Question: How do you rationalize opportunity attacks?

[Minigiant]

When I was brought in 3E, I was giving the the rationalization that characters are always swinging weapons at each other.

Your attack is the 1-4 opportunities per 6 seconds to hit someone. You could throw a 3 piece punch combo but only 1 punch is damaging.

An AoO/OA is just another bonus chance to hit someone due to them dropping their guard or being unable to guard. Much like when someone does a Fierce Dragon Punch or Crouching Roundhouse that is blocked in Street Fighter.

D&D combat was always translated into Street Fighter for me. Once your feet leave the ground, I'm already doing the anti-air special arts motion.

 

[Zhaleskra]

The short, sweet version that I know I posted on another topic: If your opponent takes his attention away from you, and you care, you may make a free melee attack on him for being an idiot.

 

[Nytmare]

Likewise it's silly that two weapons grant you extra attacks against a single target; the combat round is abstract, so you should make one attack roll for those two weapons, but probably with a higher accuracy.

My guess would be that, more than anything, this was because there is room in the design space for the mechanic. Bonuses to the die roll already cover so many things; but rolling an "extra" attack die wasn't being used, and it translates to "an extra sword" easily.

 

[Janx]

LOL. I remember trying to make sense of 1E's grapple system. I don't remember 2E's system being much better. It was better, but not by much.

And, I understand why the 3E designers have that touch attack in there. They wanted the grapple to be harder than a standard touch attack. Otherwise, the simple system (like the one I'm using in Conan 2E) makes it the same as being able to touch someone.

And, just touching someone should be a lot easier than actually grappling them and wrestling them to the ground.

Hm.. That's actually a pretty good argument to keep that touch attack in there.

I have a sword. You are a wizard. I double-dog DARE you to touch me.

You are more likely to succeed at tackling me than touching me. At the best, I am highly likely to hit you while you try to touch me.

The mentality and movement of a person trying to touch and get out does not encourage them to take a hit. as compared to somebody moving in to grapple. To grapple, you are about to get very rough and physical, the mindset is different, as is the movement.

I also think that grappling somone should have have a big chance of the two of them going prone. Rarely do you see people wrestling standing up. Most of the time, they're skidding around on the ground.

Yup, most real fights end up on the ground.

 

[Fanaelialae]

What do you think?

I came across an interesting idea today while reading about the Scratch RP System. Therein, if you provoke an OA, the provoked may make a free attack. However, this attack does not deal damage. Rather, should you hit, the target's action is denied and his turn ends.

Is it the one true answer? Probably not. At first glance, however, I kind of like it. Ending someone's turn might be too harsh for D&D, but at the very least the action denial is a good idea IMO.

Instead of 2 rolls (attack and damage) and tracking (hp), you have one simple roll. Most groups would likely only see a modest, if any, improvement in combat speed. However, I like simpler and faster, and I think it would really help any group that has the type of player that has to add up his combat modifiers every single time he rolls damage. I've witnessed those firsthand on more than one occasion.

Instead of a high hp enemy strolling past you in a blase manner regardless of whether you hit him or not, players can actually interpose themselves by denying movement. Also, if OAs did end one's turn, that would certainly be a reason to think twice before provoking one. Action denial is way harsher than damage, in most cases.

Features or feats could also modify how this rule works. Fighters might roll damage on a successful OA, while characters with the mobility feat would lose their action but not their turn when hit by an OA (allowing them to try again if they have any actions remaining).

All in all, I think it's an idea that's worthy of some consideration.

 

[Water Bob]

I'm about to test out something in my game. It's a sort of limited fumble chart.

During melee only (I haven't figured out anything for ranged weapons), if a natural "1" is rolled on the attack dice, then the a 1d6 is thrown on this chart.

1. Disarm
2. Sunder
3. Trip
4. Grapple
5. Unarmed Attack
6. Unarmed Attack.

Usually, all of these attack forms come with an AoO from the target, but if you arrive at the attack form by making a natural "1" throw on your attack, your enemy is given the opportunity to make the given attack without you getting the standard AoO.

For example, Conan battles the Vanir warrior, and Conan rolls a "1" on his attack throw. The Vanir warrior then rolls 1d6 and gets a 2. That's a Sunder result, which means, the Vanir can attempt to Sunder Conan's weapon or shield (or armor, if he's wearing any) without Conan getting the usual AoO against him.

This should bring in these types of attacks more often, and a character can get in a knee to the nads or an elbow to the face, or just a good, old fashioned punch in the face, from time to time, just as it should be. Ditto with the other types of attacks.

This should make combat a little more exciting, and it could change the nature of the combat. For examle, if a grapple result is rolled, all of a sudden, any weapon except a light weapon is useless. This gives characters a real, mechanical reason to carry a dagger. And, someone who is losing a fight might get lucky when his foe throws a "1", allowing the melee to turn into a wrestling match, James Bond style.

This should lead to fights as shown in this clip. Look at all the punching and throat cutting--the kick that sends the foe to the ground (trip), and the flat out punches.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_b6got4G4Ys"]Fight scene from the film Centurion 2010. - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Janx]

I'm about to test out something in my game. It's a sort of limited fumble chart.

During melee only (I haven't figured out anything for ranged weapons), if a natural "1" is rolled on the attack dice, then the a 1d6 is thrown on this chart.

1. Disarm
2. Sunder
3. Trip
4. Grapple
5. Unarmed Attack
6. Unarmed Attack.

Usually, all of these attack forms come with an AoO from the target, but if you arrive at the attack form by making a natural "1" throw on your attack, your enemy is given the opportunity to make the given attack without you getting the standard AoO.

An interesting idea, though tying it to rolling a 1 puts it in the same problem space as Critical Fumbles from a design standpoint. PC are going to suffer more Critical Fumbles than individual NPCs. As such, their testicular fortitude is going to take a pounding.

But I do like the general premise, that each round, there's a chance of some grapply stuff going on.

 

[Mercutio01]

I do sort of like the idea that a fumbled roll allows a response, but Janx's point above is why I stopped using fumble tables in my own games. But, even if I did use a fumble roll like you have above, which is intriguing, I don't like the idea that my response (assuming I'm the Vanir) to Conan's fumble is wholly reliant on another die roll.

 

[Water Bob]

An interesting idea, though tying it to rolling a 1 puts it in the same problem space as Critical Fumbles from a design standpoint. PC are going to suffer more Critical Fumbles than individual NPCs. As such, their testicular fortitude is going to take a pounding.

That's exactly why I went with non-lethal stuff. Every result, unless an Unarmed Strike is used with a -4 penalty, results in a non-lethal action that does more to change the circumstances of the melee rather than hurt the PC. For example, if a Grapple comes up, the melee goes into a wrestling match. Now, a character's dagger actually has a mechanical use! Or, someone may have pommel spike placed on his weapon for just such an occasion!

Plus, rolling a "1" using this chart can sometimes fall into the PC's favor when they roll a "1". For example, if the PC is very good at Grappling, the NPC who rolled a Grapple result after the PC's "1" might find himself in worse trouble than he was when fighting the PC in plain melee.

I do like, too, how this makes these often overlooked and underused combat maneuvers more important to the game. This will bring the disarm, unarmed attack, sunder, trip, and grapple more often into the game, making the combat round more exciting.

Plus, taking advantage of the "1" result is purely optional. If a bad guy rolls a "1", and the result is grapple (and the Player knows his character is no good at Grappling), then the player can choose to not take advantaged of his opportunity to Grapple. And, of course, the GM has the same choice with the NPCs.





Check out this Example...

Conan fights a Pict Warrior. Conan rolls a "1", and the Pict gets a Trip result.

How do Trips work in 3.x? First, there's a Touch Attack (but no AoO from the target) that has to be made.

That check can fail, and the Trip attempt is over.

If the Touch attack succeeds, then Opposed STR checks are made (the defender can use his DEX instead, if he wants).

If the Pict succeeds in making this Opposed throw, then Conan goes down from the Trip.

But...

If the Pict fails at the Opposed throw, then Conan gets a chance to trip the Pict! Opposed throws are made again!

So....really, does this "1" result hurt Conan or benefit him?

In certain situations, the character that throws the "1" could find more benefit in the result than the enemy.

And, I like that about this, too.

 

[Water Bob]

Here's a couple other neat combat rules from the Conan RPG. These are real rules, though optional, from the Core rulebook, that I'm using in my game.

Lock Weapons.

Check out this scene from Spartacus, about 0.35.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWqbwbJBshY]Spartacus Blood And Sand - Spartacus Vs Crixus Full Fight 1080p HD - YouTube[/ame]



To indicate this in the Conan game, this happens anytime the attack roll exactly equals the defender's AC (Parry AC in Conan).

When, locking weapons, also check for a Sunder to happen. So, the result, when attack throw = AC can be either locked weapons or the attacker swinging and breaking (or damaging) the opponent's weapon.

If a shield is involved, then the Lock Weapon aspect is skipped, but the sunder still applies to the shield.





Weapon Length.

Even when the reach of a weapon still threatens only 5', there are weapons with longer and shorter reach. This optional Conan Rule addresses weapon length (something that has slowly disappeared since 1E AD&D).

It's a simple rule. Apply a +1 or a -1 modifier to AC (in the Conan RPG, this only applies to Parry AC, not Dodge AC) for every size category of difference between the weapons.

For example, Conan The Thief fights with his dagger (a light weapon). His Vanir opponent fights with a two-handed greatsword (a Two-Handed Weapon).

The dagger is two size categories smaller than the greatsword (Light is smaller than One-Handed, is smaller than Two-handed. That's two categories). Thus, Conan fights with a -2 to his AC.

Likewise, the greatsword is two size categories greater than the dagger, thus the Vanir fights with a +2 to his AC.

With humans, this modifier will be one of these: +2, +1, 0, -1, -2.

With non-humans, depending on the size of their weapons, this range could include higher modifiers.




If Conan, with his dagger, were fighting a Guard using a broadsword, then Conan would fight with -1 AC while the Guard fights with +1 AC, since the size difference in weapons is only one category.