The (Unholy) Trinity of DnD Gameplay Pillars

[xanther]

The modern insistence on really leaning into the idea of D&D as a tactical grid based combat is really weird. ....

I've thought recently, that if you do want tactical grid based combat, you're much better of building it on a science-fiction chassis.

Here is where I must plug that a form of count-success mechanic is in my mind, and play experience these days, the way to go. Simply because it "solves" the attack-defend-movement conundrum...and much more.

The conundrum being from old war game days but ported whole sale into D&D (no surprise as D&D came from war games). The constant evaluation on the order and how of movement and combat and who takes their turn first...from attack-move, to attack-move-counter-attack-counter move, on and on. Defense was from almost the beginning a static thing subsumed into how many hits or how hard to hit a thing was.

The solution from a form of count success system being that a "success" could be used to attack, defend, or move. No need for worrying about turn order, or treating these different types of activity with different mechanics.

Right there, 3 choices, 3 tactical options. Add in some bonus for positioning, maybe extra successes to disengage and you can have a very tactical grid based game without different types of actions, or a block of text and roll to integrate movement and attack. Also defense becomes an active tactical choice. Last but not least it can take care of the whole, critical hit, multiple attack thing.

A "critical hit" is just when you apply more "success" to attack (to increase damage or aim it), multiple attacks are just allocating success to more than one target, cold even say if you want to attack squares to you side flank or rear they take an extra success etc. No need to recall that some weapons critical on a 19 or 20, others a 20, roll extra dice or roll on another table, etc. No need for a feat to do any of this, it is something anyone can do if they get to roll enough combat dice to get enough success.

On my last bit, in my hubris I sometimes wonder if D&D would have gone the count success route if but for a small change in thought...and if their had not be a cost reduction in d20s Simply because count success is very close to basic ancient miniatures combat. For example, some of my favorite rules are pretty simple, units hit on a 6, and each hit does 1 point of damage, and units can take 1 or 2 points. More powerful units got more dice to attack with or hit on a 5,6.

Quickly can expand to "hero" units equivalent of 3 men, i.e. have 3 dice, can take 3 hits. From there a simple step when the player asks in this new individual figure game, how do I do counter an attack...well you can use your "hit" to do an attack action or defense action...and another small step to include a movement action as something you can do with a hit.


P.S. Your last part about 5e made me laugh...yes all you need to do is say it.

 

[opaopajr]

I disagree about Exploration Pillar being "just a skill check" simplification. It IS a simplification from older texts like Wilderness/Dungeon Survival Guides (which I have used to various extents, with variable success). But for 5e it is a fruitful simplification for setting up time and spatial theater of the mind, in my experience.

I still have on TheRPGSite my first PbP foray into 5e Basic up, and that was one of my earliest takeaways: the Exploration & Combat rules were simple, yet defined & integrated enough to ease adjudication for a younger, more video game & CCG familiar, crop of players.

Now this was before even the DMG or MM came out, so it was 'a merely 100+ page .pdf' and my imagination against the blank canvas. But it showed me a chassis that was robust in juggling three of the most involved gaming pillars/elements without strain or slowdown OR being impenetrable to explain to others AND covered enough sequencing with open-ended interpretation. That's gold, guys.

That said, a lot of TTRPG I've seen and played in the past 20 years (and NOT just D&D) still lives in the shadow of D&D 3e-isms and modern video game RPGs in how they are actually played. So xanther's comment about younger people not knowing to do much else is a very real shared experience. WotC has been taking, what, three or four different stabs at the DMG (5e DMG, Mordekainen, Xanathar, Tasha) to approach the dense value of AD&D 1e DMG? It was my first real concern during 5e launch and Adventure League season 1: the people need the other bits of guidance that the past takes for granted to open up their play to what they could want. You cannot explore what you cannot imagine; how do you know what is your goodrightfun without knowing potential optional directions?