Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
In Search of Flexible Defense Mechanics
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Sacrosanct" data-source="post: 9250189" data-attributes="member: 15700"><p>One of the things I'm really trying to nail down is a way to make defense something other than a static value. To add flexibility and options for the players. I've had several ideas, and after playtesting sessions there's always something significant to change. It just doesn't quite feel right yet, so I'm reaching out beyond for ideas and suggestions.</p><p></p><p><strong>What I mean by flexible defense</strong></p><p>Most rpgs that I know of handle defending against an attack like this: Attacker needs to beat a target defensive value in order to hit. 90% of the time that number doesn't change. Sure, sometimes it's different based on factors (3e famously has a few ACs depending on what was going on), but it was still largely the same number whether you were being attacked by one person in a round or ten. Sometimes you could boost that target # via several means (spells, dodging, etc.), but again, the number stayed pretty static regardless of who or what was actually attacking you.</p><p>What I'm looking for is a way for the PC to adapt to what's happening in the round and react accordingly. Something to capture the idea that it's harder to defend against multiple attackers than it is against one. Something kinda sorta like spell points for Armor Class (not really, but for illustrative purposes). If you have a pool of defensive ability in a round, maybe you don't worry so much about the mooks attacking you, but focus your defense on a tougher opponent.</p><p></p><p><strong>Why I want to do this</strong></p><p>It's just one way of many to allow martial and mundane PCs have more stuff to do in combat. One round they may act like a tank, while the next go on offense. It models the verisimilitude I prefer in how a combat encounter looks like against multiple opponents--shields can't block every attack at the same effectiveness and being swarmed matters (this part is subjective, I know). I think it adds a new facet to the combat encounter that's largely overlooked.</p><p></p><p><strong>Assumptions</strong></p><p>The best way I'm handling the overall mechanics is to use a dice pool system. From here on out, assume we're using this system so try to keep suggestions based on this system. Much like RISK, both sides roll their dice pools and whoever has the highest value wins. If an attacker rolls a 5 and you roll a 4 as your highest, the attack hits. I prefer this method because there's no math in the actual combat resolution phase. No modifiers to add or subtract. The die type and amount may change, but you're always just looking at the highest result.</p><p>Damage is a similar mechanic. You roll your damage pool and take the highest result. More dice in your pool = better chance of more damage, especially if you trade up (see below). Getting more than one success can do different things. You can either increase damage or enforce some other effect (like pushing, distracting, etc.).</p><p></p><p><strong>Current iteration I'm on</strong></p><p>Right now, a defenders DEF dice pool is based on what level tier they are to determine die type (called a Proficiency Die, or PD), and the amount of dice is based on shields, traits, and maneuvers. For example, a low level PC (1st tier) would have a d6 as their PD, and have a pool of 2d6 based on a light shield (1d6) and a trait they've chosen (+1 die). A low mid tier PC might have a d8 for the PD, and have a pool of 4d8 based on a heavy shield (3d8) and the trait they've chosen (+1 die). And so on. You get the idea.</p><p>Whenever you are attacked in a combat round, you roll at least one PD for your DEF. You then decide how many of the dice in your pool you will allocate to defending that attack. As previously stated, if the attacker’s highest die beats the highest die that you allocated, the attack succeeds.</p><p>Against any further attacks, you allocate any remaining DEF dice as you wish. When you no longer have any DEF dice left in your pool, you roll only 1 PD for DEF from that point on.</p><p></p><p><strong>The flexible part</strong></p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">This allows the player to decide if they want to focus on defending against a specific attacker or not. </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">You can also trade in two dice of one type for the next highest type, or one higher type for two lower types. E.g., trade in 2d6 for 1d8 or 1d8 to 2d6. You're weighing the risk of getting a higher result at the cost of a more swingy result.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">You can also trade in DEF die to gain a bonus on other things (like attacking, or a special maneuver). </li> </ul><p></p><p><strong>Can you show me?</strong></p><p>The following illustration explains it a bit better using visual references. At least I hope <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /> </p><p>[ATTACH=full]344424[/ATTACH]</p><p></p><p><strong>My conundrum</strong></p><p>I don't think I'm still sold on it. I feel like there's a gap somewhere that I'm missing, or a cool way to utilize the pools I'm missing. Fresh eyes would be great.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Sacrosanct, post: 9250189, member: 15700"] One of the things I'm really trying to nail down is a way to make defense something other than a static value. To add flexibility and options for the players. I've had several ideas, and after playtesting sessions there's always something significant to change. It just doesn't quite feel right yet, so I'm reaching out beyond for ideas and suggestions. [B]What I mean by flexible defense[/B] Most rpgs that I know of handle defending against an attack like this: Attacker needs to beat a target defensive value in order to hit. 90% of the time that number doesn't change. Sure, sometimes it's different based on factors (3e famously has a few ACs depending on what was going on), but it was still largely the same number whether you were being attacked by one person in a round or ten. Sometimes you could boost that target # via several means (spells, dodging, etc.), but again, the number stayed pretty static regardless of who or what was actually attacking you. What I'm looking for is a way for the PC to adapt to what's happening in the round and react accordingly. Something to capture the idea that it's harder to defend against multiple attackers than it is against one. Something kinda sorta like spell points for Armor Class (not really, but for illustrative purposes). If you have a pool of defensive ability in a round, maybe you don't worry so much about the mooks attacking you, but focus your defense on a tougher opponent. [B]Why I want to do this[/B] It's just one way of many to allow martial and mundane PCs have more stuff to do in combat. One round they may act like a tank, while the next go on offense. It models the verisimilitude I prefer in how a combat encounter looks like against multiple opponents--shields can't block every attack at the same effectiveness and being swarmed matters (this part is subjective, I know). I think it adds a new facet to the combat encounter that's largely overlooked. [B]Assumptions[/B] The best way I'm handling the overall mechanics is to use a dice pool system. From here on out, assume we're using this system so try to keep suggestions based on this system. Much like RISK, both sides roll their dice pools and whoever has the highest value wins. If an attacker rolls a 5 and you roll a 4 as your highest, the attack hits. I prefer this method because there's no math in the actual combat resolution phase. No modifiers to add or subtract. The die type and amount may change, but you're always just looking at the highest result. Damage is a similar mechanic. You roll your damage pool and take the highest result. More dice in your pool = better chance of more damage, especially if you trade up (see below). Getting more than one success can do different things. You can either increase damage or enforce some other effect (like pushing, distracting, etc.). [B]Current iteration I'm on[/B] Right now, a defenders DEF dice pool is based on what level tier they are to determine die type (called a Proficiency Die, or PD), and the amount of dice is based on shields, traits, and maneuvers. For example, a low level PC (1st tier) would have a d6 as their PD, and have a pool of 2d6 based on a light shield (1d6) and a trait they've chosen (+1 die). A low mid tier PC might have a d8 for the PD, and have a pool of 4d8 based on a heavy shield (3d8) and the trait they've chosen (+1 die). And so on. You get the idea. Whenever you are attacked in a combat round, you roll at least one PD for your DEF. You then decide how many of the dice in your pool you will allocate to defending that attack. As previously stated, if the attacker’s highest die beats the highest die that you allocated, the attack succeeds. Against any further attacks, you allocate any remaining DEF dice as you wish. When you no longer have any DEF dice left in your pool, you roll only 1 PD for DEF from that point on. [B]The flexible part[/B] [LIST] [*]This allows the player to decide if they want to focus on defending against a specific attacker or not. [*]You can also trade in two dice of one type for the next highest type, or one higher type for two lower types. E.g., trade in 2d6 for 1d8 or 1d8 to 2d6. You're weighing the risk of getting a higher result at the cost of a more swingy result. [*]You can also trade in DEF die to gain a bonus on other things (like attacking, or a special maneuver). [/LIST] [B]Can you show me?[/B] The following illustration explains it a bit better using visual references. At least I hope :) [ATTACH type="full" width="667px"]344424[/ATTACH] [B]My conundrum[/B] I don't think I'm still sold on it. I feel like there's a gap somewhere that I'm missing, or a cool way to utilize the pools I'm missing. Fresh eyes would be great. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
In Search of Flexible Defense Mechanics
Top