Initial thoughts:
1. Do you really want a special rule like this for a single situation? Should it maybe work the same way all more difficult tasks do? Or at least all opposed tasks? Keep TFT clean.
2. Do you want to make high DX even less relevant than it already is?
3. Defending is boring for the player defending, who concedes agency to the enemy. Maybe it's interesting to do occasionally but not as a regular strategy. You should not create a tension between actions that are fun and actions that are effective. Therefore defending should only rarely be effective.
4. In standard TFT the implication is that the average band of pirates has an average number of attributes of 32. (32 point PCs are meant to be somewhat competent, not kids who just picked up a sword: see the examples from melee and wizard.) There'll be sergeants who are better and raw recruits who are worse, but on the average they might have a DX of say 11. Now I haven't seen the character sheets of the people attacking us, but I've a strong suspicion not many have DX as low as 11. Effectively you've devalued the attribute point. That is what is causing a good deal of your troubles.
For all these reasons I'm against the change.
Rick,
I like this proposal on first read. If I have time soon I'll give it more thorough thought. But unlike parry options, this favors lower attribute fighters over higher ones which is generally hard to achieve in a seemingly otherwise balanced mechanic.
I don't suppose it'll apply retroactively and restore 30% of our dead fighters? ^_^
--Thomas
Hi all,
In TFT, if you defend, the opponent rolls 4 dice. Triple damages
become impossible, (since you can’t roll a 3 on 4 dice), and the
chance of getting a double damage becomes almost impossible.
(Rolling a 5 (an automatic hit), is also very difficult on 4 dice.
The rules do NOT say that triples happen on 4 or 5, and double
damages happen on 6 or 7’s. (Normally, the chances of critical
successes and failures scale with the number of dice, but not
critical successes for defending or dodging.)
Now defending is a fine option against people with a 14 DX or less,
but for figures with very high DX, defending is a wasted action, you
defend (losing your action), and they will likely hit anyway.
My suggestion is that when you defend, 16 or higher rolls to hit you
STILL count as automatic misses.
The chance of a 16+ on 4 dice is, 33.56%
So if you defend, even against an opponent of very high DX, you
have about a 1/3 chance of getting an auto miss.
I was going to leave dropped weapons at 21 & 22, and broken
weapons at 23 & 24.
I am running a fight in my pbem game, and a bunch of the good guys
are defending vs. skilled opponents and I’m finding it is just a waste
of time.
Thoughts?
Warm regards, Rick
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The_Slope" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to The_slope+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The_Slope" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to The_slope+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.