Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Imaro" data-source="post: 8940492" data-attributes="member: 48965">I can only speak from my experience and I've only encountered this player rarely... but they tend to leverage the skill system/magic system in build and inplay so that they (and oftentimes the group) can bypass combat or they can take a minimal role in it. The Feywarden Ranger I play often does this (not because I am uncomfortable with wargamey combat but because of his personality being more of a trickster and deal maker... but the result is the same.). He tends to make use of spells like pass without trace, aid, etc. Along with skills like stealth, deception, etc to avoid combats and when he does end up in combat he stays at the fringes using a ranged weapon. There is also a cleric in our party who isn't to keen on combat and she tends to play the role of medic and support from the sidelines when combat breaks out.&nbsp;So while no I don't think I use 2 different resolution systems, for those who do and don't enjoy wargamey combat,&nbsp; I do help to minimize their interaction with the system at session zero (where I am assuming they express this) through guiding their build choices as well as my encounter design.Edit: To clarify more after thinking along these lines... I may actually allow different resolution systems for combat as I run my 5e games where an action such as causing a landslide can wipe out an opposing force... or sealing a room after lighting it on fire can win a battle and so on... perhaps this is the equivalent of the non-mechanical resolution but if so I'd say its been done in D&amp;D since forever and is a big part of the OSR paradigm... winning a battle without engaging the system mechanically.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Imaro, post: 8940492, member: 48965"] I can only speak from my experience and I've only encountered this player rarely... but they tend to leverage the skill system/magic system in build and inplay so that they (and oftentimes the group) can bypass combat or they can take a minimal role in it. The Feywarden Ranger I play often does this (not because I am uncomfortable with wargamey combat but because of his personality being more of a trickster and deal maker... but the result is the same.). He tends to make use of spells like pass without trace, aid, etc. Along with skills like stealth, deception, etc to avoid combats and when he does end up in combat he stays at the fringes using a ranged weapon. There is also a cleric in our party who isn't to keen on combat and she tends to play the role of medic and support from the sidelines when combat breaks out. So while no I don't think I use 2 different resolution systems, for those who do and don't enjoy wargamey combat, I do help to minimize their interaction with the system at session zero (where I am assuming they express this) through guiding their build choices as well as my encounter design. Edit: To clarify more after thinking along these lines... I may actually allow different resolution systems for combat as I run my 5e games where an action such as causing a landslide can wipe out an opposing force... or sealing a room after lighting it on fire can win a battle and so on... perhaps this is the equivalent of the non-mechanical resolution but if so I'd say its been done in D&D since forever and is a big part of the OSR paradigm... winning a battle without engaging the system mechanically. [/QUOTE]

Verification