I'm trying to add as little mechanical weight as possible with the schools. Only works for tricks that armour won't protect against.Īnother thing you can do with ascending AC and which is like your "stances" idea, is that when you start your round, you decide how many points of your attack bonus are applied your actual attack roll the rest improve your AC for the round. This is something you can do instead of a normal attack, so it has an opportunity cost: you've a round's chance to damage the opponent with a normal attack. If you exceed to opponent's roll by a certain margin (say, 5), you disarm him, trip him, pin his cloak to a tree, throw sand in his eyes or whatever. Assuming ascending AC (you'd need to move the numbers around a bit for descending AC), both you and your target make an attack roll but instead of comparing it to the other's AC, you compare the attacks to each other. One easy thing that can cover a variety of combat maneuvres is an opposed attack roll. But instead of complicating things with multiple actions per round, or even some spot accounting, you just figure out if your rolled a modified 20+ and just choose a maneuver (or you could roll a d6, I suppose).Ī big question is how much mechanical complexity you want with various schools, techniques and the like. Different styles have different maneuvers, and like a stance, you'd have to choose your style at the beginning of the round. Keeping the choice load light avoids choice paralysis. The idea here is that it keeps to the abstract nature of D&D combat, but puts a touch of swashbuckling dynamism in there.
Tag: You force a Morale roll from your opponent. Mastery: by 2 categories, with no minimum.ĥ. Dodge: You reduce your opponent’s attack damage by 1 die type (minimum d4). Riposte: If your opponent misses you on his attack, you may make an immediate counterattack, dealing an additional d4 damage. Footwork: –2 to your opponent’s next Attack roll. Here's an example of a fighting style: the Spanish Style.ġ. If the result is a natural 20, you get to do both. On a successful attack roll, if the result is a modified 20, the combatant may choose to roll two damage dice, taking the better of the two, or perform one of his Style's maneuvers. When a character qualifies to learn a new school, he can instead choose to master in one he already has. The Fighter would be the most flexible, though the Scoundrel (Thief) would be no slouch either.įighting Styles have two ranks: Journeyman and Master. It also borrows a bit from the AGE game (Stunts).Īs this is a swashbuckling game, most of the classes will have access to Fighting Styles. Borrows a bit from Honor and Intrigue, which should make Bren happy. So here's an example of what I'm thinking about right now. Maybe a Deceptive Stance to include a feint. That fits into the basic framework nicely, I think. Total Defense: No attack allowed, high bonus to AC At the beginning of the round you choose a stance that gives you conditional bonuses for the round:Īggressive Stance: Lower guard for an all out attackĭefensive Stance: Reduce to hit to increase AC These are simple and don't interfere with the flow of combat at all. One thing I'm thinking of doing is adding in Witch Hunter's stances.
I have some ideas, but I'd like to hear what others with more experience think. So how can we add slashes, lunges, feints, and other flashy maneuvers into the mix. A lot happens in a 10 second combat round, all of which is abstracted down to a single "to hit" and "damage" roll. Roll initiative and just call for Ranged, Magic, and Melee in that order. I like combat in B/X because its fast and regimented. Specifically, how do you add fighting styles and maneuvers into D&D's abstract combat round framework. So now that classes are on the right track, let's turn to adding a dash of swashbuckling combat to B/X D&D.
0 kommentar(er)
