Game Mechanics and Tactical Skill Development

One of the joys of making Bhakashal while running regular games is that I get to playtest everything over extended periods of time. It can take some time for the impact of a game mechanic to be felt at the table, particularly any mechanic that is based on dice rolls, as the inherent variability of randomized rolls can “mask” impacts for periods of time.

One of the big components of Bhakashal’s shaking up of AD&D combat came from my reading of Talislanta. Talislanta has a generic critical mechanic, e.g., you can declare a critical effect, and if you roll a critical hit that effect is realized. It is meant to be a negotiation between the player and the referee, the player comes up with a critical effect that is reasonable given past instances, and the referee collaborates to ensure it is so. 

Then you roll.

Thing is, sometimes players need prompts, if left to their own devices, “do whatever you want”, they will default to past patterns. When looking into this, I found systems that used combat criticals, systems that used weapon criticals, and systems that used free form criticals, but I had not found a system that used all three. So I decided to come up with a list of standard critical hit effects, a list of weapon specific critical impacts, AND to allow free form criticals as well. 

I have been using this system for more than 2 years with 7 different groups, and I thought it would be interesting to describe how it has landed. 

Here is the combat criticals table:

Combat Effects Table

1. Weapon Jammed/Stuck - one action to remove/fix, +2 to hit them while doing so

2. Numbing Blow - motive limb -3” to move, fighting limb, -2 to hit, 2-4 rounds

3. Disarmed - weapon knocked out of melee range, 1 action to retrieve

5. Snatch Weapon - mercenaries & spiders get a bonus attack with the weapon

6. Snatch Object - object from opponent removed (purse, potion bottle, etc.)

7. Knock Down - opponent -2 to hit, 2-point AC, 1 action to get back on feet     

8. Dodge on Lunge - additional attack at opponent’s back as they pass, +2 to hit

9. Knock Back - attacker may break off with no attack of opportunity against them        

10. Knock Back into Surface / Object - 2-4 hp additional damage

11. Blow Exposes Weak Spot - Next attack against them ignores armor

12. Temporarily Blind - next two attacks randomized btw all in melee range or -4 to hit

13. Temporarily Wind - next two attacks do half damage if successful               

14. Disorient - opponent loses next attack            

15. Stunned - Opponent AC 10 for next attack

16. Knock into a Combatant - both have 4-point initiative penalty on next attack

17. Extra Unarmed Attack - Opponent set up for free punch/kick/head butt attack

18. Set-Up Ally - next attack against opponent from an ally is +4 to hit                        

19. Extra Attack - attacker gets one extra attack                                      

20. Extra Damage - double base damage

Natural 1 - Weapon Damaged: - 1 to hit until repaired

Natural 20 - Armor Damaged/Target Damaged: 1 point of AC penalty until repaired/healed

Mercenaries also get a save versus breath weapon against any combat effect critical on them. 

1. When the table says, “next attack”, if the opponent who suffers the impact of the critical lost initiative and has not yet acted for that round, their action for that round is lost. If they have already acted that round (e.g. they won initiative), then their action for the next combat round is lost.

2. If a PC wants to propose a combat maneuver that is not on this list, treat it like a critical and calibrate its effects to be similar to what is already on the table. If it is popular, add it to the table as an option. 

And here is a sample of weapon criticals

Axe, Battle - Criticals: Cleave/Remain

Cleave - Weapon does full dice damage

Remain – Weapon stays imbedded in opponent, does minimum dice damage each round until removed

Initial Introduction

When the table, weapons criticals and the generic critical rule were introduced, the first reaction was generally positive, the first few times they got one they were very excited. Almost universally, they chose double damage as their impact. The base die is doubled, not the total with bonuses, which disappointed a few of them, but generally they felt that more damage was better. Double damage on 20 was a very common house rule BITD, and some of the players had even heard of it, so it was the natural choice.

The problem, of course, is that doubling base damage is good, but it is most often not enough to take down the foe, so they get to be around for a while longer doing damage before you can put them down. And of course you can also roll very low damage, which, even when doubled, is underwhelming.

Soon they shifted their tactics to extra attack as the default. They liked this as it had the potential to start up a “critical chain”, and that indeed happened several times against high AC foes that were easier to hit. This captured their imagination for a bit, but what they found was that on occasion they missed the second hit, so the critical was “wasted”, it was a drag to roll a critical but then get no impact. What they were really learning was that certain criticals required an additional roll, others did not, and depending on the situation, one may be preferable to another. This is an important distinction in the game, it is, for example, the difference between Magic Missile and Fireball, Fireball does more damage but the saving throw means that the damage can be halved. Magic Missile, however, ALWAYS hits, and has no save, e.g. does not require an additional roll.

This was the status quo for a time, but there were some indications of change. For one, as the referee I used criticals too, but I rolled randomly for them rather than picking. So the PCs began to see the utility of criticals other than damage reduction or extra hits through the actions of the NPCs and monsters. 

Then one session the party tank rolled a critical and couldn’t decide between extra attack and double damage. So he looked at the rest of the chart and landed on:

16. Knock Into a Combatant - both have 4 point initiative penalty on next attack 

During that fight there were two primary opponents and a bunch of “mooks”, the tank realized in that moment that a critical effect that impacted both of the two primary opponents was worth more than double damage on one of them or an extra attack that might not even land. 

After that, the floodgates opened. Now players started to comb through the list and look for critical effects that fit the combat environment at the time. Over the next few months finding creative ways to use the listed critical effects became the standard approach at the table. Players combed the environment to find aspects that fed into a critical on the table. 

They started to notice different KINDS of criticals. 

1. Criticals that impacted specific parts of their opponent’s bodies (blinding, numbing arms)

2. Criticals that impacted more than one opponent 

3. Criticals that had lasting effects as opposed to instant effects

4. Criticals that had multiple effects

5. Criticals that neutralized or reduced armor defense

6. Criticals that neutralized or reduced attacks

7. Criticals that aided your allies, not you

This led to players asking questions about the combat environment, this was something I had wanted them to do for ages, but the system incentivized them to do it, and it became the norm. This was one of the unexpected consequences of the critical system, it led the players to ask more questions about the environment in order to maximize the benefits of the critical system. This in turn gave them more information, and all other things being equal, made them better at combat. 

The system was starting to create knock-on effects.

They became interested in weapon specific criticals. Weapon specific criticals are different from combat criticals in that you have a limited number for each weapon, once the party started to embrace combat criticals they also started to be more thoughtful about which weapons they picked. 

So for another month or so players brainstormed the benefits of combat criticals and integrated weapons criticals in their gaming. Combat had become energized as the players took an active role in tactical planning. There were a few players who didn’t know what to do with the criticals table, perhaps the choice was overwhelming. Fortunately, the players who had the most trouble picking a critical impact learned to just roll on the table. One of the benefits of Bhakashal is that it randomizes almost everything in the game, so if players are indecisive, they can just roll.

Then, the final big shift happened, one of the players decided to ask for a custom critical. In this case the party was up against a warlock and a group of bandits. One of the party, a Slayer (Bhakashal ranger/assassin) was meleeing with the bandits and saw one of them lighting a molotov cocktail to throw at the party seer (priest).

The Slayer asked if she could strike the bandit on the hand, knocking the burning cocktail through the air and into the nearby warlock from the bandit group. The bandit was close enough, and we discussed it and decided as a group that this was a reasonable critical effect. 

Note that the way I run this is that the whole table must agree that a proposed critical is fair and reasonable given the comparable criticals on the predetermined list. This keeps the system from being abused, the players all know that if they approve a critical that is ‘unfair’ the monsters/NPCs will also have access to it, so initial enthusiasms are often curtailed. They also have to convince me, and I’m fairly good at assessing comparative advantages.

So the slayer tried for the critical, rolled one, and managed to knock the fiery bottle out of the bandit’s hand and on to the nearby warlock, who failed his save and was set on fire!

Well, after that happened, things changed significantly. Now players were both actively looking for environmental conditions that favored one combat critical over another, or one weapon critical over another, and also dreaming up new free form criticals to try. And the more they played with the system, the better they got at picking impacts that took advantage of the combat environment, picking weapons for their critical effects, and coming up with criticals for the game. 

Over the course of a few months (we play once a week), so about 12 sessions, the introduction of a critical system led to:

1. Increased player engagement

2. More questioning of the environment

3. Experimentation

4. Combat coordination and cooperation

5. Improved tactical skills

In short, the players had become more skilled at combat in the game because the system incentivized their engagement. Once they saw how criticals could impact combat through more than just damage, they became invested and began to experiment. This is fantastic as anything that increases engagement is good, and the players were definitely more engaged. Martial characters also gained a bit more prestige. Yes, they lacked spells, but they were the most likely to land a critical hit, and thus their contribution to combat became more pronounced.

It also expanded combat from “you hit, you do X damage” into something far more dynamic, tactically charged and exciting. Finding a good critical impact was lauded and celebrated, coming up with a new one and negotiating it with the referee and the party became a badge of honor in the group. And of course the use of criticals on the players also made things exciting, they knew what could be done TO them just as it was done BY them.

Criticals are only one aspect of Bhakashal combat, but they bring a lot to the table, and have led my groups to become more skilled and tactically minded.

Win-Win!