Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Kapre 04-07-07, 10:01 PM	My buddy is a strong believer in having a high level of detail in combat. He believes that it would bring somthing to the game, I believe it's too much detail to concern ourselves with. Insteed of boring with details of countless discussions I'll bring up the current point. Grappling. He's recently stated Judo and now believes more strongly then ever (he believed this before) that the grappling system in-game is not robust enough. I was wondering if this is a common preception, and if so, what do people do about it?
ScipioX 04-08-07, 02:11 AM	The grappling rules are horrible from a mechanical perspective and need to be completely re-written. There is pretty much always at least one grapple thread up on the front page, which tells you how poorly written they are. As far as not having enough detail and options represented, well DnD is pretty abstract about combat anyways. I would recommend against making a bunch of additional moves and effects based on ones personal experience with judo. Especially since 90% of judo moves would be ineffective against large/multi limbed critters. Just imagine trying to hip throw a centaur.
Watchman 04-08-07, 06:58 AM	Your buddy had better find another FRPG. Between assorted oddities like the AC and HP systems and general clunkiness it's quite possibly impossible to have D&D combat described in detail in an even remotely credible manner. QED altogether too many novels, except when they don't even pretend to have anything to do with the game's fighting system. Especially if the audience actually knows something about actual fighting. ;)
unfortunate_crow 04-08-07, 12:33 PM	Especially if the audience actually knows something about actual fighting. ;) You know, once you've had a taste of real "no ****" combat, you realize that no game system can simulate every aspect of combat effectively, if at all. Once you've done the real thing, trying to simulate it "with realism" in a role playing game becomes unimportant. Just ride the suspension of disbelief train, sit back, and just enjoy yourself. Trust me. Making up new mechanics to add "realism" almost always slows down the game, and while they may add "realism" (which most of the time they do not), they also result in a less enjoyable game. Combat in real-life is not enjoyable or fun. Why would you want to bring that to a table where you are supposed to be having fun?
draconic_swine 04-08-07, 01:22 PM	If your friend wants more realism added to combat, then roleplay it out. Instead of saying "I roll my grapple check to try and pin my opponent", let him describe the move he is wanting to accomplish. D&D's combat system is deliberately abstract, both to keep the rules streamlined and the game moving forward, but also to allow for many interpretations of any given mechanical move. Adding detail to combat would require a huge revamp of the rules and would likely only slow down combat. If your group is willing to put the effort into it, go for it, but I get the feeling most groups would just rather let it be.
Kapre 04-08-07, 06:05 PM	Roleplaying it out, is usally how we deal with combat anyway. The problem comes when he goes into such detail that I don't know up from down. And while I have confidence that he isn't trying to pull the wool over my eyes, I'm a little hesitant to give him the +1/+2 circumstance bonus he thinks his manovers have earned.
Shadowhowler 04-08-07, 07:29 PM	Hm. Well, just becuase your buddy has begun Judo classes at the local Y (and, just so you know I'm not Bashing Judo, I love Judo and studied it along with Kung Fu for 5 years when I was younger) dose not mean you should give new mechanics and consideration to the grapple rules specificly. If you start adding all sorts of new rules for this one area of combat, things get funky as you neglect all the other areas of combat. Also, I am NOT against house rules to make things make more sense... I do a lot of it, all the time. However, I do it with areas I feel comfortable or informed in, and with players that trust me and my opinions, so as not to create any arguments. I scale back on house rules and changes when playing with players that don't know me well... and wait to earn their trust before messing with things. That said... as other people have pointed out, the D20 rules are purpassly abstract so as to be used by the lowest common denomnator with little diffculty. I would sugest you tell your player that you apricate the detail and description he brings to his players combat, but since you don't feel expert in the area of grapple combat (and, truth to tell, if he just started, neither is he) you are gonna use the rules as presented for simplicity and fairness to all. The systems may not be very realistic, but all creatures and players in the game world are run by them, so they ARE fair... and easy to use.
draconic_swine 04-08-07, 07:47 PM	And while I have confidence that he isn't trying to pull the wool over my eyes, I'm a little hesitant to give him the +1/+2 circumstance bonus he thinks his manovers have earned. If he wants to pull off any "special manoeuvres", tell him to take Improved Grapple. Just because he knows of particular moves you can use doesn't mean his character does. His character would need training in it - a.k.a. a feat spent on Improved Grapple. You can bet when grappling (especially if the character has Improved Grapple) that the opponents aren't merely holding onto one another and pushing/pulling at one another - they'll be trying various moves and techniques to get the upper hand. I'd have to hear his exact arguments to know for sure, but I'm pretty certain I'd give him a bit fat "no" when he asks for a bonus, even a small one.
Kapre 04-08-07, 11:33 PM	Thanks a lot guys, you've been a great help and back up.