Topic: Revised Weapon Attack Tables

[Dark Schneider]

Am I the only one that thinks the best tables for combat are the HARP Hack'n Slash?.

I like them very much, and easy to handle, the simple concept of attack size, each one with its own column, all with the complete range (results until 150), and with the associated critical table. So it only needs to determine those concepts (type and size) for any weapon, and then maybe some special modifiers, but is not compulsory.
As addition, we can use the detail option of hit location, or if we want fast combat (usually if there are many combatants) we can simply bypass it. And the option of using direct critical (that many people wants) or the classical second roll for critical (but IMO it'd be better to use the letter in some way, needed for example for some direct results like fire wall or vacuum).

But I'd like some more details, like difference between flail and quarter staff, the 2nd one looks better (lesser fumble) but because it is overpowered not using negative modifiers for large crush table.

My opinion is that HARP Hack'n Slash, and the new RMC tables are pretty good, and that is the way, simple and effective, and only revising those systems a bit we could have a great definitives combat tables systems.

1) HARP Hack'n Slash: only needs to revise the attack types, adding modifers to weapons to balance (if not quarter staff is better than flail, and cheaper).
2) RMC: revise some attacks, like the magical ones (magical bolts and balls have lost very much power).

As we changed RM2 for RMFRP for a newer and better system, maybe it could be time to change the old RM combat tables for a new simpler and versatile system, for example, with the old RM table system it is very hard to insert a new weapon, because is a mystery how the tables has been made, who can create a table for a new weapon?.

[markc]

 I am not a fan of the 1 size fits all table and the various levels of attacks.

MDC

[Dark Schneider]

I am not a fan of the 1 size fits all table and the various levels of attacks.

Me too, for that I say it needs revision, so it can be better and worse wepons in the same size, but adjusting them is an excellent system as it is easy and versatile.

About levels of attack, it is the only way to have all the armor columns (ARs) and allow many weapons in the same table, it can be used too as way to represent the behavior of weapons.
i.e. the dagger, it is not so innocent as in old RM tables, but it has limited power, so it is limited. Look that with the same result it does the same damage than short sword, this is not wrong because a strike with a dagger with some result surely can do the same damage than a short sword with the same result, but the short sword can do more damage as limit.

So for RM is a good system using AR and compacting weapons in the same table.

As I said other times, it is a good system but requires some revision for weapon adjustment (balance for weapon modifiers/price/rarity/etc.) and the more important is for magic (much power loss from old tables with negative modifiers).

[providence13]

Instead of "fatiguing" the player will expend exhaustion to "improve" his skills momentarily.


This could be promising!

But how would this be used vs. Adrenals? "Adrenals for the common man..."
Fatigue could be spent to improve Crit (hits and bleeding-but not like Ambush) at an OB penalty.?
Fatigue could be used as a bonus Moving Maneuvers ...?
Once all Fatigue is used, -50% activity or even "can only perform Static Maneuvers" maybe with a penalty..?

Just thinking.

[giulio.trimarco]

i.e. the dagger, it is not so innocent as in old RM tables, but it has limited power, so it is limited. Look that with the same result it does the same damage than short sword, this is not wrong because a strike with a dagger with some result surely can do the same damage than a short sword with the same result, but the short sword can do more damage as limit.

I think this is wrong.
In genreal different weapons should achieve different damages with the some "die result".

I think that a 100 with a dagger should be different than 100 with a mace or spear. In addition weapon size is relative and not descriptive.
A poleaxe is smaller than a two handed sword but is way more dangerous and effective.
Unfortunatly we have many misconceptions of medieval combat as a brutish undisciplined affair were the bigger the weapon the bigger the damage.
Nothing is more untrue.

As we changed RM2 for RMFRP for a newer and better system, maybe it could be time to change the old RM combat tables for a new simpler and versatile system, for example, with the old RM table system it is very hard to insert a new weapon, because is a mystery how the tables has been made, who can create a table for a new weapon?.

When I'll finish my Openoffice sheet I'll post it. You will create new weapons on minutes. Some guy more "math-oriented" than myself could revise this calc sheet and render it a very stable "Weapon Table Creator".
It's already working and usable.

But how would this be used vs. Adrenals? "Adrenals for the common man..."
Fatigue could be spent to improve Crit (hits and bleeding-but not like Ambush) at an OB penalty.?
Fatigue could be used as a bonus Moving Maneuvers ...?
Once all Fatigue is used, -50% activity or even "can only perform Static Maneuvers" maybe with a penalty..?

The dynamics are more important than results.
Fatiguing is a curcial part of every real combat, armed or unarmed.

So, computing fatigue points as for RM officual rules is a real pain and not so fun.

You could use different options:

1)Every 1FP spent will give you a +2 on OB/DB, chosen at attack/defense time and not at the beginning of the round.
2)FP should be a skill. Untrained peoples should have much less than the standard formula, while trained one could have more. Sure in Athletics-Endurance category.
3)Every 2FP will give +1 on "combat skill", these should be skills that will benefit from a physical boost. For RMFRP/RMSS skill categories could be identified (Athletics Brawn, Athletic Gymnastics, etc.)
4)Simplify the fatigue penalties, like that for HIts:
01%-25% = -0
26%-50% = -25
51%-75% = -50
76%-100% = -100

Combat manouvres or skills that are based on special training (like Adrenal or the likes) should not be allowed to use FP for bonuses.
The rationale is that exerting oneself will not allow a better technique and so expending FP is useless.

[markc]

  First I would like to say, that I look forward to to see what you create and how it meshes with the rules.

 IMO you have to be careful with fatigue as you have it above you are barrowing in the beginning of combat to get a better hit and hoping you do not reach a point when the negatives will affect you.
 IMO it might be realistic but how realistic will it be?

1) ie will you take into account different weapons requiring different amounts of fatigue to wield them every round? ie you should be able to wield a dagger longer than a 2H sword or a war ax [weapon from the guild companion article The Weapons of Novi].
2) Will body type be taken into account?
3) The use of adrenals will cost fatigue but should each skill be different?
4) And the big one how do you increase your fatigue levels?
5) Do you need to use another system besides the adrenal skill system?
6) Are you using the combat companion? martial arts companion? or base system?
 

MDC

[providence13]

DeathFA, as usual,you make some interesting and well thought out points.


So, computing fatigue points as for RM officual rules is a real pain and not so fun.
Totally agree.

I would not like to add another "die result" to combat! . Rolemaster rocks(!) IMO, because of less die rolls than other systems.

Your proposed fatigue system does sound realistic; but let me get this straight-- You want to add yet another combat rule!? And another skill!?
So I can add 2 OB/ Fatigue AND 1 skill Rank/2 Fatigue. That seems to be quite a bonus...

IMHO, these are already incorporated into combat. Couldn't the tried and true % Activity be somehow used to express Fatigue?
The rationale is that exerting oneself will not allow a better technique and so expending FP is useless.
...............................I'm not spending all of my % Activity thinking about this, but doesn't that counter what you're saying

About crit tables vs. damage...
Has anyone actually graphed the crit tables to see how the lines look?
It might give an interesting comparison

[giulio.trimarco]

 First I would like to say, that I look forward to to see what you create and how it meshes with the rules.

Probabily bad  

IMO you have to be careful with fatigue as you have it above you are barrowing in the beginning of combat to get a better hit and hoping you do not reach a point when the negatives will affect you.
 IMO it might be realistic but how realistic will it be?

Realism isn't the ultimate goal of this HR. Dynamism and dynamics. That's all.

So you can use up the maximu FP to gain a OB advantage. OK. No problem.
But if someone else will use FP to gain a OB against you (remember that FP can be declared before rolling, a surprise), you will use some FP to increas your DB... and you will start fatiguing... and gain a malus.

1) ie will you take into account different weapons requiring different amounts of fatigue to wield them every round? ie you should be able to wield a dagger longer than a 2H sword or a war ax [weapon from the guild companion article The Weapons of Novi].

No. Of course not. I don't mind it.

2) Will body type be taken into account?

Can you explain?

3) The use of adrenals will cost fatigue but should each skill be different?

No. Even here it's not the goal of the rules to complicate the matter.

4) And the big one how do you increase your fatigue levels?

If I read you correctly:
You can increase FP like a skill, like Body Development. If you can increase Hits you can sure increase FP.

5) Do you need to use another system besides the adrenal skill system?

No. Why?

6) Are you using the combat companion? martial arts companion? or base system?

Base system. Sorry, but the various CC (imho) adds not much to the mechanics. Only various methods to adding OB.

providence13,

I want to simplify combat and removing the % activity round and many others quirks (like facing, etc).
I don't like the round mechanics where actions are declared in advance. I like declaration "on the fly", for various reasons (don't last my short memory  ).

You can use whatever method to compute FP. You can even declare that FP are 1/3 (or 1/2) of Body Development and that's fine.
Or you can use the base formula.

The bonus gained by FP (if an higer FP count is used) can be on a 1/+1 base. Not a problem.
If all participants to a combat keep the same FP ratio it's ok.

About the % activity as an expression of fatigue I not agree.
I can stand firm under the sun with my AT20 and using 20FP   (done that in the last battle).

Activity is only an indication of how much you have done, not how you have done it.

A long (tedious) example, to explain what I'm trying to say:

(click to show/hide)

Two boxer (or swordsman or poleaxeman, whatever).

They are sparring, friendly. The blows aren't meant to injure, wound or main.
Fatigue expenditure: Medium

The some two are in a tournament, where the KO wins. Quickness and dodging are fatiguing as are forceful blows. Fatigue conservation is the key.
You can't allow yourself to remain exausted. Any burst of strength must be used in the "sure to hit" blow.
Fatigue expenditure: High

The some two, in a real combat (to death or not). Quickness and dodging are essential. You must win. When you strike you MUST hit.
Different techniques should be used to exhaust opponent before youself.
Fatigue expenditure: Maximum

All this to say that a combat that will last for... 3 rounds, will be very different in Fatigue expenditure based on HOW you will fight.

[markc]

2) Body type: The different body types are meso, endo, ecto and normal. They have to do with things such as muscle vs fat vs skinny. So each body type would have different amouts of ExP or FP.

 The big problem that I can see is that as a GM you can have each combatant use thier FP to full effect as there are other monsters behind them to take over. The party on the other hand has to wait until there FP replenish so this leaves them at a disadvantage.
 We are experiencing the same problem in a NWoD game with a GM that can always use the creatures willpower and we the party has only a few chances to gain them back and often it is a long time between chapters. So not auto reset. It is a huge advantage for the GM's NPC's and critters being able to gain 3 extra dice on a roll or any of the other options you can use willpower for.
 Now IMO a good GM will take those things into account and use them against the players. So if you could talk about the abuses of the system then both the players and the GM will know whats up with the rules.

MDC     

[giulio.trimarco]

2) Body type: The different body types are meso, endo, ecto and normal. They have to do with things such as muscle vs fat vs skinny. So each body type would have different amouts of ExP or FP.

No Markc, I think you are bringing this to the extreeme. As I've said this isn't meant to be.
This is a peculiarity of a generic system.

The big problem that I can see is that as a GM you can have each combatant use thier FP to full effect as there are other monsters behind them to take over. The party on the other hand has to wait until there FP replenish so this leaves them at a disadvantage.
 We are experiencing the same problem in a NWoD game with a GM that can always use the creatures willpower and we the party has only a few chances to gain them back and often it is a long time between chapters. So not auto reset. It is a huge advantage for the GM's NPC's and critters being able to gain 3 extra dice on a roll or any of the other options you can use willpower for.
 Now IMO a good GM will take those things into account and use them against the players. So if you could talk about the abuses of the system then both the players and the GM will know whats up with the rules.

MDC     

I hope to bring forth a new, perfect bound  , PDF with all the rules in.
Fatigue will recover much faster, in minutes. Exact timing isn't still in my head but I think that 10% of FP every 6 minutes will be ok or, you will regain a full "level" of Fatigue (for example the 76%-100%) in 20 minutes.


Example:

01%-25% = 1-10FP => -0
26%-50% = 11-20FP => -25
51%-75% = 21-30FP => -50
76%-100% = 31-40FP => -100

To go from -100 to -50 you needs 20 minutes.
To go from -50 to -25 you needs 40 minutes.
To go from -25 to -0 you needs 60 minutes.

This will add tactical options but will not put PC in a disadvantage.
I also believe that talking of GM "advantage" is a bit strange. The GM isn't there to beat the PC.

If you PC will battle less than every hour... wow, you are on a battlefield.
In addition if every combat they will become exausted...

[Dark Schneider]

I think this is wrong.
In genreal different weapons should achieve different damages with the some "die result".

I think that a 100 with a dagger should be different than 100 with a mace or spear. In addition weapon size is relative and not descriptive.

Agree, but for that there are different tables, as dagger and short sword are both in short blades, then it is easy to think that with the same result you do similar slash or puncture damage with any in the same category (table used, see new CC), examples are short, long and great blades, polearms, etc.

And the limit, see like this for example using puncture attack, as short sword is longer than dagger, then you do the same damage until the same result, but from that point (dagger limit) you can insert more the short sword (length difference) that is the "over dagger limit", it sounds reasonable, right?.

[giulio.trimarco]

Dark Schneider,

sorry, but I don't see it that way.
I don't wont to bog down this thread in a weapon comparison disquisition.

Here we are discussing a RMC/RMSS/RMFRP combat style tables and on how to inject some new elements in this style of system without broking it.

Sure HARP tables are very good but, imho, suffer of many other "shortcomings". Like size, etc.

[providence13]

I salute you.
Let us know how it plays out!

[markc]

 IMO if you do allow FP to be used this way you should include different costs to wield different weapons. As you have said wielding a dagger is different from wielding a battle axe and both take different amounts of effort to wield.
 Also IMO people would use different weapons based on what could they wield most effectively to end the fight the quickest. Why? Well in combat most of the time your gaol is to kill the opponent as quick as quickly as possible with you taking as least damage as possible.

MDC

[Mhairtrym]

Also would not a person who is more fit, or used to this sort of activity recover faster?  In other words if you have a skill for total amount of FP, would it not affect the speed at which they recover?