I kind of liked the old opposed roll system in 3.5. It added a certain level of uncertainty and blind luck to the equation. I liked that.
Me, too!
I really like the idea of it depending on luck. The DC is kinda too high right now. Our group tends to rely on Combat Maneuvers in preference to regular attacks, and I am concerned that if we switch to this as written it's going to put a serious damper on the fun of that.
|
Me, too!
I really like the idea of it depending on luck. The DC is kinda too high right now. Our group tends to rely on Combat Maneuvers in preference to regular attacks, and I am concerned that if we switch to this as written it's going to put a serious damper on the fun of that.
I really like the flat roll, to be honest. It speeds up play *so much*. We've had some wacky grapple results in the past with effectively a 39 pt spread between two opposed die rolls.
I really like the flat roll, to be honest. It speeds up play *so much*. We've had some wacky grapple results in the past with effectively a 39 pt spread between two opposed die rolls.Me, too!
I really like the idea of it depending on luck. The DC is kinda too high right now. Our group tends to rely on Combat Maneuvers in preference to regular attacks, and I am concerned that if we switch to this as written it's going to put a serious damper on the fun of that.
Indeed. It's just those wild results that make it so much more on the edge and unpredictable.
|
This is one of those things that I'm rather up on the fence about.
I like to roll dice. I get that part, its fun. One of the guys we play with has dice specifically picked out for different situations that aren't used otherwise(you are only being rolled for initiative, ect). The randomness is a lot of fun.
Having the DC static though, does make things so much faster without completely stripping it of randomness. There is still a 1-20 spread that can be hit and that gives a lot of option after all. But only having to have one side roll and call out there number makes things much smoother, especially if you have the occasional player who isn't too quick to add up modifiers.
-Tarlane
funny that, I have a player who hates the static DCs, as he keeps getting tripped.
By the goblin warchanter,
By several wolves and worgs.
They speed up play quite a bit, as I just roll an extra d20 when I have the NPCs use a combat maneuver. All get's done in one roll.
I'm also up in the air and could go either way. If I wind up running Pathfinder games, I'll bring it up with my players and let them decide and we'll house rule it if they want to keep opposed rolls.
|
|
I like both solutions.
BBEGs and single, characterful opponents work well with the opposed roll system, that provides a highly varied and colorful range of possibilities.
A "special" enemy can thusly attain high results and spectacular fumbles, just like the PCs. This should help the feeling of fighting against a very specific enemy, that has the same opportunities to shine just as the PCs.
Otherwise, bunch of low-level critters or rank-and-file baddies go for the flat value, which speeds up combat and gives a sense of consistency both to the PCs abilities and the opponents strenghts/weaknesses.
|
BBEGs and single, characterful opponents work well with the opposed roll system, that provides a highly varied and colorful range of possibilities.
A "special" enemy can thusly attain high results and spectacular fumbles, just like the PCs. This should help the feeling of fighting against a very specific enemy, that has the same opportunities to shine just as the PCs.Otherwise, bunch of low-level critters or rank-and-file baddies go for the flat value, which speeds up combat and gives a sense of consistency both to the PCs abilities and the opponents strenghts/weaknesses.
Yes.
As a DM, I hated "combat maneuver" abilities before, and now I have no problem using them, as I used to hate keeping track of so many opposed rolls and what they did. Now all I need to know is the CMB of the target.
Likewise, my players almost never used any of these abilities in previous games, but its come up a lot more now that its a simple, "here is the DC" procedure.
I can understand where people like the old way this worked, but I think its really one of those things that makes more sense in theory, but doesn't play as well in practice. But that's my personal experience, obviously.
Hmmph. I'm a little surprised that this isn't a bigger issue. It's a fairly significant change in how combat works in the game.
As a DM, I hated "combat maneuver" abilities before, and now I have no problem using them, as I used to hate keeping track of so many opposed rolls and what they did. Now all I need to know is the CMB of the target.
However if you look up a monster in source material, it has a Grapple modifier, you have to stop and calculate its CMB.
Likewise, my players almost never used any of these abilities in previous games, but its come up a lot more now that its a simple, "here is the DC" procedure.
I think the changes really favour the players. A character MAY have a concept that relies heavily on grapple or trip but most are not designed that way and usually make grapple rolls to avoid bad things happening to them.
The grapple mechanic was already used in the rules as a nearly universal catch all for monsters. My experience with the new static system is wolves (worgs, dogs) are no longer a threat, and that greatly increasing the size of a creature no longer greatly increases its ability to grapple (constrict, swallow whole).I can understand where people like the old way this worked, but I think its really one of those things that makes more sense in theory, but doesn't play as well in practice. But that's my personal experience, obviously.
The jury is still out for me on whether I like the new system or not. I still haven't figured out the intent of the new system.
One of the broken spells, freedom of movement, came into the game the last session. Normally we would house-rule anything that says “always, automatically, with-no-chance-of-failure” to a DC or die roll adjustment. We used to rule the spell granted a bonus of 10 + 1 for every 2 caster levels to grapple/escape artist rolls when attempting to break a grapple but could not easily agree on what the bonus should be now; as we could not agree whether the system was a nerf or a buff.
If this static system stands as-is I really think that creatures like wolves/wargs with Improved Trip and critters with Improved Grab should be receiving some sort of racial bonus to their CMB for these maneuvers.
After using the static CMB so much I never want to go back to opposed rolls ever.Its fast easy to remember and easy to use.it was used 8 times in one combat with no real need for me to roll or look it up.Hope it stays as is.
After using the static CMB so much I never want to go back to opposed rolls ever.Its fast easy to remember and easy to use.it was used 8 times in one combat with no real need for me to roll or look it up.Hope it stays as is.
What do you think about giving certain critters a racial bonus of some sort for certain maneuvers?
Didn't I see you a couple thread over?
I think some critters well known for such things should get a +4 or higher . wolves to trip,crocs to grapple and so on. Including such things will make them real threats while keeping the CMB a static roll.........
I roam alot
Another question, as for keeping things consistent. When choosing to escape from a grapple, why is the DC 15 + opponents CMB if you are grappling out, and DC 10 + opponents CMB when using an Escape Artist check?
My guess is trained at getting the hell out of a grapple and not. Some one trained at that type of stuff even with little training have a much easier time then someone with no training it it.
My guess is trained at getting the hell out of a grapple and not. Some one trained at that type of stuff even with little training have a much easier time then someone with no training it it.
What represents the training? Skill points aquired in Escape Artist or combat skill represented by Base Attack Bonus?
Well to me escape artist is trained at getting out of things.Grapples ,locks,ropes and the like.To someone trained even a little in the are out escaping such things the act of braking a grapple is an easier task then someone without training in escaping.
Well to me escape artist is trained at getting out of things.Grapples ,locks,ropes and the like.To someone trained even a little in the are out escaping such things the act of braking a grapple is an easier task then someone without training in escaping.
Yeah, I can buy that.
Escape Artist was always superior to grapple when escaping anyway.Old system:
Grappler rolled a 10 + 3 for ability (Strength) + base attack bonus (never more than level)
Escaper rolled a 10 + 3 for ability (Dexterity) + Escape Artist ranks (up to 3 more than level)
DC 15 +x is just the same as 1d20 +5 +x.
You are free to roll it, but I think it's better for the basic rules not to do it.
The +5 bonus for defence makes sense to me, since it's a difficult move and anything else being the same (two identical characters fighting), the chance for success shouldn't be 50%. 25% looks okay to me.
But I'm really not sure if rolling the defence will make that much of a difference. If a static 10 is "about impossible" to archive for your character, hoping on an oppossed roll of 5 or lower would still be too low a chance for me to regulary try it.