Variant Rules

[Jester]

Some variant rules I've been considering for awhile now. I'd like some feedback and suggestions if possible.


Crunchy Stuff:

-Hit Points. I'm considering changing to a VP/WP system. However, I'm not sure how this ought to work with...
-Armor as DR. Using the Iron Heroes variant of variable (ie, 1d4, 1d6, etc) damage reduction.

With WP/VP I'm not sure Armor as DR makes sense. From my understanding VP represent some sort of "Fatigue" like concept of effort required to get out of the way of attacks -- I suppose one could presumably justify that when you're wearing armor you don't need to spend some of the effort that you normally would expend to get out of way because you can rely upon armor to absorb the damage.




-Opposed rolls. Basically I want to have, as a design principle, actions which affect another person to be opposed. This leads to...

-Defense Rolls. When someone makes an attack, you roll defense. Since characters can expect to have an attack bonus, we introduce the similar concept of the defense bonus.
-Shield Combat. Taken from the A Game of Thrones d20 system, using a Shield grants you a really significant bonus to your defense bonus. If your shield allows you to block the attack, the damage is applied to the shield.

-Clash Rules. When Attack and Defense are tied, a clash occurs. Basically this is an auto-grapple with all the grappling possibilities in play, except that the clash can be "won" by succeeding on a Str or Dex opposed roll with the opponent, giving you a free AoO.
-Wear and Tear. Weapons all take 1 point of damage on attack rolls of 1. Armor takes damage on attack rolls of 1. Furthermore, every encounter results in at least 1 point of damage to weapons and armor used.

-Attacks of Opportunity. All AoOs are made at -5. Any action except an Attack provokes AoOs (taken from Iron Heroes). Basically I want to de-emphasize the power of AoOs, simplify the rules that trigger them, but still keep the tactical effect.

-Bull Rush. Continued successes allow you to keep pushing the opponent up to your movement maximum.


Other stuff:

-Willpower. Basically, instead of using Action Points & Sanity rules I think I'm going to take the "Willpower" feature from White Wolf's Mage game. Willpower is gained by fulfilling your archetype (essentially, by RPing). Willpower can be spent to increase your chance of success. Certain monsters and crazy stuff might lower your Willpower, though.


-Skill System. I want to completely overhaul the skill system. To be honest, I don't see the need for most of the skills on the list (Use Rope -- Useless as a skill. Spot and Listen really make no sense except to oppose Hide/MoveSilent.) Basically I reduce almost all skills to stat-based checks -- Climb is a Strength check. Ride is a Dexterity check. Spot is a Wisdom check. The main skills that remain are based on Knowledge and Diplomacy. (Keep in mind I'm trying to run a low/no magic campaign with a heavy emphasis on intrigue - Not for everyone.)

One of the benefits to this is that I can come up with a generally unified way to judge the difficulty of a task -- One of the problems I have with standard D&D is how challenges are scaled to the level/expert. If you're level 1 then it'll take you DC 10 to climb a cliff. If you're level 10 it'll be DC 20. The point here is generally to reduce the importance of skill ranks on things that generally aren't terribly important to the story. Everyone has about the same level of expertise. Having the right tools is often more important than being level 20. That's not to say if you wanted to play a Thiefly character you couldn't get something that would give "+1 to Dexterity checks involving stealth," but ultimately you're not going to be able to get a crazy levels of proficiency you can when there's an explicit skill for Hide/MoveSilent.

[Epic Meepo]

I suppose one could presumably justify that when you're wearing armor you don't need to spend some of the effort that you normally would expend to get out of way because you can rely upon armor to absorb the damage.

-Opposed rolls. Basically I want to have, as a design principle, actions which affect another person to be opposed. This leads to...

-Defense Rolls. When someone makes an attack, you roll defense. Since characters can expect to have an attack bonus, we introduce the similar concept of the defense bonus.[/blockquote]
I've used both of those options from time to time, and they work nicely.

-Clash Rules. When Attack and Defense are tied, a clash occurs. Basically this is an auto-grapple with all the grappling possibilities in play, except that the clash can be "won" by succeeding on a Str or Dex opposed roll with the opponent, giving you a free AoO.

Okay, I'm not quite sure how this clash thing is supposed to work.  What's an "auto-grapple?"  What are "all the grappling possibilities?"  What does it mean to "win" a clash and what does that have to do with getting a free AoO?  And what is a "free" AoO?

-Wear and Tear. Weapons all take 1 point of damage on attack rolls of 1. Armor takes damage on attack rolls of 1. Furthermore, every encounter results in at least 1 point of damage to weapons and armor used.

That seems a bit extreme, considering the fact that there are lots of weapons that have only 5 hp.  And why does armor take damage on an attack roll of 1?

I reduce almost all skills to stat-based checks -- Climb is a Strength check. Ride is a Dexterity check. Spot is a Wisdom check. The main skills that remain are based on Knowledge and Diplomacy. (Keep in mind I'm trying to run a low/no magic campaign with a heavy emphasis on intrigue - Not for everyone.)

I'm not quite sure how you can emphasize intrigue without letting characters have the option of training in things like Hide and Spot, which can be just as useful at the king's dinner table as they can be in a dungeon.  Why does an experienced rogue have just as hard a time using Sleight of Hand in front of a 3-year-old toddler with Wis 18 as he does using it in front of an experienced Wiz 18 rogue?

If you're level 1 then it'll take you DC 10 to climb a cliff. If you're level 10 it'll be DC 20.

That doesn't sound like it would work very well.  Why should a higher-level character have a harder time accomplishing the same task as a low-level character?

The point here is generally to reduce the importance of skill ranks on things that generally aren't terribly important to the story. Everyone has about the same level of expertise. Having the right tools is often more important than being level 20.

Why are only Knowledge and Diplomacy important to a story based heavily on Intrigue?  Isn't the ability to palm an object, forge a document, sneak out the side door at a party, or recognize that the king's adviser is an imposter in disguise just as important to the story?  Why should everyone have the same level of expertise at accomplishing those tasks?

Don't get me wrong, you have some interesting ideas for variant rules.  But I must confess that many of them have left me with a fair number of questions.

[CYMRO]

WP/VP is good, I recently adopted it.

-Defense Rolls. When someone makes an attack, you roll defense. Since characters can expect to have an attack bonus, we introduce the similar concept of the defense bonus.

Check out the links in my Altvogge thread for each classes BDB that I use.

-Willpower. Basically, instead of using Action Points & Sanity rules I think I'm going to take the "Willpower" feature from White Wolf's Mage game. Willpower is gained by fulfilling your archetype (essentially, by RPing). Willpower can be spent to increase your chance of success. Certain monsters and crazy stuff might lower your Willpower, though.

I am not a big fan of selective RP rewards of this kind, because they basically force you into a rut.  Why reward a player for playing a sterotype, and conversely punish a player for thinking outside the box?

[Ishmayl-Retired]

-Wear and Tear. Weapons all take 1 point of damage on attack rolls of 1. Furthermore, every encounter results in at least 1 point of damage to weapons and armor used.

That seems a bit extreme, considering the fact that there are lots of weapons that have only 5 hp.  And why does armor take damage on an attack roll of 1?

"Armor takes damage on defense rolls of 1. "[/b]

Not positive though.  I thinese kinds of rules tend to lead to more fair contests, but damn, it sure does add a lot of extra rolling to combat.  

[Poseptune]

-Hit Points. I'm considering changing to a VP/WP system. However, I'm not sure how this ought to work with...
-Armor as DR. Using the Iron Heroes variant of variable (ie, 1d4, 1d6, etc) damage reduction.

With WP/VP I'm not sure Armor as DR makes sense. From my understanding VP represent some sort of "Fatigue" like concept of effort required to get out of the way of attacks -- I suppose one could presumably justify that when you're wearing armor you don't need to spend some of the effort that you normally would expend to get out of way because you can rely upon armor to absorb the damage.

-Opposed rolls. Basically I want to have, as a design principle, actions which affect another person to be opposed. This leads to...

-Defense Rolls. When someone makes an attack, you roll defense. Since characters can expect to have an attack bonus, we introduce the similar concept of the defense bonus.
-Shield Combat. Taken from the A Game of Thrones d20 system, using a Shield grants you a really significant bonus to your defense bonus. If your shield allows you to block the attack, the damage is applied to the shield.
[/quote]
-Clash Rules. When Attack and Defense are tied, a clash occurs. Basically this is an auto-grapple with all the grappling possibilities in play, except that the clash can be "won" by succeeding on a Str or Dex opposed roll with the opponent, giving you a free AoO.
[/quote]
-Wear and Tear. Weapons all take 1 point of damage on attack rolls of 1. Armor takes damage on attack rolls of 1. Furthermore, every encounter results in at least 1 point of damage to weapons and armor used.
[/quote]
-Attacks of Opportunity. All AoOs are made at -5. Any action except an Attack provokes AoOs (taken from Iron Heroes). Basically I want to de-emphasize the power of AoOs, simplify the rules that trigger them, but still keep the tactical effect.

-Bull Rush. Continued successes allow you to keep pushing the opponent up to your movement maximum.
[/quote]
-Willpower. Basically, instead of using Action Points & Sanity rules I think I'm going to take the "Willpower" feature from White Wolf's Mage game. Willpower is gained by fulfilling your archetype (essentially, by RPing). Willpower can be spent to increase your chance of success. Certain monsters and crazy stuff might lower your Willpower, though.
[/quote]
-Skill System. I want to completely overhaul the skill system. To be honest, I don't see the need for most of the skills on the list (Use Rope -- Useless as a skill. Spot and Listen really make no sense except to oppose Hide/MoveSilent.) Basically I reduce almost all skills to stat-based checks -- Climb is a Strength check. Ride is a Dexterity check. Spot is a Wisdom check. The main skills that remain are based on Knowledge and Diplomacy. (Keep in mind I'm trying to run a low/no magic campaign with a heavy emphasis on intrigue - Not for everyone.)
[/quote]
One of the benefits to this is that I can come up with a generally unified way to judge the difficulty of a task -- One of the problems I have with standard D&D is how challenges are scaled to the level/expert. If you're level 1 then it'll take you DC 10 to climb a cliff. If you're level 10 it'll be DC 20. The point here is generally to reduce the importance of skill ranks on things that generally aren't terribly important to the story. Everyone has about the same level of expertise. Having the right tools is often more important than being level 20. That's not to say if you wanted to play a Thiefly character you couldn't get something that would give "+1 to Dexterity checks involving stealth," but ultimately you're not going to be able to get a crazy levels of proficiency you can when there's an explicit skill for Hide/MoveSilent.
[/quote]
 So you are trying to tell us that if you practice at something (put ranks in the skill) you don't get any better? A member of a band practices his guitar and just because he practiced it will be harder to please the crowd than when he just picked it up? Experience climbers scale the rock face with the same difficulty as someone who has never seen a mountain before? I'm sorry, but I have to give the skills overhaul two big  ;nay: ;nay:

[CYMRO]

-Skill System. I want to completely overhaul the skill system. To be honest, I don't see the need for most of the skills on the list (Use Rope -- Useless as a skill. Spot and Listen really make no sense except to oppose Hide/MoveSilent.) Basically I reduce almost all skills to stat-based checks -- Climb is a Strength check. Ride is a Dexterity check. Spot is a Wisdom check. The main skills that remain are based on Knowledge and Diplomacy. (Keep in mind I'm trying to run a low/no magic campaign with a heavy emphasis on intrigue - Not for everyone.)

I can sympathize with this.  The skill system could be made into a two or three tiered system.
Proper use of rope is a skill, but its mastery is a far cry from the mastery of a profession.

[Jester]

Thanks for the feedback guys, to respond to a few things:

"That seems a bit extreme, considering the fact that there are lots of weapons that have only 5 hp. And why does armor take damage on an attack roll of 1?"

Defense roll of 1, was a typo. And yeah, some weapon HPs may need to be adjusted -- I'm fine with weapons needing constant maintenance though (otherwise breaking).


"That doesn't sound like it would work very well. Why should a higher-level character have a harder time accomplishing the same task as a low-level character?"

I'm not saying they would. I'm referring to the way standard D&D usually tries to match DCs for skill tasks against the guy with the most skill ranks -- If you've got a challenging trap it's going to be a challenge that only your Rogue can really handle 'cause he's got all the search ranks, etc. Not that there are generic dungeons to be crawled through or pointless trap encounters in my setting, but basically this is to relieve the incredulousness of situations where only the Rogue can see the pressure plate / tripwire / pit covered with leaves.

"Are natural 20's still an auto hit and in this case an auto block? How do you handle someone rolling a 20 on attack and the other person rolling a 20 on defense?"

Presumably the highest of the two wins, and a match results in a clash. 20 on a defense roll ought to be an auto-dodge, though, yes.

"I hope you are giving your PC's a lot of extra money. Do magic weapons break as well? You may end up with some angry PC's."

Actually one of my setting goals is to reduce the inflation of the typical D&D economy. I want gold pieces to be valued currency rather than the basic unit of wealth. My PCs will likely never have magic items. Kind of the point is to emphasize the gritty aspect that you're using a regular weapon and it needs to be maintained regularly or it will break. (Unlike normal D&D where you can use the same weapon from level 1 to 20 unless someone sunders it.)

"It's ok, but it adds a lot more rolling at the table. Could slow down combat a little."

Yeah, that is one concern I have. I think it's worthwhile to increase the complexity of basic combat actions in a situation in which there's no magic -- Basically taking a note from Iron Heroes. I'd probably try to retrofit the Iron Heroes classes, except I'm hoping to eventually move to a classless and levelless system, heh.

[Poseptune]

"I hope you are giving your PC's a lot of extra money. Do magic weapons break as well? You may end up with some angry PC's."

Actually one of my setting goals is to reduce the inflation of the typical D&D economy. I want gold pieces to be valued currency rather than the basic unit of wealth. My PCs will likely never have magic items. Kind of the point is to emphasize the gritty aspect that you're using a regular weapon and it needs to be maintained regularly or it will break. (Unlike normal D&D where you can use the same weapon from level 1 to 20 unless someone sunders it.)

Yeah, I read that it was low/no magic after typing that. If you re-tool some of the weapons' HP, then it should be fine.

[Epic Meepo]

I'm referring to the way standard D&D usually tries to match DCs for skill tasks against the guy with the most skill ranks -- If you've got a challenging trap it's going to be a challenge that only your Rogue can really handle 'cause he's got all the search ranks, etc.

dimension doors[/i] the party around it; or even a bard who uses Diplomacy to befriend the dungeon's architect in order to learn how to deactivate the trap.  All of those actions handle the trap without requiring the rogue you describe; in fact, the first two don't require any ranks in any skills at all.

Saying that skill DCs for traps shouldn't scale as they become more challenging would be like saying that monster natural armor values shouldn't scale with the monsters' CR.  After all, only a warrior-type character with maxed out magic weapons can easily hit certain heavily-armored monsters of an appropriate CR.  But that's no reason to do away with high ACs.  The high difficulty of certain tasks is what makes them more challenging.

Of course, if you don't like the so-called "heroic" RPG genre, where characters are expected to encounter progressively more difficult challenges as their careers progress, then I understand your objections to standard D&D.  However, the entire d20 System is specifically designed for the heroic style of play.  If you want the difficulty of challenges to remain static, or to be realistically distributed, you're not going to want to use the d20 System at all.

[Jester]

Of course, if you don't like the so-called "heroic" RPG genre, where characters are expected to encounter progressively more difficult challenges as their careers progress, then I understand your objections to standard D&D.  However, the entire d20 System is specifically designed for the heroic style of play.  If you want the difficulty of challenges to remain static, or to be realistically distributed, you're not going to want to use the d20 System at all.

Yeah - Extremely significant changes to say, skills & classes & levels probably puts things out of the scope of d20, although presumably I'd like to salvage as much as possible from it. C'est la vie.