D&D 4E Mental Math: an important 4e issue

[Kunimatyu]

I really hope that Wizards gives some thought to mental math and how it'll impact 4e.

On the surface, it doesn't seem that key, but many elements of 3.5e that slow down gameplay involve mental math. Elemental vulnerabilities/Empower Spell are prime offenders, as increasing damage by 50% requires more mental operations than doubling. Subtraction vis-a-vis DR can also slow things down sometimes, particularly for values that aren't 5 or 10. Adding up lots of dice can be time-consuming for the same reason, though the fact that Fireball won't be d6/level suggests to me that they're on to this one.

Ideally, D&D 4e should be set up so that someone who isn't that good at mental arithmetic does not significantly slow down the game. Currently, in 3.5e, this is not the case?

Thoughts? Are there any other mental-math processes that tend to slow down the game?

 

[delericho]

While I agree with you that mental math can indeed slow the game down, too much emphasis on removing the mental math feels distinctly like dumbing down to me. I'm all for making the game quicker to play and prepare, but I'd be wary of stripping out too much of the crunchy math stuff - it does engage players with the rules in a manner that might well be missed a lot more than people think.

 

[cerberus2112]

I wouldn't worry about dumbing down the game if the damage changed from 6D6 to 1D20+15 (or whatever appropriate level modifier they determined was appropriate). That's just ease of reference

 

[Aust Diamondew]

Ideally, D&D 4e should be set up so that someone who isn't that good at mental arithmetic does not significantly slow down the game. Currently, in 3.5e, this is not the case?

Thoughts? Are there any other mental-math processes that tend to slow down the game?

I have seen such players before.

The biggest offender of this in my experience is when a player who wasn't good at math was playing an epic level character dual wielding large scimitars making 8 attacks per round with a crit range of 12-20 and each scimitar having different energy types meant that sometimes one scimitar would deal energy damage and the other wouldn't further adding to confusion. This would be pretty hard for even those skilled at arithmatic. Needless to say even with a caculator the player ones taking a while (we ended up making him take average damage on all attacks).

I guess what I'm driving at is multiple attacks at varying bonuses slow down game play more than most other mental maths, that and remembering all the bonuses from buffs currently effecting your character.
So reduce the number of buffs and if a character is making multiple attacks to make them all at the same bonus would be a good design philosophy. So would be reducing the need for additional rolls after making an attack (such as critical confirmations which is one additional roll and one additional math calculation to make).

+50% damage isn't too hard, and definitley shouldn't be with an empowered spell where you're preparing it ahead of time or using it often. Divide the value by 2 and add that value back to the original, no multiplying by 1.5 needed.
That said energy vulnerability is a bit boring.

I rambled quite a bit but some stuff in there makes sense.

 

[Jer]

While I agree with you that mental math can indeed slow the game down, too much emphasis on removing the mental math feels distinctly like dumbing down to me. I'm all for making the game quicker to play and prepare, but I'd be wary of stripping out too much of the crunchy math stuff - it does engage players with the rules in a manner that might well be missed a lot more than people think.

I'm at the opposite end of the spectrum - I'd be perfectly happy to get rid of 90% of the "on-the-fly" calculations that occur in a game. Get as much pre-computed as possible and laid out in the character sheet for ease of reference. Nothing is more irriating that stopping combat to tally up some buffs and to make sure that the player didn't forget the stacking rules. (I trust my players implicitly not to cheat - I don't trust them to remember whether Bull's Strength, Rage and Gauntlets of Ogre Power all stack with each other, even if they just performed the same combo in a previous combat).

 

[Scribble]

Kind of off subject, but I wonder if the fireball will be 1d6 x level?

 

[delericho]

Get as much pre-computed as possible and laid out in the character sheet for ease of reference.

No, I agree with that. Pre-calculate, get organised, and keep good notes. But that's not the same as eliminating Empower Spell because adding 50% to damage is hard, or removing Damage Reduction because we don't want to deal with subtractions on the fly, or whatever.

Nothing is more irriating that stopping combat to tally up some buffs and to make sure that the player didn't forget the stacking rules. (I trust my players implicitly not to cheat - I don't trust them to remember whether Bull's Strength, Rage and Gauntlets of Ogre Power all stack with each other, even if they just performed the same combo in a previous combat).

And this is an example of the sort of thing that absolutely should be pre-calculated. Do it once, and use the appropriate numbers, I quite agree.

On the other hand, I don't particularly want to see things like Bull's Strength and Rage eliminated from the game entirely simply because the math is too hard for people to recalculate on the fly (although I'm not necessarily averse to those changes in principle, just those reasons).

 

[delericho]

Kind of off subject, but I wonder if the fireball will be 1d6 x level?

It won't, although I can't recall which WotC blog it was that noted this. However, the reasons don't seem to be about simplifying the math - it's more to do with rescaling magic for spells of up to 25th (or, one presumes, 30th) level.

 

[occam]

While I agree with you that mental math can indeed slow the game down, too much emphasis on removing the mental math feels distinctly like dumbing down to me. I'm all for making the game quicker to play and prepare, but I'd be wary of stripping out too much of the crunchy math stuff - it does engage players with the rules in a manner that might well be missed a lot more than people think.

I'm with you on this. The problem with managing the effects of multiple buffs, magic items, situational modifiers, etc. is not the arithmetic, it's the sheer number of things to track, along with their secondary effects (+4 Str modifies attacks, damage, some skills, etc.). Keep the basic arithmetic, and prune the number of effects to manage.

 

[TwinBahamut]

Certainly, I hope a lot of the small conditional modifiers which can't easily be pre-written on a character sheet go away. Stuff like the small +1 bouses you get on attack rolls against foes in such-and-such situation, or the racial bonuses on saves vs. poison or saves. vs. enchantment, but not on Fort saves or Will saves as a whole.