Combat Specializations Supplement

[Longman]

I'd like to get the ball rolling on this.

A while ago we had a discussion on having a supplement on Combat Specializations (CS) that talked about potential new uses for weapon specialization ranks. This would be in addition to the existing Combat Options (CO) supplement, the last version of which was posted by LL / Rachel.

viewtopic.php?f=19&t=180&start=120

download/file.php?id=1672

I am posting my version one of a proposed new supplement (CS) here. Bear in mind a few things:

1 - I am proposing different rates of progression in gaining the specialization ranks, from the basic one proposed in the CO supplement (1/4 levels). Mine suggests 1/3, 1/4 or even 1/5 levels as different speeds to play the game.

2 - My chart on the way in which weapon specialization ranks effect bonuses is different to the one in the CO supplement. I really want to skip the '3 attacks every 2 rounds' phase, and move straight to 2/1. I don't like 3/2, and I know Rachel didn't either. Let me know what you think.

3 - I have always though that Shield Bash, Two Weapon Fighting and Light Weapon Expertise should be skills that fighters can get, when they spend expertise ranks. But I know a lot of other people let any character do those things, not just specialized fighters. The question is, should they stay in the current CO supplement, or be moved into the new CS supplement? I don't mind taking them out or leaving them in. I want a vote on that.

Hopefully we can get two different supplements sorted out. (I know there is a general risk of leaving the current CO supplement a bit barren if this one takes too much way from it.)

PS - I switched fonts on this to avoid some formatting issues. It's in TNR right now.

[Clever_Munkey]

Under the progression tables for regular and slow you have
Regular: [1,4,4,10,13,16] Slow:[1,5,9,9,14,19]. should this be Regular: [1,4,7,10,13,16] Slow: [1,5,9,13,17,20]?

The regular progression one sticks out to me the most because it goes from every 3 levels to every 6 levels back to every 3 levels, whereas the slow progression goes from every 4 levels to every 5.

[Longman]

Thanks. Those are typos. The progressions should read as you say. If I get any more feedback I will incorporate into a new draft.

The 'regular' progression is actually the current one listed in the Combat Options supplement. I just wanted DMs to have the opportunity to progress fighters faster or slower than that.

[Clever_Munkey]

A few months before you started working on this combat specialization supplement I had done my own thing, but knew it needed Heavy playtesting , So I put it off. Now that I have someone in my group playing a standard fighter I thought I would revisit this.

Anyway here's what I have. It's my first draft, so feel free to tear it apart. Use what you like scrap what you don't.

There are parts I like about it and many more I don't. For one I don't like having so many niche rules that will never see play, although when they do see play I'm glad I have them (confusing I know ). The maneuvers also really need balancing, and realigning to the rules (Bleed, fast reload, and lunge in particular) if I felt like keeping that monstrous list at all.

However I do think fighters should be able to perform maneuvers and called shots easier than other people, especially if they are using a weapon they have specialized in. I also feel that thieves should have a more options for fighting dirty.

All of this is in the interest of creating choices for my players, but I don't want to give too many options as to be confusing, and I especially don't want it to slow the game down. Obviously a lot of this can be hand waved or house ruled by the GM, but it helps me stay consistent if I have some things written down.

[Longman]

This will take me a while to get to this.

Was it your intention to have a unified document that includes mine and works well with the existing one?

[Solomoriah]

I'd like to see a Combat Specialization Supplement (or maybe Fighter Specialization Supplement, since it IS limited to Fighters) that is a functional substitute for the one in Combat Options but does not conflict with any other part of that supplement (allowing for coexistence). If I see something like that here, and it's clean, clear, and reasonable, it could easily make it to the Downloads page.

[Clever_Munkey]

I'm in line with solo. I have no particular attachment to anything in that document, but I thought it might help to see a different albeit out of balance take on combat specializations.

I also considered that it might just clutter up the project with too many ideas.

[Longman]

I'd like to see a Combat Specialization Supplement (or maybe Fighter Specialization Supplement, since it IS limited to Fighters) that is a functional substitute for the one in Combat Options but does not conflict with any other part of that supplement (allowing for coexistence). If I see something like that here, and it's clean, clear, and reasonable, it could easily make it to the Downloads page.

This wasn't the project I had in mind. I personally think Combat Options needs to be changed, in order for the proposed Fighter Specialization supplement to work.

So I was wanting to move some material from Combat Options into the new supplement. i was also wanting to just change some stuff in Combat Options, outright. And I was asking for feedback on that so we could workshop any changes to be made.

But if you (and others) aren't really interested in changing the Combat Options supplement at all, that's cool. I'll just use my own homebrew when I play BF.

[Solomoriah]

Longman, to be honest, I don't want to see Combat Options changed at all. It is perfect, or as near as can be to perfect, in my opinion. It has the high degree of simplicity of application that I expect from Basic Fantasy supplements, and I use almost all of it in my game more or less "as is." I have no interest in anything more complex than the supplement as it now exists.

I do understand that others have differing views on the subject, though, and do not want to be (nor to appear to be) a petty tyrant. It's why the Workshop and Showcase are so completely open with respect to showing other's visions of the game. In fact, I just noticed you did not have Showcase access, and added you to it.

I am following this conversation, and trying for the most part to stay out of it, but I thought that what I said I'd like to see was, in fact, the consensus among you who are designing this supplement. Evidently I was wrong, and I'm sorry I spoke out of turn.

[Solomoriah]

I'm in line with solo. I have no particular attachment to anything in that document, but I thought it might help to see a different albeit out of balance take on combat specializations.

Are you aware of balance issues with the proposed supplement? I'm curious now... I hadn't looked at the math that closely.

I also considered that it might just clutter up the project with too many ideas.

No such thing as too many ideas. That's what the Workshop is for. Anyone can post their ideas here, and the ones that inspire interest in others will tend to move forward while those that really interest just the author usually stagnate. It's a sort of winnowing process, which any creative community must have.