TOPIC: Improving the Party Card

Dougout wrote: Personally, as a ranger, I carry and Owl, a Death Die, Damage Reduction, Retribution, etc. As a player I get caught up in the excitement of the moment and sometimes forget to use the items and/or apply reductions when taking damage or dying. When I get told you take 25 pts of damage, I don't always think, well that's 25 pts of damage -3 points for Viper Strike Shirt, -10 Points for the Supreme Ring, etc. On top of keeping track of that and telling the GM about retribution when I'm hit... it can be a bit overwhelming when in the moment.

Last year in Grind, Raven attacked me with normal arrows (from a Harpy I believe). I was full HP when she did and I eventually died from all the rounds of arrows. About two rounds later I realized that I forgot about having the Wind Set and that I was immune to normal arrows - two rounds too late.

My cheat comment was not directed at you Donald. I hope it didn't come across that way.

Druegar wrote: My cheat comment was not directed at you Donald. I hope it didn't come across that way.

No, I didn't take it that way at all.

darkangel866 wrote: Most of the things to be removed are set abilities. They should be covered there.

Agreed.

I agree on retribution damage.
Evasion, DR, Resistances should be honor system, just like HP.

Evasion comes up often with Reflex saves which often target multiple people. Asking each player if they have evasion takes up a lot of time, whereas having it down on the card would be immensely helpful. Relying on players to figure out their own Evasion is bad because:

1. There is more than one type of Evasion (e.g. Improved Evasion)

2. Some players forget they have evasion or the tokens are managed by someone else and he doesn't know he has evasion

3. Players commonly mess up rounding. They will round down instead of up.

4. Players may not fully understood the evasion rules and may try to apply them in situations where they do not apply. A common situation is players trying to argue they should take no (or half) damage on a FORT or WILL save (whereas Evasion only helps on Reflex saves).


Having DR's and resistances listed would be nice (though not necessary). If they aren't listed, then players should clearly announce it when they take damage (most players were pretty good about this) rather than silently factor it in (without informing the DM). This is relevant because:


1. Players often mistakenly apply reductions. For example, *many* players are under the incorrect impression that the Supreme Ring helps against Acid damage (it doesn't). In those situations, I tried to be clear that The Supreme Ring doesn't work on acid. But if everything was on the "honor system," many players would incorrectly apply the -10 reduction.

2. If the player takes no (or very little) damage from something, it would be something that the monster would probably notice. And then try a different attack or attack someone else. Similarly, if a player does absolutely zero damage to a monster, it is something that player will probably notice. Usually I try to inform the player when his attack/spell is completely ineffective rather than letting him waste his time with an ineffective attack.

3. Just as how players have ways to overcome damage reduction or magic resistance, hypothetically maybe a monster might have a similar ability. Haven't done this yet and don't plan to, but it's always a possibility.

Pouch of Tulz

Quiver of Anointment

Alchemist Pouch

[/ul]
and anything else that is slotless, and usable by most classes.

? Alchemist Pouch doesn't really do much.

Quiver is limited to certain ranged characters, so not too powerful.

I do see the point about the Pouch. And agree that we should probably prevent a party of 10 from all using the same Pouch (by passing it around).

For you, Raven, and Mike, I have no problem with the +/+ system. For the general dungeon, I don't trust a lot of GM's to be able to keep up. I think Grind may need its own party card before long.

Agreed.

I agree that damage types should be on the party card. However, it becomes problematic when I am wielding a Viper Strike Dagger (+2 poison) in one hand, and +1 Keen Celestial Longsword (no damage type) in the other. Either a GM is not going to pay attention and -2 from my KCLS, or if its not recorded, not -2 from the dagger when it is relevant.

Hopefully, experienced DM's can handle it. (The Grind DM's definitely can.)

Both weapons have their + damage already factored in to their wheels, so it doesn't affect the party card. With the Viper Fangs, you just subtract -2 poison when not applicable. Celestial Longsword damage should not be adjusted.

Picc wrote: Re damage types, as much as I would like it to be I don't think the party card is ever going to be a good place to record multiple damage types. Incog and Raven are great DMs and can handle multiple damage types but I worry we couldn't necessarily hold all other coaches and DMs to that standard.

Yeah, I agree. Normal player coaches and DM's might not be able to handle it so I understand a "dumbed down / simplified" version in those cases. But I am thinking that Grind might be capable of a more sophisticated standard.

As an also incorrect compromise what would you guys think of having player choose their damage type in the coaching room (ie wearing bracers of fire and ring of frost you the player picks fire from the available types and the coach marks down +4 damage in one box and fire in another)

Not a good idea since some damage types (Darkrift, Poison) are very much inferior to others (Sacred). I mean, you should just about always turn all your + damage to sacred whenever possible. Most monsters are vulnerable to sacred, and it does extra against undead.

Different weapon bonuses for dual wielders is a pickle, even if we add an off hand bonus box for coaches to fill in its going to be confusing for DMs to keep track of which ranger puck has which weapon in it. Maybe were at the point where we need to talk about weapon locking.

Another thing (dual wielding) which might not be feasible for normal coaches/DM's, but might be appropriate for Grind.

David Harris wrote: I know the 2 main issues are 1) room on the card, you can only have so many columns; and 2) time it takes to prepare it. So the goals should be to maximize the space with what is most useful and can be easily completed in the time allotted.

This weekend at Who's Yer Con, I really liked the 30 minute centers we had in between Grinds.

They really let us take time to finish the party cards. And they gave us extra slack in case party's ran over time (or started late).

In fact, I'm wondering if we should try to do 30 minute centers b/w Grind runs at GenCon. This will likely result in slightly fewer available runs, but the number of last year's runs might be too much for me an my assistants to handle!

To maximize space on possible change could be to label one column H/R/C which could be shorthand for HOP,ROR, COGF. The coach could write in the box up to the 3 single initials, that way all the treasure items could be covered in one column.

I like the idea. Combining the treasure tokens into a single column seems prudent.

As for weapons lock, I think that would detract from the experience for example, at WYC Grind one of the monsters was sticky and people lost there primary melee weapon. So weapon locking won't have allowed this to play out, with people either needing to grab a secondary weapon or attack with range or attack a different creature.

I am also not a fan of weapon locking (except with set bonuses). But I do think there should be a better way to accurately factor in combat adjustments when players switch weapons.

darkangel866 wrote: I specifically was thinking of the Pouch of Tulz when I made my list before. The Pouch is significantly more powerful than the Death Die. I know of at least one party that passed the Pouch from one character to another in Smoak 2.0. They all used PoDDs and then healed in the same round. Imagine a party just passing it and Bulls Strength down the line.

That shouldn't have happened (everyone using the same Pouch).

Similarly, the Cleric and Paladin shouldn't be able to use the same Phoenix Figurine. And all 10 players shouldn't be able to share the same Cat Figurine.

Just like how all 10 players cannot share the same piece of equipment when filling out the party card.

Why should the Death Die have a special slot on the party card, when it deals only with honor system stats anyway? Is it the 1/game clause?

The Death Die's effect (free chance at resurrection) is more powerful in of itself than the Pouch (which requires the use of consumables).

The Pouch is an active effect (a player takes the initiative to use it) whereas the Die's effect is passive (happening automatically).

A group shouldn't be able to decide after the fact which of the 10 players is really holding the one die.

It's also tricky since the Die use is optional and players may forget. If the DM knows they can specifically ask if the player forgets. Otherwise it can get complicated if a player forgets to use it and then says they want to roll, even though some time has passed already.

I am not at all for locking a weapon slot. This is detrimental to token sales. Furthermore, there have been too many specialty weapons introduced:
SeyLah's Cestus,Long Spear of Dragon Slaying, Sling of Impact, the list goes on and on. I have invested a lot of time, money and effort to have the correct tool for the job, and don't think it is fair to change the rules 8 years later.

Agreed. Though those weapons should not gain the +5 bonus of a Legendary weapon that you used to fill out the party card.

Though I will point out that TD *did* previously change the longstanding rule of fixed slots for all non-weapon slots. In the old days, you could freely change your amulet (except HoP), ring, and even armor. But then they introduced locked slots for everything except weapons.

Colored Sliders: Make the off hand weapon red, or purple, or yellow. Make it bright and noticable.

Identifying the offhand is usually easy enough. It's usually the weaker weapon, or the weapons are the same so it doesn't matter.

kurtreznor wrote: For the regular dungeon, #2 and 3 would be difficult on the DMs. Those might need to stay simple.

I agree. This might be something where Grind (which can handle more complexity) might do things a bit more "orthodox."

I would also suggest a few situational bonuses somehow be marked. Im thinking of the boots of underdark +2 to-hit on sneak attack.

I think sneak attack is less of an issue, since the Rogue is going to be announcing to the DM anyway that he is sneak attacking. He just mentions that it's at +2 to hit with the Boots.

Lastly, if you do implement these changes for grind, please announce ahead of time; it will change some builds for grind.

I still want to confer a bit more with Jeff and my assistant DM's.

I would anticipate the highly likely situation (for this summer's Grind) of:

1. Monks and Rangers having both weapon stats recorded (primary / secondary). This might affect some builds, but since many players often design special builds for Grinds, it should be plenty of forewarning.

2. Asking players who bring prepared character stats to note damage types (e.g. +5 sonic and +3 sacred).

Incognito wrote:

darkangel866 wrote: I specifically was thinking of the Pouch of Tulz when I made my list before. The Pouch is significantly more powerful than the Death Die. I know of at least one party that passed the Pouch from one character to another in Smoak 2.0. They all used PoDDs and then healed in the same round. Imagine a party just passing it and Bulls Strength down the line.

That shouldn't have happened (everyone using the same Pouch).

Similarly, the Cleric and Paladin shouldn't be able to use the same Phoenix Figurine. And all 10 players shouldn't be able to share the same Cat Figurine.

Just like how all 10 players cannot share the same piece of equipment when filling out the party card.

I know it should not have happened. But I also know it did happen. That's why I brought it up. If the Druegar Death Die has a mark on the party card, so should the Pouch of Tulz

Though I will point out that TD *did* previously change the longstanding rule of fixed slots for all non-weapon slots. In the old days, you could freely change your amulet (except HoP), ring, and even armor. But then they introduced locked slots for everything except weapons.

and if they wanted to lock weapon slots, they should have done it then. Waiting another 5 years is just bad form. And what happens when the mimic or rust monster eats the weapons once they are locked?

Colored Sliders: Make the off hand weapon red, or purple, or yellow. Make it bright and noticable.

Identifying the offhand is usually easy enough. It's usually the weaker weapon, or the weapons are the same so it doesn't matter.

For Grind, yes, I agree. Its the general dungeon with DMs who have less than 3 years experience playing and/or DMing I worry about.

kurtreznor wrote: For the regular dungeon, #2 and 3 would be difficult on the DMs. Those might need to stay simple.

I agree. This might be something where Grind (which can handle more complexity) might do things a bit more "orthodox."

Lastly, if you do implement these changes for grind, please announce ahead of time; it will change some builds for grind.

I still want to confer a bit more with Jeff and my assistant DM's.

I would anticipate the highly likely situation (for this summer's Grind) of:

1. Monks and Rangers having both weapon stats recorded (primary / secondary). This might affect some builds, but since many players often design special builds for Grinds, it should be plenty of forewarning.

2. Asking players who bring prepared character stats to note damage types (e.g. +5 sonic and +3 sacred).

Both of these seem reasonable things that we all should start planning for now.

Druegar wrote: It sounds like you're looking at an old party card. Evil Outsider, Deadbane, Mithral, and Cold Climate cells were not on the 2013 party card .

I was just referencing whatever party cards we used this past weekend at Who's Yer Con. Looks like we must have been using 2012 party cards.

Looking at the 2013 party cards:

- Instead of an "AC Bonus if monster attacks with a missile," we should either eliminate it or replace it with a more generic "Conditional AC" column.

- 2013 does have Retribution which is fine. Cannot be surprised and free action are relevant enough to keep.

- Disease immunity, Feather fall and immunity to normal missiles (Wind set) and Cabal bonuses are too conditional. Better just to lump them under a "Set bonuses" column

Druegar's Death Die[/color][/u][/url] only affects the owner. It may not be passed around like a potion. Yes, players can surreptitiously pass it around, but there are lots of other things they can do like that. Cheaters will cheat.

Occasional spot checks may help.

This weekend, we have an intrepid Rogue who lost three +2 Nightshade's Short Swords. After the first one was rusted by "Rusty" (the Rust Monster), he asked about if he could use another if he borrowed one from another player. I said "sure, show me your second Nightshade's" which he did. Then that Nightshade's got stuck on "Chester" (the Mimick) and he asked if he could use a Nightshade's if he borrowed a third. He showed me a third Nightshade's, which was fine until it got destroyed by a Shatter spell. After that, I think he finally ran out!

Incognito wrote: I think that was a bad decision. And one that will become even more problematic with the introduction of +3 and +5 weapons.

I don't think it was a bad decision, but it think it's one that merits reconsideration. I have two questions though:

1. How should the party card be redesigned to accommodate two distinct weapons for only two classes?
2. How will the DM know which is the primary and which is the secondary when looking at pucks on the combat board?

[/quote]

I don't think the party card technically needs to be changed. There should be enough space to fit both numbers in. Alternatively, you could simply put a slash through the hit and damage boxes for the Monk and Ranger.

The vast majority of the time, the primary is going to be the one doing more damage. If the two weapons have different pluses, then the vast majority of the time the weapon with the higher + hit is likely the weapon with the higher plus.

There might be a few rare situations: Like maybe a Ranger or Monk is using identical weapons, except he only has a single Runestone Fitting Base which affects the primary. But that's fairly cornercase and there are ways around it (averaging things. 50-50 chance. etc.).

Incognito wrote: The same also applies to weapons you swap out for during combat.

I don't see how that could possibly work. (But if you have a viable method, I'm all ears!) There isn't enough room to write it, it would be information overload if there was room, and it would take too long to fill out.

I think this is something that would work in Grind, but not in the normal dungeon.

At Who's Yer Con, Raven and I did the party card and were also the DM's. With 30 minutes in between sessions, I usually had enough time to go down the party card and quickly survey:

1. What are your primary weapons?
2. What is your armor?
3. Any special immunities, sets, evasion that we should know about?

It wasn't 100% effective but gave me a general gist.

With weapon swaps, it's most relevant when someone is using a Relic or Legendary weapon or a swaps to something with a low + hit (Quivering Palm or Maul of the Titans).

Maybe Grind should have its own party card design? If you and Raven want to make that happen, I'd be happy to work with you on it. Or, if you prefer, I'll stay the hell out of your way.

Yes, I am beginning to think that Grind should have its own.

Originally I thought it might be too much of a hassle to print party cards just for Grind. But since the party card is changing year to year anyway, maybe it is workable.

A way to include "energy" (I'm using that term loosely) damage types on the party card is already in the works.

Excellent!

Dougout wrote: Personally, as a ranger, I carry and Owl, a Death Die, Damage Reduction, Retribution, etc. As a player I get caught up in the excitement of the moment and sometimes forget to use the items and/or apply reductions when taking damage or dying.

It's easy to forget about such things.

Back in the 2012 Grind, Henwy was the only player to die on Normal difficulty (and thus should be the only one with a 2012 Normal Victim pin!). A few rounds after he died, he was kicking himself for forgetting that he had an extra +14 max HP (from Might Boots and Dragonheart Charm). Oh well. Them's the breaks!

I tend to remind players of these more often than they remember themselves. For example, every time someone rolls a 1 for their saving throw, I instinctively ask if they are using a Questor's Charm.

When I get told you take 25 pts of damage, I don't always think, well that's 25 pts of damage -3 points for Viper Strike Shirt, -10 Points for the Supreme Ring, etc. On top of keeping track of that and telling the GM about retribution when I'm hit... it can be a bit overwhelming when in the moment.

Having some of that information available to the DM (like retribution) makes things easier for the players and speeds things up. DM's just need to remember to look at the Retribution column after the monster's attack. It's much better than players needing to constantly remind the DM's about it.

When determining damage, I often find it helpful (as a DM) to talk through it aloud with the player, factoring in any tokens they have.

It's my understanding that Bone Scroll Cases and Alchemist's Pouches have been made defunct or do Potions and Scrolls take damage still?

They still have uses.

In the past, I have had sonic spells which "destroy" potions (disallowing their use) unless you had protective items. Not often, but at least once.

Donald Rients wrote: What I can’t figure out is how one person carries all of the items for the others in the party and then says who has them when it is needed. I see that quite a bit and disagree with it.
1. What if you have 8 Scarab Figurines but 10 people are in the party, kind of hard to say who has what when you are carrying all eight.

I don't know how feasible it is or whether it is worth it. But one possibility I had was that ideally each player would bring a printout listing their gear (some already do). They give it to the DM. And if the issue comes up (which should be rare), the DM can always consult with the equipment sheet you turned in.

Probably won't work with casual players, but for tokenholics who prep their stats and spend time figuring out their equipment, this seems do-able.

Donald Rients wrote: Last year in Grind, Raven attacked me with normal arrows (from a Harpy I believe). I was full HP when she did and I eventually died from all the rounds of arrows. About two rounds later I realized that I forgot about having the Wind Set and that I was immune to normal arrows - two rounds too late.

On Normal difficulty, the Harpy's bow was a normal missile attack. At Hardcore and Nightmare, it was magical though. Gloves of Deflection would still help but not the Wind set.

Incognito wrote: Looking at the 2013 party cards:
- Instead of an "AC Bonus if monster attacks with a missile," we should either eliminate it or replace it with a more generic "Conditional AC" column.
- 2013 does have Retribution which is fine. Cannot be surprised and free action are relevant enough to keep.
- Disease immunity, Feather fall and immunity to normal missiles (Wind set) and Cabal bonuses are too conditional. Better just to lump them under a "Set bonuses" column

There are currently six tokens that grant AC bonuses only to ranged monster attacks , including two printed in 2013. It was added at the request of many players whose tokens are effectively useless without that being tracked.

Disease immunity was relevant and necessary in 2013 because of the lycanthropy threat, but will not be on the party card on 2014.

Feather Fall/Wind Set will likely remain in 2014, but may not thereafter.

I suspect Cabal will remain indefinitely, but if we discover people just aren't using Cabal tokens, that column could get the boot.

Incognito wrote:

1. How should the party card be redesigned to accommodate two distinct weapons for only two classes?
2. How will the DM know which is the primary and which is the secondary when looking at pucks on the combat board?

I don't think the party card technically needs to be changed. There should be enough space to fit both numbers in. Alternatively, you could simply put a slash through the hit and damage boxes for the Monk and Ranger.

DMs, what do you think about that? Would that be easy enough to read and adjudicate quickly?

How will the DM know which is the primary and which is the secondary when looking at pucks on the combat board? I'm disinclined to use color-coded pucks because the various lightning conditions in rooms can make different colors look alike.

Incognito wrote: I tend to remind players of these more often than they remember themselves.

And I thank you for that!!! Even when I literally have the tokens on my sleeve, I often forget to use their power in the excitement of the adventure.
Your reminders last year helped keep me alive--they're very much appreciated.

Donald Rients wrote: Last year in Grind, Raven attacked me with normal arrows (from a Harpy I believe). I was full HP when she did and I eventually died from all the rounds of arrows. About two rounds later I realized that I forgot about having the Wind Set and that I was immune to normal arrows - two rounds too late.

If you were on Normal mode, and I didn't notice the "Wind Set" marked on the party card, I apologize. However, I assure you that if the Harpy had seen her arrows bounce off you, she would have changed tactics very quickly. True Grind monsters are a cut above the average dungeon monster in intelligence. Eric only recruits the best!