Troll Lord Games

Limited Advancement (looking at E6)
Limiting advancement is something I have been thinking about for a while. One decision I made in my C&C game was to end advancement at level 10. I want to add talents (renamed Feats) but at a much slower pace. Since I find Feat bloat a major turn off for me in 3rd edition.

Another bloat I really hated is Hit points. Although It doesn't bothers me as much as it used to. But I used to hate that a fall from a roof could kill a level one character. And a level 10 could take crazy amounts damage.
I think its one of the reasons I prefer to run low level adventures and rarely like to continue a campaign past level 6 or 8.

The other day I stumbled across E6 (Epic 6). It is basically the Idea of ending progression at level 6. At every 5000 exp you give out a feat. The basics of it is to make a gritty and more tolken'esq style of game.

Here is some info on it from: Epic_6 Wiki

Q: Where did E6 come from? A: E6 was inspired by the article Gandalf was a Fifth-Level Magic User by Bill Seligman. The article was published in The Dragon (which became Dragon magazine) in issue #5, March 1977. When I first had the concept of E6, where we used the first six levels for the whole game, my very first step was pitching it to my players. Some thought it was a great idea, and the rest were willing to give it a try, so I gave it a shot. E6 worked really well for our tastes, and we've done lots of playing inside E6 since then. Back then E6 was a lot more convoluted than it is now: there were intricate quasi-gestalt rules and several other little things that weren’t so much about the cap as they were about my group’s thoughts on D&D class balance. Over time, we found that the only rules we were really using (on both sides of the screen) were the feat rules, and that was producing a great play experience. So when I returned to E6 just recently, that’s how I wrote it up: As it was actually played.
Q: Why 6th level for the cap? Why not 12th, or 20th? A: My experience in D&D is that at around 6th level the characters are really nicely balanced, both in terms of balance against other classes, and against the CR system. Also, there was an element of setting assumptions; each class is strong enough that they're well defined in their role, but not so strong that lower-level characters don't matter to them any more.


While I'm not sure if I want to go to the extremes of only going to level 6 in my games. Although I may just try it. What if i was to cap some things at lower levels though? Like maybe hit point progression.
.................................................................................................
Gritty 6 (Adding grit to Epic6) for C&C
A few posts back I explored the idea of using Epic 6. I have been putting even more thought into this. I really want to use Epic 6 to represent a gritty and dangerous world for a setting I'm working on.
Here is a reworking of some of the basic rules I will be using with Epic6 to make Gritty6. Character cant level above 6th level as in Epic6. Any mortal man at level six is an epic hero, some one of legend.

First off hit points. All character start off with 2d6 HP. If you prime is Strength or Constitution then change starting HP to 2d8. If the character has a Constitution bonus in the positive add it to the total at first level only. That is it. All characters will start with between 2d6 and 2d8+ (Con bonus) hit points. No new hit points are gained each new level.

Attack rolls. On any attack roll that exceeds the "to hit" number needed by five weapons do automatic maximum damage. On a natural roll of 20 weapon damage is doubles. These two do stack. So a roll of 20 that is 5 greater than the roll needed will do double maximum damage.

Im sure more ideas on this will jump out at me. This is just what I got for now.

I like the concept of e6 alot more then actual use of it.
I understand wanting to keep the charcacters more mortal but at the same time your limiting your game alot.
Since C&C handles falls differently then any other D&D/ism/clone etc...
I dont see falling as a problem. A 50' fall is deadly to any level. (thats 15d6 dam) More then 50' and your almost assuradly going to kill them.

My biggest issue with high level play is that lack of resources is no longer an issue. E6 cant fix that problem.

In the end , play what you like and your players will show up for.

Yeah the idea was not restrict all games. Just ones I plan to use E6 or G6 for. So far I have only used E6 for one game. And in that setting it really fits. But I dont use any blanket house rules. Just pick and choose from game to game to fit the setting.

Interesting take on things. If someone rolls snake eyes for hitpoints, though, they're boned...?

I've never liked the idea of hit points, either, to tell you the truth. Sure, I know it represents the idea of a person taking damage from fatigue, blood loss, contusions, etc. It also takes in to account that a character may be evading, and the "hit points" of a higher level character also reflect the skills they've learned in taking, avoiding, or rolling with damage. Whatever.

This works great for melee weapons, I mean, you roll a 1 for damage and can say something like, Grugnarl the 4th level fighter has 30 hit points, so that one point of damage reflects a getting nicked or scratched because of his epic skills, training, and all around bad assness. Joe the 1st level magic user has 3 hit points, so that 1 point almost killed him... what's that represent? A nice stab to the guts? I don't know.

And what about missile weapons? You either get shot by an arrow, or not... What does 1 point of damage reflect on an arrow shot? It didn't penetrate the armor (but it did because you got "hit")? Maybe the arrow got really, really close to your eye and like, scratched you or something?

Whatever, stream of consciousness late night. Epic and Gritty you say? There's nothing epic about being a 6th level hero and getting ambushed by a tribe of Kobolds and having your skin stuck to a wall. Sure, there needs to be some danger in fighting low level monsters, but shouldn't the characters be allowed to reach heroic abilities? These rules look hard core, and I think I like that. It makes the whole "acquiring" aspect of the game tough though. It's hard to get good stuff, followers, and what not, when you need a week of rest after every encounter with rust monsters and gnolls.

I never liked the idea of scaling your monsters to the characters level, nor do I like the fact that once you hit about 5th level you said good bye to all the mundane creatures and instead have to deal with like floating jellyfish, Asian Ogres, mean elves, spider people, giants, and other stuff. It's like, I can picture it this way:

Grugnarl the dwarf looks out across the valley below him. The village they are traveling to is beset by... angry Unicorns.

"What the hell", says Flubnut the gnome ranger-thief, "What the hell happened to like, orcs and gnolls and shit?"

"I don't know", states Grugnarl, "But I'm going to slay me some poney", etc, etc.

The whole issue with hit points, levels, lower level creatures, etc, has lead to me using house rules: When dealing with monsters, any roll of a 20 to hit a PC if the creature is unable to "hit" the PC, ex: 1HD monster vs. some dude in plate mail with like magic rings and stuff for an AC of 23, a roll of 20 is minimum damage (IE a 1d6 sword = 1 point of damage, 2d4 = 2 points). Throw enough monsters at a higher level party and even they will have to respect the hobgoblin raiders. They may not die, but they will get hurt. Also, attacking the robed ones and other squishy types can still cause problems for parties who disrespect your lowbie monsters.

This is all moot, though, because in my games people don't tend to get past level 4-5ish anyway; they're usually getting married, having babies, I don't know, going to school or work, you know, stuff like that. Those games that we did get to high level, however (I say around 8-12), we've still had fun fighting orcs, goblins, and what not. A bruised party after killing a goblin horde is in for a big surprise when they meet that Hill Giant around the way.

I hath rambled, excuse me.

First I've heard of Gritty6 but I like the E6 concept and your ideas seem to be pretty good. I hate high-level campaigns for much the same reason that others have mentioned, so limiting advancement after 6th level is a good option for me!

bc99 wrote: And what about missile weapons? You either get shot by an arrow, or not... What does 1 point of damage reflect on an arrow shot? It didn't penetrate the armor (but it did because you got "hit")? Maybe the arrow got really, really close to your eye and like, scratched you or something?

If you read the original description of hit points from Gygax, it is luck, favor of the gods, skill, etc. All which get used up during combats. 1 hp dmg from an arrow for a high level character just means it was close and you "dodged the bullet" but, you are wearing down slowly but surely. The original write up puts it in perspective.

Ronin77 wrote:But I used to hate that a fall from a roof could kill a level one character. And a level 10 could take crazy amounts damage.

This is a real rule? I really haven't kept up with any rules beyond OD&D, but I vaguely remember that AD&D gave out hit point damage for how far you fell regardless of your level. Its just how I remember playing.

Am I remembering wrong?

falling is a Bad example I guess...what I meant was a 1d3 scratch from a house cat could kill a level 1 magic user with 3 hit points. While a level 5 fighter could be run through with a sword 5 or 6 times and walk away.

With high level (10+)character in the 50+ hit point range is just crazy to me. I understand there is ways of making sense of it. But none of those explanations made sense to me.

I like caps on hit points and bonuses to combat. I like a dragon to always be an epic creature. Taking down a great beast is only epic of the foe is epic. If you walk into a dragons cave and every member of the group has more hit points than the dragon. That is not epic to me......

Don't mind me, I just read that example the opposite of what was meant. Duh!

When I play any version of D&D I am always fine with your heroes becoming greater heroes as time marches on. Right from the beginning it has always been, your characters gets stronger so your challenges get greater. I never wanted a touch of realism in my D&D game. By the time you can take on a Dragon one-on-one takes a long time to achieve. There are enough hero stories out there of a hero defeating a dragon in some kind of epic battle. If you've played your character, to the level, where they can wade through a dragon, with the greatest of ease, it is either time to retire that character, ascend him to god-hood or up the ante to challenging god-like NPC's.

20 years of gaming (1/3 probably D&D) I have never had a PC get to the god-hood status without the campaign ending or the person retiring their PC. So, it hasn't been a problem, in that respect.

I ran an E6 game for a bit a while back and still contend that it's the only way I'd run an extended 3.x (or Pathfinder) game for a group ever again. I would play in a BTB game, but I'd likely only run a game if it were E6ized. I never did make a full on campaign out of it but I started the PCs off at level 6 and they ended up with about 3 "bonus" feats each in the end.

Ronin77 wrote:falling is a Bad example I guess...what I meant was a 1d3 scratch from a house cat could kill a level 1 magic user with 3 hit points. While a level 5 fighter could be run through with a sword 5 or 6 times and walk away.

With high level (10+)character in the 50+ hit point range is just crazy to me. I understand there is ways of making sense of it. But none of those explanations made sense to me.

I like caps on hit points and bonuses to combat. I like a dragon to always be an epic creature. Taking down a great beast is only epic of the foe is epic. If you walk into a dragons cave and every member of the group has more hit points than the dragon. That is not epic to me......

This is a misnomer based on what you believe HP to be. In an abstracted game, HP measures much more than your physical ability to take damage. It also brings into play, luck, blessings of the gods, a "sixth sense", and in no small part, skill. Since the traditional D&D style games do not have an real active defense that improves with time and skill, this is abstracted into HP. The more you are thrown into dangerous situations, i.e. combat, the more attenuated you become to it. You learn to sense the moves of your opponent, you know how to roll with a blow, you understand how to avoid the effects of magic, you can "feel" the presence of your opponents, etc. Some is force of will, some is skill, and yes, some is just dumb luck.

As for having as many HP as a dragon, take the "weakest" of the dragons, a White Dragon, it will have 3-27d12 for HP. At age category 4, it is 11d12, this is when they begin to become fearsome opponents, and at age category 7, it is 15d12. Sure a Barbarian or Monk can have 10d12, then get +4/level, how often would you get to such lofty heights in a single campaign? Even if you did, the dragon will continue to outpace the characters HP wise.

Dragons are a fearsome creatures, but catch them while they are young and you can dispatch them much more easily. Get an ancient dragon and most groups of characters are toast. For that white dragon, 162hp (average, max 324), compared to a 20th level monk/barbarian (18 con) 130hp on average, with 190hp max. The classic red dragon is 8-34hd, or a max of 408hp. Yeah, bad news... So the party should not have characters with more HP than a dragon, unless they are going after a very weak dragon.

One other thing (talking about the epic encounter with a dragon), a dragon may have thralls, and even if they do not, they will always have advantages and surprises for the characters, when encountered in their lairs. When in an enclosed space, dragons are vulnerable so they will have prepared things to give them an advantage. To often I have seen a dragon treated as any other monster. These are very intelligent beings that have lived for an extended period of time, they will have become very wise in insuring that they survive.

The falling analogy is a much better one. But using the 1d6/cumulative method plays it out fairly well. A 10' fall can be deadly if you are unlucky. The danger grows progressively as you fall further distances. Thus a 30' fall at 6d6 is very dangerous to most characters in the commonly played ranges. a 50' fall at 15d6 is deadly to characters of sub-epic levels, while a 60' fall will test even epic level characters at 21d6. Ridiculous that someone could survive that? No not really, take for instance people that have survived sky diving when parachutes didn't open. Very rare, true, but so are epic level heroes. Stories abound of people surviving the impossible, and even more when we talk of heroic fiction. And that is what we weave here, heroic fiction.

That underlines the mentality of "old school", the world is a deadly place, bad things abound, those that take great risks can reap great rewards. The kidification of the game, balancing everything, to me was to it's detriment. Characters will encounter something they cannot normally overcome, and must either flee, find a way around it, seek assistance, or have some incredible tactics with no small amount of luck. The game can be made "gritty" without having to drastically alter the rules. "Gritty" to me is a style of gaming, not the rules themselves...

Ronin77 wrote:falling is a Bad example I guess...what I meant was a 1d3 scratch from a house cat could kill a level 1 magic user with 3 hit points. While a level 5 fighter could be run through with a sword 5 or 6 times and walk away.

Only REALLY poor DM would give a house cat 1D3 damage ability. An actual house cat couldn't inflict even 1 hit point of damage to a person with an attack.

An example of something like Epic6 can't handle would be a game based on Irish mythology. In fact, much of what people think is most absurd about fantasy RPGs is actually present there. The heroes take incredible amounts of damage (including having large holes hacked in their bodies), get it all magically healed, and go right back out to the field. Individual warriors take on scores of enemies at once, and win. Dragons are killed as a matter of routine. The Druids transform large groups of people into animals, create massive hallucinations, fly through the air, put weird Geases on everybody, and generally throw around the flashiest and most fantastic magic imaginable.The heroes are always running into ultra-hot warrior MILFs, who despite having multiple grown children, are still both beautiful and in fighting condition. Just adding Feats won't adaquately replicate what happens in those stories. High Hit Points, great Saving throws, and almost limitless spell-casting ability does.

Of course, if Epic6 was based on replicating Tolkien, it stands to reason it can't do Irish mythology. Tolkien apparently hated Celtic lore for being too unbelievable.

The only problem with E6 (to me, at least) is that the system as written is designed to go hand-in-hand with d20/3E rules, which means that it has feats and such in it. Converting to C&C is still a bit of a chore, unless one simply ignores most of the rules and simply focuses on the "chop off HD at level 6" part (which is what I usually end up doing).

It would be cool to see an E6 version of C&C. Or maybe E4. (I know that SimonW's Go Fer Yer Gun is wild western C&C designed around an E4-like concept.)

clavis123 wrote:if Epic6 was based on replicating Tolkien....

This would be pretty sweet, as well. Clearly Tolkien has more of a low-level and gritty feel to it (unless you're playing First Age juggernaut characters) and an E6 modified to fit Middle-earth could be really cool.

Again my examples were just examples.
The point is really (again just an example) At level 1 a goblin with a sword is a threat. At level 10 a goblin with a sword could take a week to kill you. you can call it death by 1000 glancing blows if you want. I still don't like it in some games. Again Some games.

I would not use epic6 or gritty6 for every game. Just games that I want to have just that feel. Just games where I want those goblins to be a threat no matter the level.

In a game where the party is full of Beowulfs this would not be a good option.

As far as feats I still use them in C&C (again not every game). Just at a much lower capacity. By level 6 most character have 3 feats.

I don't use any blanket house rules...I pick and choose based on how I want the game to go. And how best to represent the setting I'm running.

As new 1st level adventurer having never fought for your life a goblin is a fierce foe.
While at tenth level... a skilled combatant is going to churn through a pack of goblins.
If your concerned that a lone goblin cant kill a 10th level fighter.. well they shouldnt. unless the goblin can catch the fighter completely unaware.. asleep etc...
The biggest error i see is you just cant except hit points are abstract. The Game master has to use common sense... if your 60 hp fighter is asleep , then a goblin can slit your throat with a dagger 1d4 dam .. .and kill you!

If you want a goblin to challenge a 10th level... give the goblin more hd/or levels.

The more you talk about levels the more i think you would be happier in a skill based game with no levels.

Ronin77 wrote:Again my examples were just examples.
The point is really (again just an example) At level 1 a goblin with a sword is a threat. At level 10 a goblin with a sword could take a week to kill you. you can call it death by 1000 glancing blows if you want. I still don't like it in some games. Again Some games.

I would not use epic6 or gritty6 for every game. Just games that I want to have just that feel. Just games where I want those goblins to be a threat no matter the level.

In a game where the party is full of Beowulfs this would not be a good option.

As far as feats I still use them in C&C (again not every game). Just at a much lower capacity. By level 6 most character have 3 feats.

I don't use any blanket house rules...I pick and choose based on how I want the game to go. And how best to represent the setting I'm running.

I agree with DH here with the goblin example. Here the difference is, while you have the Goblin fighting still as a 1HD creature, the character has gone on and improved his skills; you are comparing a hamburger from beneath the golden arches to fillet mignon. The standard goblin shouldn't be a challenge, any more than a peasant fighting a knight. Look, even in Tolkien's books, the gritty feel E6 provides is left behind as the hero's wade through hordes of goblins in Moria, not to the level of the movies mind you, but still... During the battle the hero's take little actual damage, but you can "see" their HP drop as they begin to tire worn down by the press of numbers from the lesser foe; eventually they have to run for it when the unrelenting tide of goblins continues to come for them. Even the average orc and uruk-hai are toast to the heroes, but the leader types are another story; and they should be, they have advanced their skills.

So if you take that level 1 character and "level 1" goblin, the fight is on, but taking a level 10 character against that same goblin, the numbers don't stack up... they shouldn't, the premise of the experiment is flawed. Advance that goblin to level 10, and now you have a better premise to work from. Sure a solid blow from a weapon will still be enough to kill, but even when the skill of each has increased equally, it will take a long time to get to the point of making that killing blow. Also, don't forget a combat round is 10 seconds, so in that amount of time there are only a couple of feints and/or swings, the die roll is to see if one of those is well placed and could overcome the armor. If it can, then the character takes damage, equate that with not being run through, but rather rolling with the blow, sidestepping, catching the flat of the blade instead of the point or edge, ducking, or what have you. Each of these wears down the character, and takes its toll, eventually you get tired, your luck runs out, and you do get skewered, even still at that point it doesn't have to be immediately a mortal blow.

Now on the other hand, if you truly want a game where a character that has been adventuring for the better part of a decade can be slain by a novice in the first ten seconds of a combat, then that is entirely doable, and there are game systems that can help provide that. Take for instance StarSiege where there are no HP, instead you have a Wound Track and Stress Track, here I'll just talk about the Wound Track. Each character has 4 wounds on the track, plus their Physique attribute score (negative numbers do not subtract from the wounds), so a character will start with 4-7 wounds. These can be raised in various ways, but each is expensive in XP cost. A weapon does a set amount of damage, most are 2 - 3 points of damage, and the weapon provides a bonus to hit. Armor counts for damage reduction as well as making the character more difficult to hit. Armor also has a durability rating, add one to this and you get the number of hits the armor is good for. After getting that many hits, the armor is useless until repaired. You also calculate modifiers to hit and damage based on the size differential between attacker and defender. Thus smaller beings hit larger creatures more easily but do less (or no) damage, while it is more difficult for a larger creature to hit the smaller being, but when they do, they pack an extra punch for additional damage. Once you reach critical damage, the first is "Disabled" where all challenge levels are at a +3 penalty, second is "Down" where you can do little more than try to crawl away, then with the third strike you are "Out" and will die without proper care within an hour. Further some effects can send damage straight to the critical wounds, bypassing the normal wounds. Thus, you always have the same chance of dieing from a blow from a sword. However, what will be different is the fact that you can spend XP to increase your defense value, making it even more difficult to strike you. Thus, a starting character may fear a "standard" grot, but a seasoned character will not worry since she spent some of her XP on combat defense, making it much more difficult to get to the point with the grot can hit her, and even when it does, her armor will still absorb much of the blow, just as it did when she was a novice. If you don't advance the grot, then without extenuating circumstance, a seasoned hero will have no need to fear it. Thus you still come back to the same situation, and the same argument as to why HP makes sense. Instead of an abstracted number in HP showing the advancing skills of a hero in combat, you increase the combat defense skill which makes the character harder to hit. As such it will still take a much longer period of time for that "simple" grot to kill the hero.

Now this is all well and good, and quite a bit of fun, but it isn't the same game. Sure the core mechanic of using a d20 is there with the prime/non-prime of 12/18 exists, or a CB of 18 with a +6/+0, which ever way you want to look at it. Classes are gone, characters spend XP on different skills, and the skill bundles they have specialized in are prime/non-prime instead of attributes. Weapons and armor function differently, magic will also need to be modified quite drastically, the class system needs to be deconstructed or heavily modified to meet this kind of system, all of the trappings (items, equipment, magic items, etc) need to be rewritten, and the monster stat blocks/abilities, all must be converted. With all that, again you are not playing the same game, one that is still a lot of fun, don't get me wrong, but it isn't the same game.

Ronin77 wrote:I don't use any blanket house rules...I pick and choose based on how I want the game to go. And how best to represent the setting I'm running.

One question on this last part of you post... What does this mean?

Do you mean that you don't have any blanket house rules, as in each campaign/setting may have a different set of house rules that are codified?

-or-

Do you mean that you don't codify your house rules, and instead apply whatever you feel needs to occur for each individual situation?

koralas wrote:

Ronin77 wrote:I don't use any blanket house rules...I pick and choose based on how I want the game to go. And how best to represent the setting I'm running.

One question on this last part of you post... What does this mean?

Do you mean that you don't have any blanket house rules, as in each campaign/setting may have a different set of house rules that are codified?

-or-

Do you mean that you don't codify your house rules, and instead apply whatever you feel needs to occur for each individual situation?

I use what house rules fit the setting I'm running. Dark fantasy might use E6. If I run another game based on dragon age I use fate points and use special rules for critical rolls making the players able to wade through crowds of monsters.

I use the house rules that fit the setting. I don't have any house rules that are universal or "always on". A single campaign will have one set and another campaign will have another set. Based on the feel I want the game to have.

Dead Horse wrote: The more you talk about levels the more i think you would be happier in a skill based game with no levels.

I GM those too. I just feel some setting warent holding back a little. Not all, just some. Like horror settings. I like the players to always be mortal men. Well trained maybe but never epic heroes. Again not in every game. Some games a party of 5 Beowulfs running around is fun.

koralas wrote:

Ronin77 wrote:Again my examples were just examples.
The point is really (again just an example) At level 1 a goblin with a sword is a threat. At level 10 a goblin with a sword could take a week to kill you. you can call it death by 1000 glancing blows if you want. I still don't like it in some games. Again Some games.

I would not use epic6 or gritty6 for every game. Just games that I want to have just that feel. Just games where I want those goblins to be a threat no matter the level.

In a game where the party is full of Beowulfs this would not be a good option.

As far as feats I still use them in C&C (again not every game). Just at a much lower capacity. By level 6 most character have 3 feats.

I don't use any blanket house rules...I pick and choose based on how I want the game to go. And how best to represent the setting I'm running.

I agree with DH here with the goblin example. Here the difference is, while you have the Goblin fighting still as a 1HD creature, the character has gone on and improved his skills; you are comparing a hamburger from beneath the golden arches to fillet mignon. The standard goblin shouldn't be a challenge, any more than a peasant fighting a knight. Look, even in Tolkien's books, the gritty feel E6 provides is left behind as the hero's wade through hordes of goblins in Moria, not to the level of the movies mind you, but still... During the battle the hero's take little actual damage, but you can "see" their HP drop as they begin to tire worn down by the press of numbers from the lesser foe; eventually they have to run for it when the unrelenting tide of goblins continues to come for them. Even the average orc and uruk-hai are toast to the heroes, but the leader types are another story; and they should be, they have advanced their skills.

So if you take that level 1 character and "level 1" goblin, the fight is on, but taking a level 10 character against that same goblin, the numbers don't stack up... they shouldn't, the premise of the experiment is flawed. Advance that goblin to level 10, and now you have a better premise to work from. Sure a solid blow from a weapon will still be enough to kill, but even when the skill of each has increased equally, it will take a long time to get to the point of making that killing blow. Also, don't forget a combat round is 10 seconds, so in that amount of time there are only a couple of feints and/or swings, the die roll is to see if one of those is well placed and could overcome the armor. If it can, then the character takes damage, equate that with not being run through, but rather rolling with the blow, sidestepping, catching the flat of the blade instead of the point or edge, ducking, or what have you. Each of these wears down the character, and takes its toll, eventually you get tired, your luck runs out, and you do get skewered, even still at that point it doesn't have to be immediately a mortal blow.

Now on the other hand, if you truly want a game where a character that has been adventuring for the better part of a decade can be slain by a novice in the first ten seconds of a combat, then that is entirely doable, and there are game systems that can help provide that. Take for instance StarSiege where there are no HP, instead you have a Wound Track and Stress Track, here I'll just talk about the Wound Track. Each character has 4 wounds on the track, plus their Physique attribute score (negative numbers do not subtract from the wounds), so a character will start with 4-7 wounds. These can be raised in various ways, but each is expensive in XP cost. A weapon does a set amount of damage, most are 2 - 3 points of damage, and the weapon provides a bonus to hit. Armor counts for damage reduction as well as making the character more difficult to hit. Armor also has a durability rating, add one to this and you get the number of hits the armor is good for. After getting that many hits, the armor is useless until repaired. You also calculate modifiers to hit and damage based on the size differential between attacker and defender. Thus smaller beings hit larger creatures more easily but do less (or no) damage, while it is more difficult for a larger creature to hit the smaller being, but when they do, they pack an extra punch for additional damage. Once you reach critical damage, the first is "Disabled" where all challenge levels are at a +3 penalty, second is "Down" where you can do little more than try to crawl away, then with the third strike you are "Out" and will die without proper care within an hour. Further some effects can send damage straight to the critical wounds, bypassing the normal wounds. Thus, you always have the same chance of dieing from a blow from a sword. However, what will be different is the fact that you can spend XP to increase your defense value, making it even more difficult to strike you. Thus, a starting character may fear a "standard" grot, but a seasoned character will not worry since she spent some of her XP on combat defense, making it much more difficult to get to the point with the grot can hit her, and even when it does, her armor will still absorb much of the blow, just as it did when she was a novice. If you don't advance the grot, then without extenuating circumstance, a seasoned hero will have no need to fear it. Thus you still come back to the same situation, and the same argument as to why HP makes sense. Instead of an abstracted number in HP showing the advancing skills of a hero in combat, you increase the combat defense skill which makes the character harder to hit. As such it will still take a much longer period of time for that "simple" grot to kill the hero.

Now this is all well and good, and quite a bit of fun, but it isn't the same game. Sure the core mechanic of using a d20 is there with the prime/non-prime of 12/18 exists, or a CB of 18 with a +6/+0, which ever way you want to look at it. Classes are gone, characters spend XP on different skills, and the skill bundles they have specialized in are prime/non-prime instead of attributes. Weapons and armor function differently, magic will also need to be modified quite drastically, the class system needs to be deconstructed or heavily modified to meet this kind of system, all of the trappings (items, equipment, magic items, etc) need to be rewritten, and the monster stat blocks/abilities, all must be converted. With all that, again you are not playing the same game, one that is still a lot of fun, don't get me wrong, but it isn't the same game.

But Isn't it easier to just tell the players for this particular game its going to be gritty, That the max level is level will be 6. And then just play.

And use monsters right out of the book. No leveling them with the players. No handicapping hit points. No inflating damage. This way a dragon is always an epic fight and a goblin with a sword is always a danger.

Breakdaddy wrote:I ran an E6 game for a bit a while back and still contend that it's the only way I'd run an extended 3.x (or Pathfinder) game for a group ever again. I would play in a BTB game, but I'd likely only run a game if it were E6ized. I never did make a full on campaign out of it but I started the PCs off at level 6 and they ended up with about 3 "bonus" feats each in the end.

This is really were my interest in E6 came from. My hatred for feat bloat in 3E. And since I really dislike HP bloat at high levels as well, I loved it as soon as I heard about it.

And the first time I used it for C&C I used a talents (feats using grey elfs talents house rule). And just stopped to hit bonus, hit points, and talents at level 6 and allowed progression to higher levels to still gain level based abilities.

Ronin77 wrote:But Isn't it easier to just tell the players for this particular game its going to be gritty, That the max level is level will be 6. And then just play.

And use monsters right out of the book. No leveling them with the players. No handicapping hit points. No inflating damage. This way a dragon is always an epic fight and a goblin with a sword is always a danger.

Yes and no... You have already said you are also doing other things that still allow advancement for everything beyond 6th level except for HP (which is handicapping HP), BTH, and feats... Ok, so lets see... a spell caster gets more spells, the other classes get eclipsed in the face of that. a 10th level caster becomes infinitely more powerful that a 10th level fighter. I would rather play a Cleric or Druid, since I will still get something new every level, as opposed to a fighter that will have to wait 2 levels (and then every 4 levels thereafter) of getting nothing before a new marginally useful ability comes into play (+1 attack against 1HD opponents every 4 levels), and 4 levels before getting that extra attack at level 10. On the other hand it makes the "double specialization" at 7th level that more important for a fighter, but still limited in usefulness next to additional spells and other abilities. Rangers, Paladins, and Barbarians would be the most common fighter type character, and perhaps the Monk moves to preeminence.

At 6th level, that goblin with a sword is still a gnat to be swatted away. Even if you bump all HD down to a d6 or even d4, that is still 6dx + Con bonus. The average fighter has a +1 con bonus, so BtB that fighter will have a minimum of 12hp and a maximum of 66hp (or 12-30hp if using a d4, 12-42hp if using a d6). Sure at the minimum range a goblin with a sword is a danger, but even in the mid-ranges it will be 3+ successful hits at maximum damage from the blow to kill a character.

I would argue that the greatest HP bloat occurs at 2nd level, when the character get's the 2nd HD. Surviving 1st level is a tricky endeavor at best, nearly miraculous in some cases. However, once you have the chance to possibly double your HP, your fear of a single blow goes away. And, still following with the goblin theory, by third level, the goblin has become a gnat to be swatted away like any insignificant insect. A fighter will hit it with near impunity,+3 BtH, +2 Str, +1 (assuming a magic sword has been found), results in hitting 60% of the time (55% if no magic sword), with one blow from the sword dealing a minimum of 1 +2 +1 = 4 points of damage (3 if no magic sword), and with only 1d6 hp, odds are that one hit will kill the goblin. Now the goblin is going to be striking the character with a BtH of +1... so a fighter in Mail Hauberk and shield will have an AC of 17, which means the goblin must roll a 16, that is it hits 25% of the time. And when it strikes, if using a club, short sword, or spear, it is doing 1d6 damage. What is to fear? The Fighter in e6 has a maximum of 6d10+6 hp (assuming +1 con bonus), or 36hp assuming a straight average, the goblin, 3hp... Even less fear of that spear to the gut, it will still take 6 blows at max damage to kill the fighter, that means, going with the percentages, the goblin must survive 24 rounds at a 25% chance to hit. Not quite what I call a danger...

Also, the epic fight against a dragon, at 6th level, fighting any but the weakest dragon, and here I mean an age category 1 or 2 and including some dragon types at age category 3, is just plain foolish. TPK will almost always happen unless the characters run, that is if the CK plays the dragon properly.

Hmmm, have an idea, see my new thread...

koralas wrote:

Ronin77 wrote:But Isn't it easier to just tell the players for this particular game its going to be gritty, That the max level is level will be 6. And then just play.

And use monsters right out of the book. No leveling them with the players. No handicapping hit points. No inflating damage. This way a dragon is always an epic fight and a goblin with a sword is always a danger.

Yes and no... You have already said you are also doing other things that still allow advancement for everything beyond 6th level except for HP (which is handicapping HP), BTH, and feats...

No I just stated that my first time trying it I still advanced class abilities. But not with this E6 ruleset. with E6 all advancement stops at 6. And level 6 is an epic character by its scale, It should be tough, But not 100HP tough.