|
Post by sepulchre on Sept 23, 2015 8:07:52 GMT -6
Finarvyn wrote: His AC may not be based on Conan, but his defense is based on Conan: his Weapon Class, his number of hits, and his number of attacks are assumed in the defensive aspect of a character. If it ain't broke... Moreover, should Chainmail's weapon class be minimally adapted with Judges Guild's Weapon Priority Table, Conan goes from formidable to rather harrowing. It is important to recall, most of Conan's adversaries are normal men, he is more than a match for them.
|
|
|
Post by Malcadon on Sept 27, 2015 4:36:04 GMT -6
What about this system:
When determining to-hit, compare the attacker's Weapon Class and the defender's Armor Class to get a base to-hit score, and then you compare the attacker's Combat Level to the defender's Combat Level to derive a to-hit adjustment. Much like a THAC0 score, Combat Level is based on a PC's class and level or monster's HD, and it rates ones fighting skills and abilities.
What do you think?
|
|
|
Post by Harbinger on Sept 29, 2015 12:34:05 GMT -6
Jumping very late into this discussion. This was the horrible mistake that D&D 4e made. To-hit, HP and AC all scaled with level. It required that all monsters had to have different versions to fight at different levels and combat tended to devolve into a slog-fest. As a nice side-effect, I convinced my group to abandon 4e for B/X and we haven't looked back. Now I look at 5e and think - nice system, but I'd never want to run it - too fiddly.
Keep AC capped so monsters are still dangerous at a large range of PC levels. HP increases to increase PC's staying power.
|
|
spacelem
Level 1 Medium
Green haired rodent
Posts: 23
|
Post by spacelem on Oct 5, 2015 6:49:11 GMT -6
Jumping very late into this discussion. This was the horrible mistake that D&D 4e made. To-hit, HP and AC all scaled with level. It required that all monsters had to have different versions to fight at different levels and combat tended to devolve into a slog-fest. As a nice side-effect, I convinced my group to abandon 4e for B/X and we haven't looked back. Now I look at 5e and think - nice system, but I'd never want to run it - too fiddly. Keep AC capped so monsters are still dangerous at a large range of PC levels. HP increases to increase PC's staying power. To be fair, 4e did fix the slog-fest in later Monster Manuals by reducing monster HP and increasing damage, it was really only a problem with MM1. And many other RPGs have opposed combat rolls (which is essentially what making AC improve with level is aiming for), without running into problems. There are definitely pros and cons. If AC improves with level, then a hit is less certain (more interesting outcome?) and equally matched opponents tend to have more 50-50 hits, which maximises the variance of combat. However unless you also increase weapon damage, then combat will take longer, and when the worst things you can face don't involve your AC, this gives enemies more time to do unpleasant things to you. I think it is quite possible to work provided there is some simple way of increasing damage, e.g. something like the Thief's backstab (by HD rather than level)?
|
|