Forum changes: Editing of posts has been turned off until further notice.
Started by ffilz, February 16, 2006, 03:23:55 PM
Quotefind a way to allow the GM to advance NPCs (that aren't trying to be part of the PC party)
Quote from: ffilz on February 16, 2006, 03:23:55 PM2. Make the GM role sufficiently fun, find a way to allow the GM to advance NPCs (that aren't trying to be part of the PC party)
Quote from: ffilz on February 16, 2006, 03:23:55 PM3. Share the GM role.It seems for this idea to work, the players need to be rewarded for proposing cool encounters. And for playing hard when running opposition.
QuoteActually, another thing that bothers me about tactical combats is the player whose PC is out of action. How do I keep the game interesting for them? That was certainly one of the factors that led me to disliking play, and similarly, disliking many multi-player strategy games (non-RPG) if you can be eliminated before the end of the game, at least with a 2 player game, when you are out, the game is over.
QuoteFaction XP might be a way to give a GM something to advance, though that might feel different since the advancement isn't necessarily tied to the faction doing well.
QuoteJoe - yea, the sidekick idea, or a 2nd character at least, does sound worthwhile. That will address the issue of needing 6-8 characters for the tactics to work well. I can make the single character mode still work well for those who don't want the bother of a 2nd character
Quote from: ffilz on February 21, 2006, 12:44:35 PMCallan,I've entertained such an idea before. The question I have is how does that affect the tactical game? It means that PCs can't be disabled. Which definitely means there have to be tactical options which allow moving PCs, otherwise, the PCs could take on really nasty foes in a narrow corridor, sacrificing the XP for the front line since they get to keep fighting after running out of HP.
QuoteOverall, I guess the concern I have with this idea is how much it changes the tactical situation that I enjoy.