Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Blue" data-source="post: 8680297" data-attributes="member: 20564">This is a product of games with a couple of characteristics.&nbsp; (And I use &quot;commonly&quot;, as in more than half the time, but need not be all the time.)For why you don't see nigh-unwinnable combats1. Combat is used as a common way to overcome challenges.2. The penalty for failure in combat commonly has severe repercussions on a player's fun, like character death, as opposed to other systems like Fate or Masks where it can be taken out of a scene in many different ways, many of which can be used to enhance the story the table is coming up with.(There are plenty of other points that could come up as well.&nbsp; For example people enjoying OSR might want to add in lengthy character creation as a prerequisite for the focus on balance in challenges.)Basically, if losing combat commonly leads to big deal issues, players and GMs want to avoid it.&nbsp; If if can lead to interesting issues then players and GMs are much more likely to embrace the down-beat and go with it.For why you don't see very easy combats1. When the system only provides one level of zoom to a high granularity of combat, which takes long enough that the system even enforces that all character types can contribute to combat in some way so the player is not bored, then &quot;meaningless&quot; combats in terms of the mechanical implications (resource attrition, whatever) become a waste of time.&nbsp; They take up a chunk of the session and with little mechanical change or consequence.This is pretty straightforward.&nbsp; Personally, I love occasionally throwing a weak combat at my players to curbstomp and rememeber they are heroes.&nbsp; But I also use tools like the Montage from 13th Age for other things.&nbsp; &quot;Okay, you high level adventurers are set on by a phalanx of hobgoblins.&nbsp; Why don't we go around the table and tell everyone the cool move you did as the party defeated them.&quot;</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Blue, post: 8680297, member: 20564"] This is a product of games with a couple of characteristics. (And I use "commonly", as in more than half the time, but need not be all the time.) [U]For why you don't see nigh-unwinnable combats[/U] 1. Combat is used as a common way to overcome challenges. 2. The penalty for failure in combat commonly has severe repercussions on a player's fun, like character death, as opposed to other systems like Fate or Masks where it can be taken out of a scene in many different ways, many of which can be used to enhance the story the table is coming up with. (There are plenty of other points that could come up as well. For example people enjoying OSR might want to add in lengthy character creation as a prerequisite for the focus on balance in challenges.) Basically, if losing combat commonly leads to big deal issues, players and GMs want to avoid it. If if can lead to interesting issues then players and GMs are much more likely to embrace the down-beat and go with it. [U]For why you don't see very easy combats[/U] 1. When the system only provides one level of zoom to a high granularity of combat, which takes long enough that the system even enforces that all character types can contribute to combat in some way so the player is not bored, then "meaningless" combats in terms of the mechanical implications (resource attrition, whatever) become a waste of time. They take up a chunk of the session and with little mechanical change or consequence. This is pretty straightforward. Personally, I love occasionally throwing a weak combat at my players to curbstomp and rememeber they are heroes. But I also use tools like the Montage from 13th Age for other things. "Okay, you high level adventurers are set on by a phalanx of hobgoblins. Why don't we go around the table and tell everyone the cool move you did as the party defeated them." [/QUOTE]

Verification