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
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Legends & Lore: Combat and Other Forms of Violence
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="Quickleaf" data-source="post: 5579298" data-attributes="member: 20323"><p>I agree with delericho's proposal for nested complexity. I see three ways this sort of tactical complexity could be built in:</p><p></p><p><strong>(1) DM's encounter design:</strong> Guidance for DMs to design encounters with an eye toward how long the encounter is supposed to last.</p><p></p><p>E.g. Simple terrain coupled with terrain powers dealing extreme damage speed up short combats. Big boss fights might have particularly complicated terrain though terrain powers deal less damage. Lower level skirmishers and lots of minions also speed up combat. As well as time limits, trigger changes, and unusual tactics.</p><p></p><p><strong>(2) Player's character choices:</strong> Players could choose between a simplified version of their class (a la the martial essentials classes) and a more advanced version with greater tactical options.</p><p></p><p>E.g. An "easy-mode" wizard build might have no powers which inflict conditions you need to track. </p><p></p><p><strong>(3) Rules differentiating between 'modes' of complexity:</strong> The rules could have nested layers of combat complexity as delericho mentioned. So the basic combat rules would always work, and then the tactical combat rules would get activated by the DM or players during major fights.</p><p></p><p>E.g. The basic combat rules would work fine without miniatures, meaning speed and range are reinterpreted through this lens.</p><p></p><p>Regardless I think more robust "improvised actions" rules are in order, maybe taking a cue from Mark Monack's <strong>Terrain Powers</strong> article. That's something that could be used no matter the tactical complexity of the fight, and could either shorten fights or lengthen them depending on how it's used.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Quickleaf, post: 5579298, member: 20323"] I agree with delericho's proposal for nested complexity. I see three ways this sort of tactical complexity could be built in: [b](1) DM's encounter design:[/b] Guidance for DMs to design encounters with an eye toward how long the encounter is supposed to last. E.g. Simple terrain coupled with terrain powers dealing extreme damage speed up short combats. Big boss fights might have particularly complicated terrain though terrain powers deal less damage. Lower level skirmishers and lots of minions also speed up combat. As well as time limits, trigger changes, and unusual tactics. [b](2) Player's character choices:[/b] Players could choose between a simplified version of their class (a la the martial essentials classes) and a more advanced version with greater tactical options. E.g. An "easy-mode" wizard build might have no powers which inflict conditions you need to track. [b](3) Rules differentiating between 'modes' of complexity:[/b] The rules could have nested layers of combat complexity as delericho mentioned. So the basic combat rules would always work, and then the tactical combat rules would get activated by the DM or players during major fights. E.g. The basic combat rules would work fine without miniatures, meaning speed and range are reinterpreted through this lens. Regardless I think more robust "improvised actions" rules are in order, maybe taking a cue from Mark Monack's [b]Terrain Powers[/b] article. That's something that could be used no matter the tactical complexity of the fight, and could either shorten fights or lengthen them depending on how it's used. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Legends & Lore: Combat and Other Forms of Violence
Top