Low DX dodge and defend

[mark hill]

the only thing I disliked about this in the old rules, was stuff like

2 master rapiermen with DX 20 each, theres really no point in defending at all .. the fight will be over damn quick either way, defending will do nothing to affect the chance of being hit.

This seems the opposite of the long protracted attack-parry-riposte type thing 2 such masters would have in the real, it might be 60 seconds before either tired or got a hit

my home game gives characters a defence score that makes high DX blokes and shield users harder to hit, (shields dont add to hits stopped in this setup) and swordsmen (and only swordsmen) get a counterattack if someone strikes at them and misses (swords do slightly less damage than ax/mace in my home game rules)

do the new rules do anything about this? or is it simply viewed as beyond the purview of TFT? Im wondering at all these conversations about the new rules (which I havnt seen yet) .. jeeest askin, know it sounds dumb

[hcobb]

Weapon master shield expert is -3 on 6 dice to hit when defending and DX 20 is wildly impractical. IQ 20 is for ST 6 elves and goblins.

[Chris Rice]

Mark, these things were discussed here on these forums in great detail prior to the KS. Steve eventually, and probably wisely, decided not to change the original rules to any extent.

My own solution was to make the DX roll "comparative". In other words, since two DX 10 fighters have a 50% chance to hit each other, surely two DX 16 fighters would have the same odds. I had a simple table based on that logical assumption.

There were other, equally valid suggestions, which could be easily adopted without otherwise changing the game if you feel the need.

[mark hill]

bugger .. Ive come too late to the party to get a vote then .. ah cruel fate lol :)

Im sure with this many guys thinking about it most obvious things got talked thru anyway

it sounds like skills now go up in levels eh? excellent

[mark hill]

whaddya mean, dx 20 is wildly impractical? thats never stopped my players from making some uber thief or ninja type build, going for head hits ALL the time .. not to mention the constant random wilderness encounter menace of flying invisible gargoyles (cmon, weve all been there, admit it)

[hcobb]

Attributes double in cost with every point. Hence the ST 6 DX 12 IQ 20 build at 38 attributes with additional XP going into Mana and spells.

Also once you get UC V you are also maxed out.

[Skarg]

The new table of experience costs for raising attributes means there should be far, far fewer figures with very high DX than there could be in old TFT.

Also, there are the new Expert and Master weapon/shield/unarmed talents that can give DX penalties to hit, and/or add dice to hit.

But the core issue still remains. I have been testing and developing Chris Rice's suggestion, and liking the results a lot.

(But if I really want to play with defense-oriented figures and so on, I play GURPS.)

[mark hill]

oh, each attribute has its own xp cost to raise now? so keeping your attributes all at roughly the same level is the cheapest way to increase TAP?

have I got that right?

Ive had quite a few players build a ST 9 DX 20 IQ 9 kinda guy - old rules - would be a shame if the new rules punished you for this, but eh .. they are writ in stone now I gather

Id always found GURPS to be more crunch and less outcomes than TFT .. Id buy GURPS worldbooks to steal ideas from or use flat out as TFT backgrounds .. TFT is just more my taste

[Skarg]

No, sorry for my misleading wording there. The version Steve went with is just a steep table that starts doubling costs per level, but the result is still that few people are liable to go for or get to DX 20.

You can still do ST 9 DX 20 IQ 9, if you can survive that far, though now they'll be tempted to take a bit more IQ to get the expert & master weapon talents instead, or both, by going to ST 9 DX 20 IQ 11.

(However, Steve's first take or two at a revised experience system, DID have a scale per attribute (combined with a hard cap on total attributes at 40), and personally, the more I grumble about the new table, the more I think I actually like that approach, especially with a house rule I'm working on where each character has "core" points that can slide the cost scale, but that belongs in the House Rules subforum rather than this one.)

[mark hill]

oh right .. I similarly made it super-expensive to get TAP over 40

In very early games, the biggest PC I saw was a 76 point gargoyle, player was infamous for slaughtering THE REST OF HIS OWN PARTY at the end of adventures, for the loot and the laughs .. other players devoted whole character builds to a 'gargoyle killer', or spent fortunes on items of Gargoyle Control .. but they never did get him back LOL! he schemed and made/broke alliances like a royal bastard in game of thrones .. he rocked, really, shoulda been a supervillan, he kinda was