Defenses Overhaul (PEACH,WIP)

[Fosco the Swift]

Then let's make a distinction.
Parrying is meant for 2-hand weapon people, and requires more skill and focus to use properly (thus the "fighting defensively" requirement or feat).
Blocking is meant for people who are looking to avoid damage and deal slightly less.
Problem: with one feat, parrying has become more powerful than blocking. When you block an attack, the "absorption rule" means there's a chance it won't stop all damage. Parrying has the ability to completely negate the damage, with the same bonus as blocking. So it appears that parrying needs a few changes too.
Blocking with a shield is much easier than parrying- and because the character took the time to get a shield and not swing two-handed, he should have an easier time stopping attacks. So with no extra changes to blocking, the rules for parrying should be changed...
Parrying:
-Characters who are fighting defensively may parry any melee attack with a weapon by making a parry roll with a melee weapon as an action of opportunity, with a DC equal to the attack roll of the melee attack they are trying to parry.
-The parry roll is equal to the character's BAB+STR (or DEX with weapon finesse)+Feats+Insight & luck bonuses
-Characters trying to parry with a weapon they are wielding one-handed gain a -2 penalty on their parry check.
-Characters trying to parry with a light melee weapon gain a -2 penalty on their parry check.
-Characters may parry with an improvised or non-melee weapon with a -4 penalty, and on a successful parry, the parrying weapon immediately takes damage as if the attack was a sunder attempt. No attackoO.
-Characters attempting to parry an attack from a creature larger than them gain a -4 penalty for each size category larger than the character.
-A character cannot make an attack of opportunity for successfully parrying a attack with the "Counter Maneuver: Riposte"

"Counter Maneuver: Riposte"
PQ's- DEX 14, BAB +6, Improved Parry
You may make an attack of opportunity if you successfully parry an attack. This attack must be made against the opponent you successfully parried. This uses an actionoO. You make only as many ripostes as you have actionoO and standard attacks from BAB. These ripostes do not count against attacks you make on your turn.
Special: you may not make a riposte against someone who is making a riposte against you.

Looking at this I believe that the rule "you may make an attackoO against a foe you successfully blocked, parried or dodged" should be removed. We said a while ago that parrying is for those who want to strike back, dodging is for those who want to gain a tactical advantage and blocking for those who don't want to get hit. And by allowing the attackoO rule, it extends combat on for a very long time.

[TheFamilarRaven]

Then let's make a distinction.
Parrying is meant for 2-hand weapon people, and requires more skill and focus to use properly (thus the "fighting defensively" requirement or feat).
Blocking is meant for people who are looking to avoid damage and deal slightly less.
Problem: with one feat, parrying has become more powerful than blocking. When you block an attack, the "absorption rule" means there's a chance it won't stop all damage. Parrying has the ability to completely negate the damage, with the same bonus as blocking. So it appears that parrying needs a few changes too.
Blocking with a shield is much easier than parrying- and because the character took the time to get a shield and not swing two-handed, he should have an easier time stopping attacks. So with no extra changes to blocking, the rules for parrying should be changed...

I have to stop you right there for a few reasons. Now, I haven't looked at the OP in awhile, and I probably should before making this post , but from memory blocking and parrying worked relatively the same, but BLOCKING was still better, and here's why.

-parrying takes a -4 penalty to the parry roll for every size category larger your opponent is than you, and you cannot parry a blow from a creature 2 size categories smaller than you. With blocking, there is NO penalty for blocking an attack from a creature larger than you .... realistic? No. badass? most certainly
-By spending 1 AoO, someone with a shield can block as many attacks from one subject as he has attacks (based off BaB). Parrying is a 1 AoO for 1 attack.
-Certainly, parrying negates damage completely when successful, but is highly restricted when compared to blocking with a shield.
-However, parrying also gets feats like Counter maneuver: riposte, while blocking does not.
-overall, I think blocking is still the primary defensive choice, without having to change anything

Parrying:
-Characters who are fighting defensively may parry any melee attack with a weapon by making a parry roll with a melee weapon as an action of opportunity, with a DC equal to the attack roll of the melee attack they are trying to parry.
-The parry roll is equal to the character's BAB+STR (or DEX with weapon finesse)+Feats+Insight & luck bonuses
-Characters trying to parry with a weapon they are wielding one-handed gain a -2 penalty on their parry check.
-Characters trying to parry with a light melee weapon gain a -2 penalty on their parry check.
-Characters may parry with an improvised or non-melee weapon with a -4 penalty, and on a successful parry, the parrying weapon immediately takes damage as if the attack was a sunder attempt. No attackoO.
-Characters attempting to parry an attack from a creature larger than them gain a -4 penalty for each size category larger than the character.
-A character cannot make an attack of opportunity for successfully parrying a attack with the "Counter Maneuver: Riposte"

"Counter Maneuver: Riposte"
PQ's- DEX 14, BAB +6, Improved Parry
You may make an attack of opportunity if you successfully parry an attack. This attack must be made against the opponent you successfully parried. This uses an actionoO. You make only as many ripostes as you have actionoO and standard attacks from BAB. These ripostes do not count against attacks you make on your turn.
Special: you may not make a riposte against someone who is making a riposte against you.

I don't think you changed much, except for the weapon sunders, but that only applies to people using non-melee weapons or improvised weapons, so actually, i like that.

Looking at this I believe that the rule "you may make an attackoO against a foe you successfully blocked, parried or dodged" should be removed. We said a while ago that parrying is for those who want to strike back, dodging is for those who want to gain a tactical advantage and blocking for those who don't want to get hit. And by allowing the attackoO rule, it extends combat on for a very long time.

But by striking back you have to spend another AoO, I think that's how we decided to balance it.

As far as shield sundering goes Plato, just write up both versions, and call one an "alternate blocking rule", or something silly like that. Make sure though to include descriptions of each shield and explain how hardness and HP scales with the material. Just for simplicity sake ... It's no good to have to assume a tower shield is 2 inches think and made of wood, just by using math (eeeeeeew), and looking over the tables.

[Fosco the Swift]

My only defense is that I saw nothing in the first post that talked about one actionoO needed to block all attacks from an opponent, or that parrying cannot be done to creatures 2 size categories smaller than you. And don't forget, the average character is medium and from my experience: you don't fight many tiny creatures.
Also: with the "attackoO against enemies that failed to hit", its possible for a 6th level fighter to gain effectively 5 attacks in a single round. Combat Reflexes combined with DEX 18 gives 6 actionsoO. 2 attacks at 6th level plus 3 attacks for blocking/dodging/parrying gives 5. This makes for a very long fight when you're down to the last bad guy. Although, it certainly gives some advantage to fighters compared to wizards that they have been desperately needing. But I rest my case.
And because Riposte needs some changing due to the counterattacks still being in play (and parrying still allows attacksoO...
"Counter Maneuver: Riposte"
PQ's- DEX 14, BAB +6, Improved Parry
You may make one counterattack per round against a foe you successfully parried without using an actionoO to make the attackoO. If any other attack against you is parried, you must use an actionoO to counterattack.

Armor- the tables look perfect, but I do have one question. What happens if a weapon is both "Piercing and Slashing"?

[TheFamilarRaven]

My only defense is that I saw nothing in the first post that talked about one actionoO needed to block all attacks from an opponent, or that parrying cannot be done to creatures 2 size categories smaller than you. And don't forget, the average character is medium and from my experience: you don't fight many tiny creatures.

I think that blocking rule was something suggested recently as either 1) just an assumption or 2) a suggestion that hasn't be implemented in the OP. So you're good there. As for the parrying rule, you're right, not many enemies that are tiny engage in melee anyway ... unless of course you come across the pixie of doom, who wields a tiny +5 Vorpal greatsword.

Also: with the "attackoO against enemies that failed to hit", its possible for a 6th level fighter to gain effectively 5 attacks in a single round. Combat Reflexes combined with DEX 18 gives 6 actionsoO. 2 attacks at 6th level plus 3 attacks for blocking/dodging/parrying gives 5. This makes for a very long fight when you're down to the last bad guy. Although, it certainly gives some advantage to fighters compared to wizards that they have been desperately needing. But I rest my case.
And because Riposte needs some changing due to the counterattacks still being in play (and parrying still allows attacksoO...
"Counter Maneuver: Riposte"
PQ's- DEX 14, BAB +6, Improved Parry
You may make one counterattack per round against a foe you successfully parried without using an actionoO to make the attackoO. If any other attack against you is parried, you must use an actionoO to counterattack.

You make a convincing argument for no AoO's after parrying/blocking/dodging, but the way i see it, the only time you're going to go into a AoO war is when there IS only one bad guy left, which won't necessarily draw combat out, just that character's turn. which may or may not be a bad thing. I think it's one of those things we'll have to determine via an indepth play test.

Armor- the tables look perfect, but I do have one question. What happens if a weapon is both "Piercing and Slashing"?

Thanks. In regards to the multiple damage types of some weapons: There's only like, 3 in the player's handbook that have 2 types of damage, there's the dagger (P, S) and the morning star (P, B). and 1 more that I can't remember. but I think it's exotic anyway. And then there are weapons that have two damage types because they're double weapons.
A simple solution is this: Keep the dagger the way it is, because it deal 1d4 damage anyway.
And either remove the morningstar from the game, reduce it's damage, or make it an exotic weapon.

[Plato Play-Doh]

One major concern I have, Fosco, is that parrying should by no means be left to two-handers. Parrying requires finesse, not brute strength, and for the most part the people using parry are swashbucklers with rapiers or other one-handed weapons, or dudes with parrying daggers, etc. If parrying is restricted to anything, it would be weapons that are eligible for weapon finesse, not two-handers. Of course, light weapons already have a penalty, but that can be offset in certain scenarios. Here's a thought, though. Parrying is about finesse, whereas blocking requires strength, right? Well, how about parrying uses dexterity instead of strength, both light weapons AND two-handed weapons get penalties, and certain weapons (like the rapier) get a bonus to parrying? It means that the two are for different types of builds. I think that could be interesting, and prevent them from really clashing.

On the topic of ripostes, I think that the cost in AoOs more than offsets any issue with ripostes, and the only time you'll ever really get into a fight where you're going back and forth like that except 1v1, and in that situation it's like fencing. I don't think I've actually said it yet, but in an ideal world, fights will be about disarming or sundering your opponents weapons so that they can't avoid your attacks more than about just trying to dole out a bunch of damage. I may even decrease the HD size of many classes to reflect this, and replace it with better saves, BAB, or other things.

As for things with two damage types, the you missed a couple, Raven. Namely, the halberd and the scythe. Since they require two hands, however, which prevents using a shield and, assuming I choose to adopt the rule that I just thought of, they're also worse at parrying, I think it's okay to allow that.

I have put the full attack with one AoO rule in for the shields. The no parry for creatures two sizes smaller was already in place. Also, I made the morningstar deal d6 rather than d8, and made it a martial weapon. It now is good at defeating a variety of armor, but doesn't deal a lot of damage. How's that work for you guys?

Edit: I've also added the alternate shield block rule to the OP, and made a modification to cleave (which I have put in the feat changes section). Now, it functions to allow an extra attack against the target when you break a shield. I've modified the shield entry to make excess damage hit the blocker, but not as an extra attack, unless the attacker has cleave.

[Fosco the Swift]

I love the idea of making parrying a DEX ability and Blocking a STR ability. So now that there is a difference between parrying and blocking, now what?
I still have a few feat ideas that I'll post when they're better fleshed out. Also I posted my ideas on changing the "Greater Shield Bash" feat.

[Plato Play-Doh]

Yeah, I saw your suggestions regarding greater shield bash. It now requires +6 BAB, and doesn't add to damage or knock opponents prone. Debilitating their defenses is enough.

I also went ahead and made parrying 1:make use of weapon finesse (-4 without it), and 2: always use dexterity. This means that it should probably be buffed (since it basically requires weapon finesse), so I think maybe...auto-disarm attempt upon parry as a free action?

[TheFamilarRaven]

I also went ahead and made parrying 1:make use of weapon finesse (-4 without it), and 2: always use dexterity. This means that it should probably be buffed (since it basically requires weapon finesse), so I think maybe...auto-disarm attempt upon parry as a free action?

Or just have parrying have no bonus until someone has the weapon finesse feat. Just because you deflected an attack doesn't mean you're in a position to disarm.

[TheFamilarRaven]

So looking over the Op after awhile I realize (and you guys probably do too) that it needs to be re-written (or at least modified) to be more concise. Let's keep the main ideas at the top, and details at the bottom. The reason is that if the OP is clear and concise, it'll be easier to reference changes to the defense system we've made.

Below is how I propose the OP be changed, feel free to copy and paste, or re-word certain areas. If there is something aloof with this, then I recommend quoting it and posting your concern so that we can discuss it in detail. So, without further ado ... my proposition for the OP re-write!

Opening
This thread seeks to overhaul the way the defense system works in 3.5 DnD. It changes the hit/miss method of the armor class based system and replaces it with three new ways of deterring attacks. These new rule sets emphasize tactical thinking, versatility, and teamwork. These rules may work best in a setting that focuses on low magic characters, but should fit well into the original version of 3.5. Below are the following changes to the defenses, including the news rules, new armor types and feat changes/additions.

Actions of Opportunity
The most important rule of the defenses overhaul are Actions of Opportunity (AoO). Actions of Opportunity are the basis of how creatures defend themselves and perform actions in combat. To put them into mechanical terms. AoO's incorporate Attacks of Opportunity, Defensive Maneuvers and Counter-Attacks.

Unless otherwise stated, a character can perform a number of AoO's in a round equal to (their highest base attack bonus / 4) plus their DEX modifier. For example, an 8th level fighter with a DEX of 12 (+1 modifier) has three AoO's in a round.

Armor
There is no more armor class to determine how difficult you are to hit. Instead, armor gives you damage reduction (here after referred to as Armor Rating). Three things contribute to armor rating, they are; Armor, Natural Armor, and Deflection bonus. Any numerical bonus (or penalty) to either of these directly affects the armor rating. Any damage taken is reduced by the amount of armor rating the creatures has.

However, certain types of attacks or materials can be better or worse at over coming armor rating. For more information about about over coming armor rating, and for info on the new armor types, see [here].

It is important to note, that the max dexterity bonus of certain armors do not affect your armor rating or any of your defensive maneuvers. It does, however, limit the amount of bonus AoO's a character can receive from their DEX bonus.

Defensive Maneuvers

Blocking
One of the ways a character or creature may protect themselves is by blocking with a shield. To do so, they must have a shield readied in one of their hands. When a creature with a shield is attacked, they may spend one AoO in order to block the full-attack of a creature. The creature attempting to block makes an opposed attack roll against each attack from their attacker. If they exceed the attack roll of the attacker, they successfully block the attack, negating all damage. The blocker may use their full BaB when blocking, -5 for every block attempt against the same creature for that round.

On a successful block, the attacker immediately makes a sunder attempt against the shield, which automatically hits. In this way, shields can break in combat. Effects that would normally cause Insight, Morale or Luck bonuses to armor class, now give bonuses to blocking.

Dodging
To avoid damage completely, a creature may attempt to dodge a blow that would otherwise cause them serious harm. To do this, the dodger must spend an AoO. Then attempt a reflex save, Modifiers like Size, Insight, Morale, Dodge and Luck bonuses, that normally affect armor class, affect dodge.


Parrying
A creature can attempt to deflect an attack made against them by using their weapon. To do so, the creature attempting the parry spends one AoO. They make an opposed attack roll against the creature attacking them. If they exceed the attacker's roll, they successfully negate all damage from that attack. Insight, Morale and Luck bonuses that would normally apply to armor class, are applied to parrying.

In addition, the creature who is parrying takes a -4 penalty against attacks from a creature 1 size category larger than them and from weapons meant for a creature 1 size category larger than them (i.e Human wielding large greatsword via Monkey Grip (CW) feat). They can not attempt a parry against a creature (or weapon meant for a creature) either 2 size categories smaller or larger than them.

Parrying with a light weapon incurs a -4 penalty to the parry roll. However, some special light weapons (like the sai or parrying dagger), negate this penalty. Some weapons allow a counter maneuver to be performed as an immediate action upon a successful parry. (For instance, the sai can immediately make a disarm attempt).

....And finish, you can add the miscellaneous stuff below

[Plato Play-Doh]

Howdy. Sorry for taking forever to come back to this AGAIN! I have been, for a bit over the past month, been otherwise occupied, and have completely forgotten to come back and do stuff here. I suck, and am a horrible person. I have returned, have updated the original post per the suggestion of TheFamiliarRaven, and do intend to come back more frequently now. Furthermore, I will likely, at some point in the near(ish) future, end up DMing a campaign in which this overhaul is playtested. Sorry again for the long time between posts, and barring some unforseen circumstance, it will not happen again.

[TheFamilarRaven]

welcome back. Oh, and be sure to read over my suggested re-write carefully, cuz I may have altered some of the original rules based on assumptions when I was writing it

[Soleyu]

Hi,

I will have to apologize first, I haven't read any posts apart from the one in the first page, so if anything that I'm saying has already been discussed, I do apologize. I will read everything, but right now I felt more important to write this down for discussion.

Having said that, it seems as if the first post has been updated recently, so hopefully what I will say is still relevant.

First, excellent system, I am in fact going to use it for my next game, it feels like it will give combat a new dimension and make it more...visceral maybe?, also I think that you could easily add casters to this system by making casting magic take all your AoO of a turn unless it's a cantrip or fast casting magic in which cast it takes only one AoO, that nicely changes how fighting feels between a mage and a fighter.

Now, as for criticism I do feel that blocking and parrying, as written, are not really that distinct and do not reflect what blocking and parrying are used for in combat.

In general the idea behind blocking is that you put something between a thing that wants to kills you and you, it does not really matter what, it could be a shield, or a chair or a weapon, what is important is that the something, anything, absorbs the damage instead of you.

Parrying, on the other hand is about redirecting the attack away from you, there are quite a few ways of doing this (by sliding the sword of the other guy along the blade of your sword for example) but the basic idea is that what you are using, a weapon, a shield, your hand, anything, does not absorb the damage but rather, moves it away.

So, I would propose that first, blocking and parrying as they are written should be merged into just blocking, but what you use to block is what determines the bonuses, penalties and any other special property that you get. The main stat is of course strength because you need to actually be able to keep whatever it is that you use to block in place to absorb the damage.

Since blocking is about absorbing damage, you should get damage if you lose the opposed attack roll, with the amount of damage being determined what you use to block and by how bad you lost that roll, but if you win it, all damage is negated. Also, since the idea is that you just put whatever you have in front of the weapon attacking you, you should be able to, once a round, block as a free action, but with quite severe penalties, including: penalties to the attack roll, and the enemy gets a bonus to the damage done, not being able to negate all damage even if you win the opposed roll and the enemy gets a bonus to sunder damage. The idea is to mimic that final "oh crap, need to block!" moment.

Also, the mechanic in which when you block the attacker makes an automatic sunder attempt that hits is sound, but I would say that as written right now, it makes breaking shields way too easy, which is a little bit silly considering shields were made to specifically not break while defending an attack, which is also why generally using a weapon like a sword to block is a bad idea since they break easily. So I would make the sunder damage made to shields be greatly lessened, if not negated if you win the opposed roll by a lot. The penalties that applied to parrying(-4 to creatures/weapons 1 size bigger, light weapons -4 and inability to parry creatures and weapons 2 sized smaller or larger) should now apply to blocking with a weapon/non-shield instead, along with the sunder damage.

Parrying, in combat, is used to not only prevent damage, but also, to put the enemy in a disadvantageous position. But parrying is hard, you need finesse and training to pull it off and also you need to be prepared to do it, since it relies on you being able to read the attack in order to redirect it, which would make the opposed roll you need to make be higher. So, unlike blocking which in comparison is easier you don't have that free AoO to parry since you must be ready to do it, though you still get the free AoO to block. As a bonus it nicely mimics the idea that you use a weapon to block as a last resort if you are specialized in parrying.

So, if you win the opposed roll, not only do you negate damage but you also get a bonus to your next attack AoO, with the amount of that bonus determined by how well you won that roll. If on the other hand, you fail to parry you a) your weapon gets sunder damage, though less than if you tried to block it (unless you roll really badly in which case the damage is maximized) b) you get a penalty to your next AoO and c) you suffer damage, the enemy gets a bonus to damage depending on how bad you lost the roll.

Now, unlike blocking, you can actually attempt to parry weapons bigger or smaller than you, since you are redirecting the damage, it's doable. Parrying with light weapons do not incur any penalty for the same reason, and special weapons, like the Sai or parrying dagger get a bonus or special property, like the mentioned disarm attempt, or in case of the sai, you should also attempt to sunder the weapon, because the sai, in real life, allows you to break a weapon as well as disarm an opponent. Also you could try to parry projectiles though that would be harder and dependent on the size and number of the projectiles, after all it's easier to parry a throwing ax than it is to parry a volley of shurikens.

I'm thinking that if you exactly match the opposed roll, it would be cool to enter a "locked weapon state" in which you would make str or dex rolls to determine who wins the lock.

Now, I think that blocking, parrying and dodging, the same attack is a little silly, you should at most try to block or parry and if that fails, try to dodge instead. This is from a "realistic" viewpoint however, since if you fail to block the attack or parry the attack, you wouldn't have enough time, since the weapon is already closer to you and coming in fast, for you to be able to "try again". Though maybe from a mechanical point of view it makes sense so as to keep balance. Maybe, I don't know.

Unless I'm reading it wrong (which I'm most probably am) Dodge should also be affected by armor class and encumbrance.

Also, if using this rules, I would lower the HP of both PCs and Mobs to prevent fights going too long, though that is personal preference since I loathe how combat feels to drag at high levels.

Well I think that's all, though this went on longer than i originally thought.

Also, if I'm sounding way too critical I do apologize, my intention is t give constructive criticism of a system that I feel it's awesome, so if it doesn't come out that way, do forgive me, for that was not my intention.

Update: I seem to have failed to mention that the main stat used for parrying is Dex(which you use by default, you don't need weapon finesse to apply that modifier.), as opposed to Str for blocking so that it better resembles the skills needed to parry and block.

Update 2: I have been reading, and a question popped in my mind, what happens if you are out of AoOs or you decide not to use an AoO? do you receive full damage (well full with the armor DR) or you get a reflex save to see if you can minimize the damage somewhat?

Also, to be honest I'm a little bit confused with the general combat rules (I haven' played in quite a while to be honest) so if your characters has 3 AoO a round that means he has 3 AoO to defend himself each enemy attack round or he has 3 AoO in total (so if there were 3 enemies attacking, he would have 9 AoO, 3 each or just 3 for all 3).

Because if it's the second, then fighting against multiple creature could prove to be quite disadvantageous if not next to impossible, which while true in real life, for a game of D&D which commonly pits you against many foes, it might prove to be too unbalanced, and may ruin combat for the players.

[TheFamilarRaven]

Also, if I'm sounding way too critical I do apologize, my intention is t give constructive criticism of a system that I feel it's awesome, so if it doesn't come out that way, do forgive me, for that was not my intention.

Not at all, it really helps to have more outside feedback since the main contributors have been Plato, fosco and myself. As such, it becomes harder and harder to catch possible errors, like for instance, you can only proof read your own essay so many times before the words blur together.

I'll be commenting on your points soon enough. They were indeed helpful and insightful, but I do not have the time at the moment to discuss them.

[Plato Play-Doh]

You didn't come off as too critical at all, Soleyu! As TheFamiliarRaven said, it's always good to get another opinion.

Making parrying focused more as a finesse thing is something I brought up in the past, and I DO think that making it always use dexterity makes more sense. On a side note, I have also brought back the whole thing where parrying required fighting defensively to function. I don't think it necessary to include blocking with weapons, and feel as though adding a bunch of modifications to sundering a shield vs. sundering a weapon might be unnecessary complication. I DO think that maybe CERTAIN weapons should be able to block, due to their girth (maybe that could be added to, say, the greatclub, to give that some love).

As for armor causing a penalty to dodge, I realized that that should be in there...I just added a clause under "armor" that makes armor check penalty apply to defenses.

In regards to your second update: It's the second one. Your example character has 3 AoOs each round total. However, this system as a whole does decrease, in many ways, the power of an individual character. It makes tactics a lot more important, because you can't just charge in to a big crowd of dudes and expect to come out alive. You've got to think harder about it.

It IS more difficult to defend after failing multiple defenses in succession, and it also takes more AoOs, so in practice it should be a lot rarer than it might seem that someone would end up succeeding on their second or third defense from one attack. And if they do, they're fairly likely to be unable to avoid any other attacks that round.

I've actually been pondering for a while reducing the power of PCs and NPCs with class levels, at least. There's a few thoughts I've gotten so far. 1st, once this little system is finished, I'll be posting a thread on another little subsystem I've made (or am in the process of making) that uses the amount of damage dealt to determine where on the body a given attack hits, adding extra effects to an attack depending on where it lands. Details on that will be divulged after this has been completed. 2nd, I've been thinking of generally reducing the power of players and NPCs a bit by making it so that skill and health are not interrelated. At least, not fully. Basically, I was thinking maybe applying a cap on HD from class levels equal to the constitution modifier (minimum 1) of a character. This IS intended to make the character rely more on defending themselves, and is a MASSIVE reduction in power. That is intended for my conception of how a battle is more likely to play out, in which one strike could easily kill someone. The point is not to wail on someone until the die, it is to weaken them, open them up, find a hole in their defenses, and then striking when they're weakened (a lot more emphasis on special attacks like trip and disarming, a lot less emphasis on HP). What are the thoughts of you dudes about that second idea (the first one might be discussed at a later point, since it's a complex subsystem in its own right)?

[TheFamilarRaven]

Hi,

hello

First, excellent system, I am in fact going to use it for my next game, it feels like it will give combat a new dimension and make it more...visceral maybe?, also I think that you could easily add casters to this system by making casting magic take all your AoO of a turn unless it's a cantrip or fast casting magic in which cast it takes only one AoO, that nicely changes how fighting feels between a mage and a fighter.

One way to implement magic.

Now, as for criticism I do feel that blocking and parrying, as written, are not really that distinct and do not reflect what blocking and parrying are used for in combat.

As written, parrying an blocking may not be distinct in the mechanics, but they are distinct in their implementation. Parrying is used when you don't have a shield, and have a horrible dodge bonus. It can also be used (if you have the appropriate feats or weapon), to perform counterattacks and special maneuvers (i.e, disarm, trip sunder, feint).

Blocking on the other hand, is intended to be the primary defensive choice. It allows for multiple blocks for just one AoO, and can block bigger and smaller creature, unlike a weapon. Imagine a knight using a tower shield to block a claw from a colossal dragon. Now, as I've said before, is that realistic? no, is it badass? yes. In all seriousness though, it allows the PC's to survive bouts with dragons and giants, so the game doesn't force players to always fight creatures around their size category, because if they fought anything bigger than that, they'd get owned with no chance of survival.

In general the idea behind blocking is that you put something between a thing that wants to kills you and you, it does not really matter what, it could be a shield, or a chair or a weapon, what is important is that the something, anything, absorbs the damage instead of you.

The current system allows for this, but they follow the parrying rules for doing so. Again, I want to stress, blocking and parrying may follow and and accomplish the same things mechanically speaking (i.e, they negate damage and use BaB), the emphasis is WHEN you would want to use either block/parry, not what they do.

Parrying, on the other hand is about redirecting the attack away from you, there are quite a few ways of doing this (by sliding the sword of the other guy along the blade of your sword for example) but the basic idea is that what you are using, a weapon, a shield, your hand, anything, does not absorb the damage but rather, moves it away.

Mechanically, parrying is about using a weapon (improvised or otherwise) to protect yourself (you can parry with a shield, since shields can be weapons). Sure, parrying means deflecting an attack, blocking means absorbing it. The two are different because one can accomplish something the other can't. In this case, parrying focuses on weapons, while blocking focuses on shields. This is to make each maneuver distinct, so that it minimizes confusion. As for blocking wit ha weapon, consider this, I can say "I roll to parry". Now, my fighter at the time is wielding a simple longsword, and is fighting a nasty orc barbarian. The Barbarian is swinging his greataxe at my fighter. This is when I roll to parry, since I'm not using a shield. Now, say I'm successful. There is a myriad of ways a DM can describe the action, the fact that I used parry is irrelevant when is comes to describing the action.

Example 1) The orc brings his axe down upon your head, but you manage to brace your sword and catch the blow, locking the axe in place right in front of your face.

example 2) The orc brings his axe down upon your head, but with a mighty swing, you arc your sword so that is strikes the blade of his axe, pushing it aside.


The fact that i'm using the parrying mechanic is irrelevant, because all it really is, is a mechanic, not what my character actually does. We could go ahead and call parrying "weapon blocking" and block "Shield blocking", but those are boring names. but since I used parry, there are numerous things i can do that are unique to parrying, if i acquired the appropriate feats.

Example 1) You push aside the axe that is just an inch away from your nose, and bring your sword over your head. You strike the axe with all of your might, causing the orc to drop it from the force of the blow.

Example 2) As the orc's momentum carries through after you deflected his attack, the axe slips from his hand.

Those are two examples of a successful disarm attempt following a successful parry. I couldn't use those if i was following the

Since blocking is about absorbing damage, you should get damage if you lose the opposed attack roll, with the amount of damage being determined what you use to block and by how bad you lost that roll, but if you win it, all damage is negated.

We've discussed "glancing blows", like this before, and it was determined that, while perhaps not "realistic", is simpler. A black and white hit or miss system is the easiest way to do things, and besides, any gap in the "realism" can be accounted for in the description of the action.

Also, since the idea is that you just put whatever you have in front of the weapon attacking you, you should be able to, once a round, block as a free action, but with quite severe penalties, including: penalties to the attack roll, and the enemy gets a bonus to the damage done, not being able to negate all damage even if you win the opposed roll and the enemy gets a bonus to sunder damage. The idea is to mimic that final "oh crap, need to block!" moment.

having one "hold-out" AoO isn't a bad idea, but it shouldn't apply to blocking/parrying alone. on the other-hand, the system was designed so that the players are meant to avoid those moments of "crap, i'm surrounded".

Also, the mechanic in which when you block the attacker makes an automatic sunder attempt that hits is sound, but I would say that as written right now, it makes breaking shields way too easy, which is a little bit silly considering shields were made to specifically not break while defending an attack, which is also why generally using a weapon like a sword to block is a bad idea since they break easily. So I would make the sunder damage made to shields be greatly lessened, if not negated if you win the opposed roll by a lot. The penalties that applied to parrying(-4 to creatures/weapons 1 size bigger, light weapons -4 and inability to parry creatures and weapons 2 sized smaller or larger) should now apply to blocking with a weapon/non-shield instead, along with the sunder damage.

it was discussed, (quite recently in fact), this problem of shields breaking. And it was determined that, while wooden shields will almost certainly break quite easilly, if you are the character who loves his shield, your going to make it out of the best materials and enchant the damn thing to high heaven. at lower levels, steel shields will take miniscule amounts of damage, even from ogres. They take even less when they're enchanted. By higher levels, if you really like shields, you'll for over the dough to have a magical adamantium shield.

Also, if you don't like the sunder attempt rules, there is an alternate rule set for non-breaking shields.

Parrying, in combat, is used to not only prevent damage, but also, to put the enemy in a disadvantageous position. But parrying is hard, you need finesse and training to pull it off and also you need to be prepared to do it, since it relies on you being able to read the attack in order to redirect it, which would make the opposed roll you need to make be higher. So, unlike blocking which in comparison is easier you don't have that free AoO to parry since you must be ready to do it, though you still get the free AoO to block. As a bonus it nicely mimics the idea that you use a weapon to block as a last resort if you are specialized in parrying.

While you are correct, the reason why blocking and parrying work the way they do is stated above.

So, if you win the opposed roll, not only do you negate damage but you also get a bonus to your next attack AoO, with the amount of that bonus determined by how well you won that roll. If on the other hand, you fail to parry you a) your weapon gets sunder damage, though less than if you tried to block it (unless you roll really badly in which case the damage is maximized) b) you get a penalty to your next AoO and c) you suffer damage, the enemy gets a bonus to damage depending on how bad you lost the roll.

Stuff like this is possible f you take the appropriate feats, weapons don't get sundered because unlike shields, they don't have much hp.

Now, unlike blocking, you can actually attempt to parry weapons bigger or smaller than you, since you are redirecting the damage, it's doable.

and when the Titan is bringing his gargantuan warhammer down upon you, how will you deflect that with a dagger, longsword or greatsword? One can easilly turn that around and say "well, how would you BLOCK that?" and the answer is, "cause I got a shield'. again, is this realistic? no. but it's a hell of a lot easier to justify in the description of the action than a dagger deflecting an 40 pound hammer.

I'm thinking that if you exactly match the opposed roll, it would be cool to enter a "locked weapon state" in which you would make str or dex rolls to determine who wins the lock.

Maybe, but it seems unnecessary, and then there's the core rule that "ties go to the attacker"

Unless I'm reading it wrong (which I'm most probably am) Dodge should also be affected by armor class and encumbrance.

absolutely right

Also, if using this rules, I would lower the HP of both PCs and Mobs to prevent fights going too long, though that is personal preference since I loathe how combat feels to drag at high levels.

Depends on how you plan the encounter. If you make a horde of weaker enemies (since the mobs in hordes should almost always be weaker than the party), then they'll die quickly, if you make a room of enemies around the same power-level of the party, then it'll take the average amount of time to kill them, because you can die, really easily at any level in DnD. For instance, when the party is dealing about 20 dmg per attack, they can kill an average opponent pretty quickly, barring unusual bad luck, especially if they work together.

But hey, whatever works.

Update: I seem to have failed to mention that the main stat used for parrying is Dex(which you use by default, you don't need weapon finesse to apply that modifier.), as opposed to Str for blocking so that it better resembles the skills needed to parry and block.

If you'er gonna update, just post a new comment, unless it's something minor, otherwise we might miss it.

Update 2:

I have been reading, and a question popped in my mind, what happens if you are out of AoOs or you decide not to use an AoO? do you receive full damage (well full with the armor DR) or you get a reflex save to see if you can minimize the damage somewhat?

if you run out of AoO's in the middle of the mob, you are, as they say, "**** out of luck."

Also, to be honest I'm a little bit confused with the general combat rules (I haven' played in quite a while to be honest) so if your characters has 3 AoO a round that means he has 3 AoO to defend himself each enemy attack round or he has 3 AoO in total (so if there were 3 enemies attacking, he would have 9 AoO, 3 each or just 3 for all 3).

You get 3 AoO's a round, these can be divided between using defensive maneuvers, or exploiting attacks of opportunity. How you use them is up to what you think is best strategically.

Because if it's the second, then fighting against multiple creature could prove to be quite disadvantageous if not next to impossible, which while true in real life, for a game of D&D which commonly pits you against many foes, it might prove to be too unbalanced, and may ruin combat for the players.

Dnd pits you against encounters that are challenging but beatable. In this case of fighting multiple foes, then use choke points so that their numbers mean nothing. If there are no choke points, then don't attack unless your armor is godly.

thanks for your input, it's a lot of help, and feel free to continue posting your thoughts!

Now, on to Plato's post.

Making parrying focused more as a finesse thing is something I brought up in the past, and I DO think that making it always use dexterity makes more sense.

forcing parrying to be DEX not only hurts two-handed weapon users (who primarily use strength), but is also not 100% true. It can be argued both ways. One could say that a graceful swordsman (high DEX fighter), could better position his blade so that attacks slide off. But it can also be said, that a super buff barbarian (high STR), can move his weapon at great speed and force, 'cuz he's super buff, making it easier for him to strike an incoming weapon, forcing it aside. Honestly, you don't think Gimlee (is that how you spell his name? ) gracefully deflected attacks with his axe, do you?

[Plato Play-Doh]

Gimli, and no, he probably didn't...alright then, I guess. I'll put it back to just being a normal attack roll.

[TheFamilarRaven]

Gimli, and no, he probably didn't...alright then, I guess. I'll put it back to just being a normal attack roll.

Not that using DEX is wrong. Either make it so that Weapon Finesse allows you to use DEX instead of STR for parrying, (as long as you're using a weapon that qualifies for Weapon Finesse.

Or, and this I think has been suggested before. Just do away with the Weapon Finesse, cause it's a silly feat tax anyway. And let creatures choose between DEX or STR when using a weapon that would qualify for Weapon Finesse. So people can pick up a rapier and say, "I use my STR for attack and parrying", or "I use my DEX for attacking and parrying".

On another note

-consider looking over the feat revisions, because some of them are obsolete. Like Armor Focus, since there is no armor penetration anymore.

-The more I look at deflection, the more I feel like it should increase the defensive maneuvers rather than armor rating. Or, at the very least, buff Dodge, because higher levels dodge gets put aside very quickly. Thoughts on that?

[Plato Play-Doh]

As it stands, parrying is just an opposed attack roll, so any normal modifiers (including Dex for weapon finesse people) would apply. As for getting rid of weapon finesse, I can definitely see the merit of that, though perhaps those weapons that qualify should REQUIRE that Dex be used? A skinny little rapier is liable to break if you swing it with brute force rather that stabbing certain well-selected weak points.

I will take another look at the feats when I get a chance (probably either tomorrow or Sunday, I'm kinda busy over the next couple of days).

Hmm...you ARE right about deflection. The only problem is...it would be hard to classify it. For example a shield of arrow catching would give a deflection bonus to blocking, but perhaps even a penalty to dodge (since the arrows are drawn toward you). Whereas, say, Shield of Faith would give a bonus to dodge, because it turns attacks away. I don't know how best to go about making a blanket rule here without going through each individual thing that grants a deflection bonus and deciding then...

[TheFamilarRaven]

As it stands, parrying is just an opposed attack roll, so any normal modifiers (including Dex for weapon finesse people) would apply. As for getting rid of weapon finesse, I can definitely see the merit of that, though perhaps those weapons that qualify should REQUIRE that Dex be used? A skinny little rapier is liable to break if you swing it with brute force rather that stabbing certain well-selected weak points.

Maybe, but the original rules let you use strength with a rapier so I don't see the merit of making it more complicated, but having the option to use either DEX or STR with light weapons (and other specific weapons, like the rapier) would be nice, and would take away the feat tax on DEX based characters

I will take another look at the feats when I get a chance (probably either tomorrow or Sunday, I'm kinda busy over the next couple of days).

No hurry, just thought i'd bring it up.

Hmm...you ARE right about deflection. The only problem is...it would be hard to classify it. For example a shield of arrow catching would give a deflection bonus to blocking, but perhaps even a penalty to dodge (since the arrows are drawn toward you). Whereas, say, Shield of Faith would give a bonus to dodge, because it turns attacks away. I don't know how best to go about making a blanket rule here without going through each individual thing that grants a deflection bonus and deciding then...

Easy enough to fix. As a general rule, deflection buffs dodge, however, in the case of shields or weapons that grant deflection bonus, then, they buff either blocking or parrying respectively.

Adding a penalty to dodge because arrows are attracted to you is a little unnecessary I think, because if you have a shield of arrow catching, you probably aren't going to try and dodge the projectiles coming at you. So even if there was a penalty, it wouldn't come up that much, and it would be so rare, that players might even forget there's supposed to be a penalty.