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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 6061254" data-attributes="member: 6696971">I've heard both of these statements many-a-times.  However, taken together, the situation seems extraordinarily untenable; not from an anecdotal perspective (I'm sure what you're describing takes place at your table), but from a logical perspective.If something is exceedingly easy to be successful at > and this is understood at the table > then the opportunity for user-error contracts as margin-of-error expands > therefore tactical mental overhead/handling time should be reduced by proxy of choice 1 being as relevant as choice 2 being as relevant as choice 3.  Simply, as margin-of-error expands, relevance of tactical decision-making contracts...and mental overhead/handling time should contract with it.  You can put a million and 1 choices in front of a person but if they know that the margin-of-error inherent to the output of their choice drowns out the relevance of their choice, they can close their eyes and point at a power, narrate, roll dice, in-fill narrate the resolution.  That shouldn't take too long.To the first point: Tactical difficulty.  There is an extraordinarily simple, and user-friendly within the system, answer to this.  Level + 2 or L + 3 encounters becomes standard (rather than L:L), while difficult and boss encounters move up the spectrum to L + 4 and L + 5.  Problem solved.To the second point:  Table handling time.  The handling time that you describe at your time is so, so, so off the charts that I can't even extrapolate the scene in my mind.  I think I would have to see it in action to understand.  As DM, I can (quite literally) be done with the entirety of my creatures' suite of actions and their accompanying narration in 30-90 seconds per initiative sequence (pending number of creatures).  My players (my standard combats are L + 2 or L + 3 so there is more inherent difficulty and thus more stakes and thus more mental overhead/handling time...if I went with L:L, it would take them less time) can resolve their round (tactical decision-making, mechanical resolution, fortune-in-the-middle narration) in about 60 seconds apiece.  Our combats are about 4 rounds for standard fights and 5-8 for difficult/boss fights.  Given that, our combats are mostly 20-30 minutes with a few stretching out to 40.Your "most" (2-3 sessions at 3-4 hours apiece) versus my most...25ish minutes;  I don't even know how to bridge that gap.  Do you play with an absurd number of players?  8 maybe?  Everyone takes 8 minutes per turn?  Excessive smoke breaks and Mountain Dew runs?  10 round combats?  Alien invasions that you guys have to fight back mid-session?  Perhaps my table is out of the mainstream as well but most of the testimonials/anecdotes that I know of (out of curiosity, I've watched an "Encounters" session recently at a local gaming shop...12-14 year olds...they zip through combat) put handling time much nearer my table than what you've described.I'm curious if you could flesh out your thinking and anecdotes on the above a bit further.  Genuinely curious.</blockquote>

Verification