- player proposes action
- player calculates the roll for the action
- player rejects option or changes it, often with help or suggestions from Statler and Waldorf*
- player find the mathematically best option and selects that OR starts over with a new action because "My guy wouldn't do that."
- roll occurs.
That's not very Han Solo, is it?
My preferred way to play is this:
- player proposes action, which may have included some between-turns calculation
- everyone else STFU and sits there
- player calculates the roll
- player rolls, regardless of the results
To be honest, this is how I play. I'd really like it if I could make this a rule. You could turn the caps off of Deceptive Attack and similiar things and let anything work, so you could potentially knock your skill down to below 10 or even below 3 (and thus no possible success) by choosing poorly.
I have tried to implement this but my players essentially resist through inertia and eventually revert to the top-listed approach.
Personally, I find it a bit less fun than the second option.
If only I could enforce this rule, I think game would be a bit more fun in the long run . . .
*
I feel like GURPS' one-second combat rounds should really suit the style of play you describe. If you want to act in one-second increments, declare it, and declare it quickly. It would be a bit harsh, but effectively having a shot clock going all the time, with All-Out Defend (Pick one) being the de facto choice if you don't.
ReplyDeleteI am not sure it would work out; I'm even less sure it would work out in the Felltower group. But it would be interesting to try.
Amen to this, brother.
ReplyDeleteJust make the freaking roll, already. Provided you have a ballpark idea of the numbers, but not the exact penalty, roll and then see how the dice land and work it out then. If it's really low then you probably succeeded and the exact penalty is likely irrelevant. If the roll is really high then you probably failed and likely don't need to work it out anyway. Only worry about checking the modifiers exactly on a borderline dice roll, in order to confirm the result. This is much faster in play.
I will be more forgiving of newbie players who aren't aware of all the modifiers yet, and allow them to do-over actions etc, when it was due to lack of understanding. However I expect experienced players to A) have a good idea of the modifiers inherent to their chosen actions, B) have a good idea of the environmental modifiers which might impact their chosen action, and C) accept that (in character) they might not know the exact target number because there could be factors of which the GM is aware but the PC is not.
I am the same way. I gave D&D 5E a try and there was the one player who played like your players. Going around the table the entire group would decide their actions, roll, declare results, and the GM would run his monsters in 15 minutes per round of combat. Except the one player who had to calculate everything. It took him 15-20 minutes to take his action between calculating and dithering between options he's already ruled out and the optimal one (ultimately he always chose the optimal one). I was quite miserable.
ReplyDeleteI thought you had a countdown when it comes to a player's turn. If they don't tell you what they do within 10 seconds or something then they pass their action or take a hold action or something like that.
One thing that used to be done early in D&D was the referee did everything. There is mention in the OD&D booklets and/or AD&D hardbacks that the player or caller tells the referee what the characters attempt and the referee rolls all the dice. You'll note that the AD&D PHB doesn't have any of the combat tables (no attack or save tables). That's something that having a computer with VTT can help with but you've already said you have too much to manage yourself. But I wonder how much it would add as you seem to know the details better than the players and often have to spot check everything they tell you.