the other combat managers typically give you (DMF, DMGenie?) which is a set of numbers per a static statblock.

Actually, DM's Familiar handles buffs/nerfs just fine. It's not a static statblock. You are correct in that DMF doesn't bother with figuring out stacking as RPM does. I leave that to the DM.

 

[Luke]

Actually, DM's Familiar handles buffs/nerfs just fine. It's not a static statblock. You are correct in that DMF doesn't bother with figuring out stacking as RPM does. I leave that to the DM.

I'm not sure what you mean about buffs/nerfs, but I would highly recommend putting a stacking calculator into DMF.
If you appear to take modifications into account, but don't actually do it correctly, then you run the risk of having players think that you're actually doing the correct job for them, which only turns out to be true part of the time. I think that DMGenie has the same problem. I understand that casting something like Bull's Strength multiple times in DMGenie just continues to stack up your Str higher and higher.

I realize that doing the right thing down to the level of stacking has serious issues for licensing legalities with Wizards of the Coast. You need to meet serious "open code" requirements that aren't easy - but I think its well worth it...

As before: If a bunch of people use you're program, and they're having fun, then thats the main consideration. You may just want to check, however, if they're actually aware of whats really up with the numbers that your program spits out. It may be that a significant number of your users have blind trust and misplaced faith (not necessarily how you manage it at all, but a general consideration to be aware of).
For example, if you provide a set of attack and damage numbers closer to a statblock than a dynamic which incorporates current effects and conditions with stacking, then think about how useful a quick program determination of what AC you hit, and how much damage you cause actually is. If your quick and useful output is actually based on partially followed rules, then you're actually making it harder for players than if you do nothing at all !
By that, I mean that if your final numbers are to mean anything at all, and you leave it to them to consider what the stacking rules were *meant* to do, then you're actually requiring them to not only know the full rules, but also to work out what your program considered - and what it left out, so they can somehow fill in and rework the gaps. It may be that they were better off, and would find it easier, to work it out from scratch.

I certainly don't want to appear derogatory ( especially if seen as a "rival" RPG developer). I'm just making suggestions that may "raise the bar" for RPG software and a better over-all support of our RPG community.