G&G: Combat

Combat. D&D has problems with nonmagical combat. For one, it is relatively inflexible compared to magic, though that is also largely a problem of the classes that use it.

This thread is for the basic, underlying combat system. A few points to think about:

-What shall we do with combat special attacks? Should they be simplified? Should there be more of them?
-What about full attacks? They make mobility in combat difficult, and the last few iteratives at high level are often almost pointless, as a -15 to hit compared to your main attack will rarely do much.
-Should we include a maneuver system by default, as per Tome of Battle?

That depends on what you want out of the system. I've been playtesting a setup I'd be happy to share for a while now that seems to work pretty well, but is also ridiculously abstract; The mechanics refer to narrative constructions that have no in-world analogue.

Are you going for a 100% simulation setup, or are those sorts of abstractions okay? How much is movement supposed to matter, anyway? Is combat supposed to be quick and simple or long and detailed? Should tactics give you a considerable advantage, or should it be whoever has the highest stats wins?

There was a system I was toying around with where I created a more realistic feel for real time as events occured. It affected initive and the amount of time actions took, along with how many actions each person could take in a round. If you'd like I could show you a basic diagram of what I have?

I submit my recent take on combat maneuvers to be subsumed into the project. I stole the CMB roll from Pathfinder, took out pretty much all attacks of opportunity, and cut out as many circumstantial modifiers as I could. I also added I think two new ones from Pathfinder, "Snatch" (trying to grab a non-weapon item off a guy) and "Dirty Trick" (sort of a miscellaneous option minor debuff).

On the subject of full attacks, how 'bout we replace it with something like this:

As a standard action, you may make a melee or ranged attack, rolling yadda yadda yadda... For every 5* points by which you exceed your opponent's armor class, you strike him one additional time.

• When using light weapons, you only need to exceed his armor class by 3* points.
• When using two-handed or reach weapons, you need to exceed his armor class by 7* points.
• When two-weapon fighting, you only need to exceed his armor class by 3* points. If two-weapon fighting with a pair of light weapons, you only need to exceed his armor class by 2* points.
• Non-repeating crossbows and similar weapons may never inflict iterative damage like this.

This would cut down drastically on the amount of die rolling, which is good, and by making it a standard action, it improves mobility. It contains its own two-weapon fighting fix (no need to waste feats on iterative attacks!) And by making it harder to land iterative attacks with heavier weapons, it boosts sword-and-board fighting as well. It does leave the increasing penalties in place, though, and is somewhat abstract.

*Number open to negotiation based on new system maths.

I like maneuvers, but I don't think we should go full-on Tome of Battle for all classes. Maybe each class gets their own school-- Tiger Claw for barbarians, Devoted Spirit for paladins, Diamond Mind for rogues, etc-- and the fighter and warblade merge, with "the best fighter" getting access to other classes' special moves. Maneuvers for most classes should be icing on the cake, though-- special combat moves, but not the class' defining feature.

I'd also be OK with not using maneuvers, as long as classes get similar such options in combat. My most recent fighter fix, my barbarian fix, and my never-entirely-completed Legend class are examples of what I'm talking about. None of them use the maneuver mechanic, but all have special combat abilities that make things more interesting than "I attack. I attack. I trip."

Also, to make AC a little more relevant and cut down on magic item dependance, how about adding either BAB or 1/2 BAB? Possibly in conjunction with an armor-as-DR rule.

Armour as DR has many, many problems. Probably too many to work without massive changes to both armour, DR and probably damage and hitting as well.

How about a BAB independent defence bonus?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eldan

Armour as DR has many, many problems. Probably too many to work without massive changes to both armour, DR and probably damage and hitting as well.

---

Really?

Quote:

---

How about a BAB independent defence bonus?

---

It could work, but it seems like an unnecessary complication. BAB already exists as a measure of how capable you are in a fight; why add another one?

Armour as DR works for low levels, in my experience. Because when you are throwing a few hundred damage, those four points of DR from damage reduction won't matter much.
Also, it is unfair on certain types over others. It rewards power attacking greatsword fighters who can trade those extra points they don't need to hit for more damage, while punishing two-weapon fighters.

Well, we'd need a way for TWF and archery to punch through DR anyway, given how many monsters have it...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eldan

Armour as DR works for low levels, in my experience. Because when you are throwing a few hundred damage, those four points of DR from damage reduction won't matter much.
Also, it is unfair on certain types over others. It rewards power attacking greatsword fighters who can trade those extra points they don't need to hit for more damage, while punishing two-weapon fighters.

---

For what it's worth, the system I personally use has DR scale with BAB, and applies on a per turn basis, rather than per hit (so as to not punish archers/TWFers). A low level character in my games has generally between 1 and 6 DR, while a max level character with full BAB and the best armor has around 60 DR.

The trick is getting the scaling progression right, and having damage set to a point that the DR walks that fine line between useless and immune to most level appropriate enemies.

I once suggested making percentage based DR, if that helps. 1/4 DR, 1/2 DR, that kind of thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eldan

I once suggested making percentage based DR, if that helps. 1/4 DR, 1/2 DR, that kind of thing.

---

Percentages have a bad tendency of slowing the game down. There's an alarmingly large subset of gamers who either can't or won't do division in their head. Addition and Subtraction is generally the way to go if you want to keep things moving.