To all the other "simulationists" out there...

[mmadsen]

I enjoy GURPS, but I found that the additional burden in preparation time wasn't really worth it.

If GURPS reduced its skill list to d20's and eliminated fractional points, I suspect GURPS could be quicker and leaner than d20. It's a more detailed system, but it has less coupling between disparate parts. If you want a foe with certain stats, you can just give him those stats, and he's a legal characters.

If you can't drop a character in one shot, it's not a mook.

And if you can, it is a mook -- like Smaug, killed by Bard, or the fell beast, killed by a shot in the dark from Legolas, or the Witch-King, killed by a hobbit and a girl -- wait, that was two shots.

I think we need to draw a clear distinction between foes who should drop from a single attack -- spear-carriers, cannon fodder, red shirts, mooks -- and those who can drop from a single attack -- anyone without plot protection.

 

[Fifth Element]

Again, the DM himself wasn't happy with the situation. It wasn't a situation of DM vs. Players, but real world logic vs. D&D rules.

If both the DM and the players were unhappy with the result, I think the DM needs to be reminded of Rule 0.

 

[Lacyon]

For instance, instead of having 10 hit dice, a great warrior might have a 1-in-10 chance of falling to a spear thrust (via, say, a Damage Save). By either set of rules, the great warrior should expect to survive roughly ten spear thrusts -- he's equally tough under both sets of rules -- but the two systems play out differently.

The major difference is that the great warrior expects to survive 10 spear thrusts ever, whereas the guy with 10 hit dice expects to survive 10 spear thrusts any time he's 'at full hp', whatever that happens to mean in your game.

 

[Ashrem Bayle]

Ok, let's try this again then...

Alternately, in D&D the Fighter uses his AoO to Trip the hobgoblin, and the Wizard casts his spell. How is that any different?

In D&D he would have to perform some kind of foot sweep on the passing goblin, provoking an AoO himself.
If he succeeds, the hobgoblin falls.
The next round he gets back up and continues toward the spellcaster.

In GURPS, the fighter permanently crippled the hobgoblin's leg, leaving him at the spellcaster's mercy. The hobgoblin suffered shock penalties and could not stand. He could only crawl. If left alone, he would possibly bleed to death.

But, then spellcaster killed him.

 

[Ashrem Bayle]

If both the DM and the players were unhappy with the result, I think the DM needs to be reminded of Rule 0.

Oh, I agree.

I myself would have just house ruled it.

But then, it was the desire to house rule it that sent me looking for another game.

 

[Brown Jenkin]

It sounds to me that the problems here are entirely rule system neutral and really has nothing to do with 3.5 problems or how 4E would deal with it.

Problem 1: The adventure was written so that the sentry by the bell was too powerful to be dropped in one hit.
Problem 2: The DM was unwilling to deviate from anything written in the module.

Problem 1 is rule system neutral because every RPG I know of allows for enemy combatants to stated in such a way that the PCs are unable to kill them in one strike if that is the way the designer of the adventure wants it. in 3.5 the sentry could be a War 1 or a Fighter 5 depending on what the designer wanted. In 4E the Sentry could be a Mook or a Elite depending on what the ddesigner wanted. In each system in the first case a single strike kills and the second there is no way a single strike will kill. In GURPS or HERO System or Rolemaster or anything else the designer will have these same design choices.

Problem 2 is with the DM and not the rule system. If the DM is unwilling to change things to better fit with player expectations or plans the players shouldn't blame the system.

As far as I can tell there is no rule system that will make the OP happy given this scenario and DM.

 

[Fifth Element]

Oh, I agree.

I myself would have just house ruled it.

I agree - one of the things I house rule in my games is to increase the frequency of coup de grace opportunities. For instance, in a recent game a bugbear was both stunned and knocked prone by a great thunderclap spell. I ruled that the fighter adjacent to him was able to use a coup de grace, since being stunned and knocked prone is darn close to being helpless.

I would probably rule the same thing for an invisible rogue who make a killer Move Silently check.

 

[Ashrem Bayle]

It sounds to me that the problems here are entirely rule system neutral and really has nothing to do with 3.5 problems or how 4E would deal with it.

No.
I'll explain it again. The problem wasn't that the hobgoblin was too powerful.



The problem was that, in the game system, there was nothing the PC could do to kill the hobgoblin in one hit before he made a noise.

This isn't realistic. In real life, it may be difficult at times, but it can be done.



At max damage on a sneak attack, it couldn't be done. On a critical it couldn't be done. A coup de grace isn't legal in this situation. It has nothing to do with narrative, the module, or the DM.

By the RAW, it was quiet simply impossible, which is unrealistic.

 

[Lacyon]

In D&D he would have to perform some kind of foot sweep on the passing goblin, provoking an AoO himself.
If he succeeds, the hobgoblin falls.
The next round he gets back up and continues toward the spellcaster.

Assuming he survives both the wizard's turn and the fighter's turn, he uses a move action to stand (provoking an AoO) and a standard action to move towards the caster (provoking another AoO, if the fighter has Combat Reflexes or chose not to take the first AoO). There's been enough nerdrage about whether the fighter's allowed to make that first AoO a trip or not, but he can definitely make the second one a trip.

The fighter provokes a return AoO if he doesn't have either Improved Trip or a trip weapon, but (presumably), he can take it and the wizard can't.

In GURPS, the fighter permanently crippled the hobgoblin's leg, leaving him at the spellcaster's mercy. The hobgoblin suffered shock penalties and could not stand. He could only crawl. If left alone, he would possibly bleed to death.

Sure. And there are ways to model such things directly in D&D, though I have no doubt that GURPS makes it easier than the chain of class features and feats you'd need. For my money, though, just taking the results (Hobgoblin tries to walk past fighter, fails, eventually dies), and describe them any which way makes me and my players happy is fine.

But, then spellcaster killed him.

That part sounds just like D&D.

 

[Ashrem Bayle]

Sure. And there are ways to model such things directly in D&D, though I have no doubt that GURPS makes it easier than the chain of class features and feats you'd need.

Which is another irritation. Realisticly, do you really need all that special training or whatever to decide to hit the enemy in the legs instead of the chest or whatever?

For my money, though, just taking the results (Hobgoblin tries to walk past fighter, fails, eventually dies), and describe them any which way makes me and my players happy is fine.

Not for me. I like for the players to have more control. I like for them to be able to decide where and how the enemy is hit instead of letting it all ride on the DM. It gives them more freedom and chances to be both strategic and creative.

That part sounds just like D&D.

Well...yeah.