Café de Nuit

The discussion in the Game of Thrones thread prompted me to share some thoughts with you about making combat more realistic/fun.

The armors offer DR: Instead of AC bonus, the armors offer DR. -- Characters get AC from class.
- all characters with +1 or more base attack bonus, can take a penalty to attack rolls and apply it as a bonus to damage rolls, like power attack. However, two-handed weapons don't give 2xpenalty as a bonus to damage! Just a 1-to-1.
- Power attack lets a character with a 2-H weapon deal 2xpenalty damage, or a single (penalty+1) damage with one handed weapons.

Examples: without the Power attack a fighter with a greatsword can take a -2 to hit roll and get a +2 to damage roll.
With the power attack feat it goes to -2 to hit, +4 to damage
With a longsword without the PA feat it is -2 to hit, +2 to damage
With a longsword and the PA feat it is -2 to hit, +3 to damage

The shields block:
No AC bonus. However, you get a free block action.
- When a char holding a shield is attacked, he rolls 1d20+block bonus+shield block bonus against the attacker's hit roll.
- Characters get block bonus depending on class.
- Shield block bonus depends on size.
- Shields used to block . . . get damaged.
- Shields get more hit points. They can be iron, wooden and reinforced wood. Not 5 hp as they are tougher than the average plank.
wooden buckler has 10 hp etc. Yes, now you have an even better reason to have metal shields instead of wooden.
- Shields that lose all their hit points are rendered useless.
- You can opt to block more than one attacker but all your blocks take a culmulative -4 per attacker.

Example: bandit X attacks guard Y and Y carries a shield.
X rolls attack roll and gets a modified 18.
Y rolls block and gets a modified 21. Y blocks and the shield gets the damage.

Class freedom: Less class abilities, more feats.

No XP from killing:
- You get no XP for killing monsters at random.
- You get XP by overcoming significant challenges in your quests either skills, combat etc.
- You get XP by learning something important for your character. A wizard when he learns a new spell or a casting technique, a fighter by learning fighting techniques or just about everyone by learning that his "father" is actually an assassin that killed his actual parents and then felt sorry for the orphan and adopted it and raised it as his own child.
- You get XP by fulfilling important goals for your character. You can save the kingdom from disaster, but if your character isn't motivated by that and only does it to catch the princess's beautiful eyes, he doesn't get XP at the end of the adventure.
However, he does gain a lot of XP when he finally gains the princess attention and even more when they get married.

That's for now.
Awaiting your opinion.

I have read your posts alhoon and here is my opinion:

Well, the armour as DR thing has been used by Star Wars RPG and Call of Cthulhu and a few others. It can work, but in Ravenloft if you want to maintain a fearful atmosphere, there are too many numbers to keep it that way.

The power attack thing would probably get annoying after a while.

The blocking thing; this just sounds like the option of rolling AC for every attack instead of just taking the ten that is normally done. Also you are giving people more factors to deal with. I think it overcomplicates things when AC could work just as well. You could do what I do and that is say you have a character with an AC 21 (+8 full plate, +1 dex, +2 large steel shield). If the person attacking him rolls an attack and gets 19 or 20 total (not nat) then you could have the shield take it because those would represent the +2 shield bonus.

As for eliminating class abilities, class abilities are what makes the classes distinct and unique. If you replace these with feats, you just have a bunch of fighters instead of different classes.

I disagree with the no XP for killing monsters because presumably you would learn something even from killing the monster (like where the brain is in an ogre). I know that my players would rebel against me if I wanted to use this rule, which I don't. Also, the fact of only giving the character experience for doing things you want them to (i.e. the princess thing) seems very close-minded and wouldn't give the characters a lot of freedom.

Nice arguments. I enjoy that!

Stygian Inquirer wrote:I have read your posts alhoon and here is my opinion:

Well, the armour as DR thing has been used by Star Wars RPG and Call of Cthulhu and a few others. It can work, but in Ravenloft if you want to maintain a fearful atmosphere, there are too many numbers to keep it that way.

Good Point!
A clarification: I wasn't talking about Ravenloft for this reason. That's why it is in the RP games and not the general noticeboard.

I was talking about more realistic combat rules that work when the players enjoy melee combat. They are rules to give more options in a hack & slash game.. Like the Conan D20 game.
I don't particularly enjoy hack and slash, so I don't use these rules in my own games . However if I ever run a campaign centered on fighters cutting down enemies, I would use these rules.

Stygian Inquirer wrote: The power attack thing would probably get annoying after a while.

The blocking thing; this just sounds like the option of rolling AC for every attack instead of just taking the ten that is normally done. Also you are giving people more factors to deal with. I think it overcomplicates things when AC could work just as well. You could do what I do and that is say you have a character with an AC 21 (+8 full plate, +1 dex, +2 large steel shield). If the person attacking him rolls an attack and gets 19 or 20 total (not nat) then you could have the shield take it because those would represent the +2 shield bonus.

about Power attack: Why? Is just like giving the PCs a free feat. And if you ever use DR instead of armor bonus (or the Un Arcana option of 1/2 AC and 1/2 DR) Power attack becomes invaluable.

about the block/ defend rolls: When the game is evolved around melee combat you need some complication. Trust me, in the few D20 Conan games I have played, if it wasn't for these rules upon rules, the battles would have been boring. Especially the combat manuvers were very nice addition the Conan D20 put in the game.

Also it feels more logical to me for shield to block based on skill and number of attackers rather than based on size only.
The problem is that this particular rule hasn't been in ANY D20 game I have seen so far! ! ! So I can't check a forum or review to see how people that tested it think on it.

Stygian Inquirer wrote: As for eliminating class abilities, class abilities are what makes the classes distinct and unique. If you replace these with feats, you just have a bunch of fighters instead of different classes.

No and yes.
Examples: Bardic knoweledge: Feat with some knowledge prerequisites and intelligence. And the name changes as well.
Favorite enemy: Feat
Familiar: Feat
Turn undead: Feat with alignment, deity and divine spellcasting prerequisites.
Rebuke undead:Feat with alignment, deity and divine spellcasting prerequisites.
Smite evil: Feat with alignment prerequisites and possible divine spellcasting ability prerequisites.
Sneak attack: Feat with Hide, Move silently and dex prerequisites
Evasion: Feat with Reflex prerequisite
...

Each "class" gets a bonus feat list.

So I can have a 3rd level mage without a familiar, that his background of knowledge and study is depicted by his ability to know many-many things as if he had bardic knowledge.

I can have a 3rd level cleric that protects his herd from undead and evil outsiders as he has been trained to fight them better and more effectively (favorite enemy undead, smite evil).

I can have a 3rd level cleric that since he is following a neutral religion can... decide if he will turn or rebuke the ghoul he meets.

Stygian Inquirer wrote: I disagree with the no XP for killing monsters because presumably you would learn something even from killing the monster (like where the brain is in an ogre). I know that my players would rebel against me if I wanted to use this rule, which I don't. Also, the fact of only giving the character experience for doing things you want them to (i.e. the princess thing) seems very close-minded and wouldn't give the characters a lot of freedom.

Not at all.
If you learn where the ogre's brain is . . . you learn something so you get some XP.
If the ogre puts up a good fight, you learn to better defend yourself so you learn something so you get some XP.
If you kill 25 ogres in 2 months and have vivisected 10 of them and you are 7th level, you learn nothing. According to the DMG you should get XP even by killing an ogre with three other 3 9th level friends .
Woo! ! ! The wizard blasted it with a fireball and the rogue sneak-attacked and killed it. You are the fighter, you had time just to take out your sword and . . . watch it die. Still, you get XP.

Also...

Stygian Inquirer wrote: Also, the fact of only giving the character experience for doing things you want them to (i.e. the princess thing) seems very close-minded and wouldn't give the characters a lot of freedom.

You got that one wrong...
I didn't suggest the DM to award XP if the PCs accomplish things that the DM wants them to.

I suggested the DM to award XP if the PCs accomplish things that THEY want to do.

I mean, if you the DM want them to save the kingdom, and they just care for winning over the princess's heart... then they should know before hand that they should ditch your adventure and try to win the princess's heart.

I actually use this rule. It gives the players incredible freedom but it can be very frustrating for the DM. So before any DM uses this rule:
Be sure that you know what motivates the PCs in your group! ! ! I have spent many hours preparing adventures only to find that the PCs actually wanted something else:
To build a tower for example... so since they could get enough loot from raiding 3 bandit camps instead of finishing the >insert dungeon name here< and still get the same XP, they took the logical, easy and far less dangerous way.

Interesting Rules Alhoon, Here's my Input (pardon if its long)

Armor As Damage Reduction: This system makes sense, and brings some element of reality to game play. On that note, making game play more realistic, nine times out of ten, directs it away from a fantasy campaign and towards something darker (something a good portion of RL GM's do). May it be noted that this isn't always the case.

Using Armor as damage reduction, as Stygian put, complicates game play, and therefore might distract players from 'role' playing and cause them to be bent upon 'roll' playing. On this note, the use of this rule would depend on the players. Some players would adjust to this rule way, and game play would move smoothily. Some will take this as an opportunity to 'Diablo 2' their character, and get hung up on character statistics over roleplaying. Between both Stygian's Campaigns and my own campaigns, I've seen both types of players in RL. This would be a judgment call on the GM's part.

New Rules for Experience:
The problem with the experience table in the Dungeon Master's Guide is that it is designed for a Fantasy campaign. In a fantasy campaign, a party will face easily 13 encounters for every campaign, since every encounter is most likely nothing more than a bunch of no-brained orcs who require no thought process to kill.

In Ravenloft, battles mean something. You do get 'random encounters' (their frequency depending on the GM), but if RL had the same frequency of encounters as Forgotten Realms or Grey Hawk, the players would be making new characters at least once a session. This is why using the regular Exp table can sometimes get akward, and players will either not get levels for rediculous amounts of time, or shoot up 3-5 levels at once.

My guess, Alhoon, was that when you designed this style of doing Exp, you were looking for a way to pace Exp better in a better way.

If you're doing a tailored form of Exp, such as the one you have put forth alhoon, take one thing in consideration: at what level are the players going to be when you end the campaign? Then look at your estimated number of sessions before that campaign ends. If you have 30 sessions, and you have a nasty CR 15 encounter at the end, maybe it would be best for the players to level at an average of one per three or four sessions (since making the party level 15 would perhaps make that CR 15 a bit too easy).

The advantage behind your system, as is the advantage with any tailored exp system, is that pacing with exp becomes much easier. There is one key disadvantage, however. Whether or not you are doing so, the players will still feel limited by the GM. If you are looking to make a fairly linear campaign, this system would work. However, for something multi or open ended, this system would not work. It would give the feeling that its either 'The GM's way or the High Way', and if that is what you are looking for, fine. If you want something that is open for randomness, it wouldn't work. Once again, the answer to this question is reliant on the attitude of the players. Do they want something Linear, Multi-ended, or Open ended?

Undead Cabbage wrote:
The advantage behind your system, as is the advantage with any tailored exp system, is that pacing with exp becomes much easier. There is one key disadvantage, however. Whether or not you are doing so, the players will still feel limited by the GM. If you are looking to make a fairly linear campaign, this system would work. However, for something multi or open ended, this system would not work. It would give the feeling that its either 'The GM's way or the High Way', and if that is what you are looking for, fine. If you want something that is open for randomness, it wouldn't work. Once again, the answer to this question is reliant on the attitude of the players. Do they want something Linear, Multi-ended, or Open ended?

I have indeed heard lots of complains about this system . The Players feel cheated when they want say 125 XP to make an item and they can't "go out and kill something" to get the XP they want. As if XPoints are fruits and they can go and harvest some...
Most of the time when it is about a few hundred XP they don't ask for a short adventure, they don't try to learn something easy, they don't try to promote their characters' goals or do something that motivates their characters.
No.

The wizard takes his 8th level buddies and they go around in the country to kill a brown bear or... 3-4 wolves. As if such powerful characters would leave the comfort of their homes, inns or even manor to hunt a bear just for sport!
While some people like to hunt for sport, my PCs are not bored and pampered aristocrats that want a bit of excitement... They have enough excitement.

If following the bad guy I throw at them and only hunting random animals in the mean time isn't not linear, I don't know what it is.
But still... The Players complain. They want linearity. They demand to kill things at random for XP.

Sometimes I use this XP rule, sometimes not. It depends how much the players complain. After all, I'm not a tyrant.

The Players feel cheated when they want say 125 XP to make an item and they can't "go out and kill something" to get the XP they want. As if XPoints are fruits and they can go and harvest some...

See, there's a good way to deal with power hunger when it comes to players. Basically "Do what the Dark Powers would do."

If the players want to go randomly kill a bear for exp, fine. Of course, accidents happen when this bear reverts into a hyrbid form, and simply heals off any damage they do that isn't dealt with a cold iron weapon . A couple of 'accidents' will surely wisen them up, without being a tyrant (since you technically gave them what they wanted).

'Be Careful What you wish for' as they say. Power hungry players often like to trap the GM. Rather than cut than cut them off completely, let them think they're getting what they want. Only latter should they realize that what they get (like everything else in Ravenloft) is a corrupt, ironic perversion of what they want.

I have done than a couple of times UC... but you can't turn any bear-hunting expedition to an adventure. The PCs would ask themselves "Hey, everyone that hunts bears stambles upon some CR 8-9 horror? If yes, then why there are still hunters out there?"

Even 1/10 chance is unrealistically much and that's what I use. Still it doesn't work.
(PS the PCs don't actually have such great problem to go for 125 XP and stumble upon a worthy foe.)

Not to mention that It takes time to create an 8th level werebear. I keep some monsters ready just in case, but they aren't enough.
PS2. It is usually some Shadow fey or some walking dead that I throw up. Now I plan to start throwing mist creatures too.
(Check the Teri in QtR 12 and you'll see what I mean about ready to use shadow fey)

Hmm. Here's an approach to the armor similar to the DR approach that might be easier...

Treat armor as an object, with hardness and HP. If an attack surpasses the hardness, the damage gets applied to the armor; a critical hit bypasses the armor and hits the body, as does bonus sneak attack damage by a rogue.

This makes the craft: armorsmith skill much more useful, if not vital for fighters. It also makes masterwork armor (with extra hp) more valuable, and steadily bleeds the PCs of cash (as they buy new armor). Rogues become stronger this way, too, and low-level characters actually gain some survivablility.

Dex becomes much more valuable this way; so do the Expertise and Dodge feats. You might not need to generate Ac bonuses by level for characters if PCs figure out that using these feats - especially Expertise - is the way to go. Fighters can generate the high to-hit bonuses that make this feat sing. An Improved Expertise feat that removes the +5 cap on the AC bonus would be big for high-level fighters. Rogues could very well give fighters a run for their moeny as damage dealers in a game, but fighters still have the edge in raw hp and staying power in a long fight.

What kind of protection do magic items generate if there are no armor bonuses per se? Maybe "artifical", weightless armor that regenerates every day? Luck penalties for attackers?

Shields could be treated the same way, with hardness and hp. Shields could provide cover instead of an attack bonus or block bonus. Roll a d10 with the d20 for any attack; if the cover isn't exceeded, the attack is applied to the shield and not the target. Shields would get damaged a lot this way, but they become almost mandantory for a serious fighter - as they should be! Any SCA fighter will attest that using a shield is almost mandantory in mideval combat on a one-on-one fight.

As for XP... I just award my PCs an extra level every other game. And I update the character sheets. It makes it easy on my d20 novices, and I can do sneaky things (like give my lycanthropic aristocrat barbarian levels, or slowly reduce my cursed medium's Constitution... heh.)

Yes, but what would be the hardness of the armors? Since combat has always been about "finding the weakest link" a chain mail and a chain shirt cannot have the same hardness...

And since iron has hardness 10, plate armor and full plate become very powerful that way.

I would go with Unearthed arcana proposed system in a mix with yours.
AC/2 as hardness and AC/2 as armor bonus.
For example, plate armor (AC 7 originally) has Armor bonus 3, hardness 4.

If an attack hits, it does damage to both the armor and the man wearing it.

Hmm. Sounds about right. (Great, another reason to blow cash on a $30 book... ah well.)

I thought about the "damages both the armor and its wearer" idea as I was driving from Georgia to Ohio this morning. (We started the trip yesterday.) I did notice, skimming through the 3.5 PHB, that there's no notes on how to repair an item using the Craft skill, or how much it costs. This might yet prove urgent, as PCs in my Ravenloft game are finding piece of DaVinci technology modelled on the Gnome Artificer devices from Magic of Faerun. Brass dents easily...

Still need to answer the question of what magical "armors" like the Bracers of Armor or Amulet of Natural Armor provide...

Irving the Meek wrote:Hmm. Sounds about right. (Great, another reason to blow cash on a $30 book... ah well.)

I did notice, skimming through the 3.5 PHB, that there's no notes on how to repair an item using the Craft skill, or how much it costs.

Which book you're refering to? Unearthed Arcana has the 1/2 armor 1/2 damage reduction book. The rules about damaging wearer and armor aren't published anywhere I know of. They are out of my mind, based on the thread.

There are rules for repairing:
1/2 cost of new item cost. It takes time, as given in the craft rules.

If you decide to repair an item before it is broken, I would say that cost/time takes proportionally less time.
i.e. To fix your chain shirt after it has lost 70% of its hit points it would take: 1/2 * 100 *70% = 35 gold pieces.

Yurk. Can't say as I like that approach to repairs, alhoon.

If my 30 hp chain shirt has taken 12 points of damage, how much will it cost to repair? Answer: If any game rule can't be answered without use of a calculator, I don't use it.

I think a better approach, at least in terms of a system with degradable armor, is to assign a gp per hp repair cost and leave it at that. Maybe a set cost for each type of armor, but it would be just as easy to assign a cost for light, medium, and heavy armor. (And possibly a DR for each repair - not something that needs to be rolled, but it permits you to assign a minimum Craft skill in order to affect repairs. It's easier to repair leather armor than full plate.)

It's a slow, slow day at my mother in law's house. Maybe I'll dig out my PHB from the car and throw together some numbers on these armors just to give us something concrete to discuss.

Feel free to use whatever you like.
But IMO, if a rule can't be answered without looking a table I don't use it
OK that's a blatant lie, by I support realism even if it needs a calculator. I don't find it all that hard. A player would decide to repair his armor at max once after every combat. On average, it will be once after every two-or three battles. Not that time consuming.

BTW... I won't use this rule because the book-keeping of it is too much IMO. If you have to keep a record how much HP the armor of every player in total and how much damage it has taken with each blow it becomes tiresome.

Well, if you're not using this rule, and I'm not using this rule... for mercy's sake, we must be bored silly over Christmas break!

I propose it for academic reasons.
You or I may not use this rule, but I would experiment with it if I was given the chance.