[Rant] Is Grim n Gritty anything more than prejuidice?

[kengar]

From what I get the feeling, it's not so much grim and gritty as reliance on outside magical items to be bad ass.

Yes, Raven, Captain, and others are bad ass, much like Conan and Solomon Kane.

However, stripped to the skin and thrown into a pit of alligators, they are still bad ass.

Typical 20th level D&D character in same situation with no spells memorized, unless it's a monk or monk variant, is alligator chow.

Maybe I'm wrong and people want the grim and gritty instant kill thing but I think it's all abou the magic and the balance built into the game of having that magic, especially in terms of healing.

A 20th level fighter stripped of equipment and chucked in a pit of alligators = a bunch of luggage.

Even with the -4 to hit for unarmed non-subdual damage, the 20th level fighter will be hitting an AC15 croc over 75% of the time with 4 attacks/round. Even with 1d3 base damage, any Ftr20 is going to have at least a +3 ST bonus (probably higher). this means he's dealing out approx 20 pts a round on average. Your normal MM crocodile only has 22hp. Figure 4 crocs in the pit and even with a few d6 falling damage, the Ftr20 is probaly starting the fight with triple digit HP. Call it (conservatively) 6 rounds for him to kill the 4 crocs -with his bare hands- and the critters have maybe inflicted 60-70hp damage. Sure they have Imp Grab, but I doubt the fighter will be grappled more than a round, if at all. End result? Your fighter wades out of the pit missing probably less than half his full hp and 800# of reptile are belly up. Grim? Possibly. Gritty? I don't think so.

 

[Mark]

That's some serious Gamer-Posting, there, kengar!

 

[kengar]

That's some serious Gamer-Posting, there, kengar!

I don't even play d20 any more. (this is one reason why).

 

[GMSkarka]

If you'll allow me a bit of "old curmudgeon":

"Grim-n-Gritty" is just another effort by gamers to attribute genre tropes to a gaming experience, where the label, as used by the gamers, has precious little to do with its actual original meaning.

See also: "Pulp", "Cinematic" and "Cyberpunk."

 

[Desdichado]

I've not read Ken Hood's GnG stuff in ages, but I seem to remember it being a little complex. The downside of GnG is often complexity, which is why I love Grim Tales so much is that is manages to add the GnG without adding a lot of complexity (although some would argue that d20 is high on the complexity scale to begin with). My favorite all time is still the old SPI Dragonquest -- WP/VP (they called it fatigue/endurance), armor as DR, levelless, magic so ineffective as to be largely absent, and damn easy to play.

It is, but it's also modular. The aspect I most like is that your hit points, determined by your CON score and class, remain fairly static no matter what level you are. Even a barbarian in the high teens isn't going to have hit points above 20 or so.

Frankly, the rest of the system, with decreased efficiency based on hit point loss and all that is more complexity than I need. It's a nice enough system, it's just extraneous for my taste.

 

[Desdichado]

If you'll allow me a bit of "old curmudgeon":

"Grim-n-Gritty" is just another effort by gamers to attribute genre tropes to a gaming experience, where the label, as used by the gamers, has precious little to do with its actual original meaning.

How so? Maybe I'm just out of the loop, but when has Grim-n-Gritty ever meant anything at all outside of the gaming community? I'll certainly not argue that Grim-n-Gritty is a haphazard series of attempts to make gaming conform to percieved genre conventions, but I can't see that it exists as something else and gamers are misusing the term.

Trope, on the other hand, as you've used it, is a gamerism that has nothing to do with the actual definition of the word.

 

[kengar]

One of my personal "tests" for a game system is what I call "the Lone Goblin." Simply put, do the mechanics of the system allow for the possibility of a single normal goblin (or its moral equivalent in the setting) with a dagger killing a non-helpless PC of any level/rank/grade/etc. with a single, well-placed blow?

It doesn't have to be likely, or even probable, but it should be at least within the realm of possibility. D&D fails this test. Does that make it a "bad" game? No, but it is not gritty.

D&D is designed -and has been since its inception- as heroic fantasy. Characters are stars, larger than life. They tackle dragons and demons and evil overlords. They save the world and battle against teeming hordes. Sure, the start out somewhat vulnerable, but they reach a point where the things that could have killed them in a single round are no longer even speed bumps. A lot of this has to do with things like the way Hit Poinits and Armor Class are handled. Again, this isn't an "error," it's just a design choice.

There are times when I want high/heroic fantasy. Where I want the PCs to have magic that can heal a wound or cure a disease in an eyeblink. Where wizards can destroy platoons of soldiers with a single spell, where warriors can fight and win against overwhelming odds. When I want that I play some version of D&D.

When I want a game where every fight could be your last. Where hunger and disease kill as readily as orcs. Where magic is feared or shunned or the province of madmen. Where I have to count every arrow and dodge the watch, becausea couple of dudes in leather armor with crossbows & spears are a serious problem. When I want that kind of game, I don't play D&D.

 

[LostSoul]

The event: A 6th-level fighter (currently at 34/57 hit points) has just finished off his opponent, only to see an enemy wizard cast a fireball at him. The fighter makes his Reflex save with a lucky roll and only takes 14 points of damage, taking him from 34 to 20.

If I wanted: Grim & Gritty

I would say: As the fighter sees the fireball streaking in, he shouts "Incoming!" and dives behind a tree for cover. He doesn't quite make it, and a wave of heat sears his leg as he rolls behind cover. His boot-leather sears his leg, and he knows the skin underneath is raw and angry -- and will likely come away with the boot when he takes it off. His lungs burn briefly as he inhales smoke and scorching air, but he knows that the wizard won't wait, and he stumbles back out, his panicked adrenaline rush keeping his leg from slowing him down at least for now, and shouts a scream of defiance at the wizard with his sword raised.

A few problems arise here:

Is the fighter now behind cover, and if the wizard shoots him with an Acid Arrow, does he gain the +4 cover bonus to AC? (You don't move while making saving throws, and you don't need cover to make a save.)

Does he take a penalty to his movement speed for the raw and angry burn he's taken? (Hit point damage does not hamper your character in any way.)

When the adrenaline runs out, will he be tired, weak, and sore? (No. Even if he plans to walk 24 miles for the rest of the day, he can still do that on the burned leg and not slow down at all.)

If you want to house-rule things and say, "I guess your movement rate will be slower because of the burn," why not switch to a more Grim and Gritty system?

If you don't house-rule things like that, the above flavour-text does not match up with the way the system works.

 

[takyris]

Kengar, could you demonstrate some other rules systems in which a normal -- no class levels, nothing special about him at all, and in this rules system he's considered an acceptible monster to send against just-starting-out heroes -- goblin can kill the most powerful player character possible with a single lucky strike?

Now, if you gave the goblin a morningstar, the weapon it is using in the monster manual, and if it rolled a critical hit, and if you were using the d20 Modern damage threshold instead of the D&D damage threshold, you could conceivably do 14 points of damage (2d8-2 for strength), which would force a massive damage save on anyone with a Con of 14 or lower. But you've specified a dagger, so that's out.

I'm not using traps, either, since what you seem to have in mind is a "no environment, no special circumstances, just one guy and a goblin in an arena, with the goblin having nothing but a dagger and the hero having all his equipment" fight.

It is statistically unlikely, but not impossible, for a goblin to kill a high-level character in D&D. I mean, thousands to one odds, yes. The easiest way would be for the goblin to disarm the hero with an incredibly lucky roll and then use the hero's weapon, and then roll a critical hit incredibly luckily, and so forth. Not completely impossible. Unlikely, yes, but not impossible.

So, if that's the test, please show me a system where a completely equipped character at the highest level (point value, whatever) achievable in the game, and who is combat-maximized (ie, not a GURPS guy with no points in combat), has a significantly better chance than the D&D guy of dying at the hands of something he was expected to beat when his character was first starting out as a brand-new recruit.

 

[takyris]

A few problems arise here:

Is the fighter now behind cover, and if the wizard shoots him with an Acid Arrow, does he gain the +4 cover bonus to AC? (You don't move while making saving throws, and you don't need cover to make a save.)

He dives behind the cover and then comes out. The net result is no movement. It's flavor-text. If, in your game, fireballs are solid spheres that can't be dodged, then the only reasonable way for a non-supernaturally-tough character to avoid dying when hit by one is to have been behind something. Hence, flavor-text. Sound it out with me. Fla-vor-tex-tuh. It's this thing you put into the game to account for the fact that six seconds pass between each of your actions so that things make sense. It's also why, when you have 90 hit points and are stabbed with a dagger for 3 points of damage, you don't say that it's a stab directly into your eye and then declare that D&D is completely unrealistic in how it handles dagger wounds.

Does he take a penalty to his movement speed for the raw and angry burn he's taken? (Hit point damage does not hamper your character in any way.)

Did you miss the part about the adrenaline rush?

When the adrenaline runs out, will he be tired, weak, and sore? (No. Even if he plans to walk 24 miles for the rest of the day, he can still do that on the burned leg and not slow down at all.)

That's when he gets tough and grimly hikes on, proving his heroism. Or when his player roleplays "I'm hurt. I don't think I'm up for a hike." I don't know what kind of game you run, but in my game, if the players are injured and out of healing, they sit down and rest up unless things are dire. And if they're dire, they complain about their injuries and push on through.

If you want to house-rule things and say, "I guess your movement rate will be slower because of the burn," why not switch to a more Grim and Gritty system?

Because unlike you, I know how to use flavor-text.

I understand that you don't understand this. I understand that this breaks the little boardgame you had going in your head. But really, if you set up bad flavor text, use bad flavor text, and then say, "Aha, the solution is to change the rules," you're missing something.

If you don't house-rule things like that, the above flavour-text does not match up with the way the system works.

Why not? Do you also believe that if I make one attack in a round and do nothing else, that I simply stand in place like a statue? That flavor-text doesn't work. Obviously, the solution is to declare that unless I spend a move-equivalent action to dodge, I'm standing there without moving and lose my Dex bonus, and in fact am considered helpless.

Or that if I do dodge, I am restricted to a five-foot space? Have you ever tried dodging an attacker while standing inside a five-foot square and not leaving it at any time? Well, that doesn't work either. Obviously, the solution is to declare that unless you spend a move action moving through several squares to simulate dodging, I should take a penalty to my AC as well.

You're being silly.