Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="aramis erak" data-source="post: 7702891" data-attributes="member: 6779310">Several things ...The Ken Way vs the Teen Way the way Ken runs T&T vs the way Teens first encountering it might run it are very different. The way ken runs it, each round, you describe what you want to do special; if Ken thinks it will affect your combat effectiveness, he assigns a saving roll... on success, modify your combat total or someone else's (as appropriate) by an amount selected by the GM. On a fail, take some damage for the failed save, and don't modify the damage. My own term for this is "Stupid PC Tricks"... which Ken claimed to laugh about when he saw it on one of the boards..Many teens looking at it, including me at the time, didn't quite grasp the "State an intent and make a save to modify the combat total" element in the 5.0 rules. It wasn't until the 90's that I realized that was the expectation. (Initially, I only got into T&T for the solos... in about 1986.)Many players had, by the 90's, established house rule lists of SR Levels for various actions. Some of which (often) included things like these from my list:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"> making some of your melee damage into targeted damage (which Missiles and Magic already are), but if you fail the roll, those dice are LOST this round. (I used 1 level per die so declared.)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Taking someone else's share of the damage, or hiding behind an ally. (I used level = points transferred.)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Parrying damage (I used 1 level per point of extra AV for weapons. For shields, the shield's AV per level. On a fail, reduce the adds or AV by the damage, rather than your Con.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Extra Spite: 2 levels per point of spite. Or, alternatively, 2 levels for spite on 5-6.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Burn Armor: double your armor: 2 levels. On success, double it this round, then reduce it by 1 permanently at end of round. On fail, damage is to AV not PC...</li> </ul>The moment you start using things like this, combat oriented skills in 5.5 and later suddenly get interesting, as they make it possible to do more fancy stuff.Also, it closes the Advancement Point gap between Wizards and Warriors even in 5.0... Note that Wizards get AP for every spell cast equal to the total casting Strength. Warriors now are often making a Save every round, and suddenly are getting quite a lot of bang! (Note that the actual cost is reduced - often quite a bit - for level 2+ wizards with staves. A level 2 wizard casting a level 1 TTYF is a base of 6. Since he's 1 level higher, he reduces it to 5; since he's using his staff, he reduces it by his level, to 3. A third level wizard, same spell, reduces it for level from 6 to 4, then applies a -3 for the staff, casting it for 1! A 5th level wizard, he casts it at 2nd, base 12, -3 for increased level over spell, to 9, then -5 for the staff, to 4. A 6th level wizard — the second highest I've ever had a PC get to in a game I've run — casts the level 2 for 12-(6-2)-6=12-4-6=2... ) In 7E, he's got to roll to cast it, too, and that's an SR...And then house rules using spite in interesting ways<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Degrade Armor With Spite: I allowed this as 3 spite per point killed.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Using Spite to trigger colorful effects instead of damage</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Using Spite to reduce weapon adds and/or dice...</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Damaging attributes other than Con. I used 2:1...</li> </ul>And, for those of us who learned a thing or three from the videogame, a fight in a big room might not be resolved as a single fight, but might break into several smaller melees, with Saves made to isolate certain individuals... if you've got the guy with massive AV and a ton of Con, you can have one of the warriors isolate someone, and kill him in one turn... Takes a SR to do if using Theater of the Mind; takes careful movement if using minis or counters on a map. (And that's actually a supported — kind of — mode of play in 5.0...)T&T's very loose framework was awesome If you could add SR's to do special things in combat. That took the players and the GM both agreeing to the Stupid PC tricks.An example of this from a 5.5 campaign I ran... Tam is playing a Warrior; Jim, a Wizard; Steph a Paragon*; Jimmy, a Ranger. Me: You have been followed to the edge of the chasm by 5 Naga... who are menacing you with their big-ass swords... Tam: How Big? Me: 4d kind of big. And look to be pretty buff. Jim: I want to Taunt one to charge me, then roll out of the way so he goes over the edge. Me: Ok, when I call for rolls, Level 3 on lower of Charisma or Dex. Steph: I want to Hidey-hole. Everyone BUT Jim. Me: They know where you are, and you can't move while in a Hidey-hole. I'll triple your AV, but attacking would break the spell... Steph: in that case, Hold That Pose the lead 2. 8-1-3=4 Wiz. Tam: I want to do all my damage to one of them. Jim: Does my Roguery Apply Me: Jim, yes. Tam, how? Tam: BF&I! Duh! † Me: 5 dice? Level 5 Strength. Need 40-Strength. Tam: 10? On 2d6? Me: Doubles open end, remember? Tam: Oh, yeah, Duh. I'm Stooopid.‡ Jimmy: I shoot the small one. Me: Level 2. Jimmy: I want to shoot him in the back. Me: Level 3, but +1 die if you make it. Me: Ok, roll them! Jim: WOOT! Made it! 57 on the dice. (Jim's rolled: 6+6, 4+4, 6+6, 1+1, 2+2, 3+3, 1+2.) Tam: double 2's. Damn. Jim: Doubles open... Tam: Oh, yeah... (rolls 6+5). Made my 10... Me: Don't forget to log the roll & Level for XP later... Steph: I did my part... Me: Jim - no combat roll, your target went over the edge... Jimmy: I need ... 0. Me: Remember, a 1+2 or 1+3 fails... Jimmy: I hate that ... (grins) Rolled a 4... 2+2. Rolling again. 2+2. And again. 3+3. And again. 1+6. Yep. I hit him. Me: Combat Rolls... (loud clatter of lots of dice from me, tam, and jimmy.) Jim: Can I still take a share of the hits? I've got good armor... Me: Sure. Jimmy: Hot! 28 on the dice, + 20, is 48 Tam: 29 total. Me: The two left fighting got a total of 55... Me: Jimmy, You slay that one. Yes, he WAS one of the two fighting. Me: Your side totaled 77; 22 margin. Jimmy's kill had 15 con and 5 AV, so that's 2 left. Tam's directed damage gets hers down, too. Since all damage was directed, the excess is lost. them: (assorted cheering and barking) Me: Going into Round 2, the two Naga are suddenly realizing they may not live very long, and are going to back away. Jimmy: Not if I can help - Step: HTP! Jimmy: it! Jim and tam: I KILL IT. Jinx! Jim: Coke's in the fridge. Bring two. *Warrior Wizard by the 5E rules, but we used the 7E title for it, because it feels better.† Brute Force & Ignorance. She had a Str 30...‡ Teenager in smart-alec mode. Sarcasm so biting it makes a Shark look unarmed.See, Combat isn't so boring after all... with a GM who grasps the situation. In a straight up "Side vs Side", with no Stupid PC Tricks, the PC's would have been in trouble. Steph's combat was only 4d+8, and Jim's was 2d+12...D10's vs d6'sThe use of D10's in 5E was for the language table. Unreliable NarratorKen's interviews by Mr. Petersen do not match with his older comments in print. They're similar, but not the same. Ken's an unreliable narrator... more importantly, what I've seen of the PATW interviews covers no new ground vs the older, closer to the referenced time, written commentary by Ken. Unfortunately, much of that content predates the Internet Archive... so it survives mostly in various people's hard drives, and in some print products. Which means Ken, unintentionally, may have mislead Mr. Petersen.</blockquote>

Verification