The Gaming Den

Posted: **Thu May 15, 2008 8:31 am**

So I've been throwing around various numeric rubrics for combat, trying to wrap my mind around a regression that would function properly. First, here are my preconceptions:

Having a 4e style slugfest with every single kobold warrior is frustrating and boring. It makes heroes seem unimpressive. I don't want to do it.
Having 3e style rocket launcher fights with boss monsters is frustrating and anti-climactic. It makes giant monsters seem like pussies. I don't want to do it.
I want to be able to sneak up on a sleeping Ogre and cut his throat.
I want mighty champions to survive having a gremlin stab them through a blanket.
I genuinely want combats to end Mortal Kombat/Sailor Moon style where major enemies explode in flashy colors.

So enter the concept of the Combat Advantage Number. If you have more of it, you can use more deadly attacks. If your combat advantage number is high enough, you can use SoD style one-shots on people.

CAN (Combat Advantage Number) goes up if:

You are higher level than your target.
You have positional advantage over a target.
Your target has a debilitating condition.
Your target is wounded.

Lesser attacks can't kill people in one shot. Hell, they probably can't kill people at all. If you are fighting opponents who are of sufficient might, you have to beat on them for quite a bit before you get enough CAN to take them down.

-Username17

Posted: **Thu May 15, 2008 9:15 am**

Could we just call it "CA"? The CAN is confusing in certain contexts since it's an actual word that people sometimes capitalize for emphasis.

Concepts 2 and 3 might be contradicting unless there is a plan for how stabbing helpless foes will work differently in TNE.
But if the latter holds true then 4 will be an issue, since it becomes a one-sided fight.
Hero CAN stab (and kill) the Ogre, but the Goblin CAN'T kill the hero. Why? Arbitration? Sleep in armor? More HP?

And will these flashy colors do anything other than cause seizures for epileptic Japanese kids? Will it be like Balor Death Throes?

Posted: **Thu May 15, 2008 9:36 am**

First all, I think abbreviations in the game should be pronounceable. The fact that you have enough CAN to kill the Demon Lord with your next attack is fun to say.

In any case, the point is that your target being asleep doesn't set your CAN to X, it adds X to your CAN. So if a mighty hero comes across a sleeping ogre he can gank it, but if the same mighty hero comes across the sleeping mighty dragon and gives it mighty whallop the dragon will awaken with a roar, wounded but alive. That's the key here. You shouldn't be wiping out powerful boss monsters with a sleep smack, just as a character being dropped shouldn't have their life thence ended by a vicious squirrel bite.

-Username17

Posted: **Thu May 15, 2008 10:14 am**

Great idea. I'd steal it myself if only there were any conceivable way to incorporate it into my current home brew.

So I say yeah, go with that.

Posted: **Thu May 15, 2008 10:20 am**

Potential concern -- it soudns like this system might lead to the biggest, shiniest attacks being used mostly on mooks, which is a kind of weird story. Like, why do we incinerate goblins with the bolts of shadowflame, but go after the boss with daggers?

Posted: **Thu May 15, 2008 11:09 am**

FrankTrollman wrote:So enter the concept of the Combat Advantage Number. If you have more of it, you can use more deadly attacks. If your combat advantage number is high enough, you can use SoD style one-shots on people.

Boolean wrote:Potential concern -- it soudns like this system might lead to the biggest, shiniest attacks being used mostly on mooks, which is a kind of weird story. Like, why do we incinerate goblins with the bolts of shadowflame, but go after the boss with daggers?

Are you saying that the most spectacular attacks only occur vs mooks? Or are you saying that an attack like Bolts of Shadowflame can be used on anyone, and that it only acts as a SoD when the CAN is high enough?

Some possible issues/problems and questions:

How detailed would the CAN calculations be? It shouldn't be too complicated or else it would bog the game down, especially if it is calculated on every attack, and it changes constantly due to fluctuating conditions.

Would every character have a CAN target number consisting of their base level, wounds, and debilitating conditions? Would attacking characters roll against it adding positional and level differences?

Do different monster types get different CAN bonuses? So being an Imp gives you nothing, while being a Master gives you a huge bonus?

How are you ensuring that high level monsters don't one-shot Pc's. Would Pc's get a CAN bonus similar to that of a Master?

Posted: **Thu May 15, 2008 5:01 pm**

Are people going to know how high their CAN is? Like, say you have your finishing move require a 5 CAN. Does the DM inform you when you get 5, calling out 'FINISH HIM!' ? Do you just have to guess when you get 5, and end up dealing only minor damage, or nothing, instead?

Posted: **Thu May 15, 2008 6:32 pm**

Boolean wrote:Potential concern -- it soudns like this system might lead to the biggest, shiniest attacks being used mostly on mooks, which is a kind of weird story. Like, why do we incinerate goblins with the bolts of shadowflame, but go after the boss with daggers?

That's how it works in God of War, is that a problem? But of course, you'll get killing blow attacks on major enemies later in the fight, you'll just be allowed to use them on mooks right off.

DC wrote:Are people going to know how high their CAN is? Like, say you have your finishing move require a 5 CAN. Does the DM inform you when you get 5, calling out 'FINISH HIM!' ? Do you just have to guess when you get 5, and end up dealing only minor damage, or nothing, instead?

I see two main ways to do it: one in which you have attack progressions where attacks automatically upgrade if your CAN is high enough, and the other where your CAN is simply a known quantity and you get to select abilities off the CAN limited list.

-Username17

Posted: **Thu May 15, 2008 6:44 pm**

So, you cast nuclear apocalypse on an enemy army. Your CN is different for different targets.

What we probably want is to have all the poor grunts splatter while Lord Rumsfeld walks out of the fireball only scathed. That already works with the normal system of soak rolls or hit points.

Do we use CNs with such area attacks at all? Does a sleeping Rumsfeld get killed in the blast?

Posted: **Thu May 15, 2008 6:49 pm**

Would CAN build up over the course of an encounter or generally be a static level-dependant value?

Posted: **Thu May 15, 2008 7:05 pm**

Okay. Sounds interesting.

I have to wonder at some points, though.

-Do enemies get a CAN? (Combat Advantage Score would be a better name, by the way?) I have a feeling it would work better if they didn't, since CAN (Or CAS)-related attacks would tend to be kickass, it'd be kinda game-ruining to have the enemies able to break them out and score a TPK easily.

-The God of War paradigm is a bit trickier. It works best if the players encounter large numbers of weak enemies in crowds as well as stronger enemies in smaller groups. That way, players get some attacks that do low-to-moderate damage over a wide area, thus clearing out the mooks, and have more focused moves to use on one enemy at a time--or smaller area of effect for more damage, whatever works. I can see a few ways different classes could handle it--the Barbarian goes nuts and starts flailing around, the wizard drops a fireball in the middle of the group, the rogue dodges through the crowd ganking people...

That's fine if we ever want to crank out God of War d20 (which I'm all for. Hack-and-slash, brutal combat with the occasional puzzle thrown in? Sweeeet!) I'm just not sure if it's something we should worry about integrating into TNE.

Posted: **Thu May 15, 2008 7:28 pm**

I like this idea/mechanic. I don't think CAN should matter against Imps though, they go down like cheap hookers whenever you beat their destruction threshold, generally one level appropriate attack, regardless of circumstances. More or less.

So when you start throwing around clouds of nuclear fire to clear out the mobs, Brutes might suffer a wound or a status effect or might shrug it off, boss enemies(whatever it was we were calling them) will basically just shrug it off unless you've already inflicted enough wounds or nasty enough status effects, even if you have beaten them down sufficiently the Imp killing attacks will only inflict wounds or further status effects; you'll need to use a CAN dependent attack to kill a Brute or a Boss. Generally CAN dependent attacks would be targeted or have rather small AoE.

Oh yeah, Brute and Boss monsters should have a CAN score, since they can actually kill the PCs. Imps don't need one though, if you want Imp only encounters to actually be able to kill the party just give Imps some kind of CdG type attack that can be used when the character accrues a certain number of wounds.

Posted: **Fri May 16, 2008 4:48 am**

With the proper numeric assignment, I think that horde monsters of level X could actually be the Glass Cannon monsters of level X-N. That is, if you face an enemy at one level who is deadly (that is, has a high starting offensive CAN modifier) and fragile (that is, has a low starting defensive CAN modifier), then a few levels later you can encounter them in large groups because they will have the CAN needed to take threatening attacks against you, but you will have the CAN against them to make their heads explode.

So Pixies are a glass cannon monster at their level, and a mook for a few levels later. That sounds about like what we want.

-Username17

Posted: **Fri May 16, 2008 6:35 am**

CAN works great as an acronym because you CAN open a CAN of whoopass on somebody.

Posted: **Fri May 23, 2008 11:30 am**

I like the idea. Its a good way to unify various mechanics for your attacks being better. It has the advantage of not pushing people off the RNG, something that makes to hit bonuses pretty much a non starter.

I would rather mooks not trigger the PC's most awesome attacks right off the bat though. I prefer the aesthetic where heroes use their awesome moves on the named NPCs. Mooks get weaker moves so the hero can so how awesomely badass they are by essentially bringing a knife to a gun fight and winning.

Posted: **Fri May 23, 2008 4:15 pm**

Draco_Argentum wrote: I would rather mooks not trigger the PC's most awesome attacks right off the bat though. I prefer the aesthetic where heroes use their awesome moves on the named NPCs. Mooks get weaker moves so the hero can so how awesomely badass they are by essentially bringing a knife to a gun fight and winning.

If you have CAN supply the deadliness of your attack rather than the attack itself, you can simply have your knife slaughter mooks like a gun would because you're just that awesome.

So at CAN1 a knife does a little bit of damage. Your equals do not go down easily to knives, nor do they go down easily to your death magic which slowly drains their strength.

At CAN2 the knife hurts really bad and the death magic is debilitating, so you can defeat weaker foes quickly.

At CAN3 you can run around slitting throats and casting Finger of Death and the nameless guards simply fall down because they suck.

Posted: **Fri May 23, 2008 5:53 pm**

First, I like that CAN sets lethality of all attacks, so Riddick can still kill you with a teacup.

I think the granularity should be higher than 1-3, though. Base CAN should be the difference between your level and their level, maxing at about +/-5. 0 is equals, diverging until you get to 4 (the lower is seriously outclassed) and 5 (the lower is inherently doomed). That fits the old CR model, where +4 is supposed to be a boss fight and +5 is supposed to be 'run!'

Then the other bits, like positioning, debilitation, and sleep-stabbing, each have specific modifiers, depending on how you want to tune it. In a non-cinematic game sleep-stabbing would be like +9 or +10, so even a peasant could knife a mighty warrior to death with little difficulty. If you make it more like +5 (the point at which a gremlin sleep-stabbing a great warrior threatens as much as an equally-great warrior attacking him in open combat) that's probably closer to what Frank wants.

Posted: **Fri May 23, 2008 5:58 pm**

I used 1-3 as an example; going for 4 or 5 would likely be much better.

Posted: **Fri May 23, 2008 8:44 pm**

Here's a problem; will the benefits of CAN be a multiplier or a scaled value?

For instance, if a mighty L6 general is confronted by sneaky L1 back stabbers while on his highhorse in the midst of battle, does he get something like x5 normal damage to slap them with his cutlass, or X damage multiplied by level difference?

Posted: **Mon Jun 30, 2008 6:58 am**

For ease of reference, I'm putting Frank's most recent CAN notes here.

Frank Trollman wrote:So to pull numbers out of the air, imagine for the moment that you had 3 tiers of damage before dropping, and each of them were 4 numbers long. Each of them heaps a +1 CAN bonus on you, and they are cumulative. The difference being that they come harder and harder to remove. Now let's say that Dropping comes at 20. Meaning that:

* On an 8-11 you get scuffed for a +1 to enemy CAN.
* On a 12-15, you get scuffed and bruised, for a +2 to enemy CAN.
* On a 16-19, you get scuffed, bruised, and wounded, for a +3 total to enemy CAN.
* On a 20+ you drop.

* A scuffed condition can be removed by you spending an action to catch your breath, which makes you have your guard down for a turn. During that period, enemies have +1 more CAN against you, and afterwards both the guard down and a scuffed go away.
* A bruised condition can be removed by using various abilities, most of which have charge limits or recharge times.
* A wounded condition cannot be removed in combat under any circumstances.

Then, when you face lesser enemies like hobgoblin soldiers, you start with a +5 CAN on them. That means that initially you're going to be dropping them on a 15 (almost 10% of the time), and you'll be progressing on every hit (literally a 3+ to cause the least of the damage effects). Chances are you'll drop the target in 3-4 hits.

On substantially lesser opponents, like grunts, you'll have a +10 CAN, meaning that you drop them on a 10+ and provide at least a second tier damage effect on any blow that doesn't drop them in one. You'll take them down in a hit or two almost every time.

On imps and wisps, you have a +15 or higher CAN, meaning that you drop them on virtually every hit, and with a second hit you are genuinely guaranteed to drop them.

Now obviously, these numbers can be fiddled with and probably should be. If these numbers are too high, for example, one could very plausibly drop to 2d6 and all the CAN numbers would get adjusted accordingly.

I don't terribly understand what would constitute a flashy attack, or even a Save-or-Die, unless it's just an eloquent way of describing a high-CAN attack. And if the flashy attacks aren't the high-CAN, what kind of mechanical benefit would we apply to consider them flashy other than flavour-text?

There was also talk of attack bonuses & AC being a static value, not subject to change as levels rise. This will largely imply amongst players, who have a very limited imagination at times, that every hero becomes a walking pincushion that will exceed even the most extreme parodies concerning HP; strolling towards the enemy looking like a hedgehog of arrows and a dozen axes stored in his spine.

It will also mean that the 'dodgey' archetype reaches his prime at level 1, as will the 'accurate' archetype, and needs to start looking at thematic abilities for the rest of their career. We can mitigate this by having abilities which just negate penalties, rather than grant bonuses, which end up the same but without knocking anyone off the RNG. In order for this to work, though, we need to have healthy list of situational modifiers to attack/AC.

Posted: **Mon Jun 30, 2008 7:25 am**

virgileso wrote:For ease of reference, I'm putting Frank's most recent CAN notes here.

That's essentially the entire Effect Roll.

I don't terribly understand what would constitute a flashy attack, or even a Save-or-Die, unless it's just an eloquent way of describing a high-CAN attack. And if the flashy attacks aren't the high-CAN, what kind of mechanical benefit would we apply to consider them flashy other than flavour-text?

Be Gone! (Encounter): Gain +4 CAN for a Tier 4 Effect to take effect.

There was also talk of attack bonuses & AC being a static value, not subject to change as levels rise. This will largely imply amongst players, who have a very limited imagination at times, that every hero becomes a walking pincushion that will exceed even the most extreme parodies concerning HP; strolling towards the enemy looking like a hedgehog of arrows and a dozen axes stored in his spine.

I think there was an Irish mythological hero who regularly did that sort of thing. Supposedly.

Posted: **Mon Jun 30, 2008 7:30 am**

I know of an Irish hero that spewed as much blood as you'd ever see from a Kill Bill movie, just from being angry, but that is but one example; and I doubt any would appreciate having EVERY potential character be Cuchulainn, without choice.

Posted: **Mon Jun 30, 2008 11:32 am**

I've read everything I can find, and I'm still not quite clear on the steps. I get the 3d6 damage test, but I'm uncertain of how the initial attack resolution phase works...

In the example of a sword-swing, are we using a d20 + [modifiers] vs. [defence rating] mechanic to determine whether or not the attack hits in the first place, or are we going with 3d6 all the way? Probably this stuff was in the Basic Dice Rolling section of the wiki, but that has been defaced

Additionally, what sort of scale of numbers are we talking about with Hit Points and Wounds vs. the amount of damage done by a weapon or spell?

Posted: **Mon Jun 30, 2008 12:35 pm**

virgileso wrote:I know of an Irish hero that spewed as much blood as you'd ever see from a Kill Bill movie, just from being angry, but that is but one example; and I doubt any would appreciate having EVERY potential character be Cuchulainn, without choice.

Well, there's also The Green Knight, and of course Bishma who dies only after he is impaled by so many arrows that he is no longer able to touch the ground. It's a fairly common Bronze Age trope actually. Since that's a period when armor reigned over weaponry, it's hardly surprising to get a lot of stories of people wounded like a million times before falling.

Probably this stuff was in the Basic Dice Rolling section of the wiki, but that has been defaced

Yeah, I put it up, and it gets defaced again. No fucking idea why the spambots decided to give their love pump to that page. I'm strongly in favor of just orphaning it and starting that section over on a new link.

In any case, the basic idea is that to-hit you roll a d20 and add bonuses and penalties based on positional advantage, the target's current conditions, and the appropriateness of the attack to the defenses of the target. But not to the level of the target.

-Username17

Posted: **Mon Jun 30, 2008 1:08 pm**

I'm sure there's good game theory for why damage scales and hitting doesn't, but from an actual play perspective if hitting is the cover charge that keeps out the riff-raff, you cut down on the number of rolls people have to make when fighting inferior opposition.

i.e. if 20 accuracy-screwed Goons each hit on a 20, you roll the dice, one of them hits, and you roll damage 1 time which will probably deal injury. But if 20 damage-screwed Goons each hit on an 11, you roll the dice, 10 of them hit, and then you have to make 10 damage rolls (and if 9 of those fail you have a similar threat from the same number of Goons).

In terms of table-experience is there a reason to prefer the latter set-up?

The Gaming Den

TNE: Combat Advantage Number

TNE: Combat Advantage Number