Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Siberys" data-source="post: 6011219" data-attributes="member: 30619">For your first bullet-point, I think a lot of this has to do with not having someone more familiar with the game than you at the table; IME, most games (well-built euro board games excepted) need someone who knows the particulars of the rules for the first play-through to go smoothly, or else you will run into all sorts of problems like these.Totally agreed on round-by-round tracking; one of my pet projects used to be finding a way to eliminate that, but it can get complex, and I'm both very familiar with the rules and have access to tools to help me with the tracking, so I decided it wasn't worth it. For DDN, though, it needs to be kept in mind.As for the other bullet points; part of the reason the math is structured that way is to avoid a high level of swinginess, but it can introduce grind if combat isn't handled carefully. For one, if as DM I feel the combat is in the &quot;mopping up&quot; stage, I just end the fight and move on. I also won't stat up an encounter as a combat unless I'm comfortable with it going pretty long - if I want it shorter, that's skill challenge territory.Also, WRT new players being shy about using their powers; that is something I struggle with myself. Often, I'll be playing with fairly competetive Magic players, too, and they should understand things like opportunity cost and whatnot. Especially for non-home games like Encounters, I highly recommend to new players that they use Essentials builds, simply because they're less fiddly, and that seems to make players less shy about using their stuff.So, yeah, DDN should have;• a roster of clearly-marked simple-to-use classes ideal for beginners.• either quicker combat rules, or else clearly-defined &quot;set-piece&quot; and &quot;skirmish&quot; encounter building advice.• Little to no round-to-round tracking.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Siberys, post: 6011219, member: 30619"] For your first bullet-point, I think a lot of this has to do with not having someone more familiar with the game than you at the table; IME, most games (well-built euro board games excepted) need someone who knows the particulars of the rules for the first play-through to go smoothly, or else you will run into all sorts of problems like these. Totally agreed on round-by-round tracking; one of my pet projects used to be finding a way to eliminate that, but it can get complex, and I'm both very familiar with the rules and have access to tools to help me with the tracking, so I decided it wasn't worth it. For DDN, though, it needs to be kept in mind. As for the other bullet points; part of the reason the math is structured that way is to avoid a high level of swinginess, but it can introduce grind if combat isn't handled carefully. For one, if as DM I feel the combat is in the "mopping up" stage, I just end the fight and move on. I also won't stat up an encounter as a combat unless I'm comfortable with it going pretty long - if I want it shorter, that's skill challenge territory. Also, WRT new players being shy about using their powers; that is something I struggle with myself. Often, I'll be playing with fairly competetive Magic players, too, and they should understand things like opportunity cost and whatnot. Especially for non-home games like Encounters, I highly recommend to new players that they use Essentials builds, simply because they're less fiddly, and that seems to make players less shy about using their stuff. So, yeah, DDN should have; • a roster of clearly-marked simple-to-use classes ideal for beginners. • either quicker combat rules, or else clearly-defined "set-piece" and "skirmish" encounter building advice. • Little to no round-to-round tracking. [/QUOTE]

Verification