D&D General If you could put D&D into any other non middle ages genre, what would it be?

doctorbadwolf · Jun 19, 2019

CapnZapp said:
The *entire point* of having levels in D&D is to allow you to level out of the danger zone of being felled before your melee charge reaches the opponent.

Besides, there are numerous other aspects of firearm enabled settings that D&D simply isn't equipped to handle...

No. The point of levels are to gain abilities and power over time, giving the player a sense of progress, and allowing kobolds and dragons to be completely different in terms of power without characters having to be able to take on dragons at the same level that kobolds are a challenge.

And maybe there are, but HP isn’t one of them.

Tony Vargas · Jun 19, 2019

doctorbadwolf said:
And maybe there are, but HP isn’t one of them.

But I don't think high-damage guns and reduced hp PCs is part of the solution, either. HP are a central mechanic in D&D, they're essentially plot armor, and old-west heroes are as plot-armored as any others. Their hats get shot off, their friends get shot, their horses get shot out from under them, posts & waterbarrels & windowsills get shot right in front of their faces, and they take shoulder wounds with alarming regularity, but they don't get killed so much relative to the amount of lead flying around.

Unlike a D&D Barbarian, though, they have the courtesy to duck, dodge about, get behind cover, and act concerned about the barrage rather than stand out in the middle of it on a pile of bodies.

doctorbadwolf · Jun 19, 2019

Tony Vargas said:
But I don't think high-damage guns and reduced hp PCs is part of the solution, either. HP are a central mechanic in D&D, they're essentially plot armor, and old-west heroes are as plot-armored as any others. Their hats get shot off, their friends get shot, their horses get shot out from under them, posts & waterbarrels & windowsills get shot right in front of their faces, and they take shoulder wounds with alarming regularity, but they don't get killed so much relative to the amount of lead flying around.

Unlike a D&D Barbarian, though, they have the courtesy to duck, dodge about, get behind cover, and act concerned about the barrage rather than stand out in the middle of it on a pile of bodies.

Its a good solution if you want “rocket tag” shootouts. Otherwise, HP as is with dmg guns works fine.

Bc dnd already models shootouts. 5e general rules doesn’t incentivize melee combat in any way other than imposing disadvantage on ranged attacks when threatened by a melee opponent. If you’re swapping out the classes, ya only include features that require melee attacks if you want that class to be the “kung fu Master in the old west” archetype, or to include support for brawling in the saloon.

Tony Vargas · Jun 20, 2019

doctorbadwolf said:
Its a good solution if you want “rocket tag” shootouts.

I mean, if you want that, fine, but I don't think that model the genre that well - that is, you might manage to create high-damage guns, low-hp characters, combat rules to incentivize them dodging and use cover and other genre bits to avoid getting hit - and what you'll have is a combat that plays out as a LOT of missing.

A completely separate, almost non-combat, sub-system for a showdown, like 0D&D had a separate sub-system for jousting, might be a thing, though.

Bc dnd already models shootouts. 5e general rules doesn’t incentivize melee combat in any way other than imposing disadvantage on ranged attacks when threatened by a melee opponent. If you’re swapping out the classes, ya only include features that require melee attacks if you want that class to be the “kung fu Master in the old west” archetype, or to include support for brawling in the saloon.

The fighter, for instance, has one ranged style, the rest are all melee. You'd probably want to create new styles - like Brawler and Gunfighter, I suppose. Actually probably more than one gunfighter, like a Quickdraw, Two-gun, Rifleman...

doctorbadwolf · Jun 20, 2019

Tony Vargas said:
I mean, if you want that, fine, but I don't think that model the genre that well - that is, you might manage to create high-damage guns, low-hp characters, combat rules to incentivize them dodging and use cover and other genre bits to avoid getting hit - and what you'll have is a combat that plays out as a LOT of missing.

right, which is what some ppl want from such a game. It’s not what I want from a Wild West game, but for folks who do, it’s not like dnd can’t model it well, you just don’t use the phb classes and weapons to do it.

A completely separate, almost non-combat, sub-system for a showdown, like 0D&D had a separate sub-system for jousting, might be a thing, though.

depending on how complex you want a duel to be, it can either be an ability check contest, or an opposed skill challenge modeled after the dmg Chase scene section. Ie, a skill challenge.

[/quote]The fighter, for instance, has one ranged style, the rest are all melee. You'd probably want to create new styles - like Brawler and Gunfighter, I suppose. Actually probably more than one gunfighter, like a Quickdraw, Two-gun, Rifleman...[/QUOTE]

Right, you’d want a new set of classes and/or subclasses for a total Wild West game.

My preference would be a Weird West game that is closer to DnD rules, with some variants and new options to give each class room to participate in such a campaign, and guns that are in line with phb weapons.

Tony Vargas · Jun 20, 2019

doctorbadwolf said:
depending on how complex you want a duel to be, it can either be an ability check contest, or an opposed skill challenge modeled after the dmg Chase scene section. Ie, a skill challenge.

Or something like the old samurai 'psychic duel?' (Which I don't remember well enough - it might've just been a contested check.)

Right, you’d want a new set of classes and/or subclasses for a total Wild West game.
My preference would be a Weird West game that is closer to DnD rules, with some variants and new options to give each class room to participate in such a campaign, and guns that are in line with phb weapons.

5e's so all-in with sub-classes, I'd want to go that route as much as possible. Combat Styles, alone, could mostly-adapt the Fighter & (spelless) Ranger to the setting. Rogue could get a Gambler sub-class

...

Lanefan · Jun 20, 2019

CapnZapp said:
I would have thought shooting a grizzly bear would piss off the bear, not the hulk.

It's a little-known fact about umber hulks that when they're not busy eating adventurers, many of them are secretly wildlife conservationists...

CapnZapp · Jun 20, 2019

doctorbadwolf said:
No. The point of levels are to gain abilities and power over time, giving the player a sense of progress, and allowing kobolds and dragons to be completely different in terms of power without characters having to be able to take on dragons at the same level that kobolds are a challenge.

And maybe there are, but HP isn’t one of them.

Thanks for missing the point.

We were talking about levels in the context of hit points. The fact that hit points increase with levels.

As a matter of fact, there exists RPGs where you basically don't get more hit points per "level", and in fact have no levels at all, only skill scores.

And no, the point is definitely to not feature one-shot kills, which you pretty much need if melee is going to be a major thing.

Which is the root cause of the "mockery" of guns that started this little sub-thread.

CapnZapp · Jun 20, 2019

Tony Vargas said:
But I don't think high-damage guns and reduced hp PCs is part of the solution, either. HP are a central mechanic in D&D, they're essentially plot armor, and old-west heroes are as plot-armored as any others. Their hats get shot off, their friends get shot, their horses get shot out from under them, posts & waterbarrels & windowsills get shot right in front of their faces, and they take shoulder wounds with alarming regularity, but they don't get killed so much relative to the amount of lead flying around.

Now you come across as someone unfamiliar with other role-playing designs than hit points and levels, but I'm sure that's not really the case.

Meaning all of that is certainly not a defining feature of hit points, and in fact, a way to use hit points that is deeply unsatisfactory to many.

How's that? Because with hit points you *know* the first stab or bullet is not going to reduce your fighting capability in any way. Not everybody is capable of feeling the excitement and (exaggerated) fear of death there.

This is a major reason why other RPGs were invented.

That is, to better model a scenario where each bullet could kill you (but not really, since you're a hero). But fundamentally, to replace hit points with Dodge tests, built in physical resistance, and relying much more on armor, cover and tactics.

If all you know is D&D, it is very hard to see and appreciate this. Not that this applies to you. Right?

For a general set of expectations on gun duels, I am arguing one of these games, where hit points don't increase with levels, is a better fit.

(And for the umpteenth time, not because D&D is bad, only because it's suited to another set of expectations on how a combat "should" go down)

doctorbadwolf · Jun 20, 2019

CapnZapp said:
Thanks for missing the point.

We were talking about levels in the context of hit points. The fact that hit points increase with levels.

As a matter of fact, there exists RPGs where you basically don't get more hit points per "level", and in fact have no levels at all, only skill scores.

And no, the point is definitely to not feature one-shot kills, which you pretty much need if melee is going to be a major thing.

Which is the root cause of the "mockery" of guns that started this little sub-thread.

Cap, tbh, you’ve exhausted my ability to give a damn about this argument. You’re going in circles. I didn’t miss the point, you failed to make it. Meanwhile, you haven’t really addressed anyone else’s points, much less mine.

So, I’m done. This isn’t a thread about Wild West games. I’m gonna go ahead and stop participating in this needless derail.