From: ratinox@splinter.coe.northeastern.edu (Richard Pieri/Stainless Steel Rat)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Joys of Dice
Date: 12 Aug 92 18:27:00 GMT
	<1992Aug11.222349.195911@cs.cmu.edu>
Reply-To: ratinox@meceng.coe.northeastern.edu
Organization: 3WA, Boston Office. Or Nu Meta Chi. Take your pick.
In-reply-to: cscott+@CS.CMU.EDU's message of 11 Aug 92 22:23:49 GMT
X-Get-A-Clue: Have two, they're small.
X-Signature-Virus-Protection: Version 1.51
X-Posting-Software: GNUS 3.14.1 [ NNTP-based News Reader for GNU Emacs ]

>>>>> "CS" == Curtis Scott <cscott> writes:

[role-played combat example]

CS> OK. Let's grant for a moment that such roleplaying will be fun for some,
CS> and lay aside any question of how "fair" or "impartial" or "clever"
CS> the GM may or may not be. Frankly, I am in agreement with the "diceless"
CS> folk who contend that many of these problems are GM problems rather than
CS> "system" problems.

Agreed. Diceless is not for every GM.

CS> My question is this: Wouldn't roleplaying a scene like that in so much
CS> detail leave the other players rather bored? I mean, if the GM has to
CS> describe the length of the grass, the location of trees and rocks, and
CS> the details of every thrust and parry, that pretty well consumes his
CS> time.

Not really, no. Diceless combats tend to run much faster in real time than
diced combats do (with the exception of nuking the site from orbit :-).
[From an example I posted the other day, a 15 minute game time fight only
took about a minute or two to role-play through; there are diced combat
systems where this fight might have taken hours to resolve]. If the combat
does run long, then the other players can use that time to interract with
each other. Or, if the fight does go on and on, it's usually quite
entertaining as a "spectator sport" for the other players.

CS> Based on the above (which was written by an admitted non-diceless
CS> player), I would expect diceless RPGs to go in cycles of interaction.
CS> Each player would get a period of time "in the spotlight," getting his
CS> questions answered and his interactions handled, then the GM would have
CS> to turn to the next player. In a "diced" system, these cycles go pretty
CS> quickly; the GM abstracts the player's behavior into a series of system
CS> actions and implements them using the rules. The old-style "round"
CS> structure, while it has lots of disadvantages, acts to keep the GM
CS> talking to all the players more or less evenly, at least during combat.
CS> In a diceless system, I can see these cycles getting slower, and that
CS> could lead to boredom for players not in the "spotlight."

Not if the story is kept interesting to the "inactive" players. But again,
this is a GM problem, not a "system" problem.

CS> You get an analogous effect in dice-based games when you have too many
CS> players, or when the combat system is too complex (where "too complex"
CS> is a function of how skilled the GM and players are in the system, not
CS> an arbitrary standard). However, without the (admittedly artificial)
CS> structure of the "round," have diceless GMs encountered this problem?
CS> How many players have you had when you did?

It's a trade off; keeping everyone active almost constantly vs. resolving
each individual's encounter quickly. Within Amber, if the PCs encounter a
group and a fight ensues, the opposing party will tend to be either all
"grunts," or the opposition is grunts lead by a powerful enemy. In the
first case the PCs will mop up the floor very quickly and move on to more
important things. In the second case, a one on one duel between the villain
of the piece and one of the PCs will develop, while the other PCs mop up
(you're locked in mortal combat with your evil twin brother; the rest
quickly finish off/incapacitate the guards; back to you and your evil
twin...). From a dramatic standpoint, the duelists should be nearly equal
in ability as far as the means of the duel, which should (hopefully) be
entertaining to the rest of the players.

But regardless of whatever system you use, combats between large numbers (5
per side and up) of relatively equal opponents will take a lot of real time
to resolve, whether you use dice or not. This is a "problem" with reality,
not the GM nor the "system".

--Rat

||||| | | | |  |  |  |   |   |    |    |    |   |   |  |  |  |  | | | | | |||||
                                                   __        ___ 
Richard Pieri, Northeastern's Stainless Steel Rat/   | /| / /   | The Worlds
Internet: ratinox@meceng.coe.northeastern.edu   /__  |/ |/ / /| | Welfare Works
    UUCP: ...!northeastern.edu!meceng!ratinox  /   | /| / / / | | Association:
  BITNET: UA_RLP@NUHUB{.BITNET}               /__  |/ |/ / /  | | I will solve
  USNail: 14 Westdale RD  Holbrook, MA 02343 /   | /| / / /___| | any problem
 ICBMnet: 42 deg 1 min N, 71 deg 0 min W    /    |/ |/ /_//_____| for you.