Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DND_Reborn" data-source="post: 8039304" data-attributes="member: 6987520">So, against a bandit captain (BC):[ATTACH=full]123851[/ATTACH]Assuming average for all the rolls and discarding the critical concept for now:it would deal (just using the average damage) 6 + 6 + 5 = 17 damage using multiattack with scimitar and dagger. The fighter above would reduce damage an average of 12 points, making the net damage dealt 5 points per round.So, the fighter with CON 14 and half HD at level 6 would have 14 + 5 * 6 = 44 hp.Thus, the BC will take 9 rounds to kill the fighter if it lives that long. Now, if the fighter can also spend HD for an extra 6 soak, he would completely absorb the damage for that round 12 + 6 = 18 vs. 17 damage, it could be up to 6 rounds longer given 6 HD.Let's say the fighter is 1d8+3 damage and has two attacks. His average damage is 15. The BC's soak would be +3 (DEX 16), Studded leather (1 DR) for d8 + 4, average of 8 or 9. Thus the BC will take about 6 points per round in damage because his defense is much lower. Using half HP, the BC would have about 32 hp, and the fighter would kill him in 6 rounds. Now, the BC has 10 HD to add, at 4 each, would reduce the damage to only 2 on those rounds. That could make the battle drag out to 12 rounds if he used all of them.Since the fighter could use all of his HD for soaking, he could survive up to 15 rounds, outlasting the BC by 3 rounds and likely winning.Now in RAW (with critical hits):the same fighter would have AC 18 (chain shirt, shield, DEX +2, DFS +1). At +5 attack rolls, the BC hits on 13 or higher (40%), and would have an expected damage of 7.875. The fighter would have 52 hp, and thus it would take about 6.6 or 7 rounds to kill the fighter if the BC lives.The fighter would have +6 attack bonus, needing a 9 or higher to hit (60%), and with two attacks would have expected damage (given d8+3) of 9.45. With 65 hp, it would take the fighter 7 rounds to kill the BC.Using RAW, the two are fairly evenly matched, and one could typically expect to defeat the other in about 7 rounds.That is only half the number of rounds your suggestion would take. So, unless I am calculating things wrong, this definitely seems like some battles this would drag out. Granted, in real time, you are making one "mass damage roll" against one "soak" on each side, compared to a total of 5 attacks between both parties each round with corresponding damage rolls when they hit (expect 1.2 damage rolls by the BC, and 1.2 damage rolls by the fighter). Thus we have 4 total rolls vs 7.4 rolls for the rounds. Given the estimated number of rounds, that is 48 rolls (12 rounds) vs. 52 rolls (7 rounds).Not a huge difference in the number of over all expected rolls, but despite the greater number of overall rounds of the combat, it would likely be the same or no worse for the number of times you have to roll.All that given, the only real downside I see to a system like this is you have to rework most of the numbers in the game, which for all the monsters that PCs encounter is a lot. There's certainly some interesting ideas here, but I don't know if the implementation would be easy at all.What are your thoughts?</blockquote>

Verification