OOC Chat

[Neopopulas]

Makes sense to me.

[8w_gremlin]

ok folks, first combat is over, I'd like any thoughts, feelings, comments and criticisms of the system, my handling of it, or things that nature. (preferably constructive, my fragile ego can't take it)
thanks!

[solyrflair]

Since this was a playlets, I would like to see in your post how you spent Fear/Actions. I was able to figure it out myself after a bit.

What were the stats for the Thistle-folk? Evasion-Armor-HP Thresholds, etc.

I think the combat went well. I didn't have an issue with it, and you were more responsive than I thought you'd be.

[Neopopulas]

I think it went really well, even if we're all getting used to some of the way things work. We basically ended up using initiative anyway but i'd be curious how things would go if we weren't basically acting in blocks. Whether on purpose or not we basically all acted as a PC block and then the GM block, there were a couple of times i thought i could just make another post, but then you really risk me making 4 posts and everyone else making one. And even though that means the action economy is stable - the GM just gets 4 more actions - it does overwhelm the other actions so i think the player/GM blocks are good, but it also doesn't feel like its really properly using the combat system either so i'm really torn on that.

I feel like there must be a way to allow players multiple actions 'out of turn' while still restricting it so one player doesn't just take six turns.

Like maybe you can't take 2 or more turns in a row - so you always have to wait for someone else - and maybe limit the amount of turns you have based on something like your level.

[8w_gremlin]

Thistle-folk stats

and the thief


I basically spent the fear to interject and interrupt as you folk kept getting Success with hope, and not fear, and once done I'd play a couple or so actions for each of the thistlefolk, keeping an action in case I needed it.

Once you failed with fear, I was also able to do some actions and use the actions I'd banked to do more.
for every complication, I tried to further the pre-defined goals for the ambush.

I hope I was doing it right, as the system changed from 1.2 to 1.3 so was a little confused.

(does that help?)

I agree that some had a few actions more than others, due to posting faster, and I agree there perhaps should be a limit, I'll re-read the rules again, and check.
But you all kept rolling well, so few Fear dice being higher.

[Dixi]

First thing to say is that your ego should rest peacefully. We are trying a very new system that changes as we play and we test it on an official module. Whatever we might criticize is on CR.

So far I can say that I still like the core idea of the mechanics - Hope/Fear. But like others unsure about the initiative and action economy. It might feel better and smoother at the table. For the PbP it does seem like more structure is needed.

Block initiative and 1 post per "turn" can work but there is a problem with interruptions. For example, the thief freely took the package with at least three PCs around. Sure, we were in combat but there was no window to say "I risk an attack of opportunity (or whatever analog we have here if it exists at all) and grab the package preventing the thief from taking it."

Again, at the table it would be simple and - I think - expected. But how can we handle it here?

 

[jkason]

I thought it went well! Even though we sort of acted in blocks, it did feel a little looser in that I didn’t feel like I had to make sure X character acted ahead of me. I mostly tried to make sure I wasn’t just acting solo back to back and held off a bit when it seemed there were folks who hadn’t acted at all yet.

One PbP wrinkle possibly related to that is I’m struggling to figure out how best to give a Help. It seems the game assumes there will be a decent amount of “let me give my companion advantage,” but since I think the intent of that is to declare in the moment (before a roll result), it’s tricky to figure out. I could say “I’ll burn a Hope to give whoever goes next advantage,” but since the idea is you have to describe how you help that gets clunky.
 

Tag Team will probably be similar, but since that’s session limited, I imagine we’ll hold back on that for when fights look tougher)
 

Oh! Do we have a “house rule” for when session abilities reset? PbP had no sessions really, so I’m not really sure how to gauge that.

Overall thank you and well done!

[solyrflair]

I always equated Session with Thread. So if you start a new thread, then you start a new "session", meaning there was a significant break in what is happening.

I am glad that I did give you some Fear to work with. I haven't rolled with Hope yet.

I will say that the block actions seemed to work fine, and I don't think people took too many turns. I know at the beginning of the fight, I wanted to not rush forward after the little guys and stand my ground against a possible counter-attack (then things happened more quickly while I was very busy). I thought I would avoid giving you actions until I was ready to take an action. At the table, this would be easy with a nod or hand waive, letting others know I would or wouldn't want to take an action. I'm not sure if requiring a "No Action" post would be helpful.

I think the game flowed smoothly, and people who had actions took them had things to do. Which is the problem with D&D, is that when it's your turn, there is a pressure to do something.

Thanks for posting the stat blocks. I was curious what low-level creatures looked like.

Edited April 21 by solyrflair (see edit history)

[8w_gremlin]

right, thanks for the feedback, I'll get back to the adventure.

[8w_gremlin]

Help an Ally You can spend one Hope to help an ally who is about to make an action roll where you could feasibly aid them. When you do this, describe how you’re helping and roll your Hope die; this doesn’t count as an action for you. Your ally then chooses which of the two Hope die results count toward the roll; the other one is ignored. Only one PC can contribute an extra Hope die in this way.

[jkason]

7 hours ago, solyrflair said:

I always equated Session with Thread. So if you start a new thread, then you start a new "session", meaning there was a significant break in what is happening.

 

 

It's been several years since I've been in a PbP game. Is starting new threads for ongoing campaigns the usual practice? (this is a genuine question. My working assumption was that a given adventuring party would just use the same thread until their party ended adventuring, but like I said it's been awhile).

[8w_gremlin]

depends, I've seen GMs do both, it's a personal preference.
If I do swap to a new thread, I usually say so, and give links to the new one.

Act two is up: https://www.myth-weavers.com/index.php?/topic/18887-act-two-hush-now/

Edited April 22 by 8w_gremlin (see edit history)

[solyrflair]

Sorry for the out-of-time post, but the page didn't update, and was working on the post for a bit, not realizing things had moved on.

[jkason]

Heads up it looks like another rules update will be dropping next week. If it’s like last time, Demiplane sheets will auto-update with newest rules / text at that time. I need to remember to try and do screen caps this time so I can better compare sheet updates (my memory is awful about noticing things like that :) )

[8w_gremlin]

Hey, thanks fro the Heads up @jkason I appreciate your vigilance.
It would be nice if they had a changes doc, so I can tell at a glance what has changed, with each version. (beyond the base one)