Stunts in d20 (different from Iron Heroes)

[Turanil]

What do you think of this simple stunt system for d20 ?


A SIMPLE STUNT SYSTEM

The Stunt mechanic is a generic guideline to handle what happens when a player wants to do something special and cinematic, such as jumping from a balcony down onto his foes, throwing a barrel into his pursuers' legs, etc. The basic mechanic is both very simple and very flexible: "-4/+1d6" where you subtract 4 to a skill check, attack roll or initiative to get 1d6 something. Then, the exact interpretation of this rule is left to the players and GM. The way "-4/+1d6" will be implemented during the game will vary according to the situation and environment the PCs find themselves in, player's creativity, and GM's arbitration. The only restrictions are:

1) You don't take a -4 to a roll in order to get +1d6 to that same roll (it would be absurd).
2) Stunts must be described by the character and fit the scene (see examples below).
3) There should be a balance between the hindrance ("-4") and the benefit ("+1d6"), and the GM has a final say on what a stunt may allow to do or not; a stunt cannot be an excuse for powergaming.
4) Every additional stunt by the same character during the same combat or scene imposes a cumulative -1 additional penalty (so the 2nd stunt is at -5, the 3rd at -6, etc.). Particularly difficult stunts may also require the expenditure of an Action/Conviction point at GM's discretion. Note that if players find a way to abuse stunts, GMs are entitled to do the same things against them.

Stunts Examples - What you could do or couldn't

Example 1
-- Player: "I attempt a stunt: I take a -4 penalty to my attack roll to add 1d6 to my damage roll if I hit."
-- GM: "No, you can't. You are not describing a stunt but improvising a feat (Power Attack) that you don't have."
-- Player: "Hum okay, so how with this: I jump from upstairs down onto the orc with my full weight to stab him with my dagger, in hope of doing more devastating damage."
-- GM: "Okay, this indeed is a stunt. So, doing this you take a -4 penalty to your attack roll but add 1d6 to your damage roll if you hit. If you fail your attack roll, you will have to make a Reflex save or suffer 1d6 dmg from the fall however."

Example 2
-- Player: "Ah, there is a chandelier looming just above the orcs?! I shoot at -4 at the rope holding it, so the chandelier falls on the orcs doing 1d6 of dmg to all of them."
-- GM: "Okay, you can try this stunt, but it will work like this instead: You take a -4 penalty to your initiative to aim at the rope, which is AC 20 and 6 hp. If the rope is cut, the chandelier will fall on 1d6 orcs (rather than all of them), doing 2d4 of dmg (half if they succeed their Reflex save).

Example 3
-- Players: "I bluff that I am falling to the ground in order to get sand and throw it into the ogre's eyes to blind him".
-- GM: "You must succeed an attack roll at -4. If so, the ogre will be dazed for 1d6 rounds, suffering a -2 to his attack rolls (or just -1 if he makes his Constition save).


Help me refine this system, and especially, refine the examples above and/or give additional stunts examples you may think of.

Thanks.

 

[dvvega]

The only major "hole" I can see is that Characters with Good BAB will use stunts more often in combat to garner the +1d6 damage. It is like power attack, doesn't grant the same amount of damage bonus but its free as opposed to a feat.

All they need to do is describe the action.

1) Do multiple repeats of the same stunt garner the same benefit? There should be a system whereby you record the stunt and every cosecutive use grants -1 cumulative penalty to the 1d6. After 6 uses of the stunt it becomes instinctive to the character and it will be one of their standard combat actions. This will stop people just giving you the "jump on them" spiel to get the bonus.

2) Can stunts stack with feats? For example can I use a stunt and Power Attack as well? Or is Power Attack classified as a stunt in and of itself? This goes for any other combination of feat usage that might be classifed as a stunt and thus not stack.

I would perhaps make the stunt mechanic more like -4/+4 - the +4 is the 3.5 average of a d6 rounded up.

Why? Randomness in a stunt should be only based on the attempt as opposed to the result. For example stuntmen who jump their motorcycles over 12 buses - they usually fail because their take off isn't 100% spot on (not enough speed, bad angle, etc). Thus the randomness should be in the action not in the benefit. If they hit even with a -4 they get a set result. This would also limit stunt repeats to 4 times only if you use the -1 per repetition concept.

 

[Turanil]

All in all, this simple system is intended to let players express their creativity and do weird things in combat, not just roll dice to attack. Now, I see a main difference between feats and stunts:

Take the first example, for an effect similar to Power Attack feat:

-- Feat: you just have to say you use the feat, for instance getting a -4 to hit for +4 dmg. You can use the feat almost whenever you want.

-- Stunt: circumstances must warrant it. If the PC and his opponent are on a flat and bare surface, there is nothing that enables to do a stunt, so fight must be normal. The PC cannot ask for a -4 penalty to hit to get +1d6 of dmg. A stunt is possible only in special circumstances where the environment would let the character use terrain to some advantage. In the example, the PC is upstairs and the orc down below, hence the PC decides to spring on him, adding weight and momentum to his attack, but losing accuracy, so he gets a -4 penalty to hit and +1d6 dmg. If he weren't already above the orc (upstairs, balcony, whatever) he couldn't ask for doing this. Furthermore, the GM must agree to the stunt, adding maybe side effects or asking for some saving throws as he sees fit. This is not a feat you can use whenever you decide to.

-- Stunts don't become some form of free feat over time, just because you do it often. Also using a feat in conjunction with a stunt must be adjudicated on a case by case basis, but most of the time they won't be compatible. In the above case, I don't see Pwer Attack usable when jumping on the orc below.

 

[IceFractal]

I dunno, the examples given make stunts seem kind of pointless. I mean, take the example of jumping down onto the Orc for more damage.

It's like Power Attack, except you do less damage usually, and you have to make a Reflex save or take damage. And if you have a two-handed weapon, it's much less effective than Power Attack, and probably can't be combined with it. Awesome! :\

Now the other stunts - those could be useful. But they've got the same problem as existing fancy manuevers - from mid-level on, the minor bonus you get isn't worth giving up a full attack or even using a non-magic/non-specialized weapon.


What I've been using for stunts is a simplified system - resolve the action in the most favorable way. So someone leaps dives down onto their foe from a balcony; you could call for Tumble checks and Reflex saves to avoid falling damage, or you could just treat it as a charge with the bonus going to damage instead of attack, with extra height damage if the player is willing to take it as well. The idea is that using a stunt shouldn't be worse than just attacking normally.


Actually, a thought - applying the stunt effect to the same roll might not be a bad thing. Stunts tend to be somewhat of a random factor - they either give you an advantage or fail badly. So what if you could apply a stunt by, say, subtracting 4 and adding 1d8?

So for example:
Fancy swordplay to distract your foe: -4,+1d8 attack - you'll either create an opening or just waste effort.
Swinging down from the balcony on a curtain: -4,+1d8 tumble/jump - if it works, it'll slow your fall, but if the curtain rips, you're screwed.

 

[JVisgaitis]

The concept behind this is awesome as its simple and easy to do almost anything. What I think it needs is better examples of what can be done and maybe different types of stunts. I may steal this at some point if that's cool...

 

[Turanil]

The concept behind this is awesome as its simple and easy to do almost anything.

Thanks! (although some of the comments above make sense to me)

What I think it needs is better examples of what can be done and maybe different types of stunts. I may steal this at some point if that's cool...

This is the main problem: I couldn't think of other stunts, so I hoped others on ENworld would give their ideas. The thread is open to them...

 

[hong]

The only major "hole" I can see is that Characters with Good BAB will use stunts more often in combat to garner the +1d6 damage. It is like power attack, doesn't grant the same amount of damage bonus but its free as opposed to a feat.

All they need to do is describe the action.

If the intention of the OP is to encourage more detailed/interesting descriptions of combat as opposed to just "I roll a 15 to hit/I roll 20 damage", then that's a feature, not a bug. The tricky bit will be to ensure people don't get stuck in a rut or go overboard when it comes to making up descriptions.

 

[Psion]

I use the Unearthed Arcana variant of action points:
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/adventuring/actionPoints.htm

In particular, what makes this variant work for me is the emulate feat bit:

Emulate Feat

At the beginning of a character’s turn, he may spend 1 action point as a free action to gain the benefit of a feat he doesn’t have. He must meet the prerequisites of the feat. He gains the benefit until the beginning of his next turn.

The upshot is that all those books you have full of feats, most of which you will never use, become Books of Stunts.

I'm somewhat flexible with this, because not all players have an encyclopedic knowledge of feats. If a player wants to do something, if I don't know if a feat exists to do it, I'll make something up on the fly.