MCDM Update: The Power Roll

[darkbard]

You’d think when people didn’t like something they’d simply stop engaging with that thing. Instead, so many people seek out the things they dislike and forcefully engage with them. It’s really weird. Like “hate watching” a show. Why do people seek out things that make them angry? Are people just that addicted to hate?

What I posted about MCDM rpg is both true and relevant to the discussion. Just because I don' t agree doesn't automatically become threadcapping. I'm allowed my informed opinion, right?

Surely you see the irony here, right? What you're doing isn't "not agree[ing]." It's engaging with something you don't like, in this case an unreleased game that you feel the need to slander the intentions of.

 

[mamba]

What I posted about MCDM rpg is both true and relevant to the discussion.

this could not be further from the truth...

I'm allowed my informed opinion, right?

your opinion is not informed, you are allowed to have your uninformed opinion however, just don't expect to not get pushback

 

[Umbran]

I know exactly how this will end.

Mod Note:
I can make some guesses as to how this discussion is apt to end for you, if you continue in the disrespectful manner you've shown thus far.

You are free to not like MCDM. You are free to expect their efforts will fail. But at this point, you are pretty much threadcrapping that opinion around in a way that's disrespectful to your fellow posters. Please clean up your act. Thanks.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

My experience of power-roll-type systems is broadly positive. I'm not sure the PtbA comparison makes a lot of sense, but this approach seems reasonable to me. I'm not in love with a game that makes me look everything up on a bunch of different tables though, hopefully they can find a way to avoid that, specifically.

 

[Meech17]

Overall I like this system, but I worry about the need for every player needing tables.

Matt mentions in the video that over time you'll learn what your skills do, and probably not need a table, sure.. But as someone currently running a 5E game for mostly new players (And as a new DM) I can tell you that sharing reference materials is a drag. I own a copy of the PHB in paper, and then I have a digital copy. One of my players owns it on DDB and another is using the free version. Three players have no copies and rely on mine. I can share the physical one but I use my tablet for other DMing stuff so I'm hesitant to pass it around the table. (Tangent.. I'm not saying I don't trust my players to not look at my notes or something, it's just that I don't want to give away the device holding those notes when I'm likely to need to reference them.)

But I can imagine early sessions having combat drag as each player passes around the book, flip to their class, and then make their attack. Maybe the PDFs will be formatted in a way that allows for the tables to be easily printed.. Or maybe available freely online for players to reference on their phones or something.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Overall I like this system, but I worry about the need for every player needing tables.

Yeah that's my big concern based on other RPGs, and Matt has sort of resurrected one of the issues I was concerned about with this game when he was intending to use "funky dice" (ugh), which was that his "alternative" was if we didn't like/want-to-buy the "funky dice" we could just roll on tables instead. I know that tables make stuff take longer - sometimes significantly longer - than dice. PtbA gets around this because it doesn't really have a table - it just has three results and the numbers are always the same forever. That's clearly not going to be the case here. So they need to keep it real simple if they want to use tables.

I also don't really buy the "Oh well eventually players will learn!" thing re: tables, because like, sure, some will, but in my experience it's like 40% of players will accurately learn that, 20% will think they learned it and keep getting it wrong/confused, and 40% will just never learn it. I feel like he's going to get biased results here because the sort of people who are interested in actively participating in a playtest, and probably everyone in his own group(s) is in the first 40%.

I think they've suggested there will be an app for the game, which will help, but yeah it'll be important to have easy printed resources for the game too. I'm sure fans will create the latter, but if MCDM doesn't have their own official version it will demonstrate a failure to understand the issues they're creating with this decision.

 

[Meech17]

Yeah that's my big concern based on other RPGs, and Matt has sort of resurrected one of the issues I was concerned about with this game when he was intending to use "funky dice" (ugh), which was that his "alternative" was if we didn't like/want-to-buy the "funky dice" we could just roll on tables instead. I know that tables make stuff take longer - sometimes significantly longer - than dice. PtbA gets around this because it doesn't really have a table - it just has three results and the numbers are always the same forever. That's clearly not going to be the case here. So they need to keep it real simple if they want to use tables.

If I understood the video correctly, the tables will all be structured the same way, with the same tiers. I think his example was 1-7 being the first tier, with 8+ moving to the second one. He mentioned a similar problem. He wants people to know what's what. Just because your characters powers are different than mine, we both understand that an 8 is better than a 7, and it's universal.

I also don't really buy the "Oh well eventually players will learn!" thing re: tables, because like, sure, some will, but in my experience it's like 40% of players will accurately learn that, 20% will think they learned it and keep getting it wrong/confused, and 40% will just never learn it. I feel like he's going to get biased results here because the sort of people who are interested in actively participating in a playtest, and probably everyone in his own group(s) is in the first 40%.

I agree with this wholly. Some players do seem to just grok the rules better than others. I've seen this at my table where some of the players are picking things up, whereas another one still isn't quite sure what her proficiency bonus is and when she should add it.

I think they've suggested there will be an app for the game, which will help, but yeah it'll be important to have easy printed resources for the game too. I'm sure fans will create the latter, but if MCDM doesn't have their own official version it will demonstrate a failure to understand the issues they're creating with this decision.

Agreed. I hope play testing reveals the need for this.

 

[DEFCON 1]

The fact that their game is coming out of an extension of their love of 4E and the "tactical combat" that comes with it... I wonder if perhaps their remembrance of the "power card" format that 4E used is what allows them to think that each power having its own mini-chart is not going to be that big of a deal? If we look at the 4E power blocks, they all had a standardized format to them into which placing a small 3-line chart into the results section in place of the Hit: and Miss: lines would not be that much of an issue or a change I wouldn't think.

Matt did mention that the charts might be a little difficult to include on a standard character sheet... but if they decided to just go the "power card" route a la 4E... then those individualized charts shouldn't be an issue.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

If I understood the video correctly, the tables will all be structured the same way, with the same tiers. I think his example was 1-7 being the first tier, with 8+ moving to the second one. He mentioned a similar problem. He wants people to know what's what. Just because your characters powers are different than mine, we both understand that an 8 is better than a 7, and it's universal.

Yeah I was assuming they'd all be structured the same way re: the roll numbers, but if the result numbers/types are different in each case or many cases, that still leaves us with the fundamental issue of having to consult the table every time.

The worst will be if they have a number of subtle-y different tables like:

Table A - result 1: 3, result 2: 5, result 3: 7
Table B - result 1: 3, result 2: 5, result 3: 8

and so on.

Matt did mention that the charts might be a little difficult to include on a standard character sheet... but if they decided to just go the "power card" route a la 4E... then those individualized charts shouldn't be an issue.

Yeah have they mentioned power cards at all? I was under the impression they hadn't, but it seems like it might be the best solution for this issue. Players had weirdly few problems using them in 4E. I was genuinely shocked how well people handled them, both as actual cards, or just as printed sheet of powers they consulted. Seemed to slow us down far less than people sometimes having to look up specific spells in 5E.

 

[Zaukrie]

I really hate referencing tables, and hope this idea dies.