Realistic Combat that's Simple(ish)

[Bill Zebub]

This thread topic reminds me more and more of the adage "Good, fast, and cheap. Pick two."

 

[Bill Zebub]

But a similarly skilled NPC should be about on par mechanically with that PC, I believe. That's what I'm talking about. The fourth level character isn't better because they're a PC.

This is another facet, imo, with the underlying problem with level-based RPGs. Well, RPGs with very steep progression curves, which I think have a high correlation to levels.

 

[Thomas Shey]

This thread topic reminds me more and more of the adage "Good, fast, and cheap. Pick two."

Eh. Honestly, a lot of it just turns on whether you want halfway realistic combat in the first place. I could design a fairly realistic damage system (note not the same as the full combat system, which has to factor in a lot more things to be realistic) in probably an hour. Layer a metacurrency system on that to buffer some of the most unpleasant consequences, and address other elements you might not want to deal with on a PC end regularly, and you'd be good to go, and it'd probably be more realistic than 80% or more of the damage systems out there without having excessive overhead.

It's just that probably 19 out of 20 people really wouldn't care.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Eh. Honestly, a lot of it just turns on whether you want halfway realistic combat in the first place. I could design a fairly realistic damage system (note not the same as the full combat system, which has to factor in a lot more things to be realistic) in probably an hour. Layer a metacurrency system on that to buffer some of the most unpleasant consequences, and address other elements you might not want to deal with on a PC end regularly, and you'd be good to go, and it'd probably be more realistic than 80% or more of the damage systems out there without having excessive overhead.

It's just that probably 19 out of 20 people really wouldn't care.

I hope you mean 'halfway' only idiomatically, not mathematically.

Or maybe you mean moving it from 0.00001% realistic to 0.001%? "Half as many zeroes"?

 

[Micah Sweet]

Depends on the system. There's been a wave of Metacurrency (Hero Points, Bennies, Inspiration) games that have given PCs the advantage over everybody and everything they face. Because some people can't stomach failure

Absolutely it depends on the system. That's where the "I think" comes in, because my games do what can be practically done to avoid PC superiority.

 

[Celebrim]

But a similarly skilled NPC should be about on par mechanically with that PC, I believe. That's what I'm talking about. The fourth level character isn't better because they're a PC.

Generally agreed, although it depends on the NPC. A fourth level commoner or even a fourth level mercenary captain might and probably does lower overall attribute scores and breadth to their skills than a typical PC. The PC is special only in the way that the brightest kid in the class is special, and not that there isn't another kid in a different class as bright. They are talented, but not uniquely so. They are above normal heroic individuals, but at the same time, they mostly hyper-excel the average person as a warrior and dungeon delver. They can't build furniture or appraise the value of cloth as well as some dweeb in town, and probably can't sense motive as well as that 80-year-old feeble matriarch.

I do have a meta currency in my 3.X homebrew called 'Destiny Points' and while most NPCs don't have 'Destiny Points' some (typically BBEG's and other important figures) do. It's sort of like 'Force Points' in WEG Star Wars. Sure, most people don't have them but you will meet other people and even enemies that do. The purpose of 'Destiny Points' is mostly that the 'Saving Throw' system can be overly random, so they serve the same sort of protection from things that bypass hitpoints as hitpoints serve from injury. However, as my game transcript would prove, they don't stop PCs from dying if they get themselves in a bad spot too often. I kill a PC about once every 20 sessions despite the metacurrency because like hit points, they can run out and aren't perfect protection anyway.

I get what you are saying by a "normal" person in my campaign would be a 2nd level commoner with something like a 12,11,11,10,10,9 attribute array and feats like Skill Focus (Craft - Farming). First level PCs start out with a ton of advantages in disposable wealth, raw potential, background and combat ability compared to "average" people. But then, at some point so do the villains.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

Eh. Honestly, a lot of it just turns on whether you want halfway realistic combat in the first place. I could design a fairly realistic damage system (note not the same as the full combat system, which has to factor in a lot more things to be realistic) in probably an hour. Layer a metacurrency system on that to buffer some of the most unpleasant consequences, and address other elements you might not want to deal with on a PC end regularly, and you'd be good to go, and it'd probably be more realistic than 80% or more of the damage systems out there without having excessive overhead.

It's just that probably 19 out of 20 people really wouldn't care.

I disagree, I think they would care a lot, they would not like it. Part of the popularity of D&D and the trend toward more survivable characters is that many people want the heroic fantasy and that is not dying in a ditch to some random orc.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I hope you mean 'halfway' only idiomatically, not mathematically.

Mostly idiomatically, though I used it somewhat carefully since there is detail it'd ignore--but its detail that's largely meaningless in play. As an example, it wouldn't tell you precisely where the bleeder that was going to kill you in a few minutes were, just that it would and whether it was external or internal (which has some strong effects on how possible it is to treat with conventional first aid). So if your definition of "realistic" mandates that detail, its only "halfway" realistic, but in practical terms its hard to see the situations where its relevant coming up often, if at all.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I disagree, I think they would care a lot, they would not like it. Part of the popularity of D&D and the trend toward more survivable characters is that many people want the heroic fantasy and that is not dying in a ditch to some random orc.

You clearly ignored my comment about applying metacurrancy. You can get perfectly good heroic fantasy out of a more realistic basic system than D&D with that as an overlay; as I noted, that's largely how Savage Worlds does it in broad strokes.

Other than familiarity, I don't flat out believe people care if their character survives because they spent some of their Goodie Points to survive even though its gritty at its root, or because there's a big fat abstraction that D&D calls hit points there. The latter just arrived first and became big, so now a lot of people are used to it, and the benefits of doing it the other way aren't things they care about.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

You clearly ignored my comment about applying metacurrancy. You can get perfectly good heroic fantasy out of a more realistic basic system than D&D with that as an overlay; as I noted, that's largely how Savage Worlds does it in broad strokes.

Other than familiarity, I don't flat out believe people care if their character survives because they spent some of their Goodie Points to survive even though its gritty at its root, or because there's a big fat abstraction that D&D calls hit points there. The latter just arrived first and became big, so now a lot of people are used to it, and the benefits of doing it the other way aren't things they care about.

If you are mitigating the effect of "realism" by a meta currency, then it is no longer realistic, is it? I am not convinced that Savage World is that realistic, it is or can be more gritty.

I largely agree with your second paragraph.