New combat system

[codeman123]

I have been very enamored by using chainmail for my combat rules after reading greyelf's explanations but after playtesting these rules i found them a little to brutal for my tastes so i took the chainmail combat rules as the base and did this with them. Basically you would roll a certain amount of dice based on the attack ability as listed in men & magic and would have to hit a target number based on the opponents armor class.

*All hits combined only count as one hit, shields subtract 1 die to hit, and a hit(s) still only counts as 1-6 points of damage.

armor typetarget number
(9)Unarmored/3
(7)Leather/4
(5)Chain/5
(3)Plate/6

[kesher]

So, if I'm getting this right, if I'm a 3rd lvl Fighting Man, and I were trying to hit a foe wearing chainmail, I'd roll three dice, with a +1 to one of those dice, with ANY five or better meaning I hit for one die of damage?

If so, yeah, that's a pretty slick way to do away with to-hit charts...

[tombowings]

Assuming I'm understanding this correct, as a Champion, fighting as a Superhero-1, you'll never be able to hit plate. Is this intentional?

Maybe just have the Fighting-man roll a number dice equal to his or her level, up to a maximum number of 9.

[kesher]

Dec 28, 2009 15:15:11 GMT -6 tombowings said:

Assuming I'm understanding this correct, as a Champion, fighting as a Superhero-1, you'll never be able to hit plate. Is this intentional?

Maybe just have the Fighting-man roll a number dice equal to his or her level, up to a maximum number of 9.

Oh, see, I made the wrong assumption (re-reading codeman's op) that he meant roll HD, as opposed to fighting capability...

However, as a Champion, rolling as a Superhero-1, he'd simply roll (I think) eight dice, with a -1 to one of those dice, getting a hit if ANY of them came up "6". Which means he'd have a pretty good chance of hitting plate, actually...

[codeman123]

Sorry if my replies are a tad slow i have been working out of town without Internet. But yes that is the correct assumption. Thanks for the feedback.

Actually though i have thought that maybe shields or shield equivalence ,instead of subtracting a die would actually entitle the bearer a free block once per the encounter.

[giantbat]

Reminds me of Warhammer.

If shields subtract 1 die to hit, is it possible for a Veteran to hit a shield bearer?

Perhaps a shield could entitle the bearer to choose one of the attacker's dice on which to apply a -1 penalty. But then a Veteran might still be helpless against a defender with plate and shield.

[kesher]

giantbat, I was just thinking about the same thing last night! Then I went to my LBB, and realized that FM fight as a Man +1, so they'd hit plate (with their one die) on a 5 or better. A shield would just make that a six.

Of course, it'd make it impossible for a Cleric or a MU to hit, but I suppose, all round, you could rule that a six hits, period. At least down to AC 2...

The more I think about this system, the more I like it...

[calithena]

Having thought this through, Kesher, take another look at Burning Wheel...

[aldarron]

Dec 27, 2009 15:30:25 GMT -6 codeman123 said:

*All hits combined only count as one hit,

That's a very interesting solution to the problems accompanying using HD as attack dice. A down side would be that levels lose some advantages of getting more dice because the odds of getting at least one 6 become fairly high fairly quickly, so there would not, for example, be much of an attack difference between, say a level 9 character and a level 12 character.
Another thing is that high level characters are no better at defending than low level characters, since to hit is solely based on armor. Since you only have a couple pips to work with on a d6 you may be limited with the adjustments you can make with the "count as one hit" idea.
Chainmail requires 4 simultaneous hits on heros, you could perhaps modify this idea such that 1/4 (rounded to nearest, mininum of 1) of a creatures HD are required to hit it, but damage is 1d6 regardless. That way hd 1-5 creatures require one hit, HD 6-7 require 2, HD 8-9 require 3 and so forth. Or something like that.

[kesher]

Having thought this through, Kesher, take another look at Burning Wheel...

Really? 'Cause you know I'll do what you suggest...

[calithena]

Higher level characters might split dice for multiple attacks, if you're worried about the differential between 9 and 12 frex.

[kesher]

Jan 4, 2010 10:11:42 GMT -6 aldarron said:

Chainmail requires 4 simultaneous hits on heros, you could perhaps modify this idea such that 1/4 (rounded to nearest, mininum of 1) of a creatures HD are required to hit it, but damage is 1d6 regardless. That way hd 1-5 creatures require one hit, HD 6-7 require 2, HD 8-9 require 3 and so forth. Or something like that.

Okay, now that's a great idea! And, you could do the same thing for characters and levels, which I think would mix pretty well in terms of nuance with the target numbers for different ACs.

Higher level characters might split dice for multiple attacks, if you're worried about the differential between 9 and 12 frex.

Another good nuancing technique. I'd be inclined to keep it to the same progression as above, and apply it to monsters as well...

[codeman123]

Well the -1 for shields is not to the control die but an actual -1 to the attackers dice pool. Also i kind of like the idea that higher hit-die opponents require more hits... hmm....

[apparition13]

Jan 4, 2010 10:11:42 GMT -6 aldarron said:

Dec 27, 2009 15:30:25 GMT -6 codeman123 said:

*All hits combined only count as one hit,

That's a very interesting solution to the problems accompanying using HD as attack dice. A down side would be that levels lose some advantages of getting more dice because the odds of getting at least one 6 become fairly high fairly quickly, so there would not, for example, be much of an attack difference between, say a level 9 character and a level 12 character.
Another thing is that high level characters are no better at defending than low level characters, since to hit is solely based on armor. Since you only have a couple pips to work with on a d6 you may be limited with the adjustments you can make with the "count as one hit" idea.
Chainmail requires 4 simultaneous hits on heros, you could perhaps modify this idea such that 1/4 (rounded to nearest, mininum of 1) of a creatures HD are required to hit it, but damage is 1d6 regardless. That way hd 1-5 creatures require one hit, HD 6-7 require 2, HD 8-9 require 3 and so forth. Or something like that.

If you're concerned with defense, you can allow characters to split dice between attack and defense, with defense dice canceling out successes as in risk. So if you have 6 dice, you can use all six for attack, all six for defense, or some mix in between. Let's say you allocate 3 to defense, and are wearing Chain. Your opponent attacks with 4 dice, and rolls two fives, while you roll 4-5-6. The five and six cancel out the two fives, meaning you avoided getting hit that round (assuming ties go to defense) or the six cancels out a five, meaning you get hit once (assuming ties go to offense).

Shields could then add a dedicated defense die to your pool, or if ties go to offense, shields could change that to ties go to defense.

[codeman123]

apparition this is a very cool idea man! I really like that idea diffently playtesting that one!

[codeman123]

What i'm thinking now is the system should be tweaked out a little.. here we go.. k..

1. keeping the target numbers i had originally
2. attack dice pool is equal to hit dice for creatures and players
3. dice pools may be spilt and these dice can be used as a defense pool. Shields and magic armor(points ex. +1) add to defense pools only. The target number to beat for defense rolls is equal to those of the attacker. If more hits are scored by the defender the attacker deals no damage.
4. Magic weapons add to attack pools

thoughts.. concerns?

[apparition13]

A couple of things that came to mind, if you're not completely wedded to the combat table.

Everyone gets at least one die (and has to choose whether to attack or defend), to which you add the character's fighter level in dice. Maybe Clerics get 2/3 levels (no additional for levels divisible by 3) and MUs 1/2 levels (additional dice on odd or even levels, depending on whether you want them to be better than 0 levels at 1st level). So a level six fighter gets 1+6 = 7 dice, a level 6 cleric gets 1+4 = 5 dice, a level 6 mage gets 1+3 = 4 dice, and a 6 hit die monster gets 6 dice.

Is that too good for the mage?

By the way, this makes armor an offensive weapon. If you feel more secure about avoiding attacks, you will shift more of your dice to attack than you would if you were in no armor, which is one of the actual effects armor has psychologically. More armor = more aggression.

[codeman123]

Interesting idea indeed.. hmmm.. i will run some simulations to see how these work and get back to ya..

[tombowings]

The more I think about this, the more I like it. Would you mind if I did some playtesting with this system sometime in the next few months?

[codeman123]

Please by all means play all you want with it. Thats why i posted the idea to share with you guys! Glad you like it.

[sham]

Dec 27, 2009 15:30:25 GMT -6 codeman123 said:

I have been very enamored by using chainmail for my combat rules after reading greyelf's explanations but after playtesting these rules i found them a little to brutal for my tastes so i took the chainmail combat rules as the base and did this with them. Basically you would roll a certain amount of dice based on the attack ability as listed in men & magic and would have to hit a target number based on the opponents armor class.

*All hits combined only count as one hit, shields subtract 1 die to hit, and a hit(s) still only counts as 1-6 points of damage.

armor typetarget number
(9)Unarmored/3
(7)Leather/4
(5)Chain/5
(3)Plate/6

Amazingly enough while working on an all d6 game using the Fistfuls of Dice routine I was fooling around with last year I came up with the exact same armor ratings you've used above; None:3, Leather:4, Mail:5 and Plate:6.

I've been allowing Shields to simply "absorb" one damage after at first using a chance to block idea where the defender had to match the attack roll in order to negate all damage (so a 1in6 chance to do so, essentially). The absorb one technique is simpler, though.

Fistfuls of Dice is simply roll Xd6 and select the highest. Experience and Magic Items can add to this pool. I also use it for damage and saving throws, as well as a generic resolution routine called 5plus for out of combat tasks (just the default 2in6 from OD&D inverted so that higher is always better in the game). Basically instead of any "+'s" to rolls, more dice are used.

I've been using this d6 style for dungeon crawls with my soon to be 4 year old son. It's fast and easy to remember. Best of all he loves throwing dice, even though they often end up under the table or couch.

[apparition13]

Feb 1, 2010 9:28:27 GMT -6 sham said:

Dec 27, 2009 15:30:25 GMT -6 codeman123 said:

I have been very enamored by using chainmail for my combat rules after reading greyelf's explanations but after playtesting these rules i found them a little to brutal for my tastes so i took the chainmail combat rules as the base and did this with them. Basically you would roll a certain amount of dice based on the attack ability as listed in men & magic and would have to hit a target number based on the opponents armor class.

*All hits combined only count as one hit, shields subtract 1 die to hit, and a hit(s) still only counts as 1-6 points of damage.

armor typetarget number
(9)Unarmored/3
(7)Leather/4
(5)Chain/5
(3)Plate/6

Amazingly enough while working on an all d6 game using the Fistfuls of Dice routine I was fooling around with last year I came up with the exact same armor ratings you've used above; None:3, Leather:4, Mail:5 and Plate:6.

I've been allowing Shields to simply "absorb" one damage after at first using a chance to block idea where the defender had to match the attack roll in order to negate all damage (so a 1in6 chance to do so, essentially). The absorb one technique is simpler, though.

Fistfuls of Dice is simply roll Xd6 and select the highest. Experience and Magic Items can add to this pool. I also use it for damage and saving throws, as well as a generic resolution routine called 5plus for out of combat tasks (just the default 2in6 from OD&D inverted so that higher is always better in the game). Basically instead of any "+'s" to rolls, more dice are used.

I've been using this d6 style for dungeon crawls with my soon to be 4 year old son. It's fast and easy to remember. Best of all he loves throwing dice, even though they often end up under the table or couch.

I appear to have misread something here, as I was thinking each success would count as a hit, and result in damage, which is the lines on which I have been thinking.

[sham]

I appear to have misread something here, as I was thinking each success would count as a hit, and result in damage, which is the lines on which I have been thinking.

I should have prefaced my comments by warning of a slight thread derailing. I was just noting that I found codeman's armor rating system interesting because it is identical to the one I came up with for my all d6 game last year. That's the only bit shared by the two approaches; mine is more or less a modified OD&D alternative combat system while codeman is using the armor ratings for a modified chainmail style.

[apparition13]

Feb 1, 2010 20:09:41 GMT -6 sham said:

I appear to have misread something here, as I was thinking each success would count as a hit, and result in damage, which is the lines on which I have been thinking.

I should have prefaced my comments by warning of a slight thread derailing. I was just noting that I found codeman's armor rating system interesting because it is identical to the one I came up with for my all d6 game last year. That's the only bit shared by the two approaches; mine is more or less a modified OD&D alternative combat system while codeman is using the armor ratings for a modified chainmail style.

Have you looked at Silcore? I believe the approach is similar to what you propose, as it Sorcerer actually.

[vladtolenkov]

I have to say that this system sounds sounds pretty nifty. I'm tempted to go off and develop my own variant.

[codeman123]

I had another thought today when i was reading back on this thread. Someone brought up warhammer and that is really what i have been emulating in one way or another that and heroquest. My new thought is that instead of armor having a target number armor grants a saving throw if a opponent scores any hits against a defender the defender gets to roll a saving throw vs. his armor type to avoid taking damage. The saving throws would be something like this on one die.
Leather-5+
Chain -4+
Plate-3+
shields add a +1 to armor saves
magic items do not add to armor saves but let you roll more dice. So +1 chain allows a save on a 4 or better but you get to roll 2 dice instead of one.

Another note should be the actual attack rolls i have tweaked out a bit. The attack roll is based on a amount of dice based upon the attackers hit-dice (i.e. a 4 hit die monster rolls 4 attack dice). The target number is always the same for all attacks and is a 5 or a 6. All hits count only as 'one hit' and damage dice are then rolled if defender does not make his armor save. Magic weapons mearly add additional dice to the pool per a +1.

Higher hit-die opponents require more then just one-hit scores to inflict a hit upon them this factor is based on their hit-die value.

HD #hits required
1-3 1
4-6 2
7-9 3
10-12 4
13+ 5

[EdOWar]

Mar 7, 2010 10:59:07 GMT -6 codeman123 said:

I had another thought today when i was reading back on this thread. Someone brought up warhammer and that is really what i have been emulating in one way or another that and heroquest. My new thought is that instead of armor having a target number armor grants a saving throw if a opponent scores any hits against a defender the defender gets to roll a saving throw vs. his armor type to avoid taking damage. The saving throws would be something like this on one die.
Leather-5+
Chain -4+
Plate-3+
shields add a +1 to armor saves
magic items do not add to armor saves but let you roll more dice. So +1 chain allows a save on a 4 or better but you get to roll 2 dice instead of one.

Another note should be the actual attack rolls i have tweaked out a bit. The attack roll is based on a amount of dice based upon the attackers hit-dice (i.e. a 4 hit die monster rolls 4 attack dice). The target number is always the same for all attacks and is a 5 or a 6. All hits count only as 'one hit' and damage dice are then rolled if defender does not make his armor save. Magic weapons mearly add additional dice to the pool per a +1.

Higher hit-die opponents require more then just one-hit scores to inflict a hit upon them this factor is based on their hit-die value.

HD #hits required
1-3 1
4-6 2
7-9 3
10-12 4
13+ 5

This is an interesting approach, but I can see some potential problems with it.

If an armor save negates an entire attack, then once I have plate + shield and at least one piece of +1 magic armor, I'll almost never take damage. Rolling two dice and needing 2+ to save means I have a 1 in 36 chance of ever taking damage. If I get to roll 3 dice that goes to 1 in 216.

Conversely, with the higher attack hit requirements for higher level characters/monsters, it can become quite difficult to hit someone even with magic weapons. And a 1st level character, allowed only 1 attack die but needing two hits, would have no chance at all to hit a 4 HD monster (or conversely, a horde of goblins would have no chance to hit a 4th level or higher character, unless you allowed the horde to group their hits together).

Maybe a better approach is to require a 6+ on the attack rolls to hit, but magic weapons allow you to add +1 to each die roll for each point of magical bonus (i.e. a +2 sword adds +2 to each die). I believe OD&D weapons only go up to +3, so the best they'll ever get on attack rolls is 3+ for a hit. Edit: And then perhaps allow groups to combine hits against tougher opponents they otherwise wouldn't be able to damage at all.

A system like this might work better if you treat the dice as if they are competing dice pools, where damage inflicted is the difference between attack hits and armor saves rolled (i.e. if I roll 4 hits and the target rolls 2 saves, they take two damage). However, then the system is getting into Heroquest and Shadowrun territory, which uses similar mechanics. It would also necessitate a rewrite of many of the game's mechanics, and then you wouldn't really be playing D&D anymore.

Still, I like your ideas using d6 instead of 2d6 or d20. It allows some additional fudging and tweaking so each GM can make the game their own. Good stuff.

[aldarron]

Codeman, have you read the Blackmoor combat thread? You might be interested in some of the parallels between what you are experimenting with and what we've been discussing about what Dave Arneson did with combat.

[codeman123]

Yeah i have read some of Arneson's techniques and find them really cool. You are probably right about the math i haven't play tested the mechanics yet.

[Harbinger]

This thread interested me enough to unlurk and join the discussion.

Like many others, I took a look at the chainmail mass-combat rules and said to myself - there must be a way to make this work for D&D. My main motivation was to go to a 'roll a pile of dice' method, where each d6 represented an increase in the character's attack capability.

So here were my basic assumptions:

• Attack capability: Dagger,etc is Light Foot; Mace, Flail is Heavy Foot; Long Sword is Armored Foot. This effectively means Wizard -> LF; Cleric -> HF; Fighter -> AF
  
• Defense capability: Leather is LF; Chain is HF; Plate is AF. Unarmored grants an extra attack die, shield grants a defense die that negates a hit on 5 or 6.
  
• +1, +2, etc., grants a single +1 (or +2, etc) to a single die, declared before hand by the attacker.
  
• The attacker can split their attack dice however they choose against melee foes.
  
• Use the standard mass-combat tables for number of dice and 'to-hit' calculations.
  
• Each 'hit' causes 1d6 damage.
  

In order to get a simplified view of what this would mean in terms of probability, I took the simple case of Armored Foot Attack against Armored Foot defense and look at hit probabilities and damage output at different hit dice.

First off, hit probability quickly reaches 50%+, so combat is more about being able to absorb more damage than your opponent than avoiding getting hit.

Secondly, +1 to a single die skews the hit probability enormously. It is always better to roll x dice with a +1 than to roll x+1 dice (e.g. HD2+1 is better than HD3). So in the Men&Magic progression, there are some cases where the player gets worse as they level up. To compensate, they are able to attack more individuals simultaneously. As long as the +1 only applies to 'to-hit' and not damage, the damage output isn't affected too badly.

Damage output is much higher - with the d20 rules, a 4-6th level fighter does an average of 1.05 damage per round with a 30% hit probability. With these rules, they do 2.33 at 4th, and 3.5 at 6th. So combat is much deadlier, and healing ability becomes very important. Interestingly, the 'rounds-to-kill' an equal level opponent levels out at 6 rounds at 3rd level and above.

I've attached a graph showing the cumulative probability of getting hits at each hit-die level. This is assume the 'to-hit' number is a 6.

While I like the idea of rolling a lot of dice, I think my small tests of this method show that it may not be that fun in play as it is very lethal. This in part is because it really wasn't designed for a 'hit-point' system. It could perhaps benefit from a 'minimum threshold' concept as mentioned by someone else where there is a minimum number of hits required to damage a foe.

A few conclusions
- I really like the mechanical feel of this - roll a bunch of dice, pick up each one that hits, roll them for damage.
- As is, too deadly to be fun. A single combat would exhaust the characters hit points to the point they'd have to turn back.
- I really like the 5-6 for shield defence. It also happens to line up with early rules that gave a shield a 33% chance of being effective.
- Plusses should only be granted to 'to-hit' rolls. That has a knock-on effect of increasing the damage dealt. If you add the plus to the damage as well, then damage output becomes too strong. I wonder if this could be the source of the Holmes Basic rule that magic weapons only add to 'to-hit'.
- I tried playing with having armor reduce the 'hit-dice' of the attack, as mentioned for magic armor in the LBB, and it does create an interesting effect - but has problems at HD 1-3. Which again, might be why Dave Arneson started everyone at Hero (4HD) level (or so I've read).

Attachments: