Grim-n-Gritty: Revised and Simplified

KenHood said:
Hey! Ken is sneaky.

Ken is funny. Your rant and descriptions have had me laughing out loud. Although I do empathise.

I've just finished reading through the Revised version. It looks very neat and tidy, and I couldn't see any issues. I'll post up here if anything comes up.

Thanks again.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

KenHood said:
Me, too. Remember, I'm the guy who created the original GnG rules and didn't have any "softeners" for the magic system. You got hit with a 10d6 fireball, you got the whole 10d6 -- no odds equal 1s.

That reminds me, I've been meaning to say 'thanks' for the last year. My group has been using G&G modified rules for the last eight months, and it has worked extremely well. The players are very happy with the system (as it's more lethal for the bad guys too) and everyone has been much more committed to roleplaying.

I have no intention of using most of the revised rules as the old fashioned ones work well for me, but I will be using a few to 'patch' what I have seen as shortfalls the original. Namely, touch attacks get a +4 bonus to hit; sneak attack converted to +2 dmg per d6 of sneak attack. The Pounce bonus was decent, but making sneak attack more lethal is imperative. Then again, I use magic full strength as well - I demand bloody combat.

Enough rambling, just wanted to say thanks for the original and for the good ideas in the revised. I had zero interest in DMing a d20 group until I encountered your variant, so you're responsible by proxy for the deliquency of eight individuals you've never met.

M
 

Ken,

I like both your design goal list and the example with Boppo and think it would be cool to include them in your next version of the rules to help set them in context for others.
 

mafisto said:
I have no intention of using most of the revised rules as the old fashioned ones work well for me, but I will be using a few to 'patch' what I have seen as shortfalls the original. Namely, touch attacks get a +4 bonus to hit; sneak attack converted to +2 dmg per d6 of sneak attack. The Pounce bonus was decent, but making sneak attack more lethal is imperative.

Yep. That's why I added them.

Now, I would suggest that you try out the rules -- not necessarily in your home campaign, but on the side. Use one human-on-human combat, one party vs. a bunch of little guys, and one party vs. a Really Big Thing. You might find these rules give you a lot of bang for your buck and may end up upgrading to the new version.

It's like I'm always saying to my young, impressionable students, "Shut up, and do as you're told!"

You know you're reaching people on a meaningful level when they collapse into the fetal position and whimper.

And that's just their parents...


...so you're responsible by proxy for the deliquency of eight individuals you've never met.

Well, that's just GREAT!

Oh, yeah, DUCKY!

JUST FREAKIN' DUCKY!

Delinquency! That's what EVERY teacher loves to hear!

Get off your rear, put up the games, get an edumacation, and find a job! It ain't hurt me none! Hell, I'm a bona fide corn-you-co-pee-ah of book learnin' and et-i-kit.
 

Wulf Ratbane said:
Ken, I think your rules are great. I'm not surprised that they didn't get a warm reception on Monte's boards-- why anyone would think that Monte's high fantasy system would be a match for Grim and Gritty is beyond me. AU is not the place where GnG goes to play. (I tell you I'm running Grim and Gritty in my game, and you tell me you want to play a fairy, I'll show you the door...)
Well I didn't really expect that people would naturally piece AU and the GnG rules together, but there's some real masochists on those boards so I figured I'd ask *grin* Really it was more of my own curiosity as to why I would post about it over there. I wanted more people to see Ken's rules and even know taht they've been revised. While it might not blend as well in AU, it might be right for another campaign they're running. Think of it as advertising.

Actually, I could see a GnG variant of AU as being quite interesting...especially since there are far few spells that do handfuls of damage, no dragons, etc. The setting is high fantasy (as is standard D&D) but I think it could be made to work nicely. But Faen would definitely need to be sneaky and avoid combat. Duh heh.

Ken>Sorry for the apoplexy I gave ya there, but I just wanted to share the initial reactions of folks with you. The good thing is that you posted a lot of things that I think you need to insert into the document. Your expectations of the system is more detailed. Your examples of how weapon DCs are figured as well as combat examples are excellent and should definitely be in the document. Naturally, any of the files you want up can be sent to me and I'll post them for you as usual.

Doc vs MS>technically OpenOffice and WordPerfect can both open .doc files no problem. OpenOffice is a free office suite originally designed for Linux but it has been ported to many OSes including Windows. .doc files aren't the end of the world *grin*

Hagen
 

SSquirrel said:
Well I didn't really expect that people would naturally piece AU and the GnG rules together, but there's some real masochists on those boards so I figured I'd ask *grin*

Now, that's just funny. I use the original G&G rules with many AU variant rules and all of the AU spell system. In my mind they're an excellent match, as the spell system is more flexible and less oriented towards combat spells. That doesn't mean the system is less deadly, per se. With combat being the meat grinder that it is, even simple spells like Compelling Command can get you killed nice and quick.

I don't use the AU setting, which I understand would be very different story; personally I don't think it would work terribly well, what with the commonplace occurance of a wide range of PC sizes. In Ye Olde Generic England Setting (tm) most of your opponents are Medium, just like you, which levels the playing field.
 

Another Combat Example

Once upon a time, there were three adventurers: Fred the Fighter, Harold the Halfling Rogue, and Warren the Wizard.

They took counsel among themselves and said, “Lo, there are many holes in the ground. Within these holes, we often find lump sums of currency, mystic tomes, gemstones, and magical items, wherewith we may acquire goods and services upon exiting said holes. This treasure is oft protected by challenges commensurate to our ability. Said challenges, whilst sometimes difficult, do not pose threat that exceeds the worth of the reward. Shall we not go forth into these holes and acquire more riches?”

“Verily, we shall,” said they, and off they went.

So, they met an ogre, named Otis.

----

Pertinent Statistics

Fred the Fighter – 5th level
Attack: +10 (+5 base, +3 Strength, +1 masterwork, +1 weapon focus)
Defense: +8 (+5 base, +1 Dexterity, +2 heavy steel shield)
Soak: +10 (+2 Constitution, +8 full plate)
Damage: bastard sword, 1d10 + 5 (+3 strength, +2 specialization)

Harold the Halfling Rogue – 5th level
Attack: +9 (+4 base, +4 Dexterity (weapon finesse), +1 enhancement)
Defense: +11 (+5 base, +4 Dexterity, +1 buckler, +1 size)
Soak: +0 (+1 Constitution, +3 studded leather, -4 size)
Damage: short sword, 1d6 – 3 (+0 Str, +1 enhancement, -4 size)
Special: Sneak Attack +6

Warren the Wizard – 5th level
Attack: +2 (+2 base)
Defense: +4 (+2 base, +2 Dexterity)
Soak: +2 (+1 Constitution, +1 Bracers of Armor)
Damage: quarterstaff, 1d6

Otis the Ogre
Attack: +9 (+4 base, -1 size, +5 Strength, +1 weapon focus)
Defense: +2 (+4 base, -1 size, -1 Dexterity)
Soak: +16 (+3 Constitution, +4 size, +5 natural armor, +3 hide armor, +1 toughness)
Damage: greatclub, 2d8 + 9 (+5 Strength, +4 size)

-----

Fred wins initiative and swings at Otis with his bastard sword.

Fred (attack): rolls 20
Otis (defense): rolls 9

Fred hits with an 11 point margin of success. He makes a critical hit and selects “Bypass Natural Armor.” He makes a confirmation roll: 15 (Fred) v. 16 (Otis). Fred fails the critical.

Fred rolls his damage: 1d10 + 5 + 11 (margin of success) = 20 points – 16 (Otis’ Soak) = 4. Otis suffers 4 points of damage. He loses 4 pips in the Lightly Wounded column.

---

Harold sneaks up behind Fred, flanks, and performs a sneak attack on Otis.

Harold (attack): rolls 18
Otis (defense): rolls 11

Harold hits with a 7 point margin of success. He does not make a critical hit.

Harold rolls his damage: 1d6 – 3 + 6 (sneak attack) + 7 (margin of success) = 16 points – 16 (Otis’ Soak) = no damage. Otis is not even scratched.

---

Otis attacks Fred, the real threat.

Otis (attack): 27
Fred (defense): 12

Otis hits with a 15 point margin of success. Otis gets a critical hit and selects “Bypass Heavy Armor.” He rolls to confirm. Otis gets 15, Fred rolls 12, and Otis confirms the critical. Otis ignores Fred’s Soak from the full plate armor!

Otis rolls damage: 2d8 + 9 + 15 (margin of success) = 32 points – 2 (Fred’s Soak without the armor) = 30 points of damage.

Fred loses all of his life pips.

With a resounding battle cry of “UGH!” followed by a moist splatter, Fred decorates the room in fleshtones and crimson.

---

Warren panics and casts fireball, thinking, “Well, Harold does have evasion and a good Reflex save….”

In the normal rules, Warren would roll 5d6 for his fireball. Under the GnG rules, he rolls 4d6 + 2 and inflicts 18 points of damage. Otis’ Soak absorbs 16 points, so Otis suffers only 2 points of damage. This fills in two more pips and brings him to Moderately Wounded. He suffers a -1 penalty on most rolls.

Harold does make his saving throw, but he’s not too happy about the fireball.

---

Harold curses Warren. Though Harold no longer flanking Otis and loses the sneak attack, Harold attacks again.

Harold (attack): 21
Otis (defense): 6

Harold hits with a 15 point margin of success. It threatens a critical hit and selects, “Bypass Natural Armor.” Harold rolls to confirm and gets a 16, while Otis rolls 12. Otis is forced to make a Reflex save against DC 13. Bad luck for Harold! Otis rolls 19.

Go, ogre!

Uh, I mean, poor Harold!

Harold rolls his damage: 1d6 – 3 + 15 (margin of success) = 17 – 16 (Otis’ soak) = an astounding ONE POINT OF DAMAGE! Otis loses fills in another pip in the Moderately Wounded column.

Go, halfling thief!

---

Otis beats Harold like a drum.

A squishy, screaming, fluid-filled, bone-supported drum.

Otis (attack): 28!
Harold (defense): 21

Otis wins by a margin of 7. Not enough for a critical hit, but plenty to ruin Harold’s day.

Otis rolls damage: 2d8 + 9 + 7 (margin of success) = 24 – 0 (Harold’s soak) = 24 points of damage.

Good news! Harold isn’t dead!

He’s just dying!

Yee-haw!

---

Shortly after soiling himself and wondering if CR 3 still means the same thing in the GnG system, Warren tries an acid arrow against Otis.

Warren (+4 for ranged touch attack): 24
Otis (defense): 14

Warren hits with a 10 point margin of success. He threatens a critical hit! He selects “Bypass Natural Armor” and rolls to confirm: Warren gets 18. Otis gets 4. Warren confirms the hit and ignores the Soak from Otis’ natural armor.

Warren rolls for damage: 2d4 + 10 = 15 – 11 (Otis’ Soak without Natural Armor) = 4 points of damage. Otis loses 4 more life pips. Now, he’s Severely Wounded (-2 on most rolls).

And angry!

---

Otis charges Warren!

---

Lucky Warren! He gets to make an attack of opportunity against the charging Otis. Screaming like a girl-child, he swings his staff.

Warren (attack): 17
Otis (defense): 12

Warren hits with a 5 point margin of success. Not a critical hit!

Warren rolls damage: 1d6 + 5 (margin of success) = 8 – 16 (Otis’ Soak) = NO DAMAGE!

Yeah!

---

Otis completes his charge.

Otis (charge, attack): 20
Warren (defense): 9

Otis gets an 11 point margin of success. He threatens a critical hit and selects, “Disable Head.” With a -8 penalty, Otis rolls to confirm. He gets a 13. Warren rolls a 12. Warren makes a Fortitude save against DC 17 and fails with a 6. Warren is stunned for one round and his head disabled (-2 on all rolls).

Otis rolls his damage: 2d8 + 9 + 11 (margin of success) = 35 – 2 (Warren’s Soak) = 33 points of damage. Warren dies instantly.

Good news! He doesn’t have to deal with a disabled head!

Bad news! He doesn’t have to deal with a head at all!
 


mafisto said:
Now, that's just funny. I use the original G&G rules with many AU variant rules and all of the AU spell system. In my mind they're an excellent match, as the spell system is more flexible and less oriented towards combat spells. That doesn't mean the system is less deadly, per se. With combat being the meat grinder that it is, even simple spells like Compelling Command can get you killed nice and quick.

I don't use the AU setting, which I understand would be very different story; personally I don't think it would work terribly well, what with the commonplace occurance of a wide range of PC sizes. In Ye Olde Generic England Setting (tm) most of your opponents are Medium, just like you, which levels the playing field.
Ahh but you don't discount my comment of masochists on Monte's boards *grin*
Actually I think it could be interesting in the setting and storyline as well. I definitely appreciate teh flexibility of AU and will be running it in mid may (can't start sooner due to conflictin gschedules sadly) but I don't think my group would enjoy the grim n gritty rules. Altho who knows maybe they would. maybe I'll have people look at them and if they like em we'll try them out. If everyone hates em in play we'll dump em.

yes in a setting where all the PC races are medium it balances them better against each other, but as Ken said, if you're tiny you SHOULDN'T be equal.

Hagen

Hagen
 

I didn't even have time to read this thread, but I did want to drop a quick note to say to you, Mr. Hood, that I downloaded GnG, playtested it, and plan to use a slightly tweaked variant of it in a d20 fantasy campaign sometime in the future. Thanks for providing it - I think it's great.
 

Remove ads

Top