http://fastercombat.com
Is this worth the time and money, or is it all a scam? Do you think their "lessons" are only for D&D and Pathfinder?
This is the most autistic shit I've seen in a while.
The fastest way to make combat faster is to get rid of initiative. It is a garbage idea that only serves to slow down combat and hurt tension.
As a game designer, I immediately discard any RPG I see that uses an initiative system. It is outdated game design and it is time the RPG community accepts that and moves on.
It got an article on Wired a few years back so it's probably at least somewhat legitimate. However, anything they give you for $27 (to start with) you can get for free by reading online and asking people for advice. Anyone who pays for this is a sucker. I feel bad for anyone just getting into the hobby that might actually be sucked into this shit because they don't know any better.
Also the man at the bottom of the page has almost no chin.
Make sure people are familiar with the mechanics of their character.
Seriously make sure people are familiar with the mechanics of their character.
Make sure you are familiar with the mechanics of the monsters/NPCs.
Cut down on idol side chatter
Punish people taking too long by skipping their turn.
>>44512216
It looks like a parody site.
>>44512638
>Cut down on idol side chatter
But how will I know which iM@S is best girl?
>>44512302
What do you instead of initiative? How do you decide who acts when?
This is D&D-centric advice but that's also the game this is most often a problem in. So:
>give everyone a 30 second to 1 minute timer to fully declare their turn, depending on your preference
>if they do not declare they lose the turn
Ta-fucking-da.
Slower combats are almost always caused by player decision. I hear of a DM who doesn't know what actions to take once in a blue moon, and that is usually a sign of system insecurity rather than an actual freeze-up. Your players do not need to take and discuss their turns over the course of an hour - set a hard limit appropriate to the game and go with it.
>>44513467
Oh, and having skimmed the article after reading this I will say the point about bad encounter design is fair.
If you put a generic 'I hit people' monster inside a plain 15' x 15' foot room and expect that to be fun, you should be taken out the back and shot.
In general in ANY game one of my guiding principles as a DM is that where violence is used, there should always be meaningful consequences to that violence. D&D as a game inherently encourages regular and consistent violence more than many other games, but I still go by this principle. If there are no real stakes to a combat, do not put that combat in your game.
For similar reasons I will never fudge a role, although I can see the argument for why other DMs do and fully admit some groups may enjoy that style of play more (though I would say it is better suited to non-D&D games that just incorporate that into their mechanics).
>>44513363
not Iori, that's for sure
>>44513553
Also XP is junk. Like do not feel you have to have X combats a session or a campaign or whatever to generate XP to level. Just do that at appropriate points or if you've got to do it incrementally do it with story rewards.
Giving XP based on the amount of money the party spends is fun and very well-suited to crazy heist games though, so I'd encourage trying that out as an XP system if that's your kind of game.
>>44512216
Dunno, but foxgrils a cute.
>>44512394
>no chin
And barely any ears
>>44512216
One of the things they were selling is something I was easily able to find for free with a quick google search, which itself encourages you to freely share with people
>>44513416
>you kick down the door, there is an orc, what do you do
>I charge orc
>and I want to cast a spell
and then they do.
>>44514056
So the players always go first? And do all of the players act first, then all of the enemies? That's still an initiative system m8. How do you decide which of the players acts first?
>>44513467
I've noticed that there are two things slowing combat down. Player indecision and unfamiliarity with the rules.
I've seen plenty of systems where even a starting character has a lot of things they can do in combat. Multiple types of attack action, multiple types of move action, other miscellaneous actions, etc. If I'm GMing, that usually means I know the system better than other players. I often find that I can't remember every single one of those options. So there is no way I can expect players to remember them all.
What I do for those systems is make sure that there is something on the table that lists each of those actions with a brief description of each that everyone can look at without having to ask me to check the rulebook. Sometimes I've even find myself looking at the quick reference to jog my memory of some rarely used action, because looking through my quick reference is quicker than looking through the rulebook.
Sometimes some characters (typically magic users) get a lot more options specific to them. Too many options to stick on their character sheet. In those cases, I write up a quick reference for that player to use if they have trouble remembering because it speeds things up.
Basically, if there is an action a PC can do in combat, then I make sure that they are written down on a piece of paper sitting on the table. Either something shared between players, or something a player puts with their character sheet, depending on the actions in question.
>>44513416
Ironclaw has a simple system. The GM divides the combatants into two or more groups. Typically two, PCs in one, enemies in the other. GM decides which goes first. Then each group alternates, with members in each taking their turns in whatever order they want. But always taking their complete turn in one go.
>>44514141
>Ironclaw has a simple system. The GM divides the combatants into two or more groups. Typically two, PCs in one, enemies in the other. GM decides which goes first. Then each group alternates, with members in each taking their turns in whatever order they want. But always taking their complete turn in one go.
That's still an initiative system. That's the initiative system D&D used at times. It's good for being quicker but is a little more dangerous for both PCs and enemies because ganging up is a lot easier.
No initiative system is like Dungeon World, where you're literally just reacting to whoever at the table decides to speak.
>>44514201
Point taken.
>>44514141
Yeah. My comment is kind of assuming everyone has a passing familiarity with their character and are more getting hung up on tactics or the best action, but that's a really great tip if it's system problems that are causing the delay.
Also having handouts is always nice because it opens up something you can use in a meta way, like if a psychic starts taking control of a PCs mind maybe you take the sheet and mark out 1 random action, and they can't do that until the psychic is gone.
>>44514114
>the orc raises his blade to defend himself
>but then he's it the face by a magic missile, knocking him flat, allowing you to hack him up
>another orc comes barreling out of the shadow at you, axe raised
>I prepare to parry him
>make an opposed roll
>okay
>alright you defended yourself, what now?
>I take the opportunity to counter attack
>make another opposed roll, the orc fails to dodge and is beheaded.
So forth an so on. It isn't hard to simply allow things to progress naturally, just don't use miniatures and try to play it like a skirmish wargame.
>>44514720
codex martialis is best adaptation of dnd to something closish to this. It still has initiative but involves a lot of blocking dodging ect during your opponents initiative
>>44512302
>As a game designer, I immediately discard any RPG I see that uses an initiative system. It is outdated game design and it is time the RPG community accepts that and moves on.
This is the most retarded and pretentious thing I have heard said on /tg/, which is an impressive feat. Almost all games have some initiative system, the best ones allow for 1 action per turn or easily shifting initiative around based on who needs to go first.
Even D&D DMGs give alternate initiative rules to simplify or speed up though.
>>44514201
>No initiative system is like Dungeon World, where you're literally just reacting to whoever at the table decides to speak.
So basically competitive freeform?
>>44512216
If you want faster combat just make all of your enemies out of glass and balsawood. Or just make combat less of a thing in the game.Who the fuck pays for dnd lessons, what's next: Advanced Wargaming Tactics class at community colleges?
>>44512302
>As a gayme designer
Homebrews and backports don't make you a game designer, neither does worldbuilding.
>For example, I take opportunity attacks on my foes all the time to put them in advantageous positions to stomp on the PCs. Sure my NPCs and monsters take extra damage, but think about the combat as a whole. The players get to make extra attacks – and how excited do you think they are about that? – and my foes get put in better positions to unleash unholy fury with their special attacks and abilities. Plus combat goes faster because damage output goes way up all around.
So the way you make combat go faster is to just have enemies make extremely bad tactical choices that get them hacked to bits for no reason other than so players feel more excited since they're throwing more dice, and because having an enemy charge through multiple AoOs just to make one attack move will wrap up the encounter more quickly?
That's the worst advice I've ever heard.
>>44517261
>designing game doesn't make someone a game designer
Okay bro.
>>44512216
Yeah this sounds legit. You could totally fill 52 weeks worth of lessons with this.
Orrrr they could take your money and run for the hills, which is the more likely option.
>>44520026
Mike Mearls is a game designer, and his opinions on game design is pretty worthless.
>>44512302
>>44514056
>>44514720
>As a game designer, I immediately discard any RPG I see that uses an initiative system. It is outdated game design and it is time the RPG community accepts that and moves on.
So you are a shit game designer then? One that basically removes one of the most important part of combat and just allows the players to do whatever?
What is the orc was faster then the wizard that cast magic missile and threw his mug of grog at said wizard's face before his casting was finished?
>>44517147
Pretty much. It's still GM taking care of flow and deciding when players act and when NPCs, but it makes combat a merry chaos. Also, what appeals to me is, with a natural flow, players can't perdict the order of fight and have to act in reaction. It's cool.
>>44520696
Then the orc would have to roll his combat or agility whatever bonus vs the mages casting bonus to see who managed to strike first. In real life people act simultaneously, same thing can be done it games.
I'm a orc anon by the way, orc anon and "I'm a game designer anon" are different.
>>44512302
>>44520026
This is the funniest shit I've seen in a long time.
>For example, I take opportunity attacks on my foes all the time to put them in advantageous positions to stomp on the PCs. Sure my NPCs and monsters take extra damage, but think about the combat as a whole. The players get to make extra attacks – and how excited do you think they are about that? – and my foes get put in better positions to unleash unholy fury with their special attacks and abilities. Plus combat goes faster because damage output goes way up all around.
Why do I get the sense that "faster, funner" combat is just "make it easier for your players to win"?
>>44523528
That's literally what that statement says.
Because there would be no point in making an enemy use stupid tactics to charge through player AoOs if you increased the monster AC or health, since that would just average out to the same combat length if the enemy just didn't get attacked to begin with.
And we all know that making games easier to win doesn't make them better, unless your players are complete idiots and only play room-by-room hack-and-slash dungeon crawls.
Making games better means making them both more challenging, and more engaging so players WANT to be challenged more. A fast, easy game is just as boring as a slow, difficult game.
>>44513363
It's Hibiki, Takane, Anzu, or Yayoi. We're done with this convo.
>>44514016
Wow, that's scummy of them.
>>44512638
I used a little one-minute "hourglass" I took from a board game. Can't finish your turn before it empties? You character hesitates, and you lose your turn.
