GRIM TALES mixed with D&D classes: Action Points?

Ulorian said:
Here're a few questions: how often do you hand out Action Points? At what rate do your players typically consume them? It's hard for me to tell if a talent which requires burning APs is worth taking without a general idea of how many free APs a typical character has with which to play.

There's still a learning curve among players, with regards to getting used to spending action points. The short answer is that they spend them very quickly as soon as they "realize" they are in a climactic situation.

I do not award action points very often-- but this question is really better resolved by how often you allow action points to refresh. Obviously, if you're playing a very action-packed variant where APs refresh every session, you won't have to award them very often. If you're playing gritty and APs never refresh, it's more important for you to award them.

In answer to your last question, don't worry about it. Let your players decide whether a feat is worth it or not, just like you always have with any other feat. Don't worry, your players will figure it out!

Heroic Surge is always worth it (and actually is the place most APs in my games have been spent). Second place would be making tough attack rolls; last place would be making tough skill checks.

Wulf
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Wulf Ratbane said:
There's still a learning curve among players, with regards to getting used to spending action points. The short answer is that they spend them very quickly as soon as they "realize" they are in a climactic situation.

I do not award action points very often-- but this question is really better resolved by how often you allow action points to refresh. Obviously, if you're playing a very action-packed variant where APs refresh every session, you won't have to award them very often. If you're playing gritty and APs never refresh, it's more important for you to award them.

In answer to your last question, don't worry about it. Let your players decide whether a feat is worth it or not, just like you always have with any other feat. Don't worry, your players will figure it out!

Heroic Surge is always worth it (and actually is the place most APs in my games have been spent). Second place would be making tough attack rolls; last place would be making tough skill checks.

Wulf
Thanks for that; it's nice to have someone's in-game experience to give you perspective on a new ruleset.

I would have initially guessed that skill check bonuses would be a more frequent use of Action Points, but it makes sense that if a player wants their PC to be good at a skill, he'll have raised it high enough to beat that skill's most common usages' DCs, and so won't generally need the AP boost. Otherwise, the skill rank is so low that the AP boost won't make a difference anyway.
 

Well, I mis-typed.

I didn't mean to say skill checks were last place-- I should have said THIRD place.

Being able to spend the action point AFTER you roll the d20 but BEFORE you know if you succeeded or not does make a big difference. You roll, you add your skill bonuses, you get a 19...

...You probably want to consider an AP!

Wulf
 

Wulf Ratbane said:
Well, I mis-typed.

I didn't mean to say skill checks were last place-- I should have said THIRD place.

Being able to spend the action point AFTER you roll the d20 but BEFORE you know if you succeeded or not does make a big difference. You roll, you add your skill bonuses, you get a 19...

...You probably want to consider an AP!

Wulf
Ah. I missed the bit about declaring the use of the AP after the roll.

Completely off-topic, but.. why doesn't the Smart hero get a larger selection of basic talents? Not much here if you want to dip into Smart for a few levels.. Linguist is neat, but Savant is not very useful if you only have a few Smart levels. I guess a few levels of Smart is good if you want to boost your skill points, but the hit you take to BAB and HD.. you better REALLY need those skill points!

Also, can you take an advanced talent at 3rd level, or do you have to wait till 5th?
 


Ulorian said:
Completely off-topic, but.. why doesn't the Smart hero get a larger selection of basic talents?

Dunno. Their entry level talents (even in d20 Modern) really suck.

Skill points are pretty damn important though, I'll give you that. Starting 1st level as a Smart hero also gives you 3 extra core skills.

Also, can you take an advanced talent at 3rd level, or do you have to wait till 5th?

Yes, you can take it at 3rd level.

Wulf
 

Hey Wulf.. completely off-topic again, but I wanted to bounce this off you, as someone with real game design experience.

This is something that's been bugging me about D&D since I started playing in 1982 (the red and blue basic set, closely followed by the AD&D books). First off, I always was annoyed that in 1st and 2nd edition AD&D the monsters' stat blocks were completely different from the PCs' (aside from THACO, saving throws, and AC), making it difficult if not impossible to have sensible rules for interaction between PCs and monsters besides simple combat (for example, how would you adjudicate a PC wrestling a minotaur in 1st edition?). Also, monsters had no way of using the non-combat rules (non-weapon proficiencies, etc.) that the PCs enjoyed.

Then along came 3rd edition, and I thought: "Well, now they've finally caught on!". Monsters now used the same ability scores as PCs, they used the same skills and feats system, so all was looking grand.. until I noticed that the most heinous artifact from 1st edition still remained: the Hit Die.

PCs use levels to represent their degree of prowess; higher level lets you: attack more frequently and with more accuracy, have better saving throws, improve your spellcasting and other class abilities, etc. Monsters use Hit Dice in the exact same way (i.e. as a mark of prowess), except it has another factor rolled into it: a monster's size.

To reflect the extra hit points a monster of larger size would have, extra Hit Dice are added to its statblock. This is fine except that increasing Hit Dice also increases BAB, saving throws, and number of skills and feats. Seems innocuous at first glance, but this results in really large, really powerful monsters having absolutely ridiculous BAB and saving throws, which means that PCs have to have ridiculously high-powered magic items, spells, stat boosts, etc. to be able to defend themselves against these monstrosities. I think this is one of the main reasons people complain that D&D breaks down after about 10th level.

It would be a lot better, in my opinion, to replace the Hit Dice stat with a Level stat, which works exactly like a PC level: it is used to calculate your BAB, saves, skills, feats, etc. If a monster is larger or smaller sized, their are specific size-based bonuses and penalties applied. For instance:

1) Strength
2) hit points (increased hit die size, flat hit point increase, bonus hit dice for purposes of hit points only, or whatever other system you care to think of)
3) grappling attack bonus
4) increase or decrease to poison DC (if the creature has a natural poison - the bigger you are, the bigger the dose of poison you inject.. even if a weak poison is a lot deadlier if you get a half gallon of it instead of a drop)
5) increase or decrease to poison save (or maybe to Fort saves in general)
6) etc.

Some examples to illustrate:

Why would a blue whale, which is basically non-aggressive and completely unskilled in combat, have the attack capability of a really high-level fighter?

Why would a sheep the size of a house have better combat ability and better Will saves than a run-of-the-mill sheep?

Basically, I like a simple ruleset that is evenly applicable. The Hit Dice for monsters/level for PCs works against that in my opinion.

I know that was a bit long, but any thoughts?
 
Last edited:

Remove ads

Top