Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="JohnSnow" data-source="post: 8071311" data-attributes="member: 32164">So, with that perspective, and since I started with some of the things that don't work so well, let me first talk about some of the systems I've played, and the things that, IMO, they get right.Simple mechanics. Whether it's all the d20-based games' "die roll + bonuses vs. difficulty number," the d6 System's "dice pool vs. difficulty number," Savage Worlds's system of "Success plus Raises," or the Vampire/Hero/Shadowrun "Count successes" method, a simple, intuitive die mechanic beats tables and charts every single time. Do I think some work better than others? Sure, but that's mostly a matter of implementation.I also think it's better if combat defaults to requiring a single action check roll each round, because multiple actions per character turn can quickly get tedious. As such, it is my contention that each character be limited to one, but granted a maximum of 3 actions that require a resolution roll. Why 3? Because it's enough to feel like a lot, but not so many that the system bogs down. d6 System and Savage Worlds both do this well, giving a character the chance to take a second or third action by accepting a cumulative penalty to all actions.Movement and free actions. Simple movement should be assumed in combat. Most people don't spend a fight standing still and slugging it out. You tend to circle, move, attack, spin, turn, duck, bob, weave, and dodge. This is true whether you're fighting hand-to-hand or shooting. By default, there should be penalties for moving fast, shooting on the run, and specialized movement should merit checks to accomplish. So you should always be able to move and attack. This is also why facing is, IMO, a stupid rule in hand to hand combat. Simple actions are things you can do that take no check, like talking, easy movements, and the like. You only need to use a significant action to open a door if it's locked or hard to move in some way. The GM gets final say on whether something counts as "significant."No Parry or Dodge rolls, and for the love of god, don't use both. Palladium did this: Attacker rolls d20, Player 2 rolls to dodge, and if that fails, he rolls a second time to parry. You only get to defend once. And yes, there's variability in how good your defense is, and in how good the other guy's attack is, but all that variability is summed up by one die roll. It does not need two, so cut the other one. Later editions of D&D sorta do this right with having defenders effectively "take 10" on what it calls "Armor Class," but could be more honestly called (and is, in many d20-based games) "Defense." In Savage Worlds, hand-to-hand combat uses something called "Parry" which represents fighting skill and bonuses. Ranged weapons target a different thing, which actually creates a meaningful distinction between hand-to-hand and throwing/shooting (we'll come back to that).Dynamic initiative: Yes, I'm aware that an initiative check is another die roll (or card draw) and I just said we should be trying to minimize those, but I think this is a complexity worth keeping. It keeps combat flexible and constantly shifting, and that helps to keep it "unpredictable" and reduce "slog time" - i.e. "more fun."That's all for this post, as I'm trying to keep from having to spend hours writing them without a break. In my next post, I'll switch to talking about damage, hit points, weapon types, and the fundamental difference between "believable" and "realistic."</blockquote>

Verification