Grim-n-Gritty: Revised and Simplified
- Thread starter KenHood
- Start date
Nac Mac Feegle
First Post
Thomas Hobbes said:
Now, in a reasoned fashion, I must state my dislike for this system and my belief that it would be not the best solution. I dislike especially the fact that the high level character can withstand many "helpless" strikes by a low-level character. Furthermore, I find that this reminds me entirely to much of the d6 starwars system that preceded the WotC d20 version (wizards.com/starwars I believe) which I firmly disliked in its general nature and was quite happy to switch systems. I believe that there is too much of a change in the standard d20 system to really work for compatibility and ease of use. Now beyond that, I personally dislike this system for several reasons, but I will not mention them here because they are simply personal and have no place in a rational argument.
Or, to put it in other words,
WRONG.
Last edited:
Actually personal beliefs DO have a place in a rational arguement. They can let your DM, Ken, myself, and everyone else in this thread see points which maybe we had not seen before or at least see other viewpoints and determine their validity for our own game. Maybe you have some reasons for disliking it that are actually quite logical and would make people think.Nac Mac Feegle said:
Hagen
Fenris
Adventurer
A number of you have said that they like the system but were going to scale the Soak/Defense differently. Well I took all the tables and used a 2,4,8,16 progression for Soak, Defense, and Damage and re-ran Ken's combat example to see how it would play out.
The big difference was that the crit by Fred on the first hit succeeds. This alonf with the Soak and defense changes leads to an 11 pip loss for Otis on that hit, leaving him Severly Wounded. That -2 to Otis makes a huge difference. Harold's attack woul now be a crit. I assumed it did not succeed for simplicity, but Harolds attack adds 6 pips to Otis, leaving him at 17 and Disabled. Otis then, even with the -3 for being disabled, still squished Fred. But it is close, the crit confirmation roll is tied but the tie goes to the attacker so Fred loses his armor soak. He only takes 25 pips of damage this time, but is still dead. Warren's fireball then does 4 pips to Otis leaving him unconcious and dying.
So quite a bit better really. One PC died but the others are unharmed. The lessons: One hard blow will kill you. Strike early and hard the penalties from the life bar affect everything (except soak) and the lowering of defense, and attack makes a huge difference early on. Every -1 you put on your opponent is a big big deal.
Just wanted to run the numbers so people could see. I don't think they really made so much difference as the crit success did. And that could have been made under Ken's numbers. I will be using them scaled down though.
Fenris
The big difference was that the crit by Fred on the first hit succeeds. This alonf with the Soak and defense changes leads to an 11 pip loss for Otis on that hit, leaving him Severly Wounded. That -2 to Otis makes a huge difference. Harold's attack woul now be a crit. I assumed it did not succeed for simplicity, but Harolds attack adds 6 pips to Otis, leaving him at 17 and Disabled. Otis then, even with the -3 for being disabled, still squished Fred. But it is close, the crit confirmation roll is tied but the tie goes to the attacker so Fred loses his armor soak. He only takes 25 pips of damage this time, but is still dead. Warren's fireball then does 4 pips to Otis leaving him unconcious and dying.
So quite a bit better really. One PC died but the others are unharmed. The lessons: One hard blow will kill you. Strike early and hard the penalties from the life bar affect everything (except soak) and the lowering of defense, and attack makes a huge difference early on. Every -1 you put on your opponent is a big big deal.
Just wanted to run the numbers so people could see. I don't think they really made so much difference as the crit success did. And that could have been made under Ken's numbers. I will be using them scaled down though.
Fenris
Fenris
Adventurer
Eltern said:What is this example that you speak of? Is it buried somewhere in this uberlong thread? I haven't read through all of it. (it's big, ok?!)
Page 3 has the original, page 4 has it using the DEX variant. It is also attached as an appendix to the latest version of the rules.
I should mention that I used the standard STR rules and that I used the rolls Ken did.
I think Improved Initiative and Toughness will be must have feats in this system. Striking first is vital to survival. But that's the way Ken likes it
And I would agree.I would say that with no con they have no Soak bonus, but they are still immune to the Sneak Attack damage as they have no weak points. They would receive penalties b/c I see this as seriously tearing up the body and making it less apt to hold together. Really bad for undead...especially zombies hehFenris said:
Hagen
