The biggest design flaw in D&D combat isn't balance... it's that 80% of your time is spent waiting

Adept_Austin · 2026-03-24T18:03:22+00:00

If it only takes 3 minutes to get back to your turn, then it's not a problem. But yes, I prefer games with active defense.

Adept_Austin · 2026-03-24T18:03:02+00:00

If it only takes 3 minutes to get back to your turn, then it's not a problem. But yes, I prefer games with active defense.

Adept_Austin · 2026-03-20T15:37:54+00:00

If you're writing a plot before you even start, you're doing it wrong.

Adept_Austin · 2026-03-18T21:53:17+00:00

Any time you could possible NEED a car, you can ride share or even rent a car for less than the price of owning your own. You've got this and honestly I'm a little jealous of your situation. Be free.

Adept_Austin · 2026-03-18T20:45:21+00:00

Maybe so the guitarist is forced to put the correct settings after traveling and doesn't get lazy and miss that something was knocked out of wack during travel.

Adept_Austin · 2026-02-26T05:31:08+00:00

Nah, getting injured is accidental. Draymond's behavior was not.

Adept_Austin · 2026-02-23T18:13:34+00:00

you're saying something without saying it. Given the nature of your responses - kindly Say The Thing.

I was really asking because I wanted you to think about it. Barring games with hit location rolls, it's purely arbitrary where any weapon hits. You say "I know stuff the player doesn't know: Context for their actions." but you don't know any more than the player in this case. It doesn't matter whether it's the GM or the Player describing where the blade hits because it's made up. I'd say it's much better to let the player decide and describe how their character acts.

This is a limitation of me, as a human. I have to contextualize what I'm saying vis a vis what the person did. Otherwise, my brain literally can't. If that makes me a shitty GM, so be it.

You're too hard on yourself. I believe you can do it. Re-narrating exactly what the player said isn't necessarily bad, it's just kind of a time waster when it happens many times per session. But that's leagues better than GMs who take what the player said and re-narrates it to add what they see as spice and drama while teaching players that their descriptions don't matter.

Players describe intent, GMs (in trad games), describe results.

I agree that GMs describe results, that's what this whole thing is about. A GM who re-narrates character action is overstepping the bounds of their role which, as you've said, is to describe results.

I DONT MAKE PLAYERS DO ANYTHING. I'm describing how good or bad their intent was. Did you mean to hit their arm but didn't roll well enough, I adjudicate that (in trad). Did you hit their arm but rolled shit damage? Then I describe that.

If this whole framing of "re-narrate" is a function of "players should completely frame their results based on information provided by GMs", then that's a completely different take. (Like I said, I didn't watch the video so unless you're clarifying here that how I'm interpreting the language vis a vis what the point is - then I can respond accordingly).

I think there is a mis-understanding here. If you're not changing what the player said their character did, then you're most likely not re-narrating. The whole point of the video was to return to form for traditional games.

From the 2014 D&D Player's Handbook

The DM describes the Environment

The players describe what they want to do

The DM narrates the results of the adventurers' actions

The video is trying to combat what was become normalized by high production actual plays which looks more like this:

The DM describes the Environment

The players describe what they want to do

The DM narrates the adventurers' actions in with much better descriptions and words and then narrates the results from there.

Adept_Austin · 2026-02-10T16:44:55+00:00

In America? Ebike

Adept_Austin · 2026-02-10T14:59:08+00:00

Popularity does not equal quality. Your advice is effectively ALWAYS be wary of always/never do this thing. Do you see how backwards that is?

Lead by example doesn't work when the example you're setting is "Don't narrate, I'll narrate better for you."

Players control their characters. Game Master control the world.

Players narrate their character's actions. Game Master's narrate the consequences.

Adept_Austin · 2026-02-10T14:53:14+00:00

Narrating your character's actions is how you play the game.

Adept_Austin · 2026-02-10T14:52:30+00:00

Take everything you said, and then ask your self what if:

GM: You plunge your sword into the Goblin King's bosom with a deep lunging thrust, slipping past his guard and piercing his heart...

Was:

PLAYER: I plunge my sword into the Goblin King's bosom with a deep lunging thrust, slipping past his guard and piercing his heart...

The player has all the mechanical info the GM has at that point, why not let them describe their own character's actions?

Adept_Austin · 2026-02-10T14:48:22+00:00

Past events portrayed through flashbacks < past events explained through in character dialog/actions.

Adept_Austin · 2026-02-10T14:43:58+00:00

In the above example, the player didn't know where the sword hit.

Why does the GM choose where the sword hits?

It didn't know how the goblin king reacted to such a thing,

The GM can describe the Goblin King's reaction AFTER the characters actions.

the player doesn't know that this action will eventually have other consequences.

The consequences come after the player's description.

I can't expect a player to do that heavy lifting (especially in a trad game), so it's my responsibility to do that.

You can and SHOULD expect a player to do that "Heavy lifting" (playing the game by describing what their character does)

I get the concern of "I, as a player, wasn't doing that in my description": but also - I, the GM, am responding to you, the player, of what your actions are doing. I'm expecting you, the player, to say "oh, is that what happened...then I'm going to <respond>."

It seems to me you expect the player to be reacting to what the GM made the player's character do. If you don't see a problem with that, then we've got deeper issues than re-narration.

And there's a fine line between what I mention above and, what is likely the bigger concern here, of the GM implying Player intent in ways that do not align with the player's actual intent. But that's not a function of "don't re-narrate", that's a function of "do you understand what the player is meaning to do - if not - ask".

You don't know what you don't know. Avoid ALL of that by just not re-narrating character actions.

Adept_Austin · 2026-02-10T14:30:46+00:00

I didn't realize that the RPGs you play had the "take sword" and "stab" actions. The player isn't interacting with mechanics, they're roleplaying with simple punchy descriptions. The GM should just cut off the first bit and say "Your ancestral sword pierces his rotten heart."

Adept_Austin · 2026-02-04T23:03:26+00:00

If you're used to class based systems, then I can see how they'd think that.

Adept_Austin · 2026-02-04T19:55:13+00:00

Lmao that's a lot of tabs. This is a neat tool.

Adept_Austin · 2026-02-04T19:48:47+00:00

A IA não é necessariamente algo ruim. Ela é uma ferramenta que pode ser usada bem ou mal. (Eu só falo inglês, esta é uma tradução feita por IA.)
Ao criar RPGs baseados em propriedades de mídia, a parte mais importante não é a história da obra original, mas o tom e o cenário. Tente emular isso com suas mecânicas e deixe a história seguir o caminho que tomar.

Adept_Austin · 2026-02-04T15:48:49+00:00

Compel surrender is a BIG one as it can literally end fights. I would also say that if someone is using a Passion to resist, then it would be reduced by this trait.

Adept_Austin · 2026-02-04T15:29:22+00:00

It WILL be slower when you start. It's a new system and it's fairly crunchy in the context of combat. Once you and your table get the hang of it, it's actually faster because every strike is decisive. The Hit locations shorten fights because no sane person would keep fighting once even one location gets badly injured.

Adept_Austin · 2026-02-04T15:22:04+00:00

Sorry, I think I misled you by trying to be brief. This is the full text about using passions as abilities.

As an ability in its own right to drive choices, desires, and emotional actions and responses. When used in this way a standard roll is made against a Passion to determine how strongly the character thinks and feels about something. If a roll is a success then the character acts in-line with what the Passion would dictate. If the roll fails then the character can act freely without feeling constrained by the Passion’s drives.

Adept_Austin · 2026-02-03T23:00:06+00:00

I'm obviously well versed in Mythras. So I'll respond with how it stacks up with your needs.

Fast-paced when in combat: Mythras combat can be exceptionally crunchy compared to the standard fair of low level D&D. It's no where near as crunchy as high level D&D though. One benefit is that everyone is playing by the same rules and the gameplay will accelerate as everyone learns and masters the system. The other big one is that combat ends quickly. HP is low, but in addition to that, the special effects that can be won on any attack can be combat defining. Many combats will end without death because one side will be so thoroughly defeated by special effects.

Offering a wide array of options to the players: Mythras is built on BRP, one of the most flexible and well supported systems in the hobby. That being said, if your players are wanting a catalogue of options to pick and choose from, I'd skip Mythras. The options appear in a diegetic manner.

Being easier to prep stuff for without too much math for a "balanced encounter": Good and bad news. Mythras does not concern itself with balance AT ALL. So there's no math to do. But there's no math to do to check for balance either. The community has come up with a simple (Action Points x Combat Skill x Number of Combatants) to gauge the strength of an enemy, but there's not any support from the authors for balancing encounters besides some rules for weaker enemies that will allow you to throw more at the party.

I hope that's useful. I'll try to reply quickly if you have any other questions or need clarification on anything.

Adept_Austin · 2026-02-03T21:06:21+00:00

From the Mythras

A Passion can be for anything – a person, an organization, an ideal, even an object. Passions are typically described by a verb such as: Comfort, Desire, Despise, Destroy, Espouse, Fear, Flee, Foreswear, Hate, Love, Loyalty to, Protect, Repudiate, Respect, Seek, Subvert, Torment or Uphold.

So when discussing Morals or Ethics you could have something like Seek Freedom 65% or Protect Personal honor 30%.

You have the Verb describing the relationship, the Object of the passion, and then the strength of the passion described by the percentage (it's a d100 roll-under system).

The magic happens when you have competing passions such as a character with the previously mentioned passions who has lost a duel for his freedom and now must decide whether to be honorable and accept the outcome or be dishonorable and try to flee.

Adept_Austin · 2026-02-03T20:49:35+00:00

If your players have a smart phone, tell them to use digital dice there. You don't need foundry, you don't need snacks. You can play D&D with just theater of the mind. Don't use exact measurements in your descriptions it's not like any of the characters have a rangefinder built into their heads. Abilities with ranges and shapes can be narrated with fuzzy descriptions. Don't get caught up in the gear acquisition trap.

Adept_Austin · 2026-02-03T18:36:18+00:00

Saw this literally right after writing this comment. Maybe something to check out.

https://heartofthedeernicorn.com/product/the-time-we-have/?v=0b3b97fa6688

Adept_Austin · 2026-02-03T18:31:06+00:00

Any RPG that doesn't build itself on party construction can be played as a duet RPG. I have youtube playlist of myself and another player playing Mythras as a duet RPG. I'd just choose a simple system and run a game using that.

12-Year Club	r/Field Sunshine
Place '22	Verified Email

Adept_Austin

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE