Poll #32: Rolling on Behalf of...   Posted by GM Arkrim.Group: 0
GM Arkrim
 GM, 6407 posts
 Game Master
Mon 19 Feb 2018
at 01:31
Poll #32: Rolling on Behalf of...
So I noticed a lot of people posting only half their combat post and then stopping to await the results of saving throws, AoOs, skill checks, and Concentration checks from opponents.

This really slows down the game and gums up the works.

Let's be honest folks, this is way more tedious than it needs to be.

We can all see that diceroller, there's no need to assume your opponent will do anything fishy if they roll your saving throw on your behalf. I could see it if they did (it would be highlighted in bright colors) and that would be instant disqualification.

Of course that still leaves HERO POINTS and IMMEDIATE ACTIONS and not knowing about adjustable modifiers.




Can we agree to some methods to try to speed up the game without these "pending outcome" posts? This is more of a discussion than a poll. Any ideas?
Vry
 Sorcerer 3,076, 514 posts
 Advanced Gnome
 Shadow's Caress
Mon 19 Feb 2018
at 05:23
Poll #32: Rolling on Behalf of...
Rolling for someone else is hard to do well I think. Right now, we don't reveal our save modifiers... We do for companions though, and I consider it a rather severe reveal - if the enemies see that Taff has a -1 reflex or will, then that might make their spells so much more worth to cast, than if those saves are +6, or +11. We know the enemy's AC and CMD already, as well as some spell resistance and such... But with saves, it makes for more important choices. In the juggernaut, I often considered how good saves the others had; and had I known their best saves, who was worst at fortitude, even that they all had several great saves for the spells I wanted to cast - it would have changed a lot of my tactics. For the tactical aspect of the game, I prefer if that information is revealed after I've tried and succeeded or failed - rather than before I try.

There's also the several ways of choosing to boost, re-roll etc, that should happen perhaps right before the outcome is known, or right after... If I write a post now where I cast a spell as my first action, then do a couple more actions afterward, then I will account for the risk that the spell fails. If I write it with a rolled save for my enemy, know the outcome of that, perform a couple of actions knowing what happened with the spell - then that reveals much more of my hand before the enemy decides to re-roll, boost, or whatever option they have available. So that's a big con with rolling for someone else...

Personally I try to keep from that sort of posting, making a half round and then waiting for results. But I'd prefer handling it by confining the actions of one round to one post - unless immediate actions happen. Especially if the Play half a round - wait for saves - then take second half of a round resets the 48h rule and one round can thus take 144 hours (if one only has to wait for ONE player to roll saves). More complicated characters, more complicated tactics will need more complicated posting... But I don't think the rules should cater to more complicated tactics, as we then end up with this. At level 1, missing a swift action in a round rarely has an impact at all. At level 14, when I can EITHER redirect my saved bouncing suffocation spell OR cast a quickened fireball, it matters a lot. But that's on me, I can't expect everyone to wait until I see how my every tactical plan plays out. Because that will make games slower and thus more boring.

My suggestions are thus:
a. Keep the entire combat round in ONE post, unless immediate actions, hero points and such happen.
and/or
b. Maintain a strict 48 hour rule, giving 48 hours for the player's turn only. What I'm suggesting here might already be your intention, Arkrim, but the practise is now that the 48 hours begin to tick only just when one has the information one is entitled to - i.e. when someone else has rolled saves to the spell I cast with my first action. This is trickier with stealth, like in the monster hunt where recently it took a while to figure out if I knew Opal's position. But hidden-on-map as standard could solve that.

Both of these suggestions are aimed at limiting complicated tactics when they work in such a way that they delay the game.
Latro Dectus
 Antipaladin 3,151, 1532 posts
 Drow N. Antipaladin
 Shadow's Caress
Mon 19 Feb 2018
at 12:55
Poll #32: Rolling on Behalf of...
My only real suggestion is leaving a private message to the ref on the actions you predict yourself taking in one outcome or another to keep from posting half rounds.

The problem here is that, depending on how complicated one's tactics are, you could have multiple branching paths that the ref may need to follow.

As for rolling saves for one another, that could be really tricky as Brakt Vry said.
There is a certain level of strategy in keeping your saves hidden until you need to roll them. Granted a certain amount can be known simply from knowing what class(es) your opponent is and going from there but thats also not accounting for Ability boosts, magic boosts, racial boosts, ect.

Perhaps there should be some kind of time limit on waiting for saves to be rolled before a ref rolls it for them at which point a hero point couldn't be used to alter the outcome of the save? If we're going for expedient gameplay, then that seems the most logical rout.

Edit: name corrections

This message was last edited by the player at 14:41, Mon 19 Feb 2018.

GM Arkrim
 GM, 6408 posts
 Game Master
Mon 19 Feb 2018
at 17:39
Re: Poll #32: Rolling on Behalf of...
Vry:
b. Maintain a strict 48 hour rule, giving 48 hours for the player's turn only. What I'm suggesting here might already be your intention, Arkrim, but the practise is now that the 48 hours begin to tick only just when one has the information one is entitled to - i.e. when someone else has rolled saves to the spell I cast with my first action. This is trickier with stealth, like in the monster hunt where recently it took a while to figure out if I knew Opal's position. But hidden-on-map as standard could solve that.

Actually, this is incorrect. We ALREADY have a strict 48 hour rule. The moment you post the next combatant has 48 hours to respond no matter what it is you post (ooc, incomplete combat post, complete combat post). So if you post an incomplete post and they post before you finish, they just skip the second half of your turn.

You are well within your rights to IGNORE an incomplete post's request for more info and skip the rest of that player's turn when they do that.

The referee can overrule this and the only issue is that refs and players have been allowing everyone to overrule this because they don't really pay attention.
Vry
 Sorcerer 3,076, 516 posts
 Advanced Gnome
 Shadow's Caress
Mon 19 Feb 2018
at 17:44
Re: Poll #32: Rolling on Behalf of...
Yeah, that's what I thought (and hoped) - which is why I said that what I described as being the current state is the practise in the arena and not your rule. In that case, I personally see no need for any changes rules-wise. What people need is to move their games forward, not try to take up more than two days per post and not let others do so either.

Also, stealth still is an issue given that positions need to be given before the turn is taken, and stealth has become quite popular lately. But maybe that will pass!
GM Arkrim
 GM, 6409 posts
 Game Master
Mon 19 Feb 2018
at 19:11
Re: Poll #32: Rolling on Behalf of...
But I know some people struggle because the outcome of a saving throw can change their actions.

I just need to know what you all think we should do. I don't see a problem rolling saves on your opponent's behalf and revealing saving throws.

But the question is: do you all see issue with that?
Josep Gavinho
 Wizard 1,987, 1264 posts
 Human Wizard
 TA - 1,687 BP
Mon 19 Feb 2018
at 20:03
Re: Poll #32: Rolling on Behalf of...
As a frequent caster, I’d be delighted to know my opponents’ weak saves.
In a way, I can already make educated guesses.
I don’t have a problem with revealing saves (except conditionals) and active player rolling on behalf of the other one.
BUT, there needs to be a bulletproof description in the dice roller for what you’re rolling against (what spell, what target, type of damage, metamagic or not, what’s the DC, ...) otherwise it would be too easy to roll first and decide what spell that was after you know the result.
At the moment, I find we use the dice roller in a very trusting way (which is fine with me for I always assume the best intentions of everyone ;)
Vry
 Sorcerer 3,076, 519 posts
 Advanced Gnome
 Shadow's Caress
Mon 19 Feb 2018
at 20:44
Re: Poll #32: Rolling on Behalf of...
I don't think it's just about the weak saves though... If I have a sword in my hand, and will attack the enemy - then I can calculate the percentage chance of me hitting and choose whether to apply power attack or not, for example. As a caster, however, I can calculate the percentage chance of hitting not just against touch AC, but also against fortitude, will and reflex; and I can choose to target any one of those defenses or I can use spells on myself.

Even though I may be able to guess that the enemy has a great will or fort, I cannot guess how good their worst save is, which is very important. And I cannot guess just how good their best save is - does my best spell have an 80% chance of hitting, or a 40% chance? A 50% chance, or a 15% chance? Perhaps I can see that the enemy - if they have a hero point available - has a 5-10% chance of failing against my game-winning spell with a retroactive hero point boost. I won't cast that spell then. Or perhaps the enemy has planned to use a hero point to boost their save by +8 in that crucial round when a huge spell is coming their way - then I take that option out of their hands...

As a caster, I think revealed saves would change things. Picking a versatile spell list so that I can begin my attack with spells aimed at the enemy's weak point becomes very important... While figuring out the weak point or just trying to push through at a point of my favor in their defenses are the choices I have to go with otherwise.