Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 6101737" data-attributes="member: 6696971">@<a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/member.php?6680772-Iosue" target="_blank">Iosue</a> Here are my concerns regarding the way I like to frame my encounters/scenes and how 5e may inhibit this.  These are just off the top of my head.  - Given the low HPs and the high damage of all actors, it appears that combat in 5e is going to be much closer to AD&D; somewhere around 5 rounds maybe.  As I said in the above post, given that, I'm going with any duration greater than 1 minute and less than 24 hours (basically persistent) as a problem area for encounter/scene based design.  Its a problem both from a balance perspective (carrying a spell/buff over the course of more than 1 fight is considerably more potent than in only 1 fight...especially, if you're looking at 4-5 fights in a "work day"), pacing perspective (both scene to scene and overall "work day"...and this feeds back from and to the balance concern) and table handling time/overhead (granular time tracking and bartering over said tracking with respect to "is this spell still active" questions).  If I've got unified resources schemes, primarily focused around deployment at the encounter level (but also working synergistically with the expectation of a difficult fight where nova resources need to be deployed), then balance (intra-class, PC:Monster, and from encounter to encounter) is affirmed allowing for GM predictability of scene resolution, pacing rhythm/expectation is predictable and easily maintained/understood by both GM and PCs, and extra-scene considerations have minimal impact on handling time/overhead.  So (i) lack of unified resource schemes, (ii) primary focus on the adventuring day downward (top down) rather than precise, laser-like focus on the encounter (bottom up), (iii) and a large number of resources that span multiple scenes are all problem children.  These have balance, pacing, and handling time/overhead implications for a scene-based game.- Healing surges are a scene-based resource facilitator in 4e.  They unlock healing in combat and they allow GMs to impose threat/punishment in non-combat conflict resolution (which, as a scene, contributes to pacing the adventuring day).  They let you know how many HPs you have available in a scene (assuming you can access them).  They help the narrative space (unlocking your own surges a la the heroic comeback) and the tactical space (both in PC build schemes and in deployment of those resources in combat.  They also pace the adventuring day.  In 5e, that is all they are, a transition resource that paces the adventuring day.  They don't facilitate scenes.- Narrative implications of the skill/ability modifier framework on out of combat conflict resolution.  Narrow specialties (Listen, Spot) superimposed on ability checks imposes a contraction of the possible narrative renderings in the shared imaginary space.  Broad skills (Perception) allow for an expansive narrative rendering in the shared imaginary space.  With the latter I have freedom to interpret the task with much more latitude and compose diverse, dynamic pressures from conflict to conflict.  With the former, I'm much more process bound and therefore limited in narrative interpretation, thus reducing dynamism and diversity.  Narrow, process-sim areas of specialty (climb, jump, swim vs athletics) help task resolution in open world exploration.  Broad skills help narrative dynamism in scene/encounter play.</blockquote>

Verification