|
Over the years I've run into a number of 'problems' with high level combat which slow the game down significantly and make it difficult for me to challenge my players. To adapt to these challenges I'm coming up with a set of house rules for combat which I thought I'd post here to see what people think of them. This is a work in progress so bear with me. The overarching objective is to create a simple set of hard and fast rules which can be used to run fast combats without miniatures which don't grossly favor one class or ability set over another.
A. Each character gets 1 attack per round at their best value. Add each characters BAB score to the damage dealt and add extra damage dice to the attack as though the character was using the vital strike feat (and its higher level variants). Thus a 13th level warrior with three potential attacks per round, a strength of 21, a +2 greatsword, and no other relevant feats would look like this;
BAB +13; Str 21 (+5, +7 with a two-handed weapon); +2 weapon; etc
Greatsword +20 (6d6+22/19-20 x2)
Obviously feats like two-weapon combat and cleave would need to be addressed, but it's a work in progress.
B. Extra damage dice from things like enchantments (flaming, shock, etc), sneak attack, etc are applied to the attack once and not multiplied.
C. A roll of 18 or higher is always a hit, a roll of 3 or lower is always a miss, and a natural 1 prompts an immediate attack of opportunity from the creature being attacked.
D. Using special alchemy items like blinding powder, tanglefoot bags and thunderstone is a straight CMB roll against the enemies CMD. This represents 'skillful' use of these items and makes them useful to higher level characters. Otherwise the low saving throws they require makes them obsolete almost immediately.
These rules are meant to reward high level fighter types with the ability to deal more damage while avoiding multiple rolls and separate calculations eating up lots of time. The auto hit auto miss rules are intended to moderate the effects of armor class creep and make high level players wary of (and thus capable of being challenged by) encounters with large numbers of low level opponents. These rules are also intended to make fights last multiple rounds and avoid the 'whoever loses initiative gets samurai zinged' phenomenon which I see a lot of in high level play.
Questions and comments to improve on this idea and develop a fast-but-fair set of rules are greatly appreciated.
To tell you the truth, I think E6 is something that might interest you.
The overarching objective is to create a simple set of hard and fast rules which can be used to run fast combats without miniatures which don't grossly favor one class or ability set over another.
Are you talking about weapon combat only? If not, I'm afraid there simply is no 'hard and fast' in PF, mainly because of spellcasting. How do you rebalance these rules against spellcasting? Also, if you have only one attack per round, how does full-attack work? How do monsters with multiple natural attacks work?
Add each characters BAB score to the damage dealt
This gives a relative benefit to those not using two-handed fighting, which is nice. Keep it in mind when balancing two-weapon combat etc.
B. Extra damage dice from things like enchantments (flaming, shock, etc), sneak attack, etc are applied to the attack once and not multiplied.
This however nerfs non-two-handed fighting. If I were you I'd figure out a way to let sneak attack work differently.
C. A roll of 18 or higher is always a hit, a roll of 3 or lower is always a miss, and a natural 1 prompts an immediate attack of opportunity from the creature being attacked.
I normally hate '1 is a fumble' on attack rolls because it punishes the best combatants more than the worst. Since there is only one attack roll this is less of a problem. However, auto-hitting and auto-missing is, I think, going to be a problem for your design philosophy more than a solution. It rewards good melee combatants less. Also, unless you remove multiple attacks alltogether (monsters with natural attacks) this is going to skew balance towards those with multiple attacks.
May I suggest using swarm rules or something similar for large mobs of mooks?
D. Using special alchemy items ... is a straight CMB roll against the enemies CMD.
That makes those items Strength-based. Not a good idea if you ask me.
|
|
Are you talking about weapon combat only? If not, I'm afraid there simply is no 'hard and fast' in PF, mainly because of spellcasting. How do you rebalance these rules against spellcasting? Also, if you have only one attack per round, how does full-attack work? How do monsters with multiple natural attacks work?
Initially I would say that monsters with multiple attacks would make their primary attack and gain a damage bonus the same as a PC would (BAB, etc). Multiple attacks could be treated as multiple sets of weapon dice a la vital strike. So an owlbear with a claw/claw/bite routine would do its bite 'weapon' damage x3 (3d6) plus its strength bonus and BAB. It does favor monsters with multiple attacks, but I feel that on some level this could work out okay. It worked in 2nd edition.
This gives a relative benefit to those not using two-handed fighting, which is nice. Keep it in mind when balancing two-weapon combat etc.
I'm thinking two-weapon combat would allow two attacks, one with each hand, but both attacks would suffer the two-weapon penalty to hit and the damage bonus to each blow would only be 1/2 of BAB. If we retain the rules for power attack 'as is' (-1 for +3 damage on 2-handed weapons) it may work out. Thoughts?
This however nerfs non-two-handed fighting. If I were you I'd figure out a way to let sneak attack work differently.
Perhaps sneak attack is automatic on the first round if 'surprise' is achieved (stealth vs. perception DC) and the rogue adds sneak attack damage to her attacks if she and a team mate are both attacking the same monster that round (this implies she is automatically trying to do the 'I use acrobatics to get behind and flank' thing all rogues who aren't archers do).
I normally hate '1 is a fumble' on attack rolls because it punishes the best combatants more than the worst. Since there is only one attack roll this is less of a problem. However, auto-hitting and auto-missing is, I think, going to be a problem for your design philosophy more than a solution. It rewards good melee combatants less. Also, unless you remove multiple attacks alltogether (monsters with natural attacks) this is going to skew balance towards those with multiple attacks.
You're right about this one. Perhaps the auto hit auto miss rules should only apply to monsters then? My goal is to prevent characters from getting their armor classes so high that combat becomes boring because only super powerful monsters have any chance of hitting them. It sort of puts an element of risk back into combat. Also, if the dragon tries to nom poor Ragnar and rolls a 3 perhaps Ragnar will then appreciate the rule more.
May I suggest using swarm rules or something similar for large mobs of mooks?
How would such swarm rules realistically function?
I see your point about strength influencing alchemy items. Perhaps a better option is to make the saving throw against these items a straight 10+BAB of the user? Batman makes far better use of his smoke pellets than Joe the garbage man who lives down the street.
It does favor monsters with multiple attacks, but I feel that on some level this could work out okay. It worked in 2nd edition. ... I'm thinking two-weapon combat would allow two attacks... Thoughts? Perhaps sneak attack is automatic on the first round if 'surprise' is achieved (stealth vs. perception DC) and ...
Your options all sound okay in principle, but I'd suggest running a few DPR calculations on sample characters (its a simple formula really). You'd be better off tweaking the numbers when you have an idea how they impact all fighting styles. It's a bit of a grind but I'm doing the same thing for my houserules and I think it prevents obvious unbalance. :)
My goal is to prevent characters from getting their armor classes so high that combat becomes boring because only super powerful monsters have any chance of hitting them... How would such swarm rules realistically function?
The AC problem is also because of the endless number inflation. You can either apply some sort of auto-hit rules or do something about the number inflation. The aforementioned E6 solves number inflation. Anyways I recall reading about a mob template on this forum before, and as far as I can find with a quick google it is part of the 3.5 DMG II or cityscape book.
It works like a swarm in this way: you treat a mob of weak creatures as one creature. Each 'hp' is one creature. Characters that occupy the same square as a mob at the end of their turn automatically take damage equal to [some balanced number]. The mob's area is, of course, alot bigger than that of a swarm. You'd best limit the damage. Otherwise mob's are fragile but dangerous.
Perhaps a better option is to make the saving throw against these items a straight 10+BAB of the user?
That's an option but aren't those items intended to be of use for rogues as well? I have no idea for a better way to get level-scaled DCs for those items though. And I suppose adding BAB is better than nothing, even for a rogue.