Things I Think Of at Night! (RULES!) (Page 1 of 2)

I am starting to think that encumbrance should directly and significantly penalize combat stats like attack bonus and saving throws. This is drawn a little out of the 2nd AD&D rules. My thought runs thus: hit players with a penalty in an area they really care about (combat) and they will immediately respond by carrying less gear and making harder choices about what to carry... which is the whole point of encumbrance rules anyway, right?

I think an optional skills section, with a discussion about different skills that could be added to the game and how they might affect the game, would be more useful than just outright adding new skills.

Witch-Hunter concept sounds very interesting. Would you adjust the saving throws or create a subsystem around magic-resistance?

I don't quite see what the Conquistador concept offers that a Bushcraft and Stealth Specialist build wouldn't already offer.

Have you thought about moving demi-humans to the appendix and then using the extra space in the core rules section for a few of these new classes?

What about adding an option for Specialists to increase attack bonus by spending skill points? That allows you to cover all sorts of fighter/specialist hybrids without adding new classes. Fighters would still be unique in having more hit points, better saving throws, and combat options.

Last edited by CironeAE (2015-01-28 01:38:01)

Somehow I like the idea of Specialists being able to "specialize" in fighting among other things better... It just feels like the better compromise for my engineer brain. Say, an Attack modifier per 2 (or 3?) skill points, to a maximum of 6.

How exactly do you do that without replacing major part of the system? Given the quite different XP and saving throw progression charts for each class...

Last edited by Lepus (2015-01-28 07:56:16)

Speaking of taking the largest / smallest of a pool of dice, I've recently been looking into dice roll probability graphs, and other geeky game design stuff... and found THIS here:
Troll dice roll probability calculator

It might be known to everyone, or it might be new, anyway it's very useful in determining the effects of dice rolling mechanisms. Taking the largest of a pool significantly reduces the mean deviation of a throw. If a single die is picked, then the highest probability will be the highest result, while if the largest n dice, (like the 3 largest of a pool of 6), the result is a narrower bell curve skewed to the side.

Syntax examples for the calculator:

Least die of 2d8: least 1 2d8
Largest die of 2d8: largest 1 2d8
Largest 3 dice of 6d6: sum largest 3 6d6
And so on. There's also a documentation but it's quite massive. You can simulate entire combat actions and see the probabilities of outcomes.

Best throws at class level or best throws at character level? (Eg. does a Fighter 2 / Magic-User 3 use the best of the Fighter and Magic-User throws at 5th level, or uses the best of Fighter 2nd and Magic-User 3rd throws?)

* Constitution determines what die you use for rolling hit points.

I assume this is instead of a Con mod? Seems to punish people who have a high Con rather than another stat. Too random.

* Magic saving throws modified by Charisma.

Don’t mind this.

* Shields should give bonuses to parrying.

Might use it if the party was mostly made up of combat junkies, otherwise no.

* Encumbrance should affect initiative in some way.

Don’t have anything against the idea but it’s application could get messy.

* Not original, but all weapon damage is d8, with the "roll twice, take the lowest/highest" for certain kinds of weapons.

No. I like all the dice.

* Also thinking that by expanding the skill list a bit, we could give Fighters and Magic-Users some skill points to play with…

Tending to the no, fighters are great at fighting, MU’s cast, leave the specialists their deal.

* Witch-Hunter, Conquistador

If they had unique abilities, if your thinking of dropping the races, then maybe yes.

That's kind of the point. One thing I hate about the modifiers is they eliminate the lower possibilities. It's why Strength doesn't modify damage, because doing 1 point of damage should always be on the table.

(One thing I'm going to have in the Ref book is the idea that monsters shouldn't have multiple attacks, nor should their attacks do multiple dice of damage, just so even on a successful attack it's always possible for them to do only 1 point of damage.)

While the basic idea is nice I don't really like the idea of rolling multiple dice and choosing best or worst. It is just not... elegant. Also, this idea departs from the basic system in which the only thing you need to know about your character are stat modifiers and character class. Instead, you need to check also his Constitition die. If I'd go with this system I'd probably go with just four different dice: 1d4 (negative Constitution modifier), 1d6 (no Constitution modifier), and 1d8 (positive Constitution modifier). Magic-User would roll one die smaller, Fighter one die higher, and Dwarf two dice higher (so a Dwarf with positive Constitution modifier would roll 1d12).

Also, Magic-Users will have lower hit points than specialists even without specific penalties, as their level progress is slower. Eliminating Constitution modifiers plays in favour of weak characters as even they will get at least 1 HP per level.

Having multiple dice rolled and one choosed also makes it difficult to calculate the probabilities.

I like this idea, though it leaves Intelligence rather useless. (At least in our games Charisma has become one of the most important stats, as you will need to hire retainers if you want to survive.)

So that you could always choose to gain AC bonus against one attack per round? But wouldn't that make one-on-one combat quite a bit longer? Also, this would greatly harm characters who are facing multiple enemies at once, which means that flashy heroic deeds would be much more uncommon. Personally I like the way in which you just choose your combat style for one round and that's it. Elegant and simple, but still gives some tactical depth.

I like the idea of having different dice. Having multiple penalty dice, not so much. ENC 0 -> 1d12; ENC 1 -> 1d10, ENC 2 -> 1d8, ENC 3 -> 1d6, ENC 4 -> 1d4, overencumbered -> 1d2. These could be printed in the character sheet along with other encumbrance notes. Simple, fast, and having plenty of dice of different size and shape is always a plus.

Well, I don't really like having multiple dice rolls. Rolling just one dice is much simpler. Even rolling several dice and totaling them is better than choosing the best or worst from several rolls. And having multiple different dice is always cool.

I like the way in which every character class is specialized. That makes every character in the group important. And it is elegant, as are many things in LotFP. Giving skill points to Fighters and Magic-Users would leave Specialist more or less useless.

This sounds great! What would that mean, specifically? Good saving throws, at least, but what else? Some kind of counter-magic skills that improve that every level? Something like "Magic-User that tries to cast a spell on Witch-Hunter will take one d6 of damage per Witch-Hunter's level"?

Sounds good.

Would there be lawful Magic-Users? Or do you have to be chaotic in order to heal someone? Will there be (non-magical) first-aid if clerics are eliminated?

Last edited by Miihkali (2015-02-02 12:54:22)

Elegance is subjective, but I perceive it as the lowest needed amount of rules, exceptions, and rolls. It is simple to check the amount of dice from your sheet and then roll and pick the lowest or highest result... But it is even simplier to check which die to use and roll just once.

As for the probability machine you linked above, yes, it is easy to use, but I personally want to be able to comprehend probabilities inside my head instead of checking them from a table or something like that.

Design is always a compromise between simplicity and functionality.

Using a single die will always result in a flat distribution of probability. Using modifiers will always result in a simple shift in that flat distribution, making previously impossible results possible, and previously possible results impossible to attain.

If, as Jim expressed, one wants a system that always allows for a positive probability on all possible results, but shifts the probabilities around, one simply cannot make do with a single die.

That is a good personal argument, but hardly an objective one.

The only time you really need to comprehend the exact probability distributions is when you are designing a game (including die throw mechanics), or writing random tables. And you can perfectly afford using a computerized tool to help you in those specific cases.

And as I pointed out above, there is an inevitable compromise to be made between simplicity and functionality. You'd prefer simplicity to reign supreme. I think there is room to add some functionality without sacrificing actual ease of use (ie. how much work and tedium it is to actually play).

Last edited by Lepus (2015-02-09 21:49:31)

Pardon the thread necromancy, but I'm late to the game and I have to get this off my chest...

Jim - You aren't seriously considering these rules changes, are you? These seem more like after-the-fact "house rules" applied to what is, in my opinion at least, an already extremely well written and thought-out set of rules.

  * Constitution determines what die you use for rolling hit points...

I'm not sure how this is any "better" than the current rules. I understand your desire to see more "low" throws for hit dice, but they are there in the current rules... unless one is cheating.

  * Magic saving throws modified by Charisma...

Makes some sense I suppose, if your concept of how magic works in your game is that it is purely a function of the caster's will. But, given that the spell rules are decidedly old-school Vancian, it seems more appropriate to use Intelligence. (Personally I prefer no bonuses at all - use the tables as is. Although, I do like LotFP's take on Wisdom being sort of "luck" bonus for non-magical saves - perhaps have it apply to all saves?)

  * Shields should give bonuses to parrying...

Might be good to add some more options to combat, but I think this needs to be ironed out a bit first. Shields already give a bonus to AC... which is, in essence, a "parry bonus".

  * Encumbrance should affect initiative in some way...

I love the Encumbrance rules in LotFP; they're fast and easy. So why not make this one fast and easy too? Characters that are heavily encumbered or worse go last in the round... period.

  * Not original, but all weapon damage is d8, with the "roll twice, take the lowest/highest" for certain kinds of weapons.

Sort of like the original "all weapons do 1d6", but house-ruled to satisfy those players who complain that a halberd would do more damage than a prison shiv "in real life". I like using lots of different dice for weapon damage myself. One die, one number, done. And it makes the halberd-vs-shiv crowd happy.

  * Also thinking that by expanding the skill list a bit...

That word. Skillz. Blarg! I love the idea of the Specialist (reminds me of the "Other" career in classic Traveller), but I also like that those "skills" are isolated to the Specialist, and all other classes are 1 in 6 for anything.

On an opinionated side note: I could go on and on about how I feel that the hobby was destroyed in part by the idea of skills and customized characters, but I won't. I'll just say that the most memorable characters for me were not numbers on a character sheet; it was how they were played and how they developed in the campaign that made them memorable.

  * Witch-Hunter, etc...

I think these sorts of things are best left for a supplement. I think it makes it easier for the referee to preclude them if they aren't staring the players in the face on the pages of the core rule book. And for what it's worth, any imagined archetype can be played using just the four core "human" classes. A Witch-Hunter is just a Cleric or Fighter. If I wanted to be a Witch-Hunter, I would roll up a Cleric and say "I hate witches and demons, and I'm going to use a cross-bow... with silver bolts." Same goes for the "explorer", after all, isn't that what all the character do already?

=============
TL/DR section:

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

It's not "broke", per se, but the rules as written no longer reflects how I personally play the game.

I don't use demi-humans or Clerics at all.

So the choices for PCs are Fighters, Magic-Users, and Specialists. Some additional level of customization for PCs seems to be in order when the basic choices are cut down like that.