Sacrilege! Shame! The center cannot hold! Madness! Rioting neckbeards! Muderous halflings!
Look at that flat affect, he'll use that blowgun on you in a second. |
Well let’s look at a nice descending AC chart – I’ll use the
one from Labyrinth Lord, because I have it right here. AC 9 is unarmored and requires a 0-level
human roll an 11. Monsters of 1HD or less and 1HD humans (of all classes) need
a 10. So AC 9 = AC 11. Thus AC 8-6 (light armor) is AC 12-14, Medium
armor is AC 14-15 and heavy armor AC 16-17.
Add a shield so a fellow in plate mail has an AC of 18. Dex bonuses can be added easy enough. Well it
depends a little on if it’s hit on the number or hit if better then the number –
let’s say it’s hit on the number here, just like descending AC a target number not a limiting number.
Ascending AC = 20 - minus Descending AC.
What’s more interesting is that once conversion to ascending
AC is complete, hit matrices don’t seem so useful anymore, the AC vs. hit
calculation is so simple that a bonus system (like LOTFP uses) has much more
appeal – two lines on a sheet “bonus to melee” and “bonus to range” are all one
needs. Still conversion – how to do it? LOTFP does this by making most
adventurers better then humans (+1 bonus) and fighters really good at hitting
things with bonus of 1+level. Thus a 5th
level fighter with a normal strength has a bonus of +6, meaning a 45%, 12 or
better hit on a plate armored shield wearer.
That’s a lot better than the 14 or better required by a 5th level
fighter on the Labyrinth Lord Table, but not absurdly better. It is an example of how LOTFP is (contrary to
some opinion) mechanically tougher then Basic D&D. It’s not, LOTFP Fighters hit exactly like
monsters. B/X fighters don’t, but I think
the statistic bonuses of B/X make up for the gap between monster and fighter
here rather to the player’s advantage – especially at lower levels.
I don’t mind this, because monster AC in traditional rule
sets gets absurdly low at some points – A 0 AC = 20, so the DEMON TYPE V has a
an AC of 25, and fighter damage is flat.
Your fighter should be able to chip away at the huge dread beast over
time while the rest of the party tries to figure out ways to do it in more
dramatically, but with less chance of success (great saves for that beast). LOTFP make me feel a bit bad for the other
classes, especially demi humans and thieves, in games with more fighting then
LOTFP. No one but a fighter ever gets
better at combat – thus non-magical classes get less useful in combat as they
advance. This is especially cruel for
dwarves, who are usually thought of as fighter types. Thus I would ramp up the
PC level based bonuses a bit for a vanilla D&D world game.
Ideally this would work with a flat stat bonus system, +3 bonuses overwhelm and confuse everything, maybe only a +1 bonus for 13 or better in a stat, -1 for 8 less. This limited stat bonus discourages stat inflation and limits absurd hit and damage bonuses. Stat inflation is bad, not only because it is min-max game playing, but because it makes stats as the basis for character knowledge checks less helpful.
The proposal I have for hit bonuses is as follows. PCs have four categories: Warrior, Martial, Trained and Untrained.
Ideally this would work with a flat stat bonus system, +3 bonuses overwhelm and confuse everything, maybe only a +1 bonus for 13 or better in a stat, -1 for 8 less. This limited stat bonus discourages stat inflation and limits absurd hit and damage bonuses. Stat inflation is bad, not only because it is min-max game playing, but because it makes stats as the basis for character knowledge checks less helpful.
The proposal I have for hit bonuses is as follows. PCs have four categories: Warrior, Martial, Trained and Untrained.
Untrained Adventures
are: wizards and anything like them.
They have no to hit bonus to start, like a normal person (normal people
include hired guards and such so this isn’t that bad). Every 5 levels of adventuring the untrained
PC gains a bonus to his. Thus a 10th
level wizard (The maximum level I would allow) has a +2 bonus.
Trained
Adventurers are the non-martial classes that still have training in fighting:
thieves and clerics in a simple B/X game.
In a more advanced game it’s classes without specific military impulses,
but some training – bards, illusionists (my mu/thief version at least), druids,
halflings, elves. These classes gain 1 +
level/3 bonus to hit. A 10th
level thief will have a +4 bonus to hit, which isn’t bad.
Martial
Adventurers are adventurers specifically trained and practiced in warfare. This includes the fighter subclasses mostly:
paladins, rangers, dwarves and likely assassins. Those with a combat bent, but without the
warrior’s narrow focus on mayhem. Bonus is
1+level/2.
Warriors are
special they are adventurers that are not only trained, practiced and devoted
to fighting This group is limited to
fighters and likely special classes like monks and barbarians. The bonus to hit for these combative monsters
(and they fight exactly as well as monsters) is 1+level. Thus a 10th level fighter gets +11
to attack, meaning no matter what an unarmored foe does they will be hit.
arts, but have a special quality of aggressiveness or
pugnaciousness that makes them more dangerous then even a well-trained
soldier.
A note on Demi-humans:
Demi-humans are special magical, strange or odd creatures. That or they have extremely static societies
usually, and train their members rigorously in certain types of combat. Either way one looks at it they have an
attack bonus of some kind. While in
older D&D this comes from the monster descriptions of Demi-humans (Elves
gain +1 hit with sword or bow) and tends to be specific, I think a flat
categorical bonus for the 3 basic types of Demi-humans works for me.
Elves (and their ilk) gain a +1 combat bonus for ranged and melee. This is usually for their cultural weapons,
but not necessarily. Thus a Level 1 elf
fights as good as a fighter, but this advantage is quickly lost. This makes sense in the settings I like ASE
elves are genetic commandos, and culturally hive dwelling cruel militarists. On
the Apollyon Passengers all have otherworldly blood and commonly receive
military training.
Dwarves (and other melee focused demi-humans): A +1
to hit in melee. Normal dwarves are
as good in a fight and in melee their natural density and tirelessness makes
them as dangerous as motivated veteran troops. Even as they level they remain
good in combat, but do not advance as quickly or as far as human warriors.
Halflings, froglings, merrowmen, clockwork gnomes, ratmen,
goblins and whatever other sort of horrible sneaky subhuman populates the weak
but sinister spot on the great chain of being in your game world gain +1 with missiles. Don’t try to mousetrap a hobbit village. That fat hobbit farmwife can throw a kitchen
knife with the same terrible accuracy that the king’s elite archers can drop an
arrow. Don’t even play pub darts with
these sorts of creatures. If you are
fighting a rude halfling, after losing at darts, grapple with the creepy little glutton.
These are the rules I am adopting for my G+ games from now
on. They are simple to convert and
simple to use.
Here’s a table:
Adventurer Category
|
Melee
Bonus |
Missile
Bonus |
Untrained
(Wizard)
|
0+Level/5
|
0+Level/5
|
Trained
(Cleric/Thief/Elf/Halfling) |
1+Level/3
|
1+Level/3
|
Martial
(Dwarf/Paladin/Ranger) |
1+Level/2
|
1+Level/3
|
Warrior
(Fighter/Monk) |
1+Level
|
1+Level
|
Elf based
(regal/ancient)
|
2+level/3
|
2+level/3
|
Dwarf based
(tough)
|
2+level/2
|
1+level/2
|
Halfling based (sneaky)
|
1+level/3
|
2+level/3
|
Another holdout coming over to the ascending AC dark side!?
ReplyDeleteBlack is white! Day is night! Dogs and cats living together!
Please master, teach us new ways to shout and kill and revel and enjoy ourselves, until all the earth flames with a holocaust of ecstasy and freedom.
Well the key to understanding OSR play is that the best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity.
DeleteWhat rude beast slouches towards The Keep on The Borderlands waiting to be born? Ascending AC!
Ascending AC is fine and dandy as long as all you want out of AC is a simple score to determine success of a hit chance it works fine, Gary messed up AC in AD&D anyway ;-)
ReplyDeleteFor the level of simplicity I want in my games (as a means of emphasizing exploration over combat) AC needs to be simple. I do intend on using some minor absorption effects for heavy armor, but generally OD&D rules with low HP totals, max AC of 18 and flat damage are excellent for making any combat encounter quick and terrifyingly unpredictable.
DeleteSwords & Wizardry has very easy rules for ascending AC, including class "to hit" bonuses and a handy table for converting descending AC. Makes pulling monsters out of different rulesets pretty quick.
ReplyDelete