Brawling!

Zephrin the Lost

First Post
Has anyone run a tavern brawl or other unarmed-or-improvised weapon battle using the 4e rules? I haven't done so yet, but wonder if the higher HP totals and the special nature of most powers make such a fight impractical, assuming it's a battle where the combatants aren't trying to kill one another.

I mean, if it's a 'He called the Enterprise a garbage scow!' sort of conflict, the swordmage probably won't use his sword, the ranger won't use his bow, etc, you get the idea. The low damage of unarmed, few-power combat could take a while to find a winner.

One idea I had is that most folks would choose to 'tap out' of a fight that's not worth killing (or dying) over when they reach bloodied state.

Anyone else thought about or actually run something like this?
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

The nature of the 4E hit point rules makes this easy. Just run the fight as normal and say that the default for 0hp is a knockout and that lethal damage must be specified instead.
 

Charger28Alpha

First Post
Along the lines of a brawl, does anybody have any houserules or has Wizards put out official rules for two folks occupying the same square?

I think those rules would improve brawls quite a bit. Moves like a head lock, an arm lock then bouncing opponents head off the bar or wall, small character jumping on back of large character and beating his head with a mug, are all hard to do when to fighters have to stand in their own 5x5 square.
 


Moves like a head lock, an arm lock then bouncing opponents head off the bar or wall, small character jumping on back of large character and beating his head with a mug, are all hard to do when to fighters have to stand in their own 5x5 square.

I dunno. Most 4E combat feels like a grinding headlock anyway.
 

Zephrin the Lost

First Post
The nature of the 4E hit point rules makes this easy. Just run the fight as normal and say that the default for 0hp is a knockout and that lethal damage must be specified instead.

I get that part, but if your strikers aren't doing striker damage because they are using their fists instead of weapons and spells, defending the honor of the Enterprise (to use my earlier example) could take a long while.
 

Badwe

First Post
You could probably run a brawl as a modified skill challenge using skills like endurance, athletics, intimidate, and streetwise. Also, you could let just a plain old attack roll without a weapon suffice, which is essentially a jack-of-all-trades skill check when you only add your STR mod and 1/2 level +2 (proficiency bonus for unarmed ). Also, don't neglect grappling rules, forced movement while grappled, bull rushes, and generally improvised combat manuevers. Bloodied is probably a good stopping point to help make up for the lack of damage.
 

Morrus

Well, that was fun
Staff member
I think those rules would improve brawls quite a bit. Moves like a head lock, an arm lock then bouncing opponents head off the bar or wall, small character jumping on back of large character and beating his head with a mug, are all hard to do when to fighters have to stand in their own 5x5 square.

It's an abstract combat system using a pool of hit points as an abstract representation of all that entails. D&D no more simulated specific unarmed combat moves than it does armed combat moves - it doesn't specifiy when a sword hits an arm or a leg, or any other detailed combat moves, and it doesn't specificy when you haev an arm lock or are bouncing xomeone's head off the bar.

There's always been this weird thing with D&D players that I've noticed: may seem to think that unarmed combat requires detailed simulations of exact positions, while armed combat does not.

That's just how D&D works. It's all abstract; invent your own fluff text. But the upshot of it is "a hit reduces hit points".
 

Charger28Alpha

First Post
Bloodied is probably a good stopping point to help make up for the lack of damage.

Very good point, if the fight is just about avenging the slight made against the Enterprise, and thus not to the death. Having Bloodied be the point where PC or opponent "taps out" is fitting.
 

Charger28Alpha

First Post
There's always been this weird thing with D&D players that I've noticed: may seem to think that unarmed combat requires detailed simulations of exact positions, while armed combat does not.

I know it is an abstract combat system. However, what I was pointing out is that it does have a detailed system of positioning armed or unarmed combatants, 5'x5' squares, that has many rules applying to a wide variety of situations and conditions. What it does not have is rules for close combat, two folks in same 5'x5' square.

I prefer other systems in which combat is less abstract, but I am playing D&D 4th Ed. So I was curious about any rules tweaks involving combatants sharing a 5'x5' square.
 

Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Upcoming Releases

Top