Combat and Conversation 1: The
Basics
Many who play RPGs love the combat experience, especially when it’s
rife with opportunities for cool combat maneuvers and support options. Yet
every wrinkle added to the mechanics of combat threatens to add more time and
more complexity. Every addition to complexity and time should probably be
regarded, at least prima facie, as undesirable in the system. Many who play
RPGs also enjoy the conversational component of the RPG, even when the
mechanics there are only lightly involved or wholly uninvolved. In this blog
post, I begin a (hopefully brief) series of posts thinking through simple,
conversational combat that affords options and flavor to players without adding
so much to the machinery that it becomes a detriment to player enjoyment.
A Simple Model
Suppose two evenly matched foes face off. A simple d20 could model a
range of combat outcomes, like the following:
D20 Roll Outcome
1 massive
success for combatant 1
2-3 great
success for combatant 1
3-5 moderate
success for combatant 1
7-14 even
exchange
15-17 moderate
success for combatant 2
18-19 great
success for combatant 2
20 massive
success for combatant 2
The next logical step would be to convert this to your game’s wounds/damage
system; I’ll represent that stage in this way, where a ● is a degree of success
and an x represents a failure:
D20 Roll Combatant 1 Combatant
2
1 ●●● x
2-3 ●● x
4-6 ● x
7-14 ● ●
15-17 x ●
18-19 x ●●
20 x ●●●
In an RPG, each ● could represent a multiplier of damage, so if a long
sword does 1d8 damage typically, combatant 1 would deal 3d8 damage on a roll of
1. An x would represent perhaps no damage dealt. Note that the 7-14 range, the
largest of the bunch, could instead be represented as x/x, meaning that neither
side succeeds. I represent these exchanges as ●/● because I’m now thinking
about the exertion of a combat exchange, even if neither side “win” the
exchange. This can happy because both sides miss, both sides exchange
ineffectual blows, or because both sides score a solid blow but neither gains
the advantage. The dot represents that both sides have lost something – if only
energy – in the combat.
There are now two obvious wrinkles for such a system, although I think
it works well enough for a turn-based combat game exchange between even
opponents. The first is that combat does not obviously take place between
equals, especially in an RPG. Someone has advantages of one kind, and the other
side might have advantages of another kind. Thus, in a future blog post, I’ll
add in thoughts on affording advantages to one side rather than the other. In another
future blog post, I’ll tackle a second problem, the problem of group combat,
which offers its own challenges. On one hand, the combat could be modeled with
a single die roll, regardless of size of the combatant groups. On the other
hand, players tend to like to see their own specific contributions to the combat.
The task becomes to balance these while maximizing player enjoyment.
Note that I have not yet addressed the question of how to make this
exchange something conversational. “You score a massive success” doesn’t
exactly satisfy the conversation piece, but it is a start in that direction. In
a third later blog post, I’ll spell out some ways for converting the numbers
into conversations.
Comments
Post a Comment