I always tell my players: if you have an idea, just say so. You can probably at least make an attempt. Also, only one chandelier. Jumped from a banister to the top of a big wooden chandelier, and used it to jump onto a bookcase on the opposite wall. That tiny moment of awesome was encouraged by another DM with that same mentality.
For Bushido, I have houseruled for iaijutsu duels, creating a defenive stance, quick stance, and strong stance along with three possible action: Measure Opponent, Change Stance, Strike, and Bow Out. Each stance has special bonuses to attack and/or damage and/or initiative but also stand in a rock-paper-scizzors relationship to each other. To make sure that there is no meta gaming, the duelants use cards/tiles to secretly decide their actions and reveal at the same time.
I like when games compromise and provide you a list of fundamental maneuvers (throw/catch, grapple etc.) that are quite generic but well described, e.g. "throw any object below weight X up to distance Y", and then, clearly in the rules, encourage players to use these creatively with some examples e.g. "throw can be used to, for example, throw a torch to set fire on something or throw dirt in the face of an enemy to blind them".
Seven chandeliers here. Forty years of gaming in multiple systems, as a player and DM. Learned a long time ago that if they want to try, determine the kind and difficulty of the check as opposed to just saying no not allowed.
DCC is the main game I run. And typically newer players do not use it too often. Usually, once they're told "you can't use a mighty deed to instantly decapitate" they're put off by it... Until they fight a orc that also has mighty deeds and he's going crazy! I love the deeds because they're so abstract, but that's also it's double edge.
I've recently gotten into a Samurai game called "Chanbara" that has something interesting about it. There is a second attack type vs a second defense number called Tactical Attack/Tactical Defense. These two are used when doing non-damage effects. Disarm, tripping, grabs, pushes, stuns, ect. Also, these numbers use your intelligence stat and wisdom stats, so there is a use for so-called "Dump Stats" that a warrior doesn't usually need. If your character is not very wise, they're vulnerable to trick moves.
Among other things, I use Fantasy Trip's drive back rule: if you strike someone in melee and you take no damage yourself, at the end of the round you can push your enemy back 1 space (and move into the space he left, if you want). This helps to make fights positionally dynamic.
@9:03 This phenomenon I believe is linked to computer/video RPGames. Because through that medium you can only ever do what you have a button/icon for. So people get in the mindset of toggling and button spamming their abilities from a given parameter. Thrown into a TTRPG, and their character sheet becomes their 'computer interface', and so only the things listed are the button/icons that they can choose. I like to tell players "Don't look at your character sheet as something that limits things you can do. Look at your character sheet as things you might do well." Meaning to think outside the character sheet.
Yes, but if you don’t make options that aren’t on their character sheet as strong as the options which are, why would they use them? Why do something creative for potentially 3d6 damage when I can cast Fireball for 8d6?
@@punishedwhispers1218 Play like what? Using their consistent attacks to deal 1d8 + 3 damage as opposed to nonconsistent, variable actions that may deal 2d4 fire damage?
@@burgernthemomrailer Thats one of the reasons, the system is made to shoehorn you into taking the attack action every turn as a martial character. You need it for two weapon fighting, the feats, martial arts, reckless attack, and so on, its MADE to be a computer game where you need to push a specific attack button for things to work. And theres a LACK of consistent actions, grappling does barely anything, shove does barely anything...there is 0 narrative or realistic consequences to them other than imposing a negligible MMO condition onto them, theres no feinting, intimidating, no choking people out, no bull rush or overrun, no disarms, grapple doesnt even stop SPELLCASTING, you just stand there...and let the wizard finish. Theres no reason to do anything but roll attack every single turn. Its TERRRIBLE game design.
Great discussion! (On a side note, you did make a video on grappling rules.) I really love how Break!! does it. It’s basically aligned with the lite-type rules of ‘just describe whatever you want to do and we’ll figure it out”, but codifies it just enough to make the options other than “attack with my weapon” more visible. Basically if you want to do something that just does damage then you’ll do the normal attack. If you want to do something which will deal damage and do something else (trip them, blind them etc) the GM will set a DC and give a negative consequence for failure. If you want to do some sort of an action that doesn’t do damage but some sort of effect (tripping etc) then the GM will set the DC but there is no negative effect for failure. You can also assist people in various ways to help your teammates get bonuses on their attacks or whatever using the same system. At first look it looked really complicated but doing it a bit I’ve realized that ira actually super open and really is largely just a hint to the players to try creative things. I love the skill increases from Adventure that you talked about. That’s also how I want to run games but haven’t figured out a way to make it super official or solid. So long as it’s a close, regular group I think it’ll generally be clear what characters are better at what as the game develops. May be smart to be a bit more systematic about it though.
I created a ruleset I call CKAV. Combat is simultaneous, with phases; Planning, Declaration, Action. All movement and actions happen together, no turns. It's quite quick, and very intense. High damage, and movement tactics are incredibly powerful. Combat is often over in 3 rounds or so, and ranged attacks are terrifying
Hey Daniel, it was me who asked the question in discord. Thank you very much for the video and I want to also thank your discord for being super helpful on this matter.
Great ideas, thanks for sharing. I still think sometimes you don't want combat to be a chess game, you just want to knock heads together in a fast-paced brawl. Melees against a ton of 1 hit point minions ought to be completely free-form. Do we need to worry about turns & initiative, or grappling, disarming, etc.? Can't all that stuff get rolled up into your modified to-hit rolls? I mean to speed things up, why not let everyone roll dice & move their characters simultaneously. Don't think it will be complete chaos if done correctly. The DM says "The 20 Orcs are charging forward..." "... 2 squares..." . Player 1 jumps in: "OK I'm firing my bow..." . Player 2 (at same time): "Firing my bow..." . Keep the action flowing, only stop for complex actions or spells. Anyways, just a thought.
One thing you can do is roll to hit and damage at the same time. It saves a surprising amount of time. It also can make the narration interesting. Assume fail to hit but great damage roll. "You get a good swing, your sword whistles through the air at completely misses."
@@JeffreyJibson That's certainly a possible solution - it depends on the gaming style of the players. If they want Conan wading through scores of enemy soldiers, or Aragorn vs. a small army of Uruk-hai, there ought to be mass combat rules that don't play like an "I go, you go" war game. If it's the final battle vs. the boss monster at the end of the adventure, then I can see slowing down combat, making it more tactical.
16:58 the AD&D zero level funnel “treasure hunt” uses this mechanic (learn skills by doing). Eg Accumulate enough “thief” actions you level up to a level 1 thief.
I have used this idea in some form for a long, long time. Sometimes it's just for Fighters, sometimes it's for all: Stunting: If the attack roll is 5 (any "pretty high but not entirely unrealistic" number can go here, but 5 often fits the combat numbers well) over the required (so the AC of the enemy +5, or you're hitting an AC of at least 5 lower if using THAC0), the Fighter can dictate some kind of an additional effect for the attack, such as knocking a foe over, disarming someone, pushing through enemy lines, or gaining a momentary opening, etc. This gives Fighters much more say in what happens in a battle. Dedicated maneuvers are often basically a trap option and do not help you at all (spending a turn pushing someone over, and then them just getting up has done concretely nothing to make you win the combat, which is kind of the point of trying something like that in the first place...). Usually the Fighter is the character/one of the characters with the *least* actual control over combat, since they just attack for damage, while any caster can, as an action, just cause effects like paralyzing, frightening, knocking unconscious etc. This just seems wrong. Surely the Fighter should be the character whose word means a LOT in combat? If something the player suggests seems too powerful, you can A) say that such a stunt requires a result 10 over the required (i.e. you have two categories of stunts), B) require some kind of an additional roll to confirm it or C) veto it on the grounds that it is overreaching, and give the player a small damage bonus to it. Generally, if the player can't come up with anything pertinent, that means there is no real need to do a stunt right now. The player does not have the "right" to demand a stunt, despite having no idea what it could be; it is something they *can* do if they have an idea. If nothing comes out, hand them their small damage bonus (like for example actually just +1 point of damage, it's not meant to be actually impressive as an alternative since this is not about pumping up numbers) and fight on. This rule has been great and has given us so much swirling melee and excitement over the years as Fighters throw down foes, demand attention, drive their foes before them and make attacks that really do have effect. I simply do not think any amount of number fixing will ever be as impactful as just letting the attacks of a fighter have actual, concrete effect on the battlefield. Allowing powerful enemies something similar makes for an equally fantastic time. It makes the actual hits of the combat seem so much more like something is really happening when the ogre suddenly grabs your fighter and HURLS him aside into a wall. And the real trick to it is that it's emergent, not something you're fishing for.
I really like the idea of characters learning skills and getting better at skills as they accomplish things. I find that far more interesting than starting with certain skills and that’s what they can do. It feels more like characters are progressing and learning and working in the physical laws of the world.
I’ve started running a megadungeon in 5E, and for those cool improvised stunts (chandeliers, throwing sand and all that) my house rule is: you can do something like that once on your turn in addition to whatever else you do, it’s a check, if you succeed you impose a condition or move someone around etc, but if you fail it goes wrong and you pay through the nose. This way you don’t have to choose between your cool idea and doing damage, but you still won’t necessarily do it every turn because it carries a risk. Only done one session but so far it’s working beautifully.
I just want to thank you for your videos, I enjoy them so much. I really enjoy the creativity and flexibility that you bring with your perspective on gaming! Keep them coming please.
I think I've had a Rogue swing from all of one chandelier in all the years of roleplaying haha. I'm a fan of anthropology and HEMA so I'm always tweaking the some basic concepts and making lists of options, but it can be a lot of fun when players want to try something new in the spur of the moment that we hadn't considered earlier.
It's amazing how easy GMing is when you stop looking for reasons to say no to players and instead start thinking about ways to make what they want to do even more fun.
A generic rule I've concocted for my 5e games for stuff like this is called the Cinematic Action rule: When you use your movement or take an action (including Attack) you can do something cool to enhance that action, such as kicking dust in an enemy's eye, knocking them prone, swinging from a chandelier, etc. You must also declare what you want the effect to be ("I want to blind him" "I want to swing up to the second floor") including but not limited to gaining advantage, imposing disadvantage, imposing a condition on an enemy, disarming or grappling them etc. The DM chooses a skill or ability check and DC (sometimes opposed check, sometimes flat DC), you roll, and if you succeed, your intended effect happens as gauged by the DM. If you fail, there is an equal complication or drawback imposed that also moves the narrative forward ("the chandelier breaks and you fall prone in front of the boss!" "your opponent spots your feint and gains advantage to hit you on their next attack") Since it adds a roll it can slow down combat a little but in a way that is super fun and flavorful, and because there's a risk of failure and consequences, players don't spam it every turn - they generally wait until there's a moment to get creative. Our ranger in particular loves this. This has led to things like our ranger riding a manticore into battle against a wyvern or launching himself out of a catapult into the face of an Annis hag, or shoving an NPC out of the way and taking the villain's sniping attack meant for her (that nearly killed him).
I remember that I did quite a lot of tavern brawls. And I always had custom rules for it, for an example I added once the combat expertise rule. That rule means that once per turn they can choose any skill they are proficient with and describe how they you it to get an edge. Like sleigh of hands to punch before initiative starts. Medicine to hit them in a sensitive spot, insight to predict the enemies attack. That system worked really well
I recently ran the updated version of Sinister Secret of Saltmarsh, updated for 5e, using Shadowdark rules. There was a very dynamic battle on a ship, and a halfling thief with the sailor background ran up and down the rigging and sails. A fighter leaped down from the forecastle (front raised part of the deck) down onto enemies below! A Seer character used his quarterstaff to trip an enemy and knock him overboard after rolling a critical hit in melee! I try to encourage cinematic action, and sometimes it comes out really well.
@ken.droid-the-unique Adventurer, Conqueror, King A RPG created by Autarch that takes the bones of BECMI and provides the meat and math needed for a campaign to span the distance from low level dungeon crawling to the rising and falling of empires...and everything in between.
@@ken.droid-the-unique Adventurer, Conqueror, King System. Cleaving in that system is being able to make extra attacks after you drop an enemy to 0HP and you can move between these extra attacks if you have movement left. The amount of extra attacks you can make with this ability is equal to your level.
It has long been my desire to create a TTRPG system where, among other things, mechanics, tactical play, and narrative are intertwined such that the most optimal option in combat is also the most interesting or coolest/satisfying option.
I think there's something to be said about failing forward in this last example you gave. Perhaps you could say something like "It's very hard to evade all the arrows that will be shot at you before you reach the table, and it's hard to run and flip the table in time under pressure like this. Do a XXX check. You are risking YYY if you can't make it" XXX could be an acrobatics check like you said, or roll under half your Dex or whatever. YYY could be the Character gets knocked prone in a square before reaching the table and looses xd6 hit points, or is brought to 0 HP on a critical fail. Or if there are more degrees of success/failure, the action could fail and the Character is prevented from actually entering the room (abort the move) but forced the archers to shoot and waste their attack, or the table doesn't roll into a good defensive position so the Character is still exposed at the start of their next turn, etc. Cool video.
In my system ALL attacks are called shots, with each Hit Group having a Hit Score determining the difficulty to hit. This in combination with damage type driven Injuries (Status Effects that last until Treated) makes even the most basic melee weapons very different from each other. No longer can a player say, "I attack the orc, I do 4 damage". The minimum detail becomes "I slash at the orc's hamstring" or "I bring my mace down on the orc's head" followed by the GM's detail of either missing or inflicting a (Tier 1 to Tier 3) Injury to that Hit Group, which again will vary with Guarding effectiveness and armor. If that orc is not wearing a helmet, that's quite the difference... There's also mechanics for Pain, which can interrupt actions - and Morale, which when low can cause Fear Compulsions to freeze up or flee (Compulsions are a whole thing). The game has usage-based progression (from a dependency chart, not freeform), and no levels or classes so character advancement is deliberate, incremental, and player driven.
Sounds interesting- the closest I’ve played to something like that was Cyberpunk 2020 - I didn’t love it, but I can see it could be fun for some players.
@@BanditsKeep Thanks! Yeah it's certainly a departure in many ways, but in my case ultimately to serve the dungeon crawl. I haven't played Cyberpunk myself but have watched some live plays, also didn't seem like my thing. A lot of the design is around distributing the burden of description between the GM, party, and the world implied by the game. Hit locations tie the narrative and mechanical contexts together, and similarly when exploring the party moves between Landscapes, Landmarks, and Points of Interest. Having these "checkpoints" helps guide both GM descriptions and player choices/incentives without actually dictating them.
In a game I am designing, I wanted to make belivable, "realistic" and intresting fights. My system is build upon roll under and player facing opposition rolls (no roll to hit, but roll to win combat round). But with every d20 combat roll, players can roll a d6, which is "combat effect dice". If they roll 1, they can do something cool in adition to hitting. Usualy its some form of extra bonus. I encourage them to narrate what they want to accomplish, but I also have a ready list of possible effects. This list include: - hit the gap in the armour - stun - hurt leg or arm Ect. Warrior class has in-built higher chance for those to happen, and other martial classes can buy abilities to increase it. It works really well. Especialy when they only think about effects if they get in on d6. Coming up with creative ideas is quickly getting tiering, when dices are not cooperating. Different weapons have access to different effects, so like you cannot stun with a sword, ect. I also have a default option for effects, when nothing seems right - clean strike. It just increases numerical values of passive weapon effects. Combat in my game is very fast and deadly, so my players are super into squeazing every opportunity for advantage they can get.
Couple of things from QUARREL + FABLE : 1. Every missed attack suffers a free counterattack: the tank gets right in the mess of it all 2. Players can forgo advantage to attack multiple enemies in the same swing (of course, that also opens them to more counterattacks!)
Back in the old, old days we used to say we were going to "Errol Flynn" it. For you youngsters, google it. This was usually during a bar, banquet room or Market fight or escape. The DM would help narrate it in the best movie style providing endless scenes of hilarity and entertainment.
I've removed the 'tactical' elements from my role-playing game. I will never state 'roll for initiative'. because I use AC as damage reduction, there is no to-hit roll, just a damage roll. any damage that exceeds the AC, causes hit point damage. the action economy has been removed. it's not about what the rules say you can do, but, what do you want your character to do and we will figure out any rolls to make. the idea is simple, we are playing a role-playing game, not a tactical simulation. it takes some time to get used to this method, but any combat encounter can resolve in a few minutes without any interruption to determine turn order or what can/cannot be performed etc. there are other things we have changed regarding magic, but that's a separate topic.
sorta, it's a continuous flow narration of the scene. as things are happening, I ask a specific player to describe the activity of their character. if it's an attack action, then they roll to see if they exceed the AC to cause injury. if it's a spell/prayer, then they roll to see if they successfully create the effect. during this time I am continuing to describe activities that are happening. players not called upon are able to openly convey ideas, converse with each other and/or the npc's. it's a touch chaotic sounding, but I keep the game in motion. if a player hesitates or has an activity that is involved, I skip them and move to another player. a typical skirmish combat will resolve in 10-15min. as for my determination of 'who' acts, it's situational. some of it depends on the character class, some on dex attribute, some on activities of the party members, and some on the npc's/creatures activities. again, sounds chaotic, but it runs smooth and fast. most importantly, I don't break the role-playing immersion. no pause to determine character turn order. no fumbling for notes on possible actions that characters or npc's may take. no stopping everything to determine if the actions by the characters fit into the action economy guidelines. this is not an easy way to GM. I don't recommend it for newer GMs. but an experienced GM may find the ability to keep things moving and tension high, something they've been missing.
Having played in a lot of 5e groups over the last 8-ish years, I've only just opened up to trying weird creative actions. Recently in a one shot, we were fighting in a crowded market, I asked my GM if I could try to purchase a potion from someone mid-combat. It was a fun and silly moment that really made the game for me.
16:00 This is how I've decided to handle "skill levels". Whatever your skill was with whatever....if you succeeded so many times (in a row? Within a certain amount of time? IDK) your skill would get better. IDK...I'm still in the planning stages of my game/system
Gem of a video! I loved how you wrapped up the video with my favourite content nugget, “GM demonstrates strategy and options for players to learn” As I gained experience as a player I knew that I could “be as cool” “have as much fun” as seasoned players by interacting with the mundane world such that my PC achieved something amazing. So I watched for ideas from other players so that I could open up my imagination and options. GMs are ttrpg cultural leaders/gurus thus perfectly positioned to showcase what is possible and invite player creativity. Great video!
Exactly zero chandeliers. I like that 5th edition rules actually put improvised weapons out there. Not that they do much damage, but the rules do highlight this so that a player might think about it. Shield bash? Butt Strike? Older rules systems, as I recall, didn't spend many words on this, if any. Check out "Who gets the first swing?" In Dragon 71. It's not exactly about alternative combat, but covers Charging, Fending, Retreating and Pressing, in addition to attack priority with 1e and 2e.
On intimidation, I've often thought, but never followed through, that you could have several systems that feed into each other. My specific thought is in a modern game, you would have a "shouting and waving guns" system, that can either end peacefully or escalate into a "firing and taking cover" system. And then if that doesn't resolve things, you escalate to the "straight-up murdering someone" system. As you say, you can't force the players to back down, but they can judge if the enemy might back down, or if things are about to get a lot more dangerous
Another great video Daniel. I love the idea of teaching by doing. Im sure my players would pick up on maneuvers and dirty tricks faster if they get used on the players! Id like to hear more about your grapple/wrestle rules if you can fit it into a future video, ive never been satisfied with official rules.
No chandeliers, but in a pirate game I ran one of my players who sunk all his points into engineering did develop the Boarding Action Delivery System, or B.A.D.S. It was essentially a specialized catapult that could "safely" launch crew members onto enemy ships 😆😆😆
It makes me think of Torg's "interaction attacks" (trick, maneuver, test of will, taunt, and intimidate) -- the system I was writing had a simplified version of the same idea though mostly focusing on trick and maneuver called "Unconventional Attacks."
To my experience of running games at cons (i.e. to a group that could be any level of experience, not know each other and in general have the highest "awkwardness rate" possible), the big hurdle with the rules is people not knowing *how* to do the things they're thinking of doing, which then often translates into them not knowing what to do. My two solutions are either to have an NPC show them (when I'm not absolutely exhausted xD) or, if it's the latter part of the day and I'm positively knackered, I just occasionally remind them of possible interactions with things they have on their sheet, to show them the scopes to look at the game world through.
Awesome video, a lot of valuable insights, as a kind of DM and Player myself those situations falls flat either because the ambient is vaguely described or due to some lack of motivation to came up with ideas on what to do, most of my adventures are purely narrative with only a little few of them having a board or map, so those tips are golden.
Great advice to poll the table on how to make a ruling on some random action. If you think that what the table comes up with seems too easy, let them know that the monsters will be playing with the same rules. They can balance it pretty quickly at that point. Or maybe they'll choose the path of Mayhem! I can't remember any attempts to swing from or ride a chandelier, but there have been a couple instances of cutting a chandelier down to fall on a group of enemies!
In the system I use, I try and give every class a "flex" on the fly; rogues can tweak their skills, fighters have straight up mighty deeds, and magic-users create their own spells. When they do make use of it, it feels great. It's like they're cheating the system to do their own thing.
Great video. No chandeliers here, but during a one shot I wrapped rope around an obelisk and jumped off a ledge to topple it (was part of a magic ritual party wanted to disrupt). Encouraging players to engage with physics and environment definitely requires not shutting it down. I was initiated in 3.5 but after watching this channel and hearing other people talk about old school, I think I would have fit in even better then.
My Fighter Gringamore, carried a belt pouch with metal shavings, ground glass, and fine sand to throw in opponents faces all the way back in 1983! The DM gave the opponent a save vs petrification or blinded for 1d3+2 rounds!
I have been running DCC for over a year and I would say Fighters/Dwarves forget to call out their mighty deep about 60% of the time in my experience. It is a fantastic resource that is a blast. A great Judge knows how to take what they call out and make it work whether they succeed or fail.
While I really like a narrative-driven style of play, I often realize, especially with experienced players (I lead several rounds, some with newbies and some with veterans in the hobby), that they mostly see the math behind the maneuvers. It's easy to calculate whether something is worth it and if it feels like it can always be used ("I always have pepper powder in my pocket for blending now."), it becomes rather boring. Actually, in systems with clear rules (D&D, 13th Age, Pathfinder, etc.) I tend to play more closely by the book, but if someone has a really creative idea that is adapted to the situation, I reward it outside of the regular framework. However, I state clearly that you cannot simply resort to such an action again and again. A good example was a fight against a Green Dragon and his Wyvern minions. Everything took place on a ship and the flying monsters deliberately threw characters into the water. One player immediately remembered his water elf friend (an NPC) who always swam around the ship and called him for help. I let him get back on the ship without any checks and very quickly, but later when everyone wanted to do it just like that, at first there was only a small bonus and later the elf was exhausted.
I like to get pretty wacky with combat maneuvers and came up with my own system to let people develop their own special moves. Fighters shatter their enemies' weapons into shards, impale three orcs on a single spear-throw, paralyze their foes with pressure point strikes, all kinds of kung fu junk.
DCC: Mighty deeds is used because it's built right into your attack roll mechanic. It's its own mnemonic. There's also no "downside" or trade-off to using it.
I also think a lot of times players don't remember all the terrain in the room they might use to do cool stuff. Do you ever do random checks to see if a desired piece of furnishing or room feature is there to exploit? Or do you run "rooms as written" in a module? I find that as DM, I can't think of all the random stuff that might happen to be in a dungeon -- and aren't they supposed to be lived-in or even "living" in a sense that they're always changing, not static environments? So there's a CHANCE an item could be in there...
re intimidation checks: The Nightmares Underneath uses the reaction roll with the charisma modifier swapped for the ferocity modifier (the game's strength attribute analog). Nice and simple, like repurposing the turn undead chart.
Crack shot with a bow...my take on the cleric's weapons restriction is that it's about drawing blood. (Let's just ignore the fact that a mace can beat someone bloody...) They must be able to use a blade for other things, or they'd have to ask the fighter to cut their steak for them. So the cleric rolls crack shot with a bow. Maybe he or she was taught archery as a child, before taking orders and eschewing sharp weapons. So what use is it? Knocking something down, sending a message through a window on the top floor of the tower, lighting fire to something at distance, etc. Just don't draw blood with it!
In my group there were more and more questions about additional moves in combat, we tried to get around it somehow, we discussed together, but keeping an eye on our own rules and testing became annoying. After the adventure was over we decided to change the system to Pathfinder 2e, all the actions you mentioned are in this system and it suited us.
I think people "default" into redundancy modes when they're expecting something they're anticipating moreso than trying to figure out the current moment. This can be said about IRL behaviors as well as in any kind of game or job too. In the MEANTIME while they're too busy thinking about that carrot on a stick; whether that be a plot point, reward, expected outcome, etc, this is the time to throw them off. Chaos will have people backtracking on the current moment instead of the anticipatory goal.
I'm not a big fan of stances, but some players like them. In a stance, characters just exchange number a for b. You go on the defensive and have higher AC, at the cost of lower to hit. Or you lunge for more damage at the cost of lower AC. Pressing an attack is basically a stance. A bonus to aiming is easy and makes prepared positions and ambushes a lot more powerful. Then the cost is time, one round isn't a lot but in combat that means one round of not shooting and moving. Sometimes the PCs have kept a marksman back who took time to aim and sniped important people from the back line. Cover is a relatively easy environmental rule. You can easily judge that a dude popping out behind a corner has some sort of half-cover, and that a fellow in a prepared position with a slit to fire through has full cover. Then the players can start to think "What if we use something that ignores cover? Like our tear gas grenades or a flamethrower?" Grappling can become a way to deal with people in heavy armour, if the roll is a contest of Str vs Str and not their AC. A bloke trying to trip me or wrench me down isn't going to care about a kevlar vest. Sir Bob in a gothic plate suit is going to get jumped by five gnolls. At least it's harder to run up and grab someone who has a sword up. A humanoid trying to wrassle a bull is going to have a much harder time than shooting said bull. One side rule of grappling I have used is using small weapons. People who are rolling on the floor might not be able to swing at eachother with swords or aim a rifle but wrestling with a bloke who has a knife or a pistol is scary. Professional soldiers are going to carry a dagger as a side weapon just for that situation. It creates a few niche situations where the biggest, baddest longsword and shotgun aren't the best.
The first time I played pathfinder was a one shot and I obviously didn't know the rules, I was a sorcerer and I had a few litres of lamp oil in my inventory, and that's all i needed to know to become a piromaniac, making the last encounter sort of trivial since the enemy was hiding in darkness and trying to lure us in and instead it got bbq treatment for it's troubles. Now that I have a firmer grasp on the system I don't think such an idea would spring to my mind, so many coded mechanics hinder what is not coded IMHO. That's why I'm tring to work at an FKR system, though trying to give it some solid bases with rigid diegetic traits instead of stats (strong as a larg man/a bull/a dragon). Any advice?
I like the advice of using traits - that what I do in my sword and sorcery game “unchained heroes” you can hear more about it (and grab a beta) from my podcast.
If a player wants to improvise an action that's specific to their current circumstances (tip over a statue on someone, bait someone into a trap they've discovered in the dungeon, trip someone who's standing on ice, etc) I give the players better odds than a normal attack - clever use of the environment takes more player brainpower so it should be more effective than just attacking. For combat actions that are always strong (blinding, tripping, shoving, disarming, restraining, etc) it's best to use a system or framework that puts these options on par with or weaker than the normal Roll-to-Hit vs AC combat system.
I think i've done one swing from the chandelier over the last 40 years. My first solo adventure this month, my halfling got poked with a spear while knocked on the ground. after getting poked, it occured to me he was on a river bank, and threw sand in the goblines eyes! I came back to old school stuff because with little or no rules, just think out side the box and roll for it.
When someone wants to "swing from the chandelier," never say no. Don't negate the players. Say "Yes. And then this happens ..." When it comes to awesome stuff like that, always have them do it automatically, but they still have to roll to see HOW successful they are and whether there are any fun "complications." Even if their roll is terrible, improvised actions (as well as almost all skill checks) should always "fail forward."
Warhammer Fantasy Role Play has some of the best combat rules. I especially like how losers of a combat round have to fall back an inch, and the winners can choose to press the attack or disengage the enemy.
I like the intimidation thing so much I dedicide to try and use it(and other social skills) instead of initiative, it works well so far, though it makes some combats get defused before beggining
I typically play relatively rules-heavy games. I definitely will attempt more creative actions that have no in-rules basis, but I generally stick to the actions on my sheet. There is a certain sense of joy figuring out how to do interesting things within the constraints of the system. I've never swung from a chandelier, but I've definitely done my share of unnecessarily fancy attack just because it's cool.
I don't think I've seen a single chandelier swing move in the way too many years to count. (40+?) There is at least one boss fight coming up in my campaign and I have another boss idea cooking, so I believe at least one of those will have a chandelier. And my players will look for any excuse to swing from it.
This inspires me. However... I need to look at this as 1) will signature moves limit imagination (constantly throwing dust to blind). 2) being consistent with adjudication of results via dice rolls. I need to ponder.....
In my experience both playing and running later versions of the Ampersand Game (and its offshoots), "signature moves" absolutely limit imagination. But that might be due to the system of feats (and progressions / trees of feats) that tend to make that signature move the player's only viable action. At the very least, it seems to be "I got good at this thing, I'm gonna do it whenever I get the chance!"
From my experience, 5e players declare their action, bonus action, etc for their own mental tracking. I tend to do it with DMs I’m playing with for the first time to also establish trust, that I’m accounting for my action economy.
Is there any suggestions for broaching this idea as a player? I'd love to do stuff like this, but my DM uses a lot of flat plains, empty rooms and blank stages once combat starts
About Adventure Fantasy Game's idea of letting players develop Skills organically -- in a narrative way -- for what they want their PC to be good at: I am going to try giving 100 xp to players every time they do something *clutch* in a session based on the class traits and other specialties they want for their PC. It rewards ingenuity and the specific skills that they try during the game. This would be for our B/X campaign, which levels up so slowly, since we can usually play only 1/month or less. So 100 xp, I hope, will motivate more proactive RP!!!
Never swung from a chandelier or anything in 7 years. Did drop one on a guy once, if that counts for anything. What I have seen is a player swing from one ship to the next and attack in the same turn like he was Jack Sparrow
@@BanditsKeep Lemme summarize it for you since it was my first TTRPG. You have three moves in combat: strike, parry and dodge, all of them affected by dextery (PP) while damage is modify by strength (there are no minuses for low attribute/characteristics in Palladium). You have up to five attacks depending of your class, because each fighter class has their own way to set bonuses to any of the moves (and also damage) and how it increases the number of attacks. Arnours block damage or get passed through. all attacks are rolled with d20, and parries and dodges must roll equal or better than attacks in d20. Initiative is rolled in d20. I have to mention that having a weapon proficiency adds to strike, parry, throw (or rate of fire in bows).
something I really wanna do, is if one of my players wants to intimidate, or persuade someone. I will, have them roll, and then have them role play it out. Depending on how the roleplay was will depend on wether I think they deserve a +1 (if they make a convicing moment) or even a -1(if they outride weren't intimidating) to their roll. Sorry, at my table, you don't just get to do things with the roll of a die, less fun that way.
I definitely like the idea of modifying the dice based on player action - though I would not make a player act if that is not their style - an brief description of what their character does is what I like
My colleagues want me to create a DnD game for them and I am very happy to have a good excuse to binge your videos again. I'll make it OSE because I must unconsciously want to be fired lol
Not really done a chandalier, my rogues tend to be strength and dex mains, they would be more likely to string up an enemy from one.. they are also fond of throwing foes from towers. Gravity is a fun weapon.
Tough luck .... the chandelier was really a Mimic in disguise !!!!
Ha ha, mean but epic!
Ha! 😄 I might use that!
Good topic, and I like the advice of showing your players what they can do by having the NPCs do it first.
Thank You!
I always tell my players: if you have an idea, just say so. You can probably at least make an attempt. Also, only one chandelier. Jumped from a banister to the top of a big wooden chandelier, and used it to jump onto a bookcase on the opposite wall. That tiny moment of awesome was encouraged by another DM with that same mentality.
I once grabbed the carcass of an ankheg and squeezed it to spray acid on a swarm of bees.
Nice!
Great move!!
For Bushido, I have houseruled for iaijutsu duels, creating a defenive stance, quick stance, and strong stance along with three possible action: Measure Opponent, Change Stance, Strike, and Bow Out. Each stance has special bonuses to attack and/or damage and/or initiative but also stand in a rock-paper-scizzors relationship to each other. To make sure that there is no meta gaming, the duelants use cards/tiles to secretly decide their actions and reveal at the same time.
Nice. Gotta Love Bushido.
I like when games compromise and provide you a list of fundamental maneuvers (throw/catch, grapple etc.) that are quite generic but well described, e.g. "throw any object below weight X up to distance Y", and then, clearly in the rules, encourage players to use these creatively with some examples e.g. "throw can be used to, for example, throw a torch to set fire on something or throw dirt in the face of an enemy to blind them".
For sure
Seven chandeliers here. Forty years of gaming in multiple systems, as a player and DM. Learned a long time ago that if they want to try, determine the kind and difficulty of the check as opposed to just saying no not allowed.
DCC is the main game I run. And typically newer players do not use it too often.
Usually, once they're told "you can't use a mighty deed to instantly decapitate" they're put off by it... Until they fight a orc that also has mighty deeds and he's going crazy!
I love the deeds because they're so abstract, but that's also it's double edge.
I've recently gotten into a Samurai game called "Chanbara" that has something interesting about it. There is a second attack type vs a second defense number called Tactical Attack/Tactical Defense. These two are used when doing non-damage effects. Disarm, tripping, grabs, pushes, stuns, ect. Also, these numbers use your intelligence stat and wisdom stats, so there is a use for so-called "Dump Stats" that a warrior doesn't usually need. If your character is not very wise, they're vulnerable to trick moves.
I like that!
I've never seen a chandelier in game to my memory, let alone swung from one to attack, hahaha!
I had a player jump and grab a chandelier in Boothill...and he fell and broke his legs. 😅
Hopefully some day!
I've done it at least twice! As a DM I've seen players do it at least a dozen times.
Among other things, I use Fantasy Trip's drive back rule: if you strike someone in melee and you take no damage yourself, at the end of the round you can push your enemy back 1 space (and move into the space he left, if you want). This helps to make fights positionally dynamic.
Nice
@9:03
This phenomenon I believe is linked to computer/video RPGames. Because through that medium you can only ever do what you have a button/icon for. So people get in the mindset of toggling and button spamming their abilities from a given parameter.
Thrown into a TTRPG, and their character sheet becomes their 'computer interface', and so only the things listed are the button/icons that they can choose.
I like to tell players "Don't look at your character sheet as something that limits things you can do. Look at your character sheet as things you might do well."
Meaning to think outside the character sheet.
Great perspective. One of the better comments I've read... And all the comments are valuable. But this one puts the perspective in layman's terms. 👏
Yes, but if you don’t make options that aren’t on their character sheet as strong as the options which are, why would they use them?
Why do something creative for potentially 3d6 damage when I can cast Fireball for 8d6?
Its 5e teaching people to play like this
@@punishedwhispers1218 Play like what? Using their consistent attacks to deal 1d8 + 3 damage as opposed to nonconsistent, variable actions that may deal 2d4 fire damage?
@@burgernthemomrailer Thats one of the reasons, the system is made to shoehorn you into taking the attack action every turn as a martial character. You need it for two weapon fighting, the feats, martial arts, reckless attack, and so on, its MADE to be a computer game where you need to push a specific attack button for things to work. And theres a LACK of consistent actions, grappling does barely anything, shove does barely anything...there is 0 narrative or realistic consequences to them other than imposing a negligible MMO condition onto them, theres no feinting, intimidating, no choking people out, no bull rush or overrun, no disarms, grapple doesnt even stop SPELLCASTING, you just stand there...and let the wizard finish. Theres no reason to do anything but roll attack every single turn. Its TERRRIBLE game design.
Getting the enemies to do something is actually a fantastic idea! So simple, but far out, I had never thought of doing something like that.
Thanks!
Great discussion! (On a side note, you did make a video on grappling rules.)
I really love how Break!! does it. It’s basically aligned with the lite-type rules of ‘just describe whatever you want to do and we’ll figure it out”, but codifies it just enough to make the options other than “attack with my weapon” more visible.
Basically if you want to do something that just does damage then you’ll do the normal attack. If you want to do something which will deal damage and do something else (trip them, blind them etc) the GM will set a DC and give a negative consequence for failure. If you want to do some sort of an action that doesn’t do damage but some sort of effect (tripping etc) then the GM will set the DC but there is no negative effect for failure. You can also assist people in various ways to help your teammates get bonuses on their attacks or whatever using the same system.
At first look it looked really complicated but doing it a bit I’ve realized that ira actually super open and really is largely just a hint to the players to try creative things.
I love the skill increases from Adventure that you talked about. That’s also how I want to run games but haven’t figured out a way to make it super official or solid. So long as it’s a close, regular group I think it’ll generally be clear what characters are better at what as the game develops. May be smart to be a bit more systematic about it though.
I created a ruleset I call CKAV. Combat is simultaneous, with phases; Planning, Declaration, Action. All movement and actions happen together, no turns.
It's quite quick, and very intense. High damage, and movement tactics are incredibly powerful.
Combat is often over in 3 rounds or so, and ranged attacks are terrifying
Very cool!
Stunts in Deathbringer : you can trip, disarm, push...your enemy but the DM might give a disadvantage to your attack
Cool - seems to be a common ruling
Hey Daniel, it was me who asked the question in discord. Thank you very much for the video and I want to also thank your discord for being super helpful on this matter.
Awesome! Thanks for starting a great conversation.
Great ideas, thanks for sharing.
I still think sometimes you don't want combat to be a chess game, you just want to knock heads together in a fast-paced brawl.
Melees against a ton of 1 hit point minions ought to be completely free-form. Do we need to worry about turns & initiative, or grappling, disarming, etc.? Can't all that stuff get rolled up into your modified to-hit rolls?
I mean to speed things up, why not let everyone roll dice & move their characters simultaneously. Don't think it will be complete chaos if done correctly.
The DM says "The 20 Orcs are charging forward..." "... 2 squares..." . Player 1 jumps in: "OK I'm firing my bow..." . Player 2 (at same time): "Firing my bow..." .
Keep the action flowing, only stop for complex actions or spells.
Anyways, just a thought.
One thing you can do is roll to hit and damage at the same time. It saves a surprising amount of time. It also can make the narration interesting. Assume fail to hit but great damage roll. "You get a good swing, your sword whistles through the air at completely misses."
@@JeffreyJibson That's certainly a possible solution - it depends on the gaming style of the players. If they want Conan wading through scores of enemy soldiers, or Aragorn vs. a small army of Uruk-hai, there ought to be mass combat rules that don't play like an "I go, you go" war game.
If it's the final battle vs. the boss monster at the end of the adventure, then I can see slowing down combat, making it more tactical.
16:58 the AD&D zero level funnel “treasure hunt” uses this mechanic (learn skills by doing). Eg Accumulate enough “thief” actions you level up to a level 1 thief.
Nice! I think I may actually have that in a pile of modules I picked up a while ago.
I have used this idea in some form for a long, long time. Sometimes it's just for Fighters, sometimes it's for all:
Stunting: If the attack roll is 5 (any "pretty high but not entirely unrealistic" number can go here, but 5 often fits the combat numbers well) over the required (so the AC of the enemy +5, or you're hitting an AC of at least 5 lower if using THAC0), the Fighter can dictate some kind of an additional effect for the attack, such as knocking a foe over, disarming someone, pushing through enemy lines, or gaining a momentary opening, etc.
This gives Fighters much more say in what happens in a battle. Dedicated maneuvers are often basically a trap option and do not help you at all (spending a turn pushing someone over, and then them just getting up has done concretely nothing to make you win the combat, which is kind of the point of trying something like that in the first place...). Usually the Fighter is the character/one of the characters with the *least* actual control over combat, since they just attack for damage, while any caster can, as an action, just cause effects like paralyzing, frightening, knocking unconscious etc. This just seems wrong. Surely the Fighter should be the character whose word means a LOT in combat?
If something the player suggests seems too powerful, you can A) say that such a stunt requires a result 10 over the required (i.e. you have two categories of stunts), B) require some kind of an additional roll to confirm it or C) veto it on the grounds that it is overreaching, and give the player a small damage bonus to it. Generally, if the player can't come up with anything pertinent, that means there is no real need to do a stunt right now. The player does not have the "right" to demand a stunt, despite having no idea what it could be; it is something they *can* do if they have an idea. If nothing comes out, hand them their small damage bonus (like for example actually just +1 point of damage, it's not meant to be actually impressive as an alternative since this is not about pumping up numbers) and fight on.
This rule has been great and has given us so much swirling melee and excitement over the years as Fighters throw down foes, demand attention, drive their foes before them and make attacks that really do have effect. I simply do not think any amount of number fixing will ever be as impactful as just letting the attacks of a fighter have actual, concrete effect on the battlefield. Allowing powerful enemies something similar makes for an equally fantastic time. It makes the actual hits of the combat seem so much more like something is really happening when the ogre suddenly grabs your fighter and HURLS him aside into a wall. And the real trick to it is that it's emergent, not something you're fishing for.
I like this!
I recall that TSR's Boot Hill had a relatively simple system for hand to hand fighting.
True! I really like that system - and Boot Hill in general
I like the idea of guidance through what the enemy is doing. Good suggestion!
Thank You!
I really like the idea of characters learning skills and getting better at skills as they accomplish things. I find that far more interesting than starting with certain skills and that’s what they can do. It feels more like characters are progressing and learning and working in the physical laws of the world.
For sure
I’ve started running a megadungeon in 5E, and for those cool improvised stunts (chandeliers, throwing sand and all that) my house rule is: you can do something like that once on your turn in addition to whatever else you do, it’s a check, if you succeed you impose a condition or move someone around etc, but if you fail it goes wrong and you pay through the nose. This way you don’t have to choose between your cool idea and doing damage, but you still won’t necessarily do it every turn because it carries a risk. Only done one session but so far it’s working beautifully.
Nice! Sounds like a good balance
i like the 'Godlike' system because a hit is shown as where it hits the opponent: torso, left arm etc.
Nice
I just want to thank you for your videos, I enjoy them so much. I really enjoy the creativity and flexibility that you bring with your perspective on gaming! Keep them coming please.
Thank You!
I think I've had a Rogue swing from all of one chandelier in all the years of roleplaying haha. I'm a fan of anthropology and HEMA so I'm always tweaking the some basic concepts and making lists of options, but it can be a lot of fun when players want to try something new in the spur of the moment that we hadn't considered earlier.
It's amazing how easy GMing is when you stop looking for reasons to say no to players and instead start thinking about ways to make what they want to do even more fun.
I agree
A generic rule I've concocted for my 5e games for stuff like this is called the Cinematic Action rule: When you use your movement or take an action (including Attack) you can do something cool to enhance that action, such as kicking dust in an enemy's eye, knocking them prone, swinging from a chandelier, etc. You must also declare what you want the effect to be ("I want to blind him" "I want to swing up to the second floor") including but not limited to gaining advantage, imposing disadvantage, imposing a condition on an enemy, disarming or grappling them etc.
The DM chooses a skill or ability check and DC (sometimes opposed check, sometimes flat DC), you roll, and if you succeed, your intended effect happens as gauged by the DM.
If you fail, there is an equal complication or drawback imposed that also moves the narrative forward ("the chandelier breaks and you fall prone in front of the boss!" "your opponent spots your feint and gains advantage to hit you on their next attack")
Since it adds a roll it can slow down combat a little but in a way that is super fun and flavorful, and because there's a risk of failure and consequences, players don't spam it every turn - they generally wait until there's a moment to get creative. Our ranger in particular loves this.
This has led to things like our ranger riding a manticore into battle against a wyvern or launching himself out of a catapult into the face of an Annis hag, or shoving an NPC out of the way and taking the villain's sniping attack meant for her (that nearly killed him).
Very cool
I remember that I did quite a lot of tavern brawls.
And I always had custom rules for it, for an example I added once the combat expertise rule.
That rule means that once per turn they can choose any skill they are proficient with and describe how they you it to get an edge. Like sleigh of hands to punch before initiative starts. Medicine to hit them in a sensitive spot, insight to predict the enemies attack. That system worked really well
Fun!
lots of great suggestions to make combat more fun and interactive
Thanks!
I recently ran the updated version of Sinister Secret of Saltmarsh, updated for 5e, using Shadowdark rules. There was a very dynamic battle on a ship, and a halfling thief with the sailor background ran up and down the rigging and sails. A fighter leaped down from the forecastle (front raised part of the deck) down onto enemies below! A Seer character used his quarterstaff to trip an enemy and knock him overboard after rolling a critical hit in melee!
I try to encourage cinematic action, and sometimes it comes out really well.
Nice!
ACKS's Cleave rule does a fantastic job of making Fighters keep up with Magic-Users later on into the level curve.
That's a good game. Reminds me of an Advanced B/X with options.
ACKs is solid
What is ACKS?
@ken.droid-the-unique Adventurer, Conqueror, King
A RPG created by Autarch that takes the bones of BECMI and provides the meat and math needed for a campaign to span the distance from low level dungeon crawling to the rising and falling of empires...and everything in between.
@@ken.droid-the-unique
Adventurer, Conqueror, King System. Cleaving in that system is being able to make extra attacks after you drop an enemy to 0HP and you can move between these extra attacks if you have movement left. The amount of extra attacks you can make with this ability is equal to your level.
It has long been my desire to create a TTRPG system where, among other things, mechanics, tactical play, and narrative are intertwined such that the most optimal option in combat is also the most interesting or coolest/satisfying option.
Lol, I've been trying this for 3 years. So far it's getting better but it's not there.
I think there's something to be said about failing forward in this last example you gave.
Perhaps you could say something like "It's very hard to evade all the arrows that will be shot at you before you reach the table, and it's hard to run and flip the table in time under pressure like this. Do a XXX check. You are risking YYY if you can't make it"
XXX could be an acrobatics check like you said, or roll under half your Dex or whatever.
YYY could be the Character gets knocked prone in a square before reaching the table and looses xd6 hit points, or is brought to 0 HP on a critical fail. Or if there are more degrees of success/failure, the action could fail and the Character is prevented from actually entering the room (abort the move) but forced the archers to shoot and waste their attack, or the table doesn't roll into a good defensive position so the Character is still exposed at the start of their next turn, etc.
Cool video.
For sure
In my system ALL attacks are called shots, with each Hit Group having a Hit Score determining the difficulty to hit. This in combination with damage type driven Injuries (Status Effects that last until Treated) makes even the most basic melee weapons very different from each other.
No longer can a player say, "I attack the orc, I do 4 damage". The minimum detail becomes "I slash at the orc's hamstring" or "I bring my mace down on the orc's head" followed by the GM's detail of either missing or inflicting a (Tier 1 to Tier 3) Injury to that Hit Group, which again will vary with Guarding effectiveness and armor. If that orc is not wearing a helmet, that's quite the difference... There's also mechanics for Pain, which can interrupt actions - and Morale, which when low can cause Fear Compulsions to freeze up or flee (Compulsions are a whole thing).
The game has usage-based progression (from a dependency chart, not freeform), and no levels or classes so character advancement is deliberate, incremental, and player driven.
Sounds interesting- the closest I’ve played to something like that was Cyberpunk 2020 - I didn’t love it, but I can see it could be fun for some players.
@@BanditsKeep Thanks! Yeah it's certainly a departure in many ways, but in my case ultimately to serve the dungeon crawl. I haven't played Cyberpunk myself but have watched some live plays, also didn't seem like my thing.
A lot of the design is around distributing the burden of description between the GM, party, and the world implied by the game. Hit locations tie the narrative and mechanical contexts together, and similarly when exploring the party moves between Landscapes, Landmarks, and Points of Interest. Having these "checkpoints" helps guide both GM descriptions and player choices/incentives without actually dictating them.
In a game I am designing, I wanted to make belivable, "realistic" and intresting fights.
My system is build upon roll under and player facing opposition rolls (no roll to hit, but roll to win combat round).
But with every d20 combat roll, players can roll a d6, which is "combat effect dice". If they roll 1, they can do something cool in adition to hitting. Usualy its some form of extra bonus.
I encourage them to narrate what they want to accomplish, but I also have a ready list of possible effects.
This list include:
- hit the gap in the armour
- stun
- hurt leg or arm
Ect.
Warrior class has in-built higher chance for those to happen, and other martial classes can buy abilities to increase it.
It works really well. Especialy when they only think about effects if they get in on d6. Coming up with creative ideas is quickly getting tiering, when dices are not cooperating.
Different weapons have access to different effects, so like you cannot stun with a sword, ect.
I also have a default option for effects, when nothing seems right - clean strike. It just increases numerical values of passive weapon effects.
Combat in my game is very fast and deadly, so my players are super into squeazing every opportunity for advantage they can get.
Couple of things from QUARREL + FABLE :
1. Every missed attack suffers a free counterattack: the tank gets right in the mess of it all
2. Players can forgo advantage to attack multiple enemies in the same swing (of course, that also opens them to more counterattacks!)
Cool
Back in the old, old days we used to say we were going to "Errol Flynn" it. For you youngsters, google it. This was usually during a bar, banquet room or Market fight or escape. The DM would help narrate it in the best movie style providing endless scenes of hilarity and entertainment.
Awesome
I've removed the 'tactical' elements from my role-playing game. I will never state 'roll for initiative'. because I use AC as damage reduction, there is no to-hit roll, just a damage roll. any damage that exceeds the AC, causes hit point damage. the action economy has been removed. it's not about what the rules say you can do, but, what do you want your character to do and we will figure out any rolls to make.
the idea is simple, we are playing a role-playing game, not a tactical simulation. it takes some time to get used to this method, but any combat encounter can resolve in a few minutes without any interruption to determine turn order or what can/cannot be performed etc.
there are other things we have changed regarding magic, but that's a separate topic.
almost forgot, 1 chandelier. however, I have thrown a food cart across a market place.
Are all actions simultaneous?
sorta, it's a continuous flow narration of the scene. as things are happening, I ask a specific player to describe the activity of their character. if it's an attack action, then they roll to see if they exceed the AC to cause injury. if it's a spell/prayer, then they roll to see if they successfully create the effect. during this time I am continuing to describe activities that are happening. players not called upon are able to openly convey ideas, converse with each other and/or the npc's. it's a touch chaotic sounding, but I keep the game in motion. if a player hesitates or has an activity that is involved, I skip them and move to another player.
a typical skirmish combat will resolve in 10-15min.
as for my determination of 'who' acts, it's situational. some of it depends on the character class, some on dex attribute, some on activities of the party members, and some on the npc's/creatures activities. again, sounds chaotic, but it runs smooth and fast.
most importantly, I don't break the role-playing immersion. no pause to determine character turn order. no fumbling for notes on possible actions that characters or npc's may take. no stopping everything to determine if the actions by the characters fit into the action economy guidelines.
this is not an easy way to GM. I don't recommend it for newer GMs. but an experienced GM may find the ability to keep things moving and tension high, something they've been missing.
I think I've been witness to 2 total chandelier attacks. Great video as always! Lots of great ideas
Excellent!
Having played in a lot of 5e groups over the last 8-ish years, I've only just opened up to trying weird creative actions. Recently in a one shot, we were fighting in a crowded market, I asked my GM if I could try to purchase a potion from someone mid-combat. It was a fun and silly moment that really made the game for me.
Nice! That feels like something that would happen in a movie.
16:00 This is how I've decided to handle "skill levels". Whatever your skill was with whatever....if you succeeded so many times (in a row? Within a certain amount of time? IDK) your skill would get better. IDK...I'm still in the planning stages of my game/system
Gem of a video!
I loved how you wrapped up the video with my favourite content nugget, “GM demonstrates strategy and options for players to learn”
As I gained experience as a player I knew that I could “be as cool” “have as much fun” as seasoned players by interacting with the mundane world such that my PC achieved something amazing. So I watched for ideas from other players so that I could open up my imagination and options.
GMs are ttrpg cultural leaders/gurus thus perfectly positioned to showcase what is possible and invite player creativity.
Great video!
Thank You!
That artwork in the thumbnail is WILD.
Dude is grinning like a fool, might be naked, and is holding his axe like handlebars on a motorcycle lol
🪓
Exactly zero chandeliers. I like that 5th edition rules actually put improvised weapons out there. Not that they do much damage, but the rules do highlight this so that a player might think about it. Shield bash? Butt Strike? Older rules systems, as I recall, didn't spend many words on this, if any. Check out "Who gets the first swing?" In Dragon 71. It's not exactly about alternative combat, but covers Charging, Fending, Retreating and Pressing, in addition to attack priority with 1e and 2e.
On intimidation, I've often thought, but never followed through, that you could have several systems that feed into each other. My specific thought is in a modern game, you would have a "shouting and waving guns" system, that can either end peacefully or escalate into a "firing and taking cover" system. And then if that doesn't resolve things, you escalate to the "straight-up murdering someone" system. As you say, you can't force the players to back down, but they can judge if the enemy might back down, or if things are about to get a lot more dangerous
For sure
Another great video Daniel. I love the idea of teaching by doing. Im sure my players would pick up on maneuvers and dirty tricks faster if they get used on the players! Id like to hear more about your grapple/wrestle rules if you can fit it into a future video, ive never been satisfied with official rules.
For sure! Here is the grappling I use - Unarmed combat in D&D Gygax Style
ruclips.net/video/gOETSVmOlKM/видео.html
No chandeliers, but in a pirate game I ran one of my players who sunk all his points into engineering did develop the Boarding Action Delivery System, or B.A.D.S. It was essentially a specialized catapult that could "safely" launch crew members onto enemy ships 😆😆😆
Oh man 😂 that sounds fun!
What are some really good ideas thank you!
It makes me think of Torg's "interaction attacks" (trick, maneuver, test of will, taunt, and intimidate) -- the system I was writing had a simplified version of the same idea though mostly focusing on trick and maneuver called "Unconventional Attacks."
Cool
To my experience of running games at cons (i.e. to a group that could be any level of experience, not know each other and in general have the highest "awkwardness rate" possible), the big hurdle with the rules is people not knowing *how* to do the things they're thinking of doing, which then often translates into them not knowing what to do.
My two solutions are either to have an NPC show them (when I'm not absolutely exhausted xD) or, if it's the latter part of the day and I'm positively knackered, I just occasionally remind them of possible interactions with things they have on their sheet, to show them the scopes to look at the game world through.
Awesome video, a lot of valuable insights, as a kind of DM and Player myself those situations falls flat either because the ambient is vaguely described or due to some lack of motivation to came up with ideas on what to do, most of my adventures are purely narrative with only a little few of them having a board or map, so those tips are golden.
Excellent
Great advice to poll the table on how to make a ruling on some random action. If you think that what the table comes up with seems too easy, let them know that the monsters will be playing with the same rules. They can balance it pretty quickly at that point. Or maybe they'll choose the path of Mayhem!
I can't remember any attempts to swing from or ride a chandelier, but there have been a couple instances of cutting a chandelier down to fall on a group of enemies!
Ha yes! Cutting the chandelier down is classic!
In the system I use, I try and give every class a "flex" on the fly; rogues can tweak their skills, fighters have straight up mighty deeds, and magic-users create their own spells. When they do make use of it, it feels great. It's like they're cheating the system to do their own thing.
Nice
Great video. No chandeliers here, but during a one shot I wrapped rope around an obelisk and jumped off a ledge to topple it (was part of a magic ritual party wanted to disrupt).
Encouraging players to engage with physics and environment definitely requires not shutting it down. I was initiated in 3.5 but after watching this channel and hearing other people talk about old school, I think I would have fit in even better then.
That sounds epic!
My Fighter Gringamore, carried a belt pouch with metal shavings, ground glass, and fine sand to throw in opponents faces all the way back in 1983! The DM gave the opponent a save vs petrification or blinded for 1d3+2 rounds!
Nice!
I have been running DCC for over a year and I would say Fighters/Dwarves forget to call out their mighty deep about 60% of the time in my experience. It is a fantastic resource that is a blast. A great Judge knows how to take what they call out and make it work whether they succeed or fail.
For sure
While I really like a narrative-driven style of play, I often realize, especially with experienced players (I lead several rounds, some with newbies and some with veterans in the hobby), that they mostly see the math behind the maneuvers.
It's easy to calculate whether something is worth it and if it feels like it can always be used ("I always have pepper powder in my pocket for blending now."), it becomes rather boring. Actually, in systems with clear rules (D&D, 13th Age, Pathfinder, etc.) I tend to play more closely by the book, but if someone has a really creative idea that is adapted to the situation, I reward it outside of the regular framework. However, I state clearly that you cannot simply resort to such an action again and again.
A good example was a fight against a Green Dragon and his Wyvern minions. Everything took place on a ship and the flying monsters deliberately threw characters into the water. One player immediately remembered his water elf friend (an NPC) who always swam around the ship and called him for help. I let him get back on the ship without any checks and very quickly, but later when everyone wanted to do it just like that, at first there was only a small bonus and later the elf was exhausted.
I like to get pretty wacky with combat maneuvers and came up with my own system to let people develop their own special moves. Fighters shatter their enemies' weapons into shards, impale three orcs on a single spear-throw, paralyze their foes with pressure point strikes, all kinds of kung fu junk.
Nice!
Great advice!!! If the baddies are doing it.......the characters can attempt it too. Brilliant!
For sure
Excellent advice!
Thank You!
"I hit it with my sword"...lol
Roll a d20 😊
DCC: Mighty deeds is used because it's built right into your attack roll mechanic. It's its own mnemonic. There's also no "downside" or trade-off to using it.
Sure - as long as you can remember to do it.
I also think a lot of times players don't remember all the terrain in the room they might use to do cool stuff. Do you ever do random checks to see if a desired piece of furnishing or room feature is there to exploit? Or do you run "rooms as written" in a module? I find that as DM, I can't think of all the random stuff that might happen to be in a dungeon -- and aren't they supposed to be lived-in or even "living" in a sense that they're always changing, not static environments? So there's a CHANCE an item could be in there...
I keep it open ended
Another one up. Another home run. All gems for the GM. Watch these videos and you will be a better GM. Thank you for making them.
Thank You!
re intimidation checks: The Nightmares Underneath uses the reaction roll with the charisma modifier swapped for the ferocity modifier (the game's strength attribute analog). Nice and simple, like repurposing the turn undead chart.
Nice
Crack shot with a bow...my take on the cleric's weapons restriction is that it's about drawing blood. (Let's just ignore the fact that a mace can beat someone bloody...) They must be able to use a blade for other things, or they'd have to ask the fighter to cut their steak for them. So the cleric rolls crack shot with a bow. Maybe he or she was taught archery as a child, before taking orders and eschewing sharp weapons. So what use is it? Knocking something down, sending a message through a window on the top floor of the tower, lighting fire to something at distance, etc. Just don't draw blood with it!
I like this, they are a master of the bow, they just use it for utility.
Mystic Empyrean uses a mechanic similar to what you describe as the main way to “level up”.
Nice
As someone building a ttrpg, this is very helpful information.
Awesome.
In my group there were more and more questions about additional moves in combat, we tried to get around it somehow, we discussed together, but keeping an eye on our own rules and testing became annoying. After the adventure was over we decided to change the system to Pathfinder 2e, all the actions you mentioned are in this system and it suited us.
Cool.
I think people "default" into redundancy modes when they're expecting something they're anticipating moreso than trying to figure out the current moment. This can be said about IRL behaviors as well as in any kind of game or job too. In the MEANTIME while they're too busy thinking about that carrot on a stick; whether that be a plot point, reward, expected outcome, etc, this is the time to throw them off. Chaos will have people backtracking on the current moment instead of the anticipatory goal.
Indeed
The Burning Wheel had a skill advancement system where you need to pass and fail a skill a certain number of times before you can upgrade the skill
Cool
I'm not a big fan of stances, but some players like them. In a stance, characters just exchange number a for b. You go on the defensive and have higher AC, at the cost of lower to hit. Or you lunge for more damage at the cost of lower AC. Pressing an attack is basically a stance.
A bonus to aiming is easy and makes prepared positions and ambushes a lot more powerful. Then the cost is time, one round isn't a lot but in combat that means one round of not shooting and moving. Sometimes the PCs have kept a marksman back who took time to aim and sniped important people from the back line.
Cover is a relatively easy environmental rule. You can easily judge that a dude popping out behind a corner has some sort of half-cover, and that a fellow in a prepared position with a slit to fire through has full cover. Then the players can start to think "What if we use something that ignores cover? Like our tear gas grenades or a flamethrower?"
Grappling can become a way to deal with people in heavy armour, if the roll is a contest of Str vs Str and not their AC. A bloke trying to trip me or wrench me down isn't going to care about a kevlar vest. Sir Bob in a gothic plate suit is going to get jumped by five gnolls. At least it's harder to run up and grab someone who has a sword up. A humanoid trying to wrassle a bull is going to have a much harder time than shooting said bull.
One side rule of grappling I have used is using small weapons. People who are rolling on the floor might not be able to swing at eachother with swords or aim a rifle but wrestling with a bloke who has a knife or a pistol is scary. Professional soldiers are going to carry a dagger as a side weapon just for that situation. It creates a few niche situations where the biggest, baddest longsword and shotgun aren't the best.
The first time I played pathfinder was a one shot and I obviously didn't know the rules, I was a sorcerer and I had a few litres of lamp oil in my inventory, and that's all i needed to know to become a piromaniac, making the last encounter sort of trivial since the enemy was hiding in darkness and trying to lure us in and instead it got bbq treatment for it's troubles. Now that I have a firmer grasp on the system I don't think such an idea would spring to my mind, so many coded mechanics hinder what is not coded IMHO. That's why I'm tring to work at an FKR system, though trying to give it some solid bases with rigid diegetic traits instead of stats (strong as a larg man/a bull/a dragon).
Any advice?
I like the advice of using traits - that what I do in my sword and sorcery game “unchained heroes” you can hear more about it (and grab a beta) from my podcast.
If a player wants to improvise an action that's specific to their current circumstances (tip over a statue on someone, bait someone into a trap they've discovered in the dungeon, trip someone who's standing on ice, etc) I give the players better odds than a normal attack - clever use of the environment takes more player brainpower so it should be more effective than just attacking.
For combat actions that are always strong (blinding, tripping, shoving, disarming, restraining, etc) it's best to use a system or framework that puts these options on par with or weaker than the normal Roll-to-Hit vs AC combat system.
Makes sense
I think i've done one swing from the chandelier over the last 40 years. My first solo adventure this month, my halfling got poked with a spear while knocked on the ground. after getting poked, it occured to me he was on a river bank, and threw sand in the goblines eyes!
I came back to old school stuff because with little or no rules, just think out side the box and roll for it.
When someone wants to "swing from the chandelier," never say no. Don't negate the players. Say "Yes. And then this happens ..." When it comes to awesome stuff like that, always have them do it automatically, but they still have to roll to see HOW successful they are and whether there are any fun "complications." Even if their roll is terrible, improvised actions (as well as almost all skill checks) should always "fail forward."
For sure
100% agreed!
Warhammer Fantasy Role Play has some of the best combat rules. I especially like how losers of a combat round have to fall back an inch, and the winners can choose to press the attack or disengage the enemy.
What determines who is the winner of a round?
The team who inflicts more damage wins the round.
I like the intimidation thing so much I dedicide to try and use it(and other social skills) instead of initiative, it works well so far, though it makes some combats get defused before beggining
That can be good thing, right?
@@BanditsKeep Absolutely, I am liking it a lot
I typically play relatively rules-heavy games. I definitely will attempt more creative actions that have no in-rules basis, but I generally stick to the actions on my sheet. There is a certain sense of joy figuring out how to do interesting things within the constraints of the system.
I've never swung from a chandelier, but I've definitely done my share of unnecessarily fancy attack just because it's cool.
True, rules mastery can be very enjoyable
I don't think I've seen a single chandelier swing move in the way too many years to count. (40+?) There is at least one boss fight coming up in my campaign and I have another boss idea cooking, so I believe at least one of those will have a chandelier. And my players will look for any excuse to swing from it.
Sure it’s been mentioned. DCC Dwarves do have Mighty Deed of Arms
Cool, thanks!
This inspires me. However... I need to look at this as 1) will signature moves limit imagination (constantly throwing dust to blind). 2) being consistent with adjudication of results via dice rolls.
I need to ponder.....
In my experience both playing and running later versions of the Ampersand Game (and its offshoots), "signature moves" absolutely limit imagination. But that might be due to the system of feats (and progressions / trees of feats) that tend to make that signature move the player's only viable action. At the very least, it seems to be "I got good at this thing, I'm gonna do it whenever I get the chance!"
@@Mr.RobotHead exactly
I think it could for sure - this would maybe be good for players who normally are not doing any special moves anyway
From my experience, 5e players declare their action, bonus action, etc for their own mental tracking. I tend to do it with DMs I’m playing with for the first time to also establish trust, that I’m accounting for my action economy.
Cool, that makes sense
100% healthy advice
Thanks
DCC has Mighty Deeds = Thematic and dramatic combat. 💪
Yup
Is there any suggestions for broaching this idea as a player? I'd love to do stuff like this, but my DM uses a lot of flat plains, empty rooms and blank stages once combat starts
Where can I find the dice pool grapple rules?
About Adventure Fantasy Game's idea of letting players develop Skills organically -- in a narrative way -- for what they want their PC to be good at: I am going to try giving 100 xp to players every time they do something *clutch* in a session based on the class traits and other specialties they want for their PC. It rewards ingenuity and the specific skills that they try during the game. This would be for our B/X campaign, which levels up so slowly, since we can usually play only 1/month or less. So 100 xp, I hope, will motivate more proactive RP!!!
Cool!
Great vid...thanks.
Thank You!
Never swung from a chandelier or anything in 7 years. Did drop one on a guy once, if that counts for anything. What I have seen is a player swing from one ship to the next and attack in the same turn like he was Jack Sparrow
Nice!
Look at the Conan second edition d20 system for combat manovers "Parry the wrist"
That’s out of print now right? I have the QuickStart
where do you get this art for the thumbnails? it's fuckin sick
I look for old pulp magazine covers
I missed some thoughts on Palladium RPG combat system, specially first edition.
Haven’t tried those games
@@BanditsKeep Lemme summarize it for you since it was my first TTRPG. You have three moves in combat: strike, parry and dodge, all of them affected by dextery (PP) while damage is modify by strength (there are no minuses for low attribute/characteristics in Palladium). You have up to five attacks depending of your class, because each fighter class has their own way to set bonuses to any of the moves (and also damage) and how it increases the number of attacks. Arnours block damage or get passed through. all attacks are rolled with d20, and parries and dodges must roll equal or better than attacks in d20. Initiative is rolled in d20. I have to mention that having a weapon proficiency adds to strike, parry, throw (or rate of fire in bows).
something I really wanna do, is if one of my players wants to intimidate, or persuade someone. I will, have them roll, and then have them role play it out. Depending on how the roleplay was will depend on wether I think they deserve a +1 (if they make a convicing moment) or even a -1(if they outride weren't intimidating) to their roll. Sorry, at my table, you don't just get to do things with the roll of a die, less fun that way.
I definitely like the idea of modifying the dice based on player action - though I would not make a player act if that is not their style - an brief description of what their character does is what I like
I've been thinking about borrowing the initiative system from Battletech for several years now but have never gotten to it.
Would be worth a try
My colleagues want me to create a DnD game for them and I am very happy to have a good excuse to binge your videos again. I'll make it OSE because I must unconsciously want to be fired lol
Ha ha, I’m sure they will love it!
I love improvised actions. I encourage my players to think outside the box and not make the enemies bags of HP.
Nice
Not really done a chandalier, my rogues tend to be strength and dex mains, they would be more likely to string up an enemy from one.. they are also fond of throwing foes from towers. Gravity is a fun weapon.
Indeed it is!