What Cool Things Should the Rules Let You Do?

[mmadsen]

I was reading an essay by Gerry Klug on how he created the classic James Bond RPG back in the day, and this tidbit explained why it was so good:

The methodology used to design the James Bond game was a variant of the way I used when I was a Lighting Designer in theatre and rock 'n' roll. I first immersed myself in the subject, reading all the James Bond books Ian Fleming wrote. I then reread them carefully, noting instances and occurrences I wanted to recreate in the game when Bond fans played it.​

If you were to create a list of evocative things fantasy heroes might try, what would go on that list?

 

[NCSUCodeMonkey]

To be perfectly honest, I'd probably start by not making a list. The players' creativity an the situation at hand usually come up with way cooler things to do than what I can come up with beforehand. It's one reason that I wish I could get a group of RISUS players together for more than one session. I'd like to see what kind of cool stuff you could do in a system that flexible.

IME, D&D tends to stifle that creativity (if your DM adheres strictly to the RAW), because you can only choose from a set list of cool things (in combat, anyway) like tripping someone, or bull rushing them. And, to make matters even worse, it's harder to do those cool things than it is to just attack with your regular attack.

So yeah. No list for me. Just make it easy for the players to do cool things descriptively while keeping it balanced mechanically.

 

[EricNoah]

Swing on ropes

Attack parts of creatures, particularly larger creatures -- improved grab should be countered by cutting off tentacles/arms/whatever!

Stagger around when you are hurt

Try casting a spell that you don't know -- maybe from a spellbook?

Lend your magical power to another caster through cooperative casting

Take more time when casting spells to have a better/more effective spell

 

[mmadsen]

To expand on my original post:

For instance, the James Bond RPG includes rules for car and foot chases, where you can "bid" on the difficulty of the stunts to try to lose pursuers, rules for seduction, with various stages, rules for gambling, including all the games from the books and movies, etc.

A western game would have explicit rules for quick-draw shootouts at high noon, cheating at poker, hopping on a horse, etc.

In a samurai game you should be able to chop off limbs and kill a man with one blow. You should also expect a battle of wills before a duel -- much like a western game, naturally, if you know your film history.

So, in a fantasy game, what are the "cool bits" that should be doable under the rules?

 

[mmadsen]

Swing on ropes

Naturally! Swing on ropes, slide down banisters, jump onto horses, cut into a sail and "zip" down -- all kinds of swashbuckling goodness!

Attack parts of creatures, particularly larger creatures -- improved grab should be countered by cutting off tentacles/arms/whatever!

So true! You want to be able to cut off the Watcher's tentacles, shoot the Oliphaunt in the eye, or climb up its body.

Stagger around when you are hurt

It always feels weird to roll high damage and have nothing immediate happen...

Try casting a spell that you don't know -- maybe from a spellbook?

"Klaatu barada nikto!" Seriously, it's a fantasy staple to try to cast a spell you have no business casting. Often it works, if not quite the way you intended.

 

[EricNoah]

BTW, players in my campaigns can accomplish stuff like this now and then without resorting to the rules. Each session, every player gets one "screw the rules" point. They just say what happens, and it happens (within reason). I figure as DM I screw the rules now and then to make the story happen, and the players should have a chance to do the same.

 

[Nebulous]

BTW, players in my campaigns can accomplish stuff like this now and then without resorting to the rules. Each session, every player gets one "screw the rules" point. They just say what happens, and it happens (within reason). I figure as DM I screw the rules now and then to make the story happen, and the players should have a chance to do the same.

I think i'll use that too. Neatly circumvents an actual "rule" somewhere.

 

[mmadsen]

I want characters to have reasons to do "suboptimal" things, because both real and fictional fights are chaotic, with unpredictable openings for unusual moves. Think Three Musketeers. How often is kicking the other guy your best option in the game when you're holding a rapier? How often is kicking the other guy a great idea in a swashbuckling movie? Once per scene.

How about pulling a foe's cloak over his head? Or punching him with your off hand? Or clothes-lining a different foe as he lunges at your ally?

 

[Awakened]

I love how the swashbuckling stuff is the first "why can't we do that?" response. Without fail, that's the inexplicably communal notion of gaming cool. So much so, in fact, that I've seen TONS of products advertising ways to do this in-game stuff, (including WOTC stuff, mind you- you don't have to look beyond it to find the rules to do these things) and yet the demand always stays there.
It seems like, as long as swinging on crap isn't in a core book, people will endlessly demand systems. It's like a gamer bug, I swear.
Weird.

 

[Jeremy Ackerman-Yost]

I want characters to have reasons to do "suboptimal" things, because both real and fictional fights are chaotic, with unpredictable openings for unusual moves. Think Three Musketeers. How often is kicking the other guy your best option in the game when you're holding a rapier? How often is kicking the other guy a great idea in a swashbuckling movie? Once per scene.

Technically, this is sort of how it works with iterative attacks. That kind of thing is abstracted in. There's no reason to assume that every one of those hits is a strike with a sword. In fact, for reasons of realism, you kinda need to assume they're NOT. Assuming most of your actual "hits" are punches, kicks, glancing blows, or superficial nicks is the only way to have the whole thing make sense, at least against humanoid and animal opponents. For creepy things from beyond I'm happy to let every hit cause massive apparent damage that just doesn't slow the thing down.

The problem is damage is derived from the weapon you're using, rather than your competence. I'm not sure if that's a bug or a feature. For cinematic combat, definitely a bug, I think. Then again, Saga has made me wonder if iterative attacks are a bug, as well.

How about pulling a foe's cloak over his head? Or punching him with your off hand? Or clothes-lining a different foe as he lunges at your ally?

Those are less well-modeled. Didn't the Book of Iron Might include some decent rules for this kind of thing, though? You took penalties on attack or damage (or folded in a skill check) to get special effects (dazed, blinded by his cape, etc). Yes, they were harder to do than regular attacks, but not cripplingly so, iirc.