In reply to Esparam (msg # 112):

Done. Thanks for the heads up!  :)

FYI

I just realized that some info should be under Mechanics

So I will be moving a few posts around and added some game info.
Will not all be today but over the course of this week.

Active players

Titus Aurelius
Tarrano Grazlak
Esparam
Catweazle


Active NPC

Eldon Thrush

Non-Active NPC

Shandar
Hakon

Its time to get into this game as it was designed.
I could really use this info so I know how to handle posting.

As an FYI I posted for Titus Aurelius. As noted in my Game guild lines I will post for players if needed.
This message was last edited by the GM at 21:57, Fri 12 Oct 2018.

In reply to Narrator (msg # 116):

I'm Pacific Time zone. Weekdays is kinda random depending on work as i'm on most of the day checking it but not always responding. Weekends I tend to be busy.

In reply to Narrator (msg # 116):

Central European Time for me. I usually can find time to log in every day.

I'm on EDST on the east coast of Australia.

Weekdays: pretty constantly from early AM to 5pm-ish, after which I'm iffy.

Weekends: on sporadically all day from early AM to early evening.

Hey Esparam

We played one game before where we developed a system using 3.5
It was so the flow would be faster - we did some house rules and guildlines on posting and how to roll ??

Do you happen to remember that stuff ??

In reply to Narrator (msg # 120):

I know I was co-GM and helping out with rolls and rules (which helped because of the time zone difference), but I can't remember any specific guidelines other than that :/

In reply to Esparam (msg # 121):

OK I have to get that done soon and before we get into our first fight.

I will look around and everyone should keep an eye out for this in Mechanics.
It will be important because we just can not go straight D&D on combat or one fight will take a month so we have to trim down how we will post and roll so the rounds are smooth.

In reply to Narrator (msg # 122):

So I went back to the very first campaign we played since it's still up.
It more or less goes like this:

1. You post at the beginning of each round the list of characters and foes, with their init and damage taken/status in effect.
   
2. Players post in OOC their actions, not necessarily in the initiative order, and they post an empty post in IC in the init order. (If GMs can post as a separate character while still allowing its player to edit it, this may make it even faster if GM and co-GMs can pre-post for players.)
   
3. When players have the result of their rolls confirmed by the GM, they can edit their placeholder post in IC with flavour text.

This makes it possible for players to write their own flavour text for the round without having to wait for the previous player. The latter will then be able to add their own flavour text later, the whole party already knowing whether it's a hit or miss, etc. from OOC and thus being able to continue the fight.

Late flavour text of course has to be consistent with posts that come after it, there can't be any retro-editing (eg. Thelonius can't cut the goblin's arm if Tarrano, who plays chronologically after him but has written flavour text before him, has shot an arrow in the same arm).

General tips would also be:

• Players could allow GM and co-GMs to roll for them when a roll is asked (eg: Listen, Spot, Search, and so on)
• Players should be proactive and roll what they deem adequate without asking for GM to tell them what to roll, based on the action they wish to do. eg: proactively rolling a Climb check to patrol around the camp fire in the mountain. Better to roll an unnecessary check than to slow the game down by not rolling it and having the party waiting for you.

This message was last edited by the player at 22:30, Mon 15 Oct 2018.

That method adds incredible complexity and awkwardness into a process that is already made difficult by the nature of play-by-post gaming. There are far simpler methods.

In reply to Catweazle (msg # 124):

This makes it more complex, but it does let everyone post in their own time without slowing the whole group.

What other system do you suggest then?
This message was last edited by the player at 22:29, Mon 15 Oct 2018.

There's a few variations on a theme, but one alternative:

1) Initiative is only rolled to see who beats the monsters. After that, it's us-them-us-them-us-them.

2) People state their actions in their post and roll appropriate rolls. They probably don't know if they hit or not (unless it's really obvious).

3) At the end of the round (the 'round' being when it's the monsters' turn), the DM posts the results of all the actions by players, as well as 'his bit', the monsters' turn.

That's basically it, and there are many additions and caveats that can get added to that without making it a long, drawn-out process. But it is quick.

Additions can include abandoning initiative after the first round (where the quick ones have already used their advantage), and all actions and turns are executed in the order in which players post. That is HEAPS easier on all involved, but some people get quite anal about initiative, despite the fact that it's a pretty pointless statistic beyond round 1.

Also, posting AC's, HP, one or both, to allow players to know when they've hit, but a higher proportion of DM's don't like that. For some reason, they prefer to punish those players who don't cheat by looking at the Monster Manual ;), and choose to keep AC's etc secret :)

Posting in OOC to be placed in IC after DM's have adjudicated just won't work in PBP format. Well, it WILL work, but it will be so slow that combat will be tedious and a chore, rather than exciting and free-flowing.

There are just some allowances you have to make because of the already-slow format of pbp. Having placeholders in IC, waiting for DM's to tell you whether you've hit, etc, is just extra waiting around that isn't necessary.

To cover some scenarios, most DM's who use the above method (pretty much all of them in one guise or another) will allow players to ask if something is dead before making a choice about their own turn, but it does require the DM to be looking in regularly else it slows things down.

Also, when things are running smoothly, if a character's attack is null because the skeleton he was attacking was killed by a previous poster, then the DM can just switch the attack to the nearest other skeleton, etc etc etc.

Many options and variations on a theme, but it saves an enormous amount of time and helps combat to retain some of the fun that it harbours in tabletop gaming.

This is pretty much how it's been done in most 3.5e games I've been in on Rpol.

I see.


I play IRL in another setting where the initiative is team-based, and it's true that it could make things smoother to use a team initiative rather than individual initiative. And then actions are done in the order of the posts.


One drawback I see with what you describe is that it puts a lot of narrative power on the GM at the expense of the players' creativity. I personally prefer to know the results of my character's action so that I can write and embellish flavour text, rather than just post the action and let the GM describe what happens. This may make things slower, but for me, it would make things much, much more enjoyable. I like to be able to describe a certain fighting style for instance, which adds to the character's substance.


Regarding AC and HP, I admit as a player, I prefer not to know (and merely guess). I prefer being told IC that the monster is gravely injured than to know it has 12hp left. This is about being surprised and keeping the suspense alive for me, as I play for the story and unexpected development more than just to roll dice. And thus I prefer those stats to be secret, so they don't spoil the story for me (eg realising this monster has a higher than usual stat because it's elite or important to the story, buffed by an invisible spellcaster or whatnot).

But clearly, for PbP it is not ideal, and if I had to choose between the suspense of the roll's result and the narrative creativity that comes with being able to instantly know the result, then I think I'd choose knowing HP/AC. Although as a wizard, saves may remain an issue.


I'm looking forward to see what the others think about how we should proceed with combat.
This message was last edited by the player at 12:09, Tue 16 Oct 2018.

I would like to tackle this one line at a time.

I think one Initiative Roll per combat sequence.

A combat sequence is when initiative is needed. And ends when no more Combat Actions are taken.

I like this better then group initiative because it allows a player or creature to hold an action and gives an equal chance.

For example if a group of goblins win and they all team up against one player he could be out before the fight even begins. Same of course goes for the creature. But if we all roll and go in order of an 'Initiative List' it allows a player to move over and heal, or stand in the way of an opponent to protect etc etc.
I just find old school D&D style 'us-them-us-them-us-them' to be less fair all around.

I will say that if any two groups meet I would take out wizard first, If undead the cleric, If terrain was an issue the range fighter, etc etc. just like any player would.

Give this some thought. Please post what you would like Group Initiative or Individual Initiative

I will say we do not roll every round once a pecking order its given we follow that order unless an action is on hold which moves that person next on list or something effects the order. There are advantages to this. We can also say that every 5 rounds calls for a new initiative roll or some other house rule.

I'm just not a fan of Group Individual.

This one I think is actually easy. I post the DC/TN and or AC etc etc for each creature. So a player makes his rolls and posts. You know right away if you succeeded or not (not needed to wait for DM). No need to hide it in most cases. If the DC/TN and or AC needs to be secret then we will have to play it as it goes.

I'm also worry about players over stepping or assuming actions out of turn. The first player says he chops of the hand of the target because he rolled a 20 and max damage, Yes it's a great hit and Yes maybe the creature is dead (which is fine to say the hand was removed). But what if the creature was alive, you now just said he has no hand ?? can he still attack - realistic NO - and he would take negatives for the loss of a hand etc etc. This is the point we need to set an understanding before we get to combat.

I want players to have full control over THEIR characters and actions but the descriptions need to be done so it's fair all around. I can list Hit Points so if a player did enough damage he/she can post without worries.

Again in some cases the Hit Points will be secret and we will need to adjust accordingly.

I don't see this as an issue I only keep key info, spell lists, and these type of things secret to keep the challenge up. The info on a goblin, or any other adventure encounter can be open knowledge The stuff that should be secret are thing that have a counter effect if failed, like a trap. Or the lead villains.

• 1 - I would prefer individual Init at least to start and then go by posting order once things are started. One GM I was in would after everyone roll Init create starter posts in the Init Order for people to edit in their actions. Another Has everyone go in order the first round and then it's just posting order.

• 2) I would just post the Monsters AC and DC's. Leave the descriptive text to the players where they can say they feinted this way, then reversed the blade to strike. the DM would then determine what his wounds look like.

I like and agree, almost what I was looking for.
Just a few mechanics to think about. Holding an action so a player can react.
And
Time waiting if we go with posting in order (Players have to agree they can be skipped if they don't post within 24hr) We have to be strict not like we have been with the ICs so far in intros.

What about a Combat Thread ?? and then we move the info over with a finial post ??
This message was last edited by the GM at 18:13, Tue 16 Oct 2018.

Hey Esparam

I took you IC and add your notes on Roderick Gumpreli-Trallmar & Lyandel Jliyuanminlandoral.

You can use your creative juices and i will add the, to our NPC list of who's who.
If they are deceased let me know I will add those notes as well.

If not interested ion writing up this info i can do so and build on your notes.

Send link on how you think they should look :)

1) Doing it with individual inits and running a combat with them takes far, FAR too long. It's not just the players who need to post one at a time, it's the DM, which means in a group of 6 hobgoblins we will have to wait up to 6 times per round for the DM to log back into the game and post his actions for an individual monster. That's just not going to work. With six players and six interjections by the DM a round will take more than a week, and in fact can take up to 12 days without NPCing anyone 'to prevent it dragging on'. Way too long for combat.

2) Combat threads aren't useful. It's just another screen one has to toggle between to see what has gone on. If everyone, players and DMs alike post their rolls AND ACTIONS below their IC post in orange (stock standard on this site), then other players can determine for themselves what has transpired without having to rely on the prose above from each participant. Most people misrepresent their rolls and actions when they try to describe them, or don't include everything. Including rolls and actions in orange down below allows others to know exactly what has happened.

3) Tarrano's idea still breaks up inits into too many individual waiting periods. If you tack a 24-hour rule onto each of those brackets, each round will still take a week to get through. That's up to three months for one combat. Good luck with that.

I'm just offering my insights from long experience of seeing how not to do it. It's up to the DMs as to how they want to run combat. But if you don't make allowances for the pbp format, the game will get heavily bogged down in combat, and no amount of flowery repartee describing one's swordstroke will make up for having had to wait nearly two weeks since your last one :)

In reply to Catweazle (msg # 134):

I'll agree with Cat on the combat thread, especially for those that use mobile having to swap between threads can get tedious.

Personally I have never had a combat take that long with the 24Hour rule plus the init example I posted. At most combat has taken like 3 days but yes these have been low level combats so higher level ones could take longer.


For as long as I've been gaming, DM's usually only have like 1-3 different iniative's to go on, Monster Group A, Leader 1, Leader 2, etc... So a group of hobgoblin's would all go at the same time for simplicity sake.

With DM not an issue. First I log in daily and sometimes post 4+ times a day. Yes some days better then others. YES weekends will be slower then weekdays, but I can commit that if I am not traveling I will stay active on weekends for combat.

I would like to make a sample test thread and actually have this group fight 12 goblins.

Lets play out one mock fight ?? if interested I will add you to a new group thread as #2

Lets take this baby for a test ride.