Tactical Combat, an idea for a houserule

[zanshin]

The rather rules detailed game Rolemaster had a combat option which was quite fun. You could convert your attack bonus with a weapon into a defence bonus - reducing your chance of hitting , but also of being hit.

This could be incorporated into T&T , with a small amount of added complexity, if people like the idea.

In classic Tunnels and Trolls combat there is a simple comparison of totals - the higher total does damage equal to the difference in the totals, with armour providing protection.

To simulate the effects of all out aggression , but without carrying out an actual stunt, permit the following.

Characters (and maybe monsters with stats) may, before any dice are rolled, choose a bonus amount to be added to their attack total. This bonus amount cannot exceed their positive adds.

When Hit Point Totals are calculated, this bonus increases their total for calculating damage on the enemy by the amount chosen. It also reduces their Hit Point Total by the same amount for the purposes of calculating damage fended off.

Example

Gark the Urook , a MR 30 Orc is in battle with Shang the Delectable, a novice warrior with a fierce temper.

Shang is armed with a Short Sabre (3d+1) and a Buckler. She has personal and Warrior adds of +9. She knows the Urook is a fierce opponent , and hopes to get the Urook on the back foot with a vicious assault. She takes a +5 aggression modifier to her attack.

Gark viciously claws at Shang, generating a roll of 13 on 4 dice, for a HPT of 28 with his adds of +15.

Shang swings desperately, rolling a 16, +1 for the sabre and +9 for adds, 26. However as she committed 5 points to aggression, she generates an attack total of 31, and a defence total of 21.

Blood is spilled on both sides! Gark takes 3 damage, but manages to stretch a claw past Shangs buckler, taking advantage of her rash assault, doing 1 point of damage. Will the damage Gark has taken change the balance of the fight? Or will Shang be worn down by her fierce opponent?

[derv]

zanshin, I'd like one more example, where both parties modify their attack. I'm thinking, in the above scenario, if both modified their attacks, both would sustain more damage as a result. If everything in the example above was the same and Gark could also modify his HPT by +5, Shang would be suffering 12 points damage (not accounting for buckler) and Gark would take 8 points damage. This method could become very deadly, very quick, if I'm understanding it properly.

[zanshin]

Hi Derv , I wanted to keep things at a sustainable level of complexity for the GM, and MR monsters provide a 'baseline' , which is why I was suggesting only PC's/NPC's with stats employ the aggression modifier. It controls the number of variables.

If both sides start being aggressive then , absolutely, combat will start becoming rather deadly! That could be a feature or a bug depending on your preferences.

The advantage for Delvers is they can try to kick off the MR monsters death spiral, but at the risk of taking more damage than if they play it safe.

I'll expand the example if I have time and others are interested.

[Aramis of Erak]

Simpler way of phrasing it: Reduce damage taken by the other side by X in order to reduce damage taken by your side by the same X.

The problem being that X is likely to dwarf spite... to the point of spite being non-extant. And if you didn't win the round, you didn't do X in the first place, so reducing the damage you do is a meaningless bit, unless spite is affected, but if spite is affected, they're going to do likewise, and, voila, status quo.

It's a great big illusion.

[zanshin]

Its not about reducing damage, its about increasing damage if you look at the example. The most defensive position is the default roll. I think you have misunderstood this Aramis.

Spite is another way of handling the stalemate, but less adjustable by the pc's.

Many games have a similar approach to this - Rolemaster, The One Ring, even 3e D&D with the expertise feat and fighting defensively.

[derv]

I find this somewhat interesting because it actually involves a little strategy when it comes to determining how much of a bonus you think will be necessary to cause substantial damage without lowering your Defense Totals too low. I kind of like the idea that you can do damage as well as take damage in the same round also. I think if I were to use this, I would limit the bonus to the characters adds per conflict instead of per round. The character could choose to use the max bonus all at once or over a number of rounds until used up, as they deem necessary. In effect, this would simulate a surge of adrenaline.

As far as using it with MR monsters, maybe they could use 1/2 of their adds to draw from. I don't see any real problem in using the rule with MR monsters vs those that are fully statted. I always apply rules like this across the board and presume that if a player can use it, it's apponent should also be able to use it.

[zanshin]

Cool ideas derv - I would look to avoid extra book keeping myself, but whatever works at your table is great.

With MR monsters and 'confrontational' GM's there would be a temptation to up the aggression as the monster starts to lose - that might be a good thing , as they would remain more of a threat while dying quicker. I can see pro's and cons.