[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: (TFT) An Even More Radical Re-Imagining of TFT...
At 09:00 AM 1/21/04 -0600, Ty Beard wrote:
Each figure makes a melee "attack" on every enemy figure in its front hexes.
This will give you some Conan-like (or better) cinematic effects and speed
combat results, all right, as you are essentially giving every character
the ability to do a Sweeping Blow (q.v. Advanced Melee) every turn
regardless of weapon type with zero penalty (or, up three attacks per turn,
one per enemy).
Ranged attacks and spells aren't getting a similar boost. In fact, they are
getting weakened by the added defensive abilities of their targets (who in
Canon TFT generally get no defense unless they waste their whole turn
dodging, and even that doesn't help against thrown spells IIRC).
More hack-power to ya, if that's what you want, but those considering this
suggestion should consider these points.
3. Everything generally happens simultaneously, though if critical, the GM
can rule that the actions actually happen in descending order of rolls.
Just another non-critical observation about balance - this is of course a
disadvantage to high-AdjDX characters compared to TFT (where actions take
place in order of AdjDX). However, this rule 3 could be omitted if not
desired, without a big effect, as desired. Samurai fans might actually like
the ability of two swordfighters to kill each other (and up to four others)
In fact, your basic system (rules 2 and 3, without option 4, and without
the "if critical" part of rule 3), I would expect to butcher-high DX
characters without armor. Sure they would butcher those they were facing at
the time, but there is no minus to the attacks against high-DX characters,
and with simultaneous resolution and no "if critical" clause, you'd remove
TFT's chance for a high-DX character to kill opponents _before_ they kill
him. With the "if critical" part, though, I guess the high-DX could kill
all the low-DX characters before they got their attacks in, but he'd need a
powerful weapon and good damage rolls to avoid getting hit himself. I'd
definitely use some form of option 4 to give some defensive effect of the
high DX, besides first strike.
Options and Comments
2. On a d20 system, critical hits occur on a natural 20 (then roll 1d6 1-3
automatic hit; 4-5 double damage; 6 triple damage) and failures on a natural
1 (then roll 1d6 -- 1-3 automatic miss; 4-5 drop weapon; 6 break weapon).
For 3d6, simply make 16, 17, and 18 work like 3, 4 and 5 (and vice versa).
Ok, though this is one of the disadvantages of d20 over 3d6 - you can't
reduce the chance of an extreme result below 5% on d20 (such as the chance
of Zorro having a critical miss). However, you could add a "confirmation"
roll on critical results (perhaps only for characters with a certain level
of skill). (e.g. On a 1 or a 20, roll again if the skill is within 5 of the
result, with a mod of +/- 15, to see if the critical result occurs or not,
or something similar.)
3. If a figure is attacking from the side or rear, add the appropriate bonus
to his roll but only to attacks on the figure who is flanked.
Why is this is an _option_? Seems to me it would follow from "add the
appropriate modifiers" above? If not, you're dispensing with a large part
of the point of using a hex map, no?
4. A less radical version would be to simply roll d20 (or 3d6) for each
attack and have the attack succeed if a figure makes his DX roll by as much
or more than the target. This seems less intuitive to me, but veteran TFT
players might like it better.
Yes, or use the GURPS system, which would be my choice, and which is very
similar to 4, except with very comprehensive and play-tested (and more
This point 4 adds a major effect compared to your basic rule
I don't really understand the desire to reduce die rolls for simplicity
when characters' lives and limbs hang in the balance, but if quick and easy
is desired, you could also just roll (3d6 minus ten) against (attacker
AdjDX minus defender AdjDX).
6. Note that the resolution mechanic can be adapted to all of TFT -- simply
roll d20 (or 3d6) and add the attribute. A 21+ is a success (or an 11+ if
you express the attribute as a +/- number with zero being equivalent to a
ten). I personally think that addition is more intuitive -- especially for
new players. It also removes the little dissonance where rolling low is
good, but negative modifiers are bad...
True, although I find TFT's "roll against skill by comparing values" system
intuitive. I think it's actually easier to follow the logic of that "add
everything and compare to 21". No doubt I and most of this list are
conditioned by years of TFT experience, though.
Post to the entire list by writing to firstname.lastname@example.org.
Unsubscribe by mailing to email@example.com with the message body