Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 jimprofit Apr 26, 2008 17:32:31	This actually is a huge leap away from normal D&D, but may infact be better. I'm not sure, hense why it needs testing. Here's the two main points. Weapons: Weapons play a vital role, something has to excuse the fact why a king would hire armed guards besides the fact swords are cheaper then spells. The reason is; practical use. Here's an example, a burglar is armed with a punching dagger. His weapon should read accordingly.. Punching Dagger: Attack: 1d4+7 Damage: 1d4 Critical: 19-20 Multiplyer: x3 What does this mean? You notice a weapon has an attack die now. This is the pinnacle of difference which we'll discuss later as well as damage. Critical is 19-20, so when you make an attack, you roll a d20 that's independant of the attack itself. On a critical hit, you add the multiplyer amount to your attack roll amount. So let's say the burglar strikes you for 11 attack (1d4+7, 4+7=11) and manages to roll a critical, so multiply that by three.. That's 33 attack. What does this all mean? It means that an opponent must roll a above a 33 on a d100 to avoid being hit by your attack. Otherwise, they take 1d3 damage. Add your dexterity modifier to the d100 roll to "avoid being hit"... When you take a total damage amount of more then your HP, you die. Think about it like this, if a level 5 fighter is the armed burglar is using the punching dagger. His attack is going to be +5 BaB+1d4+7+his strength modifier (let's assume he has a 17str so +3) That's atleast a 16% to 19% chance of hitting with an attack. This all in all makes "hitting" you harder, but damage alot more severe. This as always, might seem to put magic in the favorable position. But it doesn't. Here's an example of the edited fireball. Fireball: Attack: 1d6/plus an additional 1d6 per caster level (max 10) Damage: 1d6/plus an additional 1d6 per caster level (max 10) Saving Throw: Reflex Halves No doubt a fireball will probably kill you given half the chance. But first it has to succeed in attack, then your reflex save can halve the damage. So the fireball is actually all in all less likely to hit you. And sense casters need high mental stats, you warriors will be the ones more likely to have a decent dexterity to halve the damage... Determing HP: Obviously under such a system every single digit of HP is important. For one, toughness as a feat should either be banned, nerf, or fighter-only. Every living creature has an HP score atleast equal to their constitution score or more. (GMs can figure this out for themselves.. Personally I take their number of hit die and use that as the plus modifier. So a juvenile red dragon would have +14hp do to 14hit die..) Classes should have HP they augment with new levels. Something like; Fighter: Gains +1hp each level. Barbarian: Gains +3hp every 4th and 5th level. (Rage now grants temporary HP with constitution boost) Wizard: Gains +1hp every 10th level. As you can see, damage is something you want to avoid. But luckiely you can. I don't know exactly how good it will be at "evening out" all creatures regardless of level or whatever. I think it might do a good job, my only regret is perhaps the increddibly slow moving combat. (Which might make players want to avoid combat like the plague, not out of danger, but sheer boredom) And it completely changes which spells we'd define as broken.. False Life is overpowerd now. Mage Armor and Shield are far too good to be level 1 spells. (As it practically makes all weapons useless against you) Armor would be far too broken granting AC bonus, so instead it'd grant damage reduction. (Thank God damage reduction doesn't stack..) So there are some critical flaws, but overall I think it might make the game more balanced. Depending on where your priorities are between game balance, speed, and dependancy on die rolls.
#2 tequila_sunrise Apr 27, 2008 17:02:32	I think low level combat just went from being somewhat realistic in the deadly sense to a Matrix "everyone can dodge bullets" style. High high levels did the opposite. If you have a group that's willing to try this rule, great. But I think if you want more hp realism, d&d is just not your game. I myself am designing a somewhat more realistic game from the ground up, but there are others in print that do similarly. TS
#3 kineon_war May 01, 2008 22:01:33	Sounds more complicated than it needs to be.
#4 zeratulcraft May 01, 2008 22:31:45	Yeah I skipped over it when I realized it was long. Needs simplification.
#5 Senevri May 02, 2008 0:51:31	...If you just added two extra die rolls to attacks, you deserve a hasted, TWFing thri-kreen monk multipouncer. With Raging Mongoose.
#6 Nathreet May 02, 2008 10:36:24	Whenever employing crazy numbers the first issue will be balance, b/c there's about a 0.01% chance that the weird numbers you choose at random will work out well in a real game. Something will be ridiculously overpowered or underpowered.
#7 ryguysolis May 03, 2008 9:00:32	Seems too simple. Where's the variance in success based on the angle of the sun from true horizon at the time you strike? Why don't the previous combat rolls of the day compound to create a new number necessary for success on every subsequent attack? A good effort, but you really need to consider the extent to which any new rule further complicates the game. For a new rule to be viable, it needs to have essentially the same effect as the old while being vastly more time consuming and potentially confusing. Strike that, reverse it.