Codex Martialis questions.

[Gharkash]

I am a big fan of fighting, with weapons or not, and know some things about the history of fighting in general. That is why i find the 3.5 fighting system dissapointing.

Tome of Battle did a great job making things more interesting, gave more options, but still has problems.

I recently stumbled upon Codex Martialis in these forums. I read the system (not the feats) and i find it rather intriguing, obviously more enjoyable and realistic than what 3.5 uses.

My questions are:

What is Codex Matrialis' interaction with 3.5?
It seems a bit strange to teach to people that probably won't have the will to read the book, mainly bacause they do not use melee, so how does it affect casters
Does it make melee better? (in term of options it seems it does, but what about power)
How does it interact with Tome of Battle?
Have you used it in games? Any pros and cons that do not fall under my questions but were found out during playtesting it?


Thanks in advance.

[Morph Bark]

What is Codex Martialis?

[eggs]

I read it a long time ago, but I basically wrote it off as a paperwork nightmare with a bunch of design decisions that looked very poorly conceived. (The one glaring example I remember was a decision the system posed: either roll a bunch of dice as different attacks, or roll the same bunch of dice and use the best outcome for one attack; in a system where failed rolls don't do anything bad.) Can't speak for it in play, though.

[Partysan]

I think the Author of the Codex Martialis is actually on these very boards. With a bit of luck he might explain it himself.

[Gavinfoxx]

I think it is mostly meant to be an 'instead of' for Tome of Battle thing...

I'm also not sure if you can do an apples to apples Warblade vs Codex Martialis Fighter...

[Agent 451]

I read it a long time ago, but I basically wrote it off as a paperwork nightmare...

+1, sir. I appreciate that is a more realistic combat system (as compared to normal 3.5 combat), but without having the entire group be well versed in it all I can think about is how much it will bog everything down flow-wise.

[Galloglaich]

Hi, I am the designer of that particular combat system, and can answer some questions. I'll try to be as honest as I can given my admitted bias. :smallsmile:


(The one glaring example I remember was a decision the system posed: either roll a bunch of dice as different attacks, or roll the same bunch of dice and use the best outcome for one attack; in a system where failed rolls don't do anything bad

This has actually been thought through (and tested) more thoroughly than you probably expect. Part of the codex system is that the amount of damage you get from a critical hit is determined by the number of dice you threw into your attack. A four dice attack means four dice of crit damage if you score a 20, and the more dice you throw in the more likely that is to happen. Conversely, if you roll a natural 1, it's always a fumble and an automatic counter-attack opportunity for your opponent.

On defense, a natural 20 also means an immediate counterattack.

In play people tend to use multi-dice attacks when they are trying to kill an opponent quickly, or when the opponent is distracted from fighting someone else, or if they have a high deficit to overcome in terms of To-Hit vs defense. If the opponent is dangerous they will keep more dice for defense, if the player is being very cautious sometimes they will try the multiple single-die attacks (such as when the opponent is fighting another ally, but could focus on either antagonist), but multi-die attacks (and defense) are more common.

Single-die attacks or defense rolls can also be augmented situationally based on individual feats or equipment. For example, if you have a shield you automatically get an extra defense die on every active defense roll (and you take the highest value). So if you have a shield you can afford to spend less of your (4 die) pool on each individual defense roll, since you are far less likely to make a fumble and will have a higher average die roll. A lot of the customization of each character is based on the feats they pick, you get extra "martial" feats at a rate of 1 per BaB and this will determine if you end up being a specialized or generalist fighter, an expert at unarmed combat or close-in fighting with daggers for example, or a lethal staff fighter specializing in counter-attacks, or an aggressive samurai with a knack for opening cuts, and so on.


As for speed, one of the principle design features is that it's meant to be fast-paced. This was why for example we avoided the complex damage model other 'realistic' combat systems use, and stuck with hit points*. The modified dice pool is very intuitive and flows fast, a round of combat with 4 players usually takes about 3-5 minutes to resolve. Somebody might be dead by the end of that time, admittedly... but I think it's faster than default 3.5e DnD.


I think it is mostly meant to be an 'instead of' for Tome of Battle thing...

I'm also not sure if you can do an apples to apples Warblade vs Codex Martialis Fighter...

That is probably a fair criticism. To be honest, I don't even know what a Warblade is. I've run two campaigns and several one-offs using Codex combat rules in my own game, but these were all relatively low-magic, low-fantasy and / or historical type campaigns. Both martial arts types and regular gamers have played it and figured it out very quickly, the latter adapt readily to the martial arts options as just another means of min-maxing. But because of the built-in balance of real armor and weapons and fighting techniques with each other, this doesn't (at least so far to my experience) even come close to threatening to break the system. Basically you can indulge the minmaxing urge to your hearts content, and to the bloodiest extent possible.

On the plus side, there is really no longer one type of fighter. You can have dagger guys, grapplers and boxers, sword and shield guys, rapier guys, axe guys, polearm guys, longsword guys, spear guys, staff guys, and expert hoplite, centurian, samurai, ninja, landsknecht, knight, muskateer, pirate, conquistador and viking archetypes lifted right out of historical settings with no problem.

And, a wizard with a staff can actually get some defensive value out of the weapon.

On the other hand (down side) the various options and enhanced effectiveness of both weapons and armor make fighters a little stronger compared to spellcaster types, which may throw off the balance a bit at least at lower to medium levels. For higher levels I think it would just mean less necessity to rely on magic gear and / or abilities for your fighter / rogue / paladin /ranger / barbarian types. But I'm not sure because I've never really playtested the system in a high-magic environment.

The biggest weakness of Codex is that it's just a combat system, not a complete game, and integrating it into your campaign will take some work.


My best recommendation to find out if the combat is really fast paced like I said, and possibly worth making some effort to adopt (or steal ideas from) is to play it out. Try a few combats with pre-rolled characters and / or beasts on a one-off night with some friends, and see how it flows. I'll send you a comp copy of the core rules if you will agree to try it and post your findings in this thread. The same goes for anyone else who has posted in the thread. PM me if you are interested.

G.

* codex recommends a hit-point ceiling, for a more realistic grim and gritty fight, which is balanced somewhat by the fact that armor works better in the codex than in default 3.5 rules and you have more effective options for defense. But given the high rates of damage from weapons using the dynamic criticals rules do make it more lethal, even without the hit point ceiling. You don't for example, want to get ganged up on real bad.

[Gavinfoxx]

You spend this much time on this particular forum and don't know what a Warblade is?

O,o

It is the 'better than Fighter, Fighter', from Tome of Battle.

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20060802a&page=2
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20060802a&page=4
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/we/20061225a

And quite a lot of options from the Iron Heart discipline (which the Warblade gets) could easily have the serial numbers filed off of them and replaced with Fechtbuch terms.

[Galloglaich]

I probably should know about that I guess but I can say two things in my defense:

1) You'll notice 99% of the time I've ever spent on this forum is on that one continuing thread about real world armor and weapons, which I and a dozen or so other people like to use as a forum to answer questions about real world armor and weapons for gamers. Both because I like to and because I want gamers to know more about real world fighting. I have an agenda, you see...

2) Since the amount of time I get to play RPG's has drastically shrunk as I've gotten older, when I do get to play (or read about gaming) I prefer a specific sub-genre of RPGs, namely low-magic and historically based games. Most of the mainstream RPG products particularly for DnD seem to be very much in the opposite direction, so I kind of tuned-out of the mainstream tastes and trends around the time when 4E came out.... actually a little bit before that.

Part of why I wrote the codex was to provide a way for people to play OGL DnD back in that older style that I grew up playing, only with a few updated tools. I know I'm not the only one, thanks to other games like Cthulhu Dark Ages, GURPS low-tech and Warhammer FRPG which are at least in the ball-park of the kind of games I am personally into, not to mention Riddle of Steel and Burning Wheel and so on. I don't have anything against the high-fantasy / high-magic genre which seems so entrenched in DnD now, but it just doesn't grab me any more.

That said I obviously better read up on what a Warblade is so I don't come across like a complete idiot in discussions here... :smalleek:

G

[Galloglaich]

I should add, I'm not saying that in 'the old days' everyone played more realistic, or low-magic, or more literary based games... far from it. Almost the opposite probably. But back when I was first discovering DnD in the 70's and early 80's it was much easier to play DnD in those and a whole lot of other different types of ways including those listed above.

Now days DnD seems to be much more channeled or funneled into only one type of game-play, (i.e. the high-magic, high-fantasy type game more based on comic book superhero powers than historical, literary or mythological sources)



G

[Gavinfoxx]

Well, Gallo, you are sure to find plenty of people gushing about the warblade if you read about it here. I'll just quote the bit on the warblade from the why tier 3s are tier 3 thread, hold on..


"A note on the Warblade: Warblades are tier 3 only because 9th level spells are better than the rule books and not because the monster manuals are packed full of monsters that can kill them. Being the horseman War is great and all, but it will always be second best to a god. -SorO_Lost


Cons: They don't have ranged attacks and always have to use mithral as their armor's material if they want to use full-plate. That's it. -SorO_Lost

Pros: Warblades are simply the best melee class ever.

Ok to reiterate, Warblades pack a d12 hit dice, full BAB, proficiency with all melee martial weapons, and up to medium armor as their basic class stats meaning they are meant for melee combat. From there things go uphill at a staggering pace.

For one thing they are the smart fighter, none of that 'Thorg smash puppies' stuff fighters do. Warblades get bonuses for having intelligence such as adding their int bonus to reflex saves, crit confirmation, damage rolls when flanking, all those combat maneuvers in the PHB, and finally attack and damage rolls for AOOs. Oh and did I mention they sport 4 skill points per level and can pick up skills like balance,tumble and intimidate?

Another thing to mention is Weapon Aptitude which not only lets you have access to but lets you swap your Weapon Focus chain of feats on the fly. Did you focus on longswords but find this awesome mace? Spend an hour playing with it and poof, instant retraining with no XP cost!

By the 6th level a warblade has improved uncanny dodge and a bonus feat. Later on they will pick up an additional three bonus feats from a limited but useful list. It's kinda like stealing class abilities from the Barbarian and Fighter at the same time.

Then there is the maneuver system the ToB introduced of course, the warblade gets the best recovery mechanic of all the classes. When you run out of maneuvers just attack someone. Yes I said attack them. I mean in a boring no maneuvers used sort of way, but it's the same exact (full) attack actions that you are used to using and the monsters still are. Walk over and beat the every living crap out of something to recover your maneuvers to beat the remaining blood out of them next round. Fun times.

Warblades can choose from any of the unsupernatural style of schools. They are realistic and in your face. They don't care about such things like fire, ghosting people, or purifying the wicked. Keep it simple, the pointy end goes into the foe a dozen times or the sharp edge slices them into pieces. Expect your average warblade to ignore save or die effects, to break battle control effects cast at them, to set the battle field in favorable conditions and exploit it, and to be seen helping the entire party's melee capabilities.

Finally, even those high nosed RPers will love the warblade. Now they have rules and effects backing such stories as 'I leap up and slice the snake's head clean off'. Even the most boring of players will find them selves shouting out the names of their attacks and bragging about how cool their character looks while swinging his sword. No more boring 'I attack..." comments. Ever. Well, unless it's part of a small joke, such as 'I attack... With my Finishing Move after flash stepping behind them and my blade lights up resembling molten lava to burn away their very soul!'. Maneuvers are so flavorful...
-SorO_Lost"

And here are some of the relevant handbooks for you to look at:

http://www.minmaxboards.com/index.php?topic=2030

http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=4408

Also... remember this conversation we had, Gallo?

http://www.codexmartialis.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=158

Also, it seems to me that a lot of the superpowers and such you see in D&D actually aren't that far from mythology...

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=9837010
http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=10208.0

[Galloglaich]

To me, the popularity of this concept just highlights the potential interest in a fight you can really sink your teeth into, though I still think the mechanics of it sound a bit more like a video game, at least you get to use some other options other than the dreaded "I attack..."

And clearly people want some other options!

G

[Gavinfoxx]

Well, reread the combat cards -- but only the iron heart ones.

And then try to think, 'which renaissance martial arts term (http://www.thearma.org/terms3.htm) might most closely fit this maneuver, stance, or counter?'

I think you'll find more analogies than you would expect!

Especially since ToB fights actually have that whole, 'you reset your stance before you can get a tactically advantageous position to try a particular move again' thing, which is very realistic.

[Galloglaich]

Yeah I can see some overlap there, disarming, using speed for defense and so on... maybe I should make some cards for the Martial Feats in the Codex, hmmmm....

G

[Gharkash]

First of all, thanks for posting Gallo. You did clarify some things, and if i ever find a group willing i will test the rules.I am not sure if you sell Codex Martialis, i have to admit i downloaded it and read it (most of it), don't know if that is bad, if it is, let me know.

Truth is Tome of Battle adressed some of the things you adressed in Codex, as in variation of attacks, active defense against attack, counterattacks etc. It is a rather good system in my opinion, and can become somehow wuxia-action movie-anime, but that is up to you.I would gladly playtest it with Codex rules, but that may lead into serious complexity.

Historical RPGs are not really my thing, but low-magic "reallistic" ones are, and i think Codex would do a great job about the "reallistic" part ( the ""s are for using the word realistic in anything that includes monsters and magic).

Also, could you link the Armor/Weapons thread you reffered to in one of your posts?

[Gavinfoxx]

Well there are like a dozen such threads... what are we up to for the real world weapons and armor thread?

[Galloglaich]

I do sell it, but I don't really mind people download it to check it out; anyway it's inevitable and I give away tons of copies regardless for reviews or in threads like this, which usually leads to sales (as I've never gotten a bad review on it yet, knock on wood).

if you end up using it it would be nice if you bought a copy but that is between you and your conscience ;)

This is the current incarnation of the thread Gavin and I were referring to:

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=13353816#post13353816

As for Historical vs. fantasy, to me most low-fantasy (and even the best high-fantasy) are just historical settings with a little fudging around the margins, such as assuming the magical and mythological concepts of the day were actually real. One of the best incarnations of that idea was a German computer game called 'Darklands' which was around in the 90's...


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darklands_(video_game)


G