Next hot topic: dialogue.

It is my impression (and you can correct me if I'm wrong) that many of the prospective players here are fans of dialogue, character interaction, and the game as a vehicle for producing an interesting story.

On the other hand, part of the history and nature of D&D is rolling dice to determine winners and losers in combat -- noble barbarians fighting an evil dragon, and you get to BE a barbarian! And you could argue that by making the combat sequences the most important part of the game, as well as the most character-choice driven, the action becomes more engaging than in any movie, even Rocky. (Although a good soundtrack counts for a LOT.)

However, I think that the detailed combat in D&D doesn't suit the blog format very well (because the time slowdown becomes acute, because you lose the fun of rolling dice, because for all that player control, most rounds boil down to either "I hit him again" or "I run away",...) Also, it's virtually impossible to stick to the round-by-round system and give players the freedom of choice they deserve without them all having a copy of the Players Handbook, which is way outside my "you don't have to know the rules" policy.

So there are really several issues. First, what should the balance be between dialogue/story, puzzles and other "nonthreatening" challenges, and combat? Like I said, my impression is that lots of people would like to have their characters make interesting decisions and interact with each other and the world around them, and spending months resolving a fight with a bunch of orcs would be a drag.

Second, how will dialogue work in an online format? Can we make it work better than serial monologues?

Third, how will combat work in an online format? Can we streamline it so it doesn't take forever, while still keeping it player-driven?

Note that I said "online format" and not "blog". I don't think we need to limit ourselves to blogs, and if it's feasible to use something like openrpg, or less exotically, an IRC or other chat method for dialogue, then I'm all for trying it out. Live-action dialogue faces the issue of different time zones, but I think it might work some of the time.

Alternatively, a sort of retroactive editing is possible: one person sends what they guess will be their side of the conversation, the second person intersperses comments where they would, and the first person then revises their side so it looks nice. (I'm completely borrowing this idea from Dr. Strangelove). That could give satisfactory results.

A point worth mentioning is that, although a lot of dialogue will be with NPCs, the DM as adjudicator is unnecessary for dialogue. Two or more players can chat in character any way they like, whether I'm aware of it or not. (That two or more players can chat out of character any way they like should be obvious.)

For streamlining combat, I'm all for people describing their combat plan in exciting detail, and then offering some idea of when they'll want to re-evaluate. For example:

Trinffi, Slayer of Vampires: I slide under the table and kick the filthy Uruk in the groin. Then I jump over him, split-kicking his two buddies. A couple of deft chops later to clean up, and I expect to be surrounded by unconscious grunts.

If any of them manage to lay a hand on me, I'll be faced with the sickening thought that these guys may be more dangerous than they look, and I'll backflip out of there, kicking one of them in the chops as I go.

For a high enough level character, that's one D&D combat round, but to a first level character, the exact same description is good for about 3 or 4 rounds, and it makes clear that if the character gets hit even once, they'll withdraw out of harm's way. It's also possible to have a "standing order" that for any combat, your character is by default willing to stand and fight until they get, for example, three likely hits away from death.

If I get posts like that regularly, many a combat could be resolved in one day.

Click here to return to Fantasy - and not the X-rated kind home page