|
Post by Ronin84 on Jan 14, 2011 11:22:28 GMT -6
I try and keep the combat scenes moving guys if for some reason your actions didn't seem what you would have done, please let me know...
|
|
|
Post by chicagowiz on Jan 14, 2011 13:30:59 GMT -6
What combat?Ah, that combat, the one where two rounds went in two hours. There doesn't seem to be any order except who ever gets a post in suddenly gets the round. Can we have some sort of expectation or process to doing the rounds? (Note: not complaing, just want to know the expectations - I didn't think two hours would see two rounds completed. Heck, didn't even know we were in for a combat.) (BTW, proboards replaces b*tching with the phrase "pregnant doging" - WTH?! LMAO!)
|
|
|
Post by Ronin84 on Jan 14, 2011 13:44:12 GMT -6
What combat?Ah, that combat, the one where two rounds went in two hours. There doesn't seem to be any order except who ever gets a post in suddenly gets the round. Can we have some sort of expectation or process to doing the rounds? (Note: not complaing, just want to know the expectations - I didn't think two hours would see two rounds completed. Heck, didn't even know we were in for a combat.) (BTW, proboards replaces b*tching with the phrase "pregnant doging" - WTH?! LMAO!) Sounds fine with me...what suggestions do you have for me to make that better then? Honestly asking for when there is going to be a much more complicated combat. Should I wait a day between rounds of combat? I'm honestly asking, especially from those that have or are running pbp games. Thanks!
|
|
|
Post by chicagowiz on Jan 14, 2011 15:12:43 GMT -6
Well, I guess the question is how do you normally run your combats at the table?
For me, I collect declarations, roll initiative and then play out the combat via Philotomy's Combat Sequence.
So for my Wave Game, I do much the same - ask them what they want to do this round (Declarations) and the roll for initiative and then play it out.
For my Modern game, I'm going to do much the same, although I'll probably set an agreement that people have at max XX time to contribute an action, otherwise I'll either go with their previously stated default or I'll assume they're taking whatever defensive/best protective option is available. Then I'll run out the round.
For surprise, that's a different beastie, the players whose characters get surprise get a PM and a "you have surprise and one action - what are you going to do..." and run the round with that.
I don't know... it works for us on the Wave game, which is basically PbP'ish, except you can see what other people are typing as they type it and have a kinda IM interaction at times, but mostly it's same same.
Hope this helps?
|
|
|
Post by Ronin84 on Jan 14, 2011 15:42:00 GMT -6
Well, I guess the question is how do you normally run your combats at the table? For me, I collect declarations, roll initiative and then play out the combat via Philotomy's Combat Sequence. So for my Wave Game, I do much the same - ask them what they want to do this round (Declarations) and the roll for initiative and then play it out. For my Modern game, I'm going to do much the same, although I'll probably set an agreement that people have at max XX time to contribute an action, otherwise I'll either go with their previously stated default or I'll assume they're taking whatever defensive/best protective option is available. Then I'll run out the round. For surprise, that's a different beastie, the players whose characters get surprise get a PM and a "you have surprise and one action - what are you going to do..." and run the round with that. I don't know... it works for us on the Wave game, which is basically PbP'ish, except you can see what other people are typing as they type it and have a kinda IM interaction at times, but mostly it's same same. Hope this helps? I have seen Philotomy's Combat Sequence and the jury is out there for me. During a table top game I run initiative, people act on their count and we go from there. During a pbp game I roll and usually tell people where they are at in the "count" and then resolve the action. IF for some reason someone is out for a round then I usually "play" the character keeping them on the same road they were on when the player last posted an action. The only time I wouldn't do that is when that action would kill them.
|
|
|
Post by chicagowiz on Jan 14, 2011 16:00:49 GMT -6
OKie dokie. Imma keep quiet cause nobody else is saying anything and I don't want to be the not a very nice person.
|
|
eris
Level 4 Theurgist
Posts: 161
|
Post by eris on Jan 14, 2011 17:20:01 GMT -6
...what suggestions do you have for me to make that better then? Honestly asking for when there is going to be a much more complicated combat. Should I wait a day between rounds of combat? I'm honestly asking, especially from those that have or are running pbp games. Thanks! Ronin, in a PBP game I usually give, at least, a few hours for the players to get online, see the combat post and make a reply. Then I collect the player's posts, work out a sequence, do the rolling and post a narrative of what happened during that combat "round" and the starting situation for the next combat round. Combats in pbp games are pretty slow. For play on a forum, I usually won't do more than two rounds a day, only one if the players are international due to timing issues. In play by email, rounds can take two to four days. This can seem quite slow, compared to ftf, but it gives those that can't check their email or forums all the time a chance to "keep up." Oh, and yes, if a player doesn't get a reply in...in a reasonable amount of time...I'll NPC their PC, lightly. What is a reasonable amount of time and what is lightly varies.
|
|
|
Post by Ronin84 on Jan 14, 2011 17:28:52 GMT -6
OKie dokie. Imma keep quiet cause nobody else is saying anything and I don't want to be the not a very nice person. Chicagowiz, I asked for the opinion and I wasn't offended at all, on another note I really do respect your opinion as long as you respect mine and from what I can tell you always have. Really we have no issues, at least not from my side of the fence.
|
|
|
Post by Ronin84 on Jan 14, 2011 17:33:46 GMT -6
...what suggestions do you have for me to make that better then? Honestly asking for when there is going to be a much more complicated combat. Should I wait a day between rounds of combat? I'm honestly asking, especially from those that have or are running pbp games. Thanks! Ronin, in a PBP game I usually give, at least, a few hours for the players to get online, see the combat post and make a reply. Then I collect the player's posts, work out a sequence, do the rolling and post a narrative of what happened during that combat "round" and the starting situation for the next combat round. Combats in pbp games are pretty slow. For play on a forum, I usually won't do more than two rounds a day, only one if the players are international due to timing issues. In play by email, rounds can take two to four days. This can seem quite slow, compared to ftf, but it gives those that can't check their email or forums all the time a chance to "keep up." Oh, and yes, if a player doesn't get a reply in...in a reasonable amount of time...I'll NPC their PC, lightly. What is a reasonable amount of time and what is lightly varies. Eris, Thanks I will keep that in mind, I guess I was excited about where we had gotten to, and I knew that I wasn't going to be on much this weekend and was afraid of losing the wind..I will slow it down.
|
|
eris
Level 4 Theurgist
Posts: 161
|
Post by eris on Jan 14, 2011 17:55:16 GMT -6
Eris, Thanks I will keep that in mind, I guess I was excited about where we had gotten to, and I knew that I wasn't going to be on much this weekend and was afraid of losing the wind..I will slow it down. Ronin, It was just my 2 cents, for what that's worth. War Eagle!
|
|
|
Post by waysoftheearth on Jan 14, 2011 22:02:45 GMT -6
I'm in complete agreement with the above comments, but also recognise that this is your unique game and should be run what ever way you like.
As an international player I don't want to slow things up for the locals, but as Chicagowiz say above it's useful to set a level of expectation among the players so we (or I at least) know how soon we need to reply before our PCs switch to autopilot.
It's always interesting to see how alternate styles of play turn out, at least in the short term.
|
|
|
Post by Ronin84 on Jan 14, 2011 22:46:08 GMT -6
I'm in complete agreement with the above comments, but also recognise that this is your unique game and should be run what ever way you like. As an international player I don't want to slow things up for the locals, but as Chicagowiz say above it's useful to set a level of expectation among the players so we (or I at least) know how soon we need to reply before our PCs switch to autopilot. It's always interesting to see how alternate styles of play turn out, at least in the short term. Thankyou for your feedback as well..I will become much more slow handed
|
|
|
Post by ehiker133 on Jan 17, 2011 10:28:49 GMT -6
I thought the pace was right on. It didn't look like anyone who could have taken an immediate action missed their opportunity to react. They reacted and that brought us to the second round.
As long as nobody misses their opportunity to take an action, then I'm all for moving the pace along as much as possible.
I appreciate the idea of keeping the pace moving along during combat at the expense of not explicitly stating an action at the beginning of every round. Ronin also indicated that he a) won't assume an action that might get you killed and b) will go back if you would have done something different than his assumed action or if you feel you missed an opportunity to do something.
He'd also paused during the previous combat to clarify something when an action was stated. He then gave them the opportunity to restate or change their action if they wanted.
Every GM is going to run their game a little differently. I might not run my game the same way, but I'm in their sandbox, so to speak, so I'll happily follow their sandbox's rules. It's worth it to get to play a character instead of manage a game.
Just thought I'd chuck in my 2 cp on the issue.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 17, 2011 10:34:18 GMT -6
I was with the way you ran it before, but no problem...
|
|
|
Post by chicagowiz on Jan 17, 2011 12:41:52 GMT -6
I'm out sick today... I'll be back tomorrow.
|
|
|
Post by ehiker133 on Jan 17, 2011 12:55:06 GMT -6
Feel better, CHICAGOWiz! Lots of chicken noodle soup and heavy blankets will do you good, I'm sure.
|
|
|
Post by Professor P on Jan 17, 2011 13:18:06 GMT -6
Feel better soon ChicagoWiz!
Ronin, I assume you enjoyed the Bears game yesterday?
|
|
|
Post by Ronin84 on Jan 17, 2011 13:35:07 GMT -6
Feel better soon ChicagoWiz! Ronin, I assume you enjoyed the Bears game yesterday? Oh my, did I enjoy that game and I will be at next week's as well!! The game ended sloppily for me BUT the outcome was a win and that's what I wanted.
|
|
18 Spears
BANNED
Yeah ... Spear This Ya' Freak!
Posts: 251
|
Post by 18 Spears on Jan 17, 2011 13:37:50 GMT -6
I'll bet every Navy man who reads "C-Wiz" chuckles to himself. Man the phalanx guns!
|
|
|
Post by chicagowiz on Jan 18, 2011 8:38:09 GMT -6
I'll bet every Navy man who reads "C-Wiz" chuckles to himself. Man the phalanx guns! Why's that? Aside from the usual output of my idiocy...
|
|
|
Post by Ronin84 on Jan 18, 2011 8:52:48 GMT -6
I'll bet every Navy man who reads "C-Wiz" chuckles to himself. Man the phalanx guns! Why's that? Aside from the usual output of my idiocy... CIWS for the Phalanx gun. Close in Weapon System becomes Sea Whiz for short, at least that's what I've been told by a couple of the Navy guys I work with.
|
|
18 Spears
BANNED
Yeah ... Spear This Ya' Freak!
Posts: 251
|
Post by 18 Spears on Jan 18, 2011 8:59:38 GMT -6
Yep, that's it. Those things spew out about a zillion ball bearings a minute, shredding anything that gets in their way.
|
|
|
Post by ehiker133 on Jan 18, 2011 9:11:02 GMT -6
That would be something to see. Like when Jesse James got to shoot a railgun on his car choppin' show he used to have...
|
|
|
Post by chicagowiz on Jan 18, 2011 9:35:24 GMT -6
Heh. Learn something new everyday!
|
|
|
Post by chicagowiz on Jan 18, 2011 12:58:37 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by Professor P on Jan 19, 2011 12:51:59 GMT -6
Who's lantern is Liam holding?
If it is not Fennick's, Fennick will hold his lantern at the rear to keep an eye behind the party. He will keep his shield with his left hand and lantern in his right. His scimitar and club will be on his belt.
Unless, of course, anyone objects to having a lantern at the rear of the party.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2011 13:00:57 GMT -6
Nigel will be towards the center-rear, a pocket of rocks with him. He will have his lantern on the top of his pack ready, just in case.
|
|
|
Post by ehiker133 on Jan 19, 2011 13:26:12 GMT -6
Well... we only have four vials of oil between the lot - that isn't much time if we light both lanterns. Not sure how good it is to just have one lantern lit, but that might be our only option.
If everyone thinks we should have two lit, then we can have Laric NPC-hold his lantern.
Do we need to set up a marching order?
|
|
|
Post by Professor P on Jan 19, 2011 13:58:56 GMT -6
Well, we have one lantern (who's is it? so we can keep track of the oil). And one torch lit from Nemmet.
For now, maybe we should just use that.
As for order
Right now it seems that we have:
Kib in front Galax behind Kib Nigel at mid-rear Fennick at rear
Liam? Erimus? Nemmet? (w/ torch) Laric?
Perhaps Nigel should carry the lantern, that way Liam can have sword and hand axe at the ready and Fennick can have club and shield in hand.
Edited to show that Nemmet has the torch, not Laric.
|
|
|
Post by ehiker133 on Jan 19, 2011 14:03:55 GMT -6
Liam can go third.
Laric has a lantern with two vials of oil. I thought Fennick had two vials of oil, as well. Does anyone else have oil?
|
|