[GRIM TALES] GlassJaw's Grim Tales Variant Ruleset v1.2! (updated 9/29/05)

[Zoatebix]

I think I found an error on page 7: "Base Defense is always 10 for Medium-size characters."

That should be 0, right?

Other than that, it's looking great so far. I'll post more of what I think when I finish.

 

[GlassJaw]

Hmm. I ran through a couple of combats, and I'm not sure if I like the contested roll portion of the dodge/parry. In fact, I think I like it for parry, but not at all for dodge, and it kind of makes sense. A handful of feats based on parry rolls and counter attacks might make for even more interesting combat, and better justify the use of parry for the combatant. For some reason, I just don't like the 'crapshoot' aspect of a dodge contested roll (especially since its a character's only defense against ranged weapons).

Well like I said earlier, the opposed rolls is something I've always wanted to try. So even for me, the jury's still out. As far as rolls for dodge vs parry, I'm not sure I would want to make one opposed and one fixed. You could probably make a case for both being either fixed or opposed so for consistency I'd rather keep them both one way or the other.

As you mentioned, there is definitely opportunity for additional feats to create a more cinematic style. I also realized that the Agile Riposte feat needs to be tweaked as well.

I don't know if I like the Armor DR rules. For some reason, Armor DR begs for a hit location system that makes combat resolution that much more difficult, slow and complicated. For instance, you're basically saying that a 17th century Musketeer in a cuirass has a full-body DR of X. Or that every shot that would affect wound points would go to his torso. You're kind of pointing out that to be realistic, armor should absorb damage, but then setting it up in an unrealistic implementation. Strangely, it didn't bother me much in Star Wars, so I don't have much of a defense for the opinion.

Maybe I'm just overthinking it.

Perhaps, I'm not sure. Maybe you just aren't a big fan of armor as DR variants, which is fine. My system is almost identical to the SW system.

As far as hit locations systems go, that's something I'm definitely not a fan of. It would be easy enough to incorporate one I suppose. I'm not exactly sure why you feel armor as DR systems have more of a need for hit location system though.

VP/WP is cool, and I think the contested Parry defense has a lot of character development potential, and infuses combats with some more cinematic aspects. It certainly makes AC a more active stat, and almost forces the victim of the attack to describe how they are defending.

That was certainly one my goals.

Good job overall. I know it's an undertaking (and takes some cajones) to offer up variants to rules that people already enjoy. Especially to this crowd.

Hey, I can handle it.

 

[GlassJaw]

I think I found an error on page 7: "Base Defense is always 10 for Medium-size characters."

That should be 0, right?

Good catch. I just need to remove the "Base Defense is always 10..." line completely. That was a carry-over from Conan. Your Base Defense Bonus is the same as your size modifier.

 

[Zoatebix]

I'm not exactly sure why you feel armor as DR systems have more of a need for hit location system though.

...Because in many (most? all?) cases armor doesn't cover the entire body, or at least it doesn't cover the entire body with the same amount of protection. With normal D&D armor adding to armor class, once could imagine that an armor's bonus represents either the difficulty of harming the protected target through their armor, or the difficulty of striking an unarmored spot. When you define armor's game role more specifically (e.g. that it reduces damage on a successful hit), you risk leaving open niches that a more abstract definition of armor covers.

Did that even make sense?

 

[GlassJaw]

...Because in many (most? all?) cases armor doesn't cover the entire body, or at least it doesn't cover the entire body with the same amount of protection....

Did that even make sense?

Yes, it makes sense, and it's a good argument. But you can also argue that armor as DR still has a degree of abstraction, just like armor granting a bonus to AC. It's just trading one abstraction for another to acheive a different feel or style of play.

For example, you justify the actual amount of DR a particular suit of armor has to a number of factors, one of which could certainly be its amount of coverage. Other factors could be strength of material, types of materials use, quality of construction, etc. Leather armor may offer more coverage than a breastplate but is obviously made of softer material. Plate armor could be constructed of the same steel of a breastplate but covers more of the body.

Any rules system has a certain degree of abstraction. You just have to decide what an acceptable ratio of fun to realism is.

----------

Assuming you did incorporate a hit location system in this ruleset, do you think the combination of that with the opposed attack/defense rolls would make for very slow combat?

 

[swrushing]

The recent use of armor as DR in IH may start to addres this.

Make armor a die roll of DR. Set the range of the die roll to represent the degrees of coverage.

it does add a die roll, of course.

For my money, i would rather have armor dr as a die roll than the defense roll being a die roll. having two opposed rolls is in effect the same as having a 2d20-21 (iirc) roll to hit, a "bell curve" or "pyramid", and i like the flat probability of a single dice being rolled.

 

[genshou]

The recent use of armor as DR in IH may start to addres this.

Make armor a die roll of DR. Set the range of the die roll to represent the degrees of coverage.

it does add a die roll, of course.

For my money, i would rather have armor dr as a die roll than the defense roll being a die roll. having two opposed rolls is in effect the same as having a 2d20-21 (iirc) roll to hit, a "bell curve" or "pyramid", and i like the flat probability of a single dice being rolled.

This reminds me of the rules in Alternity Warships. I am, unfortunately, clueless when it comes to Alternity rules. But I do like the fact that a ship's "DR" is in the form of a die roll of a certain amount. It could work in character combat very easily, incorporating "hit locations" at a very basic level without adding in all the complexity. If you roll a 1 on your armor roll, you can assume that arrow hit one of the spots your armor doesn't cover.

 

[GlassJaw]

Make armor a die roll of DR. Set the range of the die roll to represent the degrees of coverage.

At first glance I didn't really like this but I might be coming around. Even when coupled with the opposed attack/defense roll, I don't think it would be too bad since it would only come into play when the defender takes WP damage.

Also, if I ever was to do a hit location system (unlikely but whatever), I think I would try to make it based off of the attack roll rather than a separate roll altogether. If your attack succeeds, the difference in your attack roll vs the defender's roll would determine the hit location.

Regardless of that, I've always felt that the damage roll incorporates hit location to an extent so adding another system on top of that is redundant.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

Make armor a die roll of DR. Set the range of the die roll to represent the degrees of coverage.

This is a really satisfactory, abstract way to approximate hit locations. A low roll means you were hit in a poorly armored location (ie, your head). A high roll means your armor intercepted most of the attack.

For a "finesse" analog to Power Attack, I would allow the attacker to subtract from his attack roll, an amount that the defender must subtract from his DR roll, on a 1-to-1 basis. Regardless of how much you subtract from the DR, you can't reduce DR below 0.

It's a little more interesting when the attacker does not know how much DR the target has. The attacker has to estimate from visual clues (ie, "He's in full plate...") how much he needs to subtract from his attack roll to completely negate the armor. He might overshoot, he might undershoot.

And just to keep adding layers to this sucker, and to further push the Power Attack analog, you might allow small/light/finessable weapons the same 2-for-1 bonus that large weapons get from Power Attack. So a fella with a dagger or a rapier can subtract 2 from his attack roll and reduce the DR by 4.


Wulf

 

[genshou]

This is a really satisfactory, abstract way to approximate hit locations. A low roll means you were hit in a poorly armored location (ie, your head). A high roll means your armor intercepted most of the attack.

For a "finesse" analog to Power Attack, I would allow the attacker to subtract from his attack roll, an amount that the defender must subtract from his DR roll, on a 1-to-1 basis. Regardless of how much you subtract from the DR, you can't reduce DR below 0.

It's a little more interesting when the attacker does not know how much DR the target has. The attacker has to estimate from visual clues (ie, "He's in full plate...") how much he needs to subtract from his attack roll to completely negate the armor. He might overshoot, he might undershoot.

And just to keep adding layers to this sucker, and to further push the Power Attack analog, you might allow small/light/finessable weapons the same 2-for-1 bonus that large weapons get from Power Attack. So a fella with a dagger or a rapier can subtract 2 from his attack roll and reduce the DR by 4.


Wulf

This I like. I'll be bringing the idea up to my player in Pledge of Tyranny; we've been somewhat bothered by a few of the Armor as DR system's foibles. This just may solve it, especially since both of the plot-crucial NPCs introduced in the story hour would be making use of it, while the PC is more interested in Power Attack.

Another possible (?) advantage I see is an option to allow it for ranged attacks as well as melee. High-level archers could then pierce the DR of a tough opponent.

Thanks for the idea, Wulf.