5e in PbP

[goatmeal]

I’m gearing up to run my first 5e campaign in PbP (having run PF and 3.5 games this way over the past three years), and had some questions about how well this works. Specifically, I’ve noticed there are sometimes the options of reactions. It seems to me that this could slow down the game immensely. If I’m making a DM post and have to stop halfway through for each character that may or may not choose to take a reaction, how does this not take like a month per round? Any ideas from those who have experience with this?

[mgshamster]

I run AL Games via PBP and am in several PBP games for 5e.

I've seen two combat styles that work:

1) Team Initiative: roll init and average the two sides. One side goes, then the other. Works rather well for simplified init, and you can easily rewrite any reactions that happen.

2) Normal initiative (my own preference), but tell the players to post as soon as they can. Do not wait for your turn in initiative. If the scene changes, then you can repost or the DM will make a best judgement for change of actions. Again, reactions are just rewritten.

So far, even for PBP, 5e is pretty quick. I can get through an AL module in 3-5 weeks with everyone posting once per day and once on weekends.

Here (http://paizo.com/people/bookrat/campaigns) are my past and present games. Pick any of the 5e games to see some examples of PBP.

[goatmeal]

Thanks for the reply. I guess I should have mentioned initiative as well. I've played PF for 4 years PbP, and seen a few variations of the methods you mention. Are there additional constraints for reactions? What if you have two creatures attacking a PC with parry? Do you just assume they parry the first attacker? It seems like having so many choices the PCs might be able to make during the DMs turn could be problematic.


I run AL Games via PBP and am in several PBP games for 5e.

I've seen two combat styles that work:

1) Team Initiative: roll init and average the two sides. One side goes, then the other. Works rather well for simplified init, and you can easily rewrite any reactions that happen.

2) Normal initiative (my own preference), but tell the players to post as soon as they can. Do not wait for your turn in initiative. If the scene changes, then you can repost or the DM will make a best judgement for change of actions. Again, reactions are just rewritten.

So far, even for PBP, 5e is pretty quick. I can get through an AL module in 3-5 weeks with everyone posting once per day and once on weekends.

Here (http://paizo.com/people/bookrat/campaigns) are my past and present games. Pick any of the 5e games to see some examples of PBP.

[mgshamster]

Thanks for the reply. I guess I should have mentioned initiative as well. I've played PF for 4 years PbP, and seen a few variations of the methods you mention. Are there additional constraints for reactions? What if you have two creatures attacking a PC with parry? Do you just assume they parry the first attacker? It seems like having so many choices the PCs might be able to make during the DMs turn could be problematic.

As a DM, sometimes I use reactions tactically, sometimes I roll randomly.

As a DM and Player, I allow or use reactions for PCs to be the most advantageous for the PC. PBP are slow enough without worrying about small quibbles like that.

[Videkus]

Another option is to have the players tell you in what situations they'll use the reaction.

I'll use my rogue ability to half damage on the first attack that damages me.
I'll cast shield if i'm below 10hp and an attack hits me. etc.

[goatmeal]

Another option is to have the players tell you in what situations they'll use the reaction.

I'll use my rogue ability to half damage on the first attack that damages me.
I'll cast shield if i'm below 10hp and an attack hits me. etc.

This makes sense to some extent. Maybe if they don't write it in as a contingency ahead of the DM post it doesn't happen.

[mgshamster]

This makes sense to some extent. Maybe if they don't write it in as a contingency ahead of the DM post it doesn't happen.

I had a DM do that in a PBP game. I was playing a tiefling monk and it was utterly infuriating.

If that's the route you take, make sure to announce it ahead of time so people know not to play certain classes.

[goatmeal]

I had a DM do that in a PBP game. I was playing a tiefling monk and it was utterly infuriating.

If that's the route you take, make sure to announce it ahead of time so people know not to play certain classes.

Then how else would you do it? Make the decision for them? As a player, I'd rather be the one making that choice.

[Dudu]

I’m gearing up to run my first 5e campaign in PbP (having run PF and 3.5 games this way over the past three years), and had some questions about how well this works. Specifically, I’ve noticed there are sometimes the options of reactions. It seems to me that this could slow down the game immensely. If I’m making a DM post and have to stop halfway through for each character that may or may not choose to take a reaction, how does this not take like a month per round? Any ideas from those who have experience with this?

For reaction to work, I use it like Celerity.

That is, you have to state what you do and the condition that will trigger the action.

[Ritorix]

2) Normal initiative (my own preference), but tell the players to post as soon as they can. Do not wait for your turn in initiative. If the scene changes, then you can repost or the DM will make a best judgement for change of actions. Again, reactions are just rewritten.

This is basically what I use. The act of rolling initiative itself can be a time waster for a pbp, so it helps if the DM does all that up front. Organize everyone in init order, then remove the actual init number and tell players to go until a monster comes up - even rolling over into the next round. Another way to do it is to roll all the monster inits, then say "Ok roll init, and anyone who beats a (higher monster init here) take your turn!", that can get everyone involved in the combat right away even if not a full turn.

The init block itself is a great place to put information like HP totals, AC and status effects. You might want to reveal an AC up-front or after a hit against a monster, to speed up player turns and let them narrate the hits/misses better than a 'maybe'. It will look something like this:

Initiative
---------
21 Joe the Rogue (30/30HP, Blessed)
17 Bob the Wizard (15/15HP)
15 A Big Demon (135/160HP, AC14, 30' Fear Aura)
13 Laura the Fighter (40/50HP, On Fire)

The PCs Joe and Bob go first, then the NPC demon goes. From then until the end of combat, all the PCs go, wrapping around from Laura into Joe and Bob's next round. After the demon, if Bob is the first to post a turn that's ok, it's best to keep the game moving. You can emphasis that by re-formatting the init block after your monster goes, putting Laura with the other PCs, though nothing actually changed:

Initiative
---------
Laura the Fighter (40/50HP, On Fire)
Joe the Rogue (30/30HP, Blessed)
Bob the Wizard (15/15HP)
A Big Demon (135/160HP, AC14, 30' Fear Aura)


It helps if reactions are talked about beforehand. I don't ask for a literal if/then condition ahead of time, that's too gamey for my tastes and there are always exceptions. A wizard might always want to Shield if low on hit points, but against a high-damage boss he might want to Shield earlier. Give the player the benefit of the doubt most of the time, unless the entire combat has altered based on the reacted-to event. If an enemy wizard casts a fireball, two players drop and then fail a death save, then finally a cleric heals everyone - it is way too late to counterspell the fireball!

It really helps if you have some form of communication outside the actual PBP game. Discord is great these days, it can let that wizard quickly say 'yeah i'll counterspell' from his mobile phone or whatever. Of course then you are a step away from just playing in Discord.

[mgshamster]

Then how else would you do it? Make the decision for them? As a player, I'd rather be the one making that choice.

As I said in my first post. Rewrite what happened when a reaction takes place. Example:

Post 1 (DM): The bandit attacks, and the thief takes 10 damage.

Post 2 (thief): I use my reaction to halve the damage.

Post 3 (GM): Ok, you only take 5 damage.

It's the same as at a live table. Besides, as a GM, you should be checking and posting more often than the rest of the group.

If you set a requirement to post once per day for players, then as a GM you should be checking at least twice per day, if not more. That way you can quickly respond to questions (and reactions) without wasting time.

If the above exchange took 3 days, then you're doing it wrong and the game will die. (I should clarify; that exact thing has happened to me. I learned it the hard way).

If you're going to run PBP games, I strongly recommend reading these two links:

Doomed Hero's Guide to PBP Gaming (http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nr91?DHs-Guide-to-Play-By-Post-gaming)

Building a Better Doomed Hero: Painlord's Advanced PBP Gaming (http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qciy?Building-a-Better-Doomed-Hero-Painlords)

That second on in particular is important, especially where it talks about pushing.

[goatmeal]

As I said earlier, I've been DMing PF games PbP for 4 years. One game ran for over a year, and another game for nearly that long. They only stopped when I had RL stuff that kept me away for months at a time. So DMing PbP isn't new to me, and isn't what I'm asking about.

What I'm asking about is how to use the specific mechanic of a reaction in a way when there is a significant communication lag as in PbP. Assume this lag is unavoidable due to things like time zone differences and RL responsibilities of those involved. What I want is to avoid the sort of rewrite you mention here, as it really messes with the type of writing intensive games that I prefer.




As I said in my first post. Rewrite what happened when a reaction takes place. Example:

Post 1 (DM): The bandit attacks, and the thief takes 10 damage.

Post 2 (thief): I use my reaction to halve the damage.

Post 3 (GM): Ok, you only take 5 damage.

It's the same as at a live table. Besides, as a GM, you should be checking and posting more often than the rest of the group.

If you set a requirement to post once per day for players, then as a GM you should be checking at least twice per day, if not more. That way you can quickly respond to questions (and reactions) without wasting time.

If the above exchange took 3 days, then you're doing it wrong and the game will die. (I should clarify; that exact thing has happened to me. I learned it the hard way).

If you're going to run PBP games, I strongly recommend reading these two links:

Doomed Hero's Guide to PBP Gaming (http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nr91?DHs-Guide-to-Play-By-Post-gaming)

Building a Better Doomed Hero: Painlord's Advanced PBP Gaming (http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qciy?Building-a-Better-Doomed-Hero-Painlords)

That second on in particular is important, especially where it talks about pushing.

[Ninja_Prawn]

how does this not take like a month per round?

In my experience, you can usually complete a round (with normal initiative) in less the two days. The fastest combat I've ever been involved in was going at about 3 rounds per day, from memory. It's definitely possible, even across time zones and with possible reactions.


Another option is to have the players tell you in what situations they'll use the reaction.

From what I've seen, most people do this without being asked, like this (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?475390-A-Faerie-Affair-IC-II-A-Pixie-in-a-Bottle&p=20925525&viewfull=1#post20925525).

[mgshamster]

As I said earlier, I've been DMing PF games PbP for 4 years. One game ran for over a year, and another game for nearly that long. They only stopped when I had RL stuff that kept me away for months at a time. So DMing PbP isn't new to me, and isn't what I'm asking about.

What I'm asking about is how to use the specific mechanic of a reaction in a way when there is a significant communication lag as in PbP. Assume this lag is unavoidable due to things like time zone differences and RL responsibilities of those involved. What I want is to avoid the sort of rewrite you mention here, as it really messes with the type of writing intensive games that I prefer.

Ah, yes. I've forgotten you said that. I apologise. Been a rough few days.

Anyways, back on track. Regarding reactions; I just rewrite scenes to accommodate reactions. Even with that, combats generally don't take more than a few days. Particularly bad timing for reactions, as the fireball example above, may extend the combat out by a day or so, but it's still relatively quick.

In the AL Games I've run, I still have seen an AL game go longer than five weeks for a group posting daily, even with reactions.

So if an entire game designed to be a four hour session with multiple combats lasts only a month, then you really shouldn't see even a single combat go that long.

[goatmeal]

No worries. I'd like to avoid rewrites if possible, so was looking for ways around that. Maybe if I stated ahead of time that posts should contain an ooc box containing all reactions the PC has access to as well as the conditions under which they would use it (or have the option of letting me decide for them).

I should also say that I tend to run slower games with paragraphs of writing per post. This makes rewrites all the more tricky, especially when the game might be closer to 1 post per week than per day.


Ah, yes. I've forgotten you said that. I apologise. Been a rough few days.

Anyways, back on track. Regarding reactions; I just rewrite scenes to accommodate reactions. Even with that, combats generally don't take more than a few days. Particularly bad timing for reactions, as the fireball example above, may extend the combat out by a day or so, but it's still relatively quick.

In the AL Games I've run, I still have seen an AL game go longer than five weeks for a group posting daily, even with reactions.

So if an entire game designed to be a four hour session with multiple combats lasts only a month, then you really shouldn't see even a single combat go that long.

[Ruslan]

I’m gearing up to run my first 5e campaign in PbP (having run PF and 3.5 games this way over the past three years), and had some questions about how well this works. Specifically, I’ve noticed there are sometimes the options of reactions. It seems to me that this could slow down the game immensely. If I’m making a DM post and have to stop halfway through for each character that may or may not choose to take a reaction, how does this not take like a month per round? Any ideas from those who have experience with this?

Reactions are basically the same as 3.5 Immediate Actions and Attacks of Opportunity. If you have dealt with them before, you will be able to deal with Reactions.
Also, not any character will even have an option of Reaction. In fact, most low-level characters don't have Reactions (except Opportunity attacks). Or sometimes they will have a very basic option that you assume they always take (for example, a 5th level Rogue has the Uncanny Dodge reaction, which he will always take when hit by an attack, simply because there's nothing else).

In summary, it's not any more time-consuming that 3.5e.

[goatmeal]

Reactions are basically the same as 3.5 Immediate Actions and Attacks of Opportunity. If you have dealt with them before, you will be able to deal with Reactions.
Also, not any character will even have an option of Reaction. In fact, most low-level characters don't have Reactions (except Opportunity attacks). Or sometimes they will have a very basic option that you assume they always take (for example, a 5th level Rogue has the Uncanny Dodge reaction, which he will always take when hit by an attack, simply because there's nothing else).

In summary, it's not any more time-consuming that 3.5e.

Very helpful to think in terms of AoOs. Thanks