My own take on d20: H20 [Help much appreciated]

[Stacie GmrGrl]

Mind if I ask, what is your goal of your H20 system that you want to work on? How do you want Aspects to work in your system? What other design elements are you considering? How much of it are you willing to adapt/change or are there any Sacred Cows of the d20 system that you are willing to either alter or get rid of? Just curious about what you have in mind...and by asking you for what your thoughts are and seeing them it might help in offering you suggestions...

 

[StormingMarcus]

Mind if I ask, what is your goal of your H20 system that you want to work on?

To offer a slightly generic d20 system much more simpler than the original and more devoted to the action-pulp-S&S genre rather than classic fantasy.

How do you want Aspects to work in your system?

As a tool to build the storylines, to give some narrative control to the players and to make roleplaying one's character profitable for the player.

What other design elements are you considering?

If it's possible, I would like to eliminate the system-0 (the golden rule saying GM are above all the other rules), but it requires well-written rules.

How much of it are you willing to adapt/change or are there any Sacred Cows of the d20 system that you are willing to either alter or get rid of?

For now, the only thing I want to keep is progression-by-level and hit points (representing also energy and determination, not only pure health). For the rest, even the d20 is something i can get rid of.

 

[ValhallaGH]

If it's possible, I would like to eliminate the system-0 (the golden rule saying GM are above all the other rules), but it requires well-written rules.

A few quick comments on this goal.
1) Every time I see a system that doesn't explicitly state this, I assume that it is so integral that they forgot to mention it. I.e. Bad editing.
2) Every time I see a system that explicitly removes rule 0, I ignore that part and continue to use rule 0.
3) Every time I see a system that explicitly removes rule 0, I conclude that a) the system is not for me and mine, b) the designer's heads were up their behinds*, c) the designers haven't played nearly enough games; in every game the rules have a seriously illogical application in certain (hopefully rare, but not always) circumstances and need a DM to adjudicate and override them, d) the entire validity of the rule set is brought into question, e) if I spent money acquiring it (even just bandwidth) then I've been cheated.
4) No rule set is ever, ever comprehensive enough to cover every possible situation. If it was then you wouldn't need a game master for anything; the players could open the books and play their own games right away.


Good luck.

*This isn't any sort of personal commentary. You seem to have your head free and clear. But anyone that tells me that I don't have rule 0 automatically gets looked at like they were stupid.

 

[Nonei]

Maybe Abstract movement for scenes can be simple as Range Distances... Think of each distance as a Increment or Zone (I think this is how its done in Spirit of the Century, but I can't remember)

Adjacent: 0 distance
Point Blank: 1 Distance apart
Short: 2 Distances apart
Medium: 3 Distances apart
Long: 4 Distances apart
Far: 6 Distances apart
Extreme: 8 Distances apart

Maybe creatures of different sizes can have a simple move like...

Short/Medium size = 1 move distance
Large/Huge = 2 move distances
Gargantuan = 3 move distances
Collossal = 4 move distances

I developed an abstract movement for my game as follows:

Adjacent: right next to each other, melee combat range
Close: within about 15 feet of each other, reach/polearm/point blank range
Short: within about 30 feet of each other, charge range or for fighting with ranged weapons at no penalty
Medium: within about 120 feet of each other, double-move range or for fighting with ranged weapons at a one-step penalty
Long: within about 240 feet of each other, two rounds of double-move or one running round away, or for fighting with ranged weapons at a two-step penalty
Extreme: over 240 feet away or so, three or more rounds of movement away, or for fighting with ranged weapons at a three-step penalty

Well, I love this idea, but if you combine the two directly (i.e. compare the number of feet away with the move distances) and consider the average (D&D) movement rate for a medium two-legged creature (non-dwarf) is 30 feet, it doesn't quite work out. I played around with it a little, and I think that it needs one more range (speaking as one who has never played without miniatures for combat, so I understand I may be wrong in practice)

Adjacent: 0 move distance. Right next to each other, melee combat range
Close: 1/2 move distance. Within about 15 feet of each other, reach/polearm/point blank range
Short: 1 move distance. Within about 30 feet of each other, one movement away or charge range or for fighting with ranged weapons at no penalty
Medium: 2 move distances. Within about 60 feet of each other, double-move or charge range or for fighting with ranged weapons at a no penalty
Long: 4 move distances. Within about 120 feet of each other, 2 rounds of double-move or one running round away, or for fighting with ranged weapons at a one-step penalty
Very Long: 6 move distances. Within about 240 feet of each other, 3-4 rounds of double-move or two running rounds away, or for fighting with ranged weapons at a two-step penalty
Extreme: 8 move distances. Over 240 feet away or so, 5 or more rounds of movement or three or more rounds of running away, or for fighting with ranged weapons at a three-step penalty

Reach would have to be taken into consideration, of course. I'm not sure how to take into account the speeds of different creatures. You wouldn't want 'halfs' in there, and a number of D20 things affect speed in 5-10'/round increments (size, armor, dwarves, number of legs for monsters, etc). You could, however, just eliminate that element of complexity from your game. A fast medium creature like a wolf could have a movement of 2.

Instead of 1 movement =30 you could make 1 movement =25 (then it would go 5, 15 (or 10), 25, 50, 100, 200, >200) so the numbers are more even.

 

[StormingMarcus]

You're right, Nonei, the two do not match perfectly.
Because half-movements are such a pain in you know where, maybe I should adjust this way:

Distance zero --> Melee attacks.
Distance one --> Point blank, throw --> Up to 15 ft.
Distance two --> Charge, range --> Up to 30ft.
Distance three --> Up to 45ft.
Distance four --> Up to 60ft.
Distance five --> Up to 120ft.
Distance six --> Over 120ft.

Tiny --> 1 zone/move
Small to Large --> 2 zones/move
Huge to Gargantuan (I discarded Colossal) --> 3 zones

Normal reach is 0, but Huge to Gargantuan have a reach of 1.

Can this work?

 

[Stacie GmrGrl]

You're right, Nonei, the two do not match perfectly.
Because half-movements are such a pain in you know where, maybe I should adjust this way:

Distance zero --> Melee attacks.
Distance one --> Point blank, throw --> Up to 15 ft.
Distance two --> Charge, range --> Up to 30ft.
Distance three --> Up to 45ft.
Distance four --> Up to 60ft.
Distance five --> Up to 120ft.
Distance six --> Over 120ft.

Tiny --> 1 zone/move
Small to Large --> 2 zones/move
Huge to Gargantuan (I discarded Colossal) --> 3 zones

Normal reach is 0, but Huge to Gargantuan have a reach of 1.

Can this work?

Well, my idea works on the premise that exact measurements don't really matter, and it gets rid of feet altogether, and in this regard it gets rid of the focus on miniatures and it makes it a bit more abstract in that sense, as everything is based on which range increment/zone you find yourself in.

Like, the tavern that is 3 Increments long. It doesn't matter where you are within each zone, what matters is knowing which zone you are in so you know what the modifier would be when attacking somebody in said zone.

If you wanted to, you could split it up into 6 zones, 3 long by 2 wide, and then you could have the map drawn out, and in each zone, lets say in zone 5 (middle bottom zone) there's the chandalier that people would swing on by targetting it with a stunt action, or in zones 3, 4, and 5 there are tables and chairs that people can use, and the bar itself is in zone 2, against the north wall in the middle of the room, so if someone is in zone 2 they can jump behind the bar for additional cover. Things like that.

Stuff like this actually helps me visualize better than using detailed feet and inches movements. Plus it seperates people from the minuteness and specific tactical elements of using miniatures that tend to grind out combats to the extreme lengths that they tend to become...and become boring in the process.

 

[StormingMarcus]

Yes, I wrote the feet to give the idea of how the system works; they will be deleted in the final version.

I do not plan on having reach weapons granting melee attacks at distance 1, so the system should look like this.

Distance is measured in zones: characters in the same zone are at a respective distance of 0, while characters in adjacent zones are at distance 1 and so on...

Distance / Effect
0 / Melee attacks
1 / Thrown weapon range
2 / Ranged weapon range
3 / ?
4 / ?
5 / ?
+1 / ?

Tiny character can move only 1 zone per move action; Small to Large characters can move 2 zones and Huge to Gargantuan characters can move 3 zones.

Huge to Gargantuan character bump all the attack effects up one zone (eg, melee at 1, thrown at 2, ranged at 3).

 

[Nonei]

Well, my idea works on the premise that exact measurements don't really matter, and it gets rid of feet altogether, and in this regard it gets rid of the focus on miniatures and it makes it a bit more abstract in that sense, as everything is based on which range increment/zone you find yourself in.

Like, the tavern that is 3 Increments long. It doesn't matter where you are within each zone, what matters is knowing which zone you are in so you know what the modifier would be when attacking somebody in said zone.

Agreed - the exact measurements don't matter. However, the 'zones' do need to be approximately the same size relative to each other, regardless of how far away they are from a particular person, if I am reading the intentions correctly. And by using actual feet in the creation and perhaps the explanation, IMO it allows you to be more consistent and help a person visualize it better.

You're right, Nonei, the two do not match perfectly.
Because half-movements are such a pain in you know where, maybe I should adjust this way:

Distance zero --> Melee attacks.
Distance one --> Point blank, throw --> Up to 15 ft.
Distance two --> Charge, range --> Up to 30ft.
Distance three --> Up to 45ft.
Distance four --> Up to 60ft.
Distance five --> Up to 120ft.
Distance six --> Over 120ft.

Tiny --> 1 zone/move
Small to Large --> 2 zones/move
Huge to Gargantuan (I discarded Colossal) --> 3 zones

Normal reach is 0, but Huge to Gargantuan have a reach of 1.

Can this work?

I think this would work. I only included half zones for within 1 movement, but you're right that by adjusting it to 15 feet you're making it easier to adapt to small creatures and reach without resorting to that PITA.

Note that if you want to be consistent in how large each zone is, you will need to have:
Distance four --> Up to 60ft.
Distance eight --> Up to 120ft.
Distance sixteen --> Over 120ft.

I'm not sure distance 3 is needed to be defined, as long as each distance approximately equals 15 feet perhaps only define the ones that represent a border (i.e. charge range, reach, bowshots)

 

[Nonei]

Distance is measured in zones: characters in the same zone are at a respective distance of 0, while characters in adjacent zones are at distance 1 and so on...

Distance / Effect
0 / Melee attacks
1 / Thrown weapon range
2 / Ranged weapon range
3 / ?
4 / ?
5 / ?
+1 / ?

Tiny character can move only 1 zone per move action; Small to Large characters can move 2 zones and Huge to Gargantuan characters can move 3 zones.

Huge to Gargantuan character bump all the attack effects up one zone (eg, melee at 1, thrown at 2, ranged at 3).

(Disclaimer: I play 3.5e and have no real RPG experience outside of it so there will be a 3.5e bias in my answers )

I might suggest based on 1 distance=15 ft:
Distance / Effect
Adjacent: 0 / Melee attacks
Close: 1 / Thrown or ranged weapon range (no penalty), or reach for huge-gargantuan creatures
Short: 2 / Thrown weapon with one penalty
Medium: 3 / Thrown weapon with 2 penalties (+1 range penalty per distance)
Long: 6 / Ranged weapon with one penalty, max range for thrown weapon (5 range penalties)
Very Long: +6 / +1 penalty to ranged

I chose +6 for "Very Long" instead of +5 despite the math only because it is an even number, and most movements will be 2 distances.

 

[StormingMarcus]

Good suggestions, Nonei, but I am still dubious about the exact dimensions of the zones.
If I state 1 zone = 15ft, the system is not very abstract; just less tactical.
If I do not connect zones and feets, movement and descriptions might be not very plausible; this is not a problem if you do not introduce very big monster or very big combat fields, but it is still an issue.