Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ancalagon" data-source="post: 6864075" data-attributes="member: 23">I think you hit upon something pretty important thecasualoblivion so I have more to say about it.To have some kind of table harmony when there are planners on the table, a few things have to happen1:&nbsp; the planning phase can't take forever.&nbsp; This requires discipline from both the players and a bit the DM.&nbsp;&nbsp; Sometimes the &quot;yohoo monsters we are here!!&quot; isn't disruption, its a god-send. 2: The people making the plans have to be, well, somewhat competent.&nbsp; A cunning plan that has 17 parts that all must work is not great.&nbsp; A cunning plan that can be trivially countered is not great either.&nbsp;&nbsp; &quot;we will fly above the goblins and rain death from the sky !!!&quot;&nbsp; &quot;... the goblins have bows&quot;.&nbsp; Good planners will also involve the &quot;not so planny&quot; players too.&nbsp; That combat monster PC is probably going to be *really* useful as part of the plan.&nbsp; &quot;Ragnar, you take the left flank!&quot;&nbsp; We had a player who played a bard in 3e (not the uber weak one I've spoken about previously) who wasn't very good at sticking with the plan so after a few battles we realized that the best thing to do was to simply tell him to &quot;disrupt the enemy as much as you can&quot; - and well it worked for him as a player and we all had fun.&nbsp; 3:&nbsp; The DM has to be willing to go along.&nbsp; Sometimes a good plan = enemies completely crushed.&nbsp; Sometimes the enemies will have a counter that will negate the plan, but the DM should resist the impulse to &quot;save his cool encounter&quot; at all costs.&nbsp; Goblins or brigand that aren't particularly bright might honestly be unable to predict the PC's gambit, and that's ok!&nbsp; Clever play should be rewarded.&nbsp; An archmage however might have more contingencies - the plan won't always work, and that's ok too.&nbsp; However, if the plan *never works* well, maybe the &quot;wohoo monsters!&quot; guy is a realist...</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ancalagon, post: 6864075, member: 23"] I think you hit upon something pretty important thecasualoblivion so I have more to say about it. To have some kind of table harmony when there are planners on the table, a few things have to happen 1: the planning phase can't take forever. This requires discipline from both the players and a bit the DM. Sometimes the "yohoo monsters we are here!!" isn't disruption, its a god-send. 2: The people making the plans have to be, well, somewhat competent. A cunning plan that has 17 parts that all must work is not great. A cunning plan that can be trivially countered is not great either. "we will fly above the goblins and rain death from the sky !!!" "... the goblins have bows". Good planners will also involve the "not so planny" players too. That combat monster PC is probably going to be *really* useful as part of the plan. "Ragnar, you take the left flank!" We had a player who played a bard in 3e (not the uber weak one I've spoken about previously) who wasn't very good at sticking with the plan so after a few battles we realized that the best thing to do was to simply tell him to "disrupt the enemy as much as you can" - and well it worked for him as a player and we all had fun. 3: The DM has to be willing to go along. Sometimes a good plan = enemies completely crushed. Sometimes the enemies will have a counter that will negate the plan, but the DM should resist the impulse to "save his cool encounter" at all costs. Goblins or brigand that aren't particularly bright might honestly be unable to predict the PC's gambit, and that's ok! Clever play should be rewarded. An archmage however might have more contingencies - the plan won't always work, and that's ok too. However, if the plan *never works* well, maybe the "wohoo monsters!" guy is a realist... [/QUOTE]

Verification