13th age vs 5e or other thing, which one haves faster combats?

Most rp systems have slow as fuck combat, especially if everyone drinks and is bad at math.

Like this, for example.

Superior stick method coming through, weebs step aside

Get on my level.

>roll to hit
The odds are in your favor. You'll have a +2 bonus if you spread your points out evenly, meaning you'll hit the average foe 58% of the time.

>roll for damage, 1d6
1d6+1 assuming you've got a starting character, you divided your points up evenly, and you're not using a large weapon.

>enemy rolls to soak, 1d3
Using the flat protection value isn't obnoxious, like rolling dice is. Also, no armor in the Mythic edition soaks 1d3; that's from Legendary. Armor has been significantly improved since then (it's not as out of control). Just ignore the protective values of helmets and don't overdo heavy armor, remembering that it has significant penalties associated with it (and you can always choose to bypass it by taking the penalty to your to-hit rather than damage).

>enemy has 10 HP
Rabble have 1-3 and toughs have from 5-9 (that's 2 and 7, respectively, if you go for the middle of their ranges). The vast majority of the time, that's who you're going to be fighting. Only true badasses have 10 lifeblood, like you do, and they're meant to be hard to kill.

So if you're fighting a sergeant of the town guard who is a tough with medium armor (2 protection) and 7 lifeblood, and you divided your points evenly and aren't using a large weapon, it's going to take an average of 3 hits to take him down. But turns go quickly, most folks tend to have light or no armor, and you'll absolutely mow through rabble, who generally go down with 1 hit and comprise the majority of combatants you will face.

Oh shit crackas what you doing

Those look like they'd hurt.

Zulu stick fighting was vicious shit, yeah. Though these days it's kind of rare for the "attack" sticks to be full-on knobkerries with that head.

You end up standing in one point trading blows. There are no interesting combat options. The system needs to be greatly expanded for it to be decent. Even something like take a -2 penalty but get +1d6 damage would be a good starting point.

Playing a Sword and Sorcery game with Fate Core and physical conflicts are extremely fast, fluid and always have something cool going on.

They're never just about standing and trading blows turn after turn, you're always trying to do something cool with all the aspects available at the scene.

To be fair the question was about fast combat, not interesting combat.

5e IMO. 13th Age doesn't really do things faster, and has stuff like the escalation die to slow combat down.

any fate fantasy pdf you could share?

>Long ass explanation, rife with house rules, of how a convoluted combat system should be considered elegant and quick
You're missing the point of rules light mate.

You don't really need anything other than Core to run a fantasy setting. I just use Core with some house rules, really. All the examples in the book are set in the author's Sword & Sorcery original setting, inspired by Conan and Fafhrd and The Grey Mouser stories.

It's a pretty fun system, and the book is useful even if you don't plan on running Fate, since it offers plenty of tips on running RPGs in general.

That sounds absolutely great if it's true. I'll have to check it out.

>You end up standing in one point trading blows.
Only if you suck, because that's A) boring and B) doesn't take advantage of the situation and is therefore unlikely to get you any sort of bonus from the GM.

>There are no interesting combat options.
In a rules-light game you improvise that shit. Choosing off a menu of options slows the game down and generally ends up actually limiting your choices, because some things are mechanically better for your character than others, and those things are set in stone.

>Even something like take a -2 penalty but get +1d6 damage would be a good starting point.
BoL does have a few rudimentary combat options along those lines (see pic).

It is, but you HAVE to make sure your players are willing to get into the Fate mindset.

Fate is NOT about simulation and immersion, it's about having fun and narrating cool adventures with your friends. It requires a group willing to cooperate and share ideas, and it is made for games where the PCs are competent, proactive and dramatic people.

If it clicks with your group, then you'll have a great time, the possibilities are infinite.

Leave it to the irish, lad.

>Long ass explanation
I was responding to each claim individually, showing where it was wrong.

>rife with house rules
There was only one house rule in the entire thing, which was a suggestion to ignore helmets.

>of how a convoluted combat system should be considered elegant and quick
You just went full retard. BoL combat is quicker and easier than at least 95% of the games out there. I mean, I'm sure you could find some two-page game out there that's simpler, but if we're talking full-length games, BoL is way on the simple end.

>You're missing the point of rules light mate.
As far as the house rules bit goes, that's what lighter rules games have always been about, since the early days of D&D.

5e has faster combat, but 13th Age's ruleset works better in theater of the mind than 5e's does.

It actually sounds like what my group has been looking for lately.

UNDENIABLE PROOF the Irish and the Blacks were both on the same level.

Flared clubs really made you a target for Americans in the 1800s, huh?

I'd rather have the irish to be honest. Last the had the good sense to be catholic.

If you wanna talk about flared clubs there's also these bad boys.

>D&D rules light...
I still think you are missing the concept of rules light.

BoL is on the simple side of Simulationist games.
Streamline by comparison to excessively bulky contenders is damnation by faint praise.

To be fair, my response was excessive, but you aren't doing the system any favours.

>escalation die
>slow things down
I'm assuming you've never played then? The escalation die makes it easier for the PCs to hit the longer combat goes, resulting in fights rarely stalling due to bad rolls.

>D&D rules light...
Moldvay Basic is a grand total of 128 pages with monsters, magical treasure and everything. Whether you consider it rules light depends on where you want to draw that subjective line, but it's a lot simpler than 5e.

>BoL is on the simple side of Simulationist games.
>Streamline by comparison to excessively bulky contenders is damnation by faint praise.
Simulationism often means adding complexities in order to make a game more realistic. This clearly isn't a big concern with BoL. But I'd be interested to get a small list of RPGs you think are simpler than BoL. Put your money where your mouth is.

>you aren't doing the system any favours.
By individually addressing and refuting every ridiculous claim you made?

But okay, let's try this one more time, as you seem to think that responding in detail somehow makes the game I'm talking about more complex. Here are short responses to >roll to hit
All games do this.

>roll for damage, 1d6
d6+1. Quit low-balling.

>enemy rolls to soak, 1d3
Use the flat protection numbers. Also, your data is outdated.

>enemy has 10 HP
Inflated value. Quit high-balling.

>Simulationism often means adding complexities in order to make a game more realistic.

Point of clarity, not exactly. Simulationist games don't really care about "realism" as they do answering the question "what would happen if..." While most people who insist on trying to make a system as realistic as possible often find themselves under the simulationist umbrella, it's not really an automatic connection. An argument could be made that trying to conform the game situation to something that feels "realistic" is actually a mutant form of narrativism, but that would be a derail of Skubian proportions.

So, using your numbers (d6 damage, d3 armor, 10 hp), it would take an average of 5.8 hits to take an enemy down. That is a bit excessive, but...

Using the actual average numbers (d6+1 damage, 2 points of armor*, 4.5 hp = average of rabble and toughs**), it takes only 1.8 hits.

*1d6-2 if you use dice rolls for armor, which actually reduces its protection by a bit, reducing the average number of hits it takes to drop an enemy to 1.52.

**If you wanted to get more sophisticated with the average hp, you could look at the frequency with which you expect to encounter each type of enemy. You'd maybe get 3 rabble for every tough and 3 toughs for every villain. That would yield an average of 3.58 hit points. If you go with 2 rabble for every tough and 2 toughs for every villain, brings the average up to 4.71 hit points. Either way, they usually drop with 2 hits.

bump

They are essentially the same, except maybe 13th Age characters having more options in general leading to more thinking from the players.