Yet another D&D resource management scheme idea.

General questions, debates, and rants about RPGs

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
Josh_Kablack
King
Posts: 5318
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: Online. duh

Yet another D&D resource management scheme idea.

Post by Josh_Kablack »

Previous go-rounds on the topic of resource management and my own experience in gaming have led me to the conclusion that the simplest resource management scheme for people to track in a tabletop RPG is "everything is usable at will". Now since simplicity generally aids in Clarity, and Speed of Play, *any* other resource management scheme has to offer advantages to compensate for the increased complexity, confusion and likely slowdown.

Now the biggest objections to "everything's at will" are that
  • Without a system of shifting conditional advantages, it leads to ability spam. There has to be a reason why an optimizing player might use hurricane kick instead of alternating between fireballing the ranged opponents and uppercutting opponents who jump over the fireball otherwise the third move (and any more moves) is a waste of space and time.
  • It doesn't let MC's run attrition / exhaustion scenarios. If the PC's never run low on mana or ammo, then health is the only resource which might cause them to retreat or flee. And within the D&D paradigms of "easy combat-time magic healing" and "retreat is rare and risky, heroes fight to the death", that's almost a nonstarter. With easy at-will combat healing PCs will engage in unlimited workdays.
  • It runs afoul of many types of Genre emulation. Not only do the unlimited workdays mentioned above run afoul of much of the source material, there are quite a few works of fantasy where characters have Big Deal attacks that they can do sometimes, but not every round. For example Lina Inverse usually opens with Burst Rondo, Flare Arrow and Fireball and only rarely uses Dragon Slave more than once per episode - even though Dragon Slave is clearly a much upgraded Fireball.

So I'm proposing a vague outline of a hypothetical resource scheme which addresses the above problems (which might not even be problems to everyone) with the idea that something like it potentially could be implemented in a future nonexistant D&D like-game. Of course, this idea is half-baked, and of course any implementation will come with more complexity than everything-is-at-will. Maybe the tradeoffs will look worth it.

Here's the idea: It takes Actions to recharge the better powers.

Always on powers don't recharge, you just get an AC increase from wearing armor, you just get +2 damage from having the Fightgar level that gives you weapon specialization. I don't need to elaborate.

At will powers reload as free actions. They recharge automatically so long as you can take actions. I don't need to elaborate.

What would in 4e terms be called Encounter powers require a character to take a reload action to recharge. For encounter style powers, this reload action is at least as long as attacking with the power and probably involves suffering defensive penalties for the round in which the character reloads. (Because imposing defensive penalties on a recharging character provides at least a small incentive to target someone other than focus fire)

Thus, if you set up encounter-type powers to be actually better than At-Wills, and if you set up your combats to last on average as many rounds as a PC gets encounter-type powers, they will generally burn through each of their encounter powers. But if they have a power that is for some reason double-or-better effective (because the enemies are fire-vulnerable or somesuch), then it's worthwhile for a PC to waste the turn. If a combat goes long (either due to unlucky rolls or MC design), then PCs have the choice of falling back on at-wills every round or recharging their best-in-this-case power to use it every other round. This provides some tactical incentive for individual PCs to withdraw from long fights for a round or two, taking cover to reload while teammates cover them-- And that sort of thing is actually pretty decent genre emulation. This setup also provides a reason for why PCs use moves that aren't the invulnerable flaming uppercut and lets MCs run at least limited exhaustion/overwhelm scenarios by just designing fights to last more rounds than the PCs have encounter-type powers.

Now for powers rarer than encounter-type, we have a couple options. We go go straight 4e and say that they have a recharge time of "Long Rest", meaning you can only use each once per day (or per abuse of the Rest rules at any rate). Or we can do what another poster suggested in one of the numerous 4e rantings, and ditch the notion of "daily" powers for "only one of these powers each encounter". In effect giving characters a fully-charged Super Combo meter or Extreme Gage, that powers their Big Deal Moves, but has a recharge action that requires non-combat time. Keep the noncombat time longer than the longest fight scene but notably shorter than "Long Rest" and you have actually provided an incentive to withdraw from fights not merely for a round or two of breath catching, but actual strategic level regrouping. You also have a setup where sometimes it's worth burning Dragon Slave to nova on round 1, but other times you might want to use Freeze-in-Place and Magic Boost before trotting out your Big Deal attack.

As an added bonus, if you're going vaguely 4e, you can totally have various Buffs and Zones last "until this power is recharged" - freeing you from tracking rounds of durations and yet giving more tactical flexibility than "until end of encounter" would.



*****

Now obviously, this setup will still have some ability spam and a lot of 5-moves-of-doom setups where PCs burn through each of their encounter powers and their Big Deal in the same order and then fall back on at-wills. Also obviously you are limited to either a relatively small number of encounter-type powers or absurdly long combats. So if those are dealbreakers for you, this should be a nonstarter.
"But transportation issues are social-justice issues. The toll of bad transit policies and worse infrastructure—trains and buses that don’t run well and badly serve low-income neighborhoods, vehicular traffic that pollutes the environment and endangers the lives of cyclists and pedestrians—is borne disproportionately by black and brown communities."
User avatar
Chamomile
Prince
Posts: 4632
Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 10:45 am

Post by Chamomile »

This strikes me as a very much anime-styled thing. This is not a bad thing.
Hieronymous Rex
Journeyman
Posts: 153
Joined: Sun Feb 21, 2010 1:23 am

Post by Hieronymous Rex »

For maximum lack of book keeping, you could make encounter-type abilities burn HP (a large amount, such that you can't effectively use it more than once per fight). This would remove the need to track the Encounter_Power_Used variable by folding it into HP. On the other hand, it would break the pattern of "recharge actions for everything".
User avatar
Josh_Kablack
King
Posts: 5318
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: Online. duh

Post by Josh_Kablack »

Hieronymous Rex wrote:For maximum lack of book keeping, you could make encounter-type abilities burn HP (a large amount, such that you can't effectively use it more than once per fight).
Doing that would mean that you would have to ditch the D&D paradigm of "combat healing is cheap and plentiful". You'd have to limit healing to either daily-types or to at-wills that healed notably less than encounter-types burnt (which would effectively work out to a number of recharge actions). If you have any encounter-type powers which heal HP in a system where encounter-type powers all cost HP it would always be a net loss (suboptimal) a net gain (breaking the system) or zero-sum swapping between PCs (which is okay in the abstract, but in practice frequently leads to abusive combos with other powers).

It's not an unworkable paradigm, but it requires more system rebuilding than the recharge action paradigm. I could (and time permitting) will write up a recharge action class for 3.x and it can be playable - it will have some issues in that 3.x combats average about 1.5 rounds and 3.x classes need to gain new abilities each level, but it's doable without rewriting the healing paradigm.
"But transportation issues are social-justice issues. The toll of bad transit policies and worse infrastructure—trains and buses that don’t run well and badly serve low-income neighborhoods, vehicular traffic that pollutes the environment and endangers the lives of cyclists and pedestrians—is borne disproportionately by black and brown communities."
ishy
Duke
Posts: 2404
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2011 2:59 pm

Post by ishy »

If you need to sometimes skip your turn to recharge you'd better hope rounds go faster than they usually do in high lvl d&d
User avatar
CatharzGodfoot
King
Posts: 5668
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: North Carolina

Post by CatharzGodfoot »

I think that having finishing moves cause large defensive penalties and require recharge time and/or actions is the way to go. What I'm imagining is that Dragon Slave gives you a -X penalty to defense and requires an attack action to recharge. Then there's incentive to recharge a finishing move in combat and incentive to use a finishing move as a finishing move, as well as everyone just opening up with a nova.

You don't need to worry about multiple finishing moves. Blow your focus, and you have to get it back before using another.

No need for a mediocre attack category, though.
The law in its majestic equality forbids the rich as well as the poor from stealing bread, begging and sleeping under bridges.
-Anatole France

Mount Flamethrower on rear
Drive in reverse
Win Game.

-Josh Kablack

Hieronymous Rex
Journeyman
Posts: 153
Joined: Sun Feb 21, 2010 1:23 am

Post by Hieronymous Rex »

Josh_Kablack wrote:
Hieronymous Rex wrote:For maximum lack of book keeping, you could make encounter-type abilities burn HP (a large amount, such that you can't effectively use it more than once per fight).
Doing that would mean that you would have to ditch the D&D paradigm of "combat healing is cheap and plentiful".
Not really. The idea was that since 1. You generally fully heal after each fight, and 2. It takes a full heal before you can safely use your Big Deal move(s) again, then Big Deal moves become once per encounter, effectively.
User avatar
Vebyast
Knight-Baron
Posts: 801
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2010 5:44 am

Post by Vebyast »

If encounter-types cause damage, then your at-will heal takes the place of the explicit recharge mechanic. The extra power you get from doing encounter powers repeatedly is offset by the fact that you spend half your time at half (or lower) health, with the extra risk that entails.
DSMatticus wrote:There are two things you can learn from the Gaming Den:
1) Good design practices.
2) How to be a zookeeper for hyper-intelligent shit-flinging apes.
CCarter
Knight
Posts: 454
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2010 10:41 pm

Re: Yet another D&D resource management scheme idea.

Post by CCarter »

Josh_Kablack wrote: Now obviously, this setup will still have some ability spam and a lot of 5-moves-of-doom setups where PCs burn through each of their encounter powers and their Big Deal in the same order and then fall back on at-wills. Also obviously you are limited to either a relatively small number of encounter-type powers or absurdly long combats. So if those are dealbreakers for you, this should be a nonstarter.
Hiya Josh. Potentially you could have a longer list of encounter-type powers work by having multiple powers share the same slot for recharging, or give a single power multiple uses that are quite different.
Username17
Serious Badass
Posts: 29894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Username17 »

I'm not sure how "everyone is a warblade" constitutes a "new" resource management system.

-Username17
User avatar
hogarth
Prince
Posts: 4582
Joined: Wed May 27, 2009 1:00 pm
Location: Toronto

Post by hogarth »

FrankTrollman wrote:I'm not sure how "everyone is a warblade" constitutes a "new" resource management system.
You beat me to it.

Personally, I like the idea that everything is available at-will-ish. For instance, I GMed a game where we used the Spell Recharge mechanics from Unearthed Arcana, and I thought there were some good things about that system (although keeping track of the random recharge times was an unnecessary pain).
User avatar
Josh_Kablack
King
Posts: 5318
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: Online. duh

Post by Josh_Kablack »

FrankTrollman wrote:I'm not sure how "everyone is a warblade" constitutes a "new" resource management system.

-Username17
Well if you want to go for cheap shots, the in exactly the same way that winds of fate isn't "everyone's a 4e monster"

But more honestly, yeah the warblade totally uses a variation of this general scheme. However warblades recharge all expended manuevers with a single swift action (and some restrictions for what else they can do in the round after that swift action) what I proposed was that powers mid-tier powers recharged one at a time with an action at least as long as the attack action and defensive penalties and big deal powers only recharged out of combat. (which is vaguely similar to the warblade ability to swap feats from weapon to weapon, but I don't think anyone would argue that constitutes a "big deal" power).

Others proposed variations on this, expending HP, ditching mid-tier powers, or suffering the defensive penalties until a recharge action is taken.

And I'm not really interested in being original here. I'm interested in whether or not the general idea is workable and how in might be best implemented and what pitfalls it might lead to. Yeah it's worth noting that the warblade used something like this and never took off - that could mean that the idea is a hard sell to D&D players. Or it could also mean that the idea was buried in a book which almost nobody actually bought and was overshadowed by the new edition release.
"But transportation issues are social-justice issues. The toll of bad transit policies and worse infrastructure—trains and buses that don’t run well and badly serve low-income neighborhoods, vehicular traffic that pollutes the environment and endangers the lives of cyclists and pedestrians—is borne disproportionately by black and brown communities."
Username17
Serious Badass
Posts: 29894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Username17 »

Fundamentally, tracking the current recharge state of all your powers is a pain in the ass to pretty much exactly the same degree whether recharging that power is cheap as free or expensive as fuck. In fact, I'm pretty sure that recharging things one at a time is by definition more of an ass pain than recharging every thing at once.

I just don't see any advantage of what you're suggesting over the resource management system of 4e player characters. And I already know that I fucking hate the resource management system of 4e PCs. Characters burn out of high tier actions and then they ability spam in pretty much every single combat, and then there aren't any meaningful lasting effects from the process because everything resets before the next encounter. That is fucking terrible: combining all the boredom of forced ability spam with all the disempowerment of having the combats being completely devoid of consequence.

-Username17
User avatar
hogarth
Prince
Posts: 4582
Joined: Wed May 27, 2009 1:00 pm
Location: Toronto

Post by hogarth »

FrankTrollman wrote:I just don't see any advantage of what you're suggesting over the resource management system of 4e player characters.
It has the advantage that if one of your powers is Flame Blast and you get attacked by the Flammable Folk, then you can actually use it more than once, even if there's an additional cost to it (as opposed to an encounter or daily power in 4E where it's one-and-done).

Of course, you made it perfectly clear in the Winds of Fate thread(s) that, in your world, you're not supposed to want to use the right tool for the right job unless you happen to roll a "1". Which is stupid, but different strokes for different folks.
Last edited by hogarth on Tue Aug 16, 2011 11:59 am, edited 1 time in total.
hyzmarca
Prince
Posts: 3909
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2011 10:07 pm

Post by hyzmarca »

Instead of recharge you could go with a precharge. Power X takes Y turns of prep that can't be done before hand.

In other words, when the wizard encounters flamable people he spends a turn prepping his flame blast (chanting, waving his arms around, whatever) and then sets them on fire. He can repeat this as much as he wants to.

This way you don't have to keep track of the charge status of umpteen dozen powers (only the one power that you want to use), and it actually gives the meatsheilds a purpose.

On the other hand, it renders some characters useless for a number of turns, which is a disadvantage.
User avatar
Ice9
Duke
Posts: 1568
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Ice9 »

If your combat system is anything remotely similar to D&D, then a power that takes multiple rounds to use has to be incredibly fucking good to be worth it.
A Man In Black
Duke
Posts: 1040
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 8:33 am

Post by A Man In Black »

hyzmarca wrote:In other words, when the wizard encounters flamable people he spends a turn prepping his flame blast
Kame...

hame...
Username17
Serious Badass
Posts: 29894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Username17 »

Ice9 wrote:If your combat system is anything remotely similar to D&D, then a power that takes multiple rounds to use has to be incredibly fucking good to be worth it.
Even if it is good enough to be "worth it", it kills the fun of the entire game. You're character sits around with his thumb up his ass doing fucking nothing while you fiddle with boxes on your character sheet, and then you do something so incredibly unfair that it was actually worth not acting for a round or more, thereby making all other players feel small in the pants.

So you get to resent all the other players because they are taking actions and you aren't, and then all the other players get to resent you because your actions are demonstrably unfair.

-Username17
User avatar
Whipstitch
Prince
Posts: 3660
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2011 10:23 pm

Post by Whipstitch »

And if everyone is using sufficiently powerful charged abilities then suddenly you're essentially just playing rocket launcher tag as everyone stares at each other all angry like while waiting for their bullshit to detonate.
bears fall, everyone dies
echoVanguard
Knight-Baron
Posts: 738
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2011 6:35 pm

Post by echoVanguard »

FrankTrollman wrote:
Ice9 wrote:If your combat system is anything remotely similar to D&D, then a power that takes multiple rounds to use has to be incredibly fucking good to be worth it.
Even if it is good enough to be "worth it", it kills the fun of the entire game. You're character sits around with his thumb up his ass doing fucking nothing while you fiddle with boxes on your character sheet, and then you do something so incredibly unfair that it was actually worth not acting for a round or more, thereby making all other players feel small in the pants.

So you get to resent all the other players because they are taking actions and you aren't, and then all the other players get to resent you because your actions are demonstrably unfair.

-Username17
This is only plausible if the choice doesn't apply equally to all players. If Players A and B both have access to tactical options which span multiple actions, there's nothing wrong with players making the choice between them.

I'm also not sure I agree with the logic of your assertion. If the tactical value of whatever you're doing is good enough to be worth spending multiple actions, then it's intrinsically worthwhile, isn't it?

echo
ishy
Duke
Posts: 2404
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2011 2:59 pm

Post by ishy »

Maybe it would be better to have some kind of build up system then, that if you for example cast fireball in a greased area it does extra fire damage or if you cast a cold spell then a force spell is more effective or something like that.
User avatar
hogarth
Prince
Posts: 4582
Joined: Wed May 27, 2009 1:00 pm
Location: Toronto

Post by hogarth »

FrankTrollman wrote: So you get to resent all the other players because they are taking actions and you aren't, and then all the other players get to resent you because your actions are demonstrably unfair.
That's why the warblade method (where your recharging action is slightly more useful than doing nothing) is a bit better. It's still not completely satisfying, though.
...You Lost Me
Duke
Posts: 1854
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 5:21 am

Post by ...You Lost Me »

I still don't see the dis-incentivation of big attacks followed by spam. I mean, if you're fighting a swarm of bad guys, you throw your finisher down to knock out as many as possible, and THEN get your hands dirty. If you're fighting a boss, you use your finisher to weaken him as much as possible, and THEN get your hands dirty.

Firing off the strongest moves is more beneficial in every way, it seems.
DSMatticus wrote:Again, look at this fucking map you moron. Take your finger and trace each country's coast, then trace its claim line. Even you - and I say that as someone who could not think less of your intelligence - should be able to tell that one of these things is not like the other.
Kaelik wrote:I invented saying mean things about Tussock.
User avatar
CatharzGodfoot
King
Posts: 5668
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: North Carolina

Post by CatharzGodfoot »

...You Lost Me wrote:I still don't see the dis-incentivation of big attacks followed by spam. I mean, if you're fighting a swarm of bad guys, you throw your finisher down to knock out as many as possible, and THEN get your hands dirty. If you're fighting a boss, you use your finisher to weaken him as much as possible, and THEN get your hands dirty.

Firing off the strongest moves is more beneficial in every way, it seems.
Say that you're fighting a lot of enemies (N). Your finishing move will put down half of them (N/2), whereas your basic move will only put down N/4.

You use your finishing move first, half of the opposition bites it, and you take 2*N/2 = N damage. The next round you recharge, taking N/2 damage. The round after that you use your finishing move again, taking no damage. In total you've taken 3N/2 damage.

Alternatively, you use your basic attack first, killing N/4, and take 3N/4 damage. The next round you use your finishing move and take out N/2, and take 2*N/4 = N/2 damage. On the last round you use your basic attack to mop up tho survivors. Total damage taken: 5N/4.
The law in its majestic equality forbids the rich as well as the poor from stealing bread, begging and sleeping under bridges.
-Anatole France

Mount Flamethrower on rear
Drive in reverse
Win Game.

-Josh Kablack

souran
Duke
Posts: 1113
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 9:29 pm

Post by souran »

What the 2E, 3.x, 4E, White Wolf, and world of warcraft combat engines have tought me is that everything needs to be into the encounter level.

Gonning Nova is fucking boring as hell, it makes the game unscalable, it makes combat a pointless exercise and it is terrible for the game.

Sadly if its available as an option its pretty much always superior to anything else you can do. Unless you put aribitrary resistions that your party cannot get their power set back the party will nova as often as they believe they can reasonably get away with it. As time goes on and it becomes possible to rest in pocket dimensions and other crazy spaces this reduces the number of encounters/day to 1 fairly quickly. (This doesn't even factor in the fact that there are numerous story reasons why a party will likely face substantially less than the expected number of enounters per day.)

So the optimal number of encounters a day for the players is 1. The solution seems clearly that any resource managmanet system that doesn't push everything into the encounter will result in rocket tag.

Have seperate resource systems for in combat/encounters and exploration/existance minigames.

Don't allow crossover, don't allow players to trade one for the other, don't make classes that focus on one at the expense of the other.
Post Reply