Per-Encounter/Per-Day Design and Gameplay Restrictions

[hong]

Hong little 'zinger'

Hey! Who's little?

 

[hong]

It doesn't matter if you have spell casters or not, the optimal strategy of the game is then to not enter combat with less than your full hit point resources. Hense, in every edition there was a tendency for skilled players to do hit and run attacks, and pull back before they became seriously threatened (whether out of spells or not).

Monster pulling is so videogamey.

 

[Celebrim]

Monster pulling is so videogamey.

Yes.

 

[hong]

Yes.

Indeed.

 

[DandD]

No. Videogame-monsters suddenly appear and challenge you to fight out of nowhere, while you're walking around.

 

[Nifft]

Monster pulling is so videogamey.

I'm pulling my monster RIGHT NOW if you... oh, nevermind.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Celebrim]

No. Videogame-monsters suddenly appear and challenge you to fight out of nowhere, while you're walking around.

Where do wandering monsters come from?

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

Where do wandering monsters come from?

When a mommy monster and a daddy monster love each other very much...

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

*sigh*

Fine. From where I'm sitting, spouting a bunch of nonsense doesn't add to the discussion either. But, point by point.

"The system now, if you have a spell caster in the party..."

It doesn't matter if you have a spell-caster in the party. The Vancian system contributes to the problem, but the heart of the problem is ablative hit points.

"...is geared around the camping in the dungeon"

It may assume resting somewhere, but it doesn't have to be 'the dungeon', not that there is anything wrong with resting 'in the dungeon' since it happens in Burroughs, Tolkien, etc.

"and "one a day" system""

In all three editions of the game thus far, the assumption was that any single balanced encounter was unlikely to penetrate the characters hit points, and that until a characters hit points are worn down below the expected damage for attacks there wasn't a significant threat to the character. At that point, it was then necessary to find a safe place to rest or risk a proactive attack by the inhabitants of the dungeon (simulated in early on by the 'wandering monster' mechanic, and later by expressedly proactive villains like Strahd). It doesn't matter if you have spell casters or not, the optimal strategy of the game is then to not enter combat with less than your full hit point resources. Hense, in every edition there was a tendency for skilled players to do hit and run attacks, and pull back before they became seriously threatened (whether out of spells or not).

For example, as a PC in KotB, we ran these sort of hit and run attacks on the CavesOfChaos, often (especially early on) retreating and resting in the keep for several days before returning and whittling on the inhabitants some more. We did this because we were running out of hit points, not because the spell-casters were running out of or out of spells, because at that point neither the cleric nor the M-U's spells per day were that significant of a resource. To a lesser extent, we used the same tactics against 'FToT' and 'LCoT'. Yes, at higher levels, 'Out of Spells' was a bigger deal, but mostly it was 'running out of hitpoints' that would be the major prompt. It was always best to retreat while you were still 'safe' and could if necessary survive a nightly wandering encounter. Nothing about 4e suggests that that is changing. So long as ANY resources are 'per day', even if its just hit points (although it will be at least hit points and 20% of a chararters 'ooomf'), the game will still gravitate to that.

"...After every combat, spellcasters are constantly asked by party members how many spells they have for the game..."

Really? In coming on 30 years of gaming, I don't think I can recall anyone ever saying, "How many spells do you have left?" I can recall people announcing that they were running out of hitpoints and I can recall people announcing that they were running out of spells, but I don't recall my games getting disrupted by this prevasive worry you describe.

"Suddenly we break from the role playing game to a euro accounting game."

How so? I think this is basicly just trying to make something sound bad. How more so that keeping track of hit points, ammunition, food, and anything else that you have to keep track of? You might as well say, "Suddenly we break from a war game to a euro accounting game." (whatever that means), or heck, since real war is mostly logistics, "Suddenly we break from war to a euro accounting game."

"In order for a spellcaster to be prepared for the next encounter, they have to rest, they are the only class that has to rest.."

Because you've never rested to recover hit points? Because no one else is likely to have per day magic items?

"When and d first came about, there wasn't a lot of thought put into all the nuts and bolts..."

This is a variation on "people used to be stupid but then we got smarter". I'm continually impressed by how much thought was put into the 1e edition rules. They may have been organic and clunky, but alot of thought went into them and a whole lot of practical experience with the rules long before they ever even saw print.

"though in lotr they set up camp... and had large parties to protect the camp site)..."

Because you know, Frodo, Sam, and Gollum never had to set up camp, or rest in the dungeon, and if they did they consituted a large party (two hobbits and a traitor, you know.

They wandered several days or weeks around the country side. But they rarely engaged in fights. Except maybe for the dungeon scene, they never rested because they were out of spells or out of hitpoints. They rested due to the fatigue imposed by overland-travel.

And I think it is an utterly spurious justification for 'per encounter' abilities. There may be some good justification with balancing, pacing, or what not. But solving the 15 minute adventuring day - a problem which is often exagerrated anyway - it will not. At least, not after the newness wears off.

I disagree. Yes, there is still a chance that overly careful / whiny players will try to rest after each encounter because they spend their daily resources in every encounter to be on the safe side. But it will not be an autoamtic requirement as it is in 3rd edition. Spellcasting-Resource wise, you vary between 80% to 100 % power between each encounter, not between 100% to 10 % (or related to "expected resource expenditure per encounter" 400 % to 10 % per each encounter.)

 

[ruemere]

Quick look at 3E resource handling:
- Per day (spells, recovery)
- Per turn (various character abilities, requiring actions to activate)
- Special: effects with fixed duration (days/hours/minutes/rounds)

Quick look at probable 4E resource handling:
- Per day (albeit reduced to about 20% in case of spells)
- Per encounter (80% of spells, numerous character abilities)
- Per turn (various character abilities, requiring actions to activate)
- Special: effects with duration of minutes and rounds are gone, instead their duration is set to "one encounter"

Probable consequences:
- bookkeeping for spellcasters should take only 20% time (major improvement)
- resource management done during encounters in out-of-one's-turn time (use of tokens may be advised) (finally non-spellcaster's classes get to do something outside of their turn)
- GMs don't need to tick off marks on to track time of various ongoing effects (major bookkeeping improvement)

A side note: I have been playing quite a lot of WoD games in my time. There per-encounter duration is a standard. And it's really easier on GMs - you don't need to track stuff by round or by minute. All you need to do is to announce end of a scene to let everyone know that their powers are off.

Of course, that leaves a significant problem with powerful effects which limit character's chances of survival. For example, Hold Person with duration set to "one encounter" would be a killer. Fortunately, fix is already present in 3.5 - one may take an action each round to to try to throw off the effect.

So, I think this change in resource management would be very welcome.

regards,
Ruemere