Login  Register

Re: Deadly Fast Play Rules in Fighting Fantasy

Posted by Billiam Babble on Nov 04, 2010; 11:58pm
URL: http://the-lost-and-the-damned.71.s1.nabble.com/Deadly-Fast-Play-Rules-in-Fighting-Fantasy-tp5703538p5707385.html

Glad to see I got your noggin working on this.  There's nothing like building on old classics.  :)

Just to reclarify for anyone reading: The Deadly Fast Play comparitive damage rules are meant for the use with the gamebooks.  All the other stuff is for a simplified group role play. Something *between* FF Intro RPG and AFF.

Provisions:
A d4 in an FF thread?   GET OUT!
:D  
I must admit I was struggling to create a range of 4 +/-1 or 4 +/-2 (3-5 or 2-6) whilst keeping the mechanic memorable and still using a d6.  My brain then broke and it just become 1 to 6.  A d4 or d3 would solve this nicely but in this thread I'll ban them!  I'm even tempted just to say "dice" from now on, because there is only one shape, and it comes in pairs and they shall be stolen from an old board game.  It is THE LAW. A polyhedral is a male parrot with a saliva problem... certainly not something which can be bought in a "hobby" shop...
Ahem. Sorry. Not sure what happened there...  
Now where's that Lone Wolf 0-9 pencil chart gone ...? ;)

You're spot on with the weapon and armour modifiers.
I'm suddenly thinking about what Balrogs use at home to open tins with...  I just like throwing random weapon names to illustrate that the ruleset should be broad enough to take on any invention.

I can't stress this enough, what I like about FF intro RPG/adapting rules from the gamebooks (but slightly less about AFF) is that the GM/DM/director  is encoraged to improvise with the rules led by the circumstance of the predicament.  So when I talk about armour weighing a hero down, its generally accepted that swinging on ropes might be effected by 1 or 2 points, but its still a SKILL or LUCK check for everyone.  Adding Speed is an interesting idea but I'd personally try to add nothing more than a MAGIC or STEALTH stat to the Adventure Sheets.  Unless of course you're using miniatures on a grid like in HeroQuest et al, then a base move for race + very basic carrying modifier should definitely be used. But it should a general Tdecision, not one based on exact encumberance (like cn in D&D Expert rules).

I was at home this afternoon found the FF rule books.  You're right about missile weapons: lots of variables based on size and distance, but its just a SKILL check in essence.  I'm not too worried about long bow distance in dark dungeon rooms, but it's different from chucking a chair leg at someone.  I certainly wouldn't bring missile combat as a player option in the gamebooks, and in the same way I wouldn't use what are special item rules in the gamebooks in a table top game.  If I remember rightly, laser combat in Starship Traveller was insane!  
The comparitive success of the Skill check could be the base damage plus a weapon modifier (+1 for arrows, +3 for a spear)

Criticals and fumbles in all systems seem like a great idea. I really like the idea of lowest and highest values creating exceptional situations.  In FF we know that's what luck in combat is for.   I think with deadly fast play (comparitive) damage the mighty  blow wouldn't be needed because of the potential for ridiculousy high damage already.  But certainly in combat "as is" in FF and AFF special effects from doubles is a great idea.
(in T&T matching dice are rerolled and added again, the probabily bell curve gets pretty messed up by that!)  Like you say, luck with the dice is comparitive to Luck itself (again this explains why LK in T&T is included in the combat adds).  In FF Luck seems to be the standard "saving throw" which makes sense if your background is in playing D&D and other early games.  We're now much more familiar which games which match a circumstantial challenge in a specific skill.  Fate points in games are about cashing in experience and luck.   However Luck in FF is an almost spiritual thing which is used in all circumstances.  In PC games and RPGs I'm always amazed at how important Personality or Charisma is (and sub skills), but in FF bluffing your way into the castle requires a good story and a Testing of Luck.  Unlucky characters are totally screwed, but hey Bumblefist the Dwarf always needed the help of his friends ...
The question is ... should Luck ratings be a major factor in combat - or a one off do or die feature?   Maybe it encorages more role play and creative thought?

Relating to that tangent ...
AFF's skills are similar to T&T's talents, and several other open systems which branch minor skills from basic stats (sometimes the skills can be invented by the GM or player to suit the character).  Again, I'd try to avoid adding too much to Sk, St and Lk. (maybe I'd sneak in Magic for spell capacity and spell resistance)  There's a simplified Sorcery magic for role playing article  in Warlock if I remember right.  Perhaps its worth a  scan.

Okay, running out of steam and focus.

Hmm.  I'm not sure what we're doing here.  If I was about to run a fantasy game of any kind, I doubt I would be able to convince them to play FF as a system.  Even a modern system like  Warrior Rogue & Mage would be frowned upon when there's still D&D or WHQ to hand (that's my house, that is).  Is the 12 year old in me still trying to rewrite rule history?

There's some really great ideas and comments there, Mortis, thanks.  Maybe we'll summarise and boil it down and present it all as a seperate thread or pdf.

Incidentally, AFF rpg seems to run really well as in-thread games on the forums, I think its because the mechanics are so simple.  Perhaps we should think about RPing on LatD?