Who's actually a fan of D20M's nonlethal damage system?

HeapThaumaturgist said:
I blended the two, and like it.

I.E. NLD accrues, but also if you can get enough through to force an MDT, then you're golden.

Seems to keep everybody happy. The brawler can sucker-punch people out in a single blow, the others can wail for a while.

--fje

Pretty much what I do. However, breaching MDT only works if the victim fails a save. I need to work on a feat (or modify Knockout Punch) so the save DC can scale.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I've used them and they worked fine, but I've only run relatively low level games. I'd probably institute the MDT houserule if I ran a campaign to high levels.

I don't mind if it's tough to knock somebody out without a bunch of training, because in the real world relatively few "nonlethal" fights go until somebody's unconcious, usually if somebody's down it's because the other guy did something potentially lethal to cause it. And in action movies and TV shows, major characters often fight through lots of extras with no real cumulative damage taken, so it's not too bad at modelling the genre, either.
 

Have used it as written and liked it.

It's not just Improved Brawl. It's Improved Brawl, Streetfighting, and Power Attack. You get those -- all of which are Tough Hero bonus feats and all of which except Streetfighting are Strong Hero bonus feats -- and you're golden.

The Tough Hero at 4th level, with his two bonus feats and two normal levelling feats, could be doing 1d8+1d4+Power Attack +Strength, and be getting a +2 to hit in the process. A Strong Hero at 4th level, with his two bonus feats and only one levelling feat, could be doing 1d8+Power Attack+Strength+Improved Melee Smash, also with a +2 to hit. And if you've got a feat slot free, give him Streetfighting as well, and you're doing, what, 1d8+1d4+2 (Melee Smash) +2 (Assume a 14 or 15 strength, not even forcing a 16) + Power Attack damage, and average of 11 plus whatever you're power attacking with. The Tough guy does a bit less damage, since he doesn't have Melee Smash, but he's got more hit points and some nice stay-alive talents to make up for it.

For me, the Power Attack is the key. That's what (I think) the rationale for giving you the bonuus to unarmed attacks is for -- it's assuming that you'll be Power Attacking to get your damage up there high enough to force a massive damage check.

And what I think some people forget is that you're not SUPPOSED to force a save every time you hit, even with a character focused on that. If you even force the save, you automatically make them lose their next turn, which is just a killer in d20 Modern fights. If you can make somebody lose their turn one round out of three, you are seriously debilitating them, even if they keep making that save. I don't think of it as "Chance to get a knockout, assuming I hit, I roll well on damage, and they fail their save." I think of it as "Chance to make them lose a turn, assuming I hit and roll well -- and I could one-shot them right out of the fight." In my mind, that's a significantly better way of thinking about it.

I've heard (but am not saying this is widespread) that some people think that the automatic-daze feature is too strong, and don't use that rule... and then complain that non-accruing damage is weak.
 

We use WP/VP, so non-lethal is real easy, though if we did use normal hit points we would probably do it like Heap described above.
 

takyris said:
For me, the Power Attack is the key. That's what (I think) the rationale for giving you the bonuus to unarmed attacks is for -- it's assuming that you'll be Power Attacking to get your damage up there high enough to force a massive damage check.

And what I think some people forget is that you're not SUPPOSED to force a save every time you hit, even with a character focused on that. If you even force the save, you automatically make them lose their next turn, which is just a killer in d20 Modern fights. If you can make somebody lose their turn one round out of three, you are seriously debilitating them, even if they keep making that save. I don't think of it as "Chance to get a knockout, assuming I hit, I roll well on damage, and they fail their save." I think of it as "Chance to make them lose a turn, assuming I hit and roll well -- and I could one-shot them right out of the fight." In my mind, that's a significantly better way of thinking about it.

Thanks. These are solid, compelling arguements. When I ask someone to advocate the system, this is what I'm talking about. Just telling me you're happy with them without addressing the points I raised isn't so useful.
 

Felon said:
Thanks. These are solid, compelling arguements. When I ask someone to advocate the system, this is what I'm talking about. Just telling me you're happy with them without addressing the points I raised isn't so useful.

Danke. I'm under no illusions that it's perfect -- I classify it as a faithful successor to the Dodge talent tree, where you take some not-so-great feats in order to get really cool stuff at higher levels. Brawl all by itself, with no followup feats, isn't so much a feat as a roleplaying choice.

The Power Attack thing slips under the radar for a lot of D&D people, I think -- they see it, go "Yeah, same as before," and don't think about it in its new context. Or if they do, they think, "Ugh, and now my BAB is lower most of the time, so I can't even use Power Attack as much." But because of the Massive Damage Threshold addition to d20 Modern, I see Power Attack as a ton MORE useful, not less. Instead of it serving as "Do lots of damage on first attack, likely miss on any iterative attacks", which doesn't always work out well in D&D, it lets you put lots of hurt into the first attack and possibly force a massive damage save -- either to not drop to -1 with normal combat, or to automatically daze somebody with nonlethal and possibly even knock them out.
 

Remove ads

Top