Diversifying Fighting Styles (was: One-Handed Fighting)

[Clovenhoof]

So in this example where PA is pretty much mandatory, you would just make it a feature of your game that all character get the power attack feat for free.

You're right, I also thought of that, and it probably would be the right thing to do. I'm considering it, but I'm not sure I want everyone PAing all the time. I have a feeling that with a general damage boosting ability, all other combat-oriented feats become altogether unnecessary.

Another option that just occured to me would be to limit Power Attack to x1 damage for OHW and THW and none for LW, but implement a new extra feat that allows to add double damage when THFing. That way, THFers do kick the most ass, but at least they have to pay an extra feat for it.
By the RAW it's on the contrary so that other styles like TWF have to buy feat after feat just to get _near_ the effectiveness of a THFer with PA alone.

Here's an example how those extra feats might look like.
> Power Attack: 1x damage bonus for OHW and THW, none for LW
|-> Light Power Attack: 1x damage bonus for Light Weapons
|-> Heavy Power Attack: 2x damage bonus for One Handed Weapons
|--> Two-Handed Power Attack: 2x damage bonus for Two Handed Weapons
[Cleave and Great Cleave as usual]

So in this case, you don't get anything for free, but have to work your way to the top by "unlocking" heavier weapons. HPA would be a prereq for THPA because THPA has a higher damage output and thus should cost more. And, since the whole chain now costs one or two feats more, other non-PA fighting styles (like Improved Crit) might actually be worth the bother.

Did anyone even glance at that thread I posted on the Riddle of Steal?

As a matter of fact, I did read that thread, but I heartily disagree with that concept. I'm not that well versed in gaming theory, but in plain English, it's boring if everything does the same and in exactly the same way. I don't want to carry that discussion over here, though.

It's okay, even desirable, if the different weapons and fighting styles net the same amount of kills over time, but they should do so in different ways.
A very simple example is comparing broadsword and battle axe. Both have d10 damage (let's omit AP here), but one has 19-20/x2 crit and the other is plain x3. If you do the math, both weapons will do exactly the same amount of average damage, but they do so in different ways. A very strong character may get more kills out of the broadsword, while a more average fighter can pass the MDT better with the battleaxe.

On the same note, you might be able to equalize kills by means of a feat that increases your critical multiplier, and is compatible with Improved/Greater Crit but incompatible with PA. But it would require some math to verify that a Power Critter scores as many kills as a Power Attacker. Anyway.

The ideal system of balance would be a weapon triangle, in the fashion of the good old stone-scissors-paper. In this case, it might look like:
THF beats TWF
TWF beats S&B
S&B beats THF

It doesn't matter for the sake of this discussion if the triangle should look like this. D20 doesn't compare weapons or fighting styles in this way. You just get a handful of situations where one style is superior to the others. Confined quarters, THWs get a penalty. You get Sneak Attack, TWF rules. It doesn't really work for S&B and much less for OHF, alas.

 

[Style]

Just to clarify, I'm not saying that you should give Power Attack to everyone for free, I'm just saying that if the rules are such that power attack really isn't an option any more, it's a requirement, then don't make it an option.

Concerning the Riddle of steel, I agree with you. I would like the end result of equipment to be equal, but not how you get there.

I felt that Clint Black's Pecs and Pulchritude setting rules on the surface looked like they did exactly that (from the Riddle of Steel thread). When you really analyze it though, there are problems. One, the biggest equalizer he puts on the greater damage dealt by larger weapons is to reduce parry. As discussed earlier, the best defense is dispatching your enemy asap, so that's not much of an equalizer. Add to that the nice parry bonus light weapons give you, and now there is no reason for non-melee types (read Sorcerers) to not use a light weapon constantly. The end result is all melee types are using the biggest sword they can find and all sorcerers are using daggers. That's not really solving the problem of everyone looking alike, is it?

Also, Pecs and Pulchritude put huge emphasis on the abilities strength and vigor (constitution). One of the beautiful things about SW is all of the abilities are important. This tosses that out the door, and makes strength and vigor clearly more attractive. So now you'd have players looking alike in other ways besides equipment and fighting styles, they'd all be pumping their strength and vigor!

One solution for the problem on my end with SW could be to give more attacks per round for lighter weapons. Of course, damage reduction only makes this so good. It might actually balance out in a game like SW where strength is a much larger portion of your damage than it is in D20 and damage rolls are open ended. The latter meaning that even though your opponent is hitting you with a light weapon, if he hits you enough times sooner or later he's going to get some nice rolls and deal a good bit of damage.

Changing the number of attacks per round is a massive alteration of the SW rules though. We're talking about a system that doesn't allow you to have extra attacks a round EVER with out feats.

 

[Clovenhoof]

Somehow I feel reminded of The Dark Eye system again:
- by default, you only ever get one attack and one parry attempt per round. Under certain circumstances, you can trade your parry for a second attack.
- there are dozens, if not over a hundred different weapons -- and most of them have (near-)identical stats. A large proportion of players is rather tired of this and would like to see more diversity in game data.

Concerning Damage Reduction:
the nominal maximum in DR is 12 (Full Plate + Great Helm). [The only viable exception would be a high-level Barbarian in heavy armour, but normally Barbs don't do that.] It is entirely possible even for low-level characters to Pierce such armour (for instance with a Warhammer). Bang, effective DR is 6.
However, most opponents will not have DR12 to begin with. A value like 6 to 8, 10 tops is more likely. Even easier to Pierce. Effective DR = 3-5.

Now of course, if you do only 10-12 raw damage per hit, even 3-5DR seriously cripples your efforts. But if you optimize towards Massive Damage, it doesn't make _such_ a big difference if you need to score 24, 25 or 26 points of gross damage.

So the long and short of it is that, to achieve style diversity, we need to make sure that a number of styles can cause around 25 points of raw damage through means of their own (other than exceptional die rolls).

So, if we leave out Sneak Attack, I see currently two options: either Power Attack or Critical Hits. The difference is that you can benefit from PA from pretty early on (let's say level 4), whereas you can't improve your Crits before level 8 (Barb 14) and maximize them at level 16 (20). By that time, it's likely you have long since taken Power Attack and don't need Improved Crit anymore.

Picking up my aforementioned idea of splitting up PA into several feats, the improvement feats could easily get BAB requirements similar to the Crit feats, so there's a real choice if you want to go the Power or Crit route.

 

[Ichabod]

I looked at some of it. Given that we are playing a d20 game, then I think one is stuck with there being a difference in what you are using. Now, for any system I'd want to play in, I'm perfectly fine with the idea that equipment is purely a matter of style.

You still need a way to differentiate characters, though. Clovenhoof mentioned something that I think is important. To some extent, you want a rock-paper-scissors situation. You don't want it to be clear cut, but you need some sort of combat metagame for people to want to fight differently. It's not nonexistent in Conan, but it's much more prevalent for NPCs/antagonists. PC archery blows, but you can wreck a party with it. Grappling has all sorts of problems against monsters, which are our usual opponents, but is awesome against PCs. Even sneak attack has some meta component in that the big SAer is likely to be great for killing something with a high Fortitude save that isn't immune to SA but can only do it so often.

If the GM puts enough encounters out that favor a particular style of combat, you fix the problem. But, the reality is is that PCs use whatever is most generally useful because ... it's generally useful.

 

[Clovenhoof]

I'm just reading the 2nd Alpha release of Paizo's Pathfinder RPG. For those who haven't heard of it, it's sort of a reworked D&D 3.5, sticking to the same basic system, sort of like "D&D 3.75" if you would say so. My first impression is that the non-magical classes seem to enjoy several powerups.

What sounds interesting and could be of use to us are a variety of new combat feats, including various Combat Styles. These styles are typically unlocked by an entry feat and then enhanced by two consecutive feats, in the vein of Dodge-Mobility-Spring Attack.
(Most existing feats have been reworked in some way (read: spiced up), but that doesn't need to bother us now.)

So, since the feats appear to be open content, I will post some of them here. DISCLAIMER: I'm not saying all of these should be ported to Conan, as they are balanced for a D&D-like magic level etc. This is just for inspiration:

Dazzling Display: make an Attack roll or Intimidate check to Intimidate all opponents who can see you within 30'
Stunned Defense: Intimidated foes are flat-footed
Deadly Stroke: flat-footed/stunned foes take double damage

Deft Shield: retain shield bonus if you hit with a Bash
Shield Slam: free Bull Rush with a Bash attack
Shield Master: no two-weapon penalties when using shield
[the latter would not apply to Conan anyway]

Wind Stance: gain 20% concealment when you move more than 5'
Lighting Stance: gain 50% concealment on a double move action
[those two seem too Kung Fu Movie style for my liking]

Double Slice: TWF, +2 bonus to attack with Light weapon
Two-Weapon Rend: on TW hit, increase damage by 1d10

Overhand Chop: add x2 Str bonus to damage for Two-handed weapon
Backswing: gain one extra attack with THW
Devastating Blow: one hit (per round?) is automatic crit

Scorpion Style: Unarmed. Reduce opponents speed to 5'
Gorgon's Fist: daze a foe whose speed is reduced
Medusa's Wrath: two extra attack against dazed foe

Vital Strike: drop lowest attack, double damage dice for remaining attacks
Improved Vital Strike: drop two lowest attacks, triple damage dice for remaining attack.
in either case, only weapon damage dice are multiplied, not Str mod or other damage boosters.

Weapon Swap: ITWF -- make all attacks with primary weapon, i.e. benefit from ITWF attacks even when you don't have an off-hand weapon.

---
Again, these were written with D&D balance in mind, where where armour gives AC instead of DR and and a THFer sacrifices a lot of AC. For Conan, the styles should be rewritten to give the non-THF styles some candy without further boosting THF at the same time. But I think there are some good ideas here that could help creating more variety in melee combat.

 

[Style]

Picking up my aforementioned idea of splitting up PA into several feats, the improvement feats could easily get BAB requirements similar to the Crit feats, so there's a real choice if you want to go the Power or Crit route.

If you go this route, I'm guessing your players won't be dancing in the streets. Your house rule will mean what they use to get in one feat now requires several feats. I'm not saying it's not a good solution, I'm just saying it likely won't go over well.

 

[Krushnak]

Ok heres two combat maneouvers/feats i've come up with lately. names arent final and all comments welcome.

Swashbuckling. prereqs: Dodge feat, Dodge bonus of +2 or greater.

while weilding a one handed or light weapon with nothing in the other hand and also wearing light or no armour you gain 1 1/2 your dex bonus to dodge.

note: you may still make unarmed attacks with the off hand while using this maneouver.

- this isnt the damage powerhouse of 2h and powerattack but you can still pwa with the one handed weapon and makes you quite decent with both damge and defense no matter the situation without being ridiculous.

Tiger Strike. prereqs: Mobility feat Str 13+, Dex 13+

When you successfully use the feint combat action it lowers the action required eg: standard action becomes move action and if you have improved feint feat then it becomes a free action allowing you to make a full attack against the fainted target.

this may only be used while wearing light or no armour and weilding one handed or light weapons.

Another thing ive been working on is massive hits and precise blows. basically the more you beat an opponents DV by the more effects you can add to the attack. eg: choose one effect.

beat DV by 5; you may do an additional d4 damage(or +2), lower the targets movement by 10ft for a round or impose a -2 penalty on the targets next attack roll.

beat DV by 10; you may do an additional d8 damage(or +4), halve the targets movement speed for 5 rounds or negate the use of one of the targets arms(or appropriate appendage for weird critters) for 5 rounds aslong as the target fails a fort save(set as damage dealt).

beat DV by 15; you may do an additional d12 damage(or +6), reduce the targets movement to 5ft for the next 10 rounds, negate the use of one of the targets arms for 10 rounds if they fail a fort save (dc 5+ dmg), blind the target for 1d4 rounds.

These extra effects can only be used by pc's and the important named npc's. against mooks you way want to just do the extra damage so you dont bog the fight down.

the extra damage is multiplied when a critical is dealt in which case you may want to just use the static number instead of the dice. for working out if a massive hit is scored on a critical hit then heres what i suggest. on a nat 20 whether it is confirmed or not you count as having reached the 'beat dv by 5 bracket' and can try and push it further on the threat roll. on a non nat 20 critical you use the base attack roll not the threat roll to determine if you've done a massive hit.

hope you enjoy these, nothings set in stone so let me know what you think.

 

[Clovenhoof]

@Krushnak: I can see where you want to go with those Precise Blows, but in their current form they are hardly worth the bother. If you can beat the target DV by 15, you can as well PA them for -15 and do an extra 15 (or even 30) damage, instead of the +6 that your draft offers.

Some more observations and analyses on the system in general:

Critical Hits
What's kinda annoying me atm is that critical hits are just noise in the system now. In Conan they are more useful than in D&D because of MDS, but they simply are not reliable enough. By the time you get to improve your threat range, you're likely to already have other means of inflicting MD available to you (like the standard PA).
I might cancel the threat confirmation roll entirely. A threat would be an automatic crit. That would make crits more dangerous on low levels (easily dispatching a healthy 3rd-level on an average damage roll), but it wouldn't make a lot of difference on high levels, since the confirmation succeeds almost always anyway.

Defense Values
Which brings me to another issue, Defense. It's well and good that Conan features inherent defense progressions, but they may be too low. Even if a Soldier focuses totally on defense, with large shield and combat expertise and whatnot, any average warrior will still hit him very often; almost 50% of the time.
It's even more drastic for classes with a +10 progression and no Combat Expertise; here maximum Defense is Base 10 + 10 Class + 8 Abi + 2 Misc = 30; i.e. a regular warrior can only miss on a natural 1.

Massive Damage Chance
I quickly whipped together a spreadsheet calculating the odds of forcing MDS depending on fighting style, named MDC (Massive Damage Chance) based on a sample warrior with Str 22 attacking a foe with DR6-8 (armour pierced). I also took into account the reduced hit chance on a Power Attack. I can't write it all down here due to formatting problems, but the results are around the following:

* OHF/S&B has a 5% MDC without PA (crit necessary), but 26% chance with PA5;
* TWF with 2 short swords has a 10% MDC, PA impossible, crit necessary
* TWF with Two Weapon Strike increases MDC to 45%;
* THF has a 40% MDC without PA, and around 65% with PA5;

How to interpret these percentages:
"100%" is the abstract chance to score a hit without attack modifiers -- of course this is not 100% in actual game but depends on attack bonus and DV. PA5 reduces attack by 5 points = -25% hit chance, so the MDC for PAs is multiplied by 0.75 (included in these figures).
Also, I assumed that threats are automatically confirmed. If you roll confirmation separately, S&B and regular TWF MDCs will drop even lower.

With my current set of houserules, the odds change as follows:
* S&B 26% unchanged
* TWF (free TWS) at 45% unchanged (but costs 1 less feat);
* THF (nerfed weapon damage and PA) drops to ~40%.

This shows that my previous idea of increasing the crit multiplier will not significantly change the MDCs. A regular x2 crit with an average damage roll is usually sufficient to exceed the MDT. So scratch that approach.

Still working on new fighting styles for OHWs... but nothing fit for print yet.

 

[Spectator]

Maybe I'm missing something but...

All the tweaks and twinks that have been proposed seem like you are "skinning the cat" the wrong way.

Why not alter the MDT amount from 20 hp to something else or eliminate it.

I don't use MDT, but were I, I would have the MDT based on Level so perhaps a 10th level character might have a MDT of 20 + 1hp per level for a 30 hp DT or whatever function you wish. It seems a lot easier than re-writing numerous feats.

 

[Clovenhoof]

Alright, I hadn't considered these, so let's analyse.

Without MD you get the D&D-typical "rolling down hp" which gets pretty annoying at higher levels. To me at least; since you don't use it I suppose you're fine with it.
Anyway, even without MDS, THF is still the single most efficient fighting style, because you cause twice as much damage. Granted, other manoeuvres like Trip etc. would become more attractive, but the bias towards THF wouldn't change a bit.

Secondly, I'm afraid altering the MDT is not going to help either:
- if you increase MDT, you make sure that forcing MDS is nigh-impossible to anything BUT two-handed weapons. That's exactly the opposite effect of what I'm trying to do.
- now if we instead _lowered_ the MDT, say to 15 pts or simply to equal CON, the percentages would increase for everything. So we might get a 40% MDC for one-handed weapons but 90% for THW. Not any better either.

What I feel would be necessary to add variety would be to either provide for similar MDCs for different styles, OR if you let THF keep its massive advantage, make up some serious drawback to balance it (and I mean serious, not some half-ass situational mumbo-jumbo). I'm thinking something like a -4 general attack penalty, but I have a feeling that would be hard to convey.

 

[Majestic7]

What comes to criticals being just noise, I use these:

http://paizo.com/gameMastery/accessories/v5748btpy7wv9

With these cards, crits can do things such as pluck out your eyes or cut off your arm. In Conan this is especially bad as there is no magical healing available - easily at least. Great fun.

 

[Style]

What about altering MDT based on the fighting style? Styles that deal less damage have a lower MDT. You could use your fancy spread sheet to determine the exact number so that the odds of MDT are equal per style.

 

[Spectator]

What about altering MDT based on the fighting style? Styles that deal less damage have a lower MDT. You could use your fancy spread sheet to determine the exact number so that the odds of MDT are equal per style.

I'm not sure what that accomplishes except leveling the playing field between the dagger wielding temptress and the axe swinging barbarian. The playing field should not be level after all the axe (two hand) should be able to meet the MD threshold a lot easier.

I am still not convinced Why there is a MD rule, other than to make combat more deadly. Heck, let the two players have a slugfest until one runs out of HPs. Just my two cents.

On a related note, its good to see some activity on this forum again.

 

[Clovenhoof]

I'm not sure what that accomplishes except leveling the playing field between the dagger wielding temptress and the axe swinging barbarian.

That's right, and I don't want to do that. I want to level the playing field between the greataxe-wielding barbarian and the broadsword-wielding barbarian. It's a bit tricky to generate specific bonuses that don't create unwanted synergies.

I am still not convinced Why there is a MD rule, other than to make combat more deadly.

Apart from preventing nonsense like soaking a 200ft-drop, I like it because it speeds up combat. At higher levels, let's say around 12, a fight between 4 PCs and 8 (weaker) opponents will consist of up to 26 attack rolls per round, even more if there are TWFers around. Then there's miss chance and damage reduction. Maybe the fight lasts just two rounds. But that's already a damn lot of rolls and will take hours on the gaming table. During the entire time, three out of four players will be doing nothing because it's not their turn. They get bored, start fooling around, chatting, or turn their attention towards their cell phones.
With MD, the same fight may be over rather quick, and after a lot fewer rolls. Maybe it took just fifteen minutes realtime. Everyone is still fresh and attentive and eager to proceed.

And that example is just for a minor skirmish. Not to mention a real slugfest against hundreds of mooks, or a boss battle against a 400hp-colossus.

Heck, let the two players have a slugfest until one runs out of HPs. Just my two cents.

I don't know about your game, but we don't have two players fighting each other to the death, but about four players taking on a variety of opposition, which are all controlled by the GM. Combat is very rarely a duel-style one on one.

Anyway, I digress. My primary concern is still to add variety to combat, and that can only be encouraged by balancing the various styles, and not having a single most efficient no-brainer choice.

 

[kintire]

Without MD you get the D&D-typical "rolling down hp" which gets pretty annoying at higher levels. To me at least; since you don't use it I suppose you're fine with it.

I don't use MD either, and I've never had this problem. Conan fighting types hand out enough damage that the HPs "roll down" pretty damn quickly in my experience.

I'm not sure what that accomplishes except leveling the playing field between the dagger wielding temptress and the axe swinging barbarian. The playing field should not be level after all the axe (two hand) should be able to meet the MD threshold a lot easier.

Why? There is a reason why every almost every warrior in history has carried a dagger: the damn things are lethal. There seems to be an assumption that bigger is better, but once metal is inside your body it doesn't really matter how much is still sticking out. A dagger in the throat will kill you just as instantly as an axe in the skull.

At higher levels, let's say around 12, a fight between 4 PCs and 8 (weaker) opponents will consist of up to 26 attack rolls per round, even more if there are TWFers around. Then there's miss chance and damage reduction. Maybe the fight lasts just two rounds. But that's already a damn lot of rolls and will take hours on the gaming table. During the entire time, three out of four players will be doing nothing because it's not their turn. They get bored, start fooling around, chatting, or turn their attention towards their cell phones.
With MD, the same fight may be over rather quick, and after a lot fewer rolls. Maybe it took just fifteen minutes realtime. Everyone is still fresh and attentive and eager to proceed.

If the players don't enjot combat, the solution isn't to make combat over in one round, its to make combat interesting! I don't find it too bad. Attack rolls are over pretty quickly. We spend more time on maneuvering than rolling attacks: providing you are firm with the time wasters (Hold Dice in Hand: Look Pensive: Roll The Dice Back and Forth in the Hand: Repeat)

 

[Elements Warden]

Clovenhoof I'm interested in any other ideas you may have come up with since April. :?: Please post if you have new thoughts.

 

[Clovenhoof]

Sorry, kinda lost track of this board, but anyway I haven't even come to a conclusion yet.

But the current selection of options I see is:

- directly enhance damage by a fixed amount, like +1 or +2. In this case, +1 may still be unattractive, while +2 equals free Weapon Specialization. However, you get more damage bonus out of wielding the OH-weapon with two hands.
- increase damage by Dex modifier in addition to 1x Str mod.
- increase Attack rating by few points (or possibly the Dex mod). This would be very versatile because you could trade Attack for Damage with good old PA.
- grant free extra attacks, similar to certain Paizo Pathfinder feats. I have to read up again on how those work. Of course, a single extra attack at full attack bonus is worth _a lot_.

We also need to consider in what form the bennies should be granted:
* Feat
* Automatic
Needless to say, small bennies could be granted for free, and substantial bonuses should be purchased with a feat.

I'm just writing a little Excel spreadsheet (OpenOffice to be precise) in order to fiddle with all the variables. Right now I'm just looking at raw damage output regardless of Hit chance. But maybe I'll manage to roll it all into one.

 

[Ichabod]

I was thinking not long ago about this thread because everything I think of to fix problems in the system does nothing to encourage someone to wield only a single one-handed weapon.

While it may be that some weapons still do too much damage, I think the greater problem with weapon damage is that too many don't do nearly enough. For instance, a dagger should be doing something like 1d12 with something like an expanded crit range of 16-20 or so* to compensate for the inability to get much out of STR and PA like 2h weapons do in an effort to make every weapon lethal. But, this still doesn't encourage the 1h combatant. Why wield one when you could wield two?

* Or have an expanded crit range and divorce base damage from crit damage. I think I said something, maybe even in this thread, that low damage weapons shouldn't multiply their base damage since that doesn't make them any more threatening but should have something like +15 damage to try to get up to the magic MDS value.

As is addressed in this thread, there needs to be something that makes 1h a superior option not only to 2h but to 2w and to sword & board in at least some situations otherwise there's no gain in flavor. And, personally, I'd hate to see s&b be popular as it's the least flavorful combat style.

 

[Clovenhoof]

Concerning Weapon Damage, that's what I had in mind when I opened the other thread. But changing daggers to something like 1d12 and then balancing everything else out would be hell of a lot of work.

Divorcing Crit Damage from Base Damage: doesn't sound bad.

As is addressed in this thread, there needs to be something that makes 1h a superior option not only to 2h but to 2w and to sword & board in at least some situations otherwise there's no gain in flavor. And, personally, I'd hate to see s&b be popular as it's the least flavorful combat style.

I spent half the other night fiddling with excel, and now I have a spreadsheet that let's you play around with all the variables - everything from BAB over DR down to PA and Sneak Attack.
(Finesse isn't programmed directly, but you can simulate it over the other variables)
However, the one thing that's missing is the chance to force MDS. Maybe inspiration will strike tomorrow.
I used it to compare the three main fighting styles and their average damage output, and experiment with possible upgrades to Single Handed Fighting.

What seems to do the trick quite well: Gain one extra attack with your weapon at full attack bonus.

This takes SHF mean damage to about the same level as TWF and THF - give or take one or two depending on DR and other variables.
Of course, if you get bonus damage (i.e. Sneak Attack) TWF is still the way to go - but that's fine.
And in certain constellations, SHF actually yields better than the other styles, damage-wise. That's a first!

Of course, reaching the MDT is still not easier than before - you just get an extra shot at it, but you'll still have to roll top damage or crit. Personally, I'd prefer a way to improve the MDT chance, but I still can't think of anything besides enormous freebie damage bonuses.

If anyone wants the spreadsheet I'll mail it to you, but right now it looks like I still can improve a thing or two.

 

[Krushnak]

hmmm just had this idea for a combat maneouver.

Precision Strikes: prereqs; dex 13, bab 3 and martial weapon proficiency.

whenever you weild a single weapon one handed with your other hand free you gain a bonus damage die. d4 for light and d6 for one-handed.