HYPERBOREA » AS&SH 2e session 2 feedback and questions

Spellbinder · 6/03/2019 1:09 am

So, tonight we played session 2 of my local AS&SH 2e game playing the intro adventure "The Black Moss Hag" and I am noticing some things with the game.

I noticed that some of my players are really struggling with the chart that shows how actions work with their multiple attacks and other such actions. Should I jettison the chart and just go with what feels right/is logical? Should I import the action point economy from 5e or something? How have your games faired in this regard?

Players were asking things like "What if I want to attack with my Quarterstaff when the melee portion of the phase comes up and then want to cast Magic Missile once the spell part comes up?" "What if I want to attack with my dagger during the melee part of the phase and then throw a dart once it is missile time?"

I am also noticing that my players are not immersing in the adventure and are often distracted with cell phones and unrelated talk. I m not sure if it is because it is not catching their imaginations by fault of the system or adventure or my GM'ing or just them being easily distracted.

Have any of you messed with changing initiative? Do you use individual player initiative at all? I am not sure if they are digging initiative or not. Are you supposed to reroll initiative for each side each phase or each round or just once per combat overall?

measuredrums · 6/03/2019 9:58 am

Hey Spellbinder ... Check out this older message thread ... http://hyperborea.boardhost.com/viewtopic.php?id=179 ... In this thread you'll find an eminently useful document put together by forum User Maezar. What you'll find is that the four phases of a combat round (melee, magic, missiles, movement) do NOT have a specific order as it may seem. The way I run combat, and it follows Maezars suggestions, is that characters take whichever action they want to/need to based solely on initiative order (i.e: Side A Phase 1, Side B Phase 1 ... then Side A Phase 2, Side B Phase 2 ... ordered by individual DEX per side) This is a discussion from back around 1st Edition timeframe, but the combat action sequence did not change from 1st to 2nd. Read through the whole thread as there are links to differing revised versions of the sheet throughout the thread. Hopefully this helps.

mabon5127 · 6/03/2019 10:45 am

Spellbinder wrote:
I am also noticing that my players are not immersing in the adventure and are often distracted with cell phones and unrelated talk. I m not sure if it is because it is not catching their imaginations by fault of the system or adventure or my GM'ing or just them being easily distracted.

Set expectations right up front. It seems like it would be obvious that being on your phone, holding unrelated conversations, or other nonsense is rude. If you put work into being ready for a game then you should expect folks that show up to pay attention. If they value the other activities over the game you are running then they are welcome to not show up.

That being said are there things you can control that could speed up the game play and engage folks a little more?

I have 9 people in my game if folks aren't ready when their turn comes up then a single round could be long enough for folks to clock out. Have an expectation that when your turn comes up you are ready to give the Ref the info they need to move forward. As the rounds become faster engagement will increase.

We play on Friday nights currently, everyone is tired. Is there a better night to play? Work fatigue can be a big issue.

Allow time before the game to discuss the latest nerdy things, sports, etc. Establish the expectation that after the social time its game on! Breaking the mood with outside talk is frowned upon.

Do you have too many players? I would really like to get down to about 5-6 but I like them all and they have been in the game for years so...

Some people can immerse and some can't. I have someone that makes a joke of nearly every thing iin the game. I have coached him into only about half the time so I feel like I'm winning!

If you are working hard to be Game of Thrones and it becomes Mony Python then the game can become disheartening. As I like my group I altered my expectations to meet them in the middle allowing some joking and levity but having some serious moments as well.

This is just off the top of my head but I would caution against blaming yourself or the game. The game is great! There are tons of resources out there to improve as a Ref read some! The best way is to play a lot, as long as it remains fun for you.

Blackadder23 · 6/03/2019 11:01 am

I ban electronic devices and rulebooks from the table during play - no exceptions.

I think it's hellaciously rude for someone to be paging through a rulebook (to say nothing of screwing around with some gadget) while at the table with other people who are there to play. If someone can't give other human beings their undivided attention for a few hours, I don't need them at my table.

BlackKnight · 6/03/2019 1:40 pm

One thing that I noticed right away in the OP. You forgot Declaration in the round. One the character declares what they are wanting to do, you should only allow "slight" changes. If a magic Wielder declares "attacking with Quarterstaff", if they are doing a partial move, they move in phase 1, attack in phase 2, if not moving, they attack in phase one, and have an open option to do up to a 1/2 move in phase 2. If they want to cast, they must declare casting. they don't need to say what, or on who, just that they are casting.
If like in your example they want to cast magic missile, then they can't attack with their Quarter staff also, it's casting or no. If however, they get to their turn and the target they were going to cast MM on is gone, or they have no target/reason to cast they can cancel, but as a result, get no action other than maybe a half move.

Proper Sequence:
Players declare their actions.
Attacking (Melee or Missle), Multiple attacks (Melee or Missle), Moving (Full or Half), Charging attack (Melee), Split move and attack (Melee or Missle), Casting, Fleeing...

The initiative is Rolled to establish the "who goes first" between players and NPCs

Phase one:
Melee | 1/2 move and Melee attacks made (If a Multi-attack/round, you can use all or split across phases)
Missile | Fire is stationary this round
Magic | Magic cast if not moving
Movement | 1/2 move executed

Phase 2:
Melee | Full Move Melee and Charge Attacks made (1/2 move in phase one, 1/2 move in phase 2 then attack)
Millses | Missles fired after 1/2 move in phase 1
Magic | Any spells after 1/2 move in phase 1
Movement | Any other 1/2 move now.

In the above, there should be no real questions about what happens when. If a mage attacks with a melee, he declares either stationary melee or 1/2-full move melee. If he declares Missle attack, either move then missile, or stationary missile in phase one. If he declares Magic, then he's casting this round, and either 1/2 move or stationary...

My only personal changes to the round sequence is I allow for up to 1/2 move in phase 2 if the character acted in phase one only (melee, magic or missile in phase 1 specifically can move 1/2 in phase 2 if they want without a declaration). The only caveat to that would be moving out of melee may invoke an attack of opportunity unless backing away defensively.

Blackadder23 · 6/03/2019 2:44 pm

I believe that btb the caster does have to specify what spell he's casting (if not the target) before the initiative roll is made, if he's casting without moving. This is because the spell is lost (or potentially lost, if a soft-hearted DM allows a concentration check) if the caster is hit before he can complete the spell, so it's necessary to specify which spell he's casting in case this "unfortunate" event should come to pass. Personally I require both spell and target to be specified, whether the caster is moving or not; I consider spell-casting to be an involved process that can't be started or retargeted on a moment's notice. Similarly, I wouldn't allow a declared spell to be aborted during the round without also being lost.

Last edited by Blackadder23 (6/03/2019 2:47 pm)

Spellbinder · 6/03/2019 4:16 pm

If you are 3/2 for attacks you have to split 3 attacks over 2 rounds. Do you have to do the first round as 2/1 and then round 2 as 1/1 or could you do it in the opposite if you wanted?

measuredrums · 6/03/2019 4:38 pm

Spellbinder wrote:
If you are 3/2 for attacks you have to split 3 attacks over 2 rounds. Do you have to do the first round as 2/1 and then round 2 as 1/1 or could you do it in the opposite if you wanted?

According to the the 2nd Edition rulebook (p.246): "A 3/2 attack rate implies a single attack on one round and two attacks on the next round; similarly, a 5/2 attack rate implies two attacks on one round and three attacks on the next round."

Though the language is not implicitly clear (though I believe Jeff and DMPrata have commented on this exact wording elsewhere on the forum), the rules seem to imply the lesser number of attacks occur the 1st round (i.e: the 1/1 part of a 3/2 attack), and the larger number of attacks occur in the subsequent round (i.e: the 2/1 part of a 3/2 attack) by the use of the wording :"next round", as opposed to say, "the other round." This is also the way I run my combats.

Any other interpretations fellows?

Last edited by measuredrums (6/03/2019 4:39 pm)

measuredrums · 6/03/2019 4:45 pm

Suggest to Admins that this post be moved to General Discussion or Rules Discussion due to content.

Spellbinder · 6/03/2019 5:26 pm

So, a caster could not cast a spell and try to attack with a dagger in the same combat round. It would be committing to one of those 2 things each round.

Also, the melee, missiles, magic, movement parts of a phase are not a set order but rather, a list of events that may occur in any given phase of combat.

DMPrata · 6/03/2019 6:47 pm

measuredrums wrote:
Suggest to Admins that this post be moved to General Discussion or Rules Discussion due to content.

Whoosh!

DMPrata · 6/03/2019 6:48 pm

Spellbinder wrote:
So, a caster could not cast a spell and try to attack with a dagger in the same combat round. It would be committing to one of those 2 things each round.

Also, the melee, missiles, magic, movement parts of a phase are not a set order but rather, a list of events that may occur in any given phase of combat.

Just so, in both cases.

BlackKnight · 6/03/2019 7:17 pm

measuredrums wrote:
Any other interpretations fellows?

3/2 would be Specifically 1 attack in round one, 2 attacks on round two.
Specifically states without question in the section under Melee Attack Rate/ Missle ROF: Page 113

Attack Rate / Rate of Fire Table Defined:
½ one attack every two rounds
1/1 one attack per round
3/2 one attack one round, two attacks the next round
2/1 two attacks per round
5/2 two attacks one round, three attacks the next round
3/1 three attacks per round

The only thing that can be taken as an assumption is the table says x attack(s) one round ,x attack(s) the Next round. This implies that the first round (round 1 of any combat, the "One Round" is implied, The Next round would automatically round 2.

So for Attack sequence it''s clear. My statement for Melee in each phase for a specific character would be as follows.

In phase one:
The Character that has 2 or more attacks THIS round could -
Move ½
Move ½ and attack
Full attacks (All his attacks this round)

Phase Two:
Use his attacks, (if moved in phase one only could use all his attacks)
½ move and attack with any left over attacks (if moved half and attacked in phase 1)
½ move if used all his attacks in phase one without move.

I see that there is some confusion about Rounds vis Phases.

Each round stands as it's own, Each Round has Two phases, Phase one and phase two.

A 3/2 attacking fighter gets One attack in the first round and with the layout of the phases can take that 1 attack in Phase 1 or 2. On Round 2, the fighter would get 2 attacks, and could use them all in phase one, one in phase 1, one in phase two, or both in phase two.

BlackKnight · 6/03/2019 7:19 pm

DMPrata wrote:
Spellbinder wrote:
So, a caster could not cast a spell and try to attack with a dagger in the same combat round. It would be committing to one of those 2 things each round.

Also, the melee, missiles, magic, movement parts of a phase are not a set order but rather, a list of events that may occur in any given phase of combat.
Just so, in both cases.

Exactly..
Each phase has it's possible events, that should be declared at the beginning of the round before initiative.

The best layout of all the posibilities is on page 246-247 of tyhe book under Comprehensive Combat Sequence.

Last edited by BlackKnight (6/03/2019 7:42 pm)

BlackKnight · 6/03/2019 7:40 pm

Blackadder23 wrote:
I believe that btb the caster does have to specify what spell he's casting (if not the target) before the initiative roll is made, if he's casting without moving. This is because the spell is lost (or potentially lost, if a soft-hearted DM allows a concentration check) if the caster is hit before he can complete the spell, so it's necessary to specify which spell he's casting in case this "unfortunate" event should come to pass. Personally I require both spell and target to be specified, whether the caster is moving or not; I consider spell-casting to be an involved process that can't be started or retargeted on a moment's notice. Similarly, I wouldn't allow a declared spell to be aborted during the round without also being lost.

After re-reading your post and then back to the book (Page 244, Action Declaration), you are correct, Spell must be stated, but not the target. This allows a little leeway so as the target may die to the melee attacks by other party members, and can be re directed to another combatant )the book does not specifically state the spell needs it's target listed).

Blackadder23 · 6/03/2019 10:12 pm

Spellbinder wrote:
So, a caster could not cast a spell and try to attack with a dagger in the same combat round.

IMO magician classes in Old School games should never fight in melee, or only in the direst of extremes. Given their low hit points, poor AC, and poor chance to hit, it's a quick ticket to rolling up a new character. IMO magician classes should:

1) cast spells
2) use area effect missiles like flaming oil
3) use other missiles
4) hold a light source and guard the treasure while the rest of the party melees
5) fight in melee as a last resort - i.e., everyone else is dead already

Old School magicians aren't wu jen from a wuxia movie, just as Old School thieves aren't ninjas. They should stay out of melee combat.

Spellbinder · 6/03/2019 10:48 pm

The mage in my group wants to be able to throw darts and then cast a spell in the same round or vice-versa.

Blackadder23 · 6/03/2019 10:54 pm

Spellbinder wrote:
The mage in my group wants to be able to throw darts and then cast a spell in the same round or vice-versa.

By the book, he can't do that. But it's your game and you can rule however you want.
Personally, I wouldn't allow it - not because it's against the rules, but because I believe the point of an RPG is for the players to make choices. Anything that smacks of "eating your cake and having it too" is a no go in my game.

BlackKnight · 6/05/2019 7:13 am

Spellbinder wrote:
The mage in my group wants to be able to throw darts and then cast a spell in the same round or vice-versa.

Then he's thinking of the two phases as separate rounds, not one round. He gets to cast in a round, or fight in a round, he shouldn't get or be allowed to do both. Especially when you factor the concentration required for casting.

Spellbinder · 6/05/2019 8:54 am

BlackKnight wrote:
Spellbinder wrote:
The mage in my group wants to be able to throw darts and then cast a spell in the same round or vice-versa.
Then he's thinking of the two phases as separate rounds, not one round. He gets to cast in a round, or fight in a round, he shouldn't get or be allowed to do both. Especially when you factor the concentration required for casting.

I agree completely.