Repairing Attack / Defense progression

[Majestic7]

I have one problem with D20 Conan that has become more and more apparent now as the characters in my campaign have passed level 10 and are approaching level 15. Mainly, attack and defense progressions are out of sync. I like that characters have low quite low Parry/Dodge unless they invest most of their feats in to them. It makes possible for, say, level 5 Soldier to still hit level 10 Soldier and possible kill him through Massive Damage. However, when two level 10 soldiers trade blows, they have far too good chance of hitting with each blow. The problem is made worse by Power Attack. With attack scores being so much higher than defenses, it is extremely effective in causing MD. I like combat being gritty - but it would be nice if there would still be misses in combat and if PA wasn't so effective but rather a gamble.

Let me elaborate with example. Level 5 Soldier might easily have +9 attack with his main weapon - +5 BAB, +4 Strength, Weapon Focus or some other bonus. His Parry could be +7 without a shield - +3 base and +4 Str. Level 10 Soldier would have +11 Parry with same Strength score - but his attack bonus would be at least +14 - 16 ! The five levels lower guy has a reasonably good chance at hitting the higher level guy. The higher level guy will ~always hit the lower level guy. Two Level 10 Soldiers will as well hit each other with each primary strike even if they roll under 10. If they are using PA or otherwise are good at causing damage, this translates in to 20+ damage each round.

Don't get me wrong - I enjoy gritty combat. I like save or die effects! I love Massive Damage. The trouble is not it hurting if you get by a Greatsword. The trouble is in it being so damned easy at hitting with the Greatsword. I want combat to be dangerous, but automatic hits take away a lot of excitement. This chasm between defenses and attacks grows even larger when more levels are added in to play.

Do you have any suggestions how to fix this? A player suggested that we'd turn in to 4th Edition BaB/Defence model - all characters would get +1 every two levels to defenses and attack. I don't like it because it makes everyone too equal. I might still have to take it if there doesn't come up a better way to do this. I've been thinking about keeping defense progressions intact and somehow nerffing BAB advancement, but it would take an awful lot of calculations to find just the right number for each class, especially for warrior types. One option would be to drop best BAB to the second best while keeping other BABs intact, but this might nerf some classes a bit too much. All ideas and suggestions are welcome. I hope I made the problem I have clear enough.

 

[Krushnak]

easy solution, give every pc and major named npc a bonus of +1 to their defenses at 4th and every 4 levels afterwards. it's their heroic ablative armour bonus

 

[Clovenhoof]

Or move all the defense progressions up one step. +10 becomes +15, and +15 becomes +20.

The main difference between this and Krushnak's approach is whether you want to modify just the "big players" or everyone in the world. Just granting the "hero bonus" to PCs and major NPCs is essentially a type of mook rule.

 

[Majestic7]

Boosting defences is not really the solution. The whole point is that I want low level characters to keep a good chance to hit higher level characters... so I want that a group of relatively low level Soldiers can still pose a threat to a group of PC's if they are outnumbered. So while upgrading defences would solve the problem between two high level characters hitting each other too easily, it would cause another problem by making it impossible for low level characters to hit high level characters.

So there needs to be a way to nerf the attack scores without touching defenses.

 

[rabindranath72]

I know it will sound blasphemous, but completely removing Defences works as you want. In my C&C games Defenses did not enter the game, and HPs were not inflated, so even a 10th level soldier is quite wary of being in a fight with two or three 1st level ones.

You might consider a different system for introducing Parry and Defence: each one grants a bonus to general Defense by sacrificing an attack. So, an high level soldier which can do 3 attacks per round, might make only one, and get a boost to Defense (for example, +2 for each missed attack).

just my 2sp.

 

[Malcadon]

I've been thinking about keeping defense progressions intact and somehow nerffing BAB advancement, but it would take an awful lot of calculations to find just the right number for each class, especially for warrior types. One option would be to drop best BAB to the second best while keeping other BABs intact, but this might nerf some classes a bit too much. All ideas and suggestions are welcome. I hope I made the problem I have clear enough.

Nerffing BAB is not a bad thing, as 1e D&D Fighters would get a hit bonus every odd level, and the 1:1 BAB for 3e D&D Fighters is to account for all the stacking AC bonuses (mostly magical bonuses). So warrior classes progressing with a 2/3 level to BRB, and all other classes with a 1/2 level to BRB is not a bad thing, if it helps keep things level with this already unorthodox system. If you are going to use this method, its best to add a +1 to all BAB, Dodge, and Parry of a 2/3 level at 1st level to help get help get some feats from the start.

I once thought about boosting the Dodge and Parry feats to +4 each, unfortunately it would make thing hard on low-level PCs when they go up against NPCs with such feats.

 

[rabindranath72]

I've been thinking about keeping defense progressions intact and somehow nerffing BAB advancement, but it would take an awful lot of calculations to find just the right number for each class, especially for warrior types. One option would be to drop best BAB to the second best while keeping other BABs intact, but this might nerf some classes a bit too much. All ideas and suggestions are welcome. I hope I made the problem I have clear enough.

Nerffing BAB is not a bad thing, as 1e D&D Fighters would get a hit bonus every odd level, and the 1:1 BAB for 3e D&D Fighters is to account for all the stacking AC bonuses (mostly magical bonuses). So warrior classes progressing with a 2/3 level to BRB, and all other classes with a 1/2 level to BRB is not a bad thing, if it helps keep things level with this already unorthodox system. If you are going to use this method, its best to add a +1 to all BAB, Dodge, and Parry of a 2/3 level at 1st level to help get help get some feats from the start.

I once thought about boosting the Dodge and Parry feats to +4 each, unfortunately it would make thing hard on low-level PCs when they go up against NPCs with such feats.

Increasing BaB has the same effect of decreasin AC, so it might work.

 

[Krushnak]

The whole point is that I want low level characters to keep a good chance to hit higher level characters... so I want that a group of relatively low level Soldiers can still pose a threat to a group of PC's if they are outnumbered.

That's already covered under the multiple attackers rule. Every attacker after the first gains a cumulative +1 bonus to hit against the same target, it's for melee only but i can see it applying for ranged attacks if they are withing point blank range.

 

[Ichabod]

If you consider the aid another maneuver an attack, then there's also the multiattacker bonus on top of the aid.

Assuming some situation like 4 attackers with BAB +2 and 16 STR, two flank, two don't, all but one of the flankers aids, one of the nonflankers fails the roll, you end up with base of 5 +3 from multiple attackers, +4 from aids, +2 from flanking (assuming flanking is possible against the PC). Unless they go out of their way to pump DVs, assume higher level PCs are about a 20 to hit, which means a 75% of hitting. Power Attack for 2 is still a likely hit.

Don't consider the aids as attacks, and it's still a 60% of hitting, down to 50% with a PA of 2.

Up the defense progression as Clovenhoof has done and you figure about a 15% less chance to hit for higher level PCs.

*shrug* I don't really see the problem in Clovenhoof's system, if you want to make it harder to hit people. The challenge in Conan is missing anything. Sure, a PC could jack up parry defense to some outlandish number, but, who cares? Just means less effective on offense. The soldiers could just bring in the designated party-killing grapplers to deal with those.

The other benefit of Clovenhoof's system is that a monster might actually miss a PC, something that "never" happens in our campaign.

BTW, I'm just not seeing the ways to get a high dodge DV. Am I missing some feat in the supplements that makes a significant difference?

 

[Clovenhoof]

BTW, I'm just not seeing the ways to get a high dodge DV. Am I missing some feat in the supplements that makes a significant difference?

Apart from the usual, i.e. Combat Expertise and Dodge Feat, I can't think of any either. There may be some feats that give you oneseys-twoseys, but nothing making that much of a difference.

If you want to throw some love at Dodge fighters, you could adapt something like the Neverwinter Nights rule that every 5 ranks of Tumble improve your Dodge Defense by 1. That goes up to +4 at level 17 (and maybe +5 with Skill Focus), where a Parry fighter can have the same +4 bonus from Day One with a large shield. So probably not a gamebreaker.

 

[Majestic7]

Upgrading defences is certainly not the way to go. It makes too hard for low level guys to hit the high level guys. I want it to be _possible_ for low level guys to hit high level guys without a natural 20 without situational bonuses if there is 5-8 level difference between them. Downgrading attacks would downgrade monster attacks as well - they receive BAB from HD. Sure, tentacle monsters the size of a small town won't be affected since they have so high STR, but they are supposed to be apocalyptic so they are beyond the scales in question.

What comes to the discussion about high dodge, it should be noted that dodge is much better than parry. Dodge is used against projectiles and touch attack spells, while parry is melee only.

rabindranath72, what do you mean by removing defences completely? Just having all defences be 10 + Stat modifier + Equipment? Wouldn't that mean that everyone hits everyone almost every time if BAB advancement is left untouched?

 

[Edhel]

A player suggested that we'd turn in to 4th Edition BaB/Defence model - all characters would get +1 every two levels to defenses and attack. I don't like it because it makes everyone too equal. I might still have to take it if there doesn't come up a better way to do this.

Dunno if I was this player but I agree with the idea.

My experiences from different d20 systems and games have shown that the underlying 3.x math is broken and it goes out of sync especially in later levels. The slow linear progression (+ small increases from ability score increases) finally implemented in 4E is the best math for this kind of system, imo. (Items are don't affect anything in the long run in 4E math so you can remove them easily. +4 sword just negates the needless +4 increase in monster defenses.)

My reasons for changing math are these:
1) Combat/challenges are easily scalable with much wider range than in 3E because it makes differences between levels matter much less. I think +½ per level is the most elegant step but you could use +2/3 or +1 or even +2 but that greatly reduces the scalability.
2) Linear progression keeps the target numbers / DCs about the same independent of the level, thus eliminating the whole dodge 15 vs attack +12 unbalance in higher levels.

There are many problems with this because changing the underlying math affects so many things in the game:
1) One needs to set the 'standard difficulty' which is independent of character level. Do you want 50% success or less or more? E.g. first level average attack bonus +8 vs average AC 19. After this you can modify it with class bonuses and ability modifiers, e.g. giving warrior types +1 to attack or skirmisher types +1 to defenses/dodge and so on. This makes the characters/classes/roles not equal. Also, making the progress slow, ability modifiers matter much more and define the character more. +4 difference in strength between a warrior and a scholar is like 8 levels between them.
1.5) Set the difficulty levels. Is -2 from standard difficulty easy? Or do you want to use -5? (-2 would be 60% success rate and -5 75%). This can be applied to monster/npc defenses and skill DCs. Equating all the progresses (atk, def, skills) also saves you a lot of work and opens up elegant uses for skills. (I hate the acrobatic attack maneuver where you have to tumble or jump against a DC and then the target has to make a reflex save and after that you can try to attack him. Why not just jump/athletics vs Reflex?)
2) Redo monsters with this new system.
3) Rethink some of the feats. Power attack is easily fixed with static penalty and damage bonus instead of infinite scaling within BAB.
4) Finally come to the conclusion that all these fixes and changes in game philosophy are too much work and give up ;P.


Having said all that, it really boils down to what do you actually want to do with the system. Maybe you think higher levels should be like Korgoth but I like my stories with challenging combat that doesn't turn trivial or tpk.

My biggest problems with Conan are exactly the same as with any 3E d20 system, including D&D, except the saving throw target numbers are way higher and really swingy. My poor pict thief (lvl 10+) can't ever beat massive damage saves or poison DCs with his puny +6 Fort save nor can his enemies beat the massive damage saves from his sneak attacks. The game crumbles into a saving throw fest. Both sides try to throw the nuke first. Maybe you enjoy it, but I don't. I liked the earlier levels where hit points mattered and you stood some chance without turning into fine bloody mist after the first blow.

There are many more major game philosophy/mechanical issues between the editions but I think that's best saved for some other thread. I think Sword & Sorcery Saga edition (based on Star Wars saga edition) is the best total conversion of Conan in d20 format that I've seen, but it needs some tinkering too.

.: edhel, waiting for 4E-math Conan

 

[Sutek]

Let me get this straight: You actually want to make it harder to hit? Is that really what you want or are you concerned about easily hitting combined with Power Attack? Power Attack is too good. That's been discussed to death. However, maybe there's a BAB cap after lvl10, just there is for HP.

Gosh. This seems complicated, but I'm sure there's a simple solution. I've just never encountered it before so it seems like the problem you really having is with PA. Dunno. I only have AE, so maybe it's factor of 2nd that I don't know about. Which edition are you using? I don't recall any differences in BAB progression between 1st and AE.

 

[Hervé]

D20 was designed as a game where you hit often, but where characters have a large amount of Hps to compensate that. Changing this would certainly mean rewrite al the basics of the system. Personally, I find this totally unrealistic, but I guess most people here know by now how I feel about D20.

On the contrary, in other game systems like Chaosium BRP or Mongoose RQ, where the system is based on an Attack/Parry matrix, you hit quite often and your opponents can dodge or parry as easily. But one landed blow can be deadly. That's far more realistic to me: in real fight there will be a lot of attacks and parries, but few real hits. One landed sword blow is generally enough to kill a man.

 

[Sutek]

The matrix in Conan is metaphysical. (lol)

Seriously. Everyone chooses Parry or Dodoge to defend with which adjusts based on lvl. It's basically the same thing.

Am drawing a total blank just now but there are Feats tat allow INT or WIS to be used to modify DV, aren't there? Perhaps there are so may successfull hits because all of the defensive feats are not being as explored as the offensive ones.

 

[rabindranath72]

Upgrading defences is certainly not the way to go. It makes too hard for low level guys to hit the high level guys. I want it to be _possible_ for low level guys to hit high level guys without a natural 20 without situational bonuses if there is 5-8 level difference between them. Downgrading attacks would downgrade monster attacks as well - they receive BAB from HD. Sure, tentacle monsters the size of a small town won't be affected since they have so high STR, but they are supposed to be apocalyptic so they are beyond the scales in question.

What comes to the discussion about high dodge, it should be noted that dodge is much better than parry. Dodge is used against projectiles and touch attack spells, while parry is melee only.

rabindranath72, what do you mean by removing defences completely? Just having all defences be 10 + Stat modifier + Equipment? Wouldn't that mean that everyone hits everyone almost every time if BAB advancement is left untouched?

The reason why I scrapped the whole parry, dodge, damage reduction, armor piercing etc. is exactly for the problems you have found.
So, when I say "remove defences", I mean: return to the original abstract AC and hit points concept.
So, your Defense is 10+Armor DR (which we can use effectively as AC) + dex modifier OR str modifier (so you are dodging or parrying).
This gives an effective simplification of the game, AND solves the problems you describe. Hit points now effectively describe more skill at avoiding damage. And AC now means what it should mean: ability to avoid damage.

 

[Paladin]

Upgrading defences is certainly not the way to go. It makes too hard for low level guys to hit the high level guys. I want it to be _possible_ for low level guys to hit high level guys without a natural 20 without situational bonuses if there is 5-8 level difference between them.

I disagree. Upping the defense is definitely better than reducing the attack power. A natural 20 is a 5% chance of hitting which is more than enough for lackeys vs. professionals.

My kids can attack me en masse, but until they get older and more experienced. They still can't beat me.

If you have a "professional" warrior who has spent 10-20 years of their life practicing the art of combat he SHOULD to be "unhittable" from novices unless swarmed.

===============

In another non-Conan D&D campaign series I used to run, I used a system where characters could use either their armor's AC value as presented in the PHB or use their current combat bonus as their AC modifier so long as they had a weapon with which they were proficient in hand (i.e. unarmored level 13 fighter still had an AC23), situational mods/improvised weapons could adjust it. Armor still served it's purpose as it had damage reduction, but it allowed higher level characters to defend themselves with their skill over purely munched out armor. Any normal feats and other bonuses still applied.

We also had a rule for allowing you to shift your combat skills a bit between attack and defense to reflect your current goals in combat. You could take a +1 To-Hit for a -2 to your AC or -2 To-Hit for a +1 AC. In both cases you were limited by your base combat bonus.

 

[afro-slav]

Someone mentioned the Mongoose Rune Quest. Is it d20 based or does it use its own system?