Friday, 14 September 2018

Combat systems as a last resort

This is a question I often think about: why isn't the best skirmish-wargame system also the best RPG combat system?

There are some obvious answers: realistic skirmish systems are too dangerous for continuity in a typical D&D-style game; and skirmish systems don't allow for the sort of madcap creativity that's a staple of a decent RPG encounter.

Let's take that second point. Creative solutions to problems are where much of the fun in RPGs arises.    And the more that creativity leaks into combat encounters, the better. When I was a kid, I disliked the D&D combat system as a sterile mix of abstraction and attrition. Why not prefer RuneQuest or Warhammer FRP, where hilarity and dismemberment often arose from a humdrum fight? Since then, I've come to appreciate the D&D approach more - for its ease of bookkeeping and the tension that hit-point-depletion creates. But I wasn't entirely wrong. D&D combat can devolve into a sterile exercise in whittling hit points.

That's why the combat system should be the fall-back option. The GM should always allow players to  fight through methods that don't involve armour class. Will mechanics be involved? Yes, of course: there's an element of chance. But not usually combat mechanics.

Here's an example from our most recent game: a one-off, highly derivative scenario involving dwarf PCs reclaiming their ancestral home from invading evils. At one point, the dwarves triggered an alarm that animated a gargoyle and summoned hobgoblins from deeper in the dungeon. As the hobgoblins closed with some of the dwarves at the top of the stairs, one player asked if her character could throw herself at the legs of the nearest hobgoblin. Basically, she wanted to rugby-tackle him down the stairs.

That seemed entirely reasonable, given the positioning, so I offered her a DEX check with disadvantage. Failure would result in injury to her character from the hobgoblin, and a fumble would send her tumbling down the stairs herself. But if she succeeded, she would topple the hobgoblin, driving him out of the combat and hurting him the process. She rolled the two d20s, succeeded on both and smashed the unfortunate hobgoblin down the stairs, breaking his neck in the process (a high damage roll).

This was a simple snap decision, and I'm sure most GMs do that sort of thing all the time. But I think it's worth highlighting how much more interesting and dynamic combat encounters become when there's no automatic default to AC and to-hit-rolls.

Simple stat checks, along with the disadvantage and advantage system, is all you need for this. Here are some of the things that have come up in our games:

1. Jumping on an adversary from above. (DEX, with advantage for Deft [Whitehack] or thief [The Black Hack] characters)
2. Pushing an opponent over an edge in melee. (STR, with advantage for characters bigger or heavier than their opponents, and disadvantage for lighter ones. Failure is failure; fumbles mean you go over; a critical lets you land on them for extra damage.)
3. Stepping out of the way of a charging opponent so that they fall - or tripping them as they go past (DEX, with disadvantage for all but the Deft).
4. "Behind you!" (CHA, with disadvantage unless there are special circumstances)
5. Throwing something - a torch or liquid or dust - in an opponent's face (DEX with disadvantage except for the Deft/thieves).
6. Intimidation ("Throw down your weapons! You're surrounded!", etc.) (CHA with disadvantage except for the Wise).
7. Flying tackles (DEX as above - disadvantage for everyone!)
8. Shield-barging charges to scatter opponents (STR with disadvantage)
9. Taunting opponents so that they charge into disadvantageous circumstances (CHA or, better, just roleplay it)
10. Swinging on ropes, chains or other suitable things - either into combat or out of it, or over enemies while dropping things (DEX with disadvantage except for the Deft/thieves).

Of course, monsters and NPCs can attempt all these things too.

When the AC/'to hit'/HP grind becomes the last resort rather than the first, the game becomes a hell of a lot more entertaining. And it gets faster. You don't need to cross off some of an orc's hit points if he's just been barged into a gaping chasm - or persuaded to charge into a troll's lair.



3 comments:

  1. Great food for thought. I'm working on a competitive dungeon crawler for miniatures that doesn't require a ref or game master, and I'm trying to develop more mechanics that give players options beyond mere hit point whittling, which as you point out is a bit easier to do in "theater of the mind" style play.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think the advantage/disadvantage system could be worked into something almost universally applicable here.

    If you don't have a D&D-style stat line, you could maybe give each character ONE stat appropriate to their class (e.g. STR for a fighter, DEX for a thief, INT for a wizard) and set it at 10. That immediately gives you three options: basic, advantage and disadvantage (or normal, easy and hard). And that would allow you to have them attempt a range of class-specific feats. You could provide some examples for each - or even stat out elements in the room ("The chandelier is a hard challenge for a swing across the room").

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yep...statting out elements in a room has been my default up until now, with a bonus based on character profile stats. Because the ruleset I'm developing borrows more from skirmish gaming (Songs of..., etc.), the stat line isn't based around RPG character attributes (Str, Wis, Cha) and more on other "values" (melee, ranged, magic, AC, wounds, wits). Your idea of giving each class a stat is an intriguing one, even though until now I've deliberately semi-eschewed class altogether, and built character generation so that class would sorta organically emerges from the values (e.g., high melee score) and the character traits (e.g., sneaky, indomitable, etc.) "purchased" through a point system during character generation.

      If you're curious, here are three links to my posts on game design and play tests over the past many months. The game definitely has evolved with time...

      POST 1: This was the first time I got a chance to test drive the system. At this point I was still attempting to build everything atop "Advanced Song Of Blades and Heroes'" core mechanics.
      https://miniaturescrum.blogspot.com/2017/11/ballads-of-dungeon-delving.html

      POST 2: In this post I discuss how I started to radically rethink some of the game's underpinnings as I chaffed under some of the limitations the "Songs" system was forcing me to work around to accomplish what I wanted to do.
      https://miniaturescrum.blogspot.com/2018/01/dungeon-delve-crypt-of-mighty-lord-thule.html

      POST 3: A play test in which I start to see how important it is to get certain stats/profiles better balanced and start to realize that I want to make each encounter unique or at least with little complications or built-in tradeoffs.
      https://miniaturescrum.blogspot.com/2018/05/dungeon-delve-when-first-rooms-are-last.html

      Anyway...if you do find yourself reading the above and have any advice or insight to share, I'd love to hear it.

      Delete