sojikai
2011-06-26, 11:03 PM
This is something that I have not really heard much about. Granted, implemening such a system would really add a level of complexity to the system, would is something that most casual gamers tend to keep away from.
I'm getting ahead of myself. Allow me to explain what it is I'm even talking about:
I was playing some good ol' D&D when something like the following happened.
Player: "He's still swinging his spear above his head, right?"
DM: "Yup."
Player: "And he's not wearing armor?"
DM: "Just fur leggings and a loin cloth. His bare chest is sticking out, a sign of great courage in his tribe "
Player: *rolls* Alright, success! I stick my dagger right in his heart and kill him!"
DM: "WHAT?! You can't just kill him like that!"
Player: "But you just said he's still swinging his spear up above his head! I'm a highly-trained assassin with my dagger already in my hand! There's no way he'd be able to dodge a point-blank attack like that when he's pinned in the corner, let alone have time to bring down his spear for a block!"
DM: "I...I guess you have a point there, but that's really bending the rules. The book says nothing about the position of the weapon having any effect on the creature's ability to block attacks."
Player: "Well, they should!"
Now, I think we'll all agree that letting the player kill the trial warrior outright like that would be a tad ridiculous, especially considering that he still had a ton of hit points left, but the bit about his stance and the position of his weapon does raise a valid point.
I think that the best way to do something like this would be something like a fighting game: melee attacks are either high, medium, or low. However, this would suggest adapting a guard stance after each attack. The obvious drawback to this is that enemies would simply attack the areas that you are not guarding, thus making the entire mechanic more or less useless.
A better approach would be to use a power system like 4e's "at-will" attacks, but give each character at least one high, medium, and low attack, each putting the character in a position to guard a certain ytpe of attack. For example, a rogue might spring up from a crouch with a slash at the thighs, which would be a low attack, but it would leave him in a good position to block medium attacks, since he is now standing perfectly upright. However, this again turns into an odd rock-paper-scissors game, though one slightly more enjoyable than the previous exmple.
Have any of you ever given any thought to something like this? Is there a way to use this effectively, and in a way that doesn't turn into a game of being forced to attack wherever the opponent's atack left him open?
Unless...your stance or whatever only granted [I]bonuses[I] to defence against attacks to that area. Instead of "Hey, he's open here!", it would be more like "****, he can easily block an attack to there, so I'll have to take my chances with an attack to either here or here..."
Alright, I think I just answered my own question, but anyway, what do you think about all of this?
I'm getting ahead of myself. Allow me to explain what it is I'm even talking about:
I was playing some good ol' D&D when something like the following happened.
Player: "He's still swinging his spear above his head, right?"
DM: "Yup."
Player: "And he's not wearing armor?"
DM: "Just fur leggings and a loin cloth. His bare chest is sticking out, a sign of great courage in his tribe "
Player: *rolls* Alright, success! I stick my dagger right in his heart and kill him!"
DM: "WHAT?! You can't just kill him like that!"
Player: "But you just said he's still swinging his spear up above his head! I'm a highly-trained assassin with my dagger already in my hand! There's no way he'd be able to dodge a point-blank attack like that when he's pinned in the corner, let alone have time to bring down his spear for a block!"
DM: "I...I guess you have a point there, but that's really bending the rules. The book says nothing about the position of the weapon having any effect on the creature's ability to block attacks."
Player: "Well, they should!"
Now, I think we'll all agree that letting the player kill the trial warrior outright like that would be a tad ridiculous, especially considering that he still had a ton of hit points left, but the bit about his stance and the position of his weapon does raise a valid point.
I think that the best way to do something like this would be something like a fighting game: melee attacks are either high, medium, or low. However, this would suggest adapting a guard stance after each attack. The obvious drawback to this is that enemies would simply attack the areas that you are not guarding, thus making the entire mechanic more or less useless.
A better approach would be to use a power system like 4e's "at-will" attacks, but give each character at least one high, medium, and low attack, each putting the character in a position to guard a certain ytpe of attack. For example, a rogue might spring up from a crouch with a slash at the thighs, which would be a low attack, but it would leave him in a good position to block medium attacks, since he is now standing perfectly upright. However, this again turns into an odd rock-paper-scissors game, though one slightly more enjoyable than the previous exmple.
Have any of you ever given any thought to something like this? Is there a way to use this effectively, and in a way that doesn't turn into a game of being forced to attack wherever the opponent's atack left him open?
Unless...your stance or whatever only granted [I]bonuses[I] to defence against attacks to that area. Instead of "Hey, he's open here!", it would be more like "****, he can easily block an attack to there, so I'll have to take my chances with an attack to either here or here..."
Alright, I think I just answered my own question, but anyway, what do you think about all of this?