Troll Lord Games

After trying to use the SIEGE system for NPC reactions and combat and morale checks, I've decided to adapt Moldvay for my needs. Thought I'd post what I came up with in case it inspires anyone else.
Sentient Creatures' Attitudes (2d6)

12 Helpful

11 Kindly

10 Curious

8-9 Self-interested

6-7 Indifferent

4-5 Wary

3 Unfriendly

2 Hostile

I use this table when the party encounters NPCs or sentient creatures in non-combat related situations. It means I don't have to decide in advance what the NPCs' motivation is. I can roll and decide in the moment.

I modify this roll using the party's combined CHA modifier-- CHA values divided by number of party members. For example, the average of 11, 16, 11, 9, 13, 10 is 11.7, or 12. There is no CHA bonus for this score and no modification to the roll.
_________________
Running two C&C games. Check them out at http://candc.forumotion.com.

One is a monthly affair on Saturday nights, 8pm EST (Company of Delvers).

The second is an historically-inspired campaign with players from around the world (Legio Campaign).

Combat Reaction Check (2d6)

sentient/non-sentient creature reactions

12 submit/cower

11 flee/flee

10 retreat carefully/retreat carefully

6-9 parley/wait

4-5 take cover/defensive behavior

3 draw weapons, maneuver/advance, maneuver

2 attack

I use this table in situations where combat is possible or likely. Once again, i don't have to decide in advance how each creature will respond to the party. And not all encounters are obvious fights.

I modify this roll by the difference between the party's combined levels and the creatures' combined levels as well as the party's CHA modifier. For example, a party with 13 levels (and a 0 CHA modifier) that happens upon 12 kobolds will get a +1 on this table. The kobolds will not attack the superior force and may even submit without a fight.
_________________
Running two C&C games. Check them out at http://candc.forumotion.com.

One is a monthly affair on Saturday nights, 8pm EST (Company of Delvers).

The second is an historically-inspired campaign with players from around the world (Legio Campaign).

Morale Check (2d6)

Fail by/ Reaction by sentient/non-sentient creatures

5+ surrender (possibly falling prone)/flee

4 flee (possibly dropping items)

3 shaken (-2 to rolls)/retreat

2 retreat

1 parley/defensive behavior

Rather than making the decision myself about whether there's any fight left in a creature, I can use a morale check and consult this table. It does mean I have to assign a morale number (usually 6-11) to a creature.

I check after the first death or half a group are incapacitated. As a rule of thumb, I use modifiers like defending home/ outnumber 3:1 (+2); leader alive/ outnumber 2:1 (+1); outnumbered (-1); leader slain/outnumbered 2:1 (-2)
_________________
Running two C&C games. Check them out at http://candc.forumotion.com.

One is a monthly affair on Saturday nights, 8pm EST (Company of Delvers).

The second is an historically-inspired campaign with players from around the world (Legio Campaign).

By strange coincidence I've also been giving reaction and morale tables a lot of thought lately. What I came up with was to adapt the reaction table from AD&D to a d20 roll vice the percentile roll:

1 Violently hostile/immediate attack

2-5 Hostile

6-9 Uncertain (55% prone to negative reaction)

10-11 Neutral/uninterested/uncertain

12-15 Uncertain (55% prone to positive reaction)

16-19 Friendly

20 Enthusiastically friendly/volunteers help

I felt that the charts from the various basic sets that used a 2d6 roll didn't have a large enough probability spread and that adding a charisma modifier all but eliminated any chance of a hostile reaction.

I like my 1d20 chart because it maintains the unified mechanic and has a large enough integer range that a positive charisma modifier will definitely help the PCs but doesn't completely eliminate a hostile reaction.
_________________
"You're not going crazy, you're going sane in a crazy world."

- The Tick

Nice
_________________
The obvious will always trip you up FAR more than the obscure.

Baron Grignak Hammerhand of the Pacifica Provinces-

High Warden of the Castles & Crusades Society

I have always liked tables like these. I don't always want to make the decisions, and the randomness makes it fun for me too.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

Treebore wrote:
I have always liked tables like these. I don't always want to make the decisions, and the randomness makes it fun for me too.

Ditto.

This recent post on Grognardia, and this older one, On the Oracular Power of Dice discuss this element of randomness and surprise that make the game more fun for the referee. I have to agree, the GM is a player too, not just a narrator. Furthermore, the random element introduced by tables often takes the play in an interesting direction that can be way cooler than what I would have thought up on my own. I usually tend to default to the most obvious reaction/solution - random die rolls on tables, on the other hand can force you to be more original.
_________________
"You're not going crazy, you're going sane in a crazy world."

- The Tick

Taranthyll wrote:
I usually tend to default to the most obvious reaction/solution - random die rolls on tables, on the other hand can force you to be more original.

Totally agree.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

good stuff. I see no reason that sometimes they just up and run...or be more helpful than one might expect...it's all good stuff.
_________________
I'll tell you what I do like though: a killer, a dyed-in-the-wool killer. Cold blooded, clean, methodical and thorough. ~Zorg

Taranthyll wrote:
Ditto.

This recent post on Grognardia, and this older one, On the Oracular Power of Dice discuss this element of randomness and surprise that make the game more fun for the referee.

That is a great article. It is truly what separates what I call gaming from the more modern "read: spoonfed" version.
_________________
I'll tell you what I do like though: a killer, a dyed-in-the-wool killer. Cold blooded, clean, methodical and thorough. ~Zorg

Arazmus wrote:
That is a great article. It is truly what separates what I call gaming from the more modern "read: spoonfed" version.

That is an interesting point. In a lot of cases the modern style of play involves a scripted, plot-driven adventure, which isn't amenable to random events that could de-rail the storyline. This is why I prefer the storyline to grow organically from the player's actions rather than be laid down ahead of time. Its a lot more fun for me as the GM to be surprised by how the story unfolds rather than know how it ends right from the start.
_________________
"You're not going crazy, you're going sane in a crazy world."

- The Tick

Taranthyll wrote:
That is an interesting point. In a lot of cases the modern style of play involves a scripted, plot-driven adventure, which isn't amenable to random events that could de-rail the storyline. This is why I prefer the storyline to grow organically from the player's actions rather than be laid down ahead of time. Its a lot more fun for me as the GM to be surprised by how the story unfolds rather than know how it ends right from the start.

the point made in the above referenced article about changing from a referee to a storyteller is right on the gold piece. I want the players to be the driving force of the story not just puppets in the "storyteller's" epic tale. The players have to feel they have some control of their characters or they'll just get sick of always being manipulated by the "boxed text". I know I do.
_________________
I'll tell you what I do like though: a killer, a dyed-in-the-wool killer. Cold blooded, clean, methodical and thorough. ~Zorg