View Full Version : Some Game Mastering Questions

April 18th, 2011, 16:18
Hey folks, been running some test battles and ran into some questions about how to run a good C&C session in FG... figured maybe some of you would have some ideas.

1) Dead bodies: I have been replacing dead combatants' tokens with 'dead body' tokens, but find that the battle field gets difficult to use pretty quickly. First, it can become hard for FG to tell which figure you're clicking on if somebody stands over a dead body (I would *love* a FG feature to move tokens to a background layer that could be used for dead bodies, battlemat scenery, horses/vehicles, etc.). Also, if the figure is still on the battlefield, it still shows its colored square as taking up space, even though they can be stepped over. I suppose that's easy-enough to ignore...

2) Also related to dead combatants, how do you deal with them in the combat tracker? I find that they are kind-of irritating to have pop up over an over after they are dead (especially when they roll higher Initiative rolls than the living). I have also found that if you delete them from the combat tracker, any effects that update on that combatant no longer update any more.

My current solution is to delete the dead guy's token, the put a big "DEAD" in his name so that it's painfully obvious when the turn for "Orc 12 DEAD" shows up in the chat window that he can just be skipped. I guess "DEAD" could be an effect, too. If I want to take the time, I'll visually scan through the CT to see if the dead guy has any Effects tied to him - if not, then I'll delete him altogether.

How do you guys handle dead guys in combat?

April 10th, 2012, 04:40
lol... some cases we just mouse-scroll the Token upside-down in a dead-Pacman-like Fashion.

I actually have a bunch of Token-stamps that are sized to indicate conditions... though I always end up forgetting to use them. Silly me

April 10th, 2012, 08:56
i change their initiative to 0 and they drop to bottom of list and get skipped as you scroll thru active/living combatants. i also usually change them to invisible (untick eye) and then if they are annoying me i move them out of way...

April 10th, 2012, 12:36
Ooo good tip

i also usually change them to invisible (untick eye) and then if they are annoying me i move them out of wa

Thanks! I think I'll use that one

April 11th, 2012, 01:22
Did this thread really sit around for a year before being answered by Mag? Wow, time flies!

Thanks for the replies, all. I pretty much do what Damned does: set their Init to 0 and delete the token from the battlemat (the CT entry remains there to allow for the issues with effects applied by those combatants. The big problem is that I have to remember to click the next button or else those effects are never updated.

*Sigh* It was yet another excellent update in Sorcerer's unfinished ruleset update: effects were not tied to combatants, but rather the 'causing' combatant's initiative at the time the effect was applied. So in other words, if the Orc shaman with an initiative of 7 put a hold person on your character during his attack, the "Held" effect that the CK applied in the CT would *not* be tied to the Orc shaman, but rather the init value of 7. Then every round, the effect would update when init of 7 was reached, not when the shaman's turn came. That way the 'countdown' of the effect was always consistent, and you could delete people from the CT whenever you wanted without worrying about the whole 'effects' issue.

He also updated the CT so that when you clicked on the 'next' after all combatants had gone, instead of the round automatically incrementing and the next combatant being notified it's their turn (which, since I have everyone roll Inits every round, was usually a mistake that needed explaining), a message would display only to the CK telling him that there were no more combatants this round, and to use the 'new round' button to start a new round (which would then roll automatic inits if necessary, etc.).

Those two features made combat *much* less quirky for me at least... I *really* pine for those features.