CrosshairCollie Posted March 30, 2011 Report Share Posted March 30, 2011 Re: to hex or not to hex Or the GM could keep track of everyone's turn and say Fred its your turn George you next. Poof suddenly the players no longer know the Enemies Dexs other than they go before or after Fred. Thus eliminating some meta gaming. Also slowing the game down, since the players don't have the numbers needed to do the computations. The GM has enough to keep track of, IMO; concealing that information from the players doesn't add enough to the game to warrant the additional hassle to me. YMMV. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister E Posted March 30, 2011 Report Share Posted March 30, 2011 Re: to hex or not to hex Meta-Gamer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmjalund Posted March 30, 2011 Report Share Posted March 30, 2011 Re: to hex or not to hex Why isn't the range divided into -1 penalties instead on -2's anyway? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L. Marcus Posted March 30, 2011 Report Share Posted March 30, 2011 Re: to hex or not to hex Ease of use and tradition, I guess. At least in FREd, -1 penalties with more granular range increments was an optional rule. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Neilson Posted March 30, 2011 Report Share Posted March 30, 2011 Re: to hex or not to hex Me: "Okay, Dex 26 ... 25 ... 24 ... 23. Thunderbolt and Arsenal go." Yes, the players then know the bad guy's DEX and likely OCV and DCV. So what? Again, it depends on the game style you're looking for. Some are fine with the tactical structure where the players have information that their characters don't really have a logical means of discerning. We could easily take this further. For example, we could announce "FireDude is going to use his 16d6 Fire Blast against Heroic Lass. Any actions?" We could distribute copies of the bad guys' character sheets and all the players could do their own analysis. We could provide OCV and DCV figures so the players always know what they need to roll on any given attack. There's tons of information that can be readily accessible to the players, or not so readily accessible. Of course, the balance also depends on whether the GM plays the opposition with a full knowledge of the PC's capabilities. If the GM works on the basis that the villains know the heroes' OCV and DCV, it's pretty unfair not to share the same data on the villains. In the course of the combat, the players will get a sense of how difficult their opponent is to hit, and how good a shot he is, as they will see how often they hit, and how often he hits. How much of a sense again depends on the level of secrecy in the game. If the GM rolls dice in the open, the players will know that the villain hit even on a 13, or has not rolled a to hit above 8, which may influence their evaluation of his combat skills. If the GM rolls behind a screen, they have less information (unless he announces the villain's OCV and/or his own rolls). If the GM rolls openly, I know how many dice he's rolling, so I know that's a 12d6 Blast. if he rolls behind the screen, I don't know whether 50 STUN was a super roll for a 10d6 Blast, a good roll for a 12d6 blast, a marginally above average roll for a 14d6 blast or a poor roll for a 20d6 blast, so I have less idea what to expect from the next attack. Or the GM could keep track of everyone's turn and say Fred its your turn George you next. Poof suddenly the players no longer know the Enemies Dexs other than they go before or after Fred. Thus eliminating some meta gaming. With 6e severing OCV and DCV from both DEX and each other, knowing the action order is a lot less informative. And what stops the villain from delaying his action? Here again, the GM can give information ("It's DEX 29 and Archer can move, but chooses to delay") or withhold it ("No one moves before Heroic Lass at DEX 26."). Even in prior editions, the opponent can certainly have skill levels, but the variance depends on how frequent skill levels are, and how many characters tended to have. Skill levels weren't a great buy in 5e compared to DEX, so they weren't that common, and it was pretty unlikely the target's OCV or DCV was less than the base implied by their action order, although (overpriced) lightning reflexes could have that result. I don't see a right or wrong amount of information to give. It's a matter of the group finding a level of info provided and info withheld that everyone is comfortable with. Counting the hexes between the hero and every target so every move distance, ramge modifier and AoE sizing is known with absolute certainty before an action is committed to is one approach, and a blank map requiring estimates (absent some special ability which provides the character with a more precise ability to assess distance, spatial relations, etc.) is another. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister E Posted March 31, 2011 Report Share Posted March 31, 2011 Re: to hex or not to hex [...] And what stops the villain from delaying his action? Here again, the GM can give information ("It's DEX 29 and Archer can move, but chooses to delay") or withhold it ("No one moves before Heroic Lass at DEX 26."). [...] This reminds me of a hilarious story on the inter-webs. The "Number Of Attacks" Scam [spoilered for size] NSFW One of the most important attributes a WFRP character has is his number of attacks. A starting character has one attack per round. Later, as you proceed through the career structure, you can gain a second attack, and perhaps even a third. As you can imagine, extra attacks massively increase your effectiveness in combat. If you make two attacks to your opponent's one, you're likely to wear him down long before he wears you down, especially as characters have to sacrifice attacks if they want to parry. This particular scam is one which TAFKAC had been running for more than a year of real-time (and we probably play around 40 or 50 sessions a year of WFRP). Me and John are playing rogue-fighter types, so we were fairly useful in combat. After perhaps 70 or 80 sessions (we've played this campaign a lot) we'd managed to claw ourselves up to three attacks per round. Wolfgang, by contrast, was a wizard who'd only done a few non-wizard careers such as Templar, and so had only two attacks per round. This was quite a disadvantage, as we get in some pretty extreme fights, and since there's only three of us, we all have to get involved. One time, for example, we were walking along a causeway in a swamp, when some tentacled creature grabbed each one of us, and hauled us off the path. The three of us were each held under the water, drowning, hacking away at the tentacles with everything we had. I really thought we'd bought it, but John's character Ulrich managed finally to hack his way free, make his way to the surface, gasp some air into his screaming lungs, then dive down to hack me and Wolfgang loose. Of course, when I say that we were hacking away with everything we had, what I meant to say is that me and John assumed that we were hacking away with everything we had. Given that we were like, dying. Then one day we were in an even worse combat with some kind of elemental creature, and John and me had been pretty badly knocked about. So Wolfgang casts a spell on himself called Hammerhand. "Hammerhand..? That's the one that doubles your attacks, isn't it?" asks John. "Err... Yeah," admits TAFKAC, in a tone which suggests that he'd rather John hadn't known that. "First attacks!" says General Tangent (the GM). We all take our first attacks, followed by the elemental creature. "Second attacks!" Again, we all take our second attacks. "Third attacks!" Me and John take our third and final attacks, along with Wolfgang. "Ah!" we think, that's because of the Hammerhand doubling his attacks! "Fourth attacks!" General Tangent often used to say that, which always used to piss us off, because how hard was it for him to remember that we only had three attacks? But this time, for once, it was justified, because Wolfgang's two attacks doubled gave him four attacks. So Wolfgang takes his fourth attack. Then... "Fifth attacks!" And Wolfgang takes a fifth attack, which puts me and John deep into "What the fuck?" territory. "Since when have you had three attacks?" we demand. "Little while," says TAFKAC shrugging. "Sixth attacks!" Wolfgang takes his sixth attack. At this point me and John, a little pissed off about TAFKAC keeping it secret that he had three attacks, pick up our dice for the start of the next round. "Seventh attacks!" TAFKAC picks up his dice and throws. WHAT THE FUCK! "You've got four attacks?" "Yeah." "But no-one has four attacks! Well... no-one except for assassins!" "Yeah." "What?" Turns out that about 60 sessions previously, while we were "encountering" Luigi Belladona, crime boss of a city down south, Wolfgang had been recruited, and trained, by said Luigi as an assassin. Something that he'd neglected to mention to us. And to preserve that secret, he'd spent 60 sessions pretending to only have two attacks per round, when the truth was that he had four! Pretending even when we were fighting for our lives. This was why General Tangent sometimes asked for fourth attacks. Well as you can imagine, it led to a somewhat heated discussion, with a raking up of every single desperate combat we'd had since that time. ("What! Luigi trained you! But that was *ages* ago! How many times have we been in the shit since then, and you just fucking sat there when you had two extra attacks?"). And the final kicker? We only know this out-of-character. As far as our characters know, the wizard cast a spell which allowed him to move four times as fast as he normally can... Bastard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brionl Posted April 7, 2011 Report Share Posted April 7, 2011 Re: to hex or not to hex Tactics are all well and good, but remember they are deciding their actions in less than a second. Letting players sit around for 5 minutes planning the best tactical approach is quite unrealistic in combat. So don't let them. Bust out a timer and when they take too long "OK, while you guys are standing around talking, the enemy opens fire." Just set a time limit for moves and stick to it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Neilson Posted April 7, 2011 Report Share Posted April 7, 2011 Re: to hex or not to hex So don't let them. Bust out a timer and when they take too long "OK' date=' while you guys are standing around talking, the enemy opens fire." Just set a time limit for moves and stick to it.[/quote'] Or just don't let them measure distances out beforehand, bringing us back to the start of the discussion. I don't see a lot of difference between denying the ability to measure beforehand and denying the time to do so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Obvious Posted April 7, 2011 Report Share Posted April 7, 2011 Re: to hex or not to hex This reminds me of a hilarious story on the inter-webs. The "Number Of Attacks" Scam [spoilered for size] NSFW One of the most important attributes a WFRP character has is his number of attacks. A starting character has one attack per round. Later, as you proceed through the career structure, you can gain a second attack, and perhaps even a third. As you can imagine, extra attacks massively increase your effectiveness in combat. If you make two attacks to your opponent's one, you're likely to wear him down long before he wears you down, especially as characters have to sacrifice attacks if they want to parry. This particular scam is one which TAFKAC had been running for more than a year of real-time (and we probably play around 40 or 50 sessions a year of WFRP). Me and John are playing rogue-fighter types, so we were fairly useful in combat. After perhaps 70 or 80 sessions (we've played this campaign a lot) we'd managed to claw ourselves up to three attacks per round. Wolfgang, by contrast, was a wizard who'd only done a few non-wizard careers such as Templar, and so had only two attacks per round. This was quite a disadvantage, as we get in some pretty extreme fights, and since there's only three of us, we all have to get involved. One time, for example, we were walking along a causeway in a swamp, when some tentacled creature grabbed each one of us, and hauled us off the path. The three of us were each held under the water, drowning, hacking away at the tentacles with everything we had. I really thought we'd bought it, but John's character Ulrich managed finally to hack his way free, make his way to the surface, gasp some air into his screaming lungs, then dive down to hack me and Wolfgang loose. Of course, when I say that we were hacking away with everything we had, what I meant to say is that me and John assumed that we were hacking away with everything we had. Given that we were like, dying. Then one day we were in an even worse combat with some kind of elemental creature, and John and me had been pretty badly knocked about. So Wolfgang casts a spell on himself called Hammerhand. "Hammerhand..? That's the one that doubles your attacks, isn't it?" asks John. "Err... Yeah," admits TAFKAC, in a tone which suggests that he'd rather John hadn't known that. "First attacks!" says General Tangent (the GM). We all take our first attacks, followed by the elemental creature. "Second attacks!" Again, we all take our second attacks. "Third attacks!" Me and John take our third and final attacks, along with Wolfgang. "Ah!" we think, that's because of the Hammerhand doubling his attacks! "Fourth attacks!" General Tangent often used to say that, which always used to piss us off, because how hard was it for him to remember that we only had three attacks? But this time, for once, it was justified, because Wolfgang's two attacks doubled gave him four attacks. So Wolfgang takes his fourth attack. Then... "Fifth attacks!" And Wolfgang takes a fifth attack, which puts me and John deep into "What the fuck?" territory. "Since when have you had three attacks?" we demand. "Little while," says TAFKAC shrugging. "Sixth attacks!" Wolfgang takes his sixth attack. At this point me and John, a little pissed off about TAFKAC keeping it secret that he had three attacks, pick up our dice for the start of the next round. "Seventh attacks!" TAFKAC picks up his dice and throws. WHAT THE FUCK! "You've got four attacks?" "Yeah." "But no-one has four attacks! Well... no-one except for assassins!" "Yeah." "What?" Turns out that about 60 sessions previously, while we were "encountering" Luigi Belladona, crime boss of a city down south, Wolfgang had been recruited, and trained, by said Luigi as an assassin. Something that he'd neglected to mention to us. And to preserve that secret, he'd spent 60 sessions pretending to only have two attacks per round, when the truth was that he had four! Pretending even when we were fighting for our lives. This was why General Tangent sometimes asked for fourth attacks. Well as you can imagine, it led to a somewhat heated discussion, with a raking up of every single desperate combat we'd had since that time. ("What! Luigi trained you! But that was *ages* ago! How many times have we been in the shit since then, and you just fucking sat there when you had two extra attacks?"). And the final kicker? We only know this out-of-character. As far as our characters know, the wizard cast a spell which allowed him to move four times as fast as he normally can... Bastard. That guy's like the Keyser Soze of WFRP... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lapsedgamer Posted April 8, 2011 Report Share Posted April 8, 2011 Re: to hex or not to hex Some people love meta gaming for whatever reason. I don't let it bug me unless it starts to ruin the game for folks who don't. When I DM I try to strike a balance between good gaming and practicality. Often I just don't want it to bog down. If I have experienced guys who know the rules on the other side of the screen and can be mature about it, it's easier for me. I have a lot of stuff with hexes on it, so I will continue to use it, but I also have a ruler, so I can go hybrid depending on what map I am using. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrosshairCollie Posted April 8, 2011 Report Share Posted April 8, 2011 Re: to hex or not to hex So don't let them. Bust out a timer and when they take too long "OK' date=' while you guys are standing around talking, the enemy opens fire." Just set a time limit for moves and stick to it.[/quote'] No, when they take too long, that means they're Holding Their Action deciding what to do, so you can move on to the next combatant. And make sure the timer is a reasonable length; the PCs might be experienced combatants with high statistics, but the players are not. And don't count time they spend gathering information their characters would have, but the player isn't sure about ('does that guy have a visible forcefield', for example). Don't penalize a player for the medium. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.