EPTOn January 08 2015 01:56 Requizen wrote:
We mainstream now.
Asmo party decision when?
We mainstream now.
Asmo party decision when?
cashing in our eFame bucks
and I assume once both one shots are done
[Tabletop] Enter Iris - Page 39
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
jcarlsoniv
United States27922 Posts
cashing in our eFame bucks and I assume once both one shots are done | ||
|
Requizen
United States33802 Posts
Then they're not really one-shots... | ||
|
PrinceXizor
United States17713 Posts
thats not asmos fault he was using these as practice to figure out combat and encounters anyway. he under estimated just how long it'd take for a group. | ||
|
jcarlsoniv
United States27922 Posts
especially when one group is scared to jump in a glowing hole, and the other spends time trying to catch wildlife | ||
|
Lord Tolkien
United States12084 Posts
On January 08 2015 02:13 jcarlsoniv wrote: fights always take longer than expected especially when one group is scared to jump in a glowing hole, and the other spends time trying to catch wildlife *tossing* wildlife tossing squirrels is a Tiefling tradition rarely understood by other races. | ||
|
Gahlo
United States35174 Posts
On January 08 2015 02:16 Lord Tolkien wrote: *tossing* wildlife tossing squirrels is a Tiefling tradition rarely understood by other races. And that's really the core of why the war starte din the first place. | ||
|
Goumindong
United States3529 Posts
Things players needed to do: 1) Know the rules that they plan to use: Some rules are obscure (tripping, grappling, pushing, helping) but some rules are not. Knowing what you can do within an action is super important to making your turn swiftly. Read chapter 9(combat) through, read chapter 7(ability checks) through. Know that outside of combat you can still use all these options (like the help option) Particularly important is the box "interacting with objects around you" on page 190, "Moving between attacks" also on page 190, and the effects of being in melee range. Knowing this will make decisions like "when to disengage, and how far to move" etc much swifter. If you have a ranged attack roll you should know what does and doesn't grant cover (I.E. yes you can definitely shoot through allies, its just a -2 penalty to attack) 2) Know your characters: Some characters are more complicated than others. That is OK. But you should still read your character/race section to know precisely what you can do. Knowing before hand which spells you can cast, and which spells you have prepared is super important to doing things swiftly. The thing that makes games slow down the most (and this was the biggest gameplay issue in 3.5) is that knowing all your spells and options and being able to make decisions swiftly is difficult. One way to make this go faster is to create a flow chart. You don't have to write it down, but just thinking about how you would take your actions before hand. A combat round is 6 seconds. Ideally you can make your decision on how to act within those 6 seconds. If you are thinking things through much more than 30 seconds then either you don't know your character well enough or you should just do one or the other thing. Because 5e is much more complicated than 4e in terms of action economy* I don't expect that turns go this fast Things the DM could do better 1) Be Prepared(with tokens): Ok this was a one shot and not part of the main campaign. No big deal. But its pretty easy to have tokens and having tokens and backgrounds makes things more interesting and faster. It lets you incorporate more details into the scenery which means more interesting combat. It might have meant that instead of 3 perfectly flat clearings we had various fights on the path, in canyons, etc. Plus having tokens ready makes setting up the combat a lot faster. The more time you spend preparing the more material you can get through. (if you have to use pre-published adventures that is OK, in my experience most of them work really well) 2) Design the session: This is mainly a player psychology issue but also a campaign structural issue. The goal, mainly, is the keep players moving/acting. This can be done by limiting options, making the tradeoffs in options clear, or closing the encounter space. Limiting options is simple, the fewer choices the less players will debate them. Obviously 1 option always is a little boring, but forcing the plot forward with NPC actions is not a bad way to handle things. Additionally when things are assumed then there doesn't need to be a question. A good example could be seen at the edge of the forest. As the game is set up we really don't have an option. We either enter the forest or go back on our word from like an hour ago and negate the premise of the one shot. While negating the premise of the one shot is an option, its not really an option. Feel free to narrate that we leave our horses and enter the forest. Making tradeoffs clear is probably the most important thing: The worst offender is the paths in the forest. We don't have a clue where any of them go, we don't have much of a reason to follow them. We are, mainly, forced to just guess and go. Players really do not like doing this because it feels like the adventure is out of their hands. It also runs afoul of the very common risk aversion in players. Even in situations when players must make a decision this makes it harder for them to do so. But if you make the tradeoffs clear players can make decisions much faster. A good example of this is the first fork. We have a path north, a path south, and a magical path. If we knew the path north and south were to a specific place we might know to avoid them. If we see tracks in the magical path we might know to go there. What happens if we don't go the magical path? Is that even really an option? The one shot, as I saw it had a more reasonable answer than the one we took. But also one that I didn't think was what you wanted to happen. That is, the players enter the magical woods, they're lost, they leave; session over. As a plot point being lost is OK, so long as the goal, once you're unlost, is not also lost. Closing the encounter space basically means making it clear that its a dungeon. You have 4 options, you take 1 you now have 3 left. Making a mistake isn't a big deal because we don't continue on forever. You could condense this into the idea that if your goal is unknown, then the amount of space you have to search in it should be known. And otherwise the goal and path should be, more or less, clear. For us, in the forest we had a very open ended structure with no clear idea of where the end goal was, either the guy we were searching for, the spirit of the woods, or what not. This meant that we were either given false choices(all paths lead to the same encounter, which is OK as a DM tool, but players don't want to feel that way) or we were just hoping that we advanced the plot. As a DM your task, basically, is to railroad players in a way that doesn't feel like they're being railroaded. This sure as shit isn't easy, but its key. *In 4e because you only got one attack per turn and very few bonus actions the ability of characters to have conditional actions was much lower. In 5e you can attack, if you kill the creature move to another creature and attack again. One of the reasons i drew my double hand axes in the game was because i was expecting to have a situation where i might kill the wolf in front of me, and given that i hit, i would move to the other wolf and attack it. So while in 4e you could just roll everything at once after you stated your action in 5e the rest of your turns may depend on your success. ------------------ Aside: if you don't mind i would like to request a rule change/character functionality change. If possible i would like to take "protection" and use it without a shield. This will let me protect characters a bit better but reduce my damage by a bit. | ||
|
jcarlsoniv
United States27922 Posts
Making tradeoffs clear is probably the most important thing: The worst offender is the paths in the forest. We don't have a clue where any of them go, we don't have much of a reason to follow them. We are, mainly, forced to just guess and go. Players really do not like doing this because it feels like the adventure is out of their hands. It also runs afoul of the very common risk aversion in players. Even in situations when players must make a decision this makes it harder for them to do so. But if you make the tradeoffs clear players can make decisions much faster. A good example of this is the first fork. We have a path north, a path south, and a magical path. If we knew the path north and south were to a specific place we might know to avoid them. If we see tracks in the magical path we might know to go there. What happens if we don't go the magical path? Is that even really an option? You walk into a forest you've never been in. There are unmarked paths, why would you know where they go? You're looking at it as a decision the players have the make, but I see it more as a decision the characters have to make (which really boils down to a disagreement in how each of us thinks the game should be played). Aside: if you don't mind i would like to request a rule change/character functionality change. If possible i would like to take "protection" and use it without a shield. This will let me protect characters a bit better but reduce my damage by a bit. No. You have intentionally avoided taking a shield so that you can take advantage of the supposed "mind sets" of enemies and their aggro. You forgo any bonuses with shield because you have done so. (obviously this is up to Asmo) | ||
|
wei2coolman
United States60033 Posts
Also, not sure how 5e deals with it, but are you guys accounting for size of your character in weapon usage and attack rolls? | ||
|
jcarlsoniv
United States27922 Posts
I think something that is 2 sizes larger than another creature gets advantage (and vice versa with disadvantage), but I could be making that up/confusing that with something else. | ||
|
wei2coolman
United States60033 Posts
On January 08 2015 05:46 jcarlsoniv wrote: As far as I know, 5e doesn't care at all about weapon usage with characters of varying sizes. I think something that is 2 sizes larger than another creature gets advantage (and vice versa with disadvantage), but I could be making that up/confusing that with something else. IIRC like a "long sword" for a small character has a smaller damage roll compared to a long sword of a large character, and stuff like that. I think being small relative to a big person also adds on to their AC? I don't remember the specifics. | ||
|
wei2coolman
United States60033 Posts
| ||
|
jcarlsoniv
United States27922 Posts
On January 08 2015 05:48 wei2coolman wrote: IIRC like a "long sword" for a small character has a smaller damage roll compared to a long sword of a large character, and stuff like that. I think being small relative to a big person also adds on to their AC? I don't remember the specifics. Nope, none of that stuff. 5e did away with a lot of the +/- x adjustments to attacks in favor of (dis)advantages. | ||
|
PrinceXizor
United States17713 Posts
On January 08 2015 05:48 wei2coolman wrote: IIRC like a "long sword" for a small character has a smaller damage roll compared to a long sword of a large character, and stuff like that. I think being small relative to a big person also adds on to their AC? I don't remember the specifics. No. but the size of the weapon matters. if its a long sword made for goblins its not going to be as powerful as a long sword made for giants. its scale of weapon not creature. also keep in mind with goumindongs interpretation of PnP adventures every character is aware of the game and the game mechanics down to understanding how dice rolls work. so its not that you are in a world, but you are in a game with a world to him. | ||
|
wei2coolman
United States60033 Posts
On January 08 2015 05:56 PrinceXizor wrote: No. but the size of the weapon matters. if its a long sword made for goblins its not going to be as powerful as a long sword made for giants. its scale of weapon not creature. also keep in mind with goumindongs interpretation of PnP adventures every character is aware of the game and the game mechanics. so its not that you are in a world, but you are in a game with a world to him. yeah, that's what i meant, sorry if i wasn't clear. | ||
|
Dandel Ion
Austria17960 Posts
| ||
|
PrinceXizor
United States17713 Posts
On January 08 2015 05:58 wei2coolman wrote: yeah, that's what i meant, sorry if i wasn't clear. yeah giant's longsword would be considered either a greatsword or a ultra greatsword (mercurial greatsword?) to a human. depending on the scale the world has for giants. Most weapons are in reference to the medium size. a medium sized dagger is 1d4 damage a small dagger is 1d3 and a large dagger is 1d6. but unless specified its pretty much always medium. | ||
|
ComaDose
Canada10357 Posts
e: oh which section is that info in px? | ||
|
PrinceXizor
United States17713 Posts
apparently instead of having these specific die changes they just want people to bump the weapons up or down a type in the list. the dice rolls i used were just stuff thats been long standing in DnD since at least 2.0 | ||
|
ComaDose
Canada10357 Posts
 | ||
| ||
