PDA

View Full Version : 4ed Grapple Rules?



Kizara
2008-06-06, 01:07 AM
What are the rules for grappling and Turning Undead in 4ed? I always found those amounst the clunkiest mechanics in 3.5 (as did most).

Also, how does Unarmed fighting/damage/attacks work? How about in a grapple? The whole Unarmed vs natural attacks with TWF and improved natural attack and etc etc were also really terrible if you poked them too hard.


I'm sure this was addressed somewhere already, but I wasn't about to wade through all the 4ed threads out there. :P

The Necroswanso
2008-06-06, 01:09 AM
Can't you just wait and buy the books? They release on the 11th to my knowledge.

Nebo_
2008-06-06, 01:11 AM
Can't you just wait and buy the books? They release on the 11th to my knowledge.

Tomorrow, actually.

The Necroswanso
2008-06-06, 01:15 AM
Wait? For real?

Kizara
2008-06-06, 01:19 AM
Can't you just wait and buy the books? They release on the 11th to my knowledge.

Thanks for being so constructive. Make sure you never make a thread asking about something, for some 'helpful' person might show up to tell you to look it up for yourself. Not ignorant at all.


And as for buying 4ed, I have no intention of doing so, as I am extremely disgusted with most of what I've seen. However, I am curious enough about these particular issues that I'm having difficulty houseruling and was wondering how WotC managed to solve them.

I'm guessing you ethier a) can't do these things now, b) what you do amounts to a generic action that deals damage or somesuch, instead of something more appropriate or c) those rules will be in a later book!! However, I made this thread with the hope of being proved wrong and shown some magic solution they've found that I haven't been able to come up with yet. (that is to say, the solutions I have come up with have not been entirely satisfactory to me thus far)

The Necroswanso
2008-06-06, 01:24 AM
Well in order to answer your question, Wizards would need to have posted the info right? Or someone would have to have read through the book.... Me, I don't plan on buying the books either. Just read a bit through them in da store yuh know?

The way I saw it anyway, was as first a touch had to be made. Then opposed rolls to determine winner/break. Simple stuff really.

tyckspoon
2008-06-06, 01:26 AM
I don't know about grappling, but Turning has shown up several times in things like the pre-built Cleric for Keep on the Shadowfell. It's one of the options for the 'Channel Divinity' encounter power, along with.. uh, something I forgot and your deity's special choice, if you take the feat that gives you the deity's power. It does Radiant damage to all undead in a burst centered around the cleric, like the 'Turning as damage' variant in 3.5.

Paragon Badger
2008-06-06, 01:30 AM
Clearly, WotC needs to create 'The Complete Grappler'

The Necroswanso
2008-06-06, 01:32 AM
Wasn't it outlined in the Rules Compendium? I never bought it myself.

Kizara
2008-06-06, 01:34 AM
I don't know about grappling, but Turning has shown up several times in things like the pre-built Cleric for Keep on the Shadowfell. It's one of the options for the 'Channel Divinity' encounter power, along with.. uh, something I forgot and your deity's special choice, if you take the feat that gives you the deity's power. It does Radiant damage to all undead in a burst centered around the cleric, like the 'Turning as damage' variant in 3.5.

So, you need to take a feat to do it and it does damage like your other abilities but only effects undead? Sounds like crap (although I think I may be misunderstanding you).

Not surprized they went this route with Turn Undead, and not really that annoyed. That variant was decent, and a working solution if an inelegant one (that phrase describes much of 4ed, IMO).


Thanks for the info, although I think I could use a bit of clarification.

Bearonet
2008-06-06, 01:36 AM
It does radiant damage *and* throws them away from you! that makes it cool. And, no, clerics get it by default.

RTGoodman
2008-06-06, 01:37 AM
For Turn Undead, as tyckspoon said, it's one of the "Channel Divinity" powers. You have a host of them, but can only pick one per encounter, and you can pick feats to add others based on your deity (though I'm pretty sure Turn Undead is one that everyone gets). The Turning one does damage to all Undead in the burst, but it also pushes them a certain number of squares (6 for the KotS Cleric, but I'm not sure if it's a fixed number or X+Cha squares or something) and makes them immobilized for a round. It allows a Will save for half damage and negates the other stuff.

For grappling, I can't remember much, but I think someone said it's a standard action and it just makes the target immobilized for a round or something like that. Not sure. The zombies in KotS have a "Zombie Grab" at-will power vs. Fort that renders the target "grabbed," but I can't seem to find it that's a special condition or what.

For unarmed attacks, I think it's a regular attack that does 1d4 damage or something like that. If you look in the thread about whether Monks, Sorcerers, and Druids will be in 4E, they mentioned it there.

I should have my books by tomorrow afternoon, if no one else gives definite answers by then.


EDIT: Aha! I found where someone mentioned unarmed strikes. Jax mentioned it here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4422341&postcount=10), but it doesn't say anything about damage (other than a PHB page reference, which doesn't help me). I guess I just made that 1d4 damage up. :smallredface:

tyckspoon
2008-06-06, 01:44 AM
So, you need to take a feat to do it and it does damage like your other abilities but only effects undead? Sounds like crap (although I think I may be misunderstanding you).


Ah, sorry, I was trying to talk about too many things at once. No, Turning doesn't require a feat. It's one of the basic options under the umbrella power of 'Channel Divinity' that all Clerics have. Feats can be used to acquire more options beyond the basic two or so if desired; the Keep Cleric had Armor of Bahamut, for example.

Skyserpent
2008-06-06, 01:47 AM
And as for buying 4ed, I have no intention of doing so, as I am extremely disgusted with most of what I've seen. However, I am curious enough about these particular issues that I'm having difficulty houseruling and was wondering how WotC managed to solve them.

I'm guessing you ethier a) can't do these things now, b) what you do amounts to a generic action that deals damage or somesuch, instead of something more appropriate or c) those rules will be in a later book!! However, I madethis thread with the hope of being proved wrong and shown some magic solution they've found that I haven't been able to come up with yet. (that is to say, the solutions I have come up with have not been entirely satisfactory to me thus far)
While I hope you give 4e a shot when the opportunity arises and try to keep an open mind I respect your opinion of 4e, even if I do not share it...

moving on from a subject that keeps getting hit upon:

As far as Turning Undead, I believe that mechanic has, in fact, been removed, I'm not sure what particular ability has replaced it as the Clerics go-to move against undead, it's possible that they just take extra damage from radiance spells or something... EDIT: Aheheh... my bad...

Grappling has been "Streamlined" in a similar fashion to the rest of 4e, so you may not like it. At any rate, here's how it goes:

On your turn, you may take a Standard Action to "Grab" a Target, you may grab any creature that is smaller, equal or one size category larger than you. It must be within melee reach, not counting reach weapons.

Make a Strength Attack against their Reflex Defense, (you must have at least 1 hand free) If you succeed, the enemy is Immobilized and can attempt to escape on it's turn.

When a character is Immobilized they cannot move from their own space though they can teleport, or be moved by a push, pull or slide.

Sustaining a Grab is a Minor Action, Ending it is a Free action, Any effect that would cause you to be unable to make opportunity attacks immediately ends the grab (i.e. stun, daze, death, etc.) If a power or effect pushes or pulls either you or your target the Grab ends.

Moving a Grabbed target is a standard action, a Strength Attack against their Fortitude Defense, succeed and drag your target half your movement speed.

Escaping a Grab is a move action that requires an Acrobatics or Athletics check against the targets Reflex Defense or Fortitude Defense respectively. Success allows you to shift one square if you so desire. Certain powers and abilities allow the Escape Mechanic to be used as well ( entangle abilities etc.)

All in all, it's a simple mechanic that plays into the rest of the system intuitively. It uses the same defenses and checks that the rest of the system uses and doesn't slow down game play significantly but still offers a fairly useful mechanic to combat. It's a tactical maneuver that is situationally useful but simple enough that should the situation arise you aren't going to dread using it.

However, it does play heavily into the nature of the rest of 4e mechanics, and so I can't promise it'll mesh well with the 3.5 system. It works fine in 4e though.

Skyserpent
2008-06-06, 01:55 AM
So, you need to take a feat to do it and it does damage like your other abilities but only effects undead? Sounds like crap (although I think I may be misunderstanding you).

Not surprized they went this route with Turn Undead, and not really that annoyed. That variant was decent, and a working solution if an inelegant one (that phrase describes much of 4ed, IMO).


Thanks for the info, although I think I could use a bit of clarification.

Ah! I found Turn undead, I looked through the Feats section for a while and couldn't find it, turns out, it's still a Class Feature, my bad! It's still grouped with the Channel Divinity ability though so we're not completely off:

Channel Divinity: Turn Undead
Standard Action, Close Burst, 2 (5 at 11th level and 8 at 21st)
Target each undead creature in a burst,
Attack: Wisdom vs. Will
On a Hit 1d10+Wisdom Modifier Radiant damage, and you push the target a number of squares equal to 3 + your Charisma Modifier, the target is immobilized until your next turn.
Miss: Deal half damage and the target is not pushed or immobilized.

so it does more than damage the enemy, it throws them backwards and keeps them from moving for a turn. Not bad for a free power at level 1. It comes alongside Divine Fortune, which is meh...

Kizara
2008-06-06, 02:03 AM
1) RE: Turn Undead. Thanks for the info. Honestly, aside from a sucky duration (should be number of rounds= Cha Mod IMO), I have nothing to complain about there. That is a pretty good solution, I will definately adapt it to my Tome.

2) RE: Grapple. Thanks for posting the info. Honestly, that isn't much better then 3.5 aside from making the grappled/Immobilized condiction easier to understand.
The opening move is essentially the same Melee Touch Attack.
The second thing actually makes less sense then something like Strength vs Strength or Dex, and is otherwise inferior to 3.5's 'grapple check' that took more into account.
You can Teleport while grappled, but otherwise can't move? That makes no sense. I also assume you can cast other spells and use other abilities without hinderance as well. So, being grappled is some kind of immoblizing gue-style nonsense that otherwise has no impact on what you can do? Typical.
Mechanics to escape/move the grappler aren't any better then 3.5s, but manage to not be nonsense.

Basically, they made it a wee bit simpler, made it compatible with their system (type of checks) and made it easier to 'understand' by making what being grappled actually amounts to pretty non-sensical. Yep, you're right, I despise it in a similar fashion as I do most of 4ed. Actually, less then many things.

Don't really have much to take away from this, as they seemed to run right into the same problem I had: Grappling is inherantly pretty complex, and its hard to streamline or simplify it while still accurately representing it. They've managed to simplify it only maginally by sacrificing any resemblance to sense. Typical.

That being said, the Turn Undead thing at least was useful.

3) RE: Unarmed attacks. Still not enough info, although I'll check out the other thread.

Skyserpent
2008-06-06, 02:16 AM
1) RE: Turn Undead. Thanks for the info. Honestly, aside from a sucky duration (should be number of rounds= Cha Mod IMO), I have nothing to complain about there. That is a pretty good solution, I will definately adapt it to my Tome.

2) RE: Grapple. Thanks for posting the info. Honestly, that isn't much better then 3.5 aside from making the grappled/Immobilized condiction easier to understand.
The opening move is essentially the same Melee Touch Attack.
The second thing actually makes less sense then something like Strength vs Strength or Dex, and is otherwise inferior to 3.5's 'grapple check' that took more into account.
You can Teleport while grappled, but otherwise can't move? That makes no sense. I also assume you can cast other spells and use other abilities without hinderance as well. So, being grappled is some kind of immoblizing gue-style nonsense that otherwise has no impact on what you can do? Typical.
Mechanics to escape/move the grappler aren't any better then 3.5s, but manage to not be nonsense.

Basically, they made it a wee bit simpler, made it compatible with their system (type of checks) and made it easier to 'understand' by making what being grappled actually amounts to pretty non-sensical. Yep, you're right, I despise it in a similar fashion as I do most of 4ed. Actually, less then many things.

Don't really have much to take away from this, as they seemed to run right into the same problem I had: Grappling is inherantly pretty complex, and its hard to streamline or simplify it while still accurately representing it. They've managed to simplify it only maginally by sacrificing any resemblance to sense. Typical.

That being said, the Turn Undead thing at least was useful.

3) RE: Unarmed attacks. Still not enough info, although I'll check out the other thread.

Glad I could help.

Also: About Grappling, in a manner of speaking "Grappling" HAS sort of been removed, Grabbing is actually more like... you know... Grabbing, You aren't taken prone as part of the action. It's more like you've grabbed their arm or shirt and are now going to do whatever it is you want to do from there, punch/stab/blast whatever. If you want you can bull-rush 'em or force them to move into a prone position. They provoke Attacks of Opportunity as normal when trying to cast, so that is still made more difficult, and also, more interesting. But I'm okay with the Wizard being able Teleport and pop out of the Grab so long as he can get the spell off before he gets socked in the face.

A big boost to simplicity is that unlike in 3.5 where there is a list of restricted actions you're free to do whatever you want while Grabbing or Grabbed. It's an easier mechanic to work with I think, I haven't had a problem yet, and this is with both people who play 3.5 and people who have never seen D&D before. They've all 'gotten' it and no one has complained about complexity...

Kizara
2008-06-06, 02:30 AM
Glad I could help.

Also: About Grappling, in a manner of speaking "Grappling" HAS sort of been removed, Grabbing is actually more like... you know... Grabbing, You aren't taken prone as part of the action. It's more like you've grabbed their arm or shirt and are now going to do whatever it is you want to do from there, punch/stab/blast whatever. If you want you can bull-rush 'em or force them to move into a prone position. They provoke Attacks of Opportunity as normal when trying to cast, so that is still made more difficult, and also, more interesting. But I'm okay with the Wizard being able Teleport and pop out of the Grab so long as he can get the spell off before he gets socked in the face.

A big boost to simplicity is that unlike in 3.5 where there is a list of restricted actions you're free to do whatever you want while Grabbing or Grabbed. It's an easier mechanic to work with I think, I haven't had a problem yet, and this is with both people who play 3.5 and people who have never seen D&D before. They've all 'gotten' it and no one has complained about complexity...

Ok.

Here's the problem: you've eliminated the problem of grappling by eliminating grappling. Brainwave: that's not actually a solution.

Having a 'grab' action is actually nice, 3.5 needed that as a grappling option (better then the current "hold with appendage at -20" option, that was far from sensible or practical). Thus, I take back what I said about your info being of no use to me, as incorporating a "Grab" action would be highly desirable.

As for 4ed 'grappling' having no problems, here's the problem:

PC 1 (playing a fighter or rogue): "Ok, I go up to the caster and like grab/tackle him."

DM: *describes the above rules about how grabing works*

PC 1: "Um, but I like grab his wrists and sit on him or something. I want to totally stop him from being able to cast spells unless he can break my hold."
(as far as I know, from what you've told me, the above is not an option)

DM: "UMM..., your character can't do that, after you grab him you sotra just hold him there and he can still cast spells although he can't run from you. Better hope he can't Cast Defensively (let me guess, no longer an option? :smallbiggrin:), as he takes no appreciatable penalties from your action aside from being stuck there."

PC 1: "What, so I can't like sit on him or try to tie him up or something like that? Anything?"

DM: "Um... nope, don't see how, maybe if I buy 2 more PHBs we can understand wrestling better." :)

JaxGaret
2008-06-06, 02:38 AM
Unarmed attacks deal 1d4 damage as one-handed improvised attacks. It's on page 219 of the PHB.

Worshippers of Pelor who have Channel Divinity (in core, Clerics and Paladins) can take a feat to gain access to Pelor's Radiance, which is basically a slightly different type of Turn Undead.

So Paladins with a feat can Turn Undead basically just as well as Clerics.

BTW, the Melora's Tide and Raven Queen's Blessing Channel Divinity feats look like good choices for both Paladins and Clerics.

Skyserpent
2008-06-06, 02:47 AM
Ok.

Here's the problem: you've eliminated the problem of grappling by eliminating grappling. Brainwave: that's not actually a solution.

Having a 'grab' action is actually nice, 3.5 needed that as a grappling option (better then the current "hold with appendage at -20" option, that was far from sensible or practical). Thus, I take back what I said about your info being of no use to me, as incorporating a "Grab" action would be highly desirable.

As for 4ed 'grappling' having no problems, here's the problem:

PC 1 (playing a fighter or rogue): "Ok, I go up to the caster and like grab/tackle him."

DM: *describes the above rules about how grabing works*

PC 1: "Um, but I like grab his wrists and sit on him or something. I want to totally stop him from being able to cast spells unless he can break my hold."
(as far as I know, from what you've told me, the above is not an option)

DM: "UMM..., your character can't do that, after you grab him you sotra just hold him there and he can still cast spells although he can't run from you. Better hope he can't Cast Defensively (let me guess, no longer an option? :smallbiggrin:), as he takes no appreciatable penalties from your action aside from being stuck there."

PC 1: "What, so I can't like sit on him or try to tie him up or something like that? Anything?"

DM: "Um... nope, don't see how, maybe if I buy 2 more PHBs we can understand wrestling better." :)

Once again, glad to help, and I'm sorry I'm going to try and defend 4e for as long as I am able, or at least rationalize a way around what you're saying so I can maintain my illusion that 4e wasn't a waste of money.

I suppose the main problem with your scenario is that the Fourth Edition spellcasting system has changed significantly. As a balance decision, this time in favor of spellcasters: There is no scenario that can take a character completely out of commission. So Tackling the big bad spellcaster doesn't lead to him being helpless against the Fighter's meaty frame and vulnerable to the Rest of the party shooting/stabbing him in the face. So, just as a fighter can still try to stab you with his sword while you're grappling him, a Warlock can attempt to Blast you with his Eldritch Blast. Vancian Wizards are out of 4e, this new type of spellcaster no longer has the grappling limitation of the 3.5 spellcaster. A bit of a flavor choice that not everyone might like but it complements the combat system well and continues to make the game fun.

Besides, why the hell would you tackle someone in a pitched battle when you could just stab them with your sword? The blunt side of your weapon would yield the same, if not a superior effect to grappling.

So the same way Save or Lose spells are out, so is the anti-spellcaster grappling system. I'm okay with it being out myself...

Again, you're right about the system needing some more clear rules though: I mean, there's no such thing as a submission hold right now, nor is there an accurate system to represent the Martial Arts. Dissapointing, but I'm still hopeful that the Martial Supplement they're releasing soon will cover it... (yeah, I know, everyone says that...)

JaxGaret
2008-06-06, 02:53 AM
@ Kizara: Somatic, Verbal, etc. components do not exist anymore. Thus, you can't "stop a caster from casting" by Grabbing them, since there's nothing to stop.

Also, Readying an action to disrupt a caster does not exist anymore, either.

However, both of these changes make sense if you have knowledge of the full 4e system. Comparing 4e mechanics using 3e methodology simply does not work. Casters aren't uber any more, for one. A Wizard using a power (called a spell) is the same as a Cleric using a power (called a prayer) is the same as a Fighter using a power (called an exploit).

They're all treated the same. If you wanted to include houserules for readying an action to disrupt spells being cast, you would also be able to use that houserule to disrupt martial characters making their attacks.

JaxGaret
2008-06-06, 02:57 AM
Again, you're right about the system needing some more clear rules though: I mean, there's no such thing as a submission hold right now, nor is there an accurate system to represent the Martial Arts. Dissapointing, but I'm still hopeful that the Martial Supplement they're releasing soon will cover it... (yeah, I know, everyone says that...)

A simple houserule or literal reading of the Grab rule is enough to create a submission hold. Simply say that when a character is the subject of a Grab, the only action they can take on their turn is attempting to escape the Grab.

The "literal reading" of the rule follows from this line:


You seize a creature bodily and keep it from moving.
The creature you grab can attempt to escape on its turn (see “Escape”).

It doesn't say that they can't take any other actions besides trying to escape the grab, but it is possible to read it that way; since it also doesn't state that you can't walk around while you're dead in 3e, you could say that this is a similar case.

It's not RAW, of course.

Sebastian
2008-06-06, 02:59 AM
1) RE: Turn Undead. Thanks for the info. Honestly, aside from a sucky duration (should be number of rounds= Cha Mod IMO), I have nothing to complain about there. That is a pretty good solution, I will definately adapt it to my Tome.


They removed that in 4e, every non instantaneous effect is either a) until end of turn or b) at the end of every turn roll 1d20 if you roll 10 or more the effect end, else it continue or c) until the end of the encounter (but only for the more powerful powers.
there are some permanent effects but are quite few, death, petrification, things like that.

Kizara
2008-06-06, 03:59 AM
I would like to thank those that have contributed here and have provided me with the information I requested (Skyserpent especially). That information has been moderately useful to me.

Rant:

I would like to say that I am not going to pursue and further discussion concerning 4ed, as that was not the intent of this thread and I also am seeing far too much red and feeling far too nauseated to have a civil, logical discussion.
Honestly, the amount of things, both in details and in general design philosophy in 4ed that just downright disgust me are so staggering I have great difficulty even expressing to others. Thus, this inability to coherantly express myself means that my participating in a discussion on this topic is impossible.

To those that favor the system, I hope you enjoy your very balanced, very equal-opportunity half of a game. I, on the other hand, will continue to use a system that allows me to accurately protray my character, his/her actions, and the world around him in a consistant, detailed and realistic (per-se) way. In short: I use DnD to provide a way to simulate my roleplaying experience, that is the reason why I learnt the system and that is what I want, first and foremost, from it. 4ed provides a 'game' that involves roleplaying, which is never what I was after. Indeed, the only 'gaming' aspects of DnD that I enjoyed was optimization, something that it actively tries to hinder.

.... GOD, see what I mean? Semi-coherent bile-filled rant. This is why I abstain from 4ed discussion. Sorry.


Off-Topic Request:

Actually, I was considering starting a new thread on the matter, but I was curious if anyone knows of a system better then 3.5ed for heroic-fantasy simulation? Right now I'm in the process of revamping 3.5 to provide what I want more effectively (and I'll admit, a few things I'm doing are inspired by 4ed), but not only is that a hell of a lot of work (currently 50-page 12pt font word doc), but I also wonder if some things couldn't be even better. For one thing, I would like a magic system with even more depth. Perhaps something like a much more refined version of the Epic Seed spellcasting system. Also, things like the primary abilities could be further defined and broken down. Weapons could have more detail in how they work and are used, as well as some kind of optional maintainance system.

I don't want something unreasonable, but I'm curious to what might be out there for inspiration if nothing else. (if this request gets no responses here, I will simply C+P to a new thread)

Ceiling009
2008-06-06, 04:19 AM
There are other ways of effectively stopping a spell from being cast other than grappling, and most always involve making the enemy grant combat advantage. Blind is a good one, as most of the "spells" and powers require targeting and more importantly, teleporation requires line of sight. Any effect that reduces number of actions, and stun really works, and lots of powers grant these conditions unto enemies. Grabbing as it were is more for dragging comrades or at least immobilizing opponents (though it could be ruled that they only try to escape or teleport, rather than do anything else?)

Rutee
2008-06-06, 06:26 AM
Actually, I was considering starting a new thread on the matter, but I was curious if anyone knows of a system better then 3.5ed for heroic-fantasy simulation? Right now I'm in the process of revamping 3.5 to provide what I want more effectively (and I'll admit, a few things I'm doing are inspired by 4ed), but not only is that a hell of a lot of work (currently 50-page 12pt font word doc), but I also wonder if some things couldn't be even better. For one thing, I would like a magic system with even more depth. Perhaps something like a much more refined version of the Epic Seed spellcasting system. Also, things like the primary abilities could be further defined and broken down. Weapons could have more detail in how they work and are used, as well as some kind of optional maintainance system.
Pretty much everything that wants to be heroic. A system where a starting character can die from pretty much any enemy rolling high isn't that hot at it. Exalted is the kitchen sink of flavor, so if you're only comfortable in one paradigm, you'll find stuff you don't like, but you'll find stuff you do. Honestly, if you want roleplay heavy, almost any system will do it better then DnD.

Unless you really meant simulate, because realism and heroic fantasy /do not play well together/. If you think 3.5 did... Ball of Commoners.

Kurald Galain
2008-06-06, 06:46 AM
Actually, I was considering starting a new thread on the matter, but I was curious if anyone knows of a system better then 3.5ed for heroic-fantasy simulation?

Certainly. While everybody has their preferences, I would recommend GURPS (if you want realism and a lot of rules); TORG (hard to get these days, but does pulp heroism very well), Exalted (does a very good job at being epic and awesome) and Warhammer FRP (which has a wholly different approach than D&D).

Kizara
2008-06-06, 07:09 AM
Answering feedback in no particular order, due to being too tired to organize thoughts.

Realize, that by simulation I don't mean gritty. Honestly, DnD 3.5 does the right level of 'gritty' for me, when I ramp up the starting stats a bit.

I really enjoy some of Warhammer's fluff, but I don't care for playing in a system favoring "joe average" or with it's level of lethality. I had a glance at the d20 RPG they put out, and it didn't catch me.

Exalted seemed... interesting, but as you astutely pointed out, I don't care for the 'melting pot' concept of setting at all (one should note that I go so far as to remove any Oriental elements in 3.5ed from my games as well, finding that they clash with my setting; not that I am racist against Japan or something). Also, the rules are what I would describe as 'dramatics based', which I find offensive. The concept: playing divine beings doing extreme things; I do find interesting mind you, and some of my best characters ended on a power level that would be appropriate for that game setting (such as Kizara, who was about ECL 35 by the time we were done). Not what I would describe as a simulation-oriented system at all.



Unless you really meant simulate, because realism and heroic fantasy /do not play well together/. If you think 3.5 did... Ball of Commoners. Well, for one I think its better to try and go somewhere with simulating a world and have holes in your rules, then to give up on trying to do so *cough 4e cough*. It's on that mentality that my Tome effort is driven. As for that particular quirk, it honestly falls into the "I guess that works, but come on be sensible" catagory.

As for the "unless you really meant simulate", I did. I don't need a ruleset to reward me for RPing, as that actually breaks my immersion, I need a ruleset to define my character and the world around him so that it has a sense of consistancy, versimilatude, etc etc.

GURPS has possibilities, but is intimidating to start. It's also a bit... inelegant, from what I've seen. As someone said on these forums in a previous discussion of GURPS, "when you are generic enough to do anything, you don't do anything particularly well". Thus, I have my reservations about getting and learning it. Perhaps you can provide a different opinion?

What is TORG? Tell me about it, and can I get it online?

Tsotha-lanti
2008-06-06, 07:30 AM
A better system for heroic-fantasy simulation?

CODA. The system used by The Lord of the Rings Roleplaying Game. It's freaking great. Edges and Order Abilities are borked, though - some are way better than others. Generally, though, the system is freaking amazing. Check it out. (It's also a million times better for Middle-earth than, well, any system, most especially MERP or Rolemaster.)

Charity
2008-06-06, 08:06 AM
Again, you're right about the system needing some more clear rules though: I mean, there's no such thing as a submission hold right now, nor is there an accurate system to represent the Martial Arts. Dissapointing, but I'm still hopeful that the Martial Supplement they're releasing soon will cover it... (yeah, I know, everyone says that...)

There is a Rogue power which is called strangle hold or some such which allows you to KO someone if you maintain a grab for three turns.
MA will no doubt turn up in some suppliment or another.

toddex
2008-06-06, 09:25 AM
Well let me say this. Everyones base attack is equal to half their level....

kc0bbq
2008-06-06, 03:52 PM
Well let me say this. Everyones base attack is equal to half their level....What exactly are you trying to infer?

AKA_Bait
2008-06-06, 04:04 PM
Escaping a Grab is a move action that requires an Acrobatics or Athletics check against the targets Reflex Defense or Fortitude Defense respectively. Success allows you to shift one square if you so desire. Certain powers and abilities allow the Escape Mechanic to be used as well ( entangle abilities etc.)


I was wondering about this. So Grabbing is still going to be somewhat annoying in combat since most monsters don't have a listed athletics or acrobatics score and the DM will need to calculate it everytime the Wizard uses a Bigby spell or the like.

I can't seem to find anything that says that the skills mechanic is the same for monsters as for PCs. Did I miss it? Is it fair to assume that to escape a grab a monster would be using Dex/Str Bonus + 1/2 level + d20?


They removed that in 4e, every non instantaneous effect is either a) until end of turn or b) at the end of every turn roll 1d20 if you roll 10 or more the effect end, else it continue or c) until the end of the encounter (but only for the more powerful powers.
there are some permanent effects but are quite few, death, petrification, things like that.

You forgot:

D) Sustainable by the caster using a minor, move or standard action on the turn after it is cast and so on.

Tsotha-lanti
2008-06-06, 04:28 PM
I was wondering about this. So Grabbing is still going to be somewhat annoying in combat since most monsters don't have a listed athletics or acrobatics score and the DM will need to calculate it everytime the Wizard uses a Bigby spell or the like.

You don't have to calculate anything. Acrobatics is a Dex check and Athletics is a Str check. All monster stat blocks list the total ability check bonus after each ability (so a level 8 creature with Str 14 has it listed as "Str 14 (+6)").

No calculation involved what-so-ever. Escaping is a Dex or Str check against the relevant Defense (Reflex is tied to Dex/Int and Fortitude is tied to Str/Con), with training in the relevant skill giving you a +5 advantage.

AKA_Bait
2008-06-06, 04:33 PM
You don't have to calculate anything. Acrobatics is a Dex check and Athletics is a Str check. All monster stat blocks list the total ability check bonus after each ability (so a level 8 creature with Str 14 has it listed as "Str 14 (+6)").

No calculation involved what-so-ever. Escaping is a Dex or Str check against the relevant Defense (Reflex is tied to Dex/Int and Fortitude is tied to Str/Con), with training in the relevant skill giving you a +5 advantage.

Ah! I see. I hadn't noticed that the parenthetical bonuses next to the ability scores was ability bonus + 1/2 level. I had assumed it was just he ability modifier. That's much easier.

kc0bbq
2008-06-06, 04:40 PM
Ah! I see. I hadn't noticed that the parenthetical bonuses next to the ability scores was ability bonus + 1/2 level. I had assumed it was just he ability modifier. That's much easier.It's pretty handy. The first few preview monsters had me scratching my head trying to figure out why those modifiers were all higher than they should be. LOL

It was one of those lightbulb above the head moments that DON'T make you proud of yourself.

Indon
2008-06-06, 05:45 PM
No calculation involved what-so-ever.

Skill Training?

But, to Kizara - I do believe Pathfinder's releasing an updated version of 3.x; a 3.75, if you will.

Draz74
2008-06-06, 06:12 PM
Skill Training?

If the monsters have Skill Training, they will have their Athletics or Acrobatics skill listed. So, still, no calculation required.

Tsotha-lanti
2008-06-06, 07:06 PM
Besides, even "half level + ability modifier visible in stat block + 5" isn't even calculation. How long does it actually take anyone to add up something like "8/2 + 3 + 5" ? 0.5 seconds? But even that much isn't necessary.

John Campbell
2008-06-07, 01:13 PM
For several of the college kids in my current gaming group, the addition would take at least a couple seconds of counting on fingers, and gods help them if they have to divide.

WotC's target audience was never taught to do arithmetic without a calculator.

Draz74
2008-06-07, 02:22 PM
For several of the college kids in my current gaming group, the addition would take at least a couple seconds of counting on fingers, and gods help them if they have to divide.

WotC's target audience was never taught to do arithmetic without a calculator.

Sad. How did they graduate high school elementary school?

Rutee
2008-06-07, 02:33 PM
For several of the college kids in my current gaming group, the addition would take at least a couple seconds of counting on fingers, and gods help them if they have to divide.

WotC's target audience was never taught to do arithmetic without a calculator.

Speaking as a member of the target audience, what are you babbling about? We were taught to use Arithmetic and algebra without calculators. It's not until Precalc and Algebra 2 that we got to make extensive use of calculators, and /that/ is only after the math's foundation is laid down the long way.