tomes
Supporter
Hello madness
Posts: 1,438
Currently Running: Dungeon World, hippie games, Fallout Shelter RPG hack
|
Post by tomes on Apr 15, 2014 11:49:55 GMT -8
Recently in one of the Argument Phase videos, malifer (Josh) mentioned that as a player, combat is interesting, especially because you have something at stake. As a GM, it is just something that often gets in the way between point A and point B, and is also sometimes just a time killer ( hear here). Obviously this isn't always the case, however as a GM who is more interested in the collaborative story generation and role playing - and not as into the mechanics of the game for the sake of the mechanics - how can I get excited about combat? As an example, I never use random encounters. I'm not into combat for combat, so if it doesn't server the story, I ain't doing it. I might have an encounter that only occurs when the party is delaying (e.g. they decide to camp somewhere to regain their spells; I might not want that to happen without consequences), but that's not a random encounter cause I'm ready for their shenanigans.
|
|
|
Post by malifer on Apr 15, 2014 12:55:28 GMT -8
Recently in one of the Argument Phase videos, malifer (Josh) mentioned that as a player, combat is interesting, especially because you have something at stake. As a GM, it is just something that often gets in the way between point A and point B, and is also sometimes just a time killer ( hear here). Obviously this isn't always the case, however as a GM who is more interested in the collaborative story generation and role playing - and not as into the mechanics of the game for the sake of the mechanics - how can I get excited about combat? As an example, I never use random encounters. I'm not into combat for combat, so if it doesn't server the story, I ain't doing it. I might have an encounter that only occurs when the party is delaying (e.g. they decide to camp somewhere to regain their spells; I might not want that to happen without consequences), but that's not a random encounter cause I'm ready for their shenanigans. I worry that an excited GM may become an Adversarial GM. There is the idea as brought up by guitarspider in one of the casts about the importance of violence in Rpgs. Do we really need all the combat to tell an interesting story or play a game? We also have "random encounters" that the GM did not create. Such as when a player decides it's a good time to start a bar brawl or try and set something on fire. A GM who tries to have combats have meaning is left with a random encounter of meh. This is why I really become more interested in games with a lethal combat system, to influence the players from the kill things and get stuff mentality.
|
|
D.T. Pints
Instigator
JACKERCON 2018: WITH GREAT POWER COMES GREAT RESPONSIBILITY June 22-July 1st
Posts: 2,857
Currently Playing: D&D 5e, Pathfinder, DUNGEONWORLD, Star Wars Edge of the Empire
Currently Running: DUNGEONWORLD, PATHFINDER
|
Post by D.T. Pints on Apr 15, 2014 19:04:37 GMT -8
This one really surprised me. Bored by combats ? What ?!? The majority of the games we play have the majority of the their mechanics built around ACTION! fighting and bashing shit...If a combat is boring for the GM I'd have to ask what about combats is exciting for that person as a player ? Me personally combats and action sequences are THE MOMENT when all of the actions of players and GM become affected by unexpected dice results. I agree that we as GMs have a huge impact on when/where/how/and what form those combats take but then at some point we fall back on the mechanics of the game and at that point ANYTHING can happen. Especially in games with exploding dice like savage worlds or warhammer. Suddenly what should have been a routine encounter turns into a nail biting bloody struggle for the players lives. I definitely get sweaty dice hands (or mouse clicking hands) when the swords come out as a GM and a player. Last pathfinder session the dwarven cleric charged headlong at the approaching marauding raptors and got the living shit kicked out of him and nearly died. And this session the mighty paladin took his newly acquired band of calvary and crashed through a great horde of slaver dwarves. If you are having a time making this fun, ask yourself what would this look like in a movie ? That's why I make trailers...regardless of what system you are playing I think we all love the moments of cinematic extravaganza. "Your terminated fucker!" Those lines should be happening in our gaming combats. When several dice rolls have occurred and no real descriptions beyond numbers has happened its time to stop the fight for a second and remind everyone what they look like, what the scene looks like and what the opponents are doing. My last trailer stole a scene from "Kingdom of Heaven" where a small band of crusaders charges into a vastly out numbering band of Saladin's forces. Like tomes said in the last Argument Phase...though I don't expect that EXACT scene to occur the coupling of crazy Pink Floyd with mad eyed crusaders, charging horses and flying blood remind me of the feel I want to have in my fights. Ramble over. But one more thought. Capt. America: The Winter Soldier. Holy shit those were some incredibly dynamic and engaging fight scenes. More of that in my games please.
|
|
|
Post by malifer on Apr 15, 2014 20:39:57 GMT -8
This one really surprised me. Bored by combats ? What ?!? The majority of the games we play have the majority of the their mechanics built around ACTION! fighting and bashing shit...If a combat is boring for the GM I'd have to ask what about combats is exciting for that person as a player ? Me personally combats and action sequences are THE MOMENT when all of the actions of players and GM become affected by unexpected dice results. I agree that we as GMs have a huge impact on when/where/how/and what form those combats take but then at some point we fall back on the mechanics of the game and at that point ANYTHING can happen. Especially in games with exploding dice like savage worlds or warhammer. Suddenly what should have been a routine encounter turns into a nail biting bloody struggle for the players lives. I definitely get sweaty dice hands (or mouse clicking hands) when the swords come out as a GM and a player. Last pathfinder session the dwarven cleric charged headlong at the approaching marauding raptors and got the living shit kicked out of him and nearly died. And this session the mighty paladin took his newly acquired band of calvary and crashed through a great horde of slaver dwarves. If you are having a time making this fun, ask yourself what would this look like in a movie ? That's why I make trailers...regardless of what system you are playing I think we all love the moments of cinematic extravaganza. "Your terminated fucker!" Those lines should be happening in our gaming combats. When several dice rolls have occurred and no real descriptions beyond numbers has happened its time to stop the fight for a second and remind everyone what they look like, what the scene looks like and what the opponents are doing. My last trailer stole a scene from "Kingdom of Heaven" where a small band of crusaders charges into a vastly out numbering band of Saladin's forces. Like tomes said in the last Argument Phase...though I don't expect that EXACT scene to occur the coupling of crazy Pink Floyd with mad eyed crusaders, charging horses and flying blood remind me of the feel I want to have in my fights. Ramble over. But one more thought. Capt. America: The Winter Soldier. Holy shit those were some incredibly dynamic and engaging fight scenes. More of that in my games please. Warning it's late and my response is probably just as ramble-y. You have been warned. I'm very intrigued by game systems as someone has taken their idea of how to simulate a reality with polyhedrals. But I do like systems that delve a little outside combat with their ideas. "Exciting" is too strong a word for my emotion towards combat. What I find "not boring" about combat as a player is if the dice fuck up that's the end of this characters story. As a GM I can not get that connected to Goblin #8. When I was much younger and had seen half as many movies as I have now. I did enjoy action flicks. Now I don't care to ever see another one. This mostly to my distaste for everything being CGI and/or 3D. But I think it rings true in my opinion of games. I don't play video game because it's all action scenes, there is no depth. Not to mention after a while all I can see is the Math. It's very boring when I contemplate that a really difficult part of the video game is just a matter of selecting the appropriate sequence of button mashing at the correct time. Nowadays "You're terminated fucker!" makes me want to change the channel. Maybe it's because I'm older, or maybe because I've seen better movies. I don't know. I know I grew up watching and loving Quentin Taratino movies and now you would have to pay me to watch one. I just have better things to do with my time. I do like Hit Locations and Wound systems in a game because they allow you to tell a stronger narrative in combat. If we were all playing D&D rules as written the appropriate narration should be along the lines of "He hits you for 10 Damage. You're really starting to get your heart racing now. If this keeps up you may end up out of breath or *gasp* with minor nick if you lose 30 more hit points." But I'll end on a happy note. My favorite thing about RPGs is that even when not in combat and dice are only being used to see how high up a player can stack them, Anything can happen. I like it when a small story element becomes a moment. My personal stories would have little effect so for an example I will use the common ground of Stu Venable's L5R AP. All the fighting was very boring to me. But the scene where Stu got Tyler to start talking to the girl was brilliant.
|
|
tomes
Supporter
Hello madness
Posts: 1,438
Currently Running: Dungeon World, hippie games, Fallout Shelter RPG hack
|
Post by tomes on Apr 15, 2014 20:44:53 GMT -8
Well, that helped. Pep talk for GMs!
|
|
|
Post by HourEleven on Apr 15, 2014 20:44:58 GMT -8
As a guy who primarily GMs three combat-less campaigns and one Pathfinder dungeon murder fest, I think the key to combat is to GM the hell out of it. For example, a fight breaks out in a bar and the enemies in the fight are Man1,Man2 ,Man3, and Man4. This could very easily be a "punch each other until the combat ends" situation, but if I approach it, as a GM, in the same fashion I would a social throw down in a Victorian drawing room, it suddenly becomes much more interesting.
If I planned for this fight, awesome, it's already prepped, if not I make some quick notes. Man 1 and 2 know each other, but don't know 3 or 4. In fact, 1 and 2 are both veterans who have fought together. They are going to coordinate their attacks, but they won't be working with 3 and 4. If either 1 or 2 gets seriously injured, the other will stop fighting and will attempt to clear them to safety. Taking out 1 or 2 will actually remove both from the fight (possibly making an enemy life), but the players don't know this (unless they see it in the tactics). Man 3, on the other hand is just drunk and looking to get out some anger at his boss - but really he wants to go home to his wife and kid tonight. If the fight turns serious, he will rethink his investment. Man 4 is a sadistic lunatic - he won't stop until he is dead or the PCs are. This fight suddenly has a lot more dynamics in it. Most importantly: As a GM, I know how they will react moment to moment, just like in an NPC conversation. Make them people that act and react, not bipedal sword swinging machines.
Try building quick relationship trees amongst a group of Kobolds, their ranks, bravery, etc. and you will see very different fights.
|
|
|
Post by malifer on Apr 16, 2014 4:39:09 GMT -8
As a guy who primarily GMs three combat-less campaigns and one Pathfinder dungeon murder fest, I think the key to combat is to GM the hell out of it. For example, a fight breaks out in a bar and the enemies in the fight are Man1,Man2 ,Man3, and Man4. This could very easily be a "punch each other until the combat ends" situation, but if I approach it, as a GM, in the same fashion I would a social throw down in a Victorian drawing room, it suddenly becomes much more interesting. If I planned for this fight, awesome, it's already prepped, if not I make some quick notes. Man 1 and 2 know each other, but don't know 3 or 4. In fact, 1 and 2 are both veterans who have fought together. They are going to coordinate their attacks, but they won't be working with 3 and 4. If either 1 or 2 gets seriously injured, the other will stop fighting and will attempt to clear them to safety. Taking out 1 or 2 will actually remove both from the fight (possibly making an enemy life), but the players don't know this (unless they see it in the tactics). Man 3, on the other hand is just drunk and looking to get out some anger at his boss - but really he wants to go home to his wife and kid tonight. If the fight turns serious, he will rethink his investment. Man 4 is a sadistic lunatic - he won't stop until he is dead or the PCs are. This fight suddenly has a lot more dynamics in it. Most importantly: As a GM, I know how they will react moment to moment, just like in an NPC conversation. Make them people that act and react, not bipedal sword swinging machines. Try building quick relationship trees amongst a group of Kobolds, their ranks, bravery, etc. and you will see very different fights. Those seem like good ideas. I am a big proponent having the opponents yield or run away after being wounded. I dislike the idea that every adversary will fight to the death or not help out a friend. But the major flaw is that it still just tactics. The story has stopped dead so you can have this gratuitous sex scene. I am actually a good tactician, but I'm not going to use that. This is not a game of chess. I don't want to win. I have to kind of dumb myself down under the guise that the Kobolds don't know that the guy with the pointy hat is a wizard and should be taken out first, so they can tell which guy with the warhammer is the cleric so they can take him out next. But the players always seem to pick out which guy is wearing the pointy hat. I am being a GM on the "player's side" and honestly waiting for the fight to be over. If even the dumbest "fight to the death" monster is being used I never go one more round when it still has "1 Hit Point" left. Nah fuck it yeah you killed him. Good job. Now I never appear bored and I try to describe action as well as I can, but I'm really only thinking of the next scene. I like it better when the "conflict" is some choice that has the players torn between the options. It's definitely more difficult to come up with than a fight, and sometimes even with a lot of planning it can get defeated quickly by the PCs. But when it works it's great.
|
|
|
Post by HourEleven on Apr 16, 2014 8:41:48 GMT -8
But the story shouldn't stop when the fight starts. There's no moment more dramatic than when someone might die. If the game is stopping and becoming a chess match whenever someone draws a weapon, it's a problem with "why" they are fighting and how you and they are approaching it.
Are the enemies just meat walls slowing them down or are they talking? Is the fight just a speed bump, or is there a reason to be there. Is the fight "balanced" so they just have to trade hits until they won, or are they so out numbered and their only hope is to protect the guy who is rigging up a quick bomb to make an emergency exit.
What's the story in the fight? If it's "there's an Orc in the room," that's a bad story and will make for a boring fight. If it's "that's the guy we've been chasing and he's going to poison the well if we can't stop him, but if we kill him we will never find joe's sister!" then that's a fight story worth telling.
|
|
|
Post by malifer on Apr 16, 2014 9:32:56 GMT -8
But the story shouldn't stop when the fight starts. There's no moment more dramatic than when someone might die. If the game is stopping and becoming a chess match whenever someone draws a weapon, it's a problem with "why" they are fighting and how you and they are approaching it. Are the enemies just meat walls slowing them down or are they talking? Is the fight just a speed bump, or is there a reason to be there. Is the fight "balanced" so they just have to trade hits until they won, or are they so out numbered and their only hope is to protect the guy who is rigging up a quick bomb to make an emergency exit. What's the story in the fight? If it's "there's an Orc in the room," that's a bad story and will make for a boring fight. If it's "that's the guy we've been chasing and he's going to poison the well if we can't stop him, but if we kill him we will never find joe's sister!" then that's a fight story worth telling. It's not that I don't think the story has to stop once combat begins. Or that it can't be tense for the players. As a GM though it's like peeling orange. It happens so you can get to the good part.
|
|
tomes
Supporter
Hello madness
Posts: 1,438
Currently Running: Dungeon World, hippie games, Fallout Shelter RPG hack
|
Post by tomes on Apr 17, 2014 10:45:19 GMT -8
...and I think this is all why it'd make a great show topic... I'm sure everyone has a strong opinion, whether incredulous ( D.T. Pints) or empathetic ( malifer) or constructive ( HourEleven).
|
|
D.T. Pints
Instigator
JACKERCON 2018: WITH GREAT POWER COMES GREAT RESPONSIBILITY June 22-July 1st
Posts: 2,857
Currently Playing: D&D 5e, Pathfinder, DUNGEONWORLD, Star Wars Edge of the Empire
Currently Running: DUNGEONWORLD, PATHFINDER
|
Post by D.T. Pints on Apr 17, 2014 14:04:09 GMT -8
Who me INCREDULOUS ?!? Never! Well maybe a bit.
|
|
|
Post by malifer on Apr 17, 2014 16:18:12 GMT -8
Who me INCREDULOUS ?!? Never! Well maybe a bit. D.T. Pints incredulous? I don't believe it.
|
|
SirGuido
Supporter
Drizztmas Santa
Ask me about the Drizztmas Exchange!
Posts: 2,127
Preferred Game Systems: L5R, Traveller, Fate Accelerated, Masks
Currently Playing: Nothing.
Currently Running: Nothing.
Favorite Species of Monkey: Anything in a Cage.
|
Post by SirGuido on Apr 18, 2014 4:28:14 GMT -8
The big thing about combat in RPGs is you have to have 3 things:
Meaning Challenge Consequences
Meaning: The combat has to mean something in the scheme of the story. Just fighting a goblin and then moving on to kobold then an orc means NOTHING unless they are there for a reason. Are they starving and attacking you for food? Do they want your stuff? Did you piss them off? There has to be a meaning behind the conflict.
Challenge; A combat has to challenge you in some way. It doesn't have to mean that the opponent is 2 levels higher than you, or can do 8d6 damage in one hit, or anything mechanical like that. It could mean good tactics, battlefield presence if you will. It could also mean that the meaning I mentioned above creates such a challenge because of its drastic consequences(see what I did there?). For example maybe you're traveling in a caravan with your family and one of the bad guys kidnaps your children. If they have your children in their grasp you are less likely to use certain tactics that you would normally use to keep from hurting those kids. This makes that combat more of a challenge.
Consequences: If nothing happens when/if you lose that combat... what's the point? There has to be a consequence(either good or bad) in order to make a meaningful combat. Holy shit, that was Gygaxian.
To me, those three things have to be in every conflict for it to be interesting and entertaining on BOTH sides of the table.
|
|
D.T. Pints
Instigator
JACKERCON 2018: WITH GREAT POWER COMES GREAT RESPONSIBILITY June 22-July 1st
Posts: 2,857
Currently Playing: D&D 5e, Pathfinder, DUNGEONWORLD, Star Wars Edge of the Empire
Currently Running: DUNGEONWORLD, PATHFINDER
|
Post by D.T. Pints on Apr 18, 2014 7:06:40 GMT -8
And so upon this Friday of Goodness thus spoketh the Guido, "Thou cannest not have exciting combats unless thou keepest to the Rule of Three. And it was good."
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Apr 19, 2014 4:01:11 GMT -8
Ditch the charts, discard the dice - go one step beyond (LARPing) . . . Give the players real swords with live blades and immerse yourself in the role of their opposing combatant. Now that'd be pretty exciting for any GM - possibly fatal but exciting none the less . . . Aaron
|
|