Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Telegraphing Attacks
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="5ekyu" data-source="post: 7631074" data-attributes="member: 6919838"><p>"If done well, I think it could lead to making combat more dynamic. What do you think?"</p><p></p><p>Well, as dynamic is in the eye of the beholder, my bet is you are right for some and not for others. Usually changes just swap the old "here is how to..." with a new one. </p><p></p><p>This is the kind of thing practically impossible to add after-markrt and have work. Systems need to be built around and balanced around the basic nature of play. So many things are scaled based on "what they do" that making a fundamental change to the mechanics changes a lot.</p><p></p><p>So, if a lot of the vote design had been built around slow vs quick options - with a lot more detailed sequencing of sctions - this would be part of that and do fine.</p><p></p><p>But, a lot of things go into overdrive if you just add this.</p><p></p><p>Premise - the slow choices thst hit next turn and allow interruption on other folk's turns have to be better than similar quick options thst happens now. Otherwise, the slow options wont be used. </p><p></p><p>Given that premise, the adding in a variety of slow options adds value to all the "deny response" and "interrupt" options.</p><p></p><p>Hold Person or Hypnotic Pattern now begs for slow attacks. So foes grapple. Meanwhile, sight blockers like wall if fog or silent image get big, as does sanctuary. </p><p></p><p>Almost certainly instead of a variety of options you wind up with "get the combos in" as a primary goal, leading to less variety, not more.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="5ekyu, post: 7631074, member: 6919838"] "If done well, I think it could lead to making combat more dynamic. What do you think?" Well, as dynamic is in the eye of the beholder, my bet is you are right for some and not for others. Usually changes just swap the old "here is how to..." with a new one. This is the kind of thing practically impossible to add after-markrt and have work. Systems need to be built around and balanced around the basic nature of play. So many things are scaled based on "what they do" that making a fundamental change to the mechanics changes a lot. So, if a lot of the vote design had been built around slow vs quick options - with a lot more detailed sequencing of sctions - this would be part of that and do fine. But, a lot of things go into overdrive if you just add this. Premise - the slow choices thst hit next turn and allow interruption on other folk's turns have to be better than similar quick options thst happens now. Otherwise, the slow options wont be used. Given that premise, the adding in a variety of slow options adds value to all the "deny response" and "interrupt" options. Hold Person or Hypnotic Pattern now begs for slow attacks. So foes grapple. Meanwhile, sight blockers like wall if fog or silent image get big, as does sanctuary. Almost certainly instead of a variety of options you wind up with "get the combos in" as a primary goal, leading to less variety, not more. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Telegraphing Attacks
Top