I've been thinking about asking my group if they want to take another crack at a modern game.
But...here's where I think I'll run into problems. They're getting used to the huge amounts of options available to them from 4E. At any given time, you have at least 2 combat options, not including the basic attack, which admitedly makes for a bit more flexible action.
But any system I turn to, barring a couple that I'm not sure will accomodate the ideas I have (namely 4E modern variants...), simply won't have options like that available to them.
So I'm wondering: Is there a way to introduce some sort of straight forward mechanic to make even your normal combats a little more interesting? One idea I'm thinking of is taking the stunt die idea from Dragon Age, but I'm not sure how one would translate that into a d20 roll (don't know if I want to change rolls to 3d6, since one of our players has a tendancy to roll high on d6s....), at least I haven't had time to think about it yet.
Any ideas?
Making repeative actions more interesting aka spoiled by 4E
Moderator: Stik
-
Crimson-Kobold
- Peddler
- Posts: 267
Making repeative actions more interesting aka spoiled by 4E
The Kobold gonna kobold.
-
greenknight
- Vagabond
- Posts: 74
All characters in 4e have at least 2 At Will attacks based on their character class. Those two attacks are chosen from a list of at least 4 attacks, each of which has a slightly different effect. The 4 At Will attacks for a Fighter in the 4e PHB1 are:
Cleave (an attack which does damage to the target and one adjacent enemy if it hits)
Reaping Strike (an attack which does some damage even on a miss)
Sure Strike (an attack which has a higher chance of hitting)
Tide of Iron (an attack which pushes the foe away and allows the Fighter to move into that spot)
Later books have expanded the list of available At Wills for a Fighter to choose from.
I think CK wants something like that, although I don't know of anything else that works quite that way.
Cleave (an attack which does damage to the target and one adjacent enemy if it hits)
Reaping Strike (an attack which does some damage even on a miss)
Sure Strike (an attack which has a higher chance of hitting)
Tide of Iron (an attack which pushes the foe away and allows the Fighter to move into that spot)
Later books have expanded the list of available At Wills for a Fighter to choose from.
I think CK wants something like that, although I don't know of anything else that works quite that way.
I'll follow your example Stik and resist the urge to bash all editions of D&D, but...
The lack of combat options is something I've really only noticed in D&D, compared to other systems I've played. I hesitate to say that it's because D&D is more abstract than other systems, because all RPG combat is pretty abstract (excepting my high school group, which would occasionally go "live-action stress release" and somebody would get tackled), but it seems that way to me.
As a player, I tend to get more caught up in combats if I describe my actions with some drama and detail, it's more exciting and gives the imagination a more vivid scene. But D&D combat is very Boolean, very pass/fail. Either the d20 rolls high enough that you hit, or it doesn't. Something I've noticed in systems with dice pools and bell curve probability is that the degree to which you succeed or fail gets incorporated into the story. In D&D, you hit or you don't. In Shadowrun, you can roll poorly and still do damage, roll really well and barely scratch your opponent, and every variation cries out to the imagination to reflexively account for the myriad of variables.
The phenomenon I've noticed in my group (which has played every edition of D&D and 3 out of 4 editions of Shadowrun) is that retelling of D&D combats tend to be about specific wild cards (like terrain, as in "You remembed when we had to fight those @!^#% grimlocks in that $%#@&# chimney cavern?") and Crits and Fumbles. (Admittedly, there are combats that are particularly important for story reasons, but those stand out because they are the exception rather than the rule.) When my group talks about old SR combats, they way we describe them and the way we remember them, if you overheard us, you might think we were talking about a scene from a movie. The retelling is much more dynamic than that of D&D combats.
There are other factors involved (like the battlemat, although we've played both games with and without mats, but there is a tendency with the mat to look at the combat from the top down rather than through the eyes of the character, I think). Part of it might be in SR we tend to emulate action movies whereas in D&D we tend to emulate D&D, if that makes any sense. (I'm pretty tired.) Part of it is in D&D no matter how well you describe your action, the dice will roll what it will roll. The GM might give you a bonus, but the best description in the world won't help you if you roll a "1". (Although I do believe that if you describe something well, you will roll better. It's irrational, but it's one of my gamer superstitions.) In SR, a lot of what you do gives specific bonuses and penalties to your roll or your opponent's roll.
A good example of this is Surprise, which in D&D is all right. You have a slightly better chance to hit if your opponent doesn't get his/her/its DEX, but unless you have a special thief or rogue ability (Sneak Attack, Backstab and so on), you're doing basically the same damage you would if they weren't surprised. In SR, since attack rolls are countered by parries, dodges and Damage Resistances, depriving your opponent of their dodge or combat pool can be devastating, making an attack that might scrape an aware opponent drop a surprised one.
None of this changes my earlier advice though. One of the reasons I like SR is because SR is what I like. If 4e is what's working for you, I'd stick with that. The fluff of any system is pretty adaptable. From playing 4e in a modern setting, I can say that some things that would be high level rituals just get handwaved (Waterbreathing is just SCUBA gear, Telepathy is basically a cell phone, and so on), but beyond that it's mostly cosmetic.
I mean mechanically, you know how 4e works. Why it works that way, the fluff, can pretty much be anything. I've reskinned SR for fantasy games and Weird War games, 1e D&D was reskinned to Wild West and Post-Apocolyptic games, and both SR and 3.5 make for good Star Wars games (although I prefer SR because Jedi are covered under the Adept powers and spells, it models ranged and melee combat well, and there is already cyberware-- and also because I prefer SR. We like what we like.)
This post was longer than I intended.
The lack of combat options is something I've really only noticed in D&D, compared to other systems I've played. I hesitate to say that it's because D&D is more abstract than other systems, because all RPG combat is pretty abstract (excepting my high school group, which would occasionally go "live-action stress release" and somebody would get tackled), but it seems that way to me.
As a player, I tend to get more caught up in combats if I describe my actions with some drama and detail, it's more exciting and gives the imagination a more vivid scene. But D&D combat is very Boolean, very pass/fail. Either the d20 rolls high enough that you hit, or it doesn't. Something I've noticed in systems with dice pools and bell curve probability is that the degree to which you succeed or fail gets incorporated into the story. In D&D, you hit or you don't. In Shadowrun, you can roll poorly and still do damage, roll really well and barely scratch your opponent, and every variation cries out to the imagination to reflexively account for the myriad of variables.
The phenomenon I've noticed in my group (which has played every edition of D&D and 3 out of 4 editions of Shadowrun) is that retelling of D&D combats tend to be about specific wild cards (like terrain, as in "You remembed when we had to fight those @!^#% grimlocks in that $%#@&# chimney cavern?") and Crits and Fumbles. (Admittedly, there are combats that are particularly important for story reasons, but those stand out because they are the exception rather than the rule.) When my group talks about old SR combats, they way we describe them and the way we remember them, if you overheard us, you might think we were talking about a scene from a movie. The retelling is much more dynamic than that of D&D combats.
There are other factors involved (like the battlemat, although we've played both games with and without mats, but there is a tendency with the mat to look at the combat from the top down rather than through the eyes of the character, I think). Part of it might be in SR we tend to emulate action movies whereas in D&D we tend to emulate D&D, if that makes any sense. (I'm pretty tired.) Part of it is in D&D no matter how well you describe your action, the dice will roll what it will roll. The GM might give you a bonus, but the best description in the world won't help you if you roll a "1". (Although I do believe that if you describe something well, you will roll better. It's irrational, but it's one of my gamer superstitions.) In SR, a lot of what you do gives specific bonuses and penalties to your roll or your opponent's roll.
A good example of this is Surprise, which in D&D is all right. You have a slightly better chance to hit if your opponent doesn't get his/her/its DEX, but unless you have a special thief or rogue ability (Sneak Attack, Backstab and so on), you're doing basically the same damage you would if they weren't surprised. In SR, since attack rolls are countered by parries, dodges and Damage Resistances, depriving your opponent of their dodge or combat pool can be devastating, making an attack that might scrape an aware opponent drop a surprised one.
None of this changes my earlier advice though. One of the reasons I like SR is because SR is what I like. If 4e is what's working for you, I'd stick with that. The fluff of any system is pretty adaptable. From playing 4e in a modern setting, I can say that some things that would be high level rituals just get handwaved (Waterbreathing is just SCUBA gear, Telepathy is basically a cell phone, and so on), but beyond that it's mostly cosmetic.
I mean mechanically, you know how 4e works. Why it works that way, the fluff, can pretty much be anything. I've reskinned SR for fantasy games and Weird War games, 1e D&D was reskinned to Wild West and Post-Apocolyptic games, and both SR and 3.5 make for good Star Wars games (although I prefer SR because Jedi are covered under the Adept powers and spells, it models ranged and melee combat well, and there is already cyberware-- and also because I prefer SR. We like what we like.)
This post was longer than I intended.
-
Crimson-Kobold
- Peddler
- Posts: 267
Well, I haven't really run too many 4E. For D&D, I generally prefer to be in the players seat.
As for adapting 4E, eh, I just find it's too tooled for a fantasy setting. What I was looking at was CoC d20, but making the Talents from D20 modern availlable, with a few tweaks (like evasion so it's not such an instant pass for avoiding area damage, might even put a Dex/Reflex save requirement on it)
I like the idea that massive damage is your Con score, and if you go over it, you need to make a save or end up in a dying situation. 4E doesn't have that, and it can have some...rather high damage numbers then I care for in a modern game.
The other reason I want to stick with the older d20 is that I was thinking of a 'monster of the week' sort of campaign, and using d20 gives me a HUGE number of beasties to pull from, be it the Monster Manuals, the Menace Manual, the odd third party manuals out there...
One game that I played a bit back in High School was Heavy Gear. And the combats from that were really exciting since death was really easy if rolls don't go your way. We don't play it due to a particular flaw in it's system: in Combat, Dex is really all you need. A shame, since the setting is pretty cool (even if the art can be...eh at times...)
Part of my problem is that half of my group are heavy World of Warcraft players, and to be successful in that game...you kinda need to super number crunch. Find the best build and so on. And sadly, it's bleeding into our table top games.
But that's another discussion for another time lol...
In 4E, even your most basic attack has a secondary benefit, be it shifting a target, dealing extra damage to a nearby enemy, multi attacks, and so on. This area I think 4E did some things really well. Then it goes off in a weird direction for me lol. But that's another subject.
I think I have an idea on that front. I'll go into detail on my next post to avoid potential tl;dr lol.
As for adapting 4E, eh, I just find it's too tooled for a fantasy setting. What I was looking at was CoC d20, but making the Talents from D20 modern availlable, with a few tweaks (like evasion so it's not such an instant pass for avoiding area damage, might even put a Dex/Reflex save requirement on it)
I like the idea that massive damage is your Con score, and if you go over it, you need to make a save or end up in a dying situation. 4E doesn't have that, and it can have some...rather high damage numbers then I care for in a modern game.
The other reason I want to stick with the older d20 is that I was thinking of a 'monster of the week' sort of campaign, and using d20 gives me a HUGE number of beasties to pull from, be it the Monster Manuals, the Menace Manual, the odd third party manuals out there...
That might be part of it. I would love to give Shadowrun a decent shot, but my group felt there was a distinct issue with, if I remember right, the spell for mind control, which was nearly impossible to avoid, unless we were reading it wrong. Which I think we were, but my guys are dead set against going back to itPhindar wrote:As a player, I tend to get more caught up in combats if I describe my actions with some drama and detail, it's more exciting and gives the imagination a more vivid scene. But D&D combat is very Boolean, very pass/fail. Either the d20 rolls high enough that you hit, or it doesn't. Something I've noticed in systems with dice pools and bell curve probability is that the degree to which you succeed or fail gets incorporated into the story. In D&D, you hit or you don't. In Shadowrun, you can roll poorly and still do damage, roll really well and barely scratch your opponent, and every variation cries out to the imagination to reflexively account for the myriad of variables.
One game that I played a bit back in High School was Heavy Gear. And the combats from that were really exciting since death was really easy if rolls don't go your way. We don't play it due to a particular flaw in it's system: in Combat, Dex is really all you need. A shame, since the setting is pretty cool (even if the art can be...eh at times...)
Part of my problem is that half of my group are heavy World of Warcraft players, and to be successful in that game...you kinda need to super number crunch. Find the best build and so on. And sadly, it's bleeding into our table top games.
But that's another discussion for another time lol...
GK and Rblademaster have it right. In at least d20 games, most attacks are pretty basic. Your roll your attack, you hit or not, roll damage if hit. Things like Power Attack, Trip, Bull Rush, grappling, they make things a little more interesting, but not quite to the scale of 4E. One complaint from one of our players regarding previous Editions was that Martial Classes were typically stuck with "I attack. Here's my roll. I hit? Here's my damage." You can dress it up anyway you want, but that's ultimately is at the core of it.Ismaels-Legacy wrote:You'll have to be more specific, CK. What exactly do you mean by "More combat options than just the standard attack"?
In 4E, even your most basic attack has a secondary benefit, be it shifting a target, dealing extra damage to a nearby enemy, multi attacks, and so on. This area I think 4E did some things really well. Then it goes off in a weird direction for me lol. But that's another subject.
Battlemats are a must for me. Keeps everyone on the same page AND honest. No "Oh crap that's bad...uh..I said I was ten feet....THAT way...yeah.... >.>" incidents.phindar wrote:There are other factors involved (like the battlemat, although we've played both games with and without mats, but there is a tendency with the mat to look at the combat from the top down rather than through the eyes of the character, I think).
Well, my original idea was to find a way to incorporate the stunt system from Dragon Age.greenknight wrote:I think CK wants something like that, although I don't know of anything else that works quite that way.
I think I have an idea on that front. I'll go into detail on my next post to avoid potential tl;dr lol.
The Kobold gonna kobold.
-
Crimson-Kobold
- Peddler
- Posts: 267
The Concept
Ok, to set up, I'll give a run down of how the stunt system works in the DA pnp game for those who haven't looked at my DA topic.
In DA, you roll 3d6, with one of the die a seperate color. This is the "Dragon Die".
Whenever you roll a double, you take the result from the Dragon Die, and you gain that many stunt points for that round, and can use it to modify your action.
There are two types of Stunts. Standard Stunts, which involves all non magic attacks (ranged or melee). Then there is Standard Spell Stunts, which, as one would expect, involves magic attacks.
For Standard Stunts:
Note that there's is currently no limit on skrimish, so you could potentially be able to move yourself or an enemy a lot. Also, aside from Skrimish, you can only activate ONE stunt per round.
So now that I've given you an idea of how it works, here is what I was thinking of. When you roll your attack, an extra d6 is rolled for stunts. This next step radically changes the concept.
The d6 (we'll call it the stunt die) still controls how much stunt points you get. However, what triggers it will be different. If the number on the stunt die can divide the d20 roll, then stunt points are awarded provided the attack hits.
IE: If you roll a 1 on it, you get 1 stunt point no matter what. It of course only leaves you one option, skrimish.
If you roll a 2, you need an even number roll for stunts to be triggered.
If you roll a 3, only d20 rolls of 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, or 18 trigger it.
4 on rolls of 4, 8, 12, 16, 20
5 on 5, 10, 15, 20
And 6 on 6, 12, 18
How does that idea sound? I'm liking how it looks at the moment, as it would allow for the lesser rolls to be used on a regular basis, where as the more costly ones won't get activated very much.
In DA, you roll 3d6, with one of the die a seperate color. This is the "Dragon Die".
Whenever you roll a double, you take the result from the Dragon Die, and you gain that many stunt points for that round, and can use it to modify your action.
There are two types of Stunts. Standard Stunts, which involves all non magic attacks (ranged or melee). Then there is Standard Spell Stunts, which, as one would expect, involves magic attacks.
For Standard Stunts:
The spell stunts tie heavily into the mana system, so I won't go into detail here.SP Cost
1+ : Skrimish=You can move yourself or the target of your attack 2 yards (1 square) in any direction(I will say that once the target is a square away, their path is linear ie you are no longer influencing their path) for each 1 stunt point spent
1: Rapid Reload=You immediately reload a missle weapon
2: Knock Prone=You knock your enemy prone. Melee attacks on prone characters grant +1 to hit
2: Defensive Stance=Your attack sets you up defensively, granting +2 to defense (AC) until the beginning of your next turn
2: Mighty Blow=Deal an extra 1d6 damage
2: Disarm=You attempt to disarm the target with a melee attack. Make an opposed attack roll. If you win, you knock the weapon 1d6+str modifier away in a direction of your choice (This could be modified by feats that allow characters to use dex instead of str for melee attacks...something to consider)
2: Pierce Armor=Not really applicable unless DR is present. You find a chink in your enemy's armor. Armor rating (DR) is halved against this attack.
3: Lightning Attack=You can make a second attack against the same enemy or another within range and sight. Weapon must be loaded (duh) for ranged attacks
4: Dual Strike (aka Cleave)=Your attack is so strong it affects two targets. Second target must be adjacent to you if melee, or 3 squares of the primary if using a ranged weapon. Apply the attack roll from the first attack on the second, and if it hits the second target, roll damage
4: Seize the Initiative=Your attack changes the tempo of the battle, and you move to the top of the initiative list. You remain there until someone else performs this stunt.
Note that there's is currently no limit on skrimish, so you could potentially be able to move yourself or an enemy a lot. Also, aside from Skrimish, you can only activate ONE stunt per round.
So now that I've given you an idea of how it works, here is what I was thinking of. When you roll your attack, an extra d6 is rolled for stunts. This next step radically changes the concept.
The d6 (we'll call it the stunt die) still controls how much stunt points you get. However, what triggers it will be different. If the number on the stunt die can divide the d20 roll, then stunt points are awarded provided the attack hits.
IE: If you roll a 1 on it, you get 1 stunt point no matter what. It of course only leaves you one option, skrimish.
If you roll a 2, you need an even number roll for stunts to be triggered.
If you roll a 3, only d20 rolls of 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, or 18 trigger it.
4 on rolls of 4, 8, 12, 16, 20
5 on 5, 10, 15, 20
And 6 on 6, 12, 18
How does that idea sound? I'm liking how it looks at the moment, as it would allow for the lesser rolls to be used on a regular basis, where as the more costly ones won't get activated very much.
The Kobold gonna kobold.
-
Crimson-Kobold
- Peddler
- Posts: 267
For melee/ranged attacks. Since I'm looking at Call of Cthulhu D20, there are no 'fighters', although I suppose one could potentially pull this into D&D pre 4E to spice things up. I would say any warrior type class would use it at the least, or even any melee/ranged attacks.
Not sure how to incorporate magic into the mix since in D20, you don't need to roll for magic attacks.
Not sure how to incorporate magic into the mix since in D20, you don't need to roll for magic attacks.
The Kobold gonna kobold.
-
Ismaels-Legacy
- Peddler
- Posts: 202
- Favorite D&D Edition: 2nd Edition
- Contact:
Yeah.....see.....I've yet to meet anyone that RPs quite to that extent....
Of course I've known players who, even in melee combat, will target their blows. "I attempt to strike the Hobgoblin's left leg, where the armor is missing."
I typically allow this with only minor penalties, but if they were to say "I'm aiming my crossbow for the eye slits of the Tiefling's greathelm.", THEN I may impose a hefty penalty!
Of course I've known players who, even in melee combat, will target their blows. "I attempt to strike the Hobgoblin's left leg, where the armor is missing."
I typically allow this with only minor penalties, but if they were to say "I'm aiming my crossbow for the eye slits of the Tiefling's greathelm.", THEN I may impose a hefty penalty!
Iron-Fist Ismael
-
Rblademaster
- Vagabond
- Posts: 59
the problem, tiger, is that when combat lasts longer, and there are 3 other players at the table, people don't want you to go into lenghty monologues that might even need clarification for a DM to figure out what you want to do rule technically.
I mean no offence, I acctually agree that is how you should play to really get the immersion you want to aim for. But people are waiting for you to finish up because they want to do their own thing, and shooting goblins tends to get booked off as a formality
I mean no offence, I acctually agree that is how you should play to really get the immersion you want to aim for. But people are waiting for you to finish up because they want to do their own thing, and shooting goblins tends to get booked off as a formality
"...not touching that with a 25 foot collapsable pole..."
-
Ismaels-Legacy
- Peddler
- Posts: 202
- Favorite D&D Edition: 2nd Edition
- Contact:
Player: "I draw my arrow, sizing up the length for aim. Knocking it to the string I pull back, feathers brushing my face, and I let fly!!!"
DM: "Your arrows flight is interrupted as it ricochets off the goblin's iron helmet."
Player: "Cursing the gods, I draw forth my black arrow! Muttering the cursed activating words in an ancient tongue, I deliver doom unto my foe!"
DM: "The cursed flight draws the goblin's ire as it slams into its shield with a mighty *Thunk*."
Player: "I sling my bow across my brawny shoulders, drawing my elven crafted longsword, anger blazing in my eyes! Dashing forward I seek the goblin's throat!"
DM: "You headlong charge is brought to an untimely end as a pair of hobgoblins hiding in the brush fire a volley of arrows into your unguarded chest."
----------------------------
While that is a nice, flamboyant description of combat, it's only a single round, of a single player, in a single sequence. Combat would take forever if your players are all so verbose!
DM: "Your arrows flight is interrupted as it ricochets off the goblin's iron helmet."
Player: "Cursing the gods, I draw forth my black arrow! Muttering the cursed activating words in an ancient tongue, I deliver doom unto my foe!"
DM: "The cursed flight draws the goblin's ire as it slams into its shield with a mighty *Thunk*."
Player: "I sling my bow across my brawny shoulders, drawing my elven crafted longsword, anger blazing in my eyes! Dashing forward I seek the goblin's throat!"
DM: "You headlong charge is brought to an untimely end as a pair of hobgoblins hiding in the brush fire a volley of arrows into your unguarded chest."
----------------------------
While that is a nice, flamboyant description of combat, it's only a single round, of a single player, in a single sequence. Combat would take forever if your players are all so verbose!
Iron-Fist Ismael