D20 making violent actions hurt
Posted: 2004-11-18 02:09pm
an interesting article on how to tone violence down oin most D20 games
http://www.strike-to-stun.com/WFRP/3WFRPd20.htm
http://www.strike-to-stun.com/WFRP/3WFRPd20.htm
Get your fill of sci-fi, science, and mockery of stupid ideas
http://stardestroyer.dyndns-home.com/
http://stardestroyer.dyndns-home.com/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=57290
How old is this, anyway?If we use the new unarmed combat rules from Restless Dead or Apocrypha Now, they have a -20 penalty to their Weapon skill, so now they hit each other only on a 13 or less.
Couldn't have said it better myself.Arthur_Tuxedo wrote: There is simply no way to fix the poor combat outcomes of d20. A simple solution will break everything else, and a complete solution will be a kludgy, cumbersome mess.
Not when you have Beefer as DM. And besides, you can still do that in d20. Allow me to demonstrate.Spanky The Dolphin wrote:The best games are those in which the G/DM tells party members that they suddenly drop dead without any warning...
Hehe, that reminds me of a cmpaign we did... we were in this dungeon with plenty of food, but we happen across this pot full of human stew....Spanky The Dolphin wrote:No, I just find the subject of canibalism to be somewhat amusing.
Either that or they could use his corpse for the occasional sexual relief, sort of like a cum rag. You know, keep him warm by the fire, drag him out into the bushes...
So let me get this straight: D20 doesn't reflect damage in realistic lethality, so it sucks. When they fix it, it still sucks. That about right?Arthur_Tuxedo wrote:This proposed solution is the former. It works by breaking other things. It fixes the problem of combat not being lethal enough by making it too lethal.
Star Wars D20 and Traveller D20 use this system, and guess what: combat is supposed to be deadly. Especially in the latter game system, which was designed for role players, not 'roll players'.The damage system is designed to go hand in hand with the hit point system. If you set HP equal to Constitution (as this article would suggest) or find other ways of drastically reducing it, then no one can take a single hit from the high amounts of damage most fighter-types are capable of dishing out.
Yes, they will. No different from getting a magic +5 vorpal sword of ultimate slayage.If you make all critical hits lethal, people will take feats giving them high threat ranges,
Not really. Just because the threat range has increased doesn't mean it's going to end fights automatically.and kill creatures that they should have no chance against in short order.
If we're talking D&D D20, you'd be right. Introducing the wound/vitality system into it needs a major restructuring of the rules. But some D20 systems were built up WITH this new hitpoint system in place.What about the fact that if damage were made realistic, it would be too easy to make the to-hit roll, especially if armor made someone easier to hit instead of harder? You'd have to kludge together a rule for that. What about the fact that some spells now do far too much damage? You'd have to re-do them all.
Yes. It still sucks because it breaks the game.Stofsk wrote:So let me get this straight: D20 doesn't reflect damage in realistic lethality, so it sucks. When they fix it, it still sucks. That about right?Arthur_Tuxedo wrote:This proposed solution is the former. It works by breaking other things. It fixes the problem of combat not being lethal enough by making it too lethal.
I take it KOTOR is not faithful to Star Wars D20, then? Because combat was anything but lethal in that game. Besides KOTOR, I have no knowledge of either of those systems, but every attempt I have ever seen to make d20's combat system more realistic has followed one of the two patterns I outlined earlier.Star Wars D20 and Traveller D20 use this system, and guess what: combat is supposed to be deadly. Especially in the latter game system, which was designed for role players, not 'roll players'.The damage system is designed to go hand in hand with the hit point system. If you set HP equal to Constitution (as this article would suggest) or find other ways of drastically reducing it, then no one can take a single hit from the high amounts of damage most fighter-types are capable of dishing out.
Exactly. No different from that. You don't see the problem?Yes, they will. No different from getting a magic +5 vorpal sword of ultimate slayage.If you make all critical hits lethal, people will take feats giving them high threat ranges,
If you have a rule that critical hits = instant death as the article suggested, then it does indeed mean that.Not really. Just because the threat range has increased doesn't mean it's going to end fights automatically.and kill creatures that they should have no chance against in short order.
I have not seen them, but I'd be astonished if the didn't fit one of these three patterns:If we're talking D&D D20, you'd be right. Introducing the wound/vitality system into it needs a major restructuring of the rules. But some D20 systems were built up WITH this new hitpoint system in place.What about the fact that if damage were made realistic, it would be too easy to make the to-hit roll, especially if armor made someone easier to hit instead of harder? You'd have to kludge together a rule for that. What about the fact that some spells now do far too much damage? You'd have to re-do them all.
Nope. KOTOR threw out things like: wound points, heavily damaging blaster pistols/rifles, other combat actions...Arthur_Tuxedo wrote:I take it KOTOR is not faithful to Star Wars D20, then? Because combat was anything but lethal in that game. Besides KOTOR, I have no knowledge of either of those systems, but every attempt I have ever seen to make d20's combat system more realistic has followed one of the two patterns I outlined earlier.
Apparently not. But the problem you allude to comes from so called 'power gamers', who are always obnoxious. A guy who wants to role play a character might not take that feat you describe, and take something else because it fits his character more. Good for him. The power gamer will take that feat, and likely pick fights with everyone. He's not the sort of player who would be welcomed into my game.Exactly. No different from that. You don't see the problem?
Ah. Well, fuck that rule. I actually didn't read the article.If you have a rule that critical hits = instant death as the article suggested, then it does indeed mean that.
I see. Well then I have no context from which to argue about SW d20 or Traveller d20.Stofsk wrote:Nope. KOTOR threw out things like: wound points, heavily damaging blaster pistols/rifles, other combat actions...Arthur_Tuxedo wrote:I take it KOTOR is not faithful to Star Wars D20, then? Because combat was anything but lethal in that game. Besides KOTOR, I have no knowledge of either of those systems, but every attempt I have ever seen to make d20's combat system more realistic has followed one of the two patterns I outlined earlier.
It's the system that allows them to be power gamers. Frankly, I think the term is over-used, anyway. It's an attempt by D&D ostriches (meaning those with their hands in the sand) to marginalize anyone who uses the bone-stock rulebook to make powerful characters rather than admit that it's the game system that's the problem. I don't deny that powergamers exist, but I think the system encourages powergaming, and not everyone that receives that label deserves it.Apparently not. But the problem you allude to comes from so called 'power gamers', who are always obnoxious. A guy who wants to role play a character might not take that feat you describe, and take something else because it fits his character more. Good for him. The power gamer will take that feat, and likely pick fights with everyone. He's not the sort of player who would be welcomed into my game.Exactly. No different from that. You don't see the problem?
And that would be the kludgy, cumbersome solution I was referring to. You can shore up one section of the house of cards that is D&D by knocking down another, or you can add so many cards that only your gaming group can make heads or tails of it. Either way, the result is even worse than stock D&D.Ah. Well, fuck that rule. I actually didn't read the article.If you have a rule that critical hits = instant death as the article suggested, then it does indeed mean that.
Just to set the record straight: the SW D20 and T20 game systems don't have the 'critical hits = instant death'; there is a chance you can survive, and you can increase the chance by wearing armour. But critical hits are dangerous and cause heavy damage to you, which is as it should be.