Rolling a d20 for Defense

[Nine Hands]

Thanks for the link to Core Elements.

I still wonder though.... has anyone actually played it this way? Does it really bog the game down? Or is it even better because the players have an active part in their defense?

I've run True 20 with a defense roll and it really didn't slow things down by any perceptible amount. In fact, it engaged the players a little more than normal since they were able to do something even if it wasn't their turn.

As long as the sheet is setup properly (+5 to Defense instead of a 15 Defense), then you should have no problems.

 

[Aussiegamer]

I agree changing the players sheet to reflect the new info really helps.

I put in the players damage threasholds so they can see instantly what injury level that much damage did.

 

[FraserRonald]

Active defence is a part of Ken Hood's Grim N Gritty rules (both version 3.3 which I have used extensively and the 4.0 available for purchase), and I've used it in many campaigns since learning about it. It hasn't slowed down any of my games, and the players seemed to like the addition. I think it made them feel more involved, as in they could actually do something about not being hit, even when they were rolling poorly.

 

[Wrathamon]

I played a couple sessions where I didnt (the DM) roll any attack dice. I had the players roll.

There defense was d20 + the normal AC boosts.

If they beat the Attack Score of the enemy 10 + attackbonus then they avoided the blow.

If they rolled a 1, that was a threat for a critical and they are automatically hit.

If they rolled a 20, they automatically avoided the hit.

Enemies with things like Keen would threaten a crit on 2s and 3s potentially.

The players would attack as normal. I didnt roll any dice the players would roll everything.

It was fun!

 

[ogre]

Ahh thanks for all the enlightenment.
As far as my focus, this is for a d20 modern based PA game, with mutants, mechs and crazy technology.
Anyway, I think I'll try it out, judging from what I hear from those who've tried it. It doesn't seem to slow the game down perceptionaly and it promotes player interaction even when its not their turn.
The randomness of rolling instead of a flat 10 is something I wanted to add to a modern game, where gunfighting just seems to me to have more chaos than a sword fight would. Or rather, I would like modern gun fights to be that way, whether they are in reality or not :-0
As far as the comparison to grapple goes, I'm not sure I agree. Grapple takes size into account, where normal fighting, size is actually a detriment (attack and defense lowered), so I'm not sure its an accurate detractor to roll defense methods. What if instead of rolling for grapple checks, you could only take 10? Wouldn't that be even more of a 'fixed outcome' than having the random d20 roll? I guess my point is that the d20 roll should make things less 'fixed', not more, the way grapple appears to work. I think it appears this way because there are so many modifiers, and the modifieres, as has been said is what makes outcomes more fixed, not the random die roll vs a flat 10.

I'm not sure this will really seem like opposed rolls, though technically it will be. I see it more as randomising the flat 10 into a variable of 1-20. This effectively simply adds chaos to the battle, randomness and more unknowns. It shouldn't effect the power of high level vs low level in a major way, but should produce anomolies in combat instead of predictability.
Ok, so I'm rambling here. Thanks for all the input folks!

Wrathamon- now there's a twist!

 

[ogre]

Oh, and to address the crits.
I would still keep a crit as normal as possible.
One exception, if the defender rolls a 20 its a miss, regardless of what the attacker rolls.
Defender can still dodge even if they roll a 1.
I believe in KISS, hopefully these 2 exceptions will be enough.

 

[Storyteller01]

Thanks for the link to Core Elements.

I still wonder though.... has anyone actually played it this way? Does it really bog the game down? Or is it even better because the players have an active part in their defense?

Been playing this way for a few years. It works very well. It does slow down combat a but, but it adds more suspense to combat.

We also rule that:
1) a natural 20 on a defense roll means the attack automatically misses, except for a natural 20 attack roll, in which...

2) If both attacker and defender rolls a natural 20, the attack hits but the crit is negated.

We negated the crit confirmation roll. The defense roll is doing that in its own way. We also instituted a defense bonus based on your BaB, so defense is less reliant on items. It means the NPC monsters are on somewhat even footing.

 

[iwatt]

As far as the comparison to grapple goes, I'm not sure I agree. Grapple takes size into account, where normal fighting, size is actually a detriment (attack and defense lowered), so I'm not sure its an accurate detractor to roll defense methods. What if instead of rolling for grapple checks, you could only take 10?

The comparison on grapple was because it's an opposed roll mechanic, in which it's very easy to gain a significant bonus over your opponent through feats and size increases. Another example would be disarm and the spiked chain + feats.

 

[Geoste]

It's a variant rule on page 25 of the DMG. It mentions slowing the game down.

I know this was for d20 Modern, but I should mention that I have successfully used this in my 3.5 D&D campaign, and it does NOT slow the game down. A mere second for the player to roll a d20 and add his armor bonuses. Compare w/ attack roll. Proceed as usual. It's not rocket science.

Plus, it has the added bonus of my players can never really guess what AC my opponents are because it's always changing. The look of surprise on their faces is priceless when they roll less than 10 for attack, and they are sure they did not hit (habit because of base 10 + AC bonuses), but then I say "You hit..." (it hit because I rolled really low on d20 + AC bonuses).

Ultimately, it prevents metagaming in that regard. Use or not use as you like.

Another thing I also do is to roll 1d3-1 for hit point loss when a character is in negative HP (zero hit point loss being a valid result, but the flipside is that 2 HP can also be lost). That way, players can never say "He's good for another x rounds. I can heal him then..."

 

[ogre]

iwatt
Ok, I see your reference, but how does rolling a d20 vs using a static 10 make that situation worse and not better? It would seem to me having the large variable would make static bonuses less relavent, not more relavent. Or am I missing something?