How can someone set up a test for Tankiness/Protectiveness?

[Kuro Dmon]

Hypothetical Scenario: You're the youngest member of a Royal Family, and you wake up one day with visions of the End of the World. You want to prevent that from happening, but you know you won't be listened to if you bring it up directly, and even if you are, you know you won't be allowed to participate despite you being the one having the visions.

So you decide, instead, to throw what funding you can behind an upcoming Festival, with particular interest in the various challenges available. You, in fact, intend on using the various games as a means to examine for potential heroes who might have the qualities needed to help you along your quest.

Logic Puzzles and Riddles are easy enough for the mind. Sword Fighting, Shooting Ranges and Trick Targets, an Obstacle Course; it'd be easy to devise ways to pick out your preferred Warrior, Archer, and Skirmisher.

But I'm having trouble figuring out how to test for the Tank. What sort of thing at a festival would make clear how well suited someone is at protecting the rest of their party? Physical Strength and Endurance ala Strong Men Humanoid Heavy Lifting is the closest I've got, but that just shows how well suited they are at taking hits, which overlaps with any front liner. I thought maybe a potential Battle Royale, but being the last one standing could be just a case of luck, dodging the most fights, or putting people down without taking hits at all.

Any suggestions? Or maybe I'm overthinking this idea a little too much...

Edit: Just to be clear, this is not "which warrior can take the most hits", because that's very easy to figure out. I meant Tank as in "capable of diverting blows from other members of the party". Like, wanting to scout for someone to help protect the party wizard mid spell preparation.

[Anymage]

Logically there's a lot to the idea that the best defense is a good offense, and that the best way to protect your allies from attacks is to kill whatever threatens them before it can get those attacks off.

If you want to test bodyguarding abilities in a tournament style setting you could test their ability to divert incoming attacks against one or more training dummies, but there are plenty of ways to protect a target that also limit the target's ability to act. Which sounds like an action economy loss any time the party is up against a serious threat.

[Dr.Samurai]

An obstacle course where each contestant has to make it through leading a sheep on a leash. On the way, you're also trying to stop attackers from getting dye on the sheep's wool. Warrior with the most clean sheep at the finish line wins?

Maybe dye would be too expensive? Maybe they're trying to get the sheep wet?

I don't know, something along those lines.

[GreatWyrmGold]

What is the tank supposed to do?

If the answer is literally just "take a really big punch," you could set up some kind of device that hits someone with a controlled impact (maybe a big pendulum?), strike each participant with its lowest setting, anyone standing gets hit with the second-lowest, and so on until only one contestant is still standing. Like a high jump, but with less jumping and more broken ribs. The obvious problem is that this sounds like a sight gag in an episode of Konosuba.

If you're trying to test endurance, you could do something esoteric. Sit contestants on top of big poles at the start of the festival, exposed to the elements and deprived of food or water; whoever endures this trial the longest is clearly the toughest. Or you could make them run a marathon while wearing full armor and carrying a bunch of iron ingots or something, or split the difference and have them endure some physical trial of endurance. "Who can hold up these five-stone weights the longest?"

If being a tank means protecting someone...well, that's an asymmetrical contest however you cut it. The would-be tank could be challenged to protect a straw dummy or something—but protect it from what? Making it a contest against another would-be tank challenges their fighting ability (their ability to bypass others' protection) as much as it challenges their ability to protect others.

Which brings me to the big question. Why is "the tank" being selected separately from "the warrior"? Why not just have a classic tournament arc?

[Brookshw]

You don't? It's a meta construct so I think you first need to translate it into what it would mean in game and then go from there. If you're translating it into someone who can hold the line and take a hit, then endurance and courage tests would be good. From what I can tell, it sounds like you're just looking for a durable warrior of sorts. If its some other quantity, define those quantities and what they mean in the game you're looking to play.

[Kuro Dmon]

I’m kinda torn on how to feel. On one hand, the suggestion about protecting a dummy or the sheep guiding task is absolutely what I was looking for. Those are perfect ideas when wanting to set up a way to test someone’s ability to protect an individual in a way that looks like it’d be a simple game.

On the other, translating how it would make sense for someone to think that sort of ability is important in and of itself, particularly in the face of the other points against it, lead to the aforementioned credo that I’m overthinking this… a Royal wanting to recruit people for specific purposes to aid them in saving their world sounded like a good idea, but now it sounds kinda “video game-y”…

[gatorized]

Shoot ballista bolts at the contestants. Whoever is the last one alive is the best tank.

[gbaji]

I’m kinda torn on how to feel. On one hand, the suggestion about protecting a dummy or the sheep guiding task is absolutely what I was looking for. Those are perfect ideas when wanting to set up a way to test someone’s ability to protect an individual in a way that looks like it’d be a simple game.

On the other, translating how it would make sense for someone to think that sort of ability is important in and of itself, particularly in the face of the other points against it, lead to the aforementioned credo that I’m overthinking this… a Royal wanting to recruit people for specific purposes to aid them in saving their world sounded like a good idea, but now it sounds kinda “video game-y”…

Yeah. I was going to comment to that effect. The concept of a "tank" being someone who somehow diverts damage/effects from other members of a party to themelves is very much a computer game concept. It specifically derives from computer controlled NPC AIs not being bound to standared clipping/space rules that normally exist *and* being guided by some sort of "who do you hate the most?" aggro system when deciding who to attack. This created a need for tough melee charcters to pull that "aggro" onto themselves, since by pure damage done, arcane casters would normally be the number one targets (and would get squished as a result).

This concept just doesn't exist in a table top game (or shouldn't), or well any game where realistic movement and path blocking is present. Any melee character can plant themselves in a bottleneck between the attackers and other wimpier members of the party and effectively "tank". And at that point, all that really matters is how well they can stand up in direct combat. Which could be dodging, or taking hits, or just killing opponents really fast. There is no special ability of "make my foes attack me instead of someone else". Well... usually (there certainly could be some, but they usually aren't associated with big tough warrior types).

I'd say just focus on the various useful skills for dealing with the presumed threats/opponents this group will need to face, and don't worry about "tanking".

[Maat Mons]

In D&D, tanking is traditionally viewed in terms of denying movement through an area. So the game is Red Rover. Well, some variant of it played in a 25-foot-wide strip, using a polearm-length doodad with a padded end to do the tagging.

[GloatingSwine]

What is the tank supposed to do?


1. Attract attention. A tank needs to be able to force enemies to prioritise them.
2. Control the battle. A tank should force the enemy to stand still in the best place for everyone else to damage them.
3. (Optionally but makes it more interesting) Debilitate the enemies to make them more vulnerable to everyone else.
4. Survive the process.

[Satinavian]

I’m kinda torn on how to feel. On one hand, the suggestion about protecting a dummy or the sheep guiding task is absolutely what I was looking for. Those are perfect ideas when wanting to set up a way to test someone’s ability to protect an individual in a way that looks like it’d be a simple game.

On the other, translating how it would make sense for someone to think that sort of ability is important in and of itself, particularly in the face of the other points against it, lead to the aforementioned credo that I’m overthinking this… a Royal wanting to recruit people for specific purposes to aid them in saving their world sounded like a good idea, but now it sounds kinda “video game-y”…
Well, it is video gamey. Aggro management is not really something that works well in real fights, where smart enemies tend to focus the vulnerable and dangerous, not the enemy that is hard to take down but is not much threat beyond that.

But if you want a reason just say that the chosen heroes are only for fighting world ending threat but also might occasionally have to do bodyguard duty for the royal family or other bigwigs visiting the front line.

[Sneak Dog]

Wrestling tournament or something similar to test endurance. Remember that your tournament is on a time constraint, they'll be wrestling a lot in a single day.
After your other contests, finish with it with some capture the flag or some similar team attack and defend sport. It'll show you lots of things. Ability to defend a point, attack a point, fool opponents, lead strangers, cooperate with strangers.
Now you should have your eyes on some candidates for your defender, or else your captain of the royal guard or teacher in the martial arts should. Have a soldier ambush them with a stick when they enter their personal quarters after the exhausting day. Or perhaps during dinner. See if they can sense danger at any time.

There is of course one obvious problem which makes the tournament moot. A group of decent warriors that works together excellently will beat a ragtag group of aces that don't know eachother. But that's fine. It's a fun premise and veteran squads of heroes might a little too hard to convince for our young royal.

[Sapphire Guard]

Do Prisoner Dilemmas and see who is willing to take the hit for their team.

[LibraryOgre]

If being a tank means protecting someone...well, that's an asymmetrical contest however you cut it. The would-be tank could be challenged to protect a straw dummy or something—but protect it from what? Making it a contest against another would-be tank challenges their fighting ability (their ability to bypass others' protection) as much as it challenges their ability to protect others.


Combine it with an archery competition. The tank wears heavy pads, a closed-face helm, and a shield; the archers have blunted arrows. The tank's job is to protect several bottles, spread out a bit, from the archers.

There's also the classic slap fighting (i.e. two people slap each other until one falls down) for general endurance, or the old Viking holmgang, where you have a shieldbearer whose job is to intercept the blows, while their partner makes them.

[Mastikator]

1) Does the character in question have abilities that lets them deflect, reduce or redirect attacks on others? If not they get a score of 0.
2) Try to score each ability that deflects, reduces or redirects attacks on others individually. Score by range, frequency, impact. Add each up ability scoring.
a) this one is highly subjective, and each ability will be highly contextual. An objective test is not an option, so go for a subjective test.
3) Whoever has the highest score is the most protective.

[gbaji]

I guess that bigger question is: What is the context for this? You provided the scenario, but is this an actual game thing you're talking about? A story you are writing? Are you a character in a game trying to solve a problem you've been presented? Or are you a GM thinking about how to craft a tourney to reflect an NPC looking for these attributes? Something else?

This is the roleplaying forum, so I'm somewhat assuming this is related to an RPG of some kind. But details on exactly what you are trying to do might be helpful (and maybe game system as well?). I mean, if this is a game you are actually playing/running, then to whatever degree that game actually has tanking abilities, that would seem to be an obvious start. As a couple of us have mentioned, "tanking" isn't a real thing that exists (except in the traditional sense of "can take a lot of hits"). So if it does exist, it's because the game system has put it there, which makes this very much game system dependent.

[Lvl 2 Expert]

An obstacle course where each contestant has to make it through leading a sheep on a leash. On the way, you're also trying to stop attackers from getting dye on the sheep's wool. Warrior with the most clean sheep at the finish line wins?

Maybe dye would be too expensive? Maybe they're trying to get the sheep wet?

I don't know, something along those lines.

Weigh the sheep before and after to know which one was kept dryest. :smallbiggrin:

[Fable Wright]

On the other, translating how it would make sense for someone to think that sort of ability is important in and of itself, particularly in the face of the other points against it, lead to the aforementioned credo that I’m overthinking this… a Royal wanting to recruit people for specific purposes to aid them in saving their world sounded like a good idea, but now it sounds kinda “video game-y”…

That voice of doubt in your mind?

Kill it. Perfect is the enemy of 'good enough'.

It's okay if it's video gamey. You're running a game for your friends with the tools most comfortable for you.

You're aware that it's a bit gamey? You can add a justification. This is a fantasy world; it's entirely possible that people can force attention on them in ways they can't in our world, to soak aggression that would otherwise go to the mage. Or maybe this vision included someone with that particular skillset and the royal is trying to find the Chosen One. Whatever.

The only way to get better is to run it, see what people liked or didn't like, what they engaged with most, and then learn from that and move forward. If it turns out to have been a bad idea? The noble realizes this afterwards and apologizes to the party about it. He's a person too, and he was just trying to do the best he could with the tools he had. It's a step forward that seemed reasonable at the time to him, and he didn't exactly have a lot of time or advisors to workshop it.

[OldTrees1]

If the Tank is being tested on their ability to protect:

Have a game of soccer where the tank is the goalie, there are multiple balls, and the balls explodes if they stops moving for too long.


In D&D, tanking is traditionally viewed in terms of denying movement through an area. So the game is Red Rover. Well, some variant of it played in a 25-foot-wide strip, using a polearm-length doodad with a padded end to do the tagging.

Yeah Red Rover too.

[gbaji]

You're aware that it's a bit gamey? You can add a justification. This is a fantasy world; it's entirely possible that people can force attention on them in ways they can't in our world, to soak aggression that would otherwise go to the mage. Or maybe this vision included someone with that particular skillset and the royal is trying to find the Chosen One. Whatever.

The only way to get better is to run it, see what people liked or didn't like, what they engaged with most, and then learn from that and move forward. If it turns out to have been a bad idea? The noble realizes this afterwards and apologizes to the party about it. He's a person too, and he was just trying to do the best he could with the tools he had. It's a step forward that seemed reasonable at the time to him, and he didn't exactly have a lot of time or advisors to workshop it.

Yeah. Hence my question above. If this is for a game, and the game system has skill/feats/whatever that allow folks to pull aggro on themselves, then those are actual skills that people have. They literally exist in the world you are playing in, so just test that directly. Release a dozen angry/hungry dogs/foxes/whatever into a pen or something, and see how many someone can draw over to attack them instead of a yummy rabbit or something. I mean, if this is an actual ability that exists in the world you are playing in, then there must be some means for people to learn and practice this, and therefore also a very direct way to test it.

[gatorized]

1. Attract attention. A tank needs to be able to force enemies to prioritise them.
2. Control the battle. A tank should force the enemy to stand still in the best place for everyone else to damage them.
3. (Optionally but makes it more interesting) Debilitate the enemies to make them more vulnerable to everyone else.
4. Survive the process.

What features does a fighter have that can influence which creature an enemy decides to attack?

[Reversefigure4]

A low-budget one: Have a bunch of attackers, then a bunch of target victims holding red scarves.

The tank places himself between the attackers and the defenders, and tries to stop the attackers getting the scarves. He'll need to use attacks of opportunity, goading to force the attackers to hit him instead, drawing aggro, imposing disadvantage, tripping, grappling, or whatever other Prevent Hits On Parry Members abilities exist within the system.

Least scarves taken wins, a simple scoring system. Depending on what other abilities you are also trying to score, the tank might have to KO the attackers or survive a certain time period.

[GreatWyrmGold]

What is the tank supposed to do?
1. Attract attention. A tank needs to be able to force enemies to prioritise them.
2. Control the battle. A tank should force the enemy to stand still in the best place for everyone else to damage them.
3. (Optionally but makes it more interesting) Debilitate the enemies to make them more vulnerable to everyone else.
4. Survive the process.
That was a rhetorical question. The point was not to request an answer for the sake of having an answer, but to provoke thought from the person who wants a Tank Test about what skills the tank would need to possess. These abstract goals would be a decent starting point for boiling down a Tank Test...if you were the one who was trying to design hero tests.



On the other, translating how it would make sense for someone to think that sort of ability is important in and of itself, particularly in the face of the other points against it, lead to the aforementioned credo that I’m overthinking this… a Royal wanting to recruit people for specific purposes to aid them in saving their world sounded like a good idea, but now it sounds kinda “video game-y”…
Well, yeah. The "tank" concept has parallels of varying validity, from bodyguards tackling potential assassins to lines of infantry meant to protect siege weapons from direct sally, but in its purest form it is a gameplay role. There are similar narrative roles, but most of them do a bit more than just getting punched good.

It might be better to think about the Heroes in five-man-band terms. The hero/lancer/heart trio is hard to distill into concrete skills, but the Big Guy and the Smart Guy are literally defined by the things they're good at.



Weigh the sheep before and after to know which one was kept dryest. :smallbiggrin:
There are two problems with that. First, water evaporates, and not all sheep will evaporate the same proportion of their water. Second, things other than getting wet can change sheep weights; if exactly one sheep deposits manure on the field, that sheep's protector will have a pretty significant advantage in the contest.



What features does a fighter have that can influence which creature an enemy decides to attack?
Mostly "get in the way". Depending on how you look at it, D&D is either not designed in a way that lets melee fighters effectively intercept opponents trying to reach squishier party members, or it's designed in a way that requires melee fighters to fight in 15-foot corridors to be effective.

Of course, D&D fighters aren't supposed to be pure tanks. They're supposed to be both tough and strong. Some editions manage this balance; others let wizards trivially deal more melee damage if they pick the spells that boost their melee damage.

[Lvl 2 Expert]

There are two problems with that. First, water evaporates, and not all sheep will evaporate the same proportion of their water. Second, things other than getting wet can change sheep weights; if exactly one sheep deposits manure on the field, that sheep's protector will have a pretty significant advantage in the contest.

Ah, so we should do it the other way around. There's no water, just lots of people trying to tag and/or scare the sheep. When your sheep is scared ****less, you lose!

It's a great test, because it tests the protectors overall ability to inspire confidence in their protection.

/only half joking. Well, maybe two thirds.

[Dr.Samurai]

I’m kinda torn on how to feel. On one hand, the suggestion about protecting a dummy or the sheep guiding task is absolutely what I was looking for. Those are perfect ideas when wanting to set up a way to test someone’s ability to protect an individual in a way that looks like it’d be a simple game.

On the other, translating how it would make sense for someone to think that sort of ability is important in and of itself, particularly in the face of the other points against it, lead to the aforementioned credo that I’m overthinking this… a Royal wanting to recruit people for specific purposes to aid them in saving their world sounded like a good idea, but now it sounds kinda “video game-y”…


That voice of doubt in your mind?

Kill it. Perfect is the enemy of 'good enough'.

It's okay if it's video gamey. You're running a game for your friends with the tools most comfortable for you.

You're aware that it's a bit gamey? You can add a justification. This is a fantasy world; it's entirely possible that people can force attention on them in ways they can't in our world, to soak aggression that would otherwise go to the mage. Or maybe this vision included someone with that particular skillset and the royal is trying to find the Chosen One. Whatever.

The only way to get better is to run it, see what people liked or didn't like, what they engaged with most, and then learn from that and move forward. If it turns out to have been a bad idea? The noble realizes this afterwards and apologizes to the party about it. He's a person too, and he was just trying to do the best he could with the tools he had. It's a step forward that seemed reasonable at the time to him, and he didn't exactly have a lot of time or advisors to workshop it.

I agree with Fable. Don't overthink it. If the noble's vision was of a group of people saving the world, then naturally he'd want to be sure someone on the team can protect them to see it through to the end. None of this will translate perfectly to the obstacles they will face. Also, the noble may not have the best ideas to do this either. It's his attempt at ferreting out the group that will save the world, but his attempt doesn't have to be perfect.

Cut yourself some slack; the world isn't perfect, either in real life or in fantasy land.

Include the protector challenge! :smallcool: