Topic: Combat Flavor (Hits vs Crits)

[Fullerton]

As more fuel for the fire, other major game systems don't give penalties to ranged attacks for using armor. And in the most major of those, arrows do pretty equivalent amounts of damage to melee weapons *and* bows don't suffer from reload speed issues.

Yes, and in the major of those a dart from an x-bow could have problems in killing a rat...

I'm confused as to your point here. Are you saying a d20 system crossbow (1d8 or 1d10 damage) would have a hard time killing a rat (which has only 1 hit point)?

Penalties from armor to ranged attacks make sense IMHO: try to shot an arrow wearing steel bracers and see if they don't hinder your aim!

Cool! I'm glad you have a flavor reason to want that. (Because we were talking about balance reasons for it, not flavor reasons.)

[Marc R]

It is a balance reason. . .essentially the system goes out of it's way to limit the defenses of people able to kill at range. . .

This makes it possible for a close combat character to survive into range to chop them.

The system is on the deadly end due to the crit system, so it's not a minor factor. As a comparrison, in AD&D one 10th level fighter with a Longsword facing ten 1st level fighters with loaded and aimed light crossbows is probably in a position where the smartest thing to do is charge, suck the damage, and hack them up before they can re-load. . .RM would make that a very ill advised choice.

At 1st level, 35 OBs, Armor makes a key element here. . .if the archers are in heavy armor, they will loose all OB and miss, if the target is in heavy armor, they may not take any criticals.

Flavor is why, but balance is why there's not "Melee OB penalty" (Despite the fact that logic would say that fencing in AT20 has to be harder than fencing in street clothes.). . .IMO the system is balance skewed against common sense to favor armored melee over missiles, to prevent the game from becoming one where all fights take place at long range. (Getting antagonists into melee range enhances drama, and allows for speaking. Sniping can be exciting, but it places distance from all encounters, which often leads to a mechanical/tactical game.)

Consider how boring a western would be if the hero killed everyone at 500' with a rifle. . .flavor and balance are hoplessly mixed up, because systems are balanced to provide a certain flavor. . ."Balance" in any complex system consists of a multitude of unbalanced elements that in aggregate balance each other. The choices you make in each individual element build to create the flavor of the game, but in the overall they are all balanced against each other. . .it's rather hard to discuss rules flavor without talking about balance, or vice versa, because in many ways they end up being the same things, just looked at in different ways.

[markc]

LM,
 Do you remeber the old rules for D&D; if a fighter is attacking a target with less that 1HD they get a number of attacks equle to their level. So in you case above having a bunch of 1HD vs a bung of >1HD is a big deal.

MDC

[Marc R]

I lost my first RM character to two crossbow weilding city guardsmen on the battlement over a gate to town. . .I was fleeing town on my horse. . .

In my previous AD&D life, that meant less than 20 HP damage at the worst . . . .I could live with that. . .heck, I could ignore that.

I ended up bleeding out on the ground after I fell off my horse.

My instincts were tuned to a different reality. . .the more heroic flavor of AD&D. . and I died. . .

And yeah, I remember the days of sweep attacks, clearing out a whole cave full of kobolds or goblins with a couple of mid level fighters. "Save the fireball for the bugbears!".

In my experience, a 10th level RM fighter vs 10 1st level fighters is rather risky, even a plate clad fighter vs leather clad archers with daggers. I recall that being a fairly casual fight in my AD&D days. . .when you ran up on people where your minimum rolled damage + magic sword bonus + strength bonus exceeded their HP, it was almost as good as sweeping kobolds.

I fear we've both gone utterly off topic, and branched. . .should really open new threads so the title and the content match.

[Arioch]

I'm confused as to your point here. Are you saying a d20 system crossbow (1d8 or 1d10 damage) would have a hard time killing a rat (which has only 1 hit point)?

1hp is the suggested average hp, but a rat has 1/4 d8 hps, which means that it can have up to 2 hps... and survive a bolt from a xbow... 

[yammahoper]

Well, I has a squirrel once survive a blast from my shotgun.  Hit him broadside with a birdshot load and send him tumbling about 15 feet.  Little bugger jumped up and scooted into the brush and up a tree.  I watched it in the trees and could see the blood on its side.  It was very much alive let me tell you.  I felt very bad, so I loaed a buchshot round and blew it away...litterally almost in half.  I felt pretty bad to waste a squirrel like that for no good reason, and I never hunted them again, but it sure did surprise me to see it survive that broadside.

My thinking is rats and squirrels are about the same.  It is also one of my experiences that makes me dislike ALL hit point systems, even RM.  All damage should be determined by the critical with a new mechanic for being knocked out or down (and yes, I have a couple of ideas ).

lynn

[Fidoric]

I think we are diverging from the original thread and may be we should open a new one, but I answer here nontheless.
What are those ideas ? I admit to like combat in RPG and ICE crit system suits me well. I think that you can already use it without HP, leaving a gap when it comes to determine when you go down. Maybe you can rule that when you take more penalties than your constitution, you are unconscious ?
Something like that may be OK ?
Sum up
1. Each penalty /10
2. Each hit / round
3. Each round of stun
If the sum is over 5+CO bonus, you pass out ?

I just came up with that and have not give it a long thought. Is it something like that you have in mind yamma ?

[Marc R]

I tried to sever this thread out of the other thread, I think I got enough posts to make sense. I was trying not to cut any of the posts that were mixed between this topic and the original topic.

Fidoric.

I wonder if all possible penalties should be grouped, including all you gave but also % of exhaustion and % of PP cast.

[Fidoric]

Why not. I can't say if 5+CO bonus is Ok but I imagine that we can take any penalty into account without altering the balance if we increase the threshold to pass out (10+CO...).
What I find interesting in this idea is the restraint it can induce. The more exhausted or the most power-deplete you get, the more susceptible to faint...

[PiXeL01]

5 plus con bonus would be too low for anyone if you include stuns and bleeds into the calculation. you should make it higher maybe to a mininum of 15 or 20. Also fighting men should have a higher number than the average person.
Come to think of it most of the ideas I have goes back to HP just in different form.

[Marc R]

RMX/C don't have stunned Maneuver, the skill that fits this concept best, why not use Body Development, since you're making it an irrelevant skill if you drop hits from use? Give it a standard bonus progression, and make it something akin to a "RR to remain concious".

[Fidoric]

That's a good idea LM.
That way it could also be used as a RR to avoid being knocked out by a strike on the head. Something like a RR between the attack and the Body Develpopment bonus.

[David Johansen]

I think the original coment about "could have trouble killing a rat" was ment in terms of could roll a 1 for damage.

[markc]

Well, I has a squirrel once survive a blast from my shotgun.  Hit him broadside with a birdshot load and send him tumbling about 15 feet.  Little bugger jumped up and scooted into the brush and up a tree.  I watched it in the trees and could see the blood on its side.  It was very much alive let me tell you.  I felt very bad, so I loaed a buchshot round and blew it away...litterally almost in half.  I felt pretty bad to waste a squirrel like that for no good reason, and I never hunted them again, but it sure did surprise me to see it survive that broadside.

My thinking is rats and squirrels are about the same.  It is also one of my experiences that makes me dislike ALL hit point systems, even RM.  All damage should be determined by the critical with a new mechanic for being knocked out or down (and yes, I have a couple of ideas ).

lynn

 Side Bar,
 Yamma,
 I think what you experienced was a US Army field test with a minimal amount of funding.
End Side Bar

MDC

[yammahoper]

Very funny markc.

My ideas wrap around stun results.  If stunned, roll 1d10 + rnds of stun.  If result is higher than Co mod (+ ), target passes out.  Roll 2d10 for stun no parry results.

I would like to see a simular rule for knock down results.  Many crits should be able to knock a person down without it being in the color text. 

Stun mnv skill as it exist bothers me.  I would like to see the skill changed so a successful mnv allows for attacks to be made at -50 (or -75 for Stun No Parry).  The penalties should apply in full, but successful skill check allows action.  This makes the skill useful without overpowering it.

Initially my thoughts on the stun/knockout roll were develloped for a rule handling knockdown in combat.  Anyway, i have not had any chance to play test these, but it changes the entire context of spells that cause stun. 

Basically, I think some rules along this line have a couple of advantages.  One, it could streamline Arms law and make it far less intimidating in appearance.  Second, I find hits SO artificial that a good no hit point combat system could improve play.  Hit points are the height of romance and do not fit well in a game that prides itself on being more realistic than not.

lynn

[Warl]

I had a idea for a system that had Not actual over all Hit points, But instead had "Structural points" by body location (the amount of damage an area could take before being severed/destroyed. Also had "blood Points" For bleeding results. so basicaly hit points were replaced by structural and Bleed points.

[Marc R]

the crits themselves often just flat damage, sever or destroy locations. . .what you seem to be saying is a hit points by location system, like the one used in the GDW system (T2k, DC, etc):

Stats are 1-10, IIRC it was:

Head = con x2
limbs = con + st
Chest = Con+ST x 2
abdomen = con+st

I might be off on that, it's been a really long time, but that kind of basic logic. . .your stats determine your body's ability to take damage by location. . .which is a hit points by location system with an aimed shots/hit location mechanic.

That would seem to complicate things. . .as is a "Hit breaks bone in upper arm, limb useless" result would still just short cut the logic.

[Warl]

It might save for the fact that a Hit by location system and a Generic crit table Like the Strategic targeting system in Greylaw and arm companion of RM2 reduces the number of crit charts needed to only 1.

[yammahoper]

But I like lots of crit tables.  Damage resolution is not RM's problem.  When people talk about chart master, they mostly refer to the complicated and alwful bookish appearance of the attck tables.  Face it, the look to be serious tabulation tables.  This is one reason ICE went to the condensed attck tables with listings in groups of three instead of 40-150 individual results.

RM is a great game, but it has stayed to anal for mass appeal.  I know this sounds snooty, but look around these boards.  This is NOT you average group of gamers OR geeks.  There are some very bright people here, who do  mind a little complication because it is not very complicated in their opinion.  Any more than THACO was, for that matter.

lynn

[Fornitus]

 I beleive , Yamma, you are now talking about those gamers that a lot of us would not include in a session anyway.