Tempo from the point of view of GMs and Players

[hong]

As a player, I always go full bore when entering a combat. Failure to do so could result in loss of my character or other members of the party, and as you discovered, the D&D system can result in a sudden death or incapacitation at any moment during the combat. The most dramatic combats I have ever seen were ones where neither the DM nor the PCs pulled punches, and fought to the best of their abilities. I don't really think you can force drama in the D&D system, it just happens, or it doesn't.

Of course you can. You just have to change the system.

1. Allow a limited number of rerolls, so that the occasional natural 1 on a save doesn't screw things.

2. Nerf instakills.

3. Use hero points/action points so that people can beat the odds at critical moments.

All of these can be done and still have a game that's recognisably D&D. Heck, I'm doing it.

None of these changes really reduce mortality or the importance of tactics that much, for those who were wondering. D&D is plenty lethal enough at high levels that silly play will still kill you, regardless. What they do is reduce _anticlimactic_ mortality: situations someone goes down in the 1st round of combat, because of a bad die roll or whatever.

 

[Lu Wei Fong]

As a DM I play the enemies as they would fight and how they would fight in the given situation. If the villian(s) is the type who likes to show off, has contempt for the characters, is paranoid, or whatever, I'll portray them accordingly. Or at least I try to... I'll start off doing that anyways, but I'm not out to get the PCs or anything, so if the situation takes a turn for the worse for them then I'll hold back a little. It's a habit I'm trying to break, but it takes some getting used to
As a player, I don't follow any set code for each encounter, I make my descisions based on the situation. If we're going up against a dragon but run into its minions first, I'm not going to pull out big stuff unless it's reusable or absolutely neccesary. On the other hand, if we're ambushed by bandits or something, I'm not about to go without a fight. That said, my character always does subdual rather than lethal damage to most enemies (save undead and demons and such), but that's a role-playing, doesn't want to take life, thing.
*EDIT* oh yeah, as a DM I had that happen to me a couple sessions ago. There was a Hill Giant following the party, meant to be a recurring antagonist. Anywho, they were at a town when it attacked. The militia started hay-bale fires around the villiage to act as a barrier to it while the PCs attacked at a distance while it chucked boulders at the wall. Anywho, our kamakazie kensai sky-elf flew out to meet the thing in combat (the party is level 3). So the rest of the party rushes out to help the crazy fighter and keep him alive. anywho, the thing's melee is wicked, so I have it spread it's attacks out among different targets and even have it squish a couple of the annoying summoned fire beetles. The round before the thing is about to flee a bunch of the players land nice hits and down the thing. So I really botched that whole thing in that it should've been more aggressive (probably provoking a retreat from the players). I was afraid of squishing them, even though if they were stupid enough to go out there they should've suffered the consequences.

 

[Herpes Cineplex]

So I ask, as a GM, do you ever fall prey to bad timing? You're not planning to pull your punches in the long run, but you don't feel that killing a PC in the first round of combat makes anyone have more fun, so you try to build slowly, dramatically, and have your thunder stolen from you. That ever happened?

Oh, yes. All the time.

And I like it. Oh, I put on a brave face and complain after the game's over about how much I was looking forward to having that guy as a recurring villain, and how sad I am that three seconds after he stepped out and took aim at the party, the PC gunslinger popped his head clean off with a perfect shot between the eyes.

But I'm totally lying when I'm complaining, because really, it couldn't have worked out better. When the gunslinger took out the NPC I'd spent some time lovingly crafting into someone they'd really learn to hate, inside I was laughing because it was just so unexpected and made the gunslinger look so damn cool. It's the kind of thing they still bring up when they talk about that game; even though that NPC was barely around long enough for them to remember his name or what he was capable of doing, they will never, ever forget that combat. I fail to see why I should be even remotely upset about that.

Players, do you usually just try to win as fast as possible, or do you consider whether waiting to pull out your big guns would make for better drama?

Of course I don't consider doing anything other than winning as fast as possible--are you utterly demented?

If I'm playing a game where combat comes up and it's a kill-or-be-killed kind of fight, why on earth should I have my character hold back? I have him try his absolute best from the first round to the last, in hopes that I, too, might be the guy who scores the lucky critical that pops the bad guy's head like a balloon and gets to be the big hero. Or if I'm not so lucky, then when I lose I don't want it to be because I was an idiot who let the bad guy walk all over me; I want him to have to work like Stakhanov on methampetamines to finally take me down, or to just barely make his getaway and have to come back later with massive, hideous scars from what I did to him and a serious grudge.


...because, after all, the difference is that the PC is mine but an NPC I create for a game I'm running belongs to the game.

--
and what belongs to the game serves its purpose if it makes the game better
ryan

 

[S'mon]

Trying to apply cinematic concepts of direction to the actual combat process of 3e D&D seems faintly ridiculous to me. It's a tactical wargame, not a movie. I can understand attempting to 'direct' the course of an episode - although if the players want to do something different the GM shouldn't fight it - but not a fight scene. There are other combat systems designed to allow this - the Buffy RPG's one comes to mind. 3e is as far from supporting this play style as can possibly be imagined. Even having the monk use a clearly sub-optimal attack routine seems 'wrong' - nerfing PC's spells to keep a BBEG alive would really stick in my craw.

I don't see Tasha's as overpowered at 2nd level - charm person is 1st, hold person 2nd for clerics.

 

[FireLance]

This is the reason why writers and directors don't use dice to determine what happens . Dice have no sense of tempo, pacing, mood, tension and drama. They may get it right occasionally, but only by chance, I'm sure .

 

[Maldur]

Isn't this just a great example, of why dice are fun!

I think you paced your villian perfect, doing damage, scaring them silly, and the PC's are "heroes"cause they did the improbable, and took him out with a low level spell.

This is the thing heroes are made off! (blind luck)

Your idea might be changed but was it a bad game because of it?

Sound like you lot had fun, keep it up !!

 

[RangerWickett]

Oh, well, the PCs thought the ending was delightfully ironic, and so did I. I wasn't angry, just a little curious as to whether I should've done things differently. I had much more planned for the fight, so it would unfold in stages, like a Final Fantasy final boss encounter. *grin*

Hmm. I wonder what sort of combat system would encourage fight sequences that run more like movies. Lots of back-and-forthiness, some nifty tricks, near defeat for the heroes, and then a big finish. Maybe something that somehow let Hit Points represent staying power in its entirety, not simply avoiding damage. So if you fail a save against a spell that'll take you out of combat, instead of dropping out of combat you lose a lot of hit points, and ignore the spell.

I wonder how to make that work.

But yes, until I discover such a system that works, I think I will heed some advice here and go more for the quick kill for my villains too. It could've gone:

Round 1 - Schism, Brutalize Wounds
Round 2 - Brutalize Wounds another enemy, Full Attack, kill the Elf, cleave into the other enemy who failed his save.
Round 3 - Hit one more time and spring attack out of range, trying to finish off a second foe with Recall Agony.
Round 4 - Fail the save, go down, end fight with one or two PCs dead or dying.

I have recently changed my mind about raise dead, now allowing the 5th level spell as an emergency defribulator (raising the person if they died in the past few minutes), the 7th level spell to get someone who died in the past day, so one death wouldn't have been horrible.

 

[Thanee]

Hmm. I wonder what sort of combat system would encourage fight sequences that run more like movies. Lots of back-and-forthiness, some nifty tricks, near defeat for the heroes, and then a big finish.

The Amber RPG combat system does that.

Bye
Thanee

 

[S'mon]

The Buffy RPG's Drama Points system does this too. Personally I don't like it, but it's designed to emulate what you're going for. Both PCs & villains get DPs and spend them during the fight to do cool/flashy stuff, avoid being KO'd, etc.

 

[Herpes Cineplex]

Hmm. I wonder what sort of combat system would encourage fight sequences that run more like movies. Lots of back-and-forthiness, some nifty tricks, near defeat for the heroes, and then a big finish.

Weirdly enough, you can get something very close to that from the Marvel Universe RPG. The last one that came out, the one that has (sadly) been abandoned like the Marvel games before it.

It had a very interesting mechanic where you'd assign stones from an energy pool into various actions, and would regenerate a certain number of stones into the energy pool each "panel" (round, effectively). When we were playing around with it, it really encouraged us to plan out dramatic back-and-forth actions; you'd husband your energy pool while you were defensive, waiting for your opportunity to lay into your enemy with everything you could throw at him. You'd also keep looking for ways to get free extra stones on certain actions by taking advantage of the continually evolving circumstances of the fight (hiding behind things, jumping off of stuff, and more).

I liked the system quite a bit, as it turns out. By trading the randomizing effect of dice for a more resource-management oriented system, it really made it possible to have fights that felt like they came out of a comic book. Heroes get knocked around, villains get knocked around, and at the very end someone either finds a serious advantage to turn against his opponent or draws upon previously-unused reserves of power to win the day.

I'm pretty sure they're not printing any new copies, but you should still be able to find it for sale out there. (They also did an X-Men and a Hulk/Avengers book, which may be harder to find.)

But yes, until I discover such a system that works, I think I will heed some advice here and go more for the quick kill for my villains too.

Oh, I don't know about that. You might find it more rewarding to just learn to enjoy having your villains get killed.

In their own way, villains who for various personality-related reasons will do grandstanding, show-offy, overly dramatic things are a lot of fun for both the GM and the players. Sometimes the characters will smack him down rapidly and feel really good about themselves. Sometimes the dice will betray the characters and they'll get completely owned by this pompous, half-crazy buffoon who not only beat them but then went on to rub their noses in it by pausing to make little speeches, or turning his back on a mostly-dead PC to kick the crap out of another one, and so on.

Either way, it's likely to be more memorable and entertaining than "Round 1: PC#1 gets mangled. Round 2: PC#1 is killed and his corpse stuffed down the neck of PC#2. Round 3: PC#2 chokes to death; PC#3 is polymorphed into a trout. Round 4: ...."


And besides, why bother protecting NPCs, particularly in a fantasy setting? Let them die, if only so you can bring them back as an undead villain later on.

--
the goal being, of course, to get the party to yell "why won't you just die?!" in unison