Hello folks!

I’m still working on BOG, my tabletop RPG about frog knights exploring dungeons in a cursed swamp. Since the game is largely focused on exploring dangerous ruins and mysterious places, combat needed to play an important role. But I’ve found that designing a good combat system is really difficult.

What I wanted was something simple and smooth to run, but still at least a little strategic and with a few original ideas of its own. I tested a lot of different approaches, but there was always something that didn’t quite work, or it just didn’t really capture what I wanted BOG to feel like.

So I’ve finally arrived at a version that feels closer to the mark, and I’d like to share a summary of it here to get your feedback. I’d love to know whether it sounds interesting to you, and whether it feels reasonably balanced.

So, first, each frog has two resource pools: Stamina and Vitality.

Stamina represents a frog’s ability to absorb blows, endure fatigue, and keep fighting, while Vitality represents actual health and life force. In practice, when a character takes damage, it comes off Stamina first; once Stamina is reduced to 0, further damage goes to Vitality instead. Stamina is relatively easy to recover after a fight, while Vitality requires proper care and a longer period of rest. If Vitality drops below 0, the character dies.

The creatures the frog knights fight use the same system.

When combat starts, the GM decides which side logically has the initiative depending on the situation: either the frog knights or their opponents. During the players’ side of the round, they can act in whatever order they want.

On their turn, a player can move, cast a spell or attack, and potentially use a combat action.

As for attacks, the core mechanic is pretty simple and follows the game’s general resolution system. To make an attack, the player rolls a number of d6s equal to their Vigor or Dexterity score depending on the weapon used. Attributes range from 1 to 3, and the player keeps the highest die. The target then makes a defense roll, rolling a number of d6s based on their armor and also keeping the highest result. If the attack roll is higher than the defense roll, the attack hits.

If the attack beats the defense by 4 or more, it counts as a critical success (for example, if the defender rolls a 2 and the attacker rolls a 6). Likewise, if the defense beats the attack by 4 or more, that would be a critical failure. I haven’t fully decided yet what criticals should do, but the idea would obviously be some kind of exceptional success or catastrophic failure.

If the attack hits, the attacker rolls the weapon’s damage die, and the damage is applied to Stamina or Vitality as appropriate.

The part I’m most interested in is the combat actions, which are meant to be the core tactical layer of the system.

Each round, all frog knights share a common pool of Bravery points equal to the number of frog knights participating in the fight. On a player’s turn, they can spend these points to perform combat actions. Any unspent Bravery is lost at the end of the round and does not carry over. The pool resets every round based on the number of active frog knights.

The available combat actions are:

• Reinforced Strike (cost 1): the attack deals one extra damage die.
• Reinforced Guard (cost 1): a nearby ally gains +1d6 to their defense against the next attack.
• Feint (cost 1): grants advantage to the next attack made by an ally against a specific target (they roll +1d6 on their attack).
• Decisive Blow (cost 2): a successful attack is automatically upgraded to a critical, without needing the usual 4-point margin. This must be declared out loud before rolling, so the group can agree on the bravery spend.

I’m pretty satisfied with how this part feels in theory.

When a frog is attacked, they still roll their armor dice as usual against the attacker’s highest die. Shields can also absorb damage completely, but they have 3 charges before breaking.

Overall, I’m happy with the direction of the system. We’re planning to test it in play soon, but I’d love to know what this evokes for you in theory. My goal is to strike a balance where combat feels tactical and shared between players without becoming too complex or slow.

Thanks in advance for any feedback!

Hey folks!

I wanted to share the combat system from my upcoming roleplaying game, BOG, which should release in September. In BOG, you play frog-knights exploring dungeons in a cursed swamp.

Combat systems are probably one of the hardest parts of RPG design to get right, so for this game I was aiming for something simple, easy to run, and not too heavy, but still with enough room for tactical choices and teamwork.

The basic idea is that frog-knights have two pools: Grit and Vitality.

- Grit is basically stamina and your ability to keep fighting and absorb hits. You roll 2d6 for it at character creation (rerolling if you get double 1s).

- Vitality is your actual health, and it’s more important. You roll 1d6 + Dexterity + Vigor for it at character creation. Dexterity and Vigor are stats that range from 1 to 3.

Damage goes to Grit first. Once that hits 0, damage starts going to Vitality. If Vitality drops below 0, the frog dies.

Grit is fairly easy to recover after combat, while Vitality needs actual healing. Enemies work the same way and also have both Grit and Vitality.

How combat works

At the start of combat, the GM decides whether the enemies or the players act first. On the players’ side, everyone can act in whatever order they want.

On your turn, you can move and then either take one combat action or cast a spell.

To attack, you roll your weapon’s attack die against the target’s defense die. If your attack roll is higher, you hit, and the number rolled is also the damage dealt. If the defense roll is equal or higher, the attack misses.

Combat actions

There are three combat actions:

Assault

You make an attack and add a +1 to +3 bonus from either Vigor or Dexterity, depending on the weapon. The tradeoff is that your defense becomes 1 until your next turn, so you leave yourself open.

Guard

You attack normally but without your stat bonus, while keeping your full defense die.

Feint

You don’t attack. Instead, you distract the target and give the next frog attacking it an advantage, increasing the size of their attack die.

On top of that, shields can absorb damage, but they usually only have 3 uses before they break and become unusable.

That’s the basic idea. I’ve done a bit of playtesting and so far it’s been working pretty well. I’m also considering letting a frog in Guard protect another nearby frog, which would push teamwork a bit further.

I’d love to hear what people think. Does this sound balanced? Does it seem fun and interesting enough to you? Does it remind you of any existing systems I should take a look at?

Hey! I'm currently developing BOG, a minimalist dungeon crawler where small but brave frog knights explore a cursed swamp.

I wanted a resolution mechanic that felt different from the usual single d20 or dice pool, while staying fast and simple at the table.

Here's what I came up with: every roll uses two D6, one is your Luck die, the other is your Risk die.

• Luck > Risk → success
• Risk ≥ Luck → failure (ties go to risk)

You add your relevant stat (1 to 3) to your Luck die. Without any bonus, you're actually slightly more likely to fail than succeed (around 42% success). A stat of 3 pushes your odds up to around 83%, but you're never fully safe.

For advantage/disadvantage, you simply roll two Luck dice and keep the best (or worst) result, no extra modifiers to track. It's been working well in playtests so far because it's fast, tense, and the two dice "racing" against each other adds a nice physical feel to the roll.

What do you think of this system overall? And curious if anyone else has experimented with opposed dice mechanics like this, and what you think of the base odds slightly favoring failure?