HYPERBOREA / How often do you refer to the Player's Manual?

**Posted by Rastus_Burne** 2/11/2015 5:10 pm

The question is pretty self-explanatory. Most role-playing games I've played in, there'll usually be a few copies of the player rules floating around. I have four copies of the AD&D PHB and in our Pathfinder game we have about three. In my Wild West RPG we generally use one (mainly because it's so rules lite), but with something like AS&SH I can imagine there would be use in having a few copies to clarify rules and keep things moving at a steady pace.

So how often do you refer to the PM, and how many copies do you have at your table?

**Posted by Blackadder23** 2/11/2015 5:48 pm

I don't allow (nor use) books at the table. It's distracting for everybody and slows things down.

**Posted by Rastus_Burne** 2/11/2015 5:51 pm

How do you reference rules?

**Posted by Blackadder23** 2/11/2015 6:38 pm

I only use the rules that I remember and feel like using. They're all optional anyway.

What can I say? I'm an Old School DM.

**Posted by Rastus_Burne** 2/11/2015 6:43 pm

Old school indeed: 'What are the rules?'
'Rules? There are no rules!'

I suppose if you've played 1e (or 2e) for any amount of time a lot of the conventions will be familiar, and abjudication is fairly straightforward. I personally prefer a bit more structure howevever.

**Posted by Blackadder23** 2/12/2015 10:45 am

It just seems to me that pretty much everything the players need to know (AC, saving throws, hit points, etc.) is on their character sheets. I don't see any need for them to interrupt the game to flip through books. I would much prefer they use their brains to come up with something interesting to do in combat (which I will then adjudicate, usually giving a bonus) rather than search through the books for some obscure rule that gives +1 to hit or whatever. Based on what I've observed, my games run much faster than average, and nobody's ever said to me, "I wish I had a two page list of specific feats I can perform".

In general, I prefer role-playing and use of player skill over a lot of recourse to dice and specific rules. If players have to roll dice, I feel it's usually because they failed to come up with a smarter way to resolve the situation. So their lives are usually on the line every single time they roll...

**Posted by Handy Haversack** 2/12/2015 1:28 pm

Not *too* often. A lot of info is already on the char. sheets, and I have a printout that incorporates all the tables one might need. Usually it's for spell descriptions. Because my players refuse to remember what their own spells do.

**Posted by Rastus_Burne** 2/12/2015 3:20 pm

Some food for thought, thanks guys. Although I'm not a stickler for 'by the book' generally I would like to keep pretty close to it (at least initially), and I feel like the spell variants and the two phase combat system would need a manual handy which is where my question stems from.

It's very valid that most info will be on character sheets though, so I guess provided all the 'to hit', turn undead and save charts were available it would be pretty easy with minimal manual consultation. It's especially nice with the saves how they're unified by altered depending on class. Makes it much easier.

Things I Worked On · **Posted by Ynas Midgard** 2/12/2015 6:43 pm

We mainly use it for referencing spells and rarely used class abilities.

**Posted by Rastus_Burne** 2/12/2015 7:09 pm

I've been very impressed by how compacted the necessary rules are. Some really great revisions and innovative additions to D&D. Also love the setting itself, which helps a great deal for flavour purposes. Perhaps we'll get away with just one Player's Manual at the table then.

**Posted by Chainsaw** 2/12/2015 9:05 pm

My group's still learning the game, so we keep the books (or PDFs) handy and reference them in play as desired. If finding an answer takes more than 30 seconds, we'll just wing it and look up the answer later. Usually we find it pretty quickly though.

**Posted by Rastus_Burne** 2/12/2015 9:56 pm

I've found that the organisation is clear and logical. After only a week or two of owning the set I feel like I've already got a pretty decent handle on the rules and setting, though like you, I'd prefer a rulebook at the table to clear up any uncertainty

**Posted by Handy Haversack** 2/12/2015 10:43 pm

I'd say that when we first started AS&SH, there was usually one per person on the table. Now, I have one and the players seem to use one or two. Mostly, as I said, spells. Also the Advanced Combat Maneuvers, though my players seem to figure out which few their characters like to use and then only have to look again when they, er, need a new character. It happens!

For us, too, it's mostly differences between AS&SH and AD&D that we have to remind ourselves of. I have to remind the players a lot that they don't have to wait ten rounds between charge attacks.

The out-of-the-box char. sheet has *room* to write down class abilities. Do my players do so in a reasonably useful way? Well . . . their hearts are in the right place--filled with greed and bloodlust.

**Posted by Rastus_Burne** 2/12/2015 10:46 pm

For my group I think a minimum of two would be good. In the Pathfinder campaign some players use the SRD doc or PDF which they can bring up on their smart phones. I'm tempted to do the same thing with AS&SH if the players do not wish to purchase a Player's Manual.

**Posted by Iron Ranger** 2/13/2015 7:47 pm

Handy Haversack wrote:
Not *too* often. A lot of info is already on the char. sheets, and I have a printout that incorporates all the tables one might need. Usually it's for spell descriptions. Because my players refuse to remember what their own spells do.

I know, right! What is it with these magic users?

**Posted by Rastus_Burne** 2/13/2015 8:10 pm

To be fair to the MUs out there, it is a substantial amount more book keeping (pun intended) than playing a straight fighter or thief. I like spell casters but that is one of my quibbles with them - the extra work as a player.

**Posted by NAJones** 2/14/2015 2:51 pm

Rastus_Burne wrote:
To be fair to the MUs out there, it is a substantial amount more book keeping (pun intended) than playing a straight fighter or thief. I like spell casters but that is one of my quibbles with them - the extra work as a player.

I tend to think of that as a feature not a flaw. Considering the amount of power magicians/sorcerers/wizards wield at mid and higher levels, the fact that it's not easy helps keep the population low.

**Posted by Ghul** 2/14/2015 3:51 pm

We keep a few laying around the table mostly for looking up spells (range, duration, etc).

**Posted by Rastus_Burne** 2/14/2015 5:00 pm

NAJones wrote:
Rastus_Burne wrote:
To be fair to the MUs out there, it is a substantial amount more book keeping (pun intended) than playing a straight fighter or thief. I like spell casters but that is one of my quibbles with them - the extra work as a player.
I tend to think of that as a feature not a flaw. Considering the amount of power magicians/sorcerers/wizards wield at mid and higher levels, the fact that it's not easy helps keep the population low.

Yes, that's very true. I suppose it means players who are willing to sift through spells to do the extra 'work' are able to reap the reward. Note when I say 'quibble' I don't see that as synonymous with 'flaw'; rather a minor inconvenience, or the realisation and acknowledgement that more admin effort will be required with this character.

**Posted by mabon5127** 2/19/2015 8:15 am

Handy Haversack wrote:
Not *too* often. A lot of info is already on the char. sheets, and I have a printout that incorporates all the tables one might need. Usually it's for spell descriptions. Because my players refuse to remember what their own spells do.

I try to train the players to be ready by their turn. I still have a couple that never look up spells until they throw them as though I have the descriptions memorized and I gently remind them to look it up and give me the details...

Morgan