True 20 Combat

[GreatLemur]

Then again I have experience with this sort of thing. I regularily run BESM d20 using D&D or d20 Modern for character generation, just using the d20 engine from BESM d20 - so to me, it's easy to seperate the "Char Gen" rules from the "Play" rules.

This is getting a little off topic, but I'd actually be interested in hearing how BESM d20's combat/resolution system is different from D&D. From what little I know of BESM, I'd have thought the character generation would be the main thing you'd want to keep (I'm a sucker for point-based).

AoO's are especially problematic in True20, because a free attack is much more powerful in True20 than it is in D&D. True20 has no iterative attacks, so an additional attack effectively doubles a character's offence, and under the damage save mechanic any extra attack is potentially lethal.

Now that's a damned good point, and something I hadn't thought of. That actually makes me rethink including AoOs. If I do, I might want to adjust the base DC for Toughness saves a bit. I'd actually been considering that already, anyway.

 

[Denaes]

This is getting a little off topic, but I'd actually be interested in hearing how BESM d20's combat/resolution system is different from D&D.

Honestly, it's easier to describe the system than it is to point out differences. Here it is in a nutshell:

* Attack & Defense related skills.
* No Str Bonus to strike.
* Armour doesn't add to AC, but is DR instead.
* AC is fairly low - just the maneuvarability (like dex) type bonuses.
* To Hit: Roll to strike + BAB + Attack Skills and beat opponents AC + 1 (I believe)
* To Defend: Roll a d20 + AC + Defensive Skills to defend

Thats the basic system. Feats and Attributes can mix things up quite a bit.

From what little I know of BESM, I'd have thought the character generation would be the main thing you'd want to keep (I'm a sucker for point-based).

It is, though I don't like purely classless games and even the BESM d20 classes don't really make much use of point buy aside from being really not suited for particular genres.

I just use D&D or d20 Modern classes, make sure they don't take useless Feats and let people take defects and bonus feats/attributes. I pop em a CP every once and a while to buy something with or save up if they wish. Keeps people within a guidelines of a class (and d20 Modern is pretty loose) for a level and gives them some customization.

 

[Akrasia]

In kind, I have to strongly disagree with this as well. Howard goes to great lengths in virtually every battle that Conan is in to detail the various parries, feints, sidesteps, backhand slices, crunching bones, etc. If those aren't tactical movements and maneuvers, I don't know what is.

My point is that *all* this can be captured by the True20 combat system -- and without all the tediousness of the standard d20 combat system.

True20 combat has fast pace -- just like Howard's writing. Combat doesn't take an hour to resolve.

Combat in Conan isn't reduced to a single "attack". The less options, the less gritty the feel becomes IMO. And Conan is gritty...

There are plenty of options in True 20. 'Conan-esque' combat is well captured by True20's *dramatic* combat system and conviction points.

...
Admittedly, I need to look at the True 20 system. ...

Yeah, that would *really* help.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

Incidentally, I sometimes houserule AoOs away due to my prefered action structure; I'm not terribly fond of the mechanic, I just think it's extremely logical.

And yes, both d20 and True20 can represent Conan-style combat effectively - albeit in very different ways. In fact, Mongoose's OGL Conan and True20 even share the concept of a dodge/parry bonus!

 

[Skywalker]

Combat in Conan isn't reduced to a single "attack". The less options, the less gritty the feel becomes IMO. And Conan is gritty. It's not that a simpler ruleset loses the grittiness; it's that removing tactical choices makes the action simpler. In a gritty game, I want to be able to make AoO's or flank my opponent, etc. Heck, in Mongoose's Conan ruleset, there are 2 types of defense modifiers! (which captures the feel of Conan very well IMO)

As already mentioned True 20 has almost as many combat options as D&D, even a few that aren't in D&D such as the parry/dodge distinction and the finesse attack rules in Conan. The difference is that True 20's combat options don't focus the player on tactics and book keeping which have a tendency to slow down the game and take players out of the mood. True 20 allows for faster play whilst still keep things varied.

For example, you can do a Surprise Attack in True 20, which is an attack that comes from an unexpected quarter or catches the target off-guard in some way. The effect is that the target of a surprise attack loses any dodge bonus to Defense against the attack and suffers an additional –2 Defense penalty. However, you can also use the Surprise Attack and Crippling Strike Feats to do more damage and cripple an opponent. These Feats may sound specialised but any Expert could use a Conviction Point to get one of them for one round.

The result is a focus on the action without the book keeping and then allowing the player to spend a Conviction Point (i.e. drama point) to make the Surprise Attack hamstring the opponent.

For your reference the full list of combat options (not including feats or special actions like finesse, surprise attacks, minions, ganging up, disarm etc) are:

Free Actions
Delay
Drop an Item
Drop Prone
Speak

Move Actions
Command
Manipulate an Object
Move
Stand Up

Full Actions
Aim
Charge
Move All Out
Recover
Refocus
Slam

Standard Actions
Aid
Attack
Begin/Complete Full Action
Combined Attack
Concentrate
Cover
Demoralize
Disarm
Distract
Feint
Grapple
Overrun
Ready
Rush
Startle
Taunt
Total Defense
Trick
Trip

 

[HellHound]

My point is that *all* this can be captured by the True20 combat system -- and without all the tediousness of the standard d20 combat system.

True20 combat has fast pace -- just like Howard's writing. Combat doesn't take an hour to resolve.

Just finished running a game of standard d20 yesterday - four hour game, lots of exploration, bunch of diplomacy, four major combats.

Just finished running a game of True 20 today - six hour game, same results.

In the end, we didn't find the combat -any- quicker using True20, and especially not more 'logical' as it has been implied in this thread.

But then again, as I said, I don't agree with the assessment that d20 is a mini's based wargame, since we don't play with minis, combat grids, etc, but still use AoOs and flanking just fine.

 

[Skywalker]

In the end, we didn't find the combat -any- quicker using True20, and especially not more 'logical' as it has been implied in this thread.

I agree that True 20 is no more logical than D&D. I find True 20 to be slightly quicker in combat especially if you removed most of the tactical elements like you have.

However, my point is that I find True 20 to be a lot less tactical and bookkeeping than D&D in play from combat to PC creation. So my question is did you find the tactical/bookkeeping element in True 20 to be as strong as that in D&D (despite the fact that you removed a raft of the tactical elements from D&D yourself)?

 

[HellHound]

See, I still use -ALL- the rules from D&D, so I don't consider my style of play to be one that "removed a raft of tactical elements". We just don't use a physical combat grid, it's all done in our heads.

I found True 20 to be less... precise... than d20 core I guess. But, like with most games I've played since I started playing d20, I foudn the lack of Attacks of Opportunity to be a pain because retreating from combat becomes so much easier (eek - he's scary and hurt me, I run away!).

 

[Skywalker]

See, I still use -ALL- the rules from D&D, so I don't consider my style of play to be one that "removed a raft of tactical elements". We just don't use a physical combat grid, it's all done in our heads.

Removing the tactical grid is IMO a significant removal of D&D's tactical side given how many abilities refer to grid use. YMMV

I found True 20 to be less... precise... than d20 core I guess. But, like with most games I've played since I started playing d20, I foudn the lack of Attacks of Opportunity to be a pain because retreating from combat becomes so much easier (eek - he's scary and hurt me, I run away!).

I agree that True 20 is less precise than D&D. True 20 sacrifices the precision to remove the tactical grid and some of the book keeping elements in D&D. As mentioned before, I think the correct balance between these two elements is a personal one. However, I am surprised that you didn't find True 20 less tactical or involving less bookkeeping than D&D as this is an obvious result from the design changes made.

True 20 much better suits my own preference. In D&D, I also removed the tactical grid. It works fine but it was noticed in that many of the abilities were defined by reference to that grid. True 20 on the other hand specifically supports the style of play that I prefer and I really liked how it changed many of the abilities that normally require reference to a grid like Flanking to something without a grid like Surprise Attack.

As a result, I find that True 20 drags me down less into a tactical mind frame (which I dislike) without limiting my options.

 

[Akrasia]

Removing the tactical grid is IMO a significant removal of D&D's tactical side given how many abilities refer to grid use. YMMV

Yes, I concur.

I have DM'ed two 3e campaigns, and in both cases, I found it VERY difficult to resolve combat without some kind of graphical representation (except for very simple combats, that is).

I envy Hellhound if he can do this -- but it certainly has not been my experience, or that of any 3e players I know.

True 20 on the other hand specifically supports the style of play that I prefer and I really liked how it changed many of the abilities that normally require reference to a grid like Flanking to something without a grid like Surprise Attack.

As a result, I find that True 20 drags me down less into a tactical mind frame (which I dislike) without limiting my options.

I agree 100 percent.