|
Post by madwill on Apr 17, 2012 18:28:11 GMT -5
hello, everyone
i've played TFT off and on since '82. it was great to see the streamlined DCG version. here are my house rules, most of which i just plugged in from the original version.
1) character creation: the only change i made was skill points being IQ/2 rounded down.
2) reaction: i added two more reactions- parry- win DEX+weapon skill vs. attackers roll result if hit, and block- make a DEX+1 roll to stop an attack to the front with an equipped shield. if either block or parry succeeded with a double or triple result you may counterattack.
3) dual weapons: attacking- if your main weapon hits, wether it was parried, blocked etc. you may make a follow up attack with the off hand weapon at DEX. parrying- you must declare which weapon you are parrying with and if that parry is succesful (either dex+weapon skill, or, just dex for the offhand weapon) you may counterstrike with the other weapon.
4) 0 or less STR: after combat make a survival roll. roll 3d6: if the result is triples you have only suffered a lucky hit and recover all but 1 STR. if you rolled doubles you are wounded losing either the largest single hit or your -STR total, whichever is higher. if the roll had neither doubles or triples then you are dying and in need of immidiate aid or you die within the hour.
5) missle weapons range: -1 DEX for each full number of hexes = to the heft of the weapon fired. ex. a long bow would be-1 at 11-21 hexes -2 at 22-32 etc.
any comments and criticisims are welcome.
|
|
|
Post by mister frau blucher on Apr 18, 2012 11:39:07 GMT -5
Hello, Madwill,
Welcome to the forum!
Thanks for posting your house rules - I always like looking over someone else's thoughts on the rules.
I like the IQ/2 for skills. It puts a premium on the stst for warriors at character creation that it lacked before.
I'd have to playtest the parry rules. First thoughts are that they are a little more advantageous than Dodging.
Missile weapon - I like the simplicity of using Heft. Might be a little too generous, though. If you are shooting at a target with a longbow 30 hexes away it is -2 to hit. That is a range of 150 feet. I would think it would be more difficult to hit a target at that range than a -2, but then again these are trained warriors so maybe not.
Cool stuff!
Post more!
Welcome again.
Bret
|
|
|
Post by madwill on Apr 19, 2012 6:52:57 GMT -5
Hello, Madwill, Welcome to the forum! Thanks for posting your house rules - I always like looking over someone else's thoughts on the rules. I like the IQ/2 for skills. It puts a premium on the stst for warriors at character creation that it lacked before. I'd have to playtest the parry rules. First thoughts are that they are a little more advantageous than Dodging. Missile weapon - I like the simplicity of using Heft. Might be a little too generous, though. If you are shooting at a target with a longbow 30 hexes away it is -2 to hit. That is a range of 150 feet. I would think it would be more difficult to hit a target at that range than a -2, but then again these are trained warriors so maybe not. Cool stuff! Post more! Welcome again. Bret thanks for the welcome:) the IQ/2 for skills helps out a player who wants to make a leader type fighter. one of my players went STR 11 DX 11 IQ 10 so now he can start with sword 2, leadership, tactics, herbalist. an officer in training lol. the parry rules are completely untested, as are most of them so far in the context of this system. i think parry will end up harder than dodge as you have to beat the attack roll with your own. i thought fighters who wanted to avoid damage and still hold their ground should have an option. dodge just requires 3/DX to move out and away from the attacker. my idea is to make attack rolls in the open and tell the player wether he's hit or not. and, by looking at the attack roll number decide which defense to use. if the attack roll is close to or over his his DX+skill he may opt to dodge or block. if the attack roll is lower by a fair amount he may decide to parry and not give ground, or, as usual, take the hit and get a guranteed countersrtike. Blocking- you suffer the DX peanlty as usual then you get the shield DR as a bonus (+1, +2, +3) to your block attempt. i didn't clarify how that worked very well in my first post. against ranged is where the shields start to differentiate as small shields offer no protection from missle. large and tower shields offer 4/DX and 5/DX protection from missle fire through the front hexes respectively. i based the missle ranges on a 1yd= 1 hex. i know a lot of bow hunters here in rural michigan. 20-30 yards seems a more common range and 40+ are the rarer ones. but, in a 5'= 1 hex scale i'd say if your target has moved the previous turn you are 4/DX to hit in addition to the range penalties. that makes getting the first shot in when you have initiative the first turn very important as once things start moving it gets much harder.
|
|
|
Post by klingor on Apr 30, 2012 17:33:11 GMT -5
Hi Madwill, I like the idea of skills being linked to IQ, although I think that the minimum no. of skill points for starting characters should be as per RCG and then allowing more skills for a higher allocation of IQ points. If you are creating a character for an adventure that has a greater number of total points as a baseline, then I definitely think that IQ should be factored into skills generation somehow - it certainly allows a lot more options to be considered as regarding character (and party) generation. Cheers, and please keep continuing to post any more ideas. If they're all as good as that, I'd welcome them. Colin
|
|
|
Post by madwill on May 1, 2012 0:31:58 GMT -5
Hello, Madwill, Welcome to the forum! Thanks for posting your house rules - I always like looking over someone else's thoughts on the rules. I like the IQ/2 for skills. It puts a premium on the stst for warriors at character creation that it lacked before. I'd have to playtest the parry rules. First thoughts are that they are a little more advantageous than Dodging. Missile weapon - I like the simplicity of using Heft. Might be a little too generous, though. If you are shooting at a target with a longbow 30 hexes away it is -2 to hit. That is a range of 150 feet. I would think it would be more difficult to hit a target at that range than a -2, but then again these are trained warriors so maybe not. Cool stuff! Post more! Welcome again. Bret a possible solution to the missle weapon range question would be to double the penalty. -2 instead of -1 per heft in hexes. that would make the 150' shot you mentioned a -4, a more substantial lowering of the chance to hit.
|
|
|
Post by madwill on May 1, 2012 0:50:37 GMT -5
Hi Madwill, I like the idea of skills being linked to IQ, although I think that the minimum no. of skill points for starting characters should be as per RCG and then allowing more skills for a higher allocation of IQ points. If you are creating a character for an adventure that has a greater number of total points as a baseline, then I definitely think that IQ should be factored into skills generation somehow - it certainly allows a lot more options to be considered as regarding character (and party) generation. Cheers, and please keep continuing to post any more ideas. If they're all as good as that, I'd welcome them. Colin the IQ/2 (rounded down) assumes the base of 4 skills is from an IQ of 8. for every 2 more points of IQ the character gains one more skill. i've added a few more options in my game as i'm running it in Arthurian Brittan. the players chose a culture, roll for social station which results in 6 culture/ background skill then they apply the IQ/2 skill points topped off by an age roll which adds a random amount of exp for them to spend representing previous adventures before the campaing started. the knights (no one made a wizard) range in age from 17-24, the 24 year old garnered enough exp for two stat increases to represent he's been in tournaments, wars, skimishes for almost 10 years. but, i digress, i'm going to playtest the house rules more next weekend. i'll start the session with the newly recruited knights training with practice armor and weapons, so, i can get the game going and playtest at the same time ;D
|
|
|
Post by madwill on May 1, 2012 0:51:08 GMT -5
Hi Madwill, I like the idea of skills being linked to IQ, although I think that the minimum no. of skill points for starting characters should be as per RCG and then allowing more skills for a higher allocation of IQ points. If you are creating a character for an adventure that has a greater number of total points as a baseline, then I definitely think that IQ should be factored into skills generation somehow - it certainly allows a lot more options to be considered as regarding character (and party) generation. Cheers, and please keep continuing to post any more ideas. If they're all as good as that, I'd welcome them. Colin the IQ/2 (rounded down) assumes the base of 4 skills is from an IQ of 8. for every 2 more points of IQ the character gains one more skill. i've added a few more options in my game as i'm running it in Arthurian Brittan. the players chose a culture, roll for social station which results in 6 culture/ background skill then they apply the IQ/2 skill points topped off by an age roll which adds a random amount of exp for them to spend representing previous adventures before the campaing started. the knights (no one made a wizard) range in age from 17-24, the 24 year old garnered enough exp for two stat increases to represent he's been in tournaments, wars, skimishes for almost 10 years. but, i digress, i'm going to playtest the house rules more next weekend. i'll start the session with the newly recruited knights training with practice armor and weapons, so, i can get the game going and playtest at the same time ;D
|
|
|
Post by klingor on May 1, 2012 18:35:31 GMT -5
I think of the skillset your character starts with as coming from two sources - upbringing and training. Upbringing is, basically, your species and your environment, so an Elf brought up in an urban setting would get free spoken Elvish and a free urban skill. If brought up in a rural setting they would get free spoken Elvish and a free rural skill. The skills available would be dictated by the particular town/city they grew up in or the particular type of non-urban setting (eg forest, plains, hills, etc). If it was an open community ie had regular contact with other races, they would get Common Tongue as a free skill, otherwise would have Literacy in their racial/species language instead (cf Deep Dwarfs in Terry Pratchett's THUD). Trained skills are the ones you can pick for yourself. I would determine how many of these ones using your IQ/2 rule. If you allow wizards to acquire skills/spells this way as well, then a way to do it would be to multiply (IQ/2 rounded down) by 10 and then allocate that many XPs to acquiring skills/spells at the standard rate for Fighters/Wizards. Cheers Colin BTW, your mention of Arthurian Britain as the basis for your campaign strikes a chord with me re Grailquest.
|
|
|
Post by madwill on May 1, 2012 22:54:03 GMT -5
I think of the skillset your character starts with as coming from two sources - upbringing and training. Upbringing is, basically, your species and your environment, so an Elf brought up in an urban setting would get free spoken Elvish and a free urban skill. If brought up in a rural setting they would get free spoken Elvish and a free rural skill. The skills available would be dictated by the particular town/city they grew up in or the particular type of non-urban setting (eg forest, plains, hills, etc). If it was an open community ie had regular contact with other races, they would get Common Tongue as a free skill, otherwise would have Literacy in their racial/species language instead (cf Deep Dwarfs in Terry Pratchett's THUD). Trained skills are the ones you can pick for yourself. I would determine how many of these ones using your IQ/2 rule. If you allow wizards to acquire skills/spells this way as well, then a way to do it would be to multiply (IQ/2 rounded down) by 10 and then allocate that many XPs to acquiring skills/spells at the standard rate for Fighters/Wizards. Cheers Colin BTW, your mention of Arthurian Britain as the basis for your campaign strikes a chord with me re Grailquest. thats pretty close to how i have it set up. choose a "race" roman, britton, saxon, pict. each of those give 3 different skills. then, roll for your fathers station which covers the gamut from lord to lowly warrior. your father's station gives you 3 more skills ( which can stack with your culture based ones) and your base equipment. then decide wether or not you're a spell caster then spend your IQ/2 (rounded down) in points with the limit that no skill can start higher than 2 (i have a current max of 5 skill levels). then roll for your age which generates a random amount of exp. which can be spent anyway the player chooses. skills can be taken beyond level 2 with this exp. i played grailquest when i was in high school. i might see if i still have my copy. this generation system is my adaptation of pendragon to the LAW system.
|
|
|
Post by klingor on Aug 28, 2012 15:19:18 GMT -5
Madwill, I've just read your original post again, and realised that you'd referred to something I think is overlooked in LAW. You mentioned double/triple damage rolls and I realised that there is no auto success/failure. My thoughts are 3/4 are automatic successes, 17/18 are automatic failures. How I play it is this:- Rolls of 4 or 17 simply mean that no matter how good or bad you are, what you tried worked or didn't work. A success roll of 3 or a failure roll of 18 are different league to me. If you roll a 3 on a physical attack means that you have hit and the damage you inflict ignores all physical defences - armour, shield etc - everything except magical physical protection ( eg Stone/Iron Flesh, protection rings etc). On a magical attack, unless on a contested roll, you cause the maximum effect automatically. If you roll 18, on the other hand, on a physical attack you lose the next round's actions - you've tripped and fallen over, lost your balance or dropped your weapon whatever - you are hors de combat for the next round. For a magical attack, you lose the full fatigue cost of the spell. You also lose your action on your next turn. Since the chance of a 3 is less than 1/200 and likewise an 18, and 4/17 are about 1/70 each, and cumulatively 3/4 and 17/18 rate < 2% for each couple, it livens up the game without unbalancing it. Cheers Colin
|
|