Combat molasses
contracycle:
No significant conflict, no. But it's one of those things that grew up over time rather being imposed suddenly, and in large part it coincided with the groups interests anyway. As I said, you need to be merciful and generous when you are being this pushy. At the very least you'd have to warn them in advance that if they don't hurry up you're going to start considering them to have hesitated, be in conversation, something like that. At one point we used a three minute egg-timer, and I would let them kibbitz for that long and then start demanding actions from them, ready or not. The visceral ticking clock and bell sharpened the focus.
JoyWriter:
Quote from: trick on January 10, 2010, 02:33:31 PM
Players narrate their actions with extreme detail.Players ask questions about the rules or spend time looking them upPlayers ask "what should I do" to each other, and debate on what the best tactic would be.
That thing by itself sounds like it could be fun! Some complex tactical game full of depth, like chess or magic the gathering only more so. But the problem is that although they wish the rules could support that level of tactical depth, they actually can't. Their tactical choices might be sub-par mechanically, despite them fitting their interpretations of the fiction better.
Sounds like for them to be happy without spoiling your suspension of disbelief, the combat should be harder! Yes I know that's the exact opposite way from what you intended, but the choice is always whether to get rid of a crappy element, scoot past/it remove it etc, or turn it into something good. If these players are actually enjoying this narration and tactic-ing rather than just being obligated by some feeling of completeness, then shutting that down will just shut down some of their fun.
As for the talking, I conceptualise it weirdly; lots of paintball tactics that me and my friends have done involve talking before the game about how paintball compares to other stuff, and then when actually in the match, doing just enough breathless talking to trigger off that stuff, so in a way we're actually saying loads, but it's all packed into our relationships and previous common knowledge.
Course, while doing this, I start trying to sniper and constantly miss, someone cheats and runs round despite being hit, one of my friends does the exact opposite of what he said he'd do, and some little kid who got put on our team friendly-fires someone but then takes out like 6 people from the other team, so we can't really complain, and someone spends the whole match very slowly crawling forward through a muddy stream.
So it's not much like real combat ..... or is it?
So you could use contracycle's method, and assume lots of pre/post-fight talk about fighting, or just interpret the conversation a little more loosely. Just think about it like cinematic slowmo of both the fighting and the little cues.
Hereward The Wake:
I actually think that combat is fun.... or at least, leaves you hyped, adrenaline and other chemicals in your system, the buzz, the sense of being alive etc etc. can be adictive. ALso if one is dealing with a psuedo historical setting, warrior cutltures instill in their members ways to make for waht most people to be exceptional and tress full, horrifc etc, normal and something that they can function in. The warrior mind set is something that one can see in operation, with modern special forces, samurai, medieval knights etc. They may not enjoy it, but it was/is their job so they have to at least function, which means it has to at least bearable, if not then you wouldn't do it.
Back on topic.
I also think that combat tebds to bog, down people plan and discuss what they shoudl do in the moment, which to me is juts wrong. You may talk and plan before, and debrief after, but in the moment you should be on the clock, time is life, so I enforce time limits, whether in Role play or wargames, take to long to tell me what you are doing then the action has moved on and some one else is doing stuff. Contras 3-4 seconds is a long time, if they aren't telling me soemthing straight way i move on, of they start waffleing trying to buy time, or just bcause they are under pressure, I move on. It can catch people flat footed when they aren't used to it, but they learn, if not soon then after their first guy goes down then they start thinking fast and adjusting quick. This all ties in with accounts a research I have come across, a lot of people in combat don't actually do much! Obviously layers want to be the exception, but I am a beliver that the player makes charecter DO, the stats just give you an idea of how close they come to what the players wants them to do they come.
Once you start playing like this it is more fun and adictive of itself. though you really do then need a set of mechanics that you can turn around quickly too, otherwise it starts to make a joke of it.
Added bonuses I have seen is that things start to happen that don't in normal combat sessions but you read about in real accounts of combat, people don't see things that are rtight in front of them, they forget where friendlies are or where the bad guys are. People do silly things, they don't have time to come up with a complex plan in the middle of a fight, so things go belly up and the side that does best is the one that can adapt to the screw ups fastest.
Its great fun
Best
JW
Meramec:
It's interesting to me that you seem to want a fast-paced feverish vibe to combat and yet choose a game system which resolves battles using tactical tabletop miniatures. I guess I don't see these two working well together.
I think the act of moving miniatures on the board and counting squares, etc., necessarily slows things down. If you want it to be fast, then run combat by saying "OK guys, roll your attack dice! Their AC is 21, tell me if you hit!" Then assign damage as you see fit to the enemies and move on. Everyone rolling at one time, even you for the enemies. If they want to do something special like drink a potion or shield bash then they can discuss that with you instead of rolling their attack. As long as they don't all do that at once combat should go quickly.
Deeply satisfying tactical play is great. Intense and breathless combat is great. I just don't see the two mixing. To have tactical play means you have to sit and think about the tactics (which you point out aren't even well supported in the system.)
So, I guess where I always start when feeling that a game is not providing me with the experience I want, is to isolate what it is that I want and analyze where the game is lacking. This is why I went back to white box D&D after playing WOTC's version. I just couldn't handle cycling through initiative order and counting squares anymore.
Good luck finding a solution you and your fellow players can get excited about!
Hereward The Wake:
minis don't have to slow things down but too much counting can, whether thats squares, dice, mods etc. you need a set of mechanics that support faster more fluid play.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page