My Friend's and My Ridiculous Set of Combat Rules

[magic_gathering2001]

INTRO:
My friend and i were sitting around in my father's girlfriend's basement (we're 13, we're not losers in a basement yet ) when we were struck with a brilliant idea for combat. I suggested a neat little variant rule called combat routines. This, of course, sparked a million naive ideas on variant rules, but we eventually got down to our original idea, and a semi-built system on how it works, too. So here goes.

ACTUAL RULES CONCEPT(READ THIS PART, IT'S NOT QUITE AS WORTHLESS AS THE LAST PARAGRAPH):
Instead of making attack rolls and AC and stuff, use routines. In combat, if attack is decided upon, then the attack routine is privately told to the DM by the PC in question.

Certain defense routines cancel certain attack routines, based on a category system we haven't come up with yet. But whatever it turns out to be, if I were to use a certain attack routine on my friend Seth sitting here then he would first make a spot check against a set DC which is included in the description of the routine. If the spot check succedes, then he knows what category the attack is from. Then he would also privately tell the DM which defense routine he is using.

If the defender's defense routine succedes against the attacker's routine, then the defender rolls 1d20. If he rolls a 1, then his routine fails due to incompetence and the attacker's routine succedes anyway. If he rolls a natural 20, then the attacker in question takes a -2 penalty on all combat-based d20 rolls that round because he is put off balance.

If the attacker's attacker routine succedes against the defender's routine, then the attacker rolls 1d20. If he rolls a 1, then his routine fails due to incompetence and he misses. If the attacker rolls a natural 20, then the deals double damage because he has hit a vital spot *coughcritical/cough*.

Anyone with suggested routines, a category system, ideas to make the system better, or to fix and bugs you might find DO NOT HESITATE, POST!!!

CONCLUSION: I personally hope that this system has made a difference in your game. I hope it has given you something to laugh aboot, to cry aboot, and something to think aboot. THANK YOU CLEVELAND, GOODNIGHT!

P.S.Flamers ready... and... fire

 

[John Q. Mayhem]

Well, I haven't got anything for you, but if you flesh it out a bit more, I'd like to see it.

I'm quite alright with thhe current combat system myself, but to each his own.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Rock-Paper-Scissors style?

Not a shabby idea for a house rule. Flesh it out a bit.

 

[Primitive Screwhead]

There was a Dragon Mag article on Dueling back a while ago. It allowed for much more detailed combat with 2 characters.
Essentially each character was places on a 3x3 grid. Each turn you would decide to which square you moved to, which of the oppoents square you attacked to, the characters stance [low, medium, or high] and at which level they attacked to [ditto]
An skill check was made, and the loser had to set up first and give one hint to his opponent... such as "I am shifting left"
The DM would quick reference a chart and grant each side modifiers to attack and AC.. in extreme cases the system could negate an attack.

I really need to dig that article up again
Dragon #301 according to Dragon Index

With multiple opponents the system bogs down real quick, but when you want to run a detailed good guy vs bad guy ala Cyrano De Bergerac

3E combat already takes a long time if you are not solid with the rules. I think your system, as I understand it, would extend combat longer as each side misses due to oddly matched routines... however I agree in principle that bringing more detailed choices instead of 'I swing at the Orc' is cool

 

[Thanee]

Those Spot checks are really not a good idea... I'd probably use BAB+Int mod or somesuch.

Maybe you should track down a copy of the Streetfighter RPG, it has something similar to this, where you have combat moves written on cards you put face-down in front of you when you declare your action.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Bront]

(we're 13, we're not losers in a basement yet )

If you're in your girlfriend's basement and that's all you can think about, then yes you are

As far as the side rules go, my personal preference is to not complicate combat any more than it is, but, the theory of what you want to do has some merrit. You need to get a few more ideas and rules implimentation attempts out before people can realy help you tweak it, so get working

 

[magic_gathering2001]

If you're in your girlfriend's basement and that's all you can think about, then yes you are

FATHER's Girlfriends Basement

OK here is some more of the same

Making an attack routine is a full round action.

Routines are like spells you except you know a certain amount and can "cast" them an unlimited number of times per day. There are nine levels of routines. A ninth level routine has nine actions, a first only has one.

The higher level the routine the easier it is to mess up or do extremely well. The threshold for a critical miss or hit is equal to the level so in a third level routine each action will crit on 18-20 and miss on 1-3.

Defense routines work the same way.

Each attack routine will have its own damage(modified for strength) and will only be useable with certain weapons.

Here is an example routine(I reserve the right to change my mind on this)

Name: Lunge 1 handed
Level: 1
Type: Strength
Standard Requirementsroficiency with weapon
Reach 10 requirements: BAB +8
Weapons: longsword, rapier, dagger, short sword, bastard sword
Standard Damage: 6
Countered by: medium parry, high dodge low dodge, dodge back
Misc Requirements: None

Name: Sweep
Level: 3
Weapons: Any non ranged
Parries as:medium parry, high parry, low parry
Misc Requirements: None

 

[dvvega]

It is a very interesting idea and there are a couple of systems out there that employ something similar but there are some dice rolls invovled.

I think "The Riddle of Steel" uses something similar.

One thing you might want to think about is not just "countered by" but also "partially stopped by"

This way you can remove most dice rolling (except for criticals which should always be random).

For example:

Routine: Overhead Smash - Mace
Type: Strength
Standard Requirements: Proficiency with Mace
x2 Critical Requirements: BAB +3
x3 Critical Requirements: BAB +6
Standard Damage: 6
Blocked By: Overhead Shield Routine
Reduced Damage: Two-Handed Weapon Defence (2), Two-Weapon Fighting Defence (4)


Here you just do maximum damage modified by the defensive routine employed by your target. So if they don't have any of the routines listed you do maximum damage.

The criticals will occur based on some kind of "skill check" based on BAB and appropriate ability (Dex for defence, Str for attack) made against the armour class of the target or something like that -=shrug=- just an idea.

Perhaps for each defensive routine you wish to employ in a round you are penalised on your BAB or something. This would inherently advantage fighters who are trained in the arts of warfare, while wizards would be weaker at defense but will learn in time.

Each class should have a "standard defence routine" that they can use without BAB penalty which would depend on their initial class. Fighters could choose any, Clerics weapon/shield, Rogues dodge, Wizards nothing.

Just some rambling thoughts.

D

 

[magic_gathering2001]

It is a very interesting idea and there are a couple of systems out there that employ something similar but there are some dice rolls invovled.

I think "The Riddle of Steel" uses something similar.

One thing you might want to think about is not just "countered by" but also "partially stopped by"

This way you can remove most dice rolling (except for criticals which should always be random).

For example:

Routine: Overhead Smash - Mace
Type: Strength
Standard Requirements: Proficiency with Mace
x2 Critical Requirements: BAB +3
x3 Critical Requirements: BAB +6
Standard Damage: 6
Blocked By: Overhead Shield Routine
Reduced Damage: Two-Handed Weapon Defence (2), Two-Weapon Fighting Defence (4)


Here you just do maximum damage modified by the defensive routine employed by your target. So if they don't have any of the routines listed you do maximum damage.

The criticals will occur based on some kind of "skill check" based on BAB and appropriate ability (Dex for defence, Str for attack) made against the armour class of the target or something like that -=shrug=- just an idea.

Perhaps for each defensive routine you wish to employ in a round you are penalised on your BAB or something. This would inherently advantage fighters who are trained in the arts of warfare, while wizards would be weaker at defense but will learn in time.

Each class should have a "standard defence routine" that they can use without BAB penalty which would depend on their initial class. Fighters could choose any, Clerics weapon/shield, Rogues dodge, Wizards nothing.

Just some rambling thoughts.

D

I like the partial defences and was planning on including them but wasn't sure how so thank you.

Also the skill check is Battlecraft(in honor of spellcraft and psicraft)

If i may convert yours:

Routine: Overhead Smash - Mace
Lvl 1
Type: Strength
Standard Requirements: Proficiency with Mace
x3 Critical Requirements: BAB +6
Standard Damage: 6
Blocked By: High parry, Dodge Side, dodge back
Reduced Damage: Single weapon Defence (1)Two-Handed Weapon Defence (2), Two-Weapon Fighting Defence (4) Shield Defence (6)

 

[the Jester]

If you can find it, you might check out the martial arts system in old skool Top Secret- it was somewhat similar. I also seem to recall something like this in one of the first three volumes of the Arduin Grimoire (which, frankly, was a crappy system ripped straight from dnd but had tons of cool, loot-worthy ideas in it).