Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > The Fantasy Trip > The Fantasy Trip: House Rules

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-06-2020, 05:37 AM   #31
David Bofinger
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Sydney, Australia
Default Re: Defense (sorry post is long)

My takes on this:
  • It makes DX more useful, and will affect balance. Maybe a fixable problem but something to be concerned about.
  • It might make extraordinarily high DX very useful, which would definitely be a problem. TFT is built on the law of diminishing returns for most purposes.
  • It feels too abstracted. RPGs rely on being able to understand what the situation is at any moment, what happened, how victory was won. A system like this is more like a black box processing everything and at the end the players get told what happened. Less fun.
David Bofinger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2020, 07:22 AM   #32
Kieddicus
 
Join Date: Oct 2020
Default Re: Defense (sorry post is long)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Plambeck View Post
So one figure charges at another with a spear or longer pole arm, successfully impales the target to death as they close the distance, and yet gets wounded or potentially killed at the same time by the defender's short sword, or dagger, or even a punch? Physics seems to have flown out the window.
You charge at someone with your pole-arm and impale him, but he closed a bit more distance than you expected before you hit him. Continuing his momentum his sword still barely manages to strike you as well... Seems perfectly within the reals of physics to me. It gets a little wonky with a punch, but that's about it. I've also never seen someone without UC make a punch outside of HTH before, so I am totally okay with this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Plambeck View Post
Speaking more generally, I like a game with simultaneous attacks and simultaneous damage, and I like a game where nothing happens simultaneously and every event affects the next one. TFT obviously falls in the second category. What I think really doesn't work is any game the vacillates between the two systems -- it has to be one or the other, or things start to get very messed up, as if you're playing on two different time scales at once. When some things are simultaneous but others are not, for purely mechanistic rules reasons, the sense of believability suffers.
I totally agree, which is why everything in my system change works simultaneously.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Plambeck View Post
The granular nature of person-to-person combat, resolved from second to second, cries out for the "nothing happens simultaneously" system exemplified by TFT. Everything happens at once better serves starship armada's launching attacks from lightyears away that will take hours, days or months to land their blows.
I actually disagree with this, I think person-to-person combat cries out for simultaneous combat systems (Unless you are have half-second turns). Ship combat can go either way for me.
Kieddicus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2020, 08:35 AM   #33
Kieddicus
 
Join Date: Oct 2020
Default Re: Defense (sorry post is long)

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Bofinger View Post
My takes on this:
  • It makes DX more useful, and will affect balance. Maybe a fixable problem but something to be concerned about.
  • It might make extraordinarily high DX very useful, which would definitely be a problem. TFT is built on the law of diminishing returns for most purposes.
  • It feels too abstracted. RPGs rely on being able to understand what the situation is at any moment, what happened, how victory was won. A system like this is more like a black box processing everything and at the end the players get told what happened. Less fun.
  • DX becoming to strong is definitely a problem. We have worked out a change to armor that helps this, but we need a lot more test to make sure it is balanced.
  • I like that this system makes getting more than 15 DX useful beyond just negating the occasional DX penalty. But I am aware that this might cause problems.
  • I think this is more of a question of liking simultaneous combat or not in your RPGs, I prefer it but plenty of other don't.


Another way to add defense into the game that works well with turn based combat is making the Weapon Expert/Master skills add more defense than they currently do.
Maybe -2 DX for attacking an Expert and -5 DX for a Master.
Or roll 4 dice to hit an expert and 5 for a master.
Kieddicus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2020, 08:34 AM   #34
MikMod
 
Join Date: May 2019
Default Re: Defense (sorry post is long)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kieddicus View Post
The point of my system is to simulate that a better fighter doesn't get hit as often
I kinda feel TFT already does that, just indirectly.

Assuming by 'better fighter' you mean a more skilled one - i.e. higher DX


1) Faster figures can disengage before being hit, essentially avoiding ever being hit (melee obvs) if they can keep backing up

2) Attacking first enables 'defensive' attacks, like throwing dirt in people's eyes, and its more likely to be successful

3) Faster figures can safely defend against poorly trained (low DX) foes and look for an opening, then strike an arm or head again before being hit

4) Super-skilled fighters may be able to do arm hits before being struck, disarming their attacker

5) Weapon Mastery drops attackers DX by 1 - this is how Legacy builds in the kind of effect you want to see

6) And Weapon Mastery makes Defending much more effective by adding dice - another Legacy nod to this kind of system which is already there


Honestly, the -1's for Weapon Mastery and Shield Expert is already enough of an extra-bookkeeping headache for me without adding more complexity in combat. TFT should IMHO be fast and fun. :)
MikMod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2020, 05:15 PM   #35
larsdangly
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Default Re: Defense (sorry post is long)

I totally agree that TFT provides several mechanisms for higher DX and/or more skilled combatants to reduce the chances that they are struck in combat; it simply does so through means that are more abstract than the 'attack-parry-riposte' approach of games such as Flashing Blades or GURPS. But one of the things listed below (#3) is misleading because it implies that you can do something on one turn that increases your chances of striking in the next, thus achieving the sort of dynamic that I think posters on this thread have in mind - i.e., where a high DX/skillful combatant is doing things to reduce the chance of being struck while simultaneously developing their own attack. TFT doesn't really do that, even when you figure in all of the new talents (excepting note #5 below). Yes, you can defend and that works well. But on the next turn you are right back where you started at - all you've done is reduced the chance of being hit on that turn; the next turn presents its own fresh threats that are undiminished by your having previously defending. To use your terms, there is no 'opening' to wait for.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikMod View Post
I kinda feel TFT already does that, just indirectly.

Assuming by 'better fighter' you mean a more skilled one - i.e. higher DX


1) Faster figures can disengage before being hit, essentially avoiding ever being hit (melee obvs) if they can keep backing up

2) Attacking first enables 'defensive' attacks, like throwing dirt in people's eyes, and its more likely to be successful

3) Faster figures can safely defend against poorly trained (low DX) foes and look for an opening, then strike an arm or head again before being hit

4) Super-skilled fighters may be able to do arm hits before being struck, disarming their attacker

5) Weapon Mastery drops attackers DX by 1 - this is how Legacy builds in the kind of effect you want to see

6) And Weapon Mastery makes Defending much more effective by adding dice - another Legacy nod to this kind of system which is already there


Honestly, the -1's for Weapon Mastery and Shield Expert is already enough of an extra-bookkeeping headache for me without adding more complexity in combat. TFT should IMHO be fast and fun. :)
larsdangly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2020, 04:58 AM   #36
MikMod
 
Join Date: May 2019
Default Re: Defense (sorry post is long)

ITL page 127 - Optional Rule

"A fighter may spend up to 2 turns defending and waiting for an opening getting up to +2 DX."

It's already part of TFT and although not commonly used, is available and RAW
MikMod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2020, 10:23 AM   #37
larsdangly
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Default Re: Defense (sorry post is long)

Thanks for that reminder; I suspect this is one of the new rules that I didn't notice or assimilate in the transition to Legacy Edition (a disadvantage of being an old player - you think you already know it all!). That is actually a pretty important avenue for high-skill players to develop an attack.

Edit: I just peeked at my old edition files and realized it's always been there, I just never used it! Now I'll worry all day about what else I missed....
larsdangly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2020, 08:09 PM   #38
David Bofinger
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Sydney, Australia
Default Re: Defense (sorry post is long)

A general thought on improving defence:

We want TFT to be fast and fun. That means we don't want to be forever making rolls or modifiers. So it might be good if the extra calculation would only happen when some rare event of great moment occurs. And wouldn't happen when a routine event occurs. Because rare and important events deserve more attention and the activation of extra rolls.

An example of a routine event is a PC attacking a mook, a PC hitting a mook, a mook attacking a mook, or a mook attacking a PC. An example of something that would be unusual enough that nobody minded it being done in more detail would be a boss or a PC being wounded.

So what if special defences only activated if a character who had a relevant talent got wounded? Or at least when they got hit? Only bosses and PCs would have these talents.
David Bofinger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2020, 12:57 AM   #39
Steve Plambeck
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Default Re: Defense (sorry post is long)

Wow, and here I thought I had the old rules well memorized, especially the rarely used ones like Waiting for an Opening. Never once in all these years did my porous brain register that it could be used in conjunction with the Defend option. Nice catch Mr. Mod!
__________________
"I'm not arguing. I'm just explaining why I'm right."
Steve Plambeck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2020, 03:03 AM   #40
MikMod
 
Join Date: May 2019
Default Re: Defense (sorry post is long)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Plambeck View Post
Nice catch Mr. Mod!
Thanks Steve!

Yeah, we used aimed shots and defend + look for opening more than we used H2H back in the day. In fact, defend and look for opening can be very useful for low DX characters like tanks if they're in a tight spot, either to build to a DX where they can attack first, or just to go safely from adjDX 9 to adjDX 11 for more successful attacks, if there is less time pressure.

Also, as we are in the unofficial rules forum and talking defense...

We added a Parry option for everyone, inspired/based off the two weapons talent. We reasoned that if you could parry for 4 points of armour with two weapons then people should be able to 'parry' for 2 points of armour with their single weapon. It just added a slightly different defense option, especially useful when the attacker is feeble (low damage) but high DX and defend would be limited use.

:)

Last edited by MikMod; 12-10-2020 at 03:06 AM.
MikMod is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:47 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.