Realistic Combat that's Simple(ish)

[dbm]

Verisimilitude tends to be the word people use. Do the rules plausibly support what is happening in the fiction? That can be both in terms of giving players reasonable options to leverage, and in terms the mechanism generating plausible outcomes.

This is where simple HP systems fail if, for example, a fall of 10 or 20 feet cannot kill a PC RAW.

Back to combat, there are clearly scenarios where a combatant might parry their foe, and clearly scenarios where that seems impossible (human with a knife defending against giant with a club…) so some other defence like a dodge would be needed. It’s a matter of personal preference whether you want a system that cares about the difference or not. Then there are orders of magnitude on the granularity that might involve in the rules.

When all these things are done to the player’s liking it gives them that feeling of verisimilitude.

 

[Heilemann]

Seconded. Though the whole system was very 80s... The clunkiness was somewhat everywhere.



I'd say it's not complex. You roll a d100, add a bonus that is mostly static, substract a GM-provided modifier and refer to the chart for applicable result. It's easy, as in a middle schooler can do it. Even if you'll mostly use the same table during the fight (you're wielding a broadsword, you're unlikely to change your weapon mid-fight -- though there is a tactical sense to do so sometimes -- and the enemy won't don another armour mid-fight either... so you'll mostly use the same table...

It is, however, clunky.

View attachment 410942

Because, the crits are referenced on... another table. For example, if I roll a 94 with my broadswoard attack, against a breastplate wearing opponent (AT 17) and I'll deal 6 HP damage. That's very low, and it is mostly possible that wear from the fight will be the only way to kill him or a very lucky shot. If however, I do the same attack against a robe-wearing wizard (AT 2, notice that it is WORSE than AT1, naked), I'll do 14CK, which is 14 HP.... and CK means a severity C critical... that you can check on the Krush table (the second letter defines the type of critical).

So, you flip your Arms Law manual, because weapons can do several types of criticals, and get to the Crushing Critical:

View attachment 410943

Where you roll your dice, and you check in the C column. A roll of 08 will transform you 14 damage into 17 damage, while other results will get specific results, both narrative (a wrist-shattering blow in the left arm, foe stunned on a 76-80 up to 100 (+30 damage, foe is blind, stunned and unable to parry 24 rounds.

This is nice. This isn't complicated, but it is cumbersome. In this day and age, I'd rather have a computer program solving that, potentially on the GM's smartphone or tablet. I dislike computers at the table, but this one of the reasons I'd welcome them. It maes the things fluid. Type the parameters of the attack on your app, click "result".

"It's not complex but..." is the tagline for Rolemaster

I love Rolemaster—in fact I had everything ICE ever made until selling it in anticipation of having to make house changes just a couple of weeks ago; although I haven't played it for years—but to say it's not complicated is not really right though, just because you're not dividing or square-rooting numbers.

The complexity comes out of the number of steps and the layering of complications over time. First you have to make a decision about your OB, then in SS/FRP you can choose to move fast or slow and what not, then you need to make sure to get all the modifiers in line (and there can be MANY, quick what's 76 (roll) + 35 (OB) - 20 (speed) - 29 (DB)?... I'll wait), then you have to know what the armor rating of the opponent is and cross references read it out and book it, then for one (or more) crits you look those up on the other table and read them out and take further hits, stuns, bleeding and effects like going prone (and those stack over time, so you might have three different bleedings stack with different start and end times)...

That's just a simple "I attack". It has like ten times the steps of a similar D&D attack

And I LOVE it, but it is not quite true to say that it's not 'complex'. And mind you this is without the plethora of optional rules (fatigue points, anyone?)...

(And yes, it becomes faster and faster as people get dialed into the system, and it works much better than the detractors claim... but even so).

 

[UngainlyTitan]

Another thing to consider, are character protagonists? That is, do they have some measure of plot protection and are expected to die rarely or are they expected to die often or some hybrid of the two?

 

[Theory of Games]

Another thing to consider, are character protagonists? That is, do they have some measure of plot protection and are expected to die rarely or are they expected to die often or some hybrid of the two?

If the OP is searching for "realism"/verisimilitude, "plot protection" is an assumed flaw?

This is where simple HP systems fail if, for example, a fall of 10 or 20 feet cannot kill a PC RAW.

Depends on the system. GURPS has varied modifiers that can make a 20-foot fall deadly, especially if the character lands on their head

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

Well, I said it's not "complex" but it's "clunky". To me, complex means that it's difficult. Additions and substractions come naturally -- though honestly, now that you mentionned your 62 roll, I have played with people who had trouble looking a 3d6 and adding them, so well, it might be complex for a part of the audience). But clunky (number of steps, looking at table A, then looking at table B...), oh yeah. For those who didn't play it, criticals aren't oddities, they are the main way you drop your opponent, so you'd do this frequently.

 

[Piperken]

So my question: Which RPGs--especially fantasy RPGs--already do this well, and in a way that isn't overly complex? Preferably still requiring just one role. Please give a brief explanation of how it works.

Coming from a different design space:

Is your game an anime fantasy? Having someone destroy an opponent's plate armor with punches would be valid.

Is your game attempting to capture a sense of 15th century violence in Europe? In D&D, it's possible to meaningfully injure an opponent donned in full plate armor with a longsword, provided you have enough bonuses and happen to roll well.

But one historically accurate way to meaningfully injure someone in Milanese armor would be to state that your intent is first to attempt to grapple the knight, then if able, stab them through the eye slit.

It's possible to get towards the second without even needing dice, so long as what rules (lots or little) you have for your fiction are seen as having weight and viewed as consistent by your table.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

If the OP is searching for "realism"/verisimilitude, "plot protection" is an assumed flaw?

People do survive in stories and in real life.

Depends on the system. GURPS has varied modifiers that can make a 20-foot fall deadly, especially if the character lands on their head

20 foot falls are more often crippling than deadly.

 

[LordBP]

20 foot falls are more often crippling than deadly.

Did one myself onto concrete.

Walked away from it very slowly.

If I had landed on anything besides my feet (did a PLF without thinking), there would have been broken bones for sure.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

It's possible to get towards the second without even needing dice, so long as what rules (lots or little) you have for your fiction are seen as having weight and viewed as consistent by your table.

Quite right, yes. If you accept a fiction-first principle, it doesn't matter what the rules exactly are if you slide a dagger through the faceplate in the fiction, it's very unlikely the guy inside the armour is going to have a good day. Or even be alive a few minutes/seconds later.

I was thinking about this in the context of using modern firearms in Daggerheart - if you shoot an unknowing NPC from behind, in an unarmoured head, you shouldn't be rolling damage or w/e, they're just dead. This sort of thing actually eliminates a huge number of problems that can happen with a rules-first approach.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

Quite right, yes. If you accept a fiction-first principle, it doesn't matter what the rules exactly are if you slide a dagger through the faceplate in the fiction, it's very unlikely the guy inside the armour is going to have a good day. Or even be alive a few minutes/seconds later.

I was thinking about this in the context of using modern firearms in Daggerheart - if you shoot an unknowing NPC from behind, in an unarmoured head, you shouldn't be rolling damage or w/e, they're just dead. This sort of thing actually eliminates a huge number of problems that can happen with a rules-first approach.

I would say the same in D&D.