Sources of Tactical Depth

Username17 · Post by **Username17** » Mon Mar 14, 2011 5:04 pm

There are lots of ways to add tactical depth to a game. There's the resource management system (which determines what you can and can't do on any given turn), there's the RPS system (which determines what is good or bad in a specific situation), there's the breadth of tactical problems the game produces (which incentivize different things with different enemies and goals). Most RPGs use some combination of those, and even multiple levels of each.

But to really understand what tactical depth is, it is useful mostly to understand what happens when depth goes away.

Defaulting
"I waste him with my crossbow!"

Defaulting is when the player falls back to a rote action again and again. They may do this because it is better than other actions, or because the specific action they choose is essentially irrelevant and thus falling to familiar actions is something that they "may as well" do. But Defaulting can also occur when the amount of available choices overwhelms the player or when the risks (or perceived risks) of using abilities frighten the player into a repetitive conservatism. Defaulting is also an expectable result from players having insufficient information to make an informed choice (which is functionally similar to a situation where it doesn't make much difference what choice the player makes).

Scripting
"Up, Up, Up, B."

A script is a series of actions taken in a sequence that is used over and over again. Some scripts are very short, and others are complex. But after seeing the script run a few times, it stops being interesting. Scripting is basically the same thing as defaulting, but it plays out over more than one action. It comes into being usually because of resource management systems such as charges and cool-down producing an optimal ability ordering, but it can also happen when the abilities themselves have progressional synergies that make for an optimal ordering. Scripting is often harder to shake than Defaulting, since it can take quite a while to develop an optimal script, making players unwilling or unable to make a new one on the fly.

Top Decking
"Draw a card. Play that card."

Top Decking is when the "option" you use each turn is not really an option at all. This can be either because there are literally no other options or because conditional bonuses for one ability make all the other options effectively not exist. The obvious case is when the resource management system is only giving you the one option (common in charge up and cool down systems), but the situation is effectively identical if the modifiers push one choice to be sufficiently obvious that one choice is the best. Top Decking can actually be as interesting to watch as a scenario with genuine depth, but there's no need for the player to actually make choices or interact with the game - the player could go on a food run and the character could get played in their absence with equal skill.

-Username17

Lago PARANOIA · Post by **Lago PARANOIA** » Mon Mar 14, 2011 5:39 pm

Knot Cutting
Instead of fighting the drow hordes, I cause a cave-in and use Word of Recall on Contingency to save my own ass. Sucks to be you guys.

Knot cutting happens when someone takes an option outside of the expected array you hand a player to solve the problem. This is a TTRPG specific 'problem', because only TTRPGs will even let you entertain solutions outside of the expected minigame. Because knot cutting tends to be very disruptive and counter-genre, most players only choose this option because they really don't want to interact with your system--either because they think it'll lead them to failure or they don't like it for some reason.

While this sounds really cool and badass and at first blush seems to be something you want to encourage, several problems crop up:

1) Knot-cutting is really time-consuming if players are actually trying to resort to it as a tactic as opposed to it being a flash of inspiration. Expect a lot of questions to MC and 'hmm'ing.

2) Knot cutting can be very disruptive to team dynamics. While it is quite possible for a group to team up to come with an alternate resolution, oftentimes it involves someone stealing the spotlight to themselves. And since a certain degree of smarts and rules mastery is required to do this, it tends to be the same person. If the alternate story is cool enough the group will forgive the plot-hijacking, but only if it's occasional rather than a go-to tactic, otherwise people will feel cheated in the same way as watching the wizard regularly blow apart encounters with one spell.

3) Knot cutting actually becomes very irritating if used more than occasionally. People like reading stories about heroes who used their wits rather than brawn to overcome impossible odds, but if they do that for several fights in a row the audience starts to feel cheated and the hero looks like a wuss.

It's best kept to a once-in-a-blue-moon thing. If it happens more than once or twice in a campaign, you should strongly suspect that something is wrong with the system or how you constructed the adventure because people are deliberately refusing to play the game as intended.

Dean · Post by **Dean** » Mon Mar 14, 2011 9:17 pm

I cannot however think of a way to make a system resistant to Knot-Cutting without making it inherently suck. I mean 4E seems pretty knot cutting resistance but that's just because there's no rules for anything I want to do outside of the incredibly small constraining box.

Daztur · Post by **Daztur** » Mon Mar 14, 2011 9:21 pm

I like knot cutting

If it works it makes the players feel smart and awesome and if it doesn't there's all sorts of fun complications you can add in.

For me: A Bonus To What I Was Going to Do Anyway. This is some sort of conditional bonus that is small enough that it won't affect player behavior in nearly any circumstance but has to be tracked anyway (get a +1 when skipping on Tuesdays or whatever). In doing so, it adds complication to the game but doesn't add any real tactical depth. When these little bonuses accumulate they get very annoying.

Ice9 · Post by **Ice9** » Mon Mar 14, 2011 9:26 pm

1) Knot-cutting is really time-consuming if players are actually trying to resort to it as a tactic as opposed to it being a flash of inspiration. Expect a lot of questions to MC and 'hmm'ing.

Not sure I agree on this. If Knot Cutting is being done for actual benefit, not just the hell of it, then you're probably skipping a large battle or similarly time consuming situation. 5-10 minutes figuring out the volume of the cavern may be slower than ideal, but it's still faster than a big combat (or for that matter, most combats).

3) Knot cutting actually becomes very irritating if used more than occasionally. People like reading stories about heroes who used their wits rather than brawn to overcome impossible odds, but if they do that for several fights in a row the audience starts to feel cheated and the hero looks like a wuss.

I'd say this depends on the group. I mean, planning a heist in great detail so that you can sneak in, grab the goods, and sneak out before anyone even realizes what happened could be considered excessive Knot Cutting to a "kick in the door" type of group ... but it's core gameplay in Shadowrun.

Daztur · Post by **Daztur** » Mon Mar 14, 2011 9:31 pm

Another idea for knot cutting, in order to make it less Magical Tea Party, make sure that it can be clearly adjudicated. For example using something like wall of stone to seal off a tunnel is pretty cut and dried but having spells with more nebulous effects where it's not clear to the players exactly what will happen when it's cast are not so good.

Another one: One Trick Ponyism. A specialized option is presented in the book that is usually worse than the default option that only becomes good if a lot of character-building resources are dedicated to it, at which point it becomes the new default option that the character does over and over since he dedicated so many options to it that he can't do anything else well. This is especially bad if this One Trick Pony option has a very specific and narrow effect. Example: virtually every fighter in vanilla 3.5ed who had half a brain during when selecting feats.

Dominicius · Post by **Dominicius** » Mon Mar 14, 2011 10:24 pm

Honestly, I don't even feel like tactical depth is even all that important. I would much rather prefer a game to have strategic depth where a battle is already decided 80% of the time simply based on preparation.

Sashi · Post by **Sashi** » Tue Mar 15, 2011 1:21 am

Dominicius wrote:Honestly, I don't even feel like tactical depth is even all that important. I would much rather prefer a game to have strategic depth where a battle is already decided 80% of the time simply based on preparation.

Isn't this ... every battle everywhere? Good Intel + Prep Time = win?

K · Post by K » Tue Mar 15, 2011 1:36 am

deanruel87 wrote:I cannot however think of a way to make a system resistant to Knot-Cutting without making it inherently suck. I mean 4E seems pretty knot cutting resistance but that's just because there's no rules for anything I want to do outside of the incredibly small constraining box.

The example for me is always doors.

In 3e, doors are specifically given HPs and there are mechanics for do damage to objects that tie into types of damage a person can do. This is why in 3e, you can just blow a door open with a lightning bolt and not pick the DC 50 lock.

Solving the meta-problem of "getting past this lock" with a Knot-Cutting solution is going to be inherently impossible to balance, but it will always be more satisfying to most players.

TheFlatline · Post by **TheFlatline** » Tue Mar 15, 2011 7:24 am

Dominicius wrote:Honestly, I don't even feel like tactical depth is even all that important. I would much rather prefer a game to have strategic depth where a battle is already decided 80% of the time simply based on preparation.

Your operational theater wargames are waiting over at BoardGameGeek.com

Have fun!

Otherwise you're basically saying that you prefer making character builds over actually playing them. Which is fine, but it's not exactly an RPG.

Caedrus · Post by **Caedrus** » Sun Mar 27, 2011 8:59 am

Not only is knot-cutting satisfying to many players, but it's also a type of fun that videogames just can't effectively compete at when compared to pen and paper roleplaying games.

If you ask me, that means that's a gameplay feature that pen and paper games should be playing up. They're not going to outcompete videogames by aping their strong points. They ought to emphasize what makes them unique and able to offer something more than what people are already getting through the relatively easy entry to the videogame hobby.

Or to put it another way, it's a kind of fun that they're not getting by just sitting down and playing Smash Bros instead.

icyshadowlord · Post by **icyshadowlord** » Sun Mar 27, 2011 9:09 am

Caedrus wrote:Not only is knot-cutting satisfying to many players, but it's also a type of fun that videogames just can't effectively compete at when compared to pen and paper roleplaying games.

If you ask me, that means that's a gameplay feature that pen and paper games should be playing up. They're not going to outcompete videogames by aping their strong points. They ought to emphasize what makes them unique and able to offer something more than what people are already getting through the relatively easy entry to the videogame hobby.

Or to put it another way, it's a kind of fun that they're not getting by just sitting down and playing Smash Bros instead.

This reminded me of the most funny case of knot-cutting we ever had in a GURPS game. Our team was supposed to meet up with a crime lord in the local night club, and the GM was waiting to see us just try to sneak in with our weapons hidden and solve it with a nice friendly chat before opening fire on the bastard.

But instead, we sent one guy in with a radio phone and an idea to signal us with a password. Once he said the words "I guess I got nothing...just like last Christmas", our guys RAMMED INTO THE CLUB WITH A CAR and opened fire on everyone there. That outcome was FAR more fun than what would have been a plain encounter if you ask me.

K · Post by K » Sun Mar 27, 2011 9:58 am

Caedrus wrote:Not only is knot-cutting satisfying to many players, but it's also a type of fun that videogames just can't effectively compete at when compared to pen and paper roleplaying games.

If you ask me, that means that's a gameplay feature that pen and paper games should be playing up. They're not going to outcompete videogames by aping their strong points. They ought to emphasize what makes them unique and able to offer something more than what people are already getting through the relatively easy entry to the videogame hobby.

Or to put it another way, it's a kind of fun that they're not getting by just sitting down and playing Smash Bros instead.

I agree with all of that.

Swordslinger · Post by **Swordslinger** » Sun Mar 27, 2011 4:37 pm

True knot-cutting is not a good thing. RPGs are about telling a good story, and knot-cuts make for terrible stories. Imagine how you'd feel having paid for a ticket to Lord of the Rings only to have the movie end in 20 minutes because Gandalf flew the ring in on giant eagle back or if Gimli had just smashed it with his axe. You'd have felt ripped off and disappointed.

Finishing a D&D adventure by bypassing the entire thing is equally disappointing. The game session ends far earlier than expected, the DM's work was for nothing and most of the group is left dissatisfied. Yeah, maybe there's that one guy in your group who takes pleasure in ruining everyone's night. But fuck him.

Knot-cutting should really be a feature left for video games. Nobody's fun is ruined if you happened to use a bunch of warp zones to skip to the end of Super Mario Bros. You're only cheating yourself by missing out on 80% of the game and nobody will care. There's plenty of ways to knot-cut in video games. Warp to the last level, make yourself invincible, skip right to the ending cinematic... knock yourself out. It's better to do that than ruin a bunch of other people's enjoyment.

virgil · Post by **virgil** » Sun Mar 27, 2011 4:46 pm

Only if the DM is shortsighted does the session end early. There continues to be a story to tell afterwards, like what do you do with your success, or how other people handle the victory, or something as simple as move onto the next adventure.

Knot-cutting is not a technique for making the DM end the session early. Saying to your DM, "I'm tired and want to call it a night" is the technique for that.

Novembermike · Post by **Novembermike** » Sun Mar 27, 2011 4:51 pm

Any knot cutting that goes: take ambiguous power -> use it for a non-standard effect -> tea party time is bad. This isn't talking about using skills to jump to a ledge instead of fighting or a wall of stone to block off a tunnel, but more like using Silent Image to create a box around someone's head so you have a saveless blind effect or using a bard's +40 diplomacy to convince a town that you're the moon.

Swordslinger · Post by **Swordslinger** » Sun Mar 27, 2011 5:04 pm

virgil wrote:Only if the DM is shortsighted does the session end early. There continues to be a story to tell afterwards, like what do you do with your success, or how other people handle the victory, or something as simple as move onto the next adventure.

All the DMs I've played under don't have the campaign planned more than one adventure in advance. They have jobs and stuff and better things to do than work out contingencies like "What if my PCs decided to skip the whole adventure and want a new one after".

I think the most likely response to that contingency is to tell the player who beat the adventure that he's the new DM, and make a PC. Also let him know that you'll be doing everything possible to knot-cut every single one of his adventures. And if he's okay with you flushing hours of his work down the toilet with cheat tactics, then so be it.

mean_liar · Post by **mean_liar** » Sun Mar 27, 2011 7:01 pm

Goddamn, Swordslinger, that's atrocious. I don't even know if it'd be a cheap shot to remind the folks watching this thread that you also are a big fan of 4e, something that most people decry as having heavy-gauge beams serving for its plot railroad.

I knot-cut all the time, as much as possible. I love it. Its the "emergent gameplay" that makes things so much more gratifying.

However, I mostly run. And I'm skilled enough that I have no problems with PCs knot-cutting. Those moments are the best, most-shining examples of the sort of outright fun that cooperative RPGs should have and strive for. Those are the moments when everyone at the table - including the GM - gives some variation of triumphant yell and aghast stares and those are also the moments that are the most memorable.

GMs should be expected to keep up and players should be expected to push the envelope. Its selling everyone short to expect less.

Novembermike · Post by **Novembermike** » Sun Mar 27, 2011 7:14 pm

mean_liar wrote: I knot-cut all the time, as much as possible. I love it. Its the "emergent gameplay" that makes things so much more gratifying.

There are two problems with knot cutting. First off, it's generally not all that creative. It takes about two seconds to figure out that being invisible or flying over the enemy or teleporting is a smart thing to do and the "creative" things with illusions or whatever tend to be the same trick people did last week. Secondly it's boring after awhile. If you want to make up reasons that your powers let you ignore encounters then just magical tea party it up.

mean_liar · Post by **mean_liar** » Sun Mar 27, 2011 7:30 pm

Novembermike wrote:There are two problems with knot cutting. First off, it's generally not all that creative. It takes about two seconds to figure out that being invisible or flying over the enemy or teleporting is a smart thing to do and the "creative" things with illusions or whatever tend to be the same trick people did last week. Secondly it's boring after awhile.

All I see there are two common problems with shitty GMing and preparation.

If your OMG army is defeated by a simple trick, then your writing and preparation sucks. Seriously. Your intricate adventure for 9th+ level PCs got beat by... invisibility? They've had that trick for 6 levels by then. Teleporting is still new, so hey... get that worked out by 10th level. Anticipate Teleport is cheap and easy.

Blaming players for using common tools at their disposal while your antagonists are a bunch of rubes is a problem with your GMing, not with "knot-cutting". Its not "knot-cutting" to use teleport to teleport, or invisibility to not be seen. GMs have an obligation to write and prepare for a party of something other than 4th graders, unless they actually are 4th graders.

Novembermike · Post by **Novembermike** » Sun Mar 27, 2011 7:39 pm

The problem is that there are two choices. You either let them use their powers and accept that x% of your encounters just aren't going to happen or you start giving things truesight, ranged snares, the ability to bore through stone and whatever else they need to counter the players. Neither of those are particularly fun.

Swordslinger · Post by **Swordslinger** » Sun Mar 27, 2011 7:52 pm

mean_liar wrote: If your OMG army is defeated by a simple trick, then your writing and preparation sucks. Seriously. Your intricate adventure for 9th+ level PCs got beat by... invisibility? They've had that trick for 6 levels by then. Teleporting is still new, so hey... get that worked out by 10th level. Anticipate Teleport is cheap and easy.

Blaming players for using common tools at their disposal while your antagonists are a bunch of rubes is a problem with your GMing, not with "knot-cutting". Its not "knot-cutting" to use teleport to teleport, or invisibility to not be seen. GMs have an obligation to write and prepare for a party of something other than 4th graders, unless they actually are 4th graders.

Okay then.

I challenge you to find me a high level module that's unbreakable without resorting to creating plot device anti-teleport/divination effects. Can you?

K · Post by K » Sun Mar 27, 2011 7:55 pm

Errr, how does people successfully defeating an adventure end the night's session?

I don't know how you play, but there are always more things to do in a session. The DM can add in subplots at will for more fights, more places to explore, and more challenges to face.

I mean, if you bypassed a cave complex to get to the BBEG to kill him, there can be something in his hoard that can spawn a new adventure. Maybe there is a hostage that is more dangerous than the BBEG. Maybe when the BBEG dies, one of his enemies comes after the PCs to claim his loot.

The possibilities are endless. I mean, don't people ever go off-book, even when using published adventures?

I mean, unlike a CRPG, you can't "win" DnD. Your reward for victory is "getting to play more DnD," not the end credits.

Swordslinger · Post by **Swordslinger** » Sun Mar 27, 2011 8:08 pm

K wrote:Errr, how does people successfully defeating an adventure end the night's session?

Because you just finished the adventure way earlier than expected and new adventures take time to come up with. Maybe you've got a DM whose stated out the next 4 adventures, but the majority of us have DMs with actual lives beyond D&D. My DM actually has a family to support and can't spend 8+ hours a week designing multiple adventures.

When the adventure is going in to kill the troll king, then that's the adventure he's got. he's got a map of some caves and stats of various trolls. But yeah, I totally expect him to come up with a new story, a new setting, new adversaries and new treasure on the spot after I blindsided him with some special ability he wasn't prepared for. I'm totally reasonable asking for that and I can maintain a sense of innate superiority when he doesn't invite me back next week.

Novembermike · Post by **Novembermike** » Sun Mar 27, 2011 8:09 pm

If you've just spent $20 on an adventure module and spent an hour or two going through it, adding a few extra things the party wanted in and working some additional hooks in and the wizard bypasses all of it, you are going to be in the state of mind where you want to set up extra content for them?