1. Initiative by side. I'm becoming disenfranchised with the granularity of initiative. It's quite obvious to me that requiring every player to roll initiative increases the "time count" of our play exponentially but if I thought it helped the game in any way, I'd still be loathe to remove it. However, I'm beginning to be of the opinion that requiring individual initiative increases the granularity of combat in a negative way. That is, having everyone go on their individual turn actually makes it seem like combat is flowing more slowly than I think the narrative supports. I see combat happening all at once. Every round takes 6-10 seconds, but the thief is stabbing at the same time as the ranger is shooting his crossbow at the same time the minotaur is swinging his cudgel at the fighter.
Therefore I propose this change: each side in the conflict makes an initiative roll at the beginning of every combat round and each side goes in that order. If a player character wishes to defer, they will take their turn at the end of the round. Under most circumstances the roll for the party will be done by the character initiating combat or the character who is in the lead, using the best judgement of the Dungeon Master.
This has the added benefit of allowing the player characters a better chance to plan their tactics as a group without removing the verisimilitude of "the fray," combat being a chaotic sort of affair.
2. Simplified Ranges. The fact of the matter is that Pathfinder, even my simplified Pathfinder rules, may not be the best candidate for an online game. The amount of "crunchy" rules makes for difficult situations when the game we're playing is inherently more unsure than one played at a table. There will always be the danger of a disconnect between player and DM expectations, but that danger is amplified by the distance, and the time it takes for a single turn, in an online game. Mapping helps alleviate some of this disconnect, but the lack of reliable technology that allows player characters to move their own pieces on a real board limits the benefit. In most cases I think I'd prefer to spend my time writing up descriptions and running combat than updating a map once a round.
Therefore I propose this change: during combat, ranges will be simplified in such a way that positioning can be done clearly but without the benefit of a map. The ranges will be defined as Melee, Near, Far and Distant. Under ordinary circumstances, it will take a single move action to go from Melee to Near, from Near to Far and vice versa. Distant range will require a character to spend his entire turn from Far, as he must run to get to a Distant range. The dungeon master will do his best to adjudicate movement to the benefit of the player.
Thrown weapons are effective at Near ranges, ordinary weapons are effective at Near and Far ranges and longbows and crossbows are effective at Distant ranges.
The ranges break down as follows:
|
Range
|
Feet
|
Weapon Examples
|
|
Near
|
10-29
|
Dagger, Spear, Blowgun
|
|
Far
|
30-79
|
Javelin, Sling, Shortbow
|
|
Distant
|
80-120
|
Longbow, Crossbow
|
3. Supplies. Book-keeping is embraced by some and reviled by others. At the table, a player might jot a few notes down on his character sheet and move on, trusting that the information will be there when he needs it. In an online enviornment where a single combat may take weeks in real time, that becomes a problem. I have, in the past, stated some rulings about food being taken on journeys. I want to strive to codify that in a way that allows the efficient management of food, ammunition and lodging. For this I am looking for suggestions. My current thinking is that food and drink for journeys be made a requirement, but available to be bought in "parcels" that reduces the book keeping of listing bread, cheese and mead on a character sheet. For ammunition, I'm also considering a "parcel" system that requires a roll after every combat to see if you've used up your ammo in that parcel. For lodging, I'd like to use a tiered system where you can choose to pay for basic or luxurious lodging and have some mechanical benefit for choosing the better lodging.
I'd like to add some comments/questions on each of your points.
ReplyDelete1) I like this and am used to using it in my Pathfinder games, to an extent. Typically in the PbP games on the paizo.com forums, the GM rolls initiative for each person in a block and then they run blocks. So any character that rolled above the monsters, let's say, will go then the GM will play the monster's turn, then the remaining players will go, then back to the top. Your system is more simple, but I can see the player with the most initiative being the one who always is pushed to make the roll. Does it cheapen the initiative bonus feats/traits? Maybe. I know I don't typically take them if I know we'll be using the block system. Anything to speed up combat is a win in my book, though. Sometimes you have to read back to see what has happened.
2) As an archery person in this campaign, how will you handle point blank shot and other range dependent feats/skills? Does the archer just need to say, I'll be in near and it'll be fine? How about auras and spells with specific ranges, for example haste and channels? I agree, there are a lot of really bad logistic issues with maps in this format. You spend a lot of time updating maps if you can't get a way to allow the players to move their pieces.
3) One of the things with ammo, since I play an archer, is buying durable arrows, but even then, is there a chance you lose some arrows on misses? Is that actually realistic? One of the issues we have is we are gone for many months from town and we aren't forced back into town to get supplies, since we have the war wagon. What kind of roll are we talking about for the ammo parcel? So say for example each parcel is 50 arrows and after the first or second combat I roll and use up my parcel, is that going to be offset by allowing one to last say 5-6 combats or more? Of course then you are just managing some other "form" of supplies. Normally encumbrance manages the amount of time a character can be out and about, but we overcome that with the wagon. This system may require us to travel to a town more often, which might not be so horrible, especially if you have hooks that will lead us elsewhere. I can see this being the "money sink" you need to balance the economy and give us a reason to need the other people in the village/town/city. Although I wonder if at times the cheaper of us will just live in the wagon anyway. Aren't trail rations a sort of parcel already? Are you thinking of making a "better" parcel than trail rations? That would make it easier to manage our food stores. I thought we were doing a good job of buying food and such, perhaps not. Maybe the parcel could be 1 day supply of food for X number of folks, and you just manage it like trail rations?
Very good questions.
ReplyDelete1. If the party wants the character with the best initiative to be in the lead, that's fine with me. Just as putting the character with the most hit points or the best trap sense or what have you in the lead. I don't use traits so that's a moot point. The initiative feat is, I suppose, a minor sticking point but since I pretty much let you guys play whatever you want, I doubt anyone will feel gimped. Someone might even want to play the high initiative guy just for the benefit of the party.
2. I think in most cases it will be apparent and when it's not, I expect players will let me know. :) If it works the way I want, I'll probably re-write the relevant stuff (channel especially.) I already pretty much say "tell me what range you want to be at and you'll be there" so players can get the benefit of point blank shot if they're at a reasonable distance.
I do need to spend some time thinking about how things work going outwards. I was focused on players attacking from the outside in and not from the middle out.
3. Ok, arrows are that thing that curses players of D&D everywhere. I don't think it's realistic to say that a fighter only swings his sword once per round, but is instead dodging and weaving and cutting and slashing, and that hit he does is the aggregate of that swordplay. The same isn't normally modelled for archers that way; they draw one arrow, fire it and that's the one that does the damage. A parcel system would help model that better and also have the benefit of tracking one thing rather than several. That one thing being: "how many parcels do I have?"
You bring up great points though, and I don't want to take away that choice you make about the durable arrows, or the interesting dynamic of counting arrows. I want to alleviate the problems I perceive of losing track of minor things like that because of the time it takes to do anything online. If the rangers in the party are comfortable keeping track on their blogs, by all means I’ll drop the parcel idea.
As for food, I'm glad to hear you think things are going ok. From my side of the "table" it seemed like you guys were neglecting it. I genuinely like interactions like after the Minx battle where you decided to sit down and have a pot of tea to calm your nerves. As a DM I don't want to say "but where's the tea on your character sheet?" And I also don’t want to take the time to chart out the cost of tea and butter and sugar and hibiscus extract in Bremel. But I also don't want you guys to just neglect it, which now I think maybe you haven’t.
As you can see, point 3 is the one I'm looking for the most input on :)
Something like this:
ReplyDeletehttp://intwischa.com/2011/05/house-rule-for-tracking-ammo/
And also this:
ReplyDeletehttps://plus.google.com/118084566587899989757/posts/M8vFFs8KL3U
For posterity, Shade e-mailed:
ReplyDelete"1. Range - If I have the ability to strike from distant range and the enemy can only strike from close, couldn't I just move each round to keep them two ranges out even as they move to close that range?
2. Initiative - What happens when we want to see something resolved before we act? The wizard throws a fireball and the other characters want to attack this round, but if they close than they are going to be eaten by the flames. Would we just resolve the action as though it had went off before and just press on? Seems the simplistic solution but I just want to be clear. "
Point 1: Yes you could but I’m not sure how that’s different from the game as it is now. If you fire a longbow from 100 feet, a character with move 30 would have to spend multiple turns (or Run) to get to you. Thank you, however, for pointing out that I didn’t include the option to elect to spend your whole turn moving. Do you think the ability to move two range increments as a full turn is too much?
Point 2: That’s when you delay until after your opponent. That is, if your group gains initiative, your wizard will shoot his fireball, then the monsters will go, then you. I think the trade-off is fair since you have the opportunity to plan that every round.
Range: Very similar to the EotE system. Suggestions for movement would be similar as well: one move to change between each range, with maybe two needed if you had a more distant category.
ReplyDeleteArrows: I can dig the parcel system. It's basically rolling a chance to "empty a clip" before reloading.
Food: whatever works here.
Awesome! I didnt think in those terms but it seems as though those work just like usual. Good to know!
ReplyDelete