by Jimmy Mon Nov 16, 2015 8:01 am
Well, one thing that I always found to be annoying was Combat. In a forum environment, combat is a nightmare anyway, but many people seem to forget that Vampire is about Socio-political intrigue instead of how hard you can hit something, or how often you can hit it.
I've explored several options for combat myself, to try and streamline it. The first method I tried was everyone declared their actions, then I went away and performed the combat scene, and posted up a summary at the end of each round. It negated the metagaming risk completely by putting everything under ST control, all reactive rolls etc. were done at once without player input.
That first method worked quite well, but I felt I was robbing my players of the ability to make decisions in the blink of an eye, so to speak.
My second method was to do combat as written in the book. This is where a lot of the arguments happened, mainly due to rules-lawyering by players who didn't want to lose. I can understand that, none of us want to lose...ever, but without the real risk of defeat, you cheapen combat scenes.
So far, I've trialled 3 or 4 different methods of combat scenes, and none of them, with the exception of the first, have given the flavour and detail that I felt the players deserved. That being said, as I already stated, it took control of the PC's away from the individual, but did allow for really good (and quick) combat resolution.
In short, there's no catch-all method to streamlining combat, but I'll happily offer opinions here and there if needed.