Why did it fall out of fashion? And don't tell me squad rules were too tedious to manage, any rules can be streamlined and made more casual, so it's a matter of player/developer preference, not mechanics.
>>97907611unless the point of the game is to have a squad, like warhammer 40k only war, people usually prefer playing as and only controlling one character
>>97907637Have you forgotten about story? The extras in classic stories had two purposes - to show the danger of the situation without murders of the main characters and to create intrigue about who will survive to the end. Having a squad of expendable NPCs is good if you want to do a grimdark campaign with high mortality, but players don't want to make new PCs after every session.
>>97907659and these two points are the reason for squadmates in 40k total warimperial guard are basically every single WW2 movie ever, so having extra red shirts is part of the genre and the canonical lack of armor on guardsmen means you cant realistically make them survive plasma shots, so meatshields to absorb damage gives believable ways to absorb that damagebut that kind of gameplay just isnt what most people are looking for, they generally prefer to focus on just 1 character instead of 1 character and 40 extras to absorb hits for them
>>97907611>And don't tell me squad rules were too tedious to manage
>>97907666But then how do you make a classis story about party of adventurers helping to defend a besieged city? Or any other classic fantasy plot that involves heroes being leaders of oppressed people. And then players complain that the campaigns feels all the same. Maybe it wouldn't be so monotonous if some people hadn't thrown a gigantic layer of classics out the window.
>>97907688>any rules can be streamlined and made more casual
>>97907707you dont need squad mechanics for any of them, or managing large groups of people can be something that only happens on special occasions rather than baked into the system itselfbut generally, people are more comfortable controlling one person at a timeor at most 1 person and 1-2 hirelings who can occasionally help out
>>97907716>https://youtu.be/BtEC3pNEMhYFirst, you don't have to make players to manage squad, just being part of a group is enough. Second - without rules, meaningful interaction is impossible, then the story simply turns into a choose-your-own-adventure book. So, it is not necessary to make PCs commanders, it is enough that they were "heroes leading the charge". And I want to remind you that in most classic stories, such heroes did not think about tactics/logistics/morale and other autistic nonsense that you are obsessed with, all such heroes do is shout "Attack" and run towards the enemy.
>>97907778>, just being part of a group is enoughin that case, you are arguing against nothing because players dont really have a problem having a small group of hirelings or helpful NPCs to chat withlarge groups of people who exist and fade into the background is actually how beginner GMs are told how to handle large battles, where you just describe the chaos of combat around them and the 4 enemies you roll initiative for are just the ones intending to engage youthey are fine with that, people just dont really care for having actual squad mechanics that represent those NPCs being actually part of the battle
>>97907611Streamline the rules all you want, to make the players care about them dying you'll need to have them actually be characters, which is work. Work that isn't inherently necessary for running a game, even a good game, an excellent game. So most GMs will ignore it.
>>97907611Out of fashion? When was it in fashion?
>>97907790I'll repeat myself - without rules PCs won't be able to interact with NPCs during combat or exploration, and then yes, there's no point in having such NPCs. And by the way, according to your logic, we don't need rules for social interaction, why have all these skills checks? Let DM handle NPCs and PCs interaction!
>>97908055then I will repeat myself, people dont want to bother with squad roles and prefer to play as a single person or a single person and a hireling at mostthe GM can handle all other NPC interactions, including whether or not they join combatthere are systems out there that handle squad mechanics for people who are into that thing, but generally people who want to handle a group of NPCs are the minority and they have been since the 80s
>>97907804First - if you can't make players care about NPCs you're either a shitty DM or your players are complete sociopaths and I recommend running away from them. Second, you can use such NPCs as a scarecrow for players, like look how this NPC died, your PC can be next, be carefull. And again, if you can't do this you're a bad DM.
>>97908065Okay, you're autistic, so I'll rephrase - you don't need rules for players to manage the squad, you need rules for the player to interact with the squad so that the interaction doesn't just turn into an interactive novel. Do you understand now?
>>97908085>you don't need rules for players to manage the squadthen the DM can just let them fade to the background or control them directly and the players can focus on just controlling their own characterthis is standard and this is how its always been>you need rules for the player to interact with the squad so that the interaction doesn't just turn into an interactive novelthis doesnt need special rules either, the DM can just control the NPC and the players can interact with those NPCs the same way they do any ottherthis does not need special interactions, its how most games choose to implement NPC followers, just plain old NPCs who the players can influence in-character by just telling them what they want to do>Do you understand now?you dont need special rules to represent squadmates unless you are playing something like 40k only war where replicating the WW2 war movies is the entire point
>>97908071And yet they're still not necessary to running a great game. You're not very good at selling your advice.
>>97907611Why something or other "fell out of fashion" shouldn't matter for your group, the only things that should matter are what pertain to your collective activity of choice.You even acknowledged the inherent modularity of TTRPGs right in your post, for fuck sake.
>>97907659>Have you forgotten about story?Do whatever collaborative story or theater kid shit you and your group want, literally nobody is stopping you.
>>97907707If your players complain, then talk to them and come to a compromise with them.
>>97908135>And yet they're still not necessary to running a great game.I highly doubt it. Well, if by "a great game" you mean a game for a bunch of sociopathic murder hobos then yes, you and the group have found each other. And I have one question - are you already serial killers or not yet?
>>97908103>the DM can just control the NPCAnd you think DM doesn't need any rules? Why do we need rules at all then?>you dont need special rules to represent squadmatesYou need special rules so players don't feel like DM is getting the result out of his ass.
>>97908368A DM doesn't need any rules except Rule 0.Get a GM if you want someone to run a game.
>>97908410
>>97908416It isn't bait, you insufferable faggot, it's literally what pretty much every 5efag will tell you.
>>97908425>it's not bait>an older boy told me to say it
>>97907711The answer remains the same no matter how much you whine.
It's an interesting phenomenon when wargames and skirmishes have campaign options but never add a full RPG options. I understand that the authors are more focused on the wargame, but I don't think adding quests and roleplay is that hard. Instead, the rules are always focused on treating fighters or commanders as pawns rather than characters.
>>97907611Because shit GM's couldn't keeprtheir self insert NPCs from railroading gameplay while overall educational capacity has declined to the extent most kids can't imagine leadership roles and focus on fantasy has shifted to personal exemplification and performance rather than group success. It's part of your mentality as well. After a very short point, streamlining and simplification removes nuance and interplay that is a key part of the social context of NPC/squad play and shifts it towards 'storytelling' which feeds back into the previous problems.
>>97908368What rules do you think are needed, other than the DM having the NPCs statblocks?
>>97908742Campaign rules are already tacked on and poorly tested most of the time.
>>97908901Rules for morale/losses/attacks/formations? Also, I think most ttrpgs sleep on a horde, aka a giant blobe of simple, low-level monsters united in a formation and treaten as a sigle entity. Something like Flame of War. This would allow players to have their Dynasty Warriors fantasy without turning a game into a drag.
>>97909179>Rules for morale/losses/attacks/formations? Does the DM not already have rules for those things for when the PCs are fighting a bunch of goblins?
>>97907611It is in fact a manner of mechanics. Streamlining those rules led to them being abolished because there is only so far you can streamline something like that before you hit a brick wall and can't simplify them any further.People don't want to have to micro-manage 5+ characters each, it's tedious, it slows the pace of gameplay to a miserable crawl in and out of combat, it requires more bookkeeping nobody wants to deal with, it forces the GM to have to balance his combats against a veritable army, and it forces the developer to account for this veritable army while ALSO making sure the game is balanced without it.That aside, even if it was player/developer preference, it's because you already have a party of adventurers. You don't need 30 million glup shittos who add nothing of value to the actual important characters (the PCs) or the narrative that emerges from gameplay. Furthermore, you don't need extras to show the threat of an enemy. There's also the matter of grimderp slop falling out of favor, heroic fantasy taking its place. People are tired of misery in the real world, and want an escape through their hobbies, so they want to see heroes being heroes, none of this 40kuck morally gray slop.
>>97908410DM and GM are interchangeable terms you pepperoni fart-huffing dicksucker.
>>97907611Because squads of expendable NPCs only existed so the DM could funnel characters into a meat grinder dungeon full of traps without any player having to worry that their character would be killed (unless they were stupid, or treated their character as also expendable). Once that kind of dungeon fell out of fashion, squads of expendable NPCs lost their primary reason for existence.
>>97907611>any rules can be streamlined and made more casualSo, why don't you do it then? Post your rules for squad management that are streamlined and casual. I'm not gonna hold my breath.
>>97909268not in 5e>>97911453>there is only so far you can streamline something like that before you hit a brick wall and can't simplify them any further.roll 1d20+player hype vs horde target number.Throw a coin, that's how the fight is going.Use them as a backdrop that doesn't affect anything like they do in videogames.
>>97911514>Use them as a backdrop that doesn't affect anything like they do in videogames.which is already how large scale combat is already handled, so this just goes back to arguing about absolutely nothing
>>97908360Now I don't generally like redshirt mechanics but that's a bit dramatic
>>97907611The main issue is the workload.It's a theatre. You can write and encounter many beings, put them into character sheets or some dusty attic. But retaining them in a game? They must have a gameplay function, or a key asset to the storyline, lest they ne forgotten.
>>97908761Hmm, I've certainly used demigods and avatars to solve some problems for the party. However, said characters would often fall to perils that terrified the party and coerced risky and less cohesive gameplans from them. So even a shit move can be fixed.
>>97911572Reread all posts, anon claims that it's normal when players aren't interested in NPCs at all and play only for the sake of combat.
>>97911668>players dont want to engage with squad mechanics and control only their own character>therefore they dont care about NPCsthe premise does not match the conclusionthe premise isnt even true, since players have always been totally fine with having hirelings or NPC followers, they just dont want to manage them directly
>>97911684>First - if you can't make players care about NPCs you're either a shitty DM or your players are complete sociopaths and I recommend running away from them. Second, you can use such NPCs as a scarecrow for players, like look how this NPC died, your PC can be next, be carefull. And again, if you can't do this you're a bad DM.>And yet they're still not necessary to running a great gameIf anon had pointed out that he was only talking about the squad that would be one thing. But for him, NPCs in general are not necessary "to run a great game". It speaks volumes about the mental state of him and his group.
>>97911668If you have hirelings, they're nameless and expendable mooks by definition
>>97907659What story? We're playing a game.
>>97907707I don't make plots. The players make decisions and I adjudicate as needed.
>>97911514Then there's no need for them to be there.
>>97911719Most people play games with a story, sorry you had to find out this way, but people tend to build sessions around a story structure rather than a bunch of rooms with loot in themRarely a very intricate story, usually as simple as the king wants his shit back and the party is there to help him, but that still counts as a storyEven BX sandboxes like keep on the borderlands have an implied story of the characters wanting to stop the evil forces in the caves of chaos, they arent just thrown in with no direction
>>97911719Even fucking Diablo has a plot, even Doom has a plot, so it's very stupid bait, nogames.
