08-01-2021, 02:52 AM | #11 | |
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Sydney, Australia
|
Re: Experience with Comparative DX for Combat?
Quote:
|
|
08-01-2021, 03:57 AM | #12 |
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: London Uk, but originally from Scotland
|
Re: Experience with Comparative DX for Combat?
|
08-01-2021, 09:26 AM | #13 |
Join Date: May 2015
|
Re: Experience with Comparative DX for Combat?
Ok. I imagine I'd agree with your assessment of the house rule you were playing with.
I don't see an issue with Chris' house rule there, but I could see expanding it to represent what you're pointing to, which seems to me like wanting combat talents to figure in. Perhaps daggers and weapons without talents would have less defensive effect, for example. In my own playtest experiments, I added options where a figure can forgo their defense to get a higher chance to hit, which the heroes facing wizards might well choose. |
08-01-2021, 04:51 PM | #14 | |
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: North Texas
|
Re: Experience with Comparative DX for Combat?
Quote:
Touching on another aspect of David's response, however, I also think that player choice (especially when it involves making trade-offs between two or more opposing options) is core to TFT's design. With that in mind, I'd like to offer a variation on Chris' house-rule... instead of using comparative DX for every engagement, let each figure decide if they want to exchange some of their offensive advantage for defense. So using the original example, in melee Aragorn can opt to lower his 16 DX to 14 and then use those sacrificed 2 points as a DX penalty enforced on the orc's attack (-2 DX to hit Aragorn). I originally shared this optional rule in a different thread last year. https://forums.sjgames.com/showthread.php?t=171350
__________________
“No matter how subtle the wizard, a knife between the shoulder blades will seriously cramp his style.” -Vladimir Taltos Last edited by TippetsTX; 08-01-2021 at 06:03 PM. |
|
Tags |
comparative, defense |
|
|