Poll: Historical Kit & realistic rules

[Drifter Bob]

You can be gritty and abstract and cinematic, yes. No argument there.

But perhaps we have different definitions of "realism". Realism entails a simulation closer to the real world. And the real world is detailed and complicated, rather than simple and abstract. Thus, "realistic" rules by definition need to be more complicated, and thus slower. Slow combat rules result in slower, less cinematic play.

I don't think that is true. Realism = complexity is an old fallacy, something which goes back to many gamers early experiences with systems like rollmaster, etc.

Realism means verisimilitude. It means internal consistency based on the same relatoinships that are in the real world. What level of detail you wish to model is up to you, the question is, how real is your source data? This is true both for static entitites like individual bits of kit, and for dynamic things like relationships between actors (opponents or allies) in a combat.

So for example, in D&D, you model dynamics for tumbling in combat and whirlwind attacks, and two bladed weapon fighting, and subdual damage. I might prefer a system which ignores that and focuses instead on some other factors, like say dealing with weapon reach or, or giving the combattants a different set of tactical options, as for example reflected in some of the feats above.

If I use counterstrike in my game but don't use great cleave, I'm not necessarily making the game more complex, but I am arguably making it more realistic. If I ditch dire flails but add messers or kern axes, I'm definately making it more realistic.

In other words, it's not just the quantity of your data and variables which make something more or less realistic, it's also the quality of your data.

The problem up to now with the vast majority of RPG's is that A) nobody has bothered to improve much on the initial research done in the early days of D&D, and B) that reseach and consequent assumptions about combat are not based on any experience of combat (except that maybe they knew a guy who was in the SCA...). So things like 15 lb swords and double bladed spinning boomerang axes seem to make sense to people, or the idea that you can defend yourself from attack just as well with a knife in your hand as with a staff.



That said, the house rules I have used with this weapon database (which was researched for a book for another RPG that happens to be very realistic and quite fast to play) do split AC into a defensive roll and a damage reduction, making the To Hit roll a contested roll and adding a layer of complexity in terms of one extra die roll. But something like this already exists in D20 modern, and from looking at threads on ENworld, I know it's in some recent game suppliments and a lot of people use something similar in thier house rules.

Personally I think it still basically goes just as fast, since die rolling is simultaneous, and players appreciate the feeling of playing a more active role in their defense, even just by rolling dice.

DB

 

[Drifter Bob]

One other comment,

It's just in the last 5 years or so that true historical western martial arts have become fairly widley known, with the translations of some of the Renaissance era longsword fencing manuals of the old masters like Tallhoffer. Since then, some knowlege of real historical fencing have emerged, and it's starting to trickle into rpg's now.

I think this is a good thing, because just as historical settings can often prove to be vastly more interesting than pure fantasy (as the literary "founding fathers" of D&D like Vance, Leiber, Moorcock, Lovecraft, Howard, Tolkein etc. knew very well) actual combat mechanics are often more fun and interesting, and certainly seem to have a more intuitive feel.

For you balance oriented folks out there there is also the added benefit that if you portray things realistically enough, there is almost always a natural balance which does crop up, such as between the various merits of different types of weapons.

DB

 

[Aaron2]

OK, lets do this ....

Sidestep Feat
Evade by moving aside instead of counterattacking. Prerequisites: Speed 20’, Dodge. You have the option of taking a five-foot step instead of making an attack of opportunity. This feat can be used in conjunction with Combat Reflexes to move multiple 5’ steps. In addition, sidestep grants a +2 to any Grapple check for purposes of avoiding Grapple only. If evading a Grapple attempt, the Sidestep feat can be used multiple times against the same opponent (as many as the limitations of Combat Reflexes normally allow, i.e. one time per Dexterity bonus factor)

You probably need to specify the affect this has on charges. Using AoOs in this way is troublesome as it lets you move faster if, say, your friend standing next to you is firing a bow. Also, what is "evading a Grapple"?

Counterstroke Feat
Counter Attack Feat
Prerequisites: Dodge, Weapon Focus with weapon to be used
May skip one normal melee attack to gain a single special Opportunity Attack in the same round at +2 To Hit. The individual must wait until attacked by the target designated for Dodge. Once attacked by the selected target, they may, if they survive, then counterattack as a special Attack of Opportunity with a +2 bonus. Only the first attack can be responded to in this way.

So, you give up an attack now to take an AoO later at +2. If the character gives up his last iterative attack (at, say, -15) does this AoO occur at full BAB (as normal AoOs do). If so you've just given him +17 to hit. Also, AoOs normally take place before the action that triggered them, not after. I'm not sure why this feat even exists; aren't your normal attacks counterattacks already?

Point Control Feat
Improved opportunity attacks with thrusting weapon
Prerequisites: Combat Reflexes, Dodge (can be used with any thrusting weapon)
By keeping the thrusting point leveled at your target, you prevent a single opponent who has been designated as your dodge target (see the Dodge feat) from rushing you and entering into grapple. Gain +2 To Hit on all opportunity attacks against a single designated opponent, when using a thrusting weapon, or alternately gain a free opportunity attack against any designated opponent which attempts to close to grapple but has Improved Grab, Improved Grapple, or some other feat which normally confers immunity from opportunity attack when initiating grapple. This feat works with any primarily thrusting weapon but not with weapons with a secondary thrusting capability. The A of O is always considered a thrusting attack.

What is a "thrusting attack"? What is a "secondary thrusting capacity"? Not a bad idea but needs to be reworded.

Lunge Feat
Melee Combat Feat
Prerequisites: Weapon Finesse, Weapon Focus with the weapon in question (must be a sword capable of thrusting).
A special thrusting attack. A technique developed for the rapier or cut-and-thrust sword during the renaissance, emphasized leaping forward in coordination with the thrust, enabling the attacker to reach opponents out of apparent attack range and to concentrate power and energy and to attack with remarkable speed. This technique allows a combatant to take an additional 5’ step in the attack, and to then conduct a single attack at +2 To Hit, and +2 Damage, suffering –4 to Defense in the process. Can only be used by a single-handed thrusting weapon which is also considered a Finesse Weapon. Once gained, the technique can be applied to any finesse weapon for which the user has both Weapon Focus and Weapon Finesse feats.

Does the 5' step have to be towards the opponent? If so, specify that. Also, is the move+attack a Standard action? Again, "single-handed thrusting weapon" should be "one-handed piercing weapon" (AFAICT).

Half-Sword Fighting Feat
Special sword fighting technique for use with hand and a half and two- handed swords which have a thrusting point, including Long Swords, Bastard Swords, Great Swords, Claymores, Dopplehanders (Zweihanders), and Flambards. The technique involves grasping the sword blade. It is easiest and safest to use with weapons built with a Riccasso, an unsharpened section near the hilt of the blade.
Prerequisites: Weapon Focus with a Bastard Sword, Great Sword, or Two-Hand Sword, Expertise, Dodge. This Feat can be gained up to two times. Benefits depend on the number of times the Feat has been chosen.
Benefit may make close-range thrusting attack at +2 Damage for a –2 penalty to AC / Defense.

Half swording is a pretty basic technique. I doubt it should require a feat and weapon focus. Anyway, what's with the "taken two times" thing? You can certainly half sword with normal swords as well. Also, if I'm using a bastard sword one-handed do I need two-hands? (of course, but, again, specify this kind of stuff). What is a "close-range" attack?

Improved Half Swording Feat
Prerequisites: Half-Sword Fighting Feat
Benefit: +1 Initiative bonus when using half swording weapon, +1 Defensive fighting bonus when fighting defensively or using Expertise

The Initiative bonus is totally wrong. It makes no sense. Also, why does Improved Half Swording give you a AC bonus when normal half swording gives you a AC penalty? Again, this is so common I would just assume the PC does it when it makes sense to.


Aaron

 

[Drifter Bob]

OK, lets do this ....

now were talking.

You probably need to specify the affect this has with charging. Using AoOs in this way is troublesome as it lets you move faster if, say, your friend standing next to you is firing a bow.

Hmmm.. can you spell this out for me? I am sure you are correct but I don't follow that. How does your friend firing a bow grant you an A of O?

So, you give up an attack now to take an AoO later at +2. If the character gives up his last iterative attack (at, say, -15) does this AoO occur at full BAB (as normal AoOs do). If so you've just given him +17 to hit.

Good point. It should read, you give up your first iterative attack in the round.

What is a "thrusting attack"? Not a bad idea but needs to be reworded.

Ah, thats left over from the other game system. Call that a piercing attack I guess in D&D.

Does the 5' step have to be towards the opponent? If so, specify that. Also, is the move+attack a Standard action?

Yes and yes. I'll make the change.

Half swording is a pretty basic technique. I doubt it should require a feat and weapon focus. Anyway, what's with the "taken two times" thing? You can certainly half sword with normal swords as well. Also, if I'm using a bastard sword one-handed do I need two-hands? (of course, but, again, specify this kind of stuff)

Have you tried it in full speed, full contact sparring? It's not so simple to execute effectively. Half swording is also not just the basic thrusting attack it's often portrayed as in WMA. Most of the half-swording gambits I've seen in Lichtenaur, Ringeck, Meyer, Foire or Tallhoffer are fairly sophisticated. I don't think half-swording is something many amateurs can pull off without training and practice.

Anyway, the assumption is that it requires some formal training. I did stick fighting for 15 years before I knew about WMA, and it never occured to me, nor did I see anyone else using the technique (at least not in any effective way)

You are right that half swording is possible with many sword types beyond a certain length, true, certainly an arming sword. I should come up with specific criteria. I think it would be more difficult with weapons that have complex hilts for example. And yes, as you point out, half swording obviously requires the use of both hands.

'Taken two times' needs to be edited out. It was switched to a second feat.

The Initiative bonus is totally wrong. It makes no sense. Also, why does Improved Half Swording give you a AC bonus while normal half swording give you a AC penalty? Again, this is so common I would just assume the PC does it when it makes sense to.

Perhaps these do need to be worded more clearly.

These bonuses are based on two specific gambits from Ringeck. One is a type of slip thrust done from a half swording guard, which I have found quite effective, the other is meant to represent several defensive parries from the half-sword which I think significantly enhance the defensive capability of very long weapons such as dopplehanders especially. As I said, half swording is more than just choking up for an extra powerful thrusting attack, thats just the "tip of the iceburg" so to speak. Incidentaly, there is also a third half-swording feat which allows the wielder to use the weapon in grapple.

The first half-swording feat grants the opportunity to do that half-swording thrust, which I believe does make you somewhat vulnerable though it confers much more power to your strike. I think it makes sense as a specific tactic that would be only invoked under certain circumstances, as a players option, rather than just assuming it happens when necessary. But that of course is the basic philosophy of these rules mods, to give the players more tactical options based on those you have hen actually fighting. (I could see a player using it say to defeat the damage reduction of a dangerous opponent, much as one might use power attack)

By the way, you obviously have some exposure to WMA, what is your background if you don't mind my asking? You probably know who I am from the ARMA boards.

DB

 

[Aaron2]

Sidestep Feat
Hmmm.. can you spell this out for me? I am sure you are correct but I don't follow that. How does your friend firing a bow grant you an A of O?

Using a ranged weapon draws an AoO. Another problem I have is that most things you would normally think of sidestepping (such as a charging spearman) don't draw AoOs normally. You can only sidestep people drinking potions.

Counterstroke Feat
Good point. It should read, you give up your first iterative attack in the round.

This just doesn't seem worth the trouble.

Half-Sword Fighting Feat
You are right that half swording is possible with many sword types beyond a certain length, true, certainly an arming sword. I should come up with specific criteria. I think it would be more difficult with weapons that have complex hilts for example. And yes, as you point out, half swording obviously requires the use of both hands.

I'd say a "non-light sword wielded two-handed" or something like that.

The first half-swording feat grants the opportunity to do that half-swording thrust, which I believe does make you somewhat vulnerable though it confers much more power to your strike. I think it makes sense as a specific tactic that would be only invoked under certain circumstances, as a players option, rather than just assuming it happens when necessary. But that of course is the basic philosophy of these rules mods, to give the players more tactical options based on those you have hen actually fighting. (I could see a player using it say to defeat the damage reduction of a dangerous opponent, much as one might use power attack)

I see your point. I wish d20 had maneuvers similar to how Hero System does them. I just don't know if +2 damage for -2 AC is worth a whole feat. I'd at least remove all the prereqs, esp. Combat Expertise; Int 13+ is brutal to fighter types.

OTOH, a part of me want to just assume that the character knows the best action to take and that is just part of his BAB. This is what bugs me about Riddle of Steel. The dude I normally play with is terrible at guessing games, I can read him like a book. When he GM's RoS, I annihilate all his NPC because I know what he's gonna do. There gets a point where the game is Player vs Player instead of Character vs. Character.



Aaron

 

[Drifter Bob]

Using a ranged weapon draws an AoO. Another problem I have is that most things you would normally think of sidestepping (such as a charging spearman) don't draw AoOs normally. You can only sidestep people drinking potions.

True, it should probably be worded to say it works against an A of O generated by a enemy moving toward or past the player. I've never seen anyone try to use it when an opponent read a scroll or anything...

This just doesn't seem worth the trouble.

Well, dodge has a fairly stringent requirement and only allows a +1 to defense against one opponent, but it is worth getting because it links you to a lot of other useful feats. Similarly, though I only listed a handful of feats here, counterstroke links with numerous other feats. Well, three others I think.

Also, all you are doing is basically delaying your attack until later in the round, so you aren't giving up that much, for which you get a pretty significant bonus to hit. This can be a pretty nice boost at lower levels. It is a popular feat at any rate with my players and some other people who have done beta testing for me, which is why I listed it here. It's kind of intuitive for people with sparring experience, because it's exactly what you do when up against someone with a defensive advantage, like someone with a large shield.

I'd say a "non-light sword wielded two-handed" or something like that. /quote]

Yeah, I have heavy basket hilted swords in my kit list though, I think it would be pretty akward to try halfswording with a backsword or a hanger.... but thats pretty close. i'll tweak it a bit more.

I see your point. I wish d20 had maneuvers similar to how Hero System does them. I just don't know if +2 damage for -2 AC is worth a whole feat. I'd at least remove all the prereqs, esp. Combat Expertise; Int 13+ is brutal to fighter types.

It's another feat that's popular with the lads, or seems to be. You might be right about the Expertise requirement though. I think the requirement for Expertise itself is a bit stringent though frankly. You don't have to be a genius to think of parrying or fighting more defensively.

Incidentally, these rules also allow the opposite of defensive fighting as an option: reckless attack.

How does hero system work ? You mean heroquest? There are so many rpgs out there now I can't keep up!

OTOH, a part of me want to just assume that the character knows the best action to take and that is just part of his BAB. This is what bugs me about Riddle of Steel. The dude I normally play with is terrible at guessing games, I can read him like a book. When he GM's RoS, I annihilate all his NPC because I know what he's gonna do. There gets a point where the game is Player vs Player instead of Character vs. Character.

Well, I know what you mean, I had a similar experience once with riddle of steel with a certain GM, though most GM's I have played with were quite clever and amply challenging.

Generally speaking though if it's a game, to me, you want to be involved in the action as much as possible. You don't rely on your characters intelligence score to figure out how to unravel plot mysteries, you don't make a wisdom check before deciding to cast "find traps" on that suspicious looking chest. I think a lot of people like to have a chance to micromanage their fights, if they want to, while retaining the option to let it play out in the die rolls if they prefer a more abstract fight.

That is why 3E has brought us so many more options in the battle besides the old "I swing / you swing" of old school D&D. I'm just offering people a chance to use some options which roughly correspond with real actions done in combat.

Of course, if you have a DM who is inept at tactics, granted, realistic fight dynamics may not be the way to go (something more rules-lite and role play oriented perhaps like Dying Earth RPG)

It is interesting incidentally that you play TROS. Would you be interested in beta testing this system I have here for D20? Given enough interest I was thinking of signing up maybe 10 experienced D20 people to beta test it, mainly for the sake of wording as per above. It's already been tested for speed, flow, and fun by my group and three others (in two other countries!).

DB

 

[Drifter Bob]

Slum Fu Art

Here is some of the production art for the slum fu combat archive, in various early stages of development. Obviously none of these images appear as seen here in the finished product, some of these are very early sketches. Still, they convey a sense of what I think is the excellent quality and technical accuracy of the art. One other nice feature is that in the finished documents, the images are all to scale.

see the good art / bad art thread, here:

http://www.enworld.org/forums/showthread.php?t=95368

 

[mhacdebhandia]

I would be interested in seeing D&D-style treatments of historical techniques and tactics - there's a tactical feat in Complete Warrior for fighting in a shieldwall, if I recall correctly - but I don't think D&D is the right system to use a "realistic" combat system in general with. The rest of the game isn't geared to it, so realism in combat rules but nowhere else would stick out like a sore thumb.

 

[TheLostSoul]

I am very intrigued by this and would very much like to see this in print or as an electronic product. The feats seems to fit real dueling and fencing and even adds a bit cinematic swashbuckling feel. They are quite powerful, but they do have alot of prerequisites and seems specialised and balanced enough. The Renaissance feats looked great for dueling.

I am still considering to write a product for playing in stone age setting, as the rules for "primitive" weapons are unrealistic and quite unaccurate. It will most likely be a submission to either Dragon or the new magazine co-developed by EN-world and Mongoose or a netbook. As I am an archaology student, I have great access to sourcematerial and stone age artifacts. It will be focused on the Danish stone age, either meso-lithic or early neo-lithic.

 

[Drifter Bob]

I am very intrigued by this and would very much like to see this in print or as an electronic product. The feats seems to fit real dueling and fencing and even adds a bit cinematic swashbuckling feel. They are quite powerful, but they do have alot of prerequisites and seems specialised and balanced enough. The Renaissance feats looked great for dueling.

I am still considering to write a product for playing in stone age setting, as the rules for "primitive" weapons are unrealistic and quite unaccurate. It will most likely be a submission to either Dragon or the new magazine co-developed by EN-world and Mongoose or a netbook. As I am an archaology student, I have great access to sourcematerial and stone age artifacts. It will be focused on the Danish stone age, either meso-lithic or early neo-lithic.

Thats interesting, I'm sure you know that the immediate area around Denmark was fairly unique for making stone weapons well into the bronze age and beyond, apparently due to a lack of local resources. As a result, some of the finest stone weapons ever made come from there. I've seen some photos of stone knives from Denmark which were very beautiful copies of nearly identically shaped bronze knives.

These slum fu rules do have some neolithic weapons, various protoswords, hardwood clubs, the atlatl and a few others.

My cousin married a Dane, one of my most interesting experiences was a visit to Roskilde when we were allowed to go on a short ride on an authentic viking ship. What an amazing feel, unlike any other boat...

DB