NPC Quick Fight

[Supplement Four]

I've got a situation coming up in my game where one of the NPCs, close to the main characters, is going to participate in an honor challenge to the death. Because it is an honor challenge, the PCs won't be able to interfere, no matter the outcome of the fight (well, they could interfere, but I'm sure they won't because of their barabarian honor).

I could just narrate the fight for the PCs, but I want to make it more exciting. If I describe the events, the players will know that I've predetermined what will happen to the NPC. I don't want them thinking that way. I want them thinking that anything is possible.

They really like this NPC, so, if he dies, the PCs will be sad about it. The players will be pulling for the NPC to win.

Therefore, I want to dice out the encounter. But because the players will just be watching this, I don't want a regular, drawn out combat encounter. I want to quick-dice the results, using description, based on the die results, to highten the drama.

Have you ever done anything like this before? Do you have some quick-n-dirty combat rules I could use for this encounter?

I'm thinking about using the rules for the Mass Combat System that used to be available for download here at Mongoose--using the NPC as a "unit" and his challenger as a "unit", and just dicing quickly the results of the fight.

Thoughts?

 

[Supplement Four]

Or, you could let your Players play their Comrade NPC and you play the other and just do normal fight, one on one, with both giving it 100% tactics to kill the other!

I was going to do that at first--to give my players some experience in combat with the game system. But, I've devised something something more interesting for their first real combat encounter (we're about to have our third session).

So, I didn't want to drag the game by having that combat encounter followed by this one with the NPC. Which is why I'm going to short-cut it somehow.






EDIT: I'm going to look at those Conan Mass Combat rules, but what I'm thinking right now is something simple like this: Treat the encounter like a skill check.

The "skill" is the character. His level represents "ranks". I'll use STR as the key stat. And, I'll throw in a modifier for type of weapon used.

Thus, a 1st level Barbarian with a STR 16 would be: d20 + 1 + 3 + weapon modifier.

The weapon modifier will be based on its relative damage. It will also consider armor, too.

Each round, I'll throw opposed rolls for the round. The differnence in the die rolls represents damage to the combatant with the lowest total.



That's a pretty quick, relatively fair way to do it. I can throw out two d20's at the same time, add my modifiers, and then describe the action as the dice read.

That's one way to do it. Still thinking.

 

[Supplement Four]

...but what I'm thinking right now is something simple like this: Treat the encounter like a skill check.

The "skill" is the character. His level represents "ranks". I'll use STR as the key stat. And, I'll throw in a modifier for type of weapon used.

Thus, a 1st level Barbarian with a STR 16 would be: d20 + 1 + 3 + weapon modifier.

The weapon modifier will be based on its relative damage. It will also consider armor, too.

I like this little mechanic. I think it might be useful for all types of encounters that the PCs can see but not be directly involved with. It's easily scale-able.

The structure of a skill check is familiar and becomes plug-n-play with the d20 system.

d20 + skill rank (character level) + governor stat (appropriate ability score) + combat modifier (usually a relative modifier of equipment and special abilites like Feats).

Roll the check Opposed, and the difference in check totals reveals which side hurt the other.



Let's say the PC's clan, the Blue Foxmen, has a blood fued with a neighboring clan, the Grath. 27 Blue Foxmen take the field against 42 Grath.

The Foxmen break into three skirmish groups of 9 warriors each. The PCs occupy the center group (with NPCs making a total of 9).

The Grath break into three groups in answer, with 14 warriors each.

From a GM's point of view, here's how I run this encounter: I set up a check, like mentioned above, for each of the three Grath units and each of the three Fox units.

Initiative doesn't matter, so whatever makes for best description will be decided first.

I'd want to do this from the PC's point of view, so, I'd probably start with them as they scream out their war cries and launch themselves at their enemy with their kinsmen by their sides.

I'd play out the PC encounters normally using normal combat rules. For the rest of the NPCs in their group, I'd roll the skill check. The check is flexible, so the difference in the Opposed checks can men the total men that were lost, or I can use some fraction of that number.

In an extremely large battle, I might use the difference to represent how many men are lost. But, since we're only dealing with less than 100 men on both sides, I can divide the difference by 3. For example, the Grath roll 17 and te Foxmen roll 9. The difference is 8 / 3 = 2.6. Two Foxmen fall that round.

And because it's not likely that large groups of men fall on only once side of the battle, we can take, as casualties, one third of the men the fell on the enemy's side. So, if the Foxmen lost 2 men, the Grath lost none. Next round goes in the Foxmen's favor, and the Grath lose 5 men--so the Foxmen would lose 1.

It's up to the GM to figure a fair ratio depending on the fight.

Every round, play out the PCs as normal, then, the last thing before going to a new round, roll to see how the NPCs are doing.

Because there is a Fog of War, the PCs cannot see how the skirmishes are going to the left and right of them. So, the GM need only roll these two rolls (one throw for each side) behind his screen to keep up with what is happening on those sides of the battlefield.





Here's how I'm thinking something like this could play out in a game:

1. The GM decides on the structure of the war check. In this case, the "rank" will be the average level of the unit, the "governor stat" will be the number of people in the unit, and the combat modifier will be a number determined by the GM after he as assessed the armor, weapons, and special abilities of the unit.

Thus, the left hand flank of the Foxmen would throw d20 + 3 - 1 + 0.

Where:

"+3" - rank - is the averge leve of the 9 warriors in the unit.

"-1" - governor stat - 9 warriors means a -1 if it were a stat.

"+0" - combat modifier - The GM has determined that the Foxmen have no advantage in armor, weapons, Feats, or Special Abilities over the Grath.

Likewise, the Grath's check would be: d20 + 2 + 2 + 0.

"+2" rank because the Grath average 2nd level in their unit of 14 warriors.

"+2" stat mod because 14 warriros is akin to a stat of 14 with a +2 modifier.

"+0" combat modifier because the GM determines that the Foxmen and Grath are evenly matched with weapons, armor, Feats, and special abilities.



2. The GM determines, based on the size of the units in the conflict, that 1/3 of the difference in the throws will represent how many men from the losers side falls. 1/3 of that number represents how many on the victor's side falls.



3. The encounter starts as a normal game encounter, focused on the PCs and what they see. Roleplaying prevails. The GM describes everything.



4. At some point, the actual encounter will begin. Describe the action from the PC's point of view. Run combat normally, centered on the PCs.

"You scream at the top of your lungs as you charge toward the Grath! Beside you, your kinsmen bellow out their own war cries!

"The Grath line approaches, and men from both sides beging to hack at each other. Caelis finds himself in front of a big, burly Grath who has tattooed a blue and black design on his face. Thrallan sees that two Grath have turned toward them. Both only wear loin clouts, boots, and horned helms. They're a bit shorter than the rest of the Grath, but they seem to be working in tandem.

"Roll Initiative!"



5. At the end of the PC's combat round, roll the war check opposed roll and describe the results.



6. Secretly, roll for the left and right flank skirmish units and jot down the results. The PCs can't see what's going on, but you can use this information to keep a handle on how the battle is going.

7. Back to the PCs for round 2....

 

[Supplement Four]

Actually, I really enjoy your Idea S4, looks interesting

It's basically run similar to the narrative combat system presented in Free Companies, except with an easier, quicker mechanic.

I presume then that apart from PCs the Foxmen group have in theory 9hp each and Grath have 14hp, but what will happen to PC group when they reach 0hp, would you say PC group had 7hp and two PC, meaning if things go bad, they could be surrounded by 10 Grath Warriors and the best you can tell them is "Die well!"

You've almost got it.

The result of the NPC conflict changes depending on scale. If you're talking about two NPCs fighting, then the difference in the opposed dice throw means hit points taken off the loser of the toss.

If you're talking about a skirmish unit of 9 men fighting a unit of 14 men, then the difference means the number of men lost on the losing side.





After I figured a way to quickly dice the situation in the OP, I looked at the system I cooked up and realized that it was flexible and can be used any time NPCs are fighting without direct PC involvement.



With the NPC honor fight I mention in the OP, it is a one-on-one fight. So, I'll use the war check like this:

d20 + rank + Stat mod + situational modifier

Where:

rank = the character's level

Stat mod = character's STR mod

situational modifier = a GM determined modifier based on armor, weapons, Feats, and special abilities

The difference in this Opposed check will indicate the number of hit points lost by the loser of the check.




I realized that I could scale the check for just about any situation. If I wanted a fight between two clans, the check would be:

d20 + rank + Stat modifier + situational modifier

Where:

rank = average level of a "unit"

Stat modifier = using the number of warriors in the "unit" as a stat, then taking the modifier from that (i.e. 20 warriors would mean a +5 modifier just like a STR 20).

situational modifier = GM determined modifier based on weapons, armor, Feats, and special abilities.

The difference in this Opposed check is divided by 3, with the result indicating the number of warriors downed by the losing unit. A number of warriors from the winning check will be downed as well, equal to one third of that the enemy lost.



If I wanted to run a war between two armies, each with over 10,000 men, I would use the same system, slightly modified:

d20 + rank + Stat mod + situational mod

Where:

rank = average level of men in the army

Stat mod = modifier derived from number of men / 1000, so that 10,000 men = 10, with modifier of +0.

situational mod = determined by GM based on army's equipment, gear, siege engines, average armor and weapons, special abilties (like magic), etc.

The difference in the Opposed checks represents the loser losing the result x 100 where the winning side loses half that amount.




My point is, the system is pretty flexible to handle whatever I need it to, from a one-on-one encounter to a large, Helm's Deep kind of encounter--all focused on the PCs.

As the bigger units take damage (not hit points for single people but men falling in combat for bigger units), one of the modifiers will go down, reflecting the unit's combat effectiveness deteriorating as it takes casulaties. For example, in the clan fight above, the 20 warriors are reduced to 9. That means that modifier goes from +5 to -1 because of casualties.

 

[Supplement Four]

What I like about this mechanic is that it is flexible and adjustable to fit almost any situation I may need to dice in a game that involves NPCs.

Here's an example, off the top of my head. My game is set in Cimmeria. Let's say I'm curious if the clan has prepared well for the upcoming winter in stocking food.

I can take an average hunter from the clan, make a quick check, and use that as the result of how the clan has done as a whole in stockpiling for the upcoming cold months.

d20 + rank + attribute mod + misc. modifier

Rank = replace with average level of the hunters.

attritube mod = replace attribute with the number of hunters and find modifier.

misc. modifier = a place to put in GM modifiers (if the PCs have done something in the game to influence the hunting, or if the GM wishes to implement an event, like the thin ranks of the mountain goat seen this year for whatever reason).


If the GM determines the avearage Clan hunter is level 4, and there are 27 of them. There are 336 people in the clan, and 27 hunters is considered a good number. So, we'll arbitrarily divide 27 in half to get 14, which is better than an average stat. Use the modifier for a stat 14.

The GM places a -2 on the roll as a misc. modifier because the winter has come to the clan almost a month early this year.

The roll is: d20 + 4 + 2 - 2. Or, d20 + 4.

Roll the check and look at the standard DC chart.

A result of 5-9 means that the food will run out, and people may starve--even die.

A result of 10-14 means that the the winter will be rough and lean, but the clan will make it through.

A result of 15-20 means that enough food was caught and kept in the underground cold rooms.

A result of 21-24 means taht the clan has enough food to share with a neighboring clan, if needed.



Or, something like that. Adjust the throw or the DC as needed. The point is to show how flexible the throw can be.

 

[Supplement Four]

Good idea, but was wondering why you halved the Hunter number to 14, they had 27, so bonus should have been +8, did you think it was to high, last example you split the Wargroups into to three seperate units, which was good idea for weaker force and stronger group honoured that, but you never penalised them further, they still keeped the correct number of Warriors in each group, so why half 27 hunters to 14 ?

With each use, you use the mechanic as needed. It's flexible. You make changes based on the situation.

Here, I cut the number of warriors in half because I arbitrarily decided that 27 was a good number of warriors to hunt for 336 people. So, I needed to get the modifier down. +8 would have been too big a modifier, unless I raised the DC's.

By cutting it in half, I got a +2, which sounds about right if you've got enough people for the job. 20 hunters (cut in half to 10, for a +0 modifier) would be the bare minimum number needed if the winter goals were to be met.

The GM needs to get the numbers and modifiers to where they make sense.

If there were 1000 people that needed to be fed, maybe 27 hunters wouldn't be enough. I might divide 27 by 6 to get 4, and use that as my modifier (mod of -3).

Then again, if there are only 100 people to feed, maybe 27 hunters is overkill. In that case, I'd use the full 27 to get the +8 modifier.

Make sense?