Morale systems

[MwaO]

So basically a fighter version of the Scout?

Kind of, but Scout's too complex for that group of players and doesn't do enough damage on an AP round.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Kind of, but Scout's too complex for that group of players and doesn't do enough damage on an AP round.

Which is fine, if the scout & slayer & such seem fine, I guess. I'm curious about working within (the very first post) or lopping bits off the AEDU structure, so you'd theoretically retain more consistency...

...I'm not so worried about balance, the cut-down options are supposed to be mechanically inferior, to enable different modes of play the - the Stalwart & Savant, particularly, the former to provide a simple but still contributing option, the latter to provide a greater resource-management challenge to experienced players (in essence, to give them the option of accepting a sort of handicap). The Companion may be less clear, but the idea is that some players want to engage the game on the tactical level and have some fun with it, but don't necessarily want to be the great-hero type at the center of everything.
...another thing using those options might enable is the kind of storytelling where there /is/ one Hero in the party who's kinda the center of everything, the 'first among equals,' and the others are more supporting cast, acting as enablers, confidants, etc...

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Which is fine, if the scout & slayer & such seem fine, I guess. I'm curious about working within (the very first post) or lopping bits off the AEDU structure, so you'd theoretically retain more consistency...

...I'm not so worried about balance, the cut-down options are supposed to be mechanically inferior, to enable different modes of play the - the Stalwart & Savant, particularly, the former to provide a simple but still contributing option, the latter to provide a greater resource-management challenge to experienced players (in essence, to give them the option of accepting a sort of handicap). The Companion may be less clear, but the idea is that some players want to engage the game on the tactical level and have some fun with it, but don't necessarily want to be the great-hero type at the center of everything.
...another thing using those options might enable is the kind of storytelling where there /is/ one Hero in the party who's kinda the center of everything, the 'first among equals,' and the others are more supporting cast, acting as enablers, confidants, etc...

I think I would rather achieve these goals with build options on a common base with simply different options making sense for different types of player. This is where 4e is weak in a sense, because it requires SO MANY choices, for anyone, to fully realize their 'thing' that it isn't really an ideal game for people who don't want to pore over options.

 

[Garthanos]

...another thing using those options might enable is the kind of storytelling where there /is/ one Hero in the party who's kinda the center of everything, the 'first among equals,' and the others are more supporting cast, acting as enablers, confidants, etc...

BTVS aka Buffy and the Scooby Gang (before Willow Heroes out)

 

[Tony Vargas]

I think I would rather achieve these goals with build options on a common base with simply different options making sense for different types of player. ..

That was kinda the idea, actually. AEDU is the common base. A default pre-build or a reduced-resource management option are for the players who want less.

 

[heretic888]

In my current 4E campaign, we cut back on a lot of options to make play simpler and more streamlined. One of my players has only played 13th Age and a one-shot of an Apocalypse World hack so I didn't want to overwhelm her with options and decision paralysis. This is what we've done so far:
* No races, backgrounds, themes, ability score increases, or action points.
* Feats only gained every 1st, 4th, 8th levels and heavily curated to only include simple options.
* No magic items, replaced largely with boons and grandmaster training.
* Monster attacks/defenses scale at 1/2 level instead of 1/level.
* Monster hit points reduced by 25%.
* I use a morale system and have monsters make a saving throw at critical junctures (when bloodied, when leader defeated, when 1/2 of their side is defeated, etc) and if a monster fails their save, they flee or surrender.

Its worked very well for us so far.

 

[Garthanos]

* I use a morale system and have monsters make a saving throw at critical junctures (when bloodied, when leader defeated, when 1/2 of their side is defeated, etc) and if a monster fails their save, they flee or surrender.

Its worked very well for us so far.

This last part I always take into consideration (rather did since forever it's system agnostic actually) I do not use saves for it... but one of those happen and I take consideration of the apparent pacing and if a player has a a smooth move in store and tadah. I know its role playing the monsters but in 4e if a player shoots for an intimidate move that puts it in their hands too and the above count as bloodied.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

That was kinda the idea, actually. AEDU is the common base. A default pre-build or a reduced-resource management option are for the players who want less.

I guess what I'm saying is, I wasn't happy with the cut-down E-Classes and I don't THINK I'm happy with the deep tinkering that your options require either. I mean, they actually seem rather complex to me, complex to understand at least. They might work, I don't know, but I've been working on building HoML classes that are simpler, more direct, still flexible, but maybe able to accomplish some of these goals without as much tinkering. Of course, I can't easily tell if the result is successful or not....

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

This last part I always take into consideration (rather did since forever it's system agnostic actually) I do not use saves for it... but one of those happen and I take consideration of the apparent pacing and if a player has a a smooth move in store and tadah. I know its role playing the monsters but in 4e if a player shoots for an intimidate move that puts it in their hands too and the above count as bloodied.

Yeah, I thought long and hard and tinkered and tested various schemes for morale, until I just came to the conclusion that loss of morale is and aught to be like losing a bunch of hit points. Now, if you have these hit points that you aren't actually going to use, because they're inevitably going to be lost due to whatever circumstance, then why have them to start with? You see where I'm going with this?

In effect monsters that are morally weaker simply come off as lower level, mechanically, than they would seem to warrant from a narrative standpoint. As an extreme example a 'cowardly giant' might be 15' tall and extremely strong, but he's still just a level 3 monster because he won't really fight more effectively than that in the long run.

Now, I think it would make sense to construct some sort of a device around this to help the GM tell this story effectively. That I haven't worked out yet.

 

[darkbard]

* I use a morale system and have monsters make a saving throw at critical junctures (when bloodied, when leader defeated, when 1/2 of their side is defeated, etc) and if a monster fails their save, they flee or surrender.

Quite curious as to what you've implemented. I see what [MENTION=82106]AbdulAlhazred[/MENTION] is saying wrt hps, but his solution seems unsatisfying to me. (Perhaps there is no satisfying system for this.)