|
Post by OFTHEHILLPEOPLE on Jan 20, 2017 11:39:48 GMT -8
This has come up in passing but I think it would be a good subject for the group to discuss how they handle distance and movement when playing in Theater of the Mind style games where there are no minis of maps. - How to describe ambiguous distances instead of saying "They're fifteen feet away".
- Whether to set limitations on character movement or not worry about it. Or how to have a dialogue about how far a play can reliably move themselves.
- Distance descriptions in other games, like distances of Near, Close, Far Away and how to implement that in other games.
- How to determine who is affected in Area of Effect spells and explosions.
Thoughts?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2017 0:50:45 GMT -8
This has come up in passing but I think it would be a good subject for the group to discuss how they handle distance and movement when playing in Theater of the Mind style games where there are no minis of maps. - How to describe ambiguous distances instead of saying "They're fifteen feet away".
- Whether to set limitations on character movement or not worry about it. Or how to have a dialogue about how far a play can reliably move themselves.
- Distance descriptions in other games, like distances of Near, Close, Far Away and how to implement that in other games.
- How to determine who is affected in Area of Effect spells and explosions.
Thoughts?
It seems to me that having a distance in mind is not a bad thing. While many people are bad at estimating distances (and we have a natural aversion to telling people things they shouldn't know), some people develop that skill to quite potent effect. As part of learning to shoot archery at unmarked distances, I've had to teach myself to better estimate yardage. In fact, part of the difficulty of increased range is not just being steady enough to hold a tight group, but being able to choose the correct point of aim (which of my 5 pins to hold on or betweenthe target) for the distance. I walk around now and sometimes stop to think, "That tree has to be 20 yards away from here". That was never something I thought before I got into archery (guns have an arc too, but their superior speed means you need to shoot over much bigger distances to notice its effect). Similarly, a runner might think about a stretch of road in the amount of time it would take them to run it. So really, an interesting way to narrate might be to find what perspective would matter to the character. "How long would it take me to get to that piece of cover?", is a question with multiple answers sometimes. The lure of distances are that you only need to answer once and everyone can then try to figure out how long it would take them. You could also ask for a skill roll to sucess fully estimate distances. Someone wanting to know how quickly they could move from cover to cover could roll their soldier skill to find out. If they miss the roll, perhaps they end up underestimating and get caught in the crossfire as a result. The interesting part of this concept is it asks the characters how they view the world. I may be taking my range estimations from the archery skill, while another person could be using mathematics to calculate distance off of the perceived size of a know object. Of course, the downside to asking for rolls for this kind of thing is that it takes time. The benefits, of course, are that it requires the players to think like the character. It asks them how they see and measure the world around them. If you chose a system without set turn times, it would even shine more. Because you would then no longer be determining "how long would it take me to get to point B?" I could easilly see a PbtA style result chart where you could have: - You outperform your baseline expectation
- You meet your baseline expection
- You fail to meet your expectations
So that soldier trying to make a sprint to cover might expect that he will get shot at in the process of running there, but he needs to do it anyways. So he rolls and maybe he runs so fast they don't get a shot until he is under cover again. Or maybe he runs and they get a chance to make an attack against him. Or maybe he runs and not only does he get shot at, but he gets driven into a foxhole and doesn't complete the run. Now he is trapped under enemy fire, possibly dealing with the ramifications of the attacks he endured during his sprint.
Depending on how likely the outcome is, you could shift the chart up or down. Perhaps meeting expectations is the best possible result, you can meet your expectations with a complication, and the worst is complete disaster. Or perhaps the worst result is success with complication. Instead of altering the difficulty of the roll, the possible outcomes could be where the challenge level enters the equation.
|
|
|
Post by OFTHEHILLPEOPLE on Jan 21, 2017 16:27:36 GMT -8
I am a dumby. If you tell me something is ten feet away I can't visualize it unless I'm literally looking at it. And now I'm jealous you got archery training. I've been wanting to get into it since I was a kid and have developed a love for traditional long bows from the few bowyers I know, but that initial investment...
Back on point, I have trouble visualizing distances. Whether that's a product of my upbringing or I'm just weird. But if we are in agreement that a kobold is Near me but not Close I can understand my limitations easily. That simplification versus the complication of distance language is the discussion I'd like to spark and I am loving your input.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2017 23:47:21 GMT -8
I am a dumby. If you tell me something is ten feet away I can't visualize it unless I'm literally looking at it. And now I'm jealous you got archery training. I've been wanting to get into it since I was a kid and have developed a love for traditional long bows from the few bowyers I know, but that initial investment... Back on point, I have trouble visualizing distances. Whether that's a product of my upbringing or I'm just weird. But if we are in agreement that a kobold is Near me but not Close I can understand my limitations easily. That simplification versus the complication of distance language is the discussion I'd like to spark and I am loving your input. You might pick a distance of measure everyone is more accustomed to than. A decent one is highway/street lanes. Around here, everyone drives, so we all know how large a 1, 2, 3, or even 4 lane road is. Other useful ones to consider may be comparisons to peoples height. This works especially well if you have a range of heights in the group. If only the tall person has to duck you are probably looking at a regular-smallish door. If the short person has to duck on the other hand... I know I never settled into the whole range band idea. Every game I played in that used them, I found I kept having to remind the GM of what they actually meant (as well as the other players). One thing that came up all the time was who could hear what in FFG's Star Wars. Each range band listed things such as if you could hear a person whisper, a conversation, or yelling. "*Whisper whisper whisper*" ... "WHAT!?" I find theatre of the mind works best in small scenarios or where you want to use the persons own mind to generate the imagery. If I describe a pine forest, I'm unlikely to give distances at all. It doesn't really matter that they see exactly as I do. We both know what a pine forest generally is like. The same thing applies to cities. Once you begin to complicate matters to the point where people need to know distance between several points (as opposed to a couple), it becomes too difficult to juggle that mentally. Sometimes you just need a map or sketch. Stepping back to your initial list of questions I can see I still need to cover 2 & 4. Limiting character movement is really game specific. Allowing unlimited movement in D&D would be crazy. The same with GURPS, those games balance around movement and action economy. Who would use a bow if they could all run like bullet trains in order to engage with their swords? (People fighting aerial or unreadable targets, but that is besides the point.) As far as how far they can move themselves... Not at all? Theatre of the mind works by saying what you'll do. If I say I'm going to run up and attack a monster at the other side of a field while we are in combat, that might take several turns (field is difficult terrain, so no x4 run). You might want to warn anyone who is taking on a multiple turn action, since turns take forever in some games. When it comes to explosions, many games that use them have tactical play as a cornerstone. For those that don't, it's like any other GM call. How do you decide which NPC's attack which PC's or where they begin the combat? You just do it. How spread out have the been described or envisioned? As a note: PC's who want to target "as many people in the explosion as possible" are often being cheese mongers. Unless you are a wizard flying over the battlefield (or in a bomber), your ability to determine the perfect target is less than ideal. Give them the best group that they could logically see. This should probably have already been described or be small in size (Because who would forget that giant mass of frothing berserkers?). On to point 3. Don't cross the streams. Games with narrative systems and games with tactical systems don't play nice together. GURPS won't play like PbtA, and trying to cram that square peg in the round hole will just be an unhappy experiance for everyone. In other narrative games there really is no need to convert in many cases. Those range brackets describe distance in general, system agnostic terms.
|
|