Irda Ranger
First Post
Dark Sun was so ahead of its time.ruleslawyer said:
Grittier 4th Edition: Pointers
- Thread starter Lackhand
- Start date
SlagMortar
First Post
I've played more low level than high level D&D, which may color my persceptions. Scary combats always had:
1. Big drops in proportion of hit points.
2. Some characters being disabled.
Character deaths do not make the game gritty to me. I'd rather have knockouts and revivals both be easy - for example in 3e have 10 hits points for a first level fighter, but you don't actually die until -20 so those x3 crits don't kill you every time. Everyone can be just fine once the combat is over. The scary part is when two out of four PCs are unconscious and my character just took a two hits that knocked off 50% of his hit points. Now, what I might not know is that the DM can only actually hit my character on a roll of 19 or higher, and happened to get lucky and hit on two of the last three shots. The character can still be fairly safe, but I don't feel that way.
The 4e designers talk a lot about balancing expected damage per round. I agree that expected damage per round is important. However, there is a big difference in the feel of the game between an attack that does 30 damage with a 10% chance to hit and an attack that does 4 damage with a 75% chance to hit, though the expected damage per round is the same. It sounds like 4e is going more toward the everyone hits, but the damage is low relative to the hit points. I'm much more in favor of nobody hits as often, but the damage is higher relative to the hit points. It makes the game feel more dangerous to my character.
Making 4e more this style might be as simple as all attacks do double damage, but all attack bonuses are cut in half. However, that won't quite work unless the monsters of a particular level have pretty similar AC scores. Hopefully the SRD will include the base monster formula's WoTC is using so it will be pretty easy to tweak the AC scores of the monsters to keep expected damage the same but add in more misses.
1. Big drops in proportion of hit points.
2. Some characters being disabled.
Character deaths do not make the game gritty to me. I'd rather have knockouts and revivals both be easy - for example in 3e have 10 hits points for a first level fighter, but you don't actually die until -20 so those x3 crits don't kill you every time. Everyone can be just fine once the combat is over. The scary part is when two out of four PCs are unconscious and my character just took a two hits that knocked off 50% of his hit points. Now, what I might not know is that the DM can only actually hit my character on a roll of 19 or higher, and happened to get lucky and hit on two of the last three shots. The character can still be fairly safe, but I don't feel that way.
The 4e designers talk a lot about balancing expected damage per round. I agree that expected damage per round is important. However, there is a big difference in the feel of the game between an attack that does 30 damage with a 10% chance to hit and an attack that does 4 damage with a 75% chance to hit, though the expected damage per round is the same. It sounds like 4e is going more toward the everyone hits, but the damage is low relative to the hit points. I'm much more in favor of nobody hits as often, but the damage is higher relative to the hit points. It makes the game feel more dangerous to my character.
Making 4e more this style might be as simple as all attacks do double damage, but all attack bonuses are cut in half. However, that won't quite work unless the monsters of a particular level have pretty similar AC scores. Hopefully the SRD will include the base monster formula's WoTC is using so it will be pretty easy to tweak the AC scores of the monsters to keep expected damage the same but add in more misses.
what we do...
We have a darker, more violent, gritty tone to our games...
what we do:
1) use the 2E Combat & Tactics/Spells & Magic critical hits instead of the 3.X and ongoing, the 4.X crits.... this means for more realistic combat in the sense that, swords can cut off limbs, any limb, maces can crush bones, fireballs will burn things and even melt stuff, including skin, etc.
it requires house rules for spells - such as healing now has to be focused, so that it can be used to heal up organs/bones independantly of the rest of the general HP OR you just have to choose which spells can heal bone damage, or loss of limbs, or melted organs,etc.
2) tone of the adventures....forget the regular faerie land type fantasy settings and describe them more like the 2E planescape and darksun settings...dirty, busy, lots of details but harsh as well as beautiful in their own rights. The description and type of adventures can also cause the gritty realism that you want.
Sanjay
We have a darker, more violent, gritty tone to our games...
what we do:
1) use the 2E Combat & Tactics/Spells & Magic critical hits instead of the 3.X and ongoing, the 4.X crits.... this means for more realistic combat in the sense that, swords can cut off limbs, any limb, maces can crush bones, fireballs will burn things and even melt stuff, including skin, etc.
it requires house rules for spells - such as healing now has to be focused, so that it can be used to heal up organs/bones independantly of the rest of the general HP OR you just have to choose which spells can heal bone damage, or loss of limbs, or melted organs,etc.
2) tone of the adventures....forget the regular faerie land type fantasy settings and describe them more like the 2E planescape and darksun settings...dirty, busy, lots of details but harsh as well as beautiful in their own rights. The description and type of adventures can also cause the gritty realism that you want.
Sanjay
Personally, I find no real social interaction rules are necessary at all. For my players, it's generally the joy of roleplaying itself that we enjoy and we don't need rules for it. For me, a diplomacy roll is good enough to give me a guide for how much an NPC will divulge, and the rest we play out. I don't want a combat-like system of verbal sparring. If combat could be handled fluidly and fairly via roleplaying, I'd do that. There would be skills like "flourish" and "brute force," and you picked one of them as a means of combat to determine the outcome. You'd make a check and we'd roleplay it out much like my players go the route of diplomacy, bluff, or intimidation to get information out of someone. Then again, there's a reason why I go several sessions with no combat, so I know I'm not like most players.
The most rules I'd like to see are basically already written. I'd just improve the info about NPCs. List the basic methods of interaction: diplomacy (WIS), wit (CHA), intimidation (STR), bluff (INT) (which could even be all one skill called persuasion but using different key attributes). Give me a list of info the NPC possessed, the difficulty of getting each tidbit, and modifiers for each interaction for the character. E.g. Jaded Bob (dip: 0, wit: +2, int: -2, bluff: -5): knows where the bad guy is (DC 10), knows why the bad guy is doing stuff (DC 15), knows the bad guy's weakness (DC 20). Pick an approach and make the check, then roleplay the convo giving the appropriate info as it comes up.
ruleslawyer
Registered User
I was thinking exactly of the DS character tree when the idea hit me, actually.Irda Ranger said:
Fallen Seraph
First Post
To make my 4e Game more gritty. I plan on doing the following.
1. Depending on what the Health-roll system is like, go with the weakest version of it, so watered down HP to start.
2. The gear including weapons and armour of the PCs will be of poor-make, so wouldn't give much bonuses in combat. As well as being more likely to break, be punctured, etc.
3. Have them face foes at the very top of their ability to fight. Also multiple foes, so swarms of orcs, etc. I want to see them reeling at the end of combat. Their characters/players on the edge, their powers drained, their armour mudded and weapons dulled. They then have to seek out shelter to recover and during recovery risk the creatures/people around them possibly be of ill-intention (this would be dependent on rolls and myself the DM; I don't want my PCs to die).
4. To sorta go along with 2. it is a low-magic game, with few items to help you, and magic itself is erraticate and time-consuming for non-offensive abilities (no insta-heals).
5. Definately hoping for a good social-system, since that will be key to my game.
6. Possibly introduce flaws, and fear-roll/systems into the game, to give a representation of how fragile the PCs are (it won't be that forced, but hopefully the players will RP-well and take the rolls to match it thus).
7. Finally and I think most important is simply to create a mood/atmosphere and a world that is gritty and harsh. No matter how you tweak the rules, if the game is set in a happy, bright and peaceful setting that mood won't come across.
1. Depending on what the Health-roll system is like, go with the weakest version of it, so watered down HP to start.
2. The gear including weapons and armour of the PCs will be of poor-make, so wouldn't give much bonuses in combat. As well as being more likely to break, be punctured, etc.
3. Have them face foes at the very top of their ability to fight. Also multiple foes, so swarms of orcs, etc. I want to see them reeling at the end of combat. Their characters/players on the edge, their powers drained, their armour mudded and weapons dulled. They then have to seek out shelter to recover and during recovery risk the creatures/people around them possibly be of ill-intention (this would be dependent on rolls and myself the DM; I don't want my PCs to die).
4. To sorta go along with 2. it is a low-magic game, with few items to help you, and magic itself is erraticate and time-consuming for non-offensive abilities (no insta-heals).
5. Definately hoping for a good social-system, since that will be key to my game.
6. Possibly introduce flaws, and fear-roll/systems into the game, to give a representation of how fragile the PCs are (it won't be that forced, but hopefully the players will RP-well and take the rolls to match it thus).
7. Finally and I think most important is simply to create a mood/atmosphere and a world that is gritty and harsh. No matter how you tweak the rules, if the game is set in a happy, bright and peaceful setting that mood won't come across.
Darrin Drader
Explorer
I always thought that gritty games were supposed to have a lower level of magic and fewer "wahoo" elements. Most of the opponents the PCs run up against are humans (or demi-humans, if you wish), so every time they get into a fight, there is a human toll that they must then deal with.
A gritty game is where there is no good guy or bad guy, but shades of gray. It isn't a question of whether your side is right, but which side is less wrong. In such a game paladins may fight paladins and people do not come together for the common good.
In a gritty game, vice is everywhere.You can't get through a game session without seeing alcoholism, gambling, drug use, and prostitution. The characters may even be required to take a vice. Paying off their out of control gambling debts might be the reason why they risk their lives adventuring in the first place.
More than anything else, a gritty game is one where characters are not super heroes. Take the ability progression of any given class, space it out so they only average one new ability every other level, and then make it so that their abilities max out at level 20 - meaning that once they hit this level, they have reached the peak of human achievement and cannot progress any further. Yes, that does mean that there is no such thing as 9th level spells, except as ancient legend or part of very powerful artifacts.
A gritty game is where there is no good guy or bad guy, but shades of gray. It isn't a question of whether your side is right, but which side is less wrong. In such a game paladins may fight paladins and people do not come together for the common good.
In a gritty game, vice is everywhere.You can't get through a game session without seeing alcoholism, gambling, drug use, and prostitution. The characters may even be required to take a vice. Paying off their out of control gambling debts might be the reason why they risk their lives adventuring in the first place.
More than anything else, a gritty game is one where characters are not super heroes. Take the ability progression of any given class, space it out so they only average one new ability every other level, and then make it so that their abilities max out at level 20 - meaning that once they hit this level, they have reached the peak of human achievement and cannot progress any further. Yes, that does mean that there is no such thing as 9th level spells, except as ancient legend or part of very powerful artifacts.
Professor Phobos
First Post
Whisperfoot said:
Nope; you can have gritty superheroics. It's more an issue of tone than it is of trappings.
Similar Threads
