Having PCs roll "Defenses" rather than the DM rolling "Attacks"

[Mort_Q]

There was a suggestion regarding for this in ye olde Unearthed Arcana book.

This variant takes a lot of the work out of the DM's hands, since he no longer needs to make attack rolls, saving throws, or caster level checks to overcome spell resistance for his NPCs and monsters. Than can free up his attention for more important things, such as NPC tactics, special spell effects, terrain, and the like.

Has anyone played with this at all in 4e?

I believe the notion that most people liked was to take 12 (thanks keterys) on the NPC attack, so a +7 versus would be an attack value of 19, and the PC would roll a d20 and add that to the appropriate defense instead of the flat 10. Critical hits on a 1, 20 is miss... etc.

If you've tried this, did anything come up that is screwy particular to 4e?

I'd think that it'd be easier to remember your interrupts... but... I haven't tried it yet.

 

[Elric]

There was a suggestion regarding for this in ye olde Unearthed Arcana book.



Has anyone played with this at all in 4e?

I believe the notion that most people liked was to take 10 (or 9, haven't done the math yet) on the NPC attack, so a +7 versus would be an attack value of 17 (16), and the PC would roll a d 20 and add that to the appropriate defense instead of the flat 10. Critical hits on a 1, 20 is miss... etc.

I can see why the PC would want to roll against 9 or 10 + the monster attack bonus with their defense bonus: it changes the odds in their favor!

With equal attack bonuses for the monster and defense bonuses for the PC, a monster hits on a roll of 10 or higher (55% of the time). So a PC should make his defense roll 45% of the time if you want the probabilities to stay the same. That means he needs to succeed on a 12+, so the DC of the player's "Defense check" to avoid getting hit has to be 12 + Monster Attack bonus, and the player rolls 1d20+ bonuses to [the attacked defense].

 

[keterys]

Yep, it's Atk+12 you want, not 9 or 10

Monster attack = +10
PC Defense = 20
55% of successful hit (45% chance of miss)

So to change it to defense roll, it'd be
Monster Attack = 22
PC Defense Bonus = +10
45% of successful avoid (55% chance of hit)

It's definitely an interesting option, yep.

 

[Mort_Q]

Thanks for saving me doing the Math, but my real question should have been more specific. In 4e, are there any specific powers, abilities, etc., that pose any significant challenge to this approach?

I can't think of any that wouldn't also be weird the standard way, but I tend miss the subtleties.

 

[keterys]

Mild spin on reroll type abilities... but, honestly, nothing leaps out as important.

 

[Garthanos]

We use it (I have 2 players and spinning things in there favor is an advantage ... so shush about needing 12 to maintain the odds ;-) - I use 11+ it isn't noticeable).

It brings up allowing the player to put the spin on how there defense looks similar to how they make there offense look... a very cool thing actually, it lets the player feel active even when it isn't technically his turn.

 

[darjr]

http://www.enworld.org/forum/4e-fan...roll-defense-against-npc-monster-attacks.html

I have not tried this yet. I'd very much like to.

 

[keterys]

Given the math drift for defenses, I'd consider doing the tiny adventures version (ie, that is 2 in the favor of the players and very easy to do), but honestly I think I'd seriously lose time waiting on my players (any of several groups, they'd all be slower) instead of just rolling it myself.

 

[Mort_Q]

I wouldn't do it to save time, so much as keep players involved, and maybe encourage more creative energy at the table.

I can still fudge the damage if need be. I wouldn't let them roll that... that's just adding insult to injury.

 

[keterys]

Hmmhmm... almost worth using standardized damage at that point (ie, like minions), perhaps with just doubling damage for crits. Then you could do things like hand out an index card to a player or whatever and be like 'This attack on you, cope'.