Goodman Games

Fan Forums
It is currently Wed Oct 22, 2014 9:01 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 57 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Mighty Deeds for other classes
PostPosted: Sun Sep 25, 2011 2:45 am 
Offline
Mighty-Thewed Reaver
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2011 7:13 am
Posts: 376
Location: Newcastle, England
bholmes4 wrote:
I prefer this:

Player: "I want to trip him, umm what do I do?"
GM: "Well how are you trying to trip him?"
Player: "I want to roll between the ogre's legs and grab his belt from behind,then I will try to buckle his knee with a kick as I drag down on his belt to the floor"
GM "Ok roll a dex check to pull off the tumble, and if you succeed you can make a grab attack but let's see if you pass the dex check first"


This is basically how we've been running our 5th Level 'Fighter & Thieves only' game. Rulings rather than rules. It works.

_________________
Sean Wills


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mighty Deeds for other classes
PostPosted: Sun Sep 25, 2011 5:20 am 
Offline
Cold-Hearted Immortal
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2004 6:30 pm
Posts: 1111
Location: In a galaxy far, far, away (Missouri)
geordie racer wrote:
bholmes4 wrote:
I prefer this:

Player: "I want to trip him, umm what do I do?"
GM: "Well how are you trying to trip him?"
Player: "I want to roll between the ogre's legs and grab his belt from behind,then I will try to buckle his knee with a kick as I drag down on his belt to the floor"
GM "Ok roll a dex check to pull off the tumble, and if you succeed you can make a grab attack but let's see if you pass the dex check first"


This is basically how we've been running our 5th Level 'Fighter & Thieves only' game. Rulings rather than rules. It works.


This line of thinking has merit. This is how I run my AD&D and C&C games. This is also how I will tackle such things in the DCC-RPG.

However, I do think the Goodman Game Company will have to "put out a statement" regarding this. For, in the Beta (as has been pointed out by others), these types of maneuvers are corded off from all classes except the warrior and dwarf.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mighty Deeds for other classes
PostPosted: Sun Sep 25, 2011 10:38 pm 
Offline
Chaos-Summoning Sorcerer

Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2011 5:28 am
Posts: 779
bholmes4 wrote:
jmucchiello wrote:
As written, the DCC beta makes it impossible to trip an opponent. ....

A 1 or 2 paragraph guideline that offers tips for new GMs when situations aren't covered would be nice and is probably necessary.

And this is all I'm asking for. So why be a jerk about it when you want the EXACT same thing I do?

Right now there are a bunch of pages for how warriors and dwarves can trip/disarm/whatever opponents. And there is no a single word for how a thief might do it. That is a flaw. I hope it is addressed in the final manuscript. I don't know why when I say this people assume I don't understand that there doesn't have to be a rule about everything. I don't want a rule about everything. But I want all PC classes covered for things that have rules. Since warriors have a way to do something that seems like an action everyone should be able do, the rules should explain how non-warriors accomplish the same action. This has nothing to do with rules bloat and everything to do with rules coverage.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mighty Deeds for other classes
PostPosted: Tue Sep 27, 2011 9:08 pm 
Offline
Tight-Lipped Warlock

Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 2:52 pm
Posts: 1086
Wow. Kinda sorry I missed out on this thread. The title threw me off because I fall in the category of not wanting to allow MDoAs for everyone -- although the classes I'm putting together could easily attempt them without stepping on the Fighter/Warrior's toes in any significant manner.

So maybe I'll consider including MDoAs for these classes? There aren't really any straight-up Fighter/Warrior classes. Maybe spreading the love makes the whole thing more fun.

That said...

abk108 wrote:
I would just say roll for a normal attack. If you CRIT, you also accomplished your result ("Well done! Your bolt goes straight through the cyclop's eye!")

UNLESS you are a warrior (in which case, use MDoA)


One of the systems I've used in older editions and their facsimiles is...

Quote:
If you want to do something funky, tell the DM. You can say pretty much anything as long as it's viable and within the boundaries of the given situation -- Tripping, Blinding, Staking through the Heart, etc. What happens is this. Roll to hit. If you hit, the DM has the option to accept the terms of your attack OR take normal damage. If you crit, there is no choice. What you said happens.


...with some leniency as regards "mooks". If a monster is just a goon, I'm more in the vein of "if you hit, it happens". But it's always the DM's choice. If something sounds super-awesome, there's no problem with letting it fly, IMO.

Fighters, of course, get MDoAs. So the DM gets no real choice in the matter with them -- ever.

It's also worth noting that little rule predates me. I didn't create it. I pulled it off the web when looking for stunting rules for OD&D.

So there ya go.

Barring that, I like Uncle Shecky's suggestion.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mighty Deeds for other classes
PostPosted: Thu Sep 29, 2011 4:48 pm 
Offline
Mighty-Thewed Reaver

Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2007 10:50 am
Posts: 307
Location: West Suburbs of Chicago
I am not going to address all of your comments as it would get to be too big of a thread. :)

The only one that I wanted to clarify was you take that I accused anyone not playing a Fighter/Warrior a power gamer. That was not my intention. I just found that at higher levels, spell casters take much more time to manage during the adventure because there were MANY more options (too many). So to keep everything straight a player would spend more time reviewing their options as opposed to paying attention to what was going on (i.e. not RPing as much or missing things).

That was all I was trying to convey.

Tortog wrote:
Hamakto wrote:
The changes were subtle but I think very important to prevent other classes from overwhelming a warrior. Because as you wrote them, the other classes were potentially more powerful than a warriors MDoA because a warrior has to hit AND roll higher than a number on their class die. Your non-warrior character just has it hit above a certain number. This idea becomes a very important as characters level up and your non-warrior acquires a magical weapon. They potentially have more reliable access to MDoA's than warriors.


As to the emphasized portion of the quote: I think there is some confusion based on lack of clarity on my part in my original posting. I'm not arguing to give variable attack die to all classes. I want a streamlined mechanic that allows all players access to the MDoA tables.


Agreed. I never thought you were arguing for the variable attack die. The variable attack die are all that keeps a warrior from running over the top of everyone with the MDoA's. Noting says 'it is not your day today' like rolling a 20 + 1 (on you d3) die roll. :)

Tortog wrote:
From the beta-warrior description: "If the action die is a 2 or less, or the overall attack fails, the Deed fails as well."

Based on this I can see your argument about my proposal being more powerful than warriors ability. In my games I haven't been holding to this anyway in an attempt to prompt the players into using the feature. I have found that the players are more interested in survival (which means choosing to do damage) rather than in being mighty. If a warrior declares a Deed and then rolls a 2 on the attack die, they can still do damage if they rolled high enough to hit.

My proposed mechanic states that a non-warrior will need to roll a MINIMUM of 5 higher than their opponent's AC on their attack roll...so the successful attack is part of the successful MDoA just like warriors. The only difference is that non-warriors have the -2 penalty, which guarantees that they won't get the top level MDoA results unless they have lots of magic or they are kicking puppies; and, they only use 1 die for the attack. The better trained 1st lvl warrior (with their 2 attack die formula) is effectively rolling a minimum of 1d23 for each attack that guarantees more hits more often with higher results on the MDoA chart. Seems balanced to me... especially if you consider that in this paradigm the first level warrior would probably be starting their Variable Attack Die (VAD) progression with 1d4 and ending with 1d8. I would leave the tables as written, which would then mean the warriors are more mighty than anyone else


By bumping the warrior up to a d4 starting at first level significantly skews the %'s and combat abilities of the warriors up (at lower levels). Do we need to increase 1st level Warriors and Dwarves up that much?

Tortog wrote:
As for the rest of your statement... lets turn that argument inside out shall we? I'm not that good at computers. If someone else can find the thread and post a link it that would be great; but, there was a discussion a few weeks ago that was postulating what the MDoA tables would look like for levels 6-10. By the time folks got to their descriptions for level 7+ MDoA they had given the Warrior class default magic spells that were more reliable, and have no risk of corruption. So stick that in your game balance argument and watch it fall to pieces... :mrgreen:


At the time that a Warrior is that level, his combat prowess should be fairly significant. Remember that a 5th level character is among the elite in the world. An even higher level character becomes nearly magical in their abilities. Until the charts are out and finalized, everything is only speculation. But to be honest, a Warrior will not get their high results very often. As they not only have to match the number = > on their class die, but they also have to hit their tougher opponent. So I think it is more balanced that people are thinking about.

After saying that, I am actually not a fan of the MDoA charts as written. I found that when doing Beta testing from before the charts, Warriors were more inventive and in my mind more effective. Once the charts were added, I found them just picking one ability off of the chart every round. But that is sorta a side point.

Tortog wrote:
I like "simple" too, but oversimplification can cause its own issues; the way DCCRPG treats non- humans is a perfect example (that needs its own thread). If, as you say, the oversimplification is a design strength then the designers are limited to either opening the MDoA for all classes (with warriors being superior in this regard); or, get rid of it and we all return to "winging it" like in the pre- 3e days. Creating a separate mechanic for non-warriors is not an option as it violates the simplicity meme by creating a sub-system in the attack rules.


I can agree with you there that over simplification can be bad. But I very much disagree with you that a non-Warrior class should have the ability to access MDoA. A warrior will not get a priest spell, nor shall a wizard get an MDoA.

To show that I am not 100% stubborn, I could concede that the first category of an MDoA could be accessible by any class. (i.e. MDoA result of 3). But nothing higher... well MAYBE a Cleric could get to 4. Slim down the effects of a 3 result to bring it in line with a successful result and go with it.

But I honestly do not need to see what the hangup on getting access to the MDoA. These are special maneuvers for Warriors and Dwarves. Other classes can just easily use Bull Rush, Disarm, Trip, etc... rules from the d20 OGL. (either as written or slightly modified because there is no grid to put characters on in DCC RPG).

Please note that a prior comment by someone that combat is 25 pages WAS not referencing special attack forms at all. The majority of the special attack forms can be resolved in 1-2 paragraphs each. Please note that I excluded Grapple (isn't that a word banned by gamer's in at least 40 states?)... but since that is not an MDoA, it does not matter. In reality, the MDoA section will probably take more space in the book than the 'standard' maneuver section.

Hamakto's basic example: (Please note this is just an example and not intended for final consumption)

Bull Rush: You charge an opponent attempting to move him out of the way. You take -2 to your armor class. The opponent gets a free whack as you close and if they are successful, then your bull rush is stopped and you take damage. Otherwise make an attack roll. If you are successful, you move your opponent back 5' + 5' for every 5 points you make the attack roll by. If you fail, your opponent has the option to have you stop in the blocked square or 'let' you slide by moving 5' beyond the target + 5' per 5 you missed the attack roll by.

So to take one of the earlier examples, a Wizard could attempt to push someone off the bridge. But if he rolled bad enough, then he could be the one going off of the bridge.

A warrior would have the option of choosing:

1. a 'standard' maneuver (which would incur a free whack from the opponent)
2. Using a MDoA chart (assuming there is a bull rush one in the future).
3. Describing a cool bull rush move to the DM, and the DM letting the class die decide if it is successful with no 'free whack'. Remember MDoA's are not only charts but what the imagination works up for a Warrior.

To hopefully forestall your next response... ANY character can describe the action. But the resolution system is described in the basic combat maneuver. A DM can easily allow a bull rush with a spiked shield to do some damage in addition to the bull rush. But only a Warrior can access the special table.

Hopefully that makes my position clearer.

_________________
Andy
Blood Kings
2007 & 2008 DCC Tourney Champion


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mighty Deeds for other classes
PostPosted: Thu Sep 29, 2011 11:31 pm 
Offline
Mighty-Thewed Reaver

Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2011 11:53 am
Posts: 379
jmucchiello wrote:
And this is all I'm asking for. So why be a jerk about it when you want the EXACT same thing I do?


You are right and I apologize. The whole "impossible" statement irritated me for some reason and I couldn't resist the urge to respond but I was rude and should have worded it nicer.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mighty Deeds for other classes
PostPosted: Fri Sep 30, 2011 1:46 am 
Offline
Mighty-Thewed Reaver

Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2011 1:44 am
Posts: 341
Hamakto wrote:
By bumping the warrior up to a d4 starting at first level significantly skews the %'s and combat abilities of the warriors up (at lower levels). Do we need to increase 1st level Warriors and Dwarves up that much?

Yes, it would skew the %, but I'm OK with fighters being that awesome in combat. However, to my mind the MDoA for 10 levels should be something like:Lvl 1-2 +1d4; 3-4 +1d5;...; 9-10 +1d8; and then add (1) more levels at the top of the charts. With the average of 4.5 on a d8, the 9-10 lvl fighter can then achieve a low level MDoA fairly regularly... which makes them mighty in deed.

As for the Dwarves... sure, let them have the same progression, but honestly: I think tall the races should be rewritten to be more powerful, or left to the 3PP market to provide. Using a strict interpretation of the rules; the only way to play non-humans is by random roll. I think it should be like "winning the lottery." But I digress...

Quote:
At the time that a Warrior is that level, his combat prowess should be fairly significant. Remember that a 5th level character is among the elite in the world. An even higher level character becomes nearly magical in their abilities.

So... it's OK for fighters to acquire quazi-magical abilities, but not OK for other classes to gain fighting prowess? *sniffs* smells like a double standard to me. :wink:

Quote:
After saying that, I am actually not a fan of the MDoA charts as written. I found that when doing Beta testing from before the charts, Warriors were more inventive and in my mind more effective. Once the charts were added, I found them just picking one ability off of the chart every round. But that is sorta a side point.

I'd have to agree with you there, I started off as a fan of the concept, but experience at the table is telling me that players are (still) more inventive than game designers.

Quote:
But I honestly do not need to see what the hangup on getting access to the MDoA. These are special maneuvers for Warriors and Dwarves. Other classes can just easily use Bull Rush, Disarm, Trip, etc... rules from the d20 OGL. (either as written or slightly modified because there is no grid to put characters on in DCC RPG).


The MDoA charts for the beta cover: blinding, disarming, push backs, trips & throws, rallying, precision shots, & defensive maneuvers. Of these IMO disarming, precision shots, & defensive maneuvers seem worthy of exclusivity to fighters on grounds of the necessity for training. But anyone can pick up some dirt and toss it in the face of their opponent, or sidestep a charging opponent, etc. I like the idea that the first tier MdoA available to all. {See, my not a total troll... only half... :D }

The example you gave would also be a good thing to my mind, but here is the issue: nowhere in the combat section or the judges rules (as far as I could figure out) are either of these ideas expressed. The warriors are the only ones allowed access, to this type of fighting. This problem is then IMO amplified by the fact that we've had 11 years of gamers & DM's who've been conditioned to follow rules for the sake of following rules. Which is why I think players sometimes default to the tables, rather than come up with their own. If there had been any attempt to allow "advanced combat maneuvers" (of any kind) to the rest of the classes: no one would've heard a peep out of me. At least on this issue :mrgreen:

{edit: just curious, but where do you and others stand on spells that grant fighter like abilities? like Bigby's interposing hand, or Tenser's Transformation (I know this one's too much for DCC, but the concept could be "thinned" out)}


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 57 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

All times are UTC - 6 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group