Adaptation Decay

[olthar]

In first edition, a turn was made up of 10 rounds, which was made up of 10 segments. Each segment was 6 seconds long, which made a round a full minute and a turn 10 minutes.

In 3rd edition segments were taken out because initiative was simplified (the purpose of segments was for the modified initiative rules, which were basically in place to make it so that thieves attacked first, followed by fighters, and then last were the casters). Without segments the rounds were moved to 6 seconds with a turn being 1 minute.

This seems like a simple issue, but what happens when you play with a DM who likes the old rules? (like me, though in this case I'm not the DM in question). Well most spells have durations in the rounds/turns, but some spells have durations in minutes. If, however, a spell's duration is 1/minute per level (like a lot of the buffs (e.g. bulls strength)) then by 3rd edition rules that's 1 turn per level, but by first edition rules that's one round per level. A simple way to convert this would be to convert all spells to their equivalent round/turn, but then those buffs that were intended for a few minutes (i.e. enough to buff before battle and still have a few of them for the majority of the battle), will suddenly last hours (1/turn per level at 10 minutes per turn means 6th level buffs for 1 hour)!

So, my question is, has anyone dealt with this issue before? And regardless if you have, what would you suggest I try to do?

[Fiery Diamond]

Where are you getting this 1-minute turn in third edition from? Is that terminology used in 3.0? Because it certainly isn't in 3.5. Rounds last 6 seconds in 3.5, and neither segment nor turn are terms (unless using "turn" to refer to a character's "action", as in "a swift action can only be used during your turn, but an immediate action can be used even if it is not your turn).

[Tyndmyr]

No. Just no.

Round = 6 seconds. Durations stick by that. Don't use first ed segments/turns/rounds in 3.5. It jacks everything up. If you like 1st ed play that, don't mash it into some unholy abomination with 3.5.

[olthar]

No. Just no.

Round = 6 seconds. Durations stick by that. Don't use first ed segments/turns/rounds in 3.5. It jacks everything up. If you like 1st ed play that, don't mash it into some unholy abomination with 3.5.

If I had that option, then I wouldn't be asking this question.

[Seerow]

I guess if you really wanted to, since you're making a round effectively 10x longer, increase the duration of everything else by 10. (ie minutes/level becomes 10mins/level, 10mins/level becomes 100mins/level, or hrs/level to simplify) but really that is a pretty big buff to casters, who don't need it, as it brings a lot of spells from something that has to be cast immediately before combat, or during opening rounds of combat, into the sort of thing that can be kept up all day with nothing more than extend spell.

Alternatively, you can just say "deal with it" and accept minute/level spells will be a bit weaker relative to round/level spells. Or you could make round/level spells segment/level, which nerfs those spells, since I assume with these rules not everyone goes every segment.

[MeeposFire]

Just to clarify 2e removed segments and late 2e also changed rounds from 1 minute to 6 seconds.

[hewhosaysfish]

My suggestion:

One 3e round = Six seconds
One 1e segment = Six Seconds

So: one (3e) round = one (1e) segment

So, 1 round/level (3e) = 1 segment/level (1e)
And the fact that 1e uses the word "round" to refer to something else has nothing to do with anything.

[hamlet]

Just to clarify 2e removed segments and late 2e also changed rounds from 1 minute to 6 seconds.

Actually, though the term "segments" got yanked, the concept (i.e., breaking the round up into discrete units) remained. It just wasn't named anything.

Instead, you rolled a d10, added weapon speed and adjusted for your DEX, and then the DM started counting up from 1 and eventually getting to 10, and your character acted on your modified initiative. All actions were still simultaneous, but this way, some actions were a little more simultaneous than others. Worked very well.

[Morph Bark]

The problem is that you shouldn't look at different editions as the same game, but that you should look at them as entirely different games.

The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess is for instance quite different from The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time.

[CalamaroJoe]

If, however, a spell's duration is 1/minute per level (like a lot of the buffs (e.g. bulls strength)) then by 3rd edition rules that's 1 turn per level, but by first edition rules that's one round per level. A simple way to convert this would be to convert all spells to their equivalent round/turn, but then those buffs that were intended for a few minutes (i.e. enough to buff before battle and still have a few of them for the majority of the battle), will suddenly last hours (1/turn per level at 10 minutes per turn means 6th level buffs for 1 hour)!

So, my question is, has anyone dealt with this issue before? And regardless if you have, what would you suggest I try to do?

Sorry Olthar, I'm not sure of what are you trying to do. Are you importing in 3.5 edition the segment-round-turn time scale?

In this case I think you must do a bit of conversion work. I don't remember, how much did bull's strength last in 1ed? (if it existed)

[pffh]

I'm confused what exactly do you mean by turns when talking about 3rd edition? Last time I checked it only has rounds and those last 6 seconds meaning a spell that lasts 1 minutes lasts for 10 rounds eg the character can act 10 times in combat before the spell wears off.

[LibraryOgre]

Ask your DM.

Once you start using alternate rules, you need to make sure rulings are in line with those alternate rules. I'd ask him about a couple of these options, then go from there.

[olthar]

Sorry Olthar, I'm not sure of what are you trying to do. Are you importing in 3.5 edition the segment-round-turn time scale?

In this case I think you must do a bit of conversion work. I don't remember, how much did bull's strength last in 1ed? (if it existed)

Sorry, the 1-minute round was imported into 3rd edition. So anything that says round now means 1-minute rather than 6-seconds. However, anything that says minute/level has stayed minute/level.

Segments essentially were parts of a round (though they don't exist in this game). And the reason I didn't include 2nd edition in my description was that it got confusing there.

Talking to the DM is the goal, but I was wondering if anyone had any ideas about what to suggest as potential alternatives for said conversation.

[Dr.Epic]

So, my question is, has anyone dealt with this issue before? And regardless if you have, what would you suggest I try to do?

Go back to playing the editions you like. Doesn't seem like that big of a problem. Reason why I still play an obsolete edition.

[ScionoftheVoid]

Sorry, the 1-minute round was imported into 3rd edition. So anything that says round now means 1-minute rather than 6-seconds. However, anything that says minute/level has stayed minute/level.

Segments essentially were parts of a round (though they don't exist in this game). And the reason I didn't include 2nd edition in my description was that it got confusing there.

Talking to the DM is the goal, but I was wondering if anyone had any ideas about what to suggest as potential alternatives for said conversation.

So you changed the terminology inconsistenly? Anything which fixes the issue is going to either a. lead to having the exact same durations as before the word change (minute/level stays minute/level or becomes round/level - since they're the same thing- and round/level becomes 6 seconds/level) or b. increase the durations of everything massively (anything measured in minutes is multiplied by ten, to continue to be ten times as long as rounds).

Why did you make this change in the first place? It's going to be functionally identical, at most just taking ten times as long. Unless you keep things as they are, in which case minute/level spells were nerfed heavily whilst round/level stayed the same (duration increase cancelled by equivalent increase in combat time).

[CalamaroJoe]

Sorry, the 1-minute round was imported into 3rd edition. So anything that says round now means 1-minute rather than 6-seconds. However, anything that says minute/level has stayed minute/level.

A simple way to convert this would be to convert all spells to their equivalent round/turn, but then those buffs that were intended for a few minutes (i.e. enough to buff before battle and still have a few of them for the majority of the battle), will suddenly last hours (1/turn per level at 10 minutes per turn means 6th level buffs for 1 hour)!

If you really want to keep your 1-minute round, for watever reason, IMO you must also tranform all durations of the kind "1 minute/level" (that is, for you 1 round/level) in "10 minutes/level". This keeps the buff spells usable for more than one encounter, or a couple skill checks around the dungeon (also the rounds for searching/disabling/whatever are longer).

EDIT: I too am curious on your motives. Why this change?

[olthar]

So you changed the terminology inconsistenly?

Nope, I'm a player in the game. The DM changed the terminology inconsistently.

Anything which fixes the issue is going to either a. lead to having the exact same durations as before the word change (minute/level stays minute/level or becomes round/level - since they're the same thing- and round/level becomes 6 seconds/level) or b. increase the durations of everything massively (anything measured in minutes is multiplied by ten, to continue to be ten times as long as rounds).

That is correct, which is why I am asking if anyone has any ideas about how to deal with this that may not lead to exactly that issue.

I like the game. I like the players. I like not being a DM for once. I'm just kinda miffed by this one issue because it all but takes an entire character archetype (support caster) and says "nope, you don't exist as a valid way to play."

[MeeposFire]

support casters are very much a valid way of playing 3.5 even with the lower durations. In fact it is the bard's specialty.

[Tyndmyr]

If I had that option, then I wouldn't be asking this question.

Send the DM here. I'll explain to him why he really, really doesn't want to do such things.

If he does want to do such a pointless and generally undesirable conversion, he'll at least not want to adapt spells in such a terribly inconsistent way.

If that fails, I direct you to Persist, which will fix everything.

[NichG]

This actually fixes something that really tends to annoy me about D&D 3.5, which is that even the most epic conflicts take less than two minutes to resolve. What that means is that you can rarely ever have reinforcements, or holding-action type deals (because support just will not get there in time). One minute rounds really help with this.

To really do it right though you have to also increase everyone's movement rates and increase the amount of area-control people can exert (i.e. make it so you can actually keep people from moving through your threatened area rather than just taking AoOs).

I've just never bothered figuring out the right set of modifications to use. Rounds/level spells should clearly go to minutes/level, but I'm not convinced that minutes/level spells absolutely need to be extended (I could go either way on this, so its probably easiest to just extend them). 10 minutes/level spells certainly don't since they're designed to last over the time padding between events, on which scale a 1 minute versus 10 minute encounter doesn't make a lot of difference.

[Knaight]

This actually fixes something that really tends to annoy me about D&D 3.5, which is that even the most epic conflicts take less than two minutes to resolve. What that means is that you can rarely ever have reinforcements, or holding-action type deals (because support just will not get there in time). One minute rounds really help with this.

You mean these epic conflicts with maybe 5 people on one side? Unless there is some major cover and fortification involved, with mostly ranged weaponry in use it should end quickly.

Let me put it this way. Find two people, give them sticks, and tell them to hit each other. If they are new, tell them that their target is their opponent, and not their opponents stick, despite what movies might say. The vast majority of times, despite who the people are and what level of aptitude they are at someone will be hit within 30 seconds. In all but a tiny handful of edge cases, someone will be hit within 2 minutes. A team of 3-5 up against however many it takes for the fight to go either way will be over almost as quickly.

Now, if one has groups of hundreds or thousands fighting each other, delay tactics for reinforcements that aren't extremely close by become viable.

[NichG]

You mean these epic conflicts with maybe 5 people on one side? Unless there is some major cover and fortification involved, with mostly ranged weaponry in use it should end quickly.

Let me put it this way. Find two people, give them sticks, and tell them to hit each other. If they are new, tell them that their target is their opponent, and not their opponents stick, despite what movies might say. The vast majority of times, despite who the people are and what level of aptitude they are at someone will be hit within 30 seconds. In all but a tiny handful of edge cases, someone will be hit within 2 minutes. A team of 3-5 up against however many it takes for the fight to go either way will be over almost as quickly.

Now, if one has groups of hundreds or thousands fighting each other, delay tactics for reinforcements that aren't extremely close by become viable.

I mean those epic conflicts like a swashbuckling scene from a movie of that genre, which can last 5-10 minutes, or a battle between the heroes and some monstrosity from the dawn of time or a colossal dragon. Take any battle scene from a movie - it will almost certainly last longer than 30 seconds.

Also, the size of the forces involved does not tremendously increase the duration of the battle in D&D assuming a decent density of ranged combatants or sufficiently spread out formation (which is a must in a world with pinpoint precision fireball artillery), so that fight with thousands fighting eachother might last a minute and a half instead of 30 seconds.

[Morph Bark]

I mean those epic conflicts like a swashbuckling scene from a movie of that genre, which can last 5-10 minutes, or a battle between the heroes and some monstrosity from the dawn of time or a colossal dragon. Take any battle scene from a movie - it will almost certainly last longer than 30 seconds.

Considering that in movies a lot more parrying is going on, those characters would most likely be ToB characters focusing on counters. Also, in movies, lots of running and hiding for short moments also occurs quite a lot.

Also, there are a few ways in which a DnD character could easily last long enough to pull something like that off. Frenzied Berzerker's Deathless Frenzy, a Knight's ability to expend Knight's Challenge uses to stay alive even when technically dead and that one stance in Devoted Spirit that allows you to keep going on for insane amounts of time even while in the negatives.

[olthar]

Let me put it this way. Find two people, give them sticks, and tell them to hit each other. If they are new, tell them that their target is their opponent, and not their opponents stick, despite what movies might say. The vast majority of times, despite who the people are and what level of aptitude they are at someone will be hit within 30 seconds. In all but a tiny handful of edge cases, someone will be hit within 2 minutes. A team of 3-5 up against however many it takes for the fight to go either way will be over almost as quickly.

Interestingly, the thread title can answer your question here. This is an example of adaptation decay. The armor that exists in D&D pretty much way outstrips the weapons that exist. In fact, the type of full plate armors that the game has existed at the same time as early guns. I'm not saying that it means that battles would take 10 minutes, but I have no problem believe it may take a bit longer for someone with a sword to cut through inches of metal armor used by someone skilled in its use. The magic argument is countered by the idea that it may take upwards of a minute to cast each spell and any argument you use for why magic isn't autokill in the first turn in a 6-second round system.

I also think it makes it more believable for movement in the 1-minute round. Yes, people can move 30 feet easily in 6 seconds, but the average D&D character is carrying a lot of stuff. The characters who are not are weak or have bags of holding making it weigh less but don't make the need for careful movement any less.

[Tavar]

That only works if everyone is in full plate, though. Especially at low levels, you don't have stuff like that. More like a light chain shirt, or something.

[erikun]

I... am a bit confused about the problem being presented. In 1st edition, a segment was 6 seconds, a round was 1 minute, and a turn was 10 minutes. In 3rd edition, a round was 6 seconds (and a turn 1 minute, but I think they removed that term in 3.5e). We're asking how to change spell durations from the 3rd edition model to the 1st edition model?

Well, anything that would take one 3e round takes 6 seconds. Anything that would take one minute takes... 1 minute. In 1e terms, this would mean a "one round" spell becoming one segment, and a "one minute" spell becoming one round.

I'm not sure why there is a confusion. If you're using different terms, you just translate the text into the new terms. Right?

[Mr.Bookworm]

If I had that option, then I wouldn't be asking this question.

OSRIC.

Enjoy.

[Knaight]

Interestingly, the thread title can answer your question here. This is an example of adaptation decay. The armor that exists in D&D pretty much way outstrips the weapons that exist. In fact, the type of full plate armors that the game has existed at the same time as early guns. I'm not saying that it means that battles would take 10 minutes, but I have no problem believe it may take a bit longer for someone with a sword to cut through inches of metal armor used by someone skilled in its use. The magic argument is countered by the idea that it may take upwards of a minute to cast each spell and any argument you use for why magic isn't autokill in the first turn in a 6-second round system.

I also think it makes it more believable for movement in the 1-minute round. Yes, people can move 30 feet easily in 6 seconds, but the average D&D character is carrying a lot of stuff. The characters who are not are weak or have bags of holding making it weigh less but don't make the need for careful movement any less.

You don't cut through inches of armor -for one thing even real cloth armor wasn't inches thick, for another its really hard to go through plate period-, and there are melee tactics to deal with heavy plate. My personal favorite involves knocking the guy down, pinning them with about three people, then knifing the joints or around the helmet, more practically one can use half swording. It would extend fights, but not to an extreme extent, certainly not to the 20 minutes that it translates to. 20 minutes of constant fighting in heavy armor has a tendency to leave people vulnerable due to sheer fatigue.

Much of the movement one would expect to see in a skirmish would involve charging archers and such, and 120 feet in a minute isn't going to accomplish that. Besides, dumping heavy packs at the beginnings of a fight is pretty much guaranteed.

[olthar]

I... am a bit confused about the problem being presented. In 1st edition, a segment was 6 seconds, a round was 1 minute, and a turn was 10 minutes. In 3rd edition, a round was 6 seconds (and a turn 1 minute, but I think they removed that term in 3.5e). We're asking how to change spell durations from the 3rd edition model to the 1st edition model?

Well, anything that would take one 3e round takes 6 seconds. Anything that would take one minute takes... 1 minute. In 1e terms, this would mean a "one round" spell becoming one segment, and a "one minute" spell becoming one round.

I'm not sure why there is a confusion. If you're using different terms, you just translate the text into the new terms. Right?

Segments can't translate. The purpose of the segment was for determining initiative. Using the 3.5 initiative system, the segment doesn't exist anymore. The segment existed sole reason of reflecting the thief should act before fighter who should act before caster thing. 3.5 did that by making initiative dex dependent and then also encouraging rogues to take improved initiative by making sneak attack work early in combat.

[Tengu_temp]

Tell the DM that his houserule screws up the duration of many spells. See if he comes up with a good solution - either removing this houserule or prolonging the duration of 1 min/level spells sounds good to me. If he says "not my problem" or something like that, hit him with a book.