Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 6989097" data-attributes="member: 996">When I think about it, choosing to attack an enemy you're unlikely to kill in one go is starting a multi-round action.&nbsp; I see players begin multi-round actions all the time.&nbsp; Literally 'declare' them, not so much, since there's no need to commit to the rest of the action.&nbsp; (Indeed, some players like to be cagey.&nbsp; That may be something like what you're getting at.&nbsp; If there's no need to declare an action in advance, players can decline to telegraph what they're trying to do, which is ultimately un-helpful in a very DM-dependent system.)&nbsp; For that matter, I rarely see players declare their whole round of move/action/etc up-front, but rather go through it in order.&nbsp; &nbsp;Though it's pretty common to coordinate actions - if you do that, this round, I'll do this other thing next round, or I'll wait to do something because you're going to do something else this round.&nbsp; That kinda stuff.It's more common the longer the fights tend to be, too.&nbsp; Last session was a huge battle that went many rounds and there were more things going on that took multiple rounds to unfold.&nbsp; &nbsp;Do you hold a player to a multi-round declaration until it's completed, or let them give up on 'em and try something else?Because if you don't hold them to it, it's not really a multi-round declaration, just starting the multi-round task...My experience with improvised actions is that it's driven more by the range of PC abilities than by the initiative system.&nbsp; If a PC can do something a little unusual, players look for creative ways to leverage that.&nbsp; I can see formal 'declaration' of multi-round actions happening less often in the turn-based system.&nbsp; I don't see it impacting improv so much, though.Not at all.&nbsp; It's a cooperative game, I don't think the initiative system much impacts that. (see above about 'coordinating actions')IMX, yeah, players tend to want to /do stuff/.&nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />I can and have run 3D combats with lots of vertical movement using hex or grid (you just note altitude for each figure, for instance with a d20 next to them), it's much easier than trying to keep it all straight in TotM.&nbsp; At the time and distance scales of D&amp;D - and, especially, the fast combats of 5e - such a combat couldn't be spread out over a mile, though.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 6989097, member: 996"] When I think about it, choosing to attack an enemy you're unlikely to kill in one go is starting a multi-round action. I see players begin multi-round actions all the time. Literally 'declare' them, not so much, since there's no need to commit to the rest of the action. (Indeed, some players like to be cagey. That may be something like what you're getting at. If there's no need to declare an action in advance, players can decline to telegraph what they're trying to do, which is ultimately un-helpful in a very DM-dependent system.) For that matter, I rarely see players declare their whole round of move/action/etc up-front, but rather go through it in order. Though it's pretty common to coordinate actions - if you do that, this round, I'll do this other thing next round, or I'll wait to do something because you're going to do something else this round. That kinda stuff. It's more common the longer the fights tend to be, too. Last session was a huge battle that went many rounds and there were more things going on that took multiple rounds to unfold. Do you hold a player to a multi-round declaration until it's completed, or let them give up on 'em and try something else? Because if you don't hold them to it, it's not really a multi-round declaration, just starting the multi-round task... My experience with improvised actions is that it's driven more by the range of PC abilities than by the initiative system. If a PC can do something a little unusual, players look for creative ways to leverage that. I can see [i]formal[/i] 'declaration' of multi-round actions happening less often in the turn-based system. I don't see it impacting improv so much, though. Not at all. It's a cooperative game, I don't think the initiative system much impacts that. (see above about 'coordinating actions') IMX, yeah, players tend to want to /do stuff/. ;) I can and have run 3D combats with lots of vertical movement using hex or grid (you just note altitude for each figure, for instance with a d20 next to them), it's much easier than trying to keep it all straight in TotM. At the time and distance scales of D&D - and, especially, the fast combats of 5e - such a combat couldn't be spread out over a mile, though. [/QUOTE]

Verification