| Critique my playing format.; Intentions and resolutions. | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jan 25 2008, 08:17 PM (149 Views) | |
| HollowDes | Jan 25 2008, 08:17 PM Post #1 |
|
Big Koala
|
I've stumbled across this concept accidentally a few times while DMing, and always enjoy it when I do, but for some reason, until just recently, never formalized the process in my mind. I love this play format so much, and to me it is SO logical, I'm surprised it's never been talked about or written before. Actually, I take that back. Much of what I have expected to be in the books never has been, so it's not so surprising anymore, lol. Anyway, onto this format I'm speaking of! Step 1: State your intention I start with the player to my left and move around the table clockwise asking each player to tell me what they *intend* to do in the next round. This means the action has not taken place yet and they are free to change their mind and do something else after someone else's action has resolved in reaction to that action. Once each player has told me what they intend to do for that round, I go to the next step, resolutions. Step 2: Intentions are resolved Going back to the first player and moving quickly to give the game a stronger sense of simultaneousness, I resolve each player's actions. Sometimes this is just some description, sometimes it's a dice roll. As I go around and resolve each players' actions, as I mentioned above, they can stop in the middle of their action and do something else in reaction to what another player does. I treat these like AOs and interrupt the flow of events and resolve these actions immediately. I use this format for combat and non-combat, and it's been working great. To me, it makes so much more sense. Otherwise, if I took and resolved each player's actions one at a time, then players further down the line will react to what the players before them did. But this makes no sense! A single round is 6 seconds for EVERYONE, not 24 seconds for four players. It wouldn't make sense for three people to stand there watching their one friend do something for 6 seconds, then he freezes, the next friend moves, etc. That's just absurd. Does anyone else do this already without realizing it? Or is this built into the fundamental concept of the game and I've just been a dumbass whose missed it? Like I said, in the past I've done it naturally sometimes, but other times I've forgotten and fall back into treating each player's round like its own 6 seconds, so the player turns become consecutive instead of simultaneous the way they're supposed to be. Now that my players are used to it, they really seem to like it because it creates all kinds of funny situations when exploring rooms and the like. Anyway, feedback? kthxbai ^^ |
| Sleep...oh, how I loathe those little slices of death. - Longfellow | |
| {Offline} {Profile} | {Quote} ^ |
| Redisbest | Mar 13 2008, 10:05 AM Post #2 |
|
Habitual Offender
|
A friend of mine does this exact thing when he runs in his "Lucky 13" homebrew system. It's great with a small group because the action can go really quickly and it's lots of fun to be able to imagine everything at once (which gets a little hard with turn-based). However, when he gets to a group of about 5, it starts to get difficult- especially when multiple NPC's and/or enemies are thrown into the mix. This system is really limited by group size and then also the GM's ability for mental acrobatics, which can vary from session to session. How many players do you have when you run like this? |
|
bluff bluff bluff bluff the stupid ogre.... because lurkers need love too | |
| {Offline} {Profile} | {Quote} ^ |
| HollowDes | Mar 13 2008, 10:23 AM Post #3 |
|
Big Koala
|
Funny you should mention group size. Previously we were at 5, gameplay was dragging, I was getting frustrated, and another guy's girlfriend wanted to play, so I finally got them to agree to split the group. Cool to hear that another GM uses the same technique. My seemingly crazy logic isn't so isolated after all! |
| Sleep...oh, how I loathe those little slices of death. - Longfellow | |
| {Offline} {Profile} | {Quote} ^ |
| Fenris Wulf | Mar 14 2008, 10:13 AM Post #4 |
|
Ritual Partaker
|
I stole this from DC Heroes (Mayfair). It played so well that I've just used it in every RPG I've run ever since. Initiative is determined first, using whatever Initiative system you normally use (be it straight die roll, Dex rating, whatever). Intent is stated in REVERSE order of initiative, from slowest to fastest. This gives the faster characters the ability to see what the slower characters are doing before determining their own action. Actions are then resolved in order from fastest to slowest, sometimes meaning that a slower character's actions will be cancelled, because the faster character was able to stop the intended action of the slower character. Like I said, I did it this way because that's how it's done in DC Heroes, and I was so taken by it that I've just used it ever since in every game. Arguably, it's a lot less random than some systems, and while I realize that some players like the idea that actions may not necessarily occur in the order the players hope, I am not one of those players. |
| {Offline} {Profile} | {Quote} ^ |
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Running the Game · Next Topic » |
1:25 AM Jul 11