[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: (TFT) Human Kevlar and Shield and Parry
Hello group. In looking over my e-mails in the light of day (as opposed to
deep night when I wrote them), I noticed the communications looked perhaps a
bit hostile. Not my intention, sorry.
My purpose for the long e-mail on "Human Kevlar" was to bring together the
recent views and home rules into a one stop browse and to suggest some
changes or new rules. It was the same purpose with "Shield & Parry." I may
have missed some items and I'll note those below.
Rick on 14 July writes...
One thing I've done is allowed people to take talents to make them harder
to hit (shields in particular can give the enemy negative modifiers to DX,
and the fact that some thing can always sneak up behind the PC where the
shield does not protect makes a nice ballance to it.
All of these talents require the player to say they are using
them (usually at some cost to their DX or legal actions) so I don't
have to remember who has what combination of talents.
I've tried MANY different variations on parrying and none were one that I
really liked. Let me throw an idea out here for the >list to think over,
this has NEVER been tried out. A talent or skill that is very difficult
for people to learn that requires an OK >IQ and high DX means that it takes
an enemy longer than 5 seconds to >be allowed a legal attack on you. While
this defense is up, you could attack HIM but at -6 DX or something.
This buys you time, means that if you are good, the enemy
can still get a hit (many parrying schemes I've seen allow very good
figures to avoid being hit by lower level figures altogether), and reduces
the number of die rolls rather than increasing them.
Also this comes from the Andrew Morriss Link:
"Defending & Dodging: These rules replace the ITL rules for
using 4D6 when attacking a defending or dodging character.
When a character elects to defend or dodge, his DX is subtracted
from 8. The result is the penalty assigned to the attacking
character's chance to hit (always at least a penalty of -1).
Note that this penalty applies only to the chance to hit, not
to the attack order.
Parry & Riposte: A character with an AdjDX of greater than
11 who is using a melee weapon may elect to combine his attack
with a parry. To do this, the character reduces his AdjDx for
that round (no lower than 11), and subtracts the same amount
from his opponent's attack roll. Note that while the character's
actions are all performed at the reduced DX, the only action of
the opponent's that is affected is the attack roll. This option
can be taken only against a single opponent in the character's
three fron hexes who is wielding a melee weapon. However, if
facing multiple opponents, the character may parry a different
opponent than he attacks."
In reply to Justin's quiry on my change "Two Weapon's Adjustment"
b) make a normal attack with one weapon and DEFEND, as option (1b),
with the other. If the opponent misses the character by 4DX points
the character can counterattack at -6DX with second weapon.
c) parry with both weapons, the opponent must roll 5D6 to hit the
character. If the opponent misses the cahracter by 4DX points, the
character can counterattack at -6DX with their main weapon.
Justin, I would leave a) & b) like the book (ITL:14) I would have
c) parry with both weapons, defend as option (1b). If the opponent
misses the cahracter by 4 DX points, the character can counterattack
at -6DX with their main weapon.
I suggest this variation because I like what Justin suggested of
using the defend rule, but I feel that is too much for b). [however,
its so late at night right now, I forget why its too much. sorry]
Being awake now, I was thinking I would leave b) like the book "stops 2
hits" because I guess I buy into it being like a TFT shield; it stops 2
points. Doing a DEFEND (make opponent roll 4D6 to hit you) while you attack
him is a powerful change; adding a possible second attack on that is way too
much.
But on reflection, I think I would modify my stand to:
b) make normal attack with one weapon and DEFEND as option (1b) with the
other. [No counter-attack on this one. DEFEND is OK, I guess because thats
what he's basically doing with one weapon.]
c) same as Justin's c). You're adding 1 more DEFEND die with possibility of
quick counterattack. However, I would not allow a counterattack if you
defend against two seperate opponents.
By the way, how do you DEFEND *against* 2 weapon talent attacks?
In reply to Michael's 24 July comment:
IQ9:
Combat Deftness I (2): This talent represents the adroitness in
combat gained by years of experience. A character when attacked
becomes -1DX to hit because of an ability to naturally bob and
weave when in combat. Prerequisite: DX of 14 or better.
This is OK for those who feel Warrior/Veteran *stops* a lot
of points or that a Dex base defense makes more sense.
IQ 11:
Combat Deftness II (2): A higher level of skill. A character
with this talent subtracts 2 DX from any attack against him/her
in combat. Prerequisite: Combat Deftness I<
Who would buy these? Sheild talent seems alot more useful for much less
points. These seem a little high priced for their effectiveness....IMHO.
For those characters that are non-shield carriers {ninjas} or those who
carry 2-handed weapons. I have halberd guys who can't use shields.
A correction on my Human Kevlar 24 July change:
CAMPAIGNER (3) {[IQ=11] Prereq Veteran and DX 13+. This Veteran
really rolls with the blows; the first 2 hits that get past Campaigner
(with Warrior/Veteran), are fatigue damage.
I put 11 IQ on it so it would be someone who is wised up on combat
and I lowered the cost because seldome are you going to spend 7 points
(Warrior, Veteran and Campaigner) to get this.
I forgot to lower the cost: Should read CAMPAIGNER (2) .....
And Michael, if we used your 9 July comments
There are lot harder to 'number-crunch' than GURPS and there also
a lot more 'severe' than the easily ignored GURPS Disads. IMHO.
I think a fairer conversion would be:
0 TFT pts = GURPS 5 pts or less
1 TFT pt = GURPS 10 pts
2 TFT pts = GURPS 15 pts
3 TFT pts = GURPS 20 pts
4 TFT pts (maximum for any single handicap) = GURPS 25 or more +
pts.
The advantage of this is because every handicap is so severe, you wont find
players taking them just for the points. They have more incentive to take
them for the role-playing because they're not 'free' points.
would you use GURPS as a resource?
John Paul
P.S. Sorry Justin Grabowski. I will call you Justin. I just got confused
while editing the other night.
_______________________________________________________________
Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com
=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"