A different different approach to Target Numbers

target-number
#41

Wouldn’t change anything like that.

Armor would still be the deciding stat when defending from normal attacks. Count your armor bonus like normal
(example: 2 pieces of common armor, and a common shield = 4 armor. So when enemies attack you you roll a d20 +4 against the room target. On failure you take damage like normal. Nothing has really changed except players roll instead of the GM and the enemies have no bonus modifiers except EASY and HARD)

STR and DEX aren’t doing anything when enemies are attack you (unless you want them too)

When players attack enemies you use STR and DEX like normal, that side of combat hasn’t changed at all

#42

Ok, I understand better now. It could be cool and I agree with @Shadymutha that not having to roll for stuff as much as GM would free me up to better run a smooth game.

Maybe I’m missing something more here but does this mean that we lose the differential between a +4 to rolls enemy and a +8 to rolls enemy? If so, I guess we give up some of the danger?

#43

think thats when HARD and EASY comes into consideration.

Boss enemy attacks and the player has to succeed a HARD armor roll to dodge.

Or can simply raise the room target to something higher like 16+ and make minions be EASY rolls to dodge

#44

Stop! Breathe.

TN is always 20 no need to display. No need to change.

Character stat bonuses are 0~8 these are normally static for the players and they know this number.

CR (GM creates number, is the lever replacing TN) 0~12 this can change but I assume 8 will become the norm like 12 is with TN in ICRPG. This is the only number that needs to be displayed.

The player rolls defense against 2 attacks.

Player defense is 3 CR is 10. 13+roll = 20+ character success; 19 or less character fails. If character fails player rolls damage in themselves. And notes it down…and complains how much they took or how much they have left.

The GM moved on and is probably done by the time the first player finished rolling and noting down the results of the hits on himself.

The only portion I dislike about this system are the names of the parts. CR means certain things to other players.

The other mind adjustment for the GM is to move all forces then attack in player order. This way player 1 knows all the rolls he needs to make before player 2.

GM would loose flexibility there…but gains a ton of speed and keeps things very honest.

GM doesn’t know that 2 of the hits on player 3 would be critical hits…and the third attack would finish him.

You as the GM do not need dice.

If you want to mix it up, you roll damage. But for pure speed of combat…everyone does their thing.

For large tables or complex tables 7+ character actions…a 60 minute combat might become 15.

For small tables there is little benefit here…but for tables with 5+ players or players playing multiple characters and 15 characters on the table.

This is not a revolutionary change to RPGs…but if it makes combat more than 20% faster I’m looking deeply at the possibility.

#45

If you choose to keep things static, yeah. But, there’s no saying you can’t have the collapsing bridge provide a -3 modifier, or the dragon breath a -6. And it’d be no different results than what tire doing now, only your Player is making all the rolls and he knows he has to beat 20 every single time.

#46

Ok. Restating for myself because there’s some cool stuff in your ideas . . .

  • No rolls for monsters to hit PC. PC instead rolls adding Armor stat against room target to dodge/block
  • Adjust EASY/HARD or room target itself to differentiate monster power/level threat
  • When the PC fails this attempt, the GM still rolls monster effort
#47

DM doesn’t even have to roll effort. I tell my players “take d6 damage” and they roll while I move on. Frankly, I do not like to roll as DM. I like to stay engaged with the people at my table.

#48

Nope… I don’t think so @Shadymutha for his answer.

  • PC rolls Defence + room number, needs a 20 or is hit

  • adjust easy or hard +3 or -3 as ICRPG

  • player rolls damage.

#49

I dig it. Easy enough to just throw out the average number of the effort that you would have rolled, similar to D&D monster stat listings.

I look forward to trying this out. As you’ve stated, it benefits the GM in letting them better focus on running the story and managing monsters while at the same time letting the players get to roll more often (and most do indeed enjoy rolling dice).

I look forward to trying this soon! But only using the room target, not the always 20 thing. So as not to ADD anything to the simplicity of ICRPG. :slight_smile:

#50

I fully understanded how it works per OP, but It’s completely pointless to me, as it just splits TN into two parts (static 20 and the CR that you have to add to each roll).

I run games exclusively with player facing rolls and never had the need to change how TN works. Granted, I converted armor into a damage reduction stat but math for AC can be easily translated to defense rolls.

With this ruling, you’re still deciding a CR number for your encounters and you’re also adding more arithmetic to roll calculations, I don’t see any advantage for the method.

#51

So when you as a GM attack your Player Characters, they roll against what? Or how do they save? TN?

I don’t know what I am comparing to.

So If you are doing what I think you are doing.
D20+0 vs TN? and armor counters effort? Correct?

This is D20+CR+armor Vs. 20

This works exactly how ICRPG core works. Same rolls.

ICRPG attack = D20 + CR(0)+ stat Vs. TN (variable)
ICRPG defend = D20+CR(0)+stats Vs. AC(variable per player)

@Shadymutha’s whacky system.

Attack = D20 + CR (variable) + stats Vs. TN (20)
Defense = D20 + CR (variable) + stats Vs. TN (20)

You are just moving CR instead of TN

#52

I’ll just point out that your wording implies, to me, that those who do not do as you do do not like to stay engaged with the people at their table. Honestly, it’s how it reads to me.

And with all the ruckus, no one has mentioned using a system like “Blood & Snow”'s? Rolls to hit vs. Room Target with armor serving as a damage sink?

#53

[quote=“Nicolas_Bohnenberger, post:52, topic:3392”]
I’ll just point out that your wording implies, to me, that those who do not do as you do do not like to stay engaged with the people at their table. Honestly, it’s how it reads to me. [/quote]

Not my intent. I feel less engaged when I’m fiddling with dice in front of players.

@Jason mentioned using this method. It’s also what I use in Black Light.

#54

In my case it is:

  • Always meet or beat TN
  • d20+DEX for Ranged defense
  • d20+STR for Melee defense
  • Armor is a pool of damage reduction

I understand the idea behind players actually doing math for rolls instead of thr GM, my silly complaint is that @Shadymutha’s approach works by setting a CR number (0 to 10) and then letting players roll vs 20 TN with it as a bonus to hit/defend, but you could just set a standard TN and roll vs that. You could STILL think room CR from 0 to 10 when designing and then do 20 minus CR to get a nice standard TN (which I actually think is a really good rule of thumb), doing most of the work for the player up front.

It’ll end up like:

  • Armor starts at 0 instead of 10
  • D20+STR for Melee atk, D20+DEX for ranged atk, etc.
  • D20+Armor for defense.
  • All rolls are vs TN

It’s mathematically the same, remains compatible with CORE and it requires less calculation when rolling. imo :stuck_out_tongue:

EDIT: Wording

#55

This totally works. Totally the same, CR returns to 0 and TN is variable.

Math and formula is the same, but 1 less number calculated by players to reach TN typically. Remains compatible with core except roll module and monster stats. (Welcome to the post stat block world) :stuck_out_tongue_closed_eyes:

Remains compatible with D6 only use; 3D6 ( at-2 base TN) or 4d6 (at + 4 base TN to maintain 20 spread in roll)

Hits can still work off of 6s as opposed to the HP model.

Speed of turn is the same. Possibly faster for players who can’t add.

Easier for ICRPG or D20 players to digest. 1 less variable number for players to add.

edit side note: your damage reduction armor system you are using, player hit TN, was where I think @Shadymutha started with this in September/November. Very Heavy OSR exposure probably got him to the current system.
Removing the 10 from armor would have been a faster route to the same end.

Side note 2

Another idea is TN 5 is default,
Simply justify in your head why you are at your TN thematically (not because it has the character hitting 50% of the time). Express it in your descriptions, then try to be consistent with it.
If you want a terrifying monster, TN 14 with everyone making a Hard Charisma save or all actions are Hard 1/2 effort unless trying to flee works great!
Why TN 14?

It’s really dim light +4, it smells bad+2, it’s really humid +2, sounds travels weird here +3, roots make the terrain a tripping hazard +2…well +5 (default TN) makes it 18…take out the really dim light and you are at 14.

So the place smells like a dead moldy body, humidity has your clothes and armor sticking to you…you feel things crawling on you and hope it’s just sweat, roots and loose stones are all over the ground, and your companions sound like they are in a well 20 feet away when they are right next to you, and more clearly when away from you…then you see it…everyone please make a hard charisma check!

(It can be a longer description, but this post is already too long)

#56

If I were doing player facing rolls, this is exactly how I’d do it. Super simple. But again, make it your own.

#57

Yup, that will do it, too :metal: and most likely the route I would go when running ICRPG since it’s similar to CORE. Thanks for that input. When running OD&D, however, I’ll give this method a run since it better facilitates having multiple opponents with varying ACs (and more in line with that core)

#58

Player facing rolls has me intrigued. Currently me my games consist of me and my wife or me and my kids. (Wife thinks the kids are too chaotic so she opts out of those games). Which means 2 to 3 players including the DM. Small player amount has it’s challenges when playing two player its almost like solo play. My solution has been to embrace the solo play style and use random dungeon generators mixed with monster AI. This removes DM decision making so the DM can be a player along side the other players. The roll of DM becomes much more like the roll of banker in Monopoly. I tell the players what the random dungeon generates, manage the monster AI and we all work our own PC’s. It’s a very different style of play and removes a lot of decision making from the DM but that allows them to play a PC and experience the story as it unfolds with the players.

Now I see this player facing roll idea. For my style play it might work really well. Combat would basically be two rounds, an offense round and a defense round. The DM would use the monster AI and go around the table having the players roll their defenses.

“This monster attacks you, no one attacks you and these two attack you roll two defense rolls.”

It’s a good idea and I think I’ll try it. It’s not for every ones game for sure but if you have a game where the DM would like to be freed up, its another tool to throw in the box.

#59

We’ve been playing a solo ICRPG campaign with my SO using Scarlet Heroes and it is awesome! We use Player Facing rolls and it works great so far. Nice to hear from other GMless pals around, cheers!

#60

Just looked at Scarlet Heros. It looks very interesting. Thank you for the suggestion. :slight_smile: