Dragon Warriors

A discussion forum for the Dragon Warriors RPG and related works
It is currently Fri Mar 29, 2024 5:27 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 4 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Jan 20, 2015 4:00 pm 
Offline
10th Rank
10th Rank
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2015 12:17 pm
Posts: 1778
Profession: Barbarian
I brought this up before but I remember I got a lot of answers where people claimed that a two handed sword wielding barbarian could function well in an enclosed space.

If you have a corridor of 3m wide you can have 3 people armed with shortswords or spears, or two with swords, or one with a two handed sword fighting at the same time. The rules don't mention what happens if a two handed sword and a short sword are used side by side under such circumstances. I think some people mentioned that a -2 ATTACK would apply. I suppose its not impossible to fight, but surely the two handed sword wielder might want to switch to a dagger under certain circumstances.

Also whilst I'm on this, is there any effective infantry tactics that can be applied? I read about keeping a shield wall in one of the online games. Does that make shields more effective under those new rules? What about Selentine tank formations?

_________________
Speech!





And so the show begins!!!
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/dwp ... ssages/640


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 20, 2015 5:39 pm 
Offline
Admin/Moderator
Admin/Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2015 4:38 pm
Posts: 690
Location: Birmingham, UK
Profession: Sorcerer
I guess it depends on whether you like your games to have a narrative style or a more rules-driven style.

Too many tactical rules puts too much emphasis on combat - combats are an 'easy' obstacle to write into an adventure and a lot of FRPGs tend to overuse combat to slow the pace of an adventure - I'm all for an epic battle that means something, but just fighting a guard because he was in the way doesn't seem very heroic. I think if a lot of FRPG groups timed their combats, they'd find they spend an inordinate amount of time resolving who hit who for how much damage, and much less on exploring the story, their character, and the fantasy world in which they are adventuring. Introducing more tactical rules regarding shield walls, weapon reach, swing radius, etc., would only add an extra layer of complication to an already rules-heavy part of the game and inhibit the flow of the story. I prefer a more abstract system that can be resolved quickly - if I feel that quarters are too cramped to use a particular weapon, or the characters can use a long-handled weapons' additional reach to good effect in a combat, then I'd just make an at-the-table ruling.

If anything, I'd be inclined to run rapid combats with minor encounters. Perhaps something along the lines of:
  • assign a die to each profession (d4 for sorcerers and elementalists, d6 for mystics and assassins, d8 for warlocks, d10 for knights and barbarians).
  • for each MP a sorcerer or elementalist is prepared to expend, increase the die by 2 steps, max 4 steps (i.e., d4 -> d8 ->d12)
  • for each MP a warlock is prepared to expend, increase the die by 1 step, max 2 steps (i.e., d8 -> d10 -> d12)
  • If the Mystic wants to make a Psychic Fatigue check, increase the die by 1 step for each -1 penalty to the check, max 3 steps (i.e., d6 -> d8 -> d10 -> d12).
  • the enemy loses the number of HP rolled on the character's die. If the enemy is still standing, the hero loses 1d8-AF HP (assuming the enemy can attack back - assume that all characters with ranged attacks can use them).
  • The GM narrates what happens, involving multiple blows, use of terrain, and anything else they feel is appropriate.
  • Repeat until something dies.

It's simple and fast and keeps the pace of the meaningful elements of role-playing ticking along. For the encounters that have genuine repercussions on the story, such as end-of-adventure baddies, or cliffhanger encounters, then run the combats in as much detail as you feel will build tension and create a sense of satisfaction. If the party have to churn through a dozen or so skeletons before reaching the cult leader, the players are likely to be bored or rolling so many dice in individual combats with the skeletons that the combat with the cult leader will just be a chore. But if you save zooming into tactical combat to play out the blow-by-blow detail for special encounters, the players will realise something a importance is about to go down...

This is only my opinion of course, people that like wargaming elements in their role-playing games can port wargaming and mass combat rules into their games - there are enough examples of balanced wargaming mechanics out there for people to introduce a wealth of tactical combat options to DW.

_________________
Cobwebbed Dragon (Lee)

https://www.cobwebbedforest.co.uk/
https://www.dragonwarriors.uk/
https://twitter.com/CobwebbedDragon
Now on YouTube!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 20, 2015 10:47 pm 
Offline
10th Rank
10th Rank
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2015 12:17 pm
Posts: 1778
Profession: Barbarian
Well, with the lack of interest in sappers, I think a lot of people enjoy the mini wargaming aspect. If I recall correctly, Gygax based Dn'D on some wargaming rules. Guess its wargaming with smaller parties and more rpg elements.

And what do you do without a 'tank' to suck up enemy steel?

_________________
Speech!





And so the show begins!!!
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/dwp ... ssages/640


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 21, 2015 6:18 am 
Offline
Admin/Moderator
Admin/Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2015 4:38 pm
Posts: 690
Location: Birmingham, UK
Profession: Sorcerer
Kharille wrote:
Well, with the lack of interest in sappers, I think a lot of people enjoy the mini wargaming aspect. If I recall correctly, Gygax based Dn'D on some wargaming rules. Guess its wargaming with smaller parties and more rpg elements.


I agree, the mini-wargaming aspect of role-playing a tense combat is great fun, I just don't want to overuse or over-complicate every combat in that way. And yes, you're right, D&D evolved from wargaming, and one of the things I really like about Dragon Warriors is that it's not D&D :D

Kharille wrote:
And what do you do without a 'tank' to suck up enemy steel?


The knight, with its high AF, can still fulfill the role of the party tank (not that I necessarily agree with such categorisations, born as they are from far more combat-orientated and role-playing-light areas of our hobby).

_________________
Cobwebbed Dragon (Lee)

https://www.cobwebbedforest.co.uk/
https://www.dragonwarriors.uk/
https://twitter.com/CobwebbedDragon
Now on YouTube!


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 4 posts ] 

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 56 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group