Archive for the ‘game design’ Category

character creation: dark elf vs dark knight

Tuesday, January 25th, 2011

D&D characters gain abilities in two ways: by choice and by chance.

In modern D&D, powers and abilities (feats, spells, etc) are generally chosen by the player, out of an ever-increasing set of sourcebooks.

In older D&D, the main special powers were spells, and they tended to be given out randomly or at the DM’s discretion.

Is one approach better than the other? Well, it seems to me that they reward different types of players. I’m tempted to raise the false dichotomy of “Roleplay vs Roll-play”, but I’ll avoid needless use of loaded terms and — nah, skip it! I WILL talk about roleplayers vs. roll-players. I think I may be trolling, guys! Am I doing it right?

In this context, I’ll define role-players as people who primarily choose their powers to support a specific character concept: a dual-wielding dark elf, for instance.

Roll-players are people who primarily choose their powers to make themselves effective in battle: a 3e Batman wizard, for instance.

Let’s see what Batman and Drizzt players do in modern D&D, where players can choose any ability they want out of the infinite universe of character options. The role-players are able to build their concept perfectly. Roll-players, though, quickly learn the “best” combinations and never choose anything else. They actually cheat themselves out of a wide range of character experiences this way.

On the other hand, what if we used a system where powers were assigned randomly, or discovered like treasure? Role-players would be frustrated when their dark elf ranger started accumulating longbow feats, so they couldn’t play the character they wanted to play. Roll-players, though, would be forced to optimize their character within arbitrary constraints, and would get the fun of facing different sets of tactical decisions with every character.

Modern D&D is a pretty crunchy, tactical RPG. Its totally non-random character creation, though, is better for actor-type players than tactical-type players.

In my Mazes and Monsters rules, by the way, I use a hybrid system. Characters choose special abilities from randomly-selected subsets of the available powers. 5e suggestion, guys! Might be a good way to go.

traits in Mazes and Monsters

Monday, January 24th, 2011
This entry is part 21 of 34 in the series Mazes and Monsters

Traits

In FATE, you can make up your own traits, and apply them whenever you want. That’s fine for modern games, but in Mazes and Monsters, that kind of heady authorial control is reserved for high-level characters. The technology of the 80s is all about charts.

Here’s what I’m thinking:

Every character starts the game with one Trait. A Trait is a special characteristic that makes him or her unusually good (or bad) at certain activities.

To determine your Trait, roll a d12 and consult the following chart. Each die roll has two or more possible traits listed next to it: choose the one you want.

1 ARMS: Choose one of the following traits:
strength: Add a trait die to melee weapon damage (including unarmed combat). Carry up to 2 bulky items. Also, gain a Trait die on any check that requires strength.
throwing: Add a trait die when throwing a dagger.
2 LEGS: Choose one of the following traits:
quickness: When not wearing armor, your Protection RONA is increased by one. Add a trait die when running.
stealth: Add a trait die when sneaking or stealing.
3 MIND: Choose one of the following traits:
cleverness: gain a Trait die on any check that requires cleverness or trickery.
Spellcraft: Choose a spell. Gain a Trait die on any RONA check required by this spell. Also, its spell cost is halved.
4 HEART: Choose one of the following traits:
serenity: Add a trait die when escaping or resisting emotional attacks.
courage: Add a trait die when escaping or resisting fear attacks.
5 SKILL: Choose one of the following traits:
Weapon skill: Choose a weapon to specialize in (including unarmed combat). You gain a Trait die whenever you and your target are both using this weapon.
Athletic skill: Gain 10 bonus Hit Points. Gain a Trait die on any RONA involving athletics or toughness.
6 GUIDANCE: Choose one of the following traits:
luck: Once per session, add a trait die to a roll of your choice.
direction sense: Add a trait die when finding your way. Once per maze, you may ask the Maze Controller whether a door or passage will lead the party closer to the treasure.
7 EYES: Choose one of the following traits:
sharp eyes: Add a trait die when looking for something.
aim: Add a trait die when attacking with a bow.
8 EARS: Choose one of the following traits:
hear through walls: Add a trait die when listening for something.
intuition: Add a trait die to escape the Mazed state when talking to a nonexistent person. Add a trait die when determining people’s motives.
9 TONGUE: Choose one of the following traits:
persuasiveness: Add a trait die when convincing others. You may buy items from town at half price.
bardic music: If you play an instrument and sing while casting a Trick, add a trait die.
10 SOUL:
piety: Add a trait die when attacking undead. Also, gain a Trait die on any check that requires divine aid.
power of light: You may create illumination with no light source.
11 Roll again on the Traits table, rerolling 11s and 12s. Choose a Trait. You are unusually BAD at this trait: when it comes up, the Maze Controller rolls 2d12 and takes the WORST of the two rolls.
12 You may choose any trait you want.

I notice that w’ve sort of reinvented D&D3e feats here. That’s fine. It’s inevitable, I think, given the character sheets we’ve seen with their non-numeric character descriptors like “courage” and “throwing”. Again, it’s not us inventing, it’s Rona Jaffe guiding.

Next week: spells!

Rites for everyone

Tuesday, January 18th, 2011

I recently posted a “rites” mechanic, where a wizard spends a turn powering-up his spells. I think it might actually be a good general mechanic: every class has a unique way to spend a turn powering up an attack; if successful, all hits become critical hits.

More examples:

Rogue: Skulk. As a turn-ending standard action, a rogue makes a Hide check vs. an opponent. If successful, the first hit on that opponent next turn will be a critical hit.

Fighter: Windup. A fighter begins a combat move. Like the wizard, if the fighter is hit before the next turn, the move is spoiled.

Cleric: Abjure. As a standard action, the cleric flourishes a holy symbol and demands that all enemies retreat. The next turn, an attack on any enemy within 3 squares of the cleric is a critical hit.

fantasies and scenarios

Monday, January 17th, 2011
This entry is part 20 of 34 in the series Mazes and Monsters

Mazes and Monsters board

TOM HANKS: I played a game called Mazes and Monsters a little too much.
KATE: No kidding. What level?
TOM: Uh, nine. Ninth level.
KATE: So am I! Isn’t it wonderful to be finally creating your own scenarios?
TOM: Yeah, yeah, and your own fantasies too!

OK, the above dialogue raises a few questions. For instance:
WHAT

It’s hard to see how these fit into standard RPG structure, and, indeed, upon first hearing, it sounds like arrant nonsense – nonsense that merits slaps to the writer. But if we’ve learned nothing else, we’ve learned to TRUST MAZES AND MONSTERS. If we haven’t learned that, we’ve learned nothing.

And we’ve been wasting our time.

Scenarios

Here’s my theory: a “scenario” is the intro text that introduces an adventure. For instance, “You stand before the palace of the Ghosts of the Gravelands. Fell spirits float through its ancient corridors. It is rumored that among the palace’s treasures are mighty gems that may trap men’s souls.”

At ninth level, players gain the ability to write this intro dialogue, thus choosing the nature of the maze, typical monsters or a boss who inhabit the maze, and the kind of treasure that can be gained. The Maze Controller still writes and controls the adventure within these parameters. After all, the Maze Controller’s powers are like unto those of a god. Even gods take suggestions, I guess.

Fantasies

We know that Mazes and Monsters grows progressively more psychologically difficult (and powerful) as you advance in level. However, we haven’t really explored the dangerous world of the unconscious mind. Our current rules sound like pretty vanilla 80s RPG design. We need to push the pop-psychology envelope with our Fantasy rules. As Blondie says, “We work out our problems in the caverns and then we leave them there.”

Like scenarios, fantasies must give players some agency over the perils they face. Again, Mazes and Monsters anticipates the shared narrative of modern indie RPG design.

Let’s start by getting some information about the players’ psyches. We’ll use this information to populate the game’s mazes with suitably cathartic (or destructive) challenges. At various levels, every player rolls a d12 to select a question from the following chart and gives the answer to the Maze Controller.

1. What makes you angry?
2. What betrayal do you fear?
3. In what way do you feel like a failure?
4. What part of your behavior feels out of control?
5. What’s one thing you’d like to preserve from harm or change?
6. What would you like to tell someone so they really understand? Who?
7. What do you worry about most?
8. What would make you a success?
9. What would you like people to admire about you?
10. Describe your most frightening nightmare.
11. What event could drive you to madness or despair?
12. What magical power would allow you to solve all your real-life problems?

Armed with this information, the Maze Controller can create thinly-disguised, hamhanded challenges and rewards that have real psychological effects on the players. These are called “fantasies”. For instance, if a player says that they would like the power of resurrection to bring back a dead relative, you make up a pretend relative of the character, kill them off, and then offer the character a quest that will let them conquer Death! The Maze Controller can do real psychological healing! Or harm. Hard to predict which. That’s part of the fun!

Example of play:

Maze Controller: OK, Tom, your real brother died, right? Your character, Pardieux, has a brother, and he just died. You watched him fall off a building! As he fell, he called, “Help me, brother!” but you were too far away!
Tom: (weeps)
Maze Controller: If you can find the Clock of Chronos, you can reverse those events! It will be as if it never happened. The Clock of Chronos is in the Dungeon of Lemnos…

At level 9, players can “create their own fantasy”. Once per level, they may seize control of the story and narrate their own thinly-disguised challenge, quest or hero’s journey. The Maze Controller sets all the RONAs and makes the dice rolls, but otherwise, the player has control over the fantasy until it has been conquered – or until it conquers!

Example of play:

Maze Controller: OK, guys, you’ve just returned from the Maze of Whispers. You –
Tom: Just a minute: I’m creating a fantasy. My character gives his earnings to his brother, who immediately runs away and gets lost in the city. After a few days, he has been robbed and beaten. He’s starving in an alley… he’s attacked by thugs… he cries out! “Brother! Save me!” but I’m to far away to help! He’s… (weeps)
Maze Controller: Right. Guys, if you can run through the mazes of the Slums of the Golden city, you MIGHT be able to intervene before Tom’s brother is killed.

Wow, it sounds really irresponsible to hand that kind of manipulative emotional control to people with no psychological training! Unless, of course, those people are fully licensed Maze Controllers or players able to play at the 9th level.

Next week: traits!

interrupting spells in 4e

Friday, January 14th, 2011

“He’s a dark elf wizard and he’s put some kind of hold on Derek!” Elistan cried. “Keep him from casting spells!”

-The Magic of Krynn (Dragonlance Tales, Volume 1)

Every D&D rule change comes with tradeoffs. In 4th edition, wizards were rebalanced. The advantage is that they are no longer overpowered compared to other classes. The disadvantage is that they are no longer overpowered compared to other classes.

I kind of miss the panic that set in when earlier-edition parties met a wizard, and all the maneuvering (by the party and the DM) to hit a wizard before he finishes his spell. However, honestly, 4th edition works perfectly well without it.

That’s not a reason to tinker with what ain’t broke, though. I’d like to try to return wizards to their place as fearsome super-artillery without overpowering them (much). Here’s my plan.

4e wizards may cast attack spells normally, or they may cast them as a “rite” (sort of halfway between an attack spell and a ritual, and analagous to 3rd edition spells with a full-round casting time). Casting a spell as a rite ends your turn and has no immediate effect.

On your next turn, you may finish the rite as a standard action. You cast the spell normally, except that any hit by the spell is a guaranteed critical hit.

During your casting of the spell, you are saying magic words, performing ritual gestures, and doing other wizardy things. If your concentration is broken, you lose the spell. Non-damaging forced movement, being knocked prone, being grabbed, etc. forces an Endurance check of 5 + 1/2 the attacker’s level to avoid breaking concentration. If damage is done to the wizard, the DC of the Endurance check is equal to the damage.

Is this option too underpowered (never used) or overpowered (always used)? It seems to me that it will be situational. Spending two turns to do slightly more than double damage starts out pretty balanced; if it’s successfully used with a daily power, it’s quite good indeed. However, if there is any chance of the rite being interrupted, it might be too risky to use it. Wizards might only use it when they’re in a position where they think they can avoid attack for a turn.

Rites might be used by the DM more often than they are used by PC wizards. A wizard who has begun a rite becomes a fearsome threat and may cause an abrupt change in the PCs’ tactics.

level 1 nuke spell

Tuesday, January 11th, 2011

I must be insane. It occurred to me to give a SPELL THAT AUTO-KILLS EVERYONE to EVERY WIZARD. And I kind of think it’s a good idea.

Let me explain my thinking. Ever since 1e, one of the fundamental conceits of D&D has been that the PCs wander through a dungeon and run into bite-sized encounters. Even if the dungeon is occupied by, say, a tribe of orcs, the orcs never mass into an army: they run into the PCs in dribs and drabs until they are all slaughtered.

It would be pretty stupid to try to find an in-game explanation for this. But let’s start down that dark path. How can we justify this?

If it was well-known that every wizard had a daily spell that allowed them to effortlessly slaughter armies, it would change the world’s military tactics. You wouldn’t mass into an army as much. If you did, you’d risk losing your entire army to one spell. You’d be better off dividing your army into several units which traveled separately. Suddenly, military forces look a lot more like D&D adventuring parties and their adversaries.

What if an adventuring party invaded your dungeon? You’d have your units widely spread apart, hunkered down in separate rooms. That way, you’d be nullifying the advantage of the wizard’s nuke spell.

OK, that’s my “simulationist” thinking. Here’s my “gamist” thinking.
(more…)

mazed in monsters

Monday, January 10th, 2011
This entry is part 19 of 34 in the series Mazes and Monsters

OK, we’ve got pretty much a complete game out of Mazes and Monsters. We’ve figured out combat, skills and spells: everything we need for a generic sword-and-sorcery game.

All that’s remaining are a few Mazes-and-Monsters-specific rules hints dropped by the characters. Frankly, a lot of them don’t receive a lot of rules support in the movie at all, and some almost seem like offhand fake-jargon that’s being made up on the spot. But we know that
THAT’S
NOT
TRUE.

There is Underlying Truth to be found here: we just have to dig it up.

Get your shovels!

Mazed

One of the focuses of Mazes and Monsters is the thin line between fantasy and reality.

Equally thin is the line between players and characters. Both players and characters can become confused about what’s real and what’s not.

We’ve determined that when a character is confused, they enter the “Mazed” condition. A Mazed character’s mini is placed in a special square on the Mazes and Monsters gameboard, which I will call the “Maze Prison”.

Mazes and Monsters boardWhen a character is Mazed, their perception of reality can be skewed by whoever is imposing the condition. Friends may appear enemies and vice versa; an open door may appear to be a solid wall; or the character may be totally immersed in a fantasy world that has no connection to reality (or, technically, a fantasy world that has no connection to the shared fantasy world of Mazes and Monsters: a higher level of fantasy, if you will.) All details of the fantasy are determined by the creature or effect that imposes it.

The power of a Maze is measured by the RONA check to escape it. Like other RONAs, it ranges from 3 (Easy) to 9 (Hard).

When an effect Mazes you, you may make an immediate RONA check to shake off the illusion. If you succeed, it exerts no more power over you. If you fail, you are locked into the illusion until some outside force challenges your delusion. Such an event is called a Maze Disruption, and it allows you to make a new RONA check, against the same difficulty, to break free of the illusion. If this new check fails, you incorporate the disruption within the Maze delusion, and that same effect will no longer provide you with a chance to break free.

Example Maze Disruptions:
-If you’ve been Mazed to believe an open door is a solid wall, you may make a new RONA check if someone passes through the door.
-If you’ve been Mazed to think that your friend is a fierce Gorville, you may make a new RONA check if your friend talks to you and reminds you of your shared friendship.

Caution: According to Mazes and Monsters, these are rules for real life as well!

Next week: We’ll cover more movie jargon, “fantasies and scenarios”! Will this be the sexiest Mazes and Monsters article yet??

let’s drop the 4e level bonus!

Tuesday, December 14th, 2010

So, several years after 4e came out, how is “+1 to everything every two levels” level bonus working out for everyone?

Every time you gain an even level, you have to do a lot of writing on your character sheet (or, more likely, print out a new sheet). You have to add the +1 level bonus to the attack rolls on all of your power cards, add 1 to your defenses and initiative, and update every. single. skill.

I’m starting to wonder whether you couldn’t scrap this level bonus, and just let characters’ abilities climb based on attribute boosts, enhancement bonuses, and other perks.

The level bonus has NO EFFECT on level-appropriate challenges, since the bonuses are applied to attacks and defenses (or skill bonuses and DCs). The main effect of the bonus is to make levels more meaningful. If characters or monsters have a few levels between them, they can’t reasonably compete against each other. Does this make things more fun? Let’s examine every aspect of the level-bonus rule separately.

Attack rolls and defenses: These march in lockstep, so let’s examine them together. The design intent of 4e was that monsters’ defenses would increase by 1 point every level; PC attacks would also increase by 1 every level, .5 from the level bonus and .5 from everything else (ability bonuses, enhancement bonuses, and misc etc). (In fact, the original math was slightly wrong, which means that we’re saddled with the Weapon Expertise fix.)

I don’t actually love the rapid increase of attack bonuses and defenses. Experience with 4e shows that it tends to make the most exciting fights – those against high-level opponents – drag on through miss after miss.

Is that really a fun way to handle a very tough battle? No, it isn’t, as 4e designers recognized. That’s why they developed Elite and Solo monsters, who have the increased HP and damage output of higher-level opponents, but the attacks and defenses of level-appropriate opponents.

What if we removed the level bonus from PC attacks and defenses? (We’d also have to subtract 1 point per two levels from monster attack bonuses and defenses.) Higher-level monsters would still have more HP and do more damage than lower-level foes, but their defenses wouldn’t recede quite as fast into unhittability. We’d effectively be turning every high-level monster into something more like an Elite or Solo monster.

Also, does it make fantasy-logic sense that powerful enemies are unhittable? Maybe a little bit – ogres with thick skin or fast duelists are hard to hurt. But an orc champion might not be much dodgier than an orc grunt. He can just take more damage, and behead you before you get a second attack.

Let’s try removing it!

A level 1 fighter with a +7 attack bonus (+4 strength, +3 weapon proficiency) attacks a level 8 orc. Without the level bonus, the orc’s AC is maybe 18 instead of 22. The PC hits on a 11 or better, instead of a 15 or better.

The orc strikes back! Instead of having a +13 attack bonus, he has a +9, so he hits the fighter’s AC 18 with a roll of 9 instead of needing only a 5.

Suddenly, instead of having a dull, foregone-conclusion combat round, we have some excitement around the combat rolls. Of course, the orc is still going to win the combat, because he hits like a jackhammer. His attacks still do an average of 16+ damage per attack, meaning he can bloody the fighter with one hit: while the fighter, doing possibly 9 or 10 damage per hit, is going to take a while to carve through the orc’s 90 HP. This, to me, seems like a more exciting way to model a one-sided battle.

Skills

Character skill bonuses get higher as characters gain levels, which makes sense: higher-level characters are more competent. However, the current 4e skill paradigm is that skill DCs are relative to the characters’ level anyway. A Hard climb check is always a Hard climb check, no matter the character level: there are only a handful of fixed DCs, like those for jump distance, at which higher-level characters actually improve.

If characters always face level-appropriate skill DCs, what’s the point of laboriously adding 1 to every skill bonus and DC every two levels? Let’s just forget that rigmarole and let PC skills slowly improve as they accrue attribute bonuses and skill-boosting items. We’ll subtract half-level from the giant skill DC chart as well.

This change has no downside (since it actually has virtually no mechanical effect at all), and would save a lot of erasing/reprinting of the character sheet.

Initiative

Since initiative rises steeply with level, it becomes an inevitable part of combat that higher-level opponents go before you. Does this make any sense? Why does a high-level zombie, with a speed of 4, necessarily beat you to the punch?

Also worth noting are the important areas where the level bonus is not used:

Damage Although, for instance, Strength checks and Strength-based skills increase by one point every two levels, Strength-based damage does not (which confused me when I started 4e, and probably confuses other new players). Damage increases are, instead, cooked into attacks: higher-level attacks let you roll more dice.

Hit points Characters and monsters get HP per level via a separate subsystem. The extra HP and damage given to monsters and characters, plus the non-level bonuses to other attributes, might make for more entertaining encounters between opponents of different level.

combat in Mazes and Monsters (including, of course, maiming and slaughter)

Monday, December 13th, 2010
This entry is part 18 of 34 in the series Mazes and Monsters

Last week we started work on the Mazes and Monsters combat system, figuring out HP and damage. That was the easy part: hit rolls are really the central feature of combat.

Let’s use RONA for this. As you may remember, using RONA, you roll a D12 and try to hit a target number. If you have an applicable trait, you roll 2d12 and take the highest number.

Wimpy monsters require an Easy Rona (a roll of 3 or more on an exploding d12); middle-range monsters Average (6) and tough or well-armored foes Hard (9).

Characters don’t necessarily get much better at hitting as they level. As soon as they get a trait that lets them roll 2d12 for their attack, they’re as good as they’ll ever be.

This is a departure from fantasy RPGs like D&D, which give the PCs (and monsters) steadily increasing hit chances as they level. Mazes and Monsters, on the other hand, provides steadily increasing damage; we don’t need to double-dip.

Armor

Armor in Mazes and Monsters is very limited! Iglacia the Fighter has listed among her possessions “armor”, “shield”, and “helmet”. No “leather”, “chain”, or “plate”; no armor+1. Just “Armor”.

Let’s say that hitting an unarmored character requires an Average success: in essence, you need to roll a 6 to hit them. We’ll give each of Armor, Helm, and Shield a +1 to that number, so a fully-armored character like Iglacia requires a 9 to hit: a Hard RONA.

Is there anything on Iglacia’s character sheet to bear out this theory?

Well, there is a stat right below H.P. I can’t make out the acronym: it’s two letters, and its value is 10. If I had to guess, I’d say that the letters were “P.T.” or “T.P.” or “B.R.” or something like that. Since I can’t figure out what it is, I’m going to declare that it’s “P.R.”, “Protection RONA”. It’s 10, instead of 9, which gives Iglacia a better defense than we theorized! Maybe Armor grants +2 P.R. while the helm and shield grant +1 each.

Weapons

Iglacia has a couple of weapons on her character sheet: mace, axe, and the Talking Sword of Loghri. She must have had some reason for keeping her mace even after she got her Talking Sword of Logrhi. How are we going to differentiate these weapons?

I’m tempted to adopt the D&D3 solution of giving monsters resistances and weaknesses to bashing, piercing, or slashing weapons. We can extend that to spells, too: maze mummies are weak to fire, for instance.

Actually, given that the only type of armor is “armor”, the list of weapons in Mazes and Monsters probably isn’t very long. No footman’s mace or Bohemian earspoon here. Instead of dividing weapons into categories, we can just give monsters resistances to specific weapons.

While we’re here, let’s come up with the weapons list. It probably looks something like

sword
mace
axe
spear
dagger
bow
staff

Let’s handle monster weaknesses and resistances by adjusting the monster’s P.R. (Protection RONA): +3 for resistances and -3 for weaknesses. For instance:

Mystic Skeleton
PR: 6 (9 vs arrows, swords and daggers)

Maiming and Slaughter

We’ve already come up with a colorful Maiming table. We can now tie that to the RONA system. If you (or a monster) get a critical success (10 higher than the RONA target number) you can roll on the maiming table. If you happen to roll a double crit (20 higher than the RONA) let’s say you kill your target instantly. We’ll call that a slaughter because that’s the sort of term that probably would have distressed 80s parents.

Say, what are the odds of having a character get Slaughtered by a freak roll of the dice?

I tend to think that monsters always roll 1d12s: the extra d12 from Traits are one of the ways that players have an advantage over their environment. In order to Slaughter an unarmored character with a RONA of 6, a monster needs a 26. That means rolling 12 twice, and then rolling a 6 or higher. The odds of this are about 1 in 300.

How many times is a character attacked between level 1 and level 9? Well, earlier we decided that it takes 70 game sessions to get to level 9. Let’s conservatively guess that there are two combats per session. Unarmored characters try to stay out of the way, but they probably get attacked at least once per battle. Over 9 levels, that’s about 300 attacks: you’ve got an even chance of being Slaughtered before you get to level 10. Add to that the chances of death by HP depletion, traps, tricks, and Maze-related madness, and it’s obviously quite an accomplishment to make it to the level-10 cap.

Fumbling

If there’s a special chart for critical hits, there needs to be a chart for critical failures too. If you roll ten less than a target Protection RONA, you have to roll on the Fumble Chart.

Fumble Subtable
1: The character impales himself with his or another’s weapon. Character rolls damage on himself.
1: The character makes the same attack again, this time on an ally.
3: The character’s weapon or spell breaks.
4-5: The character’s weapon or spell flies across the room.
6-7: The character leaves himself open. One opponent may make a free attack.
8-9: The character falls down. He loses his next turn.
10-11: The character misses spectacularly. No other effect.
12: If there is another enemy in range, the character automatically hits that enemy.

On a double fumble (20 lower than the target’s P.R.) the character kills himself with his own weapon.

OK, our combat system is pretty solid. We maybe erred in basing it on the same mechanic as everything else in the game; to maintain fidelity to 80’s RPG style, we should have had it be a whole separate subsystem. But at least we jammed in a few unnecessary charts.

Next week we’ll finish off whatever odds and ends of rules we haven’t addressed yet. The Mazed condition springs to mind. Then, the week after: the official release of Mazes and Monsters 1st Edition, just in time for Christmas!

Edit: We won’t do that. Instead, next time: we’ll get mazed!

hit points and damage in mazes and monsters

Monday, December 6th, 2010
This entry is part 17 of 34 in the series Mazes and Monsters

We’ve pretty much gotten a complete RPG out of Mazes and Monsters, and now we’re putting together the final pieces. In a total reversal of normal RPG design, we’re putting together the combat rules last!

For reference, here’s Iglacia the Fighter’s character sheet:

Page 1:

click for larger version

Page 2:

Combat System

For our combat rules, we need something baroque, something byzantine, something a little quirky.

Sure, we could just abstract combat, make it an instance of the general action resolution mechanic, the way modern, non-combat-oriented games do: but this is the 80s. This is a game called MAZES AND MONSTERS. It’s about fighting monsters and stealing their treasure (and working out your neuroses along the way). It needs detailed combat rules, preferably with charts.

We already know some details about the combat system. The Columbo-like detective said it featured “maiming”. We know that characters have Hit Points (dozens or hundreds of them). From the way that Tom Hanks stood between the muggers, we can guess it doesn’t feature flanking or tactical movement. And from the lethality of traps, I’d guess that combat in Mazes and Monsters can be a fairly deadly affair.

Combat rules can be reduced to four pieces: Hit Points, Damage rolls, Hit Rolls, and Defenses. We’ll take the first two today.

Hit Points

At level 9, Iglacia the Fighter has 181 HP. An awkward number: approximately 20 HP per level, but off by one. It seems that there is some random die rolling involved. And in Mazes and Monsters, if there’s die rolling, there are d12s.

We could use our exploding die rolls here, but it doesn’t seem reasonable that someone could roll a negative number for hit points. Imagine a first-level character who starts with -5 HP! I mean, this is the 80s, the decade of death during character creation, but let’s avoid that little headache and have HP rolls be regular d12 rolls.

The average roll of 3d12 is 19.5; if fighters roll 3d12 per level for HP, a 9th level fighter would average 175.5. Iglacia’s 181 is perfectly reasonable, especially considering that players’ HP scores trend high. There’s a long RPG tradition of cheating on your hit-point rolls.

D&D-like games usually have tiers of classes, toughness-wise: for instance, Basic D&D gives fighters d8s for Hit Points, clerics d6es and magic-users and rogues d4. Advanced D&D inflated things up to d10 for fighters, and then gave d12s to barbarians, but let’s not get ahead of ourselves. We’ll introduce power creep in later supplements. For now, let’s give tough classes, like Fighters, 3d12 HP per level; and weaker classes, like Holy Men and Frenetics, 2d12 HP.

What about monsters? I don’t know about you, but rolling 27d12 to generate the Hit Points of a 9th-level monster doesn’t sound very fun to me. Let’s give monsters static HP by level.

Monsters, to my mind, come in two tiers: melee monsters and ranged. Let’s give melee monsters 20 HP per level (similar to fighters in toughness) and ranged monsters 10 HP per level (a little less than Holy Men and Frenetics).

Damage Rolls

You can derive average damage from average HP by answering the following question: all things being equal, how many hits can a hero take? and dividing accordingly.

I get the sense that Mazes and Monsters is a deadly game. However, as our friends prove, it is possible to get to level 9, so the odds are stacked towards the smart player!

My guess – based on the same instinct that led me to peg spell points at 20 per level and spells at 10 spell points per level – is that, on average, a fighter can take maybe two solid hits: but I wouldn’t be surprised if a monster can one-shot a player with a good enough damage roll.

Let’s start with two types of attacks, Weak attacks and Strong attacks.

Weak attacks – like a sprite’s dagger, or an ogre’s sling – do exploding 1d12 damage times the attacker’s level. (It’s a great way to learn your times table!)

Average damage for a weak attack is 5.5 HP per level, while fighters have an average of around 20 HP per level. On average, Iglacia the fighter can take 4 Weak hits from 9th-level adversaries before being killed.

Strong attacks – like a sprite’s bow, or an ogre’s club – do exploding 2d12 damage times the attacker’s level.

Two Strong attacks from a 9th level opponent will kill Iglacia. One such attack has almost a 50% chance of dropping Pardieux. He’d better only resort to front-line fighting as a last resort! He’d better rely on his spells, or on reason.

Next week, let’s figure out hit rolls, armor, weapons, and all that jazz. Then we’ll have a complete combat system.