The Gaming Den

Bigdy McKen wrote: ↑

Wed May 21, 2025 10:10 pm

2) Are there any systems out there that do light V heavy attacks well? Meaning both are valid life choices.

Does it count is the choice is multiple light attacks vs one heavy attack? The former for dealing more damage, say to mooks or unarmoured opponents, and the latter to a more armoured one? But that means both are valid choices at different times, at a given time there's one one valid choice.

Bigdy McKen wrote: ↑

Thu May 22, 2025 2:10 am

Does your system have something like low-power mooks for throwaway encounters, or is it solely focused on 1v1 duels between equal combatants?

It has ways for resolving combat for people of different realms.

By the nature of the genre you do occasionally want to blow off 10 to 30 guys below you or 5 people just below you, or team up with three friends to defeat a higher realm opponent.

The way it works is by having round resolution involving the lowest realm combatants declare techniques, then going up the realm order to the highest realm person who declares and then acts, amd them going down the action resolution chain.

So in addition to dice advantages higher realm characters can perfectly respond in advance.

This means if a character is higher level they can probably hit all the mooks on round 1 before anything happens (though this almost certainly doesn't kill them) or can create a wall technique to prevent all the enemy attacks.

Thaluikhain wrote: ↑

Thu May 22, 2025 2:47 am

Does it count is the choice is multiple light attacks vs one heavy attack? The former for dealing more damage, say to mooks or unarmoured opponents, and the latter to a more armoured one? But that means both are valid choices at different times, at a given time there's one one valid choice.

I was thinking along those lines, yeah. The ability to perform two small attacks vs. one big attack. What I want to avoid is that thing where multiple instances of stacking passive damage bonuses is the clear winner. Damage reduction would probably mitigate that.

What I’m thinking is weapons come in three sizes: light, medium, heavy, and they just offer a static bonus to damage.

Light weapons can only make light attacks. They deal+1 damage.
Medium weapons can make light OR heavy attacks. They deal +2 damage.
Heavy weapons can only make heavy attacks. They deal +4 damage.

Light attacks get 1 damage die (base); heavy attacks get 2 damage dice (base).

Kaelik wrote: ↑

Thu May 22, 2025 3:04 am

It has ways for resolving combat for people of different realms.

By the nature of the genre you do occasionally want to blow off 10 to 30 guys below you or 5 people just below you, or team up with three friends to defeat a higher realm opponent.

The way it works is by having round resolution involving the lowest realm combatants declare techniques, then going up the realm order to the highest realm person who declares and then acts, amd them going down the action resolution chain.

So in addition to dice advantages higher realm characters can perfectly respond in advance.

This means if a character is higher level they can probably hit all the mooks on round 1 before anything happens (though this almost certainly doesn't kill them) or can create a wall technique to prevent all the enemy attacks.

That makes a lot of sense. I’ve seen your initiative paradigm play out in a lot of fightin’ anime. Very on-genre.

Bigdy McKen wrote: ↑

Thu May 22, 2025 2:10 am

Were these zones just the encountered area separated into quadrants, or was it FATE style zones (ie bar brawl. Common room=zone, behind the bar=zone, north balcony=zone, south balcony=zone, kitchen/larder=zone)?

They weren't quadrants, but more like 'elevation lines'. Like the area was generally sloping up, so the bottom left corner of the map was a zone, then there was a band that was zone 2, then a weirdly shaped y that made up zone 3, and the two other zones were 4 and 5. Something like that. I think the idea was to sort of represent the terrain. So probably more like FATE style? I don't know how Fate would do a wide open field, so my guess is someone was trying to apply that type of logic to an open space???

Bigdy McKen wrote: ↑

Thu May 22, 2025 5:06 am

What I’m thinking is weapons come in three sizes: light, medium, heavy, and they just offer a static bonus to damage.

Light weapons can only make light attacks. They deal+1 damage.
Medium weapons can make light OR heavy attacks. They deal +2 damage.
Heavy weapons can only make heavy attacks. They deal +4 damage.

Light attacks get 1 damage die (base); heavy attacks get 2 damage dice (base).

So we really wanted to encourage sneaky rogue type characters to use daggers rather than greatswords when dealing sneak attack, but we didn't want to make it so a greatsword COULDN'T get sneak attack.

We decided that ANYONE using a light weapon can add their Dexterity to damage in the same situations as Sneak Attack (opponent is flat-footed, or sufficient flanking, etc). And it sneaks with sneak attack. Light weapons also use Dexterity for attack bonus. If you're a high Dex character, a light weapon makes a lot of sense.

A one-handed weapon gets better base damage than a light weapon. Obviously with a one-handed weapon you can also use a shield. One-handed weapons can be used in two-hands (but don't have to be) so you can pick up 1 1/2x STR.

Two-handed weapons require 2-hands to wield, get the highest base damage, and get the 1.5x STR all the time. If you don't care about a shield and you're not a high Dex character, using a really big weapon makes sense.

Altogether, this has given various players enough reasons to differentiate and use different category of weapons in addition to different types.

Bigdy McKen wrote: ↑

Wed May 21, 2025 10:10 pm

2) Are there any systems out there that do light V heavy attacks well? Meaning both are valid life choices.

I think Nimble 2 does this pretty well. This is my preferred 5e replacement at this point (though Shadow of the weird wizard is still in the running). https://nimblerpg.com/pages/nimble-2

There is no to-hit roll. Instead you just roll damage with a variable size die depending on weapon - d4 daggers, d12 great axes, etc. A 1 on a damage die indicates a miss, and a maximum indicates a critical hit, which explodes the die and bypasses armor (which is a big deal). So different sized weapons let you slide along a spectrum from unreliable but armor piercing to reliable higher average damage.

deaddmwalking wrote: ↑

Thu May 22, 2025 1:28 pm

They weren't quadrants, but more like 'elevation lines'. Like the area was generally sloping up, so the bottom left corner of the map was a zone, then there was a band that was zone 2, then a weirdly shaped y that made up zone 3, and the two other zones were 4 and 5. Something like that. I think the idea was to sort of represent the terrain. So probably more like FATE style? I don't know how Fate would do a wide open field, so my guess is someone was trying to apply that type of logic to an open space???

Yeah you pretty much guessed it.

Most games I’ve seen that reference “zones” are actually talking about range bands.

Zones in FATE are more narrative focused rather than tracking square footage, so if you staged a FATE combat in your dentists office the zones might be: waiting room; behind the check-in desk; hallway; exam rooms 1,2 and 3. A big open field would probably be divided up by elevation zones like the game you played.

deaddmwalking wrote: ↑

Fri May 23, 2025 4:56 pm

So we really wanted to encourage sneaky rogue type characters to use daggers rather than greatswords when dealing sneak attack, but we didn't want to make it so a greatsword COULDN'T get sneak attack.

We decided that ANYONE using a light weapon can add their Dexterity to damage in the same situations as Sneak Attack (opponent is flat-footed, or sufficient flanking, etc). And it sneaks with sneak attack. Light weapons also use Dexterity for attack bonus. If you're a high Dex character, a light weapon makes a lot of sense.

A one-handed weapon gets better base damage than a light weapon. Obviously with a one-handed weapon you can also use a shield. One-handed weapons can be used in two-hands (but don't have to be) so you can pick up 1 1/2x STR.

Two-handed weapons require 2-hands to wield, get the highest base damage, and get the 1.5x STR all the time. If you don't care about a shield and you're not a high Dex character, using a really big weapon makes sense.

Altogether, this has given various players enough reasons to differentiate and use different category of weapons in addition to different types.

Two of the pet peeves I have about weapon rules in D&D5 are:

1. Versatile weapons. There’s not much insensitive to use a long sword two-handed. Either you want to wear a shield, or you want to just swing a great sword.

2. Finesse weapons. This shouldn’t be a thing at all. Just make it so ALL light weapons can use DEX instead of STR. Even for stuff like handaxes and clubs. Nightwing and Daredevil dual wield clubs, and they’re both obviously DEX based.

Seems like your paradigm allows for this better than wotc’s.

Was there ever MtG fan or one off format rules for creatures moving from zone to zone? Like if your attacking creatures are now in your opponent's 'half of the battlefield' and they stay there.

Multiple players, planeswalkers, create different targets of attack so that's sort of like different battlezones to move into, but surviving creatures don't 'stay' in a zone and are reset back to freely attack anyone else next turn.
---

Warhammer Invasion card game has three zones that players place units in that can defend it from taking damage. Attackers and defenders both choose who they damage.

https://images-cdn.fantasyflightgames.c ... l_file.pdf

40k Conquest card game has multiple planet cards to fight over, deploying units there, and secretly determining where their warlord is going (When warlord is defeated player loses). Ranged units have like a... "First strike phase" where players alternate between which ranged units attack which other unit on the planet. After that non [Ranged] units alternate attacking.
https://images-cdn.fantasyflightgames.c ... ay-web.pdf

Bigdy McKen wrote: ↑

Wed May 21, 2025 10:10 pm

I’ve got TWO annoying game questions.

1) Are there any systems out there that do abstract movement WELL? That is to say, accounting not only for how far characters can move, but also things like area effects, environmental hazards, etc.

2) Are there any systems out there that do light V heavy attacks well? Meaning both are valid life choices.

1) P&P has rules for abstract movement, area attacks, and environmental hazards. Because there are so many different ways of getting from one place to another, and environments are limited only by imagination, resolving movement challenges is "Moving one range class relative to some person or object takes two pages unless you're using a trait at 6d or higher." This all already assumes that you're moving around in a location with structures or terrain that you have to navigate around. Then there is a section on chases, where you make contested movement challenge rolls in a contest, and also being underwater imposes certain restrictions unless you have the Swimming power. Fortunately the resolution system makes it easy for the GM to apply whatever sort of penalties are appropriate for any travel method and situation, like fliers taking a penalty in a strong wind, but burrowers being unaffected, for example. In one game, where the heroes were battling viper demons in a cave complex where the floor was riddled with acid pools, each turn I let players choose between focusing on avoiding the hazards, in which case they had a -1 to attacks and defenses but didn't have to roll against the hazards, or focusing on the demons, in which case they had to roll a defense against the hazard's rank at end of turn. The ceiling was fairly low, so movement options were limited.

2) There are a couple of methods. There's Overkill, which lets you buy Might ranks at half price, and may allow you to exceed the trait cap at the GM's discretion, but in exchange active defenses are twice as effective against any attack you make using Might (this includes any close quarters attack, unarmed or with a weapon, as well as any close combat power like Strike or Martial Arts). The Penetrating pro makes an attack much more effective against passive defenses, but makes it more expensive. The Weak con makes an attack less effective against passive defenses, but also makes the attack much cheaper. Armor Piercing makes an attack twice as effective against characters wearing mundane armor. Characters always use the best defense available to them, so usually the target of a Penetrating attack will use an active defense, the target of a Weak attack will use a passive defense, etc. (unless their only alternative defenses are very low rank relatively, of course). So these options don't guarantee a character will always have unreasonably effective attacks against every foe. There are also options like All-out Attack, which is available to everyone for no cost, and makes an attack stronger against any sort of defense, but makes you much more vulnerable until your next turn.

Abstract movement...

The One Ring RPG (lord of the rings) has declaring 'stance' at start of a combat round, it determines initiative and if you have enough people blocking for someone to take a rearward stance to avoid melee.

Forward Stance: +2 damage dealt, +1 damage taken, everyone taking a Forward Stance acts first.
Open Stance: Neutral, acts after the previous stance.
Defensive: -damage taken, -damage dealt.
Rearward: Can't be reached by melee only ranged attacks can hit them. Can't attack in melee but can use ranged.

You need at least two people in forward, open, or defensive for a party member to take a Rearward stance, and if you're outnumbered you can't take a rearward stance unless you're in a narrow corridor up to GM arbitration.

Ok, rather general question, am looking for interesting or novel answers rather than ones that always apply.

What makes a +1 sword +1? If it just is easier to hit with and do more damage with, that sounds a lot like just a nicely made one, but then there are monsters that you need a certain bonus to be able to harm, so it's not just that. I could see it being more hurty and more able to harm resistant monsters due to magic, but being easier to hit with seems different. I like the idea of the sword somewhat swinging itself, though the +1 effect doesn't seem right, perhaps you take the average to hit roll of the wielder and, say, the 10th rank fighter whose soul is in the sword. I also like an idea that came up in the Xanth series, that the sword is lighter when you swing it, but heavy when it hits someone, though, again, mechanically, be different from a +1. Not sure of a good in-universe explanation for a +1 as stated.

Likewise, the idea of magic words...sometimes if you get the wording wrong you get the spell wrong, which seems as though an infinite amount of chimps on typewriters could come up with all possible spells. I sorta like the idea that spirits or whatever are legally bound to help you if you cite the correct laws at them or something.

Obviously a sword that gets +1 attack and damage is 'better' than a sword that doesn't. Since it provides a +1 regardless of whether being wielded by an assistant pig-keeper or a veteran general it wouldn't really make sense that the sword wields itself - there are such swords and that is the dancing property. But it's not too different than 'aid another'. Modern cars have safety features that include steering you back into the middle of the lane (but can be overcome by holding the wheel tightly). The idea that the sword 'helps' hold a position (resisting being knocked out of the way) allowing you to continue the attack you planned seems like a viable explanation.

In our homebrew, a masterwork weapon provides +1 attack/damage, so no magic is required. It is possible to make a sword generically 'magical' which allows it to damage creatures that are immune to normal weapons (and it does extra damage to extraplanar creatures in our game), but we really like items that SEEM magical. Rather than simple numeric increases, we give weapons properties. Of course there are all of the 3.x style properties like flaming or icy or keen, but we're pretty keen on putting basically any spell in a weapon. We have a 2nd level spell that let's you cause a minor earth-tremble in short range - creatures that fail a Strength check are knocked over. That's absolutely fine to put in a warhammer. Essentially they're like 'spell-completion items', but having the item puts it on your spell list. All spell activations, class ability activations (like rage) and triggered abilities from feats use the same resource (mana) so it's very easy for a Berserker to use this hammer - it basically means they're not able to activate a rage quite as often. We often stack several thematically related abilities on the same weapon; some may be 'always active' and some may require activation. Adding an ability that made it harder to be bull-rushed or tripped (or knocked down) on that same weapon would be totally appropriate. Giving abilities rather than numeric bonuses makes weapons more interesting, and lets us put the ABILITY to use a weapon firmly in the character's hands.