I would suggest that the Play-by-Post Dungeon Masters should include the ROUND NUMBER at the TOP of their validation post, IF applicable...
For example,
ROUND #2
(large font, Red color)
This would help players refer to specific rounds to know how long things have been 'active' and also to better keep track of what your character did in which round...
Thanks!!
Suggestion for the PbP DMs
Re: Suggestion for the PbP DMs
I had another idea for PbP... which just popped up in my head!
This is about Initiative. In a PbP game, DMs usually post the initiative order, then players post their actions (before the Monsters) - then the Monsters go, and then the slower players finish up the round... This system is easy to use in Table top - everyone knows when his 'turn' is up and it is easy to see the 'status' of combat, when it is your own turn.
But as we well know, PbP don't have that luxury - players are not waiting online to 'post' the moment it is their turn! So people post their turns, and the DM has to work around actions that have been invalidated (i.e. Player #2 posted his position, and then Player #1 decides to go to that same position... either because he didn't see #2 was going there, OR because he does not care as he has a better initiative! HEHE
So what am I proposing?
A new way of doing Initiative. Request actions from the PCs BEFORE the monsters, and keep their posts in that order! then you do your Monsters (validation) and then request the posts from the group who 'lost' initiative!
So if Player #2 posts his actions 2 days before Player #1 posted, then the actions of Player #2 supercede the actions of Player #1 (assuming both of them play before the monster) - This would also make it simpler for the DM to do his validation - he can 'follow' the thread, message by message to apply actions! It would also semi-reward those who post quickly, thus helping the game to move along.
Ex:
1- Validation
2- Players who won Init
3- Validation with Monsters
4- Rest of players post
back to #1
What do the DMs think about this? Would it be advantageous? Evidently, Players that are very often online will have a small edge over those who don't visit as often...
This is about Initiative. In a PbP game, DMs usually post the initiative order, then players post their actions (before the Monsters) - then the Monsters go, and then the slower players finish up the round... This system is easy to use in Table top - everyone knows when his 'turn' is up and it is easy to see the 'status' of combat, when it is your own turn.
But as we well know, PbP don't have that luxury - players are not waiting online to 'post' the moment it is their turn! So people post their turns, and the DM has to work around actions that have been invalidated (i.e. Player #2 posted his position, and then Player #1 decides to go to that same position... either because he didn't see #2 was going there, OR because he does not care as he has a better initiative! HEHE
So what am I proposing?
A new way of doing Initiative. Request actions from the PCs BEFORE the monsters, and keep their posts in that order! then you do your Monsters (validation) and then request the posts from the group who 'lost' initiative!
So if Player #2 posts his actions 2 days before Player #1 posted, then the actions of Player #2 supercede the actions of Player #1 (assuming both of them play before the monster) - This would also make it simpler for the DM to do his validation - he can 'follow' the thread, message by message to apply actions! It would also semi-reward those who post quickly, thus helping the game to move along.
Ex:
1- Validation
2- Players who won Init
3- Validation with Monsters
4- Rest of players post
back to #1
What do the DMs think about this? Would it be advantageous? Evidently, Players that are very often online will have a small edge over those who don't visit as often...
- Duniagdra
- Divine Rank 21
- Posts: 2266
- Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 5:17 pm
- Location: Newark, New Jersey, USA
- Contact:
Re: Suggestion for the PbP DMs
Essentially, this could be simple enough. I know I split rounds often in my games. I know there are some other DMs who do this as well, with a few perhaps a little more lose in the initiative rule than others. For me, switching to a more story-line format, the actual initiative won't play too strong a roll, other than for people to see what the round looks like.
Your thought is a good one though.
Your thought is a good one though.
Re: Suggestion for the PbP DMs
I already do break up my rounds like that, with a slight variation:
Round 1
1 - Players with init higher than the monsters (in initiative order)
2 - Monsters
--> Validation 1
3 - Players with init lower than the monsters (in initiative order)
Round 2
1 - Players with init higher than the monsters (in initiative order)
2 - Monsters
--> Validation 2
Repeat from 3 above until the end of the combat
This way, except for the first validation, each validation covers the entire party.
As for the second part of your suggestion (taking player actions in post order, instead of initiative order), it has some merit. However, I haven't really run into many problems with players "stepping on" each others' actions. And, unless the DM is going to validate after each player action (which I personally don't have time for), it doesn't eliminate the need for "if, thens" in player actions, because (for example) Player #2 doesn't know if Player #1's attack will kill the monster.
I do like the part where it "rewards" players who post faster (because they get to act first), but I think there are some players out there who will still want to wait to see what everyone else does before deciding.
Round 1
1 - Players with init higher than the monsters (in initiative order)
2 - Monsters
--> Validation 1
3 - Players with init lower than the monsters (in initiative order)
Round 2
1 - Players with init higher than the monsters (in initiative order)
2 - Monsters
--> Validation 2
Repeat from 3 above until the end of the combat
This way, except for the first validation, each validation covers the entire party.
As for the second part of your suggestion (taking player actions in post order, instead of initiative order), it has some merit. However, I haven't really run into many problems with players "stepping on" each others' actions. And, unless the DM is going to validate after each player action (which I personally don't have time for), it doesn't eliminate the need for "if, thens" in player actions, because (for example) Player #2 doesn't know if Player #1's attack will kill the monster.
I do like the part where it "rewards" players who post faster (because they get to act first), but I think there are some players out there who will still want to wait to see what everyone else does before deciding.
- Duniagdra
- Divine Rank 21
- Posts: 2266
- Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 5:17 pm
- Location: Newark, New Jersey, USA
- Contact:
Re: Suggestion for the PbP DMs
To be honest, it was seeing your validation, pat, that got me doing the same, when I remember .
I'll try giving post order a chance though, just to see how it works, since this seems more a benefit to the DM than the player. We'll see how it goes.
I'll try giving post order a chance though, just to see how it works, since this seems more a benefit to the DM than the player. We'll see how it goes.
Re: Suggestion for the PbP DMs
I find it interesting that you read my post as 2 suggestion, when my goal was to put forth (what you call) the '2nd' suggestion... I guess I missed my 'explanation' rollpatransom wrote:As for the second part of your suggestion (taking player actions in post order, instead of initiative order), it has some merit.
Re: Suggestion for the PbP DMs
Or I missed my Read Language checkadmin wrote:I find it interesting that you read my post as 2 suggestion, when my goal was to put forth (what you call) the '2nd' suggestion... I guess I missed my 'explanation' roll
Re: Suggestion for the PbP DMs
While reading a player's post, I realized something PbP DMs should do....!!
TIMESTAMPS!
We should use Timestamps in our threads to give players an idea of how much time passes.
This would be useful for them to determine if a spell is about to expire, or how much time an effect will last!
Obviously the PCs don't have 'timex' watches with them, but using this would give a scale to the time spend in dungeons!!
This is more useful when out of combat, as combat usually involves only rounds...
admin
TIMESTAMPS!
We should use Timestamps in our threads to give players an idea of how much time passes.
This would be useful for them to determine if a spell is about to expire, or how much time an effect will last!
Obviously the PCs don't have 'timex' watches with them, but using this would give a scale to the time spend in dungeons!!
This is more useful when out of combat, as combat usually involves only rounds...
admin