You favorite tabletop RPGs and why

[AmazonQueen]

AC encompasses the idea of not being hit but also if you get hit you don't get damaged because the armor protects you. So, yes, it makes a lot of sense.

Not really because in D&D armour offers either 100% resistance to damage or none at all which makes no sense.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

even beyond str/dex, it's baffling that intelligence is a dump stat for combatants. smarts is crucial knowing where to move your weapon. reading your opponents. learning what to do, and when.

For those of us who prefer to play characters who can use magic (whatever you call them - magic-users, mages, wizards, witches...), Intelligence is crucial.

In Fighting Fantasy there are some gamebooks that have the premise that using magic costs energy, so if you want to cast a spell, you will lose Stamina points. If your Stamina ever hits 0, you die. It's struck me as odd that your Skill level never seems to matter when casting spells in this system, but then Skill tends to refer to your skill with weapons.

Which led to a ridiculous situation for me in the 2nd book of the Sorcery! series... my character was trapped in the hold of a cargo ship and the only way out was to levitate myself up to the deck. The problem was that the spell cost 1 Stamina point... and I only had one Stamina point left (I was out of Provisions and potions and prayers to my goddess).

So just to call that attempt at Khare: Cityport of Traps over and done with and start again, I cast the spell, promptly died, but at least my dead body levitated out of there.

 

[Hygro]

even beyond str/dex, it's baffling that intelligence is a dump stat for combatants. smarts is crucial knowing where to move your weapon. reading your opponents. learning what to do, and when.

This abstraction is covered by experience level in your fighting class. I suppose in 5e it's overbalanced to your stats but in 1e, 2e, a 17 strength level 6 fighter has, effectively, a +5 to hit from level and +1 from str. In 3rd edition this would be +5 (or 6?) from level and +3 from str. So mostly it has been decided by experience level with stats as the edge.

 

[Angst]

This abstraction is covered by experience level in your fighting class. I suppose in 5e it's overbalanced to your stats but in 1e, 2e, a 17 strength level 6 fighter has, effectively, a +5 to hit from level and +1 from str. In 3rd edition this would be +5 (or 6?) from level and +3 from str. So mostly it has been decided by experience level with stats as the edge.

I mean sure; but there's something off in that you can't really effectively play a "smart" fighter, integrating it into what you do. The way to go is strong fighter. Which matters, but it's kinda sad.

I really enjoy D&D for what it is, but having tried out other systems with more open build possibilities, I've kinda been increasingly disappointed. There's not a lot of build control and having to cut away from your power to such a degree takes away from mechanical roleplaying. It's not that much of a problem mechanically since the game is mostly done to facilitate roleplaying with combat interspersed (ie it's more about what you find/explore/interact with than what your stats say), and for new players, knowing that you should care about some attributes and not care about others helps a lot of onloading, particularly in a system where you need to read & reasonably learn a book chapter's worth of text to understand what's going on at all.

 

[Hygro]

3d6 straight down for stats solves all the problems.

 

[Angst]

3d6 straight down for stats solves all the problems.

Not sure. I actually really enjoy randomization of systems like this, specifically if characters are actually in mortal danger. Problem is if you're stuck with an awfully performing character for years.

My qualm is simply that being smart makes you much better at fighting IRL (having physical bases covered), but there's no way to mechanically express that, and D&D rests on expressing your actions through randomization weighed by your mechanical skills. It's more a thing that's solved with more classes, such as Artificer being a potential expression of "I'm just gonna fight smart", but classes are very particular in D&D. This is good because they have a lot of identity and play very different; but it's bad since even with the amount of customization, paths of progression and what you should use to enhance yourself are really limited. I've played other systems where Smart Fighter is possible. I still prefer D&D over most systems since it's so evocative and elegant for what it is.

It's just a shame.

 

[Hygro]

Gods, geas, and treasures should alter your stats if you are playing a character for years.

But also just... talk to the DM. In Iron Heroes there's a weapon bind feat that binds your skill in that weapon to a different stat. When you think creatively, it could be literally any stat driving your edge.


As an aside I think the game plays better with less official classes and a strong discouraging element from there being "builds" like it's Diablo or World of Warcraft. 5e, for all its strengths, has stats give outsized effects, and everything else being in a +2 to +7 range really compresses dice outcomes outside the stats part. So I agree with your complaint of "having to cut away from your power to such a degree takes away from mechanical roleplaying". Stats more like 2e, and with the bonus range moved to +0 to +5, for example, and lower HP would make them game both more exciting and more roleplayed.

 

[Ajidica]

So SCA isn't HEMA?

Nope, though they are similar. SCA Rapier uses steel weapons and contact is done 'to the touch', which is basically the same as most HEMA groups. (SCA Cut&Thrust is also somewhat joking called SCA HEMA, as it is rapier but you can do cuts and percussive strikes.) SCA Armored uses wooden weapons but it has full force strikes. In any sort of swordfighting there are basically three concepts, of which you can choose two: real swords, real strikes, real armor. If you want real swords and real strikes, you need to get into those tank suits like the Battle of the Nations guys do. Rapier is real sword and real armor but limited strikes. SCA Armored is real armor and real strikes but limited weapons.


Incidentally, my experience with RPGs is that I prefer systems that put their focus not on character building but on having the action resolution rules fit support the theme. D&D and its variants may have all sorts stuff with character building, but the skill checks and combat rules are all very bland. Contrast that with John Carter of Mars or Fate of the Norns. In John Carter of Mars, it is based off of the classic swashbuckling adventure novels taking place on dying Mars, with airships, sky pirates, and rescuing the princess with a saber on one hand and a radium pistol in the other. The entire ruleset is designed to carry that feel through. It is less about do you succeed on normal tasks, but how you succeed. It leans heavily into an 'improv' aspect of "Yes and...". Okay, the players got lucky and managed to convince the Pirate Queen to let them go, but as they are escaping her fortress in one of her ships they are spotted by a warship from a city on patrol to fight the pirates, so now the players are in a desperate chase trying to avoid the shots of radium rifles and get into the canyon before the warship can get into a position to drop boarding parties.
The other one, Fate of the Norns, is a diceless system that has been described as 'anime vikings'. Set during Ragnarok, the players are great heros chosen by the gods to be their champion in the apocalypse. One of the starting abilities for a berserker is to transform into a blood wolf. What helps carry the vibe through is that instead of rolling dice, you pull rules that you have bound to your abilities out of a bag and build 'rune chains' to see what abilities you can activate, how you want to modify them (increased power, weapon effects, larger area, etc), and so on. It means that you are literally using your characters nature (their runes and fate) to see how they respond to situations.

 

[EgonSpengler]

Not sure. I actually really enjoy randomization of systems like this, specifically if characters are actually in mortal danger. Problem is if you're stuck with an awfully performing character for years.

My qualm is simply that being smart makes you much better at fighting IRL (having physical bases covered), but there's no way to mechanically express that, and D&D rests on expressing your actions through randomization weighed by your mechanical skills. It's more a thing that's solved with more classes, such as Artificer being a potential expression of "I'm just gonna fight smart", but classes are very particular in D&D. This is good because they have a lot of identity and play very different; but it's bad since even with the amount of customization, paths of progression and what you should use to enhance yourself are really limited. I've played other systems where Smart Fighter is possible. I still prefer D&D over most systems since it's so evocative and elegant for what it is.

It's just a shame.

In D&D, a lot of what you're describing can be covered by what's already in the game, with some creativity on the part of the players and some flexibility on the part of the DM. For example, the "Maneuvers" used by the Battle Master Fighter archetype are limited in the book: A Battlemaster gets only 3 of them and can use each of them only once per fight; other characters can get 1 or 2 Maneuvers by using a Feat. Also, Rogues can "Sneak Attack" - what used to be called a "Backstab" but has been opened up a little bit. They can hit a target for extra damage, right in the middle of a brawl, if they have Advantage or if the target is engaged in combat with someone else at the time - doubling-up on them, in other words.

If a DM is willing, all of these things could be loosened up, a lot or a little. Maybe every Class gets 1 Maneuver; the warrior Classes get 3; and Fighters who choose the Battlemaster archetype get 5 or 6. And maybe everybody can Sneak Attack, and Rogues instead get some new benefit that others don't (maybe they get to choose a roguish Feat for free). There are Feats that could be distributed around to players more liberally, too. As it is, characters don't get very many. I wouldn't be mad if my players wanted to declare that everybody gets double the Feats.

If you're aren't 'stuck' playing D&D, something like a fantasy-fighting version of Ace of Aces could theoretically work, in which the combatants simultaneously select maneuvers and then compare the result, without rolling any dice. Provided it was sufficiently decisive, it wouldn't have to take forever. However, I don't know how such a system could work with multiple combatants.

 

[Angst]

In D&D, a lot of what you're describing can be covered by what's already in the game, with some creativity on the part of the players and some flexibility on the part of the DM. For example, the "Maneuvers" used by the Battle Master Fighter archetype are limited in the book: A Battlemaster gets only 3 of them and can use each of them only once per fight; other characters can get 1 or 2 Maneuvers by using a Feat. Also, Rogues can "Sneak Attack" - what used to be called a "Backstab" but has been opened up a little bit. They can hit a target for extra damage, right in the middle of a brawl, if they have Advantage or if the target is engaged in combat with someone else at the time - doubling-up on them, in other words.

If a DM is willing, all of these things could be loosened up, a lot or a little. Maybe every Class gets 1 Maneuver; the warrior Classes get 3; and Fighters who choose the Battlemaster archetype get 5 or 6. And maybe everybody can Sneak Attack, and Rogues instead get some new benefit that others don't (maybe they get to choose a roguish Feat for free). There are Feats that could be distributed around to players more liberally, too. As it is, characters don't get very many. I wouldn't be mad if my players wanted to declare that everybody gets double the Feats.

If you're aren't 'stuck' playing D&D, something like a fantasy-fighting version of Ace of Aces could theoretically work, in which the combatants simultaneously select maneuvers and then compare the result, without rolling any dice. Provided it was sufficiently decisive, it wouldn't have to take forever. However, I don't know how such a system could work with multiple combatants.

About the DM being able to change things... While, yes, that's a solution, abd while yes, house rules are not just accepted but sometimes preferable to most players, it still doesn't change that the RAW leave a lot to be desired. ):

I still PREFER DND over most systems, but having tried a few others, I know there's a possibility of rules where it's less of a problem. DND won't do this though, and this is a good thing. When I want to play DND, I want to play DND. It does what it does well enough, and there's enough options in character expression that, having a few blind spots, it *feels* like I'm playing a druid if I took that class. So it's inflexible, but very evocative.

Like how in this thread we've been discussing that dexterity is more important than strength in melee, and strength more important than dexterity using bows. It's true in regards to realism but if I want to play a naked surpermuscle barbarian screaming moron with a big axe, the game serves me that experience on a silver platter. This is a good thing.

 

[EgonSpengler]

I'm not even sure what this conversation is about anymore. If D&D doesn't do what you want, change it or play something else. Both are pretty easy to do.

 

[Hygro]

About the DM being able to change things... While, yes, that's a solution, abd while yes, house rules are not just accepted but sometimes preferable to most players, it still doesn't change that the RAW leave a lot to be desired. ):

I still PREFER DND over most systems, but having tried a few others, I know there's a possibility of rules where it's less of a problem. DND won't do this though, and this is a good thing. When I want to play DND, I want to play DND. It does what it does well enough, and there's enough options in character expression that, having a few blind spots, it *feels* like I'm playing a druid if I took that class. So it's inflexible, but very evocative.

Like how in this thread we've been discussing that dexterity is more important than strength in melee, and strength more important than dexterity using bows. It's true in regards to realism but if I want to play a naked surpermuscle barbarian screaming moron with a big axe, the game serves me that experience on a silver platter. This is a good thing.

The stock rules accounts for dexterity as primary for many weapons, including @Ajidica 's personal weapon and example of choice, the rapier.

But understand that the core foundation of the rules and spirit of the game is that the rules are suggestions. "House rules" or "homebrew" isn't the distortion, it's the game.

 

[Angst]

I'm not even sure what this conversation is about anymore. If D&D doesn't do what you want, change it or play something else. Both are pretty easy to do.

here's my part of the thread;
- earlier in the thread i said i prefered dnd
- people were discussing dex vs str in dnd RAW.
- i noted that int should be important for weapons users too realistically, and that since mechanical expression is important in roleplaying, it's unfortunate that Smart Fighter runs contrary to the game
- some exchanges
- you noted it can be houseruled, i noted that houseruling by definition changes the system. it doesn't particularly solve the core issue of RAW being kind of unfortunate
- now you're confused because i like dnd i guess

so here's my response to your confusion; my guess is you went into the expectation either with the idea of defending dnd as a system (since house ruling exists) or making suggestions as to how to fix it when i noted a problem, reading me as if i wanted a fix, and not just me reflecting over a system's weakness during discussion.

but here's the thing. one can like and enjoy a system while still noticing and describing flaws in it. i noted RAW has problems mechanically expressing a core trope. expressing your roleplaying by randomly determining outcomes of actions, weighed by your stats & gear, is what dnd is about. that smart fighter is how it is, is unfortunate.

at the same time, specifically because of the constrained character paths with well-designed mechanical beats, what the game DOES allow you to do RAW is very evocative. it's just very limited and missing out on a few things.

one can still enjoy dnd for what it is; and yes i can play other systems on the side or instead of it, but that's kind of a strange response when what i'm doing is reflecting about the problems of a system i really like.

my guess is you probably engaged with my post over the latter thing; angst seems to be delineating a problem asking for a fix, i'm gonna help him out. but that was not really what i tried to do. i talked about a problem in the system, but i can still recognize that problem comes from a real benefit in it.

i just like talking game design, problems and benefits in design both fascinate me. ^^

 

[Angst]

The stock rules accounts for dexterity as primary for many weapons, including @Ajidica 's personal weapon and example of choice, the rapier.

But understand that the core foundation of the rules and spirit of the game is that the rules are suggestions. "House rules" or "homebrew" isn't the distortion, it's the game.

dex is primary for most weapons tho. irl that is. maybe not maces in a sense? i know very little about them specifically. but everything else. the game goes by the tolkien logic of intricate-looking weapons meaning smoother frame, and larger weapons meaning big muscles, and it's just not reflective of the real world. past a certain point, strength has very little relevance. but the realism thing is less relevant in a world where we're playing tolkien world. it's just sad that so many tropes are difficult to properly mechanically access.

in regards to house rules... i'm not sure, honestly. i guess we may have differing ideas of what it entails. there's a difference of making a dm fiat call for an ability check over a single idea a player has, and restructuring character progression for how attributes function for a class. the base game's character paths are quite linear compared to other systems i've played. that's all there is to it.

 

[Hygro]

dex is primary for most weapons tho. irl that is. maybe not maces in a sense? i know very little about them specifically. but everything else. the game goes by the tolkien logic of intricate-looking weapons meaning smoother frame, and larger weapons meaning big muscles, and it's just not reflective of the real world. past a certain point, strength has very little relevance. but the realism thing is less relevant in a world where we're playing tolkien world. it's just sad that so many tropes are difficult to properly mechanically access.

in regards to house rules... i'm not sure, honestly. i guess we may have differing ideas of what it entails. there's a difference of making a dm fiat call for an ability check over a single idea a player has, and restructuring character progression for how attributes function for a class. the base game's character paths are quite linear compared to other systems i've played. that's all there is to it.

I'm not convinced. At all. Definitely intrigued, and open. And certainly as a kid totally in the dex camp for realism. But... two people are of master skill level, but one is quite flexible and the other is very strong. Who is fighting better with sword/spear/axe/pike/halberd/mace/two-handed sword/hammer/quarter(not bo)staff/ ? The goal isn't "touch" to score a point, the goal is to crack bones and sever limbs, through armor, getting past shields, knocking away their weapon, standing firm against impact.

I know we have one simulation of armor + rapier + touch points giving @Ajidica a strong opinion that this is experience level first, dex second, and str third. D&D agrees since 3rd edition. Switch to a similarly heavy knight sword and D&D now disagrees. But I think to conversations with my brother, one who practices HEMA, the longsword. HEMA is interesting because it's jujitsu + swording. It's a full contact wrestling + striking sport. He will argue it makes sense that strength over dex for sword fighting.

I am inclined to agree. I did some judo, and judo is billed as a total finesse sport: a small person can use the large person's momentum against them. You don't need much strength, and technique is king. But in reality, strength is an incredible advantage. Technique (class experience level) is obviously first, but strength is what gives the edge. I was the most inflexible person in my judo cohort, and roughly equally skilled, but far from the worst.

Ability types in D&D are already a bit ludicrous. Your fast twitch reflexes are trained physically by weight lifting, particularly going fast and heavy. This is how you strengthen your brain-muscle connection via your nervous system. Fast twitch reflexes can also be trained mentally by competitive mouse clicking. Is that level of reflex not consistent with D&D wisdom? Is dexterity a mental trait or a physical one? Flexibility and reflexes are pretty different. To the extent that constitution isn't strength, how much of it is simply willpower and keeping your focus and therefore your health? Why aren't willpower saves constitution based? And for that matter, should the brave fighter really be worse than the studious wizard at resisting fear? Sometimes, but by default?

It helps to understand what the stats meant in the earlier editions. They were only smoothed to 2 points for 1 bonus in 3rd edition, codifying that those were the stats and disregarding their deeper complexities. Strength only gave a +1 to hit with str of 17 and 18. Now 18 was a funny case because fighters with 18 got an extra 1d100 strength category. 18/01 - 18/50 still only gave a +1 to hit. 18/51-99 gave a +2. Only 18/00 (100) gave a +3. But the damage bonus started at ... heck I'll just show you

Spoiler :

This is on the back of enemies having often same or better armor classes than in 5e. (But much lower hp). As the recommended stat generation method of first and second edition (same str table) is 4d6 drop the lowest, the expected distribution is 16, 14, 13, 12, 10, 9. You now have super duper strong characters with 16 strength, but still not strong enough to get a +hit bonus. 100% of their to-hit advantage then comes from experience level. 0% comes from strength, until they get gauntlets of ogre power, giving them the strength of a 10 foot monstrous giant, for whom their power delivers a +3 to hit. But by this point their THAC0 is double or more than effect.

Ultimately we agree, it's not a simulation of realism but a ruleset to engender a certain, say, mode of fantasy. The only risk is when the rules defy verisimilitude. For @AmazonQueen , a lack of damage reduction gradient from armor does that. It does not for me, the outcome between a binary and a stepped adjustment can be statistically the same on average, but one plays faster, with exciting variance. But I do also enjoy damage reduction rules as well.


As to your second point, if you want your fighter to have his talent augmented by intelligence instead of strength, say he studied anatomy and martial arts and his experience level is just practicing his brilliant thoughts, it is quite trivial for the DM to rule that your class be that variant. Same for any stat, even some of the weirder ones like constitution or charisma. If there's enough other PCs to create a balance complaint, just trade some power for it.

But ultimately, D&D works better a little uneven than it does smoothed out. Everyone having a specially named 1d12 + 5 attack starting at first level is bland. (At that level, better to say generic words like "I attack" than "I use firebolt" every turn. Drawing attention to a brand without substance increases tedium). But each character having their time to shine is exciting.

 

[Ajidica]

On mobile so I can’t post properly, but SCA Rapier and SCA Armored use different weapons and fighting styles. The importance of dexterity applies to both, whether you are working constraint and lunges in rapier, or if you are wielding a sword or war spear in armored and staying in measure with footwork or coordinating balance to get force on the strike.

The D&D problems come in when for armored knights can treat dex as a dump stat because they rely on armor for AC and penalty to dex gets high; or when you can wield a massive warbow when having noodle arms.

 

[Hygro]

On mobile so I can’t post properly, but SCA Rapier and SCA Armored use different weapons and fighting styles. The importance of dexterity applies to both, whether you are working constraint and lunges in rapier, or if you are wielding a sword or war spear in armored and staying in measure with footwork or coordinating balance to get force on the strike.

The D&D problems come in when for armored knights can treat dex as a dump stat because they rely on armor for AC and penalty to dex gets high; or when you can wield a massive warbow when having noodle arms.

Agreed with your D&D problems. It's another advantage of 1e/2e stats, dexterity is not penalized by armor. And bows are not assigned to their stats totally well. Though I do believe there was a str bonus to bows in some forms, in some editions.

To your first point, you state this elegantly.

 

[EgonSpengler]

dex is primary for most weapons tho. irl that is.

I'm not convinced. At all. Definitely intrigued, and open. And certainly as a kid totally in the dex camp for realism. But... two people are of master skill level, but one is quite flexible and the other is very strong. Who is fighting better with sword/spear/axe/pike/halberd/mace/two-handed sword/hammer/quarter(not bo)staff/ ? The goal isn't "touch" to score a point[..]

I wonder if Dexterity is being conflated with technique. I've never studied weapon combat, but as a fan of sport fighting, I think there's no question that technique is underrepresented in D&D. In boxing and grappling, technique even improves damage dealt, in a way that the casual viewer might not even understand. To be fair, it is hard to see with the naked eye, except in its effect, which might easily be confused for native agility or muscular power. I recall seeing an MMA fight recently in which a pro kickboxer knocked his opponent down with one punch and then delivered the "knockout blow" with a second punch. What was amazing was that the 2nd blow was delivered as the opponent was falling. The timing and precision were astonishing, but it wasn't Dexterity, in the D&D sense.

In addition to not accounting for technique in defense, D&D also doesn't account for technique in damage dealt or in timing and maneuver (the latter two have a lot to say about when blows are exchanged). A skilled fighter should get an AC bonus, an Initiative bonus, and a Damage bonus, in addition to a To Hit bonus.

On mobile so I can’t post properly, but SCA Rapier and SCA Armored use different weapons and fighting styles. The importance of dexterity applies to both, whether you are working constraint and lunges in rapier, or if you are wielding a sword or war spear in armored and staying in measure with footwork or coordinating balance to get force on the strike.

See, none of what you're describing is Dexterity to me, it's technique. Some of that is covered by proficiencies - a Wizard with a 16 Dexterity still can't use a longsword or wear armor in combat, because he doesn't know how; even with a 16 Dex, he'd be a clutz. Some of that could also be attributable to Feats or Maneuvers.

The D&D problems come in when for armored knights can treat dex as a dump stat because they rely on armor for AC and penalty to dex gets high; or when you can wield a massive warbow when having noodle arms.

Yeah, D&D tries to define your "light infantry" types - Rogues, Rangers - as "the ones who use ranged weapons more than melee weapons." That's not really how it is irl. Bows should definitely be Strength-based weapons. One thing I liked about The Lord of the Rings was the gigantic Uruk-Hai with your massive warbow that fired arrows that looked like spears. A bow strung for a fighter with an 18 Strength shouldn't even be usable for anyone with less than, I dunno, a 14 Strength. A bow strung for an Ogre should hit like a ballista. It would fire arrows as thick as broom handles and kill a Human through a wooden door.

 

[Hygro]

In addition to not accounting for technique in defense, D&D also doesn't account for technique in damage dealt or in timing and maneuver (the latter two have a lot to say about when blows are exchanged). A skilled fighter should get an AC bonus, an Initiative bonus, and a Damage bonus, in addition to a To Hit bonus.

It all gets rolled into +hit and hp. In an unequal fight, you dealing 9 damage could be described anywhere from "you gain ground, you are slightly less on the backfoot" to "you deliver a killing blow in a single strike."

But I do agree, that would be cool.

But guys nearly or literally all of your complaints and suggested solutions are featured in Iron Heroes, a d20 3.5e spinoff that kicked so much ass.
Armor as damage reduction? Check
Dodge bonuses that scale with level? Check
Taking on initiative bonuses as you level? Partial check
Assigning weapons to different stats for specific characters without breaking class? Check
Less of a Starwarsian hodgepodge of different Tolkein races all meeting in a bar? Check
Cool combat that rewards roleplay with rewarding rules? Check

And a bunch of other great things.

Here's the main sourcebook https://zaffudo.com/Iron Heroes.pdf

 

[Angst]

It all gets rolled into +hit and hp. In an unequal fight, you dealing 9 damage could be described anywhere from "you gain ground, you are slightly less on the backfoot" to "you deliver a killing blow in a single strike."

But I do agree, that would be cool.

But guys nearly or literally all of your complaints and suggested solutions are featured in Iron Heroes, a d20 3.5e spinoff that kicked so much ass.
Armor as damage reduction? Check
Dodge bonuses that scale with level? Check
Taking on initiative bonuses as you level? Partial check
Assigning weapons to different stats for specific characters without breaking class? Check
Less of a Starwarsian hodgepodge of different Tolkein races all meeting in a bar? Check
Cool combat that rewards roleplay with rewarding rules? Check

And a bunch of other great things.

Here's the main sourcebook https://zaffudo.com/Iron Heroes.pdf

I'll check it out :3