Patrefans
mcdm from patreon
mcdm patreon

The Return of the Resistance Roll

🕑 Added 2024-04-18 22:52:12 +0000 UTC
The Return of the Resistance Roll

Comments

Ryan Rupert

If an effect ends at the end of a monsters next turn, it was meant to only impact them one time. While the time frame may be shorter irl, they still take a penalty on one turn regardless of how many turns later they go. Also, if I'm a director and my monster has a debuff, I could be more inclined to bump them back in the order since they may not be as useful as other monsters while the effect is on them. All depends on what makes the most sense in the moment

Noah Topper

Is there a concern that with statuses going away at the end of the monster's next turn, the Director is tactically incentivized to choose for that monster to go next in the turn order? Could be very unsatisfying for the player.

Sean Boyce

Be interesting to see how inverting the result table interacts with Matt's rule about the table always being the same. Pointedly, I guess the table is "the same" in terms of the ranges, but the outputs are now inverted. You're looking for a low roll from your target as opposed to a good roll from yourself. Feels kinda lame compared to the satisfaction of rolling big. I would say, for my own experience, as a Director, I don't care about my monsters resisting stuff. As a dnd DM, I frequently treat scrub monsters as having 50/50 save chances, regardless of the heroes' save DCs. I only care about the heroes save DCs against opponents of significance. In point of fact, in big battles, I sometimes just use 40k style 4up saves, rolling a big blob of them and checking which succeed and which fail. Statistically, it's not that far off of what the game's doing anyway. If monsters have a negative or disadv in that stat, I roll them as 5ups or, if both, I roll them as 6ups. The point of that is to say, I don't care or want to roll Resistance for monsters that are insignificant to the adventure. I would rather just let the heroes always roll their dice and feel tactical and cool when they score big numbers. Equally, I only want them to roll Resistance when they care about it, and when they do, I don't want to have to roll attack dice. Third and finally, I would love to have the option with a Villain to Resist anything the heroes can do, but maybe not infinitely. In that way, a Villain's Resistances could be sort of like Legendary Resistances in 5e but less dumb. For example, a harpy never would roll Resistance. But the Harpy Queen might have a trait or power that lets her roll Resistance for other Harpies or herself using Presence, since it's her charismatic aura that compels her brood under her thumb. Or dew claw or whatever. Her Resistance roll then is just a contested roll against the power roll where she reduces the effect by her Tier score. Roll a tier 1, reduce effect by 1 tier. Roll a tier 4, she cancels your terrifying smite or whatever. Sucks, but she's used a Resistance roll now, so you're one step closer to landing the Big One. Or maybe she can only roll each Resistance once, so you have a chance to tactically target her and her retinue with specific powers that use those stats she has already utilized or the stats she's bad at Resisting or whatever. Point is, less rolling. Resistance only for heroes and villains, not for monsters. Leave the big cool hits to stay big cool hits that have effects. Let the players play and plan around how to burn off resistances on important enemies. Gives a better and more flexible design space.

Wesley Kriz

Pathfinder 2e has a similar system and it works well.

Nelson Chandler

The 1d6 at the end of each turn to remove status effect levels seems a bit too random swingy. Why not just make it default reduce by 1 at EoT? If you need more than that, that’s what consumables and friends with support powers are for.


More Creators