DMG combat "To Hit" tables Q

[MerricB]

It may be obscure, but I have it - though I have never played it or ran it, so there is that.

I like the rule because it is a start down the path of the type of rules I prefer: one in which how well you do really matters, and not only when you get a "critical." An easy way to get this point across is by saying that I like Rolemaster more than D&D. (Just look into RM if you don't know anything about it and you will understand pretty-quick.)

But RM combat is all about the criticals! (and the fumbles!)

Cheers!

 

[Randalthor]

But RM combat is all about the criticals! (and the fumbles!)

Cheers!

Yes, but it is a natural part of the system, that relies more on a character's skill* and not a completely random (1 in 20, in old D&D) event. In D&D, you do not base your combat tactics on the idea that you can be killed by any attack, you base them on gamist rules (like chess). I prefer to approach situations in a more realistic manner; I may be a 7th level fighter, and while I am most likely going to be able to beat that orc over there fairly easily, he could do some serious damage, and it wouldn't take complete ill-luck on my part. In D&D, that scenario might as well not happen, and because the orc poses so little threat, the PC fighter would just walk up and take him out, no tactical thought whatsoever. I don't like that. Just my preference.

Look at it this way: In D&D you fight more like Superman: you just walk up and start duking it out, not worrying about a thing until the last few HP are remaining (your enemy finally pulled out the kryptonite); in a game like RM you fight more like Batman: you attack from surprise and you think all manner of different tactics in order to not die because a single - and the first - bullet can kill you. I much prefer the second route, it just gets my creativity/imagination going more.


*At least the crits do, fumbles less so.

 

[billd91]

I had a DM in AD&D who used the Rolemaster crit tables. You rolled on the tables if you got a natural 20 or rolled 5 more than you needed to hit the target. You also applied a -5% to the table for each point of AC the target had better than AC 10. It was pretty brutal at times and gave you a very solid reason to wear the heaviest armor you could get as well as gave you reasons to avoid unnecessary combat. Yet we didn't see huge increases in PC deaths either.

 

[howandwhy99]

Alternatively, you could require a second d20 roll for creatures that can't miss or can't hit, so their dice roll options are never irrelevant. I've been puzzling out how much of the game uses linear expressions and other times parabolic curvilinear ones. The result of a 2 being 100% better than a 1, but the result of a 19 instead of an 18 is only slightly more than 5 1/2%.

AC bonuses still can miss and AC penalties can still hit. Just extend out the progression of results by halving for the second roll. 50%=10, 75%=15, 87.5%=18, 93.75%=19, and 96.875=20 to hit target numbers adjusted above 20. This matches well with the +5 limit on magic item bonus too.

 

[Randalthor]

I had a DM in AD&D who used the Rolemaster crit tables. You rolled on the tables if you got a natural 20 or rolled 5 more than you needed to hit the target. You also applied a -5% to the table for each point of AC the target had better than AC 10. It was pretty brutal at times and gave you a very solid reason to wear the heaviest armor you could get as well as gave you reasons to avoid unnecessary combat. Yet we didn't see huge increases in PC deaths either.

Your GM used Arms Law (the book with all the crit tables for Rolemaster) in the way it was originally intended (if not with the exact methodology). Many of RMs original books were put out as alternate methods of doing things (like combat and magic) for existing games, until they put it all together in it's own game.