A recent exchange running through a couple of other blogs I follow led me to check out the back catalog of Spells and Steel, a blog focusing on developing a version of Basic D&D that's informed by facts and experience with medieval combat.
What I like about Charles Taylor's approach: he's intent on keeping the simplicity of Basic D&D throughout, resulting in a very boiled-down system that still relies mainly on d20 hit, d6 damage logic. So, multiple opponents are tough, trained fighters have a huge advantage in ability versus civilians, skill and not hit points helps heroes survive, etc. Although my house-rules don't kill nearly the same amount of sacred cows, I do appreciate the impulse to consult reality instead of received "game" logic.
One observation of his that I want to put into my own rules: outside of the movies, combat with weapons actually takes place at about a 10' distance heel to heel, with combatants stepping in to attack. So a zone of attack should look more like the right picture than the left:
This means that the situation on the left should then represent close and brawling combat, where longer weapons would be less effective. Closing to a 1 space distance would require some disadvantage, like taking a hit attempt on you and failing to close if it hits.
I already have rules for that but they stick to the example of the Metagaming Melee game, where you actually moved one counter into another's space. Apart from realism, the benefit when playing with figures on a grid (as I do) is that you don't have to jam figures into the same space to represent a brawl. Just say that if one figure is facing another and adjacent, it's brawling with the other guy.
Showing posts with label brawling. Show all posts
Showing posts with label brawling. Show all posts
Wednesday, 19 June 2013
Tuesday, 8 January 2013
Boring Combat 3: Dumb Animals Turned Smart
Guerrilla goblins are all very well but surely you can't realistically have wolves, bears, and giant rats running around with complicated traps, tactics and outflanking maneuvers?
Well, no. But with a little common-sense tweaking of the standard D&D combat system, even the most straightforward creature can become an exciting, terrifying combat threat.
The key is close combat. It was Steve Jackson's micro-game Melee - precursor of the GURPS system, and an elegant, d6-based simulation of skirmish combat in its own right - that introduced the rule that two figures could occupy the same space and be locked in close combat, where most long weapons were useless. A less drastic version of this idea for D&D can be found in Ronald Hall's initiative system - someone locked in close combat with an unsuitable weapon would only lose initiative, but still attack normally.
To refresh, here's my application of the idea in my own close combat rules:
The thing is, I don't use these rules as a DM to their full extent. I probably should, but I've had a soft spot for my players until now. I originally put them in to make players consider taking a variety of weapons - dagger or short sword for close combat, for example. But as dangerous as a guy with a knife in a brawl is, an animal with teeth and claws is much, much worse.
A wolf is coming at you. To close, it has to not get hit by your attack, and then it's in there with you. It may even go for the "attack to hold" option in order to knock you down. And when you're on the ground under a predator, you're in a bad way. Your best weapons are useless and its best weapons are in prime working order. If your friends try to help you, they risk hurting you instead.
Things get worse when outnumbered or outflanked. In my system, you can only fend off something advancing to close range if you can hit it. If one wolf engaged you from the front while another attacks from the side or back, you will be in close melee with them in short order. The same goes for spiders. monkeys and stirges dropping from overhead.
For even worse threat, make it so you can get in close without any problems if you're two or more sizes smaller as well as bigger. Giant rats suddenly don't look so pathetic when they're under-running your front lines. If you don't kill them quick, they'll be hotfooting your wizard. Not to mention what happens when something really small decides to climb on you.
With not-so-dumb animals getting into the maneuver and positioning game this way, an attack by a bear or a pack of wolves turns from a toe-to-toe slog into a tense nightmare for players.
Next up: High level combat and why it's only boring in theory.
Well, no. But with a little common-sense tweaking of the standard D&D combat system, even the most straightforward creature can become an exciting, terrifying combat threat.
The key is close combat. It was Steve Jackson's micro-game Melee - precursor of the GURPS system, and an elegant, d6-based simulation of skirmish combat in its own right - that introduced the rule that two figures could occupy the same space and be locked in close combat, where most long weapons were useless. A less drastic version of this idea for D&D can be found in Ronald Hall's initiative system - someone locked in close combat with an unsuitable weapon would only lose initiative, but still attack normally.
To refresh, here's my application of the idea in my own close combat rules:
The thing is, I don't use these rules as a DM to their full extent. I probably should, but I've had a soft spot for my players until now. I originally put them in to make players consider taking a variety of weapons - dagger or short sword for close combat, for example. But as dangerous as a guy with a knife in a brawl is, an animal with teeth and claws is much, much worse.A wolf is coming at you. To close, it has to not get hit by your attack, and then it's in there with you. It may even go for the "attack to hold" option in order to knock you down. And when you're on the ground under a predator, you're in a bad way. Your best weapons are useless and its best weapons are in prime working order. If your friends try to help you, they risk hurting you instead.
Things get worse when outnumbered or outflanked. In my system, you can only fend off something advancing to close range if you can hit it. If one wolf engaged you from the front while another attacks from the side or back, you will be in close melee with them in short order. The same goes for spiders. monkeys and stirges dropping from overhead.
For even worse threat, make it so you can get in close without any problems if you're two or more sizes smaller as well as bigger. Giant rats suddenly don't look so pathetic when they're under-running your front lines. If you don't kill them quick, they'll be hotfooting your wizard. Not to mention what happens when something really small decides to climb on you.
With not-so-dumb animals getting into the maneuver and positioning game this way, an attack by a bear or a pack of wolves turns from a toe-to-toe slog into a tense nightmare for players.
Next up: High level combat and why it's only boring in theory.
Sunday, 9 September 2012
The Climbing-On Bandwagon
Scrap Princess made some rules for a cool thing that almost no rulesets cover: smaller creatures climbing on larger ones to attack them. Like this.
Zak simplified the rule down, getting it more in line with the D&D chassis. I mean, Scrap's idea of damage reduction if you can only attack something's legs makes sense, but that's really changing the D&D rules rather than adding on. The one thing I'd like to keep, though, is using multiple climbs to get a really good advantage on a much bigger enemy.
Then I realized that climbing-on fits perfectly with the One Page brawling system. Once you get into brawling range - effectively giving up your initiative to do so - you can take down or pin your opponent if you're about the same size, pick it up and throw it if you're bigger, and now ... climb on it if you're smaller. The "shaking off" rules even use the same system as the throwing rules. Adding the climb-on stuff also helped me find the will to clean up and simplify the rest of the system from its previous version.
Here I'm assuming for simplicity's sake that a climber either finds a place it can't be attacked from, or that the big creature prefers to use its attack to try and scrape off the climbing creature rather than injure itself.
This has the potential to turn the tables considerably, especially for high-dexterity types. Think of it as a kind of continuous backstabbing, but with some amount of risk involved. Just remember, if vermin with some kind of climbing ability are allowed to get on you - and it's in character for giant spiders and centipedes, who'd probably get frustrated trying to bite boot leather - they become a lot nastier, too.
Zak simplified the rule down, getting it more in line with the D&D chassis. I mean, Scrap's idea of damage reduction if you can only attack something's legs makes sense, but that's really changing the D&D rules rather than adding on. The one thing I'd like to keep, though, is using multiple climbs to get a really good advantage on a much bigger enemy.
Then I realized that climbing-on fits perfectly with the One Page brawling system. Once you get into brawling range - effectively giving up your initiative to do so - you can take down or pin your opponent if you're about the same size, pick it up and throw it if you're bigger, and now ... climb on it if you're smaller. The "shaking off" rules even use the same system as the throwing rules. Adding the climb-on stuff also helped me find the will to clean up and simplify the rest of the system from its previous version.
Here I'm assuming for simplicity's sake that a climber either finds a place it can't be attacked from, or that the big creature prefers to use its attack to try and scrape off the climbing creature rather than injure itself.
This has the potential to turn the tables considerably, especially for high-dexterity types. Think of it as a kind of continuous backstabbing, but with some amount of risk involved. Just remember, if vermin with some kind of climbing ability are allowed to get on you - and it's in character for giant spiders and centipedes, who'd probably get frustrated trying to bite boot leather - they become a lot nastier, too.
Tuesday, 7 February 2012
One Page Brawling
Launching into Book 2 of the 52 Pages, may I present the distillation of a simple unarmed combat system. Here as always, the "one page, 18 point type" restriction allows jettisoning a lot of excess material. Two options: do you wish to hurt or detain your opponent? If the latter, effects depend on your relative size. Regardless, the "to hit" roll reigns supreme.
If you think some characters deserve super luchador powers you can have them wrestle as one size category higher. (And yes - size categories are a property of monsters but go like this: giant rat -1, dwarf 0, human 1, ogre 2, giant 3, huge giant 4.)
Also: CAC = armor class without worn armor, UAC = armor class without shield and dexterity bonuses.
![]() |
| Clicking, as always, enlarges. |
If you think some characters deserve super luchador powers you can have them wrestle as one size category higher. (And yes - size categories are a property of monsters but go like this: giant rat -1, dwarf 0, human 1, ogre 2, giant 3, huge giant 4.)
Also: CAC = armor class without worn armor, UAC = armor class without shield and dexterity bonuses.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)






