01-22-2018, 11:13 PM | #41 | |
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: London Uk, but originally from Scotland
|
Re: TFT Defense
Quote:
Which is why, since the core system works well as is, it almost certainly won't be changed. Anything along these lines is best left to optional rules, which can only break the system if optionally added in (like the "aimed blows" in Advanced Melee) and can as easily be removed. |
|
01-23-2018, 10:22 AM | #42 | |
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Tyler, Texas
|
Re: TFT Defense
Quote:
Then, I'd start a TFT playtest regime to refine In the Labyrinth. While many of us have made and tested various modifications, they're mostly incompatible with each other. |
|
01-23-2018, 11:24 AM | #43 | |
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Arizona
|
Re: TFT Defense
Quote:
As you point out, the only really contentious combat rule that everyone agrees on is the pole weapon charge rules, and, to a lesser extent, the damage ratings of the various weapons. Everything else, even the parry question, are really already modeled by the system -- in fact, I believe to this day that the issue of the "parry" never would have come up if the TWO WEAPONS Talent had been phrased differently... ;-) |
|
01-23-2018, 01:53 PM | #44 |
Join Date: Dec 2017
|
Re: TFT Defense
Agreed. And, even though I have spent a lot of time fiddling with house rules over the decades, I'm a bit tired of it all, and am currently spending most of my gaming energy on getting my TFT setting materials both organized and in 'canonical' form (consistent with the published rules). I'd rather play for real by the book than play head games with my house rules.
|
01-23-2018, 08:56 PM | #45 | |
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Arizona
|
Re: TFT Defense
Quote:
Last edited by JLV; 02-02-2018 at 12:03 PM. |
|
02-01-2018, 07:57 PM | #46 |
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Sydney, Australia
|
Re: TFT Defense
I think if you want to introduce a free parry into TFT, make it require buying the ability to do so: something ordinary people don't have but more skilled opponents will buy. Then most hits achieved by the party, including all those against mooks, won't need an extra roll. The only times you'll need an extra roll will be when the party have tagged a boss, or when the bad guys have tagged a skilled player character. Both are events of moment and significance, so people won't mind making the extra roll in those circumstances. And when you hit the bad guy and the GM unexpectedly rolls and says, "parried", there's a "Uh-oh this guy is tougher than I realised" feeling which I think can only be a good thing.
If the parry right is a bit pricey and the parry requires a difficult DX roll then the player will have to ask, "Is my DX high enough yet to make this worth it?" No need for minimum DX requirements, which I find ugly. You could implement it as a talent, or as a special ability that costs attribute points. There are arguments both ways. There's an issue with parries getting too reliable at high DX. Various ways to deal with that: not sure what the best would be. |
02-07-2018, 06:00 AM | #47 | |
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Tyler, Texas
|
Re: TFT Defense
Quote:
Anything that relies on a 3d6 roll is going to run into the fact that a 13 or less will succeed the great majority of the time (84%) and a 7 or less will fail the great majority of the time (16% chance of success). Only 6 points separate these two numbers. |
|
02-07-2018, 08:40 AM | #48 |
Join Date: Jan 2018
|
Re: TFT Defense
just thoughts to approach the problem in a simple and elegant way using the same TFT style and concepts.
a new Parry with Shield skill IQ 8 level, cost 1, a new Parry with Sword skill IQ 9 level, cost 2 these talents give a free extra action per turn to parry with the shield and/or the sword. Two free parries are allowed per turn if an hero have both talents and uses sword+shield. the Hero can decide to parry after the hit lands (before any damage is rolled) and it's successful: if the hero rolls 9 or less and the opponents has higher Adj DX if the hero rolls 10 or less and the opponent has same Adj DX if the hero rolls 11 or less and the opponent has lower Adj DX. if the Hero decides to DEFEND then parries are improved: 10,11,12 respectively (i.e. + 1 on the above numbers). Rolling a 17 the weapon drops, rolling 18 the weapon breaks. Parry is possible only if the attack comes from a frontal hex. In case of an attack scoring a Critical Hit, the parry is successful only if they roll 3 or 4. We could also imagine a Parry skill with Ax/Mace , IQ 8, cost 1. but it's slightly less effective, 8,9,10. the Parry skill could be reserved only to heroes and important NPCs. Common cannon fodder does not need any parry skill. So most combats aren't slowed much for the extra dice rolls that are mostly for PCs and are necessary only when one opponent hits As said, just food for discussion. Never tried, never playtested. Just ideas floating after reading a few posts here. Edit: the first problem coming in mind is that the extra 1 or 2 IQ points needed, destroy dozens of years of study and theory about the "perfect" Character creation in TFT ... |
02-23-2018, 01:22 AM | #49 | ||
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Sydney, Australia
|
Re: TFT Defense
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
02-23-2018, 11:42 AM | #50 |
Join Date: Dec 2017
|
Re: TFT Defense
My house rule for parries effectively boils down to the following:
1 standard attack, no parry: 3d/DX 1 parry, no attack: 3d/DX 1 standard attack and one parry: each rolled as 4d/DX 2 attacks: each rolled as 4d/DX 2 attacks and 1 parry: each rolled as 4d/DX etc., plus some limits on how many attacks and/or parries can be performed on the same turn with any one weapon, fist, kick, etc. |
|
|