Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
No rolling to hit? (d20 systems)
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="Evenglare" data-source="post: 5926309" data-attributes="member: 63245"><p>I recently made a topic that talked about each player rolling to attack and defend to make the combat more active and engaging. Now on the opposite end of the spectrum, what if no one rolled to hit, every attack would have a +11 to it while ac (and other defenses/saves) had the standard +10. This would obviously make battles much - much faster, however there is an obvious limitation to this. What happens if your attack does not succeed, he would always miss by default. Been thinking about how to off set this. </p><p></p><p>There are a variety of different ways to do such a thing. Of course you could roll a d20 if your attack didnt hit, and simply play the game normally. A few other ways I have been tinkering around with include an advancing die. This mechanic would be equivalent to a move action . It would simulate studying your opponent until you can find "cracks in the armor", an easy way of thinking about it would be to pit a fighter against some sort of turtle or something. Let's say the fighter's attack is +6 and the turle's AC is 19. The fighter would have to use 3 move actions (or standard actions) to successfully fight the turtle. </p><p></p><p>There is a very big problem with this as well. A person is useless until the hit the AC. So my proposal of this is to simply do half damage with all attacks. Another possible idea is to give the monster damage reduction based on how far under the attack is on the AC or more simply is give the damage a -x. x being the difference between AC and attack. As in my example above with the fighter's 16 attack and turtle's 18 AC , the first method I mentioned would be to take a move action for "studying" and the standard action attack would simply do half damage. The second and third methods would give a penalty to damage inflicted based on the difference of attack and defense , with the fighter's 16 attack and turtles 18 AC , you would dead your damage - 2. </p><p></p><p>Has anything like this been attempted ? I'm aware there are probably things I am missing, but this is just another brainstorming session.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Evenglare, post: 5926309, member: 63245"] I recently made a topic that talked about each player rolling to attack and defend to make the combat more active and engaging. Now on the opposite end of the spectrum, what if no one rolled to hit, every attack would have a +11 to it while ac (and other defenses/saves) had the standard +10. This would obviously make battles much - much faster, however there is an obvious limitation to this. What happens if your attack does not succeed, he would always miss by default. Been thinking about how to off set this. There are a variety of different ways to do such a thing. Of course you could roll a d20 if your attack didnt hit, and simply play the game normally. A few other ways I have been tinkering around with include an advancing die. This mechanic would be equivalent to a move action . It would simulate studying your opponent until you can find "cracks in the armor", an easy way of thinking about it would be to pit a fighter against some sort of turtle or something. Let's say the fighter's attack is +6 and the turle's AC is 19. The fighter would have to use 3 move actions (or standard actions) to successfully fight the turtle. There is a very big problem with this as well. A person is useless until the hit the AC. So my proposal of this is to simply do half damage with all attacks. Another possible idea is to give the monster damage reduction based on how far under the attack is on the AC or more simply is give the damage a -x. x being the difference between AC and attack. As in my example above with the fighter's 16 attack and turtle's 18 AC , the first method I mentioned would be to take a move action for "studying" and the standard action attack would simply do half damage. The second and third methods would give a penalty to damage inflicted based on the difference of attack and defense , with the fighter's 16 attack and turtles 18 AC , you would dead your damage - 2. Has anything like this been attempted ? I'm aware there are probably things I am missing, but this is just another brainstorming session. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
No rolling to hit? (d20 systems)
Top