NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="embee" data-source="post: 8187920" data-attributes="member: 7026827">For the DC, it's literally just adding 22 to the monster's To Hit bonus. The player rolls d20 and adds the result to their AC.The Orc vs AC17 Player is a really good breakdown.The Orc has a +5 to hit. Plus 22 is DC27. Player has an AC17. If they roll a 10 or higher, they dodge the attack.That's a 55% chance to dodge. If I were to roll for the Orc, I'd have to roll a 12 or higher (12 + the +5 To Hit). That's a 45% chance to hit. It's a perfect mirror image.It makes for very smooth play. Consider a player who wants to split their movement.I think the second one moves quicker. Actions and reactions can be resolved at the same time, allowing for a smoother flow.The player is the one doing the rolls, trying to actively make a DC. It doesn't take up more time because the player can roll his dodge and his attack at the same time. The only meta information that the player "learns" about a monster is its To Hit bonus. That can be explained in-game as these characters are blooded in battle. They have enough experience in real-life combat to be able to gauge the threat an enemy poses.That exchange has 3 attacks in it - 2 by the Orc and 1 by the player. But now the player is doing all of the active rolling and the DM is narrating. Which, when you think about, is actually closer to the DM's original role - to referee.I'm not the biggest fan of Professor DM (I disagree on quite a few of his streamlining ideas and he veers a bit far into grognardism time and again) but on this, he seems to be spot on. Player Facing Combat (or PAR) seems to work a bit smoother, especially for larger encounters. I've got another session on Saturday and I'll have plenty of random encounters to run another battery of tests.</blockquote>

Verification