Falling from Great Heights

[JamesonCourage]

Yes, Burning Wheel doesn't have a lot of scrying or teleporting (it does emphasis preparation, but in the form of linked skill checks and gathering information that can be used to generate advantage dice, rather than buffs). And it does involve multiple foes penalising active defence. But my own view is that the more you take the game in this direction, the less it becomes like D&D.

Whereas some people have been bugged by this for years or decades with D&D, and still others have house-ruled it into their game all along ("you fall into lava, you die"), and it feels very D&D to them. Again, I don't expect it to be in the base game.

I'm not therefore saying it's a bad game. I'm just doubting that it would be something that the designers of D&Dnext would make it a priority to support.

I was replying to people who said they didn't think it was feasible. I don't know whether or not Wizards will include it or not with 5e via a module, but that's another topic, in my mind. As always, play what you like

 

[triqui]

Surprise, or numbers. (Sorry for the delay, I was running a game for most of yesterday.)

When attacks are made against your ACvS (Armor Class vs. Surprise), you basically lose most of your AC. A lucky hit can cause ongoing blood loss, punctured lungs, or other effects (again, it needs to be a lucky hit). Also, you have two different HP pools in my RPG (HP and THP [temporary hit points]). If an attack deals only THP (which recovers some every round), you avoid any attached negative effects (such as the lucky shots mentioned above). However, you do not get any THP when you're surprised.

When you're attacked multiple times in a round, you take a cumulative penalty to your AC (excluding ACvS). This means that 20 guys with crossbows give you a -19 penalty as of the last attack (AC tops out around 30 by level 20 in my RPG). Any of the attacks (that finally hit your HP after you lose your THP) that do connect might be a lucky shot, inflicting ongoing blood loss, skull fractures, etc.

So, you can fight a Balor, and if you're not surprised, you're getting your full AC and THP, and he's not making 20 attacks at you. You can have this epic drag-out fight with him, but later on feel threatened when 40 archers appear on the walls when the city guard yells for you to halt.

It's just how my system handles it. Again, I don't think it's the only way, and I don't expect this to be anywhere near base for D&D 5e. But, I am positive that you can have deadly 1st level archers in a world where level 20 Fighters can fight Balors.

Now, players can certainly obtain ways to negate level 1 archers, too. Get enough damage reduction (achievable by level 20, for sure), making you monstrously tough. Get abilities or combat maneuvers that reduce penalties for being attacked multiple times. Etc. But, these are probably only going to apply to a couple PCs in a party of 5-6, meaning most are vulnerable to common arrows while challenging Balors, dragons, liches, and Pit Fiends. As always, play what you like

Quite interesting. It produces a particular enviroment, with its own implications.
I'm not sure if the cumulative penalties for attacks are for different attackers, or different attacks. If it is the former, as I said, it makes fighting a 12 headed hydra "easier" than fighting 12 goblins, because the 12 headed hydra is a single oponent, and thus their 12 attacks. If it is per attack, it makes some oponents harder to beat than others, depending the number of attacks (a 12 headed hydra being more dangerous than a Titan, for example, because of the number of attacks). It's not a bad issue per se, it just makes a different scale of CR (the Hydra would be higher level than in regular D&D, Monsters with 1 single hard-hit attack like titans would be lower CR than in regular D&D). "Lurker" monsters that surprise PC as a basic routine (like Phase Spiders) are particularly more dangerous that those that do not, even if they are more powerful in theory. Again, that's not strictly a problem, just have different scale for CR. A phase spider in that system would be 4 or 5 CR above a non-surprising foe of equivalent stats.

However, assuming your game has hp and levels, and those scale in d&d style, I still doubt your solution really works. AC is only *part* of the problem about 15th level characters ignoring 12 lvl 1 archers. But the main problem is HP. Even for *naked* 15th level PC in D&D, where they don't have untouchable AC, they will obliterate 12 archers. In seconds. Their HP are simply too much, and they can do a lot of damage to several oponents at a time (rapid firing archer, cleaving fighter, and fireballing wizard and you kill the 12 archers in a round). If your game has HP/level, and the damage/level scales too, this is very hard to avoid.

What's your average lvl 1 goblin archer damage? What's your average non-surprised Lvl 12 fighter HP? What's your average lvl 20 ancient dragon damage?

 

[Minigiant]

This thread is constantly going in circles.

I do thing a more realistic modules of D&D where falling and being outnumbered by 10 is extremely dangerous, enough so that both falls and characters will be weary of them.
Both there will be many thing that go with it.

It won't be core as zero to hero to superhero was always the cure of D&D.
It might require a stamina/wound point system that will add a few other effects on the game.
Other straight "cornercase" rules would have to be added to deal with the A>B>C>A numbers problem.

I would love to play a campaign like that, but I would hate it as core due to all the consequences on other game styles (mostly subtracting rules).

My Sunken World campaign world requires 12 people surviving a 70' drop and charging into an army for a crucial part of its re-creatable fluff.

 

[Balesir]

One thing I personally like about 4e is that it removes most of the incentives for scry-buff-teleport: teleporting is hard, scrying is hard, there is next-to-no buffing, and the mechanical benefits of ambushing are at best minor.

I'm not at all sure that ambush is all that weak in 4e. Mechanically the advantage seems quite weak, I accept, but my experience is that, when they are "bounced", the party do pretty poorly, while they do far better when they gat surprise.

In our last run we had two pretty big fights. In the first, after a "standard form skill challenge" that I'm making available on certain encounters, now, they not only avoided getting surprised and scouted the strength of the enemy (i.e. I laid out the monsters before they had to decide their entry point), they got surprise as well. The party seized the initiative with what they did in the surprise round and held onto it throughout - the result was an easy victory over a tough encounter. The second encounter they tried to use diplomacy (which had worked OK on a couple of occasions already) when the "target" had ample motivation to want a fight. They got 'bounced' and had a very tough battle to achieve their objective in full (the opponent had underestimated them, thanks to smart moves in an earlier negotiation, but they really wanted to stop the main opponent - who turned out to be a vampire lord - from escaping). Now, ideally, they would press on - but they are really a bit beaten up for that...

Finally, to get back on topic after the self-indulgent ramble (sorry) - [MENTION=6668292]JamesonCourage[/MENTION]: I get how your system works in general, but if the party engage in combat against the town guards of their own volition (which was, I understand, the case), how do you justify them being "surprised"?

 

[JamesonCourage]

Quite interesting. It produces a particular enviroment, with its own implications.
I'm not sure if the cumulative penalties for attacks are for different attackers, or different attacks. If it is the former, as I said, it makes fighting a 12 headed hydra "easier" than fighting 12 goblins, because the 12 headed hydra is a single oponent, and thus their 12 attacks. If it is per attack, it makes some oponents harder to beat than others, depending the number of attacks (a 12 headed hydra being more dangerous than a Titan, for example, because of the number of attacks). It's not a bad issue per se, it just makes a different scale of CR (the Hydra would be higher level than in regular D&D, Monsters with 1 single hard-hit attack like titans would be lower CR than in regular D&D). "Lurker" monsters that surprise PC as a basic routine (like Phase Spiders) are particularly more dangerous that those that do not, even if they are more powerful in theory. Again, that's not strictly a problem, just have different scale for CR. A phase spider in that system would be 4 or 5 CR above a non-surprising foe of equivalent stats.

I don't disagree at all (though personally, I'd make a 12-headed hydra roll one attack, not 12).

However, assuming your game has hp and levels, and those scale in d&d style, I still doubt your solution really works.

My game does have HP and levels, though HP is greatly scaled down (having over 100 HP at high level is pretty rare), and, as I said, I use a HP/THP system.

AC is only *part* of the problem about 15th level characters ignoring 12 lvl 1 archers. But the main problem is HP. Even for *naked* 15th level PC in D&D, where they don't have untouchable AC, they will obliterate 12 archers. In seconds. Their HP are simply too much, and they can do a lot of damage to several oponents at a time (rapid firing archer, cleaving fighter, and fireballing wizard and you kill the 12 archers in a round). If your game has HP/level, and the damage/level scales too, this is very hard to avoid.

Damage just needs to outscale HP. For example, it's pretty easy for a level 1 warrior to deal 1d10+10 damage (and, as an aside, the system assumes that level 4 is "the average settled adult", which deals 1d10+12 pretty easily). So, if we're dealing 1d10+10 per attack against someone who has a lot of HP and THP (34 HP + 63 THP at, say, level 20), then it only takes about 6 attacks to bring them down or kill them. If you've got 20 guys with crossbows, that's pretty much going to happen to most PCs.

If you've got 12, there's a good chance that the PC will win. Though, in my RPG, there's a decent chance it'll end badly, which is especially true if they surprise you (you lose your THP, and your AC drops pretty dramatically).

What's your average lvl 1 goblin archer damage? What's your average non-surprised Lvl 12 fighter HP? What's your average lvl 20 ancient dragon damage?

Level 1 goblin archer: 1d10+10 damage (15.5 average).
Level 12 non-surprised warrior HP: 22 HP + 39 THP (61 total). (Though, to be fair, I said level 1 fighters would be in danger against numbers or if the guy was surprised.)
Level 20 ancient dragon damage (I assume colossal-sized): 2d12+30 (43 average).

The trick against the dragon? Don't get hit, recover your THP before he overcomes it (one hit will probably break it), get a ton of damage reduction, etc.

The trick with the goblins? Get cover, get a boatload of damage reduction, don't let them get the drop on you, or design your PC to resist swarm tactics (apply THP to surprise attacks, use the Whirling Movement style, grab multiple instances of the Adapted Style feat for being attacked multiple times, etc.).

If you don't do either of those things, then both dragons and low level goblins are dangerous. If you mitigate the danger from one, you probably can't afford the other while contributing much beyond your own survival. There's a certain natural balance from only having so many character points to work with. As always, play what you like

[MENTION=6668292]JamesonCourage[/MENTION]: I get how your system works in general, but if the party engage in combat against the town guards of their own volition (which was, I understand, the case), how do you justify them being "surprised"?

I wouldn't. "Surprised" only applies when they aren't expecting a fight at all. They can become "flat-footed" in combat by being caught off-guard, but all that does is lower their defenses, it does not completely remove their THP. If 12 guys shoot them from cover while they're walking through the woods and they didn't notice them, though, I'd count it as surprised.

If the party attacked the town guard of their own volition, they'd probably fear volley fire the most (multiple attacks to the same AC), but they could definitely win that fight at high levels with some smart tactics. Waiting to throw area attacks when enemies appear, using cover or corners, etc. As always, play what you like

 

[Hussar]

JC, I like your idea, but, this:

Level 1 goblin archer: 1d10+10 damage (15.5 average).
Level 12 non-surprised warrior HP: 22 HP + 39 THP (61 total). (Though, to be fair, I said level 1 fighters would be in danger against numbers or if the guy was surprised.)
Level 20 ancient dragon damage (I assume colossal-sized): 2d12+30 (43 average).

I do not like. Your collosal dragon, presumably one of the absolute biggest threats in the game, only does 3 times as much damage with its bite than a goblin with a bow?

If the goblin with a bow is averaging 15 points of damage, why isn't the dragon averaging about 200? The dragon is certainly hundreds of times bigger and stronger than the goblin. The dragon is big enough to swallow a horse whole, and the goblin is using a bow.

Don't you think that the damage for that goblin is way too much?

But, otoh, I suppose if the goal is to simply make sure that everything is a threat, this is one way to do it.

 

[JamesonCourage]

JC, I like your idea, but, this:

Level 1 goblin archer: 1d10+10 damage (15.5 average).
Level 12 non-surprised warrior HP: 22 HP + 39 THP (61 total). (Though, to be fair, I said level 1 fighters would be in danger against numbers or if the guy was surprised.)
Level 20 ancient dragon damage (I assume colossal-sized): 2d12+30 (43 average).

I do not like. Your collosal dragon, presumably one of the absolute biggest threats in the game, only does 3 times as much damage with its bite than a goblin with a bow?

If the goblin with a bow is averaging 15 points of damage, why isn't the dragon averaging about 200? The dragon is certainly hundreds of times bigger and stronger than the goblin. The dragon is big enough to swallow a horse whole, and the goblin is using a bow.

Don't you think that the damage for that goblin is way too much?

Well, it looks like 4 arrows will take a level 12 warrior down (62 damage versus his 61 hit point total), but that's a little misleading.

If he has an 18 Con (a good chance by level 12 in my RPG for a warrior with 61 hit points), he recovers 5 THP per turn. So, one goblin that somehow hits him every turn needs to hit him with 6 arrows (each arrow is effectively doing 10.5, or about 63 damage over 6 attacks).

If the warrior is wearing full plate armor, he's going to be reducing that damage down to 1d4+10. This means he's dealing about 7.5 per arrow (after the warrior regains THP), meaning he'll need to be shot with an arrow every round for 9 rounds (67.5 damage).

Against one goblin, he's going to mop up. Especially considering that his AC is high enough that he won't be hit often (whereas my math was calculated at the warrior getting hit once per round). Against 12 goblins, they're a threat, but he's got a very real chance of winning without any injuries (only THP damage), or no THP damage at all if he's very invested against multiple attacks.

A dragon might be doing 1d8+30 against the level 12 warrior if he's got full plate on. That's 34.5 damage average (against a level 12, who's got 39 THP). The level 12 warrior will avoid the first hit (only THP damage), but after that he's going to get creamed. A dragon will likely two-round the level 12 warrior, and probably drop or kill him in one real "hit" (HP damage).

If you're complaining that "the dragon should always kill him in one hit because he's so huge!" then we want different things out of a "more realistic" module. I want it to stay fantastic, but more realistic. I don't want it to make it impossible for a knight in armor to fight a dragon. I just want to make it hard -or even unlikely- for that knight to win (at those levels).

Now, my system can accommodate myth pretty easily, too (I mentioned the PC that could grapple as if he was gargantuan-sized, for example). I'm not against that style of play, either. But, in a "more realistic" type of game, I want fantasy, too. I had three main goals when designing my RPG: realism, fantasy, and balance. I want healthy doses of each.

But, otoh, I suppose if the goal is to simply make sure that everything is a threat, this is one way to do it.

Thanks As always, play what you like

 

[Hussar]

Oh, no, I don't want the dragon to take him out in one hit. I was just a bit surprised that a dragon's damage was actually so low in comparison to a goblin archer.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I think the problem is that what people demand for suspension of disbelief is so all over the place, that it is now practically impossible to have the discussion from that standpoint. In the "old days" of D&D, you had three basic groups:

• "Engineers", who applied all kinds of real-world physics to the game, and did funky things with lightning bolt angles and fireball spreads, but were a pain to DM for if you weren't one yourself. They read a lot of hard science fiction.
• "Artists", who really didn't care, as long as it was dramatic and something that was remotely plausible if you didn't look at it too hard. These were the types that were fine with all the craziest James Bond stunts in the later Roger Moore years.
• Everyone else, who might dabble a bit in both camps, generally being slightly more educated/bright than the average populace--or in some cases, more of the "stoner" type, who just went along with what everyone else was doing. Crucially, a lot of these people had done something with their hands or on a farm or worked on an engine. This acted a check to some of the more nonsensical readings of game rules.

For any one of these groups, it is fairly easy to draw lines that will lead to easy suspension of disbelief. Now, we have people all over the place. Some of those places I won't list here, but suffice to say that they are not very impressive compared to any of the above. Add to that lack of understanding of the "real world" in its various aspects a much wider view of desirable verisimilitude, due to wider range of fantasy literature, film, etc. Last but not least, we have the generational aspect, of having 40+ years of heavy gaming going on. A lot of views are thus formed from the game, rather than the thing the game purports to model.

I don't think the types of players have really changed CJ. I hate to tell you this, but there's such a thing as old age, and we is gettin' there! (slowly perhaps, kicking and screaming for sure, but the river of time moves on...).

Not that nothing has changed, but I think in the old days the divisions just played out differently. I also suspect that D&D has occupied a different part of the overall RPG player space over the years.

 

[JamesonCourage]

Oh, no, I don't want the dragon to take him out in one hit. I was just a bit surprised that a dragon's damage was actually so low in comparison to a goblin archer.

I get ya. I was just pointing out that the numbers might be a little deceptive without some nuances of the system.

That is, a level 1 goblin would need about 9 straight rounds of hits (very unlikely to happen) to take out a level 12 warrior, while a dragon would need two consecutive hits (69 damage versus the level 12 warriors 66 HP [counting 1 round of recovering THP]), and the dragon gets two attacks per round (making it very possible for the dragon to take the level 12 warrior out in one round, and about 50% to take him out in two rounds).

So, while 1d10+10 might seem close to 2d12+30 at first glance, once you factor in damage reduction (from armor) and odds of hitting (the dragon has a much better chance than the archer), it's not as close as it looks. As always, play what you like