Canonfire! Forums-viewtopic-Some Rules from the Past ....

Thu Mar 17, 2011 4:11 am Some Rules from the Past ....

Last night I was sitting in front of the PC, when I noticed my AD&D Unearthed Arcana sitting on my bookshelf between my AD&D Player's Handbook and Dungeon Master's Guide....

So I picked the book up and started paging through it, fond memories.
Then I saw the page about Comeliness and recalled how fond I was of the rule.

So my question is this what is the general feeling about a Comeliness? Is it something that can still be used in a d20 system like 3.5 D&D or Pathfinder?
I believe it could ....

My second question is about weapon speed factor and weapon armor class adjustment rules from AD&D. I loved the rules.

Has anyone converted these rules to 3.5 D&D or Pathfinder?

I just think these rules really helped define character with there choices of armor and weapons. The right tool was needed for the job, not jsut any old tool would do.

Thu Mar 17, 2011 10:11 am

Comeliness was a fun rule, but really only gave you a base from which to roleplay. My group never actually used the dice parts of the Comeliness rules. In 3.5 and Pathfinder, these rules have been subsumed by the Charisma rules and those for skills like Bluff, Intimidate, Diplomacy, etc.

The Weapon Speed Factor rules were lost in 3.5 and Armor Class Adjustment rules vs. various weapons from AD&D were simplified into the S/P/B weapon type rules of 3.5 and PF. Weapon Types aren't as accurate at reflecting the power or weakness of an individual weapon against a particular type of armor, but they are almost infinitely easier to apply in the middle of a battle. The Armor Class Adjustment rules were just too complicated. Weapon Speed Factors could be easily remembered by most players for the few weapons their characters carried, but the DM had a much more difficult time looking up the speed factors of each weapon every enemy combatant possesed.

SirXaris

Fri Mar 18, 2011 6:42 am

Personally, I don't mind Comeliness as an abstract stat that MIGHT come into play here and there (such as during "seduction" attempts); but I thought some of the effects as listed were more than a little over the top (which is fine in SOME styles of play, I guess); and I thought the old: "Give Elves a bonus; give Dwarves a penalty" to be more than a litle annoying.

This last is part of a personal annoyance I've had with Elves in numerous RPGs always making out like bandits and also due ot the fact that from my own perspective; I don't think I'd automatically find scrawny little folks with pointed ears and frequently arrogant attitdues somehow super-attractive...but that's my own personal issue! :)

As for converting rules to D20 or 3.5; I can't help as I took one look at 3rd edition and ran back to the comfort of my 1st and 2nd Edition books; but I can't imagine it would be very difficult to utilize.

Fri Mar 18, 2011 11:26 am

For me I always found it to be a useless stat. Charisma is what is important. In real life I know lots of ugly guys who get tons of chicks because they have Charisma. Weather that manifests as confidence, a funny personality or whatever it works. Conversely I also have a friend of mine who is a male model and is probably one of the best looking men I have ever met. But he is very mild and timid and so even though he gets hit on all the time by women his track record is much lower than mine as he just doesn't have the Charisma to hold onto any of them. I see the game working this way too. I let my players define how their characters look. I used to play a Half Orc thief who had a scar running across his face and was described as being pretty ugly. However he also started the game with a 16 charisma and I boosted that stat whenever possible as that was the concept for this guy. His goal was to become a crime lord so even though he was not pleasant to look at people still did what he told them weather it was because he bullied them into it or in a lot of cases was just good at talking to people and getting them to see his way of things. He had the highest Diplomacy and intimidate skills I could give him at any level. So I don't see how the character looking would have any thing to do with the way he gets played. For me it's all about the concept and how you play it that matters most.

Fri Mar 18, 2011 9:00 pm

Comeliness I never really worried about as I wanted players to have their characters look the way they liked. However Charisma is much more potent as visual attraction is more a male thing than female but it exists.

Speed factor is fine I always liked it benefit of fighting with daggers is there quick and your likely to attack first, advantage of battle axe you get a better hit for your effort.

Armor benefits where a little harder but make sense I stopped using the armor vs weapon type. However I did use armor Damage points which means each hit deals damage to your armor equal to 1 plus strength bonus. Once your armor is out of DP it is useless.

In First edition we had a house rule armor would be a damage reduction so armor took damage but might prevent you from taking damage. Padded and bone armor reduces damage by 1 leather by 2 studded leather and hide and ring 3 etc you get the picture. Damage points for armor where 10 for every point of damage it can deflect so padded was 10 leather 20 etc. Made living at first level easier.

Shields have damage points which are 5 for every point of damage they reflect. Buckler 1 for one attack a round Small shield was 1 but for 2 attacks per round plus dex bonus. Medium Shield was 2 for 2 attacks per round plus dex bonus Large where 3 for 3 attacks a round plus dex bonus. and Tower where 4 unlimited attacks per round as tower shields needed two hands to carry but great for shield bashing and rushing.

These were the rules we played with as well as a critical table that was huge and can't remember enough of it to post it here. Though if you rolled maximum damage dice you could roll damage again and add it to your total damage you dealt on that hit only one re-roll per attack.

Sat Mar 26, 2011 3:19 pm

I would love to see house rules for weapon speed factors in 3.5

Sat Mar 26, 2011 10:45 pm

Awesome timing. The seabased campaign I started a couple weeks ago uses Comeliness in 3.5
Overall it's just for fun, but the guidelines in the Greyhawk Glossography can give you an idea how to roleplay NPCs/PCs interacting with this stat.

Sat Mar 26, 2011 10:50 pm

Sat Apr 02, 2011 1:29 pm

I never liked using comeliness. For most purposes, it doesn't seem to have as much roleplaying gravitas as the other stats, and so, is not their equal. Players tended to use it as a dump stat, so everyone was ugly. Additionally, it is too race specific. I highly doubt a gnome would be very attracted to a high comeliness human, while a human would not be that attracted to a high comeliness gnome.

Weapon speed factors seemed to have wonky results to me. People with light weapons were faster than people with heavy weapons. I don't have any melee combat experience, but it seems the guy with a big long sword should be able to make a zone of defense around himself and get the first thwack in before the guy with a dagger could move in close for a stab.

I like the weapon vs armor class in theory, the idea being a pick can punch a hole through chain much better than a broadsword could slash it. But it didn't seem to pan out too well in practice. The chart only listed armor class, which is a function of many things besides just the armor type being worn. So I was never sure whether you should calculate the penalty based on the actual AC or the AC of the armor being worn. Actual AC doesn't make much sense, so I would go by the AC of the armor being worn. Then having to estimate from a monster what is the most similar type of armor. It was all more work than it was worth.

Sat Apr 02, 2011 8:32 pm