D20: As Gritty As You Wanna Be
Rick Rauser
about "gritty" vs. "cinematic" systems, with d20 and gurps being the
two candidates. Most of the posts have stated that d20 is unsuited to
gritty play, and more appropriate for cinematic.
Bah!
Here's an easy way to make D&D (and any d20 game, for that matter)
gritty rather than cinematic. It comes, ironically, from a d20 game:
Call of Cthulhu d20. Simply adopt the CoC Massive Damage rule (see
CoC d20 rulebook, page 70), which states that if a character receives
10 hp of damage in a single blow, he must make a successful Fortitude
save (DC 15) or be killed instantly. We're using this rule in my
current D&D campaign and finding it really makes combat a scary thing
(as it should be in a gritty/realistic campaign). Even the party's
10th-level fighter is hesitating about running into the midst of a
pack of orcs. Even with his 82 hit points, he realizes that he could
actually die in combat (novel idea in D&D, eh?).
Now if you prefer your fantasy cinematic, keep the massive damage
threshold at 50 hp (D&D Player's Handbook).
Merry Christmas, brothers.
Rick Rauser
rau...@canoemail.com
Scott Schimmel
>Here's an easy way to make D&D (and any d20 game, for that matter)
>gritty rather than cinematic. It comes, ironically, from a d20 game:
>Call of Cthulhu d20. Simply adopt the CoC Massive Damage rule (see
>CoC d20 rulebook, page 70), which states that if a character receives
>10 hp of damage in a single blow, he must make a successful Fortitude
>save (DC 15) or be killed instantly.
The d20 Modern variant is a good choice, too. Instead of having a set
Massive Damage Threshold, a character has a MDT equal to his
Constitution, so tougher characters can take more damage without
needing to make that save.
There's a feat which lets you add +3 to that MDT, also. Seems a
pretty decent replacement for Toughness in a gritty campaign.
--
Scott Schimmel * Ex ignorantia ad sapientium;
http://schimmel.sandwich.net * ex luce ad tenebras.
"You really aren't normal, are you?" - Miki Koishikawa
Sir Bob
news:3e091aa0...@netnews.voicenet.com...
> rau...@canoemail.com (Rick Rauser) wrote:
> >Here's an easy way to make D&D (and any d20 game, for that matter)
> >gritty rather than cinematic. It comes, ironically, from a d20 game:
> >Call of Cthulhu d20. Simply adopt the CoC Massive Damage rule (see
> >CoC d20 rulebook, page 70), which states that if a character receives
> >10 hp of damage in a single blow, he must make a successful Fortitude
> >save (DC 15) or be killed instantly.
>
> The d20 Modern variant is a good choice, too. Instead of having a set
> Massive Damage Threshold, a character has a MDT equal to his
> Constitution, so tougher characters can take more damage without
> needing to make that save.
<snip>
d20 Modern actually codifies all three approaches - a "realistic" campaign
has a Massive Damage threshold of 10 and 15-point stat buy, a "heroic"
campaign has a Massive Damage threshold equal to the character's
Constitution and 25-point stat buy, and a "superheroic" campaign has a
Massive Damage threshold of 50 and 32-point stat buy.
- Sir Bob.
Arlyansor
news:2bb9652a.02122...@posting.google.com...
What you could do to preserve the 'threat' but to allow players some degree
of spontaneity is to adopt a sliding scale for Massive Damage. For a
really gritty feel, set it at say 20% of max HP. Of course, to really
scare the players, set it at 20% of CURRENT HP...
This would mean that as they got damaged, or fatigued, or scratched, or
whatever that it would be easier to deliver the final or killing blow.
Ashley.
Stephenls
> What you could do to preserve the 'threat' but to allow players some
> degree of spontaneity is to adopt a sliding scale for Massive Damage.
> For a really gritty feel, set it at say 20% of max HP. Of course, to
> really scare the players, set it at 20% of CURRENT HP...
> This would mean that as they got damaged, or fatigued, or scratched,
> or whatever that it would be easier to deliver the final or killing
> blow.
Under this system, first level characters would have to make a Fort save
or die pretty much every time they got hit with 2 or more points of
damage. And first level characters aren't known for their wonderful
Fort saves.
--
Stephenls
Geek
Bill Seurer
> Simply adopt the CoC Massive Damage rule (see
> CoC d20 rulebook, page 70), which states that if a character receives
> 10 hp of damage in a single blow, he must make a successful Fortitude
> save (DC 15) or be killed instantly. We're using this rule in my
> current D&D campaign and finding it really makes combat a scary thing
> (as it should be in a gritty/realistic campaign).
Gee, in a recent campaign I played in the barbarion could kill everyone
with one blow every time making him even "worse" than he already was as
a death dealing machine.
Sorry, that's a bad idea.
Sir Bob
news:09bO9.26$I3....@timmy.network1.net...
<snip>
But one day, when he wades blithely into battle expecting to kill the enemy
on one blow, the enemy is going to win initiative and pull the same trick on
*him*. And the player's next character will be accordingly more cautious.
;)
- Sir Bob.
Stephenls
> <snip>
> But one day, when he wades blithely into battle expecting to kill the
> enemy on one blow, the enemy is going to win initiative and pull the
> same trick on *him*. And the player's next character will be
> accordingly more cautious.
> ;)
Balance-through-fatality-escalation?
One way to do it, I suppose.
--
Stephenls
Geek
Sir Bob
news:3E09433E...@shaw.ca...
It's *gritty*, dammit! =P
- Sir Bob.
Hazel Adkins
That's what a lot of people want. It's the only way they ever get to
feel manly.
Ed Chauvin IV
>What you could do to preserve the 'threat' but to allow players some degree
>of spontaneity is to adopt a sliding scale for Massive Damage. For a
>really gritty feel, set it at say 20% of max HP. Of course, to really
>scare the players, set it at 20% of CURRENT HP...
>
>This would mean that as they got damaged, or fatigued, or scratched, or
>whatever that it would be easier to deliver the final or killing blow.
A better way to handle this is offered as a variant in the DMG. The Clobbered
rule. If a character takes more than 1/2 his current HP from a single blow he
is Clobbered. On his next turn he can only take a partial action.
I've been using this, and it makes the shallow end of the HP pool a place
characters don't like to fight in.
Ed Chauvin IV
--
It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion.
It is by the Beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed,
the hands acquire shaking, the shaking becomes a warning.
It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion.
"I always feel left out when someone *else* gets killfiled."
--Terry Austin
John Kim
>Here's an easy way to make D&D (and any d20 game, for that matter)
>character receives 10 hp of damage in a single blow, he must make
>a successful Fortitude save (DC 15) or be killed instantly.
I'm not really sure about this. For example, I've played
in 1st edition AD&D which had a number of "save or die" threats.
However, I never felt that they made the game particularly "gritty"
in the sense that GURPS or Runequest were -- though maybe this is
just a difference in the meaning of "gritty".
-*-*-*-*-*-*-
>
>We're using this rule in my current D&D campaign and finding it really
>makes combat a scary thing (as it should be in a gritty/realistic
>campaign). Even the party's 10th-level fighter is hesitating about
>running into the midst of a pack of orcs. Even with his 82 hit points,
>he realizes that he could actually die in combat (novel idea in D&D, eh?).
Well, that won't last much longer, though. He is pretty close
to being able to automatically make a DC 15 save, right? If he just
takes the "Great Fortitude" feat and maybe a level of Ranger, he will
be able to ignore the massive damage threat.
Nockermensch
Bah!
This only encourages Counterstrike tatics and makes magic more deadly.
Suddenly a 5d6 fireball (avg. 16.5 damage) is all a wizard to clean
the field. Use these rules in the D&D system "as is" and expect that
spellcasters own the game in high level play.
@ @ Nockermensch, always wary of rules that imbalance the game yet
more for wizards and their ilk.
Jürgen Hubert
"Rick Rauser" <rau...@canoemail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:2bb9652a.02122...@posting.google.com...
> There's been a bit of a discussion on the .gurps and .misc groups
> about "gritty" vs. "cinematic" systems, with d20 and gurps being the
> two candidates. Most of the posts have stated that d20 is unsuited
to
> gritty play, and more appropriate for cinematic.
Actually, the impression _I_ got from most of the threads was that
GURPS favors gritty play, and d20 cinematic, but that with the right
rules options you can do both with either.
And the massive damage rule from Cthulhu d20 was mentioned in the
thread as well.
- Jürgen Hubert
Urbis: http://juergen.the-huberts.net/dnd/urbis/index.html
Cryogenic Vaults: http://juergen.the-huberts.net/ts/vaults/index.html
Douglas Berry
jh...@darkshire.org (John Kim) warmed at our fire and told this tale:
>Rick Rauser <rau...@canoemail.com> wrote:
>>Here's an easy way to make D&D (and any d20 game, for that matter)
>>gritty rather than cinematic. [...] Simply adopt the CoC Massive
>>Damage rule (see CoC d20 rulebook, page 70), which states that if a
>>character receives 10 hp of damage in a single blow, he must make
>>a successful Fortitude save (DC 15) or be killed instantly.
>
> I'm not really sure about this. For example, I've played
>in 1st edition AD&D which had a number of "save or die" threats.
>However, I never felt that they made the game particularly "gritty"
>in the sense that GURPS or Runequest were -- though maybe this is
>just a difference in the meaning of "gritty".
Hm. I may juggle this around and see if I can find a happy
modification. Perhaps if you take 2/3rds of your total HP in one
attack you need to make a Fortitude saving roll or die, or something
like that.
--
Douglas E. Berry grid...@mindspring.com
http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as
when they do it from religious conviction."
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), Pense'es, #894.
Sir Bob
news:4769522f.02122...@posting.google.com...
In a modern setting, a spellcaster flinging Fireballs doesn't "dominate" in
this way any moreso than a soldier with a couple of hand grenades or a
gunslinger who's not afraid to go full-auto does. ;)
(And yes, you can have a spellcaster flinging Fireballs in d20 Modern, tho'
it requires quite a few levels in an optional advanced [prestige] class to
manage it. =P )
- Sir Bob.
Justisaur
Douglas Berry wrote:
>
> On Thu, 26 Dec 2002 07:00:03 -0000, a wanderer, known to us only as
> jh...@darkshire.org (John Kim) warmed at our fire and told this tale:
>
> >Rick Rauser <rau...@canoemail.com> wrote:
> >>Here's an easy way to make D&D (and any d20 game, for that matter)
> >>gritty rather than cinematic. [...] Simply adopt the CoC Massive
> >>Damage rule (see CoC d20 rulebook, page 70), which states that if a
> >>character receives 10 hp of damage in a single blow, he must make
> >>a successful Fortitude save (DC 15) or be killed instantly.
> >
> > I'm not really sure about this. For example, I've played
> >in 1st edition AD&D which had a number of "save or die" threats.
> >However, I never felt that they made the game particularly "gritty"
> >in the sense that GURPS or Runequest were -- though maybe this is
> >just a difference in the meaning of "gritty".
>
> Hm. I may juggle this around and see if I can find a happy
> modification. Perhaps if you take 2/3rds of your total HP in one
> attack you need to make a Fortitude saving roll or die, or something
> like that.
>
Maybe make it a fort save vs DC = to hp taken in damage, with a minimum
of 10.
- Justisaur -
check http://justisaur.tripod.com/well.htm for my encounter generator,
xp calculator, and other usefull documents.
Ed Chauvin IV
>In a modern setting, a spellcaster flinging Fireballs doesn't "dominate" in
>this way any moreso than a soldier with a couple of hand grenades or a
>gunslinger who's not afraid to go full-auto does. ;)
>
>(And yes, you can have a spellcaster flinging Fireballs in d20 Modern, tho'
>it requires quite a few levels in an optional advanced [prestige] class to
>manage it. =P )
Yes, but in D&D you can have that with just a few levels in a bog-standard core
class.
This would be a good option for a game where magic was rare and überpowerful,
though you'd have to manage both NPC and PC wealth more carefully to maintain
the parity between spellcasters and non-spellcasters. Just a few magic items
could have the party wiping out entire civilizations with relative ease.
Sir Bob
news:6h1n0vg0irljloice...@enews.newsguy.com...
> Mere moments before death, Sir Bob hastily scrawled:
> >In a modern setting, a spellcaster flinging Fireballs doesn't "dominate"
in
> >this way any moreso than a soldier with a couple of hand grenades or a
> >gunslinger who's not afraid to go full-auto does. ;)
> >
> >(And yes, you can have a spellcaster flinging Fireballs in d20 Modern,
tho'
> >it requires quite a few levels in an optional advanced [prestige] class
to
> >manage it. =P )
>
> Yes, but in D&D you can have that with just a few levels in a bog-standard
core
> class.
>
> This would be a good option for a game where magic was rare and
überpowerful,
> though you'd have to manage both NPC and PC wealth more carefully to
maintain
> the parity between spellcasters and non-spellcasters. Just a few magic
items
> could have the party wiping out entire civilizations with relative ease.
And what happens the first time someone fireballs the *PC*s, then? ;)
I've never understood this tendency to implicitly assume that PCs themselves
are somehow immune to the consequences of rules that apply to them just as
much as the rest of the world.
- Sir Bob.
Rick Rauser
> >
> > One way to do it, I suppose.
>
> > That's what a lot of people want. It's the only way they ever get to
> feel manly.
On the other hand, lots of other folks only feel manly if they can
munchkin up with a 20th level wizard who effortlessly shifts between
the material and ethereal planes.
Rick Rauser
rau...@canoemail.com
Wayne Shaw
wrote:
The PCs are, on the whole, much more likely to survive it just because
of the relatively high attributes...and in D20M, because they have
Action Points as a backup.
Sir Bob
news:r31p0vs2ksudfho6m...@4ax.com...
So? PCs are *supposed* to be more likely to survive - otherwise 50% of all
campaigns would end with the first combat encounter. I think you're seeing
an overpowering advantage where none exists.
- Sir Bob.
Wayne Shaw
wrote:
>> >And what happens the first time someone fireballs the *PC*s, then? ;)
>> >
>> >I've never understood this tendency to implicitly assume that PCs
>themselves
>> >are somehow immune to the consequences of rules that apply to them just
>as
>> >much as the rest of the world.
>>
>> The PCs are, on the whole, much more likely to survive it just because
>> of the relatively high attributes...and in D20M, because they have
>> Action Points as a backup.
>
>So? PCs are *supposed* to be more likely to survive - otherwise 50% of all
>campaigns would end with the first combat encounter. I think you're seeing
>an overpowering advantage where none exists.
>
> - Sir Bob.
>
Maybe yes, maybe no; I was simply noting it _does_ exaggerate the
difference. It _does_ apply less to the PCs than to many classes of
opponents. Whether that's a bad thing is an observer call.
Ed Chauvin IV
>"Ed Chauvin IV" <edc...@newsguy.com> wrote in message
>news:6h1n0vg0irljloice...@enews.newsguy.com...
>> Mere moments before death, Sir Bob hastily scrawled:
>> >In a modern setting, a spellcaster flinging Fireballs doesn't "dominate"
>in
>> >this way any moreso than a soldier with a couple of hand grenades or a
>> >gunslinger who's not afraid to go full-auto does. ;)
>> >
>> >(And yes, you can have a spellcaster flinging Fireballs in d20 Modern,
>tho'
>> >it requires quite a few levels in an optional advanced [prestige] class
>to
>> >manage it. =P )
>>
>> Yes, but in D&D you can have that with just a few levels in a bog-standard
>core
>> class.
>>
>> This would be a good option for a game where magic was rare and
>überpowerful,
>> though you'd have to manage both NPC and PC wealth more carefully to
>maintain
>> the parity between spellcasters and non-spellcasters. Just a few magic
>items
>> could have the party wiping out entire civilizations with relative ease.
>
>And what happens the first time someone fireballs the *PC*s, then? ;)
Um... They all die. What's your point?
>I've never understood this tendency to implicitly assume that PCs themselves
>are somehow immune to the consequences of rules that apply to them just as
>much as the rest of the world.
Yeah, why would you make such a silly assumption?
Sir Bob
<snip>
My point is that making combat more deadly in this fashion doesn't
automatically turn the PCs into invulnerable gods capable of "wiping out
entire civilizations with relative ease" - on the contrary, it forces them
to exercise extreme caution, lest they run afoul of the same mass-carnage
tricks they're pulling on the NPCs.
- Sir Bob.
Ed Chauvin IV
>> >> überpowerful,
>> >> though you'd have to manage both NPC and PC wealth more carefully to
>> >>maintain
>> >> the parity between spellcasters and non-spellcasters. Just a few magic
>> >> items
>> >> could have the party wiping out entire civilizations with relative
>> >> ease.
>> >
>> >And what happens the first time someone fireballs the *PC*s, then? ;)
>>
>> Um... They all die. What's your point?
>
><snip>
>
>My point is that making combat more deadly in this fashion doesn't
>automatically turn the PCs into invulnerable gods capable of "wiping out
>entire civilizations with relative ease"
Right. I was only pointing out that by both making combat more deadly and *not*
making magic items more rare would tend to favor the PCs. They are after all,
assumed to (and quite often do, due to hoarding) have more gear than NPCs of
similar level.
>- on the contrary, it forces them
>to exercise extreme caution, lest they run afoul of the same mass-carnage
>tricks they're pulling on the NPCs.
Yes, but who do DMs more often find has "too many" magic items when it's already
too late? Player Characters.
Robert Scott Clark
>> > I'm not really sure about this. For example, I've played
>> >in 1st edition AD&D which had a number of "save or die" threats.
>> >However, I never felt that they made the game particularly "gritty"
>> >in the sense that GURPS or Runequest were -- though maybe this is
>> >just a difference in the meaning of "gritty".
>>
>> Hm. I may juggle this around and see if I can find a happy
>> modification. Perhaps if you take 2/3rds of your total HP in one
>> attack you need to make a Fortitude saving roll or die, or something
>> like that.
>>
>
> Maybe make it a fort save vs DC = to hp taken in damage, with a minimum
> of 10.
>
Or you could just do away with inflationary HP and represent defensive
skill more eloquently.
Am I missing something here?
Sir Bob
> Mere moments before death, Sir Bob hastily scrawled:
> >> >> This would be a good option for a game where magic was rare and
> >> >> überpowerful,
> >> >> though you'd have to manage both NPC and PC wealth more carefully to
> >> >>maintain
> >> >> the parity between spellcasters and non-spellcasters. Just a few
magic
> >> >> items
> >> >> could have the party wiping out entire civilizations with relative
> >> >> ease.
> >> >
> >> >And what happens the first time someone fireballs the *PC*s, then? ;)
> >>
> >> Um... They all die. What's your point?
> >
> ><snip>
> >
> >My point is that making combat more deadly in this fashion doesn't
> >automatically turn the PCs into invulnerable gods capable of "wiping out
> >entire civilizations with relative ease"
>
> Right. I was only pointing out that by both making combat more deadly and
*not*
> making magic items more rare would tend to favor the PCs. They are after
all,
> assumed to (and quite often do, due to hoarding) have more gear than NPCs
of
> similar level.
I fail to see how having magic items is going to protect you from having to
make that saving throw. Sure, if you're dim enough to be handing out
Widgets of +10 to Fort Saves at every turn, I can see that, but otherwise...
> >- on the contrary, it forces them
> >to exercise extreme caution, lest they run afoul of the same mass-carnage
> >tricks they're pulling on the NPCs.
>
> Yes, but who do DMs more often find has "too many" magic items when it's
already
> too late? Player Characters.
Again, so what? doesn't really matter how many items the PCs have - they
can only *use* so many of them per combat round, and combats tend to be
depressingly short under the rules in question.
- Sir Bob.
Sir Bob
"Robert Scott Clark" <cla...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:Xns92F1CBF77B4A5cl...@65.82.44.9...
That 90% of the combat-system material would have to be completely reworked,
at which point it's easier to just switch to a different system which better
suits your needs?
- Sir Bob.
E. Deirdre Brooks
>
> That 90% of the combat-system material would have to be completely reworked,
> at which point it's easier to just switch to a different system which better
> suits your needs?
M&M does away with hit points while keeping much of the combat system
intact.
--
E. D. Brooks | kalima...@attbi.com | US2002021724
Listowner: Aberrants_Worldwide, Fading_Suns_Games, TrinityRPG
AeonAdventure | "Why, in my day, we used to fight the Lord of
Terror with nothing but a sharp stick!" -- www.reallifecomics.com
Hong Ooi
<kalima...@attbi.com> wrote:
>
>M&M does away with hit points while keeping much of the combat system
>intact.
And remember, always eat the red ones last!
--
Hong Ooi | "Have you no imagination?"
ho...@zipworld.com.au | -- NT
http://www.zipworld.com.au/~hong/dnd/ |
Sydney, Australia |
E. Deirdre Brooks
>
> On Sat, 28 Dec 2002 02:56:03 GMT, "E. Deirdre Brooks"
> <kalima...@attbi.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >M&M does away with hit points while keeping much of the combat system
> >intact.
>
> And remember, always eat the red ones last!
Eat the blue ones *first*. They may be intelligent.
Robert Scott Clark
Well, I never said I disagreed with the statement that D&D wasn't
"gritty". The system is designed to be epicly (is that a word) and
cinematically heroic, so, yes, you would need to replace a decent part of
the system in order to do gritty well.
Gritty isn't so much about random chance of dying, but instead it is
about the fact that the range of possible ability levels is not that
great. Insta-death chances increase random death without actually
narrowing the range very much, thereby creating a poor illusion of
grittyness.
Leszek Karlik
<kalima...@attbi.com> disseminated foul capitalist propaganda:
[...]
>> And remember, always eat the red ones last!
> Eat the blue ones *first*.
It's a good advice for men - they may be able to keep up.
:->
> E. D. Brooks
Leslie
--
Leszek 'Leslie' Karlik; Drone, Offensive, Special Circumstances, Contact.
GH/L/S/O d- s+:- a24 C++ UL+ P L++ E W-() N+++* K w(---) M- PS+(+++) PE
Y+ PGP++ !t---(++) 5++ X- R+++*>$ !tv b++++ DI+ D--- G-- e>+ h- r++(%) y+*
Wayne Shaw
wrote:
>> Right. I was only pointing out that by both making combat more deadly and
>*not*
>> making magic items more rare would tend to favor the PCs. They are after
>all,
>> assumed to (and quite often do, due to hoarding) have more gear than NPCs
>of
>> similar level.
>
>I fail to see how having magic items is going to protect you from having to
>make that saving throw. Sure, if you're dim enough to be handing out
>Widgets of +10 to Fort Saves at every turn, I can see that, but otherwise...
Items of Fire Resitance, items that boost Con, and items that boost
saves will all make this to one degree or another less necessary, and
less likely to fail.
Douglas Berry
Robert Scott Clark <cla...@mindspring.com> warmed at our fire and
told this tale:
>Or you could just do away with inflationary HP and represent defensive
>skill more eloquently.
>
>Am I missing something here?
I've always played with just increasing AC as level goes up.
Sir Bob
Even accounting for all this, I've yet to see any party where every single
character a Fort bonus in the double digits - at least, not until character
levels become sufficiently high that they're facing *other* save-or-die
scenarios on a semi-regular basis *anyway*.
- Sir Bob.
Jason Tamez
<kalima...@attbi.com> wrote:
>> >M&M does away with hit points while keeping much of the combat system
>> >intact.
>>
>> And remember, always eat the red ones last!
>
>Eat the blue ones *first*. They may be intelligent.
But which one will send me down the rabbit hole?
-- Jason
(replace the nonsense with druid816 to email me)
Wayne Shaw
wrote:
You ignored the items of Resistance, which can make it far less likely
you'll take enough damage to exceed your (boosted) Con threshold.
Let's look at a potential situation. Fireball incoming. An item on
you that gives you five points of fire resistance. An item that
boosts your Con to at least 15. You have a Reflex save to halve that,
which not everyone will make, but some will; then you get to take the
five points off; then you see if what's left equals fifteen; then make
your save. A typical opponent will likely only have two of those
steps to deal with. That makes a significant difference in the
surviveability amidst the two.
Ed Chauvin IV
>> >automatically turn the PCs into invulnerable gods capable of "wiping out
>> >entire civilizations with relative ease"
>>
>> Right. I was only pointing out that by both making combat more deadly and
>*not*
>> making magic items more rare would tend to favor the PCs. They are after
>all,
>> assumed to (and quite often do, due to hoarding) have more gear than NPCs
>of
>> similar level.
>
>I fail to see how having magic items is going to protect you from having to
>make that saving throw. Sure, if you're dim enough to be handing out
>Widgets of +10 to Fort Saves at every turn, I can see that, but otherwise...
Well, given that the game assumes PCs will have more gear than NPCs, the NPCs
are the ones more likely to be making the saving throw first. Killing your
opponent in the first round of combat is an amazingly good defense against
having to make that saving throw.
>> >- on the contrary, it forces them
>> >to exercise extreme caution, lest they run afoul of the same mass-carnage
>> >tricks they're pulling on the NPCs.
>>
>> Yes, but who do DMs more often find has "too many" magic items when it's
>already
>> too late? Player Characters.
>
>Again, so what? doesn't really matter how many items the PCs have - they
Though it's not just quantity, it's quality as well. [ed. I suppose I should
have left the original it said "too much magic when...", but I was being over
wary of keeping on the topic of items.]
E. Deirdre Brooks
>
> On Sat, 28 Dec 2002 11:01:59 GMT, "E. Deirdre Brooks"
> <kalima...@attbi.com> wrote:
>
> >> >M&M does away with hit points while keeping much of the combat system
> >> >intact.
> >>
> >> And remember, always eat the red ones last!
> >
> >Eat the blue ones *first*. They may be intelligent.
>
> But which one will send me down the rabbit hole?
As long as you start with blue, end with red, and discover the right
combination and eat five pounds at one sitting without deviation from
that sequence, you'll go down as many rabbit holes as you want.
Then again, it may just need the five pounds.
Sir Bob
So your objection is essentially that the proposed changes make moderate
levels of elemental resistance worth having? =P
- Sir Bob.
Hong Ooi
>Rick Rauser <rau...@canoemail.com> wrote:
>>Here's an easy way to make D&D (and any d20 game, for that matter)
>>gritty rather than cinematic. [...] Simply adopt the CoC Massive
>>Damage rule (see CoC d20 rulebook, page 70), which states that if a
>>character receives 10 hp of damage in a single blow, he must make
>>a successful Fortitude save (DC 15) or be killed instantly.
>
> I'm not really sure about this. For example, I've played
>in 1st edition AD&D which had a number of "save or die" threats.
>However, I never felt that they made the game particularly "gritty"
>in the sense that GURPS or Runequest were -- though maybe this is
>just a difference in the meaning of "gritty".
"Gritty" is one of those words that means what you want it to mean. It's a
bit like "munchkin" in that regard.
I like to define a "gritty" campaign as one where the PCs aren't expected
to solve all the problems they face. By problems, I mean not just proximate
threats like the Lich of the Dark Tower 10 miles thataway, but also the
general tone and theme of the game world. A gritty campaign is one where
the DM presents at least one ongoing threat or condition that can't be
addressed by a group of random individuals, whether by force of arms,
diplomacy, intrigue, or any other methods available to them.
Note that this definition doesn't have much to do with the lethality of the
game. You could have a high-level D&D campaign where PCs die all the time
(and high-level D&D _is_ lethal, in 3rd Ed). However, since the PCs are
expected to overcome the challenges they face (destroy the Dark Lord of
Poo-Bah, beat back the invading armies from the Plane of Pink Smurfs, or
whatever), it isn't gritty. Conversely, you could have a character
interaction-heavy campaign revolving around gangs in a large city. Even if
not much combat takes place, the characters know that most of the people
around them are never going to leave the ghetto, are never going to make it
to greater things, etc. (Whether this latter example is really "gritty"
depends on how much the campaign focuses on social issues. You could just
as easily have a non-gritty campaign set in the 'hood, by de-emphasising
the level of poverty and desperation, and concentrating on action instead
of bleakness.)
This definition also doesn't have much to do with the campaign's degree of
connectedness with the real world. A Spycraft campaign a la James Bond is
very much "real world", in the sense of not having much magic or ultra tech
(relatively speaking). However, the characters are likely to be larger than
life, and the challenges they face will be those appropriate to the action
movie genre: ones that can be surmounted over the course of a session, or a
campaign. On the other hand, a campaign taking place in the Warhammer
universe will probably feature lots of fantastic creatures like dark elves,
orks, undead and whatnot. It'll still be gritty, because even if the PCs
kill all the bad guys, there are more where they came from: you can't
defeat Chaos, only slow it down.
Personally, I prefer just going into dungeons, killing monsters and taking
their treasure. Much less complicated.
Wayne Shaw
wrote:
>> You ignored the items of Resistance, which can make it far less likely
>> you'll take enough damage to exceed your (boosted) Con threshold.
>>
>> Let's look at a potential situation. Fireball incoming. An item on
>> you that gives you five points of fire resistance. An item that
>> boosts your Con to at least 15. You have a Reflex save to halve that,
>> which not everyone will make, but some will; then you get to take the
>> five points off; then you see if what's left equals fifteen; then make
>> your save. A typical opponent will likely only have two of those
>> steps to deal with. That makes a significant difference in the
>> surviveability amidst the two.
>
>So your objection is essentially that the proposed changes make moderate
>levels of elemental resistance worth having? =P
Christ, why do people automatically assume I have a stake in the main
argument just because I'm addressing a subpoint?
I was simply noting that this sort of situation _can_ actually favor
the PCs simply because of magical capability. That's all.
JDJarvis
damage was turned into more of a Grievous Wound .
Use the 10 hp threshold. (make fort save or not depending on DM
taste)
Anyone suffering such a grievous wound has the following effects-
a -4 cumulative penalty to all d20 rolls .
lose 2hp a round (due to shock and/or blood loss)
folks administer fistrsaid by rolling agianst a DC of 10+(damage of
grievous wound) which slows the hp loss to 2hp a minute.
Any melee actions attempted will set the hp loss back to 2hp a round.
magical healing(if it exsists) inadequate to heal the entire wound
counts as first aid. Multiple castings of lowly healing spells will
restore hp lost but will not stop the hp loss.
A second succesful attempt at treament (that takes 2 full minutes)
will slow the hp loss to 2hp an hour. Any strenuous activity will set
the hp loss back to 2hp a round.
Further attempts at surgery (30 minutes each) that beat the DC by 5 or
more finally stop the hp loss and the wound is no longer consdered
dangerous after a day of rest, a success that doesn't beat the DC by
five will slow the hp loss to 2 hp a day. Any strenuous activity will
set the hp loss back to 2hp a minute.
You end up with a gritty setting where the wounded and allies really
have to worry about wounds since they hamper chances of success and
may result in death in the near future. You can also have bandits
crawling off to die in the woods and nobles languishing in bed for
days before successful treatment or death arrives.