Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Two Combat Systems, One Game
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="GMMichael" data-source="post: 8824080" data-attributes="member: 6685730"><p>Have you ever played an RPG that allowed either GM or PC choice of more than one combat system to use? Warmech games and old(er) Shadowrun may fit this bill, with the machines/matrix getting separate sets of rules. I'm also interested in games that offer two options for the same battle - not depending on whether you're driving a robot destroyer or driving a laptop/neural implants.</p><p></p><p><strong>Which combat system did/would you prefer? Did you start a battle and wish you had used the other rules? Did you finish a battle and regret or savor the choice of rules that you made?</strong></p><p></p><p>It occurs to me because I used to dismiss the possibility of using my game's base rules (first two modules) for combat, and assumed that two additional rules modules were necessary for real combat. I recently realized that the base rules present a significant alternative to the crunchier combat set, summarized as:</p><p></p><p>Simple combat: mainly using die contests (PC vs. GM d20s) and character skill to determine victory in a combat, no structure for taking turns, and emphasis on narration.</p><p></p><p>Extended combat: emphasizing damage and protection, structure in timing and quantity of effort (initiative and actions), with emphasis on tactical choices.</p><p></p><p>TL/DR: think Dragon's Lair versus Warcraft. Gory details:</p><p>[SPOILER="Modos RPG conflicts"]</p><p>In Modos RPG, the first two rules modules (core and character) provide for outcome-deciding contests with bonuses from attributes and skills. A series of these can be considered a simple conflict - a sort of story-telling-type of battle. Side rules play into these. GMs are encouraged to give 2-point bonuses for good descriptions from PCs. Without a rule resembling health or hit points, PCs instead add to their character Flaws ("lost kneecap" or whatever the case may be). Shields are an important consideration in simple conflict because they add to a character's parrying (blocking) skill. But parrying requires an action in...</p><p></p><p>Extended conflict ties in its own module and a combat module to form the more traditional type of battle. PCs lose health when they take damage and take less damage when they wear armor. They take actions, turns, and sometimes jockey to gain the initiative. Parrying plays a side role because it costs an action, but armor always provides protection, which is important because an unparried attack almost always does damage. Goals and Flaws can contribute because they can still provide d6 bonuses ("hero points"), but flaws are not needed to track damage. Positioning takes place in zones, but is otherwise as flexible as the free-form simple conflict.</p><p>[/SPOILER]</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="GMMichael, post: 8824080, member: 6685730"] Have you ever played an RPG that allowed either GM or PC choice of more than one combat system to use? Warmech games and old(er) Shadowrun may fit this bill, with the machines/matrix getting separate sets of rules. I'm also interested in games that offer two options for the same battle - not depending on whether you're driving a robot destroyer or driving a laptop/neural implants. [B]Which combat system did/would you prefer? Did you start a battle and wish you had used the other rules? Did you finish a battle and regret or savor the choice of rules that you made?[/B] It occurs to me because I used to dismiss the possibility of using my game's base rules (first two modules) for combat, and assumed that two additional rules modules were necessary for real combat. I recently realized that the base rules present a significant alternative to the crunchier combat set, summarized as: Simple combat: mainly using die contests (PC vs. GM d20s) and character skill to determine victory in a combat, no structure for taking turns, and emphasis on narration. Extended combat: emphasizing damage and protection, structure in timing and quantity of effort (initiative and actions), with emphasis on tactical choices. TL/DR: think Dragon's Lair versus Warcraft. Gory details: [SPOILER="Modos RPG conflicts"] In Modos RPG, the first two rules modules (core and character) provide for outcome-deciding contests with bonuses from attributes and skills. A series of these can be considered a simple conflict - a sort of story-telling-type of battle. Side rules play into these. GMs are encouraged to give 2-point bonuses for good descriptions from PCs. Without a rule resembling health or hit points, PCs instead add to their character Flaws ("lost kneecap" or whatever the case may be). Shields are an important consideration in simple conflict because they add to a character's parrying (blocking) skill. But parrying requires an action in... Extended conflict ties in its own module and a combat module to form the more traditional type of battle. PCs lose health when they take damage and take less damage when they wear armor. They take actions, turns, and sometimes jockey to gain the initiative. Parrying plays a side role because it costs an action, but armor always provides protection, which is important because an unparried attack almost always does damage. Goals and Flaws can contribute because they can still provide d6 bonuses ("hero points"), but flaws are not needed to track damage. Positioning takes place in zones, but is otherwise as flexible as the free-form simple conflict. [/SPOILER] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Two Combat Systems, One Game
Top