D&D 5E “What if…” (combat idea)

[Bill Zebub]

I didn’t post this in the 5.5 forum because there is, of course, no way this would ever make it into One. Heck it’s not even D&D so maybe I should post in TTRPG General?

Anyway, imagine if all creatures had TWO defensive values: an Armor Class and a “Dodge Class.” Attacks are either Str based against the target’s AC, or Dex based against its DC. PCs and some NPCs/monsters could choose which attack mode, and other NPCs/monsters would only have one mode. No finesse weapons, but Heavy weapons can only target AC.

And further, some monsters might have special vulnerabilities against one form or the other.

Sooo….?

(I’m sure there have been RPGs that have done this I just know any.)

 

[GMMichael]

XP for not trying to influence WotC. They're probably not listening.

The question, as phrased, sounds to me like "why don't creatures have two defense values: AC and reflex save/save versus spell?"

Well, they do.

But if you were going for: "why aren't there two kinds of attacks: strength and dexterity," I have to ask, "what are you modeling?" What does it mean to "attack vs. armor" or "attack vs. parry?" The answers to these questions might clear up the issue.

To me, every attack is versus armor AND parry, so to target only one of those is to make only half of an attack. Sometimes your opponent has no armor. Sometimes your opponent can't/doesn't parry. These are good reasons to cause damage; not reasons to have two different types of attacks.

 

[Umbran]

To me, every attack is versus armor AND parry...

At least for weapon attacks, yeah. The attacker does not get to choose what defense you get to use. If I am quick, I should be able to dodge out of the way of a brute-force two-handed sword swing, and such.

Now, what gets closes to this in D&D history is... AC vs Weapon type. shudder

 

[Bill Zebub]

I have to ask, "what are you modeling?" What does it mean to "attack vs. armor" or "attack vs. parry?" The answers to these questions might clear up the issue.

I'm not modeling anything. That would suggest a simulationist approach. This is purely gamist, with two design goals:
1. Make it less compelling to dump Dex with a Str build, or dump Str with a Dex build
2. Create another meaningful decision point during combat

This is a player decision, not a character decision. Although I suppose there's some correlation to the fiction in the sense of the character choosing to try to punch through armor vs. aiming for the soft spots.

 

[Minigiant]

But wouldn't a creature attempt dodge heavy attacks and parry/tank light attacks?

It would be Heavy vs Dodge and Light vs Armor.

At least for weapon attacks, yeah. The attacker does not get to choose what defense you get to use. If I am quick, I should be able to dodge out of the way of a brute-force two-handed sword swing, and such.

Now, what gets closes to this in D&D history is... AC vs Weapon type. shudder

it does make sense that the defender getting to chose which defense they want to use.

Weapon Type vs AC then becomes the slog that drags the game down.

I've only see this work in systems where the defender choose a Defense mode to be always on (Block/Dodge/Parry} and the attacker get a damage bonus against one of them (Heavy beat Parry). Mostly in spacebattle games (Armor/Shields/PointDefense Guns tear up shields. Laser melt armor)

 

[Clint_L]

I guess my question would be, "what does this add to make the game more entertaining?" Because it adds more complexity to combat, which is already a time suck, but doesn't seem to really change gameplay much. I'm not seeing what would make the game more fun.

 

[Knorrrssk]

Well, that was one of the great things about 4e; you had defences besides AC (Ref, Fort, Will) and attacks could target those.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

I think heavy weapons (and crossbows) should target Dodge:
No matter how many layers of steel you have on you, that huge ass cleaver is punching through. You need to dodge it.

Remove medium armors and go back to 4e armors.
Have to type of Armor Class: Soak and Dodge.

Soak AC would be: 10+ Armor
Dodge AC would be 10+Dex+Shield

Heavy Armors only give Soak Armor (fka regular AC)
Light Armors give minimal Soak but allow you to add Dex or Int to Dodge AC.

Combatants have the choice to enter 2 stances as BA: Precision Attacks vs Dodge (using Dex) or Heavy Attacks (using STR).

Heavy weapons can only target Dodge AC and light weapons can only target Soak AC.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

For some reason, the rules around travel in the Astral Plane popped into my head while reading the OP and responses.

DMG pg 46: a creature's walking speed (in feet) is equal to 3 × its Intelligence score.

The parallel being: depending on the situation/equipment/enemy, you need to use a different ability score to make your attack.

Does that simplify the concept and/or make it more flexible? Or is that muddling the premise?

 

[Stormonu]

Reminds me of 3E's touch AC. I was just lamenting yesterday I missed that for things like grappling, shoving, pushing or other combat manuevers that didn't depend on caving the enemy's head in, but only making contact.

 

[Bill Zebub]

The parallel being: depending on the situation/equipment/enemy, you need to use a different ability score to make your attack.

Does that simplify the concept and/or make it more flexible? Or is that muddling the premise?

That's basically it.

Sometimes the fighter can't get through the heavy carapace, so he's gotta try to hit the weak spots between the plating.

Sometimes the rogue can't get an opening; he's just gonna have to try punch through the armor.

I mean, the basic idea is similar to what casters do in trying to target weak saves.

 

[Oofta]

That's basically it.

Sometimes the fighter can't get through the heavy carapace, so he's gotta try to hit the weak spots between the plating.

Sometimes the rogue can't get an opening; he's just gonna have to try punch through the armor.

I mean, the basic idea is similar to what casters do in trying to target weak saves.

But we already make the decision of hitting hard or targeting weak spots now when PC builds are either strength based or dex based. I understand what you're trying to do, I just don't think this hits the mark. While the tropes and depictions of fighting that we've all absorbed may not be particularly realistic, they generally fall into two categories of the brute or the acrobat, maybe with a few other oddball exceptions here and there like depicting Sherlock Holmes using intelligence to predict opponent's moves.

But as is? I just see an extra layer. How would people know which to choose? If I've maxed out 1 attribute to 20 and tanked the other so it's 8, there would have to be massive difference in effectiveness of the two choices because otherwise I'm just going to stick with the one I'm good at. That and it only affects people that rely on martial attacks, it's kind of a nerf for them because they can't focus in one over the other while spellcasters still just have to focus on 1 attribute.

 

[Bill Zebub]

But we already make the decision of hitting hard or targeting weak spots now when PC builds are either strength based or dex based.

That’s the problem I’m trying to solve. At least, I see it as a problem: you make one decision during chargen, then dump the other stat and never think about it again.

But as is? I just see an extra layer. How would people know which to choose?

That’s kind of the point. You don’t. It’s a decision point.

If I've maxed out 1 attribute to 20 and tanked the other so it's 8, there would have to be massive difference in effectiveness of the two choices because otherwise I'm just going to stick with the one I'm good at.

Right. If you’ve min-maxed like that it would be a rare situation where the monster had so much daylight between ACs (and/or vulnerabilities to one of the attack types) that you would choose your weak stat.

But maybe if the system worked this way you wouldn’t have min-maxed. That’s really the point. And by itself it would probably be insufficient to achieve that goal, but it’s a starting point for a conversation.

 

[Oofta]

That’s the problem I’m trying to solve. At least, I see it as a problem: you make one decision during chargen, then dump the other stat and never think about it again.



That’s kind of the point. You don’t. It’s a decision point.

Not knowing which ability to attack would be annoying. It's very rare that creatures are totally immune to specific spells or damage types, when they are it's usually broadcast somehow.

Right. If you’ve min-maxed like that it would be a rare situation where the monster had so much daylight between ACs (and/or vulnerabilities to one of the attack types) that you would choose your weak stat.

But maybe if the system worked this way you wouldn’t have min-maxed. That’s really the point. And by itself it would probably be insufficient to achieve that goal, but it’s a starting point for a conversation.

Then there's not enough to go on to convince me that A) the gain you would get would be it's worth the extra complexity and B) that it wouldn't just mean that martial types wouldn't then just feel like they had to max out both strength and dex.

I just don't see how this would work. I have my own issues with the dominance of dex, especially when it comes to ranged attack options. My suggestion for ranged was multiple. That everyone can throw as many javelins as they want in a turn (trading short range for option of a shield), bows are versatile and use dex or strength were the ones I actually implemented. The other option I've thought about but not used was that your bonus to damage from dex is limited to your strength mod times 2 (minimum 1).

Some other general options tossed around have been limit damage to strength bonus only, but I think that goes too far. I don't know that there's a better option, other than probably getting rid of rapiers altogether or just make them D6 damage and make them piercing while making short swords slashing or something.

 

[Fanaelialae]

I didn’t post this in the 5.5 forum because there is, of course, no way this would ever make it into One. Heck it’s not even D&D so maybe I should post in TTRPG General?

Anyway, imagine if all creatures had TWO defensive values: an Armor Class and a “Dodge Class.” Attacks are either Str based against the target’s AC, or Dex based against its DC. PCs and some NPCs/monsters could choose which attack mode, and other NPCs/monsters would only have one mode. No finesse weapons, but Heavy weapons can only target AC.

And further, some monsters might have special vulnerabilities against one form or the other.

Sooo….?

(I’m sure there have been RPGs that have done this I just know any.)

I like that's it's AC/DC. Rock on!

That said, I feel like this weakens martial characters without adding much in the way of interesting choices.

Best case scenario, the martial is capable of both attacks. They either intuit the best one to attack or try both to determine the best. After that, they just stick with the best one. You basically end up with a golf bag fighter.

Worst case, they only have access to one of the two and are therefore less effective against half the foes they face. Maybe they're more effective against the other half? However, you probably don't want to go too much more effective than normal because of characters based on the best case scenario (otherwise, those characters are simply have that much easier a time than the default). However, if it's not effective enough, most players will probably just ignore it and use whichever type they prefer.

In 4e, there were four defenses so it wasn't anywhere as easy to target the weak defense. Also, the targeted defense was determined by the power you used, as opposed to the weapon you wielded, so it wasn't quite so straightforward a choice even if you did know the low defense.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Not knowing which ability to attack would be annoying.

Is it very annoying that you don't know what saves to target when casting spells?

And it's probably not hard to figure out in a lot of circumstances. The slow thing with lots of armor? The nimble guy with light armor? Just hit him really hard. (Sure, we can quibble about the 'realism' of that...the nimble guy is going to dodge your 2H sword, at least in the movies, but again this isn't a simulation.)

 

[Bill Zebub]

That said, I feel like this weakens martial characters

That's true, unless it were just one aspect of a bunch of changes intended to make everybody more MAD and have to make more decisions.

 

[Mort]

I like that's it's AC/DC. Rock on!

That said, I feel like this weakens martial characters without adding much in the way of interesting choices.

Best case scenario, the martial is capable of both attacks. They either intuit the best one to attack or try both to determine the best. After that, they just stick with the best one. You basically end up with a golf bag fighter.

Worst case, they only have access to one of the two and are therefore less effective against half the foes they face. Maybe they're more effective against the other half? However, you probably don't want to go too much more effective than normal because of characters based on the best case scenario (otherwise, those characters are simply have that much easier a time than the default). However, if it's not effective enough, most players will probably just ignore it and use whichever type they prefer.

In 4e, there were four defenses so it wasn't anywhere as easy to target the weak defense. Also, the targeted defense was determined by the power you used, as opposed to the weapon you wielded, so it wasn't quite so straightforward a choice even if you did know the low defense.

Yeah, my issue is this weakens martials and either doesn't really affect or even strengthens casters (since they can use magic to target weaknesses and often even bypass the AC mechanic entirely). To me, anything that FURTHER widens the divide is a negative.

 

[dave2008]

I didn’t post this in the 5.5 forum because there is, of course, no way this would ever make it into One. Heck it’s not even D&D so maybe I should post in TTRPG General?

Anyway, imagine if all creatures had TWO defensive values: an Armor Class and a “Dodge Class.” Attacks are either Str based against the target’s AC, or Dex based against its DC. PCs and some NPCs/monsters could choose which attack mode, and other NPCs/monsters would only have one mode. No finesse weapons, but Heavy weapons can only target AC.

And further, some monsters might have special vulnerabilities against one form or the other.

Sooo….?

(I’m sure there have been RPGs that have done this I just know any.)

I don't know if other systems do it, but I am doing something similar in my 5e "Immortals Rules" update. In the "I" of BECMI, Immortals had another set of three abilities scores called "Talents" derived from the standard six scores. What does that sound like? Well, to me, it seemed like the precursor to Fort, Reflex, and Will (They are just called Greater, Intermediate, and Lesser talents in the Immortals Rules). Anyway...

Immortals in my 5e update don't have AC. You attack one of their three defenses. For physical attacks you attack Fort (just shrugging off the attack) or Reflex (dodging the attack). The target gets to choose which one they use for defense (generally).

 

[Fanaelialae]

That's true, unless it were just one aspect of a bunch of changes intended to make everybody more MAD and have to make more decisions.

Possibly.

I think the direction I would go with something like this would be to use Fighting Stances, rather than weapon. Martials would start with at least two stances, and gain more as they level.

For example, a dervish inspired Cyclone stance might allow you to target DC, and build up Momentum points to make bonus attacks. Light weapons might build up Momentum more quickly than Heavy weapons, but you could use either one in this stance.

You might want to switch your stance to deal with different enemies (using Landside stance to target AC against a lightly armored but quick enemy), which also might require a different tactical approach. Plus, it largely avoids the golf bag issue, since you can use a stance with any weapon (even if certain weapon types favor certain stances).