How do I make combat fun with minimal complexity?

Dethklok

First Post
For the sake of discussion, let's say I'm playing Microlite20 with only fighters and rogues - it's a very simple system, and there's no magic of any kind. The characters are thrown into an ancient ruin with rugged cliffs, trees, crumbling masonry, and monsters lurking in the darkness. What kinds of special options, rulings, or game design features would make combat more interesting?

They can be anything - shield walls, feints, special damage dice, rules for getting knocked over, morale, anything you like. What's cool?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Is intimate knowledge of M20 required for this exercise?

The first, and best, answer is: roleplaying. I think the Dungeon World people call it "fiction."

Since you've asked about a ruin, cliff, trees, and monsters (a giant?), all I can picture is the (first) duel from A Princess Bride. Make an M20 combat fun, with minimal complexity, by giving each combatant a d4, and letting each player name his combat technique. Each attack roll also gets the technique d4, each number on which represents a different attack or counter. The defender just rolls the d4. If you exceed your opponent's roll by exactly +1, then your choice of maneuever was the one endorsed by the technique, which grants you +4 on your attack, or on your AC in the case of the defender.
 

For the sake of discussion, let's say I'm playing Microlite20 with only fighters and rogues - it's a very simple system, and there's no magic of any kind. The characters are thrown into an ancient ruin with rugged cliffs, trees, crumbling masonry, and monsters lurking in the darkness. What kinds of special options, rulings, or game design features would make combat more interesting?

They can be anything - shield walls, feints, special damage dice, rules for getting knocked over, morale, anything you like. What's cool?

Get people to describe stuff. That's really all you need.

Wushu Open is a dice pool system in which you roll one dice per element you mention up to the scene cap. In practice this means everyone's rolling the scene cap - but everyone's describing four or so elements.

If you want tactics you need interactivity. 4E's forced movement (so the monsters end up down their own pit traps if the PCs are smart) works wonders here. Anything that involves more than one PC at once. (PC shield walls are generally terrible as they stop people moving).
 

You might collect some cool descriptions of fight scenes from novels, add what looks cool from fight scenes from your favorite movies, then have some brainstorming with your players about how to add those sorts of things (even if you don't do it all the time) to your game.
 


Reduce the number of rolls.
Have defense a static number that you change by taking cover. Then people will pay attention to where they are.
Have damage a static number so that people will pay attention to what weapon they use more.
In Nexus D20 I have one roll per action. If you roll a crit you have a crit. No rerolls to confirm. Any margin of success over the target's defense adds to the damage.
Combat becomes less random. This causes the players to think about the situation more and engages their minds.
Combat becomes very quick so you move from player to player quickly. People don't have time to get bored.
All of this reduces complexity.
If they want to try something fun and they have the skill to do it then let them do it with only the attack roll as rolled. If they want to shot one person, leap over a table, and shot another then just check on the athletics of the character. Is it high enough to normally do that? then just roll for the attacks.
Let them describe cool tricks. If they have the skill level then give them a bonus for the description. That way they are motivated to be creative instead of focusing on the dice too much.
Also make sure that the NPCs have a badass occasionally that does what you want the players to do. That will help them realize the style of your game.
 

Is intimate knowledge of M20 required for this exercise?
I don't use M20; it's just a way of framing the conversation.

The first, and best, answer is: roleplaying. I think the Dungeon World people call it "fiction."
But this doesn't address my question, which was, "What kinds of special options, rulings, or game design features would make combat more interesting?"


Since you've asked about a ruin, cliff, trees, and monsters (a giant?), all I can picture is the (first) duel from A Princess Bride. Make an M20 combat fun, with minimal complexity, by giving each combatant a d4, and letting each player name his combat technique. Each attack roll also gets the technique d4, each number on which represents a different attack or counter. The defender just rolls the d4. If you exceed your opponent's roll by exactly +1, then your choice of maneuever was the one endorsed by the technique, which grants you +4 on your attack, or on your AC in the case of the defender.
What does this add? Are some techniques inherently better than others? I don't see any tactical or immersive gain here, although I do see more dicerolls.


Get people to describe stuff. That's really all you need.
Do you roleplay without books or dice?

(PC shield walls are generally terrible as they stop people moving).
Why do shield walls stop people moving?


Reduce the number of rolls.
Have defense a static number that you change by taking cover. Then people will pay attention to where they are.
Have damage a static number so that people will pay attention to what weapon they use more.
In Nexus D20 I have one roll per action. If you roll a crit you have a crit. No rerolls to confirm. Any margin of success over the target's defense adds to the damage.
Combat becomes less random. This causes the players to think about the situation more and engages their minds.
Combat becomes very quick so you move from player to player quickly. People don't have time to get bored.
All of this reduces complexity.
If they want to try something fun and they have the skill to do it then let them do it with only the attack roll as rolled. If they want to shot one person, leap over a table, and shot another then just check on the athletics of the character. Is it high enough to normally do that? then just roll for the attacks.
Let them describe cool tricks. If they have the skill level then give them a bonus for the description. That way they are motivated to be creative instead of focusing on the dice too much.
Also make sure that the NPCs have a badass occasionally that does what you want the players to do. That will help them realize the style of your game.
This is a lot like the style of play I favor. However, I don't see any specific way to prevent the sort of "I attack, she attacks, you attack, she attacks" pacing that most rpgs fall into. Would you consider this not much of an issue, or is there a way of solving it?

Also, in your games, is there any advantage to be gained by trying one thing rather than another? Moving around behind an enemy vs. standing still and waiting for an enemy to approach; matching your weapon to your friends vs. selecting a different one that serves an alternate function? Going for a quick kill or fighting defensively to tire out the enemy? Is it effective to concentrate attacks on a stronger enemy or a weaker one? What kinds of design features give players an incentive to try one thing rather than another?
 

But this doesn't address my question, which was, "What kinds of special options, rulings, or game design features would make combat more interesting?"

Hmm... I mentioned Wushu Open but didn't link you.

Do you roleplay without books or dice?

Without books? After my second session if I need to refer to the book more than occasionally I find another system, one that doesn't distract everyone.

Without dice? Sometimes.

Why do shield walls stop people moving?

Because you have to stay in formation.
 

But this doesn't address my question, which was, "What kinds of special options, rulings, or game design features would make combat more interesting?"
Actually, your question was "
[h=2]How do I make combat fun with minimal complexity? "[/h] If you encourage your players to roleplay - talk about the cool stuff they're doing in combat - it won't increase complexity unless someone starts second-guessing the GM adjudications.

What does this add? Are some techniques inherently better than others? I don't see any tactical or immersive gain here, although I do see more dicerolls.
This adds some chaotic flow to combat. For a more orderly, but still simple, way to do this, allow each player to choose his number on the d4. Cover your d4 with your hand until your opponent reveals his choice - and find out which combatant chose the better maneuver.

I don't see any specific way to prevent the sort of "I attack, she attacks, you attack, she attacks" pacing that most rpgs fall into.
I actually think I solved this in my RPG. A few factors contribute to the erosion of turn-based hacking:

- You can attack whenever you want. Any character can take an action during the current turn. However, if you want to defend, you'd better make that your action choice.
- There are two positions in combat: offensive and defensive posture. And you can attack from either. Your position determines whether you do full damage, half damage, or no damage. So something as simple as making a movement can reduce your attacker's damage to half, and require him to use an action moving instead of attacking if he wants to do full damage.
- Defending is useful. It doesn't just delay your inevitable death; as long as you're defending in offensive posture, your comrades in defensive posture are harder to hurt.

That said, have you never seen a boxing match? It's pretty much "black shorts attacks, white shorts attacks, black shorts attacks, white shorts..."

What kinds of design features give players an incentive to try one thing rather than another?
Rule zero does. Although it's not really a design feature. D&D took out the benefits of footwork by eliminating "facing," then they put it back in by introducing "flanking." So I'm sure it's possible to make combat interesting with simple rules, but it would be easier just to introduce complex rules that make combat interesting.
 

"This is a lot like the style of play I favor. However, I don't see any specific way to prevent the sort of "I attack, she attacks, you attack, she attacks" pacing that most rpgs fall into. Would you consider this not much of an issue, or is there a way of solving it?"

Also, in your games, is there any advantage to be gained by trying one thing rather than another? Moving around behind an enemy vs. standing still and waiting for an enemy to approach; matching your weapon to your friends vs. selecting a different one that serves an alternate function? Going for a quick kill or fighting defensively to tire out the enemy? Is it effective to concentrate attacks on a stronger enemy or a weaker one? What kinds of design features give players an incentive to try one thing rather than another? "

Nexus D20 is different in that it uses a wound system. This changes the dynamics because you can die in one hit if you are stupid. It reflects actual combat much better and prevents people from standing up and shooting each other. Taking a wound gives you a penalty to all actions so you have a harder time doing anything after getting hit.

It also has a cascading defense rule. Each attack after the first one lowers your defense by 1. So you can overwhelm someone. This cascading is limited to 10 or 10 + your cover bonus. This makes cover extremely important and it causes players to act more logically. The only concession is that I don't make the wound penalties go to defense so it becomes a death spiral.

Different weapons have different ranges. These aren't the usual range increments rules.



[TABLE="width: 690"] [TR] [TD="width: 101"] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Range (Penalty)[/FONT]
[/TD] [TD="width: 82"] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Distance[/FONT]
[/TD] [TD="width: 288"] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Weapon types[/FONT]
[/TD] [TD="width: 187"] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Examples[/FONT]
[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD="width: 101"] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Close Quarters[/FONT]
[/TD] [TD="width: 82"] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]30ft./10m[/FONT]
[/TD] [TD="width: 288"] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Melee, Pistols, Shotguns, SMG, Throwing Knives[/FONT]
[/TD] [TD="width: 187"] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Inside a room.[/FONT]
[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD="width: 101"] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Short (-5)[/FONT]
[/TD] [TD="width: 82"] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]120ft./40m[/FONT]
[/TD] [TD="width: 288"] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Pistols, Shotguns, SMG, Assault Rifles, Javelin, Bow[/FONT]
[/TD] [TD="width: 187"] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Across the street ranges[/FONT]
[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD="width: 101"] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Medium (-10)[/FONT]
[/TD] [TD="width: 82"] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]240ft./80m[/FONT]
[/TD] [TD="width: 288"] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]SMG, Assault Rifles, Bow, Rifle[/FONT]
[/TD] [TD="width: 187"] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Down the street a few city blocks[/FONT]
[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD="width: 101"] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Longbow (-15)[/FONT]
[/TD] [TD="width: 82"] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]540ft./180m[/FONT]
[/TD] [TD="width: 288"] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Assault Rifles, SAWs, Rifles, Longbow[/FONT]
[/TD] [TD="width: 187"] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Across a field[/FONT]
[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD="width: 101"] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Long (-20)[/FONT]
[/TD] [TD="width: 82"] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]1050ft./350m[/FONT]
[/TD] [TD="width: 288"] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Assault Rifles, SAWs, Sniper Rifles[/FONT]
[/TD] [TD="width: 187"] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Across downtown[/FONT]
[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD="width: 101"] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Extreme (-30)[/FONT]
[/TD] [TD="width: 82"] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]2400ft./800m[/FONT]
[/TD] [TD="width: 288"] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Sniper Rifles[/FONT]
[/TD] [TD="width: 187"] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]One end of a small city to another[/FONT]
[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE]
So instead of saying that you are targeting something at 5 range increments you just say that you are trying to hit something at short range with a pistol. You can only hit something at medium range if you are a Master with a pistol. You can shoot at things at any range but the chances of hitting are outside of any real realm of probability.

If you attack something that is designed for long range at short range, such as a SAW, you take a penalty.

All of this makes it much quicker to do an attack.
 


Write your reply...
Remove ads

Top