Topic: Combat tables questionnaire

[Bruce]

I am going to attempt to develop a revised set of combat tables akin to H&S but more balanced. I would like some input from the community before I continue on this endeavor.

1. What combat tables does your group use (e.g. the core book tables, the Martial Law tables, The Guild Companion "RM to HARP" tables or something else)?
2. How well do you as either a player or a GM think they work, and if they need improvement
3. If they need improvement, where?
4. Would you prefer 2 roll tables (i.e. one for initial hit and damage and one for critical roll,  Rolemaster and the RM to HARP tables in the Guild Companion) or single roll tables (HARP core and Martial Law).
5. For each table would you prefer a cap at 120, 150, or even 200? Note: the 200 high end table is essentially designed so wrap around is not needed, not as much that is.

Bruce
P.S. A second post follows that details my thoughts a little

[Bruce]

Once I get some input and get some preliminary work done I will submit some stuff to ICE and see what they think. Regardless I will be using these tables in my HARP group but I would like some community input in case I do get this to ICE and they like it enough to publish it either in an official capacity or in the Guild Companion.
Currently I am working towards a morph of both H&S and the RM to HARP combat in the guild Companion article.
The tables will separate each damage size to its own column. The crit charts will be separate (as my HARP group prefers the two roll method) and I am initially planning on using the RM crit charts. I will do my best to balance everything. So please in your posts incorporate any and all changes you would suggest to the current tables. Thank you.
Bruce

[RandalThor]

As I don't need a few thousand results for each crit type (slash, crush, pierce, etc..), I would be Ok with a single table for each that goes to 150 or 200. But, I also like how HARP does it (specifically Hack & Slash from Harper's Bazaar), where there is not a separate critical roll, but the attack roll determines everything. It just comes out faster for me. This also drops the number of tables down dramatically - I really don't think we need a table for each and every weapon.

[Bruce]

I agree with the thousand results and I may just make two options one that is like the H&S tables only a bit more balanced and another that uses the RM crit charts. BTW I am not going to do it the RM way and have separate tables for each weapon, only the crit charts. Though reducing the number of charts to look up is also important.

Bruce

[Ecthelion]

1. What combat tables does your group use (e.g. the core book tables, the Martial Law tables, The Guild Companion "RM to HARP" tables or something else)?

We use the RM-like Combat System for HARP.

2. How well do you as either a player or a GM think they work, and if they need improvement

Works great

3. If they need improvement, where?

Not needed

4. Would you prefer 2 roll tables (i.e. one for initial hit and damage and one for critical roll,  Rolemaster and the RM to HARP tables in the Guild Companion) or single roll tables (HARP core and Martial Law).

2 roll tables preferred

5. For each table would you prefer a cap at 120, 150, or even 200? Note: the 200 high end table is essentially designed so wrap around is not needed, not as much that is.

Not that important

[GrumpyOldFart]

4. Would you prefer 2 roll tables (i.e. one for initial hit and damage and one for critical roll,  Rolemaster and the RM to HARP tables in the Guild Companion) or single roll tables (HARP core and Martial Law).

I prefer a 2 roll system. The reason why is because with single roll resolution, you cannot make any distinction between difficulty in hitting something and difficulty in damaging it. A whole lot of Bedouins have shot at the urn atop Al Khazneh, and a lot of them have hit. It's not a difficult target. The urn hasn't broken because it's a solid piece of stone.

[Thom @ ICE]

You can definitely do it with a single roll, if you apply damage modifiers after indicating that the attack hit.
Two rolls means an attack that barely hits can result in a death blow, or one that is way over the value needed to hit can still result in a scratch.....  but that's just my opinion.

[GrumpyOldFart]

You can definitely do it with a single roll, if you apply damage modifiers after indicating that the attack hit.

Well yeah, I could see that... but HARP doesn't take it into account with its armor rules. The only difference defensively between normal clothing and full plate is a DB bonus, which effectively makes them harder to hit (which is backwards), but not any harder to damage. You'd have to replace DB bonuses for armor with damage modifiers, and in many cases include a penalty to actual DB, that is in terms of how hard it is to hit them.

Two rolls means an attack that barely hits can result in a death blow, or one that is way over the value needed to hit can still result in a scratch.....  but that's just my opinion.

True. And putting a damage mod for armor in a single roll resolution would solve that issue.

[Bruce]

Okay, how is something like this:
Armor type               DB Mod      Damage Mod    Crit Mod
None                            0                  0                0
Soft Leather                 -5                 -5                0
Reinforced Leather       -10                -10              -1 type ("B" becomes an "A")
Chain                         -20                -20              -2 type ("C" becomes an "A")   
Plate                          -40                -25              -3 type
Full Plate                    -60                -30              -4 type
Please note I just came up with this and should probably be tweaked (or thrown out).
Also, in the combat charts I am imagining, there can be multiple levels of each crit (e.g. E1, E2, E3, etc..).
Whereas Each level of crit will give a bonus to the actual crit roll (E2 = "E" crit + 20 on the roll), and each crit reduction like a -1 type will possibly reduce each crit level a number (two or one). Which can also possibly reduce "A" crits to a negative mod to the die roll. So that still gives a chance for the heavier weapons to do killing shots, and the smaller weapons much less of a chance to do a killing shot, but it will be possible.

Bruce

[Bruce]

Just in case someone misinterprets, the DB mod is subtracted from the armor wearers DB. Also they do not get any bonus to DB from armor as is in the current rules.

[GrumpyOldFart]

Please note I just came up with this and should probably be tweaked (or thrown out).

I think it's a bit much. Here's my tweak:

Armor type               DB Mod      Damage Mod    Crit Mod
None                             0                  0                0
Soft Leather                  0                 -1                0
Reinforced Leather       -5                -2              -1 type ("B" becomes an "A")
Chain                           -5                 -3              -1 type   
Plate                           -10                -4              -2 type ("C" becomes an "A")
Full Plate                     -15               -5              -2 type

Notes:
1. DB mod is a penalty to DB, making it easier to hit the wearer of the armor.
2. Damage mod subtracts the stated number of hits from every successful attack. In other words, during half a dozen rounds and 6 solid hits from your foe, in full plate that's up to 30 hits of damage you didn't take.
3. I suppose if you wanted to be persnickity you could rule that damage mods subtract to a minimum of 1 hit.
4. I reduced crit mods because, as noted with damage mods, such things add up quickly. They likely need to be tweaked again after some playtesting.

2cp

Also they do not get any bonus to DB from armor as is in the current rules.

Right.

[GrumpyOldFart]

Also we might need to look into how much damage armor can soak up before it begins losing some of its damage/crit mod.

[Bruce]

I agree some of my numbers may be a bit high. But they are loosely based on the differences of damage on the RM damage charts (off the top of my head). At max damage Plate armor takes a significant amount of less damage than someone wearing no armor, even soft leather takes less damage, more than simply one less. In the same tables crits are also greatly different. In a way this is a simple formula to be used instead of actually using the RM charts and still getting very similar results, with one table look up.

Also we might need to look into how much damage armor can soak up before it begins losing some of its damage/crit mod.

I agree in a way, but it will not be a part of the actual alternate combat tables. Instead it might possibly end up as being an optional rule.
I have to keep in mind this is for HARP, a much more basic game than RM. Henceforth if I add to many rules and/or options it would seem more like RM than what HARP is and needs to be, IMHO. BTW I am also planning on optional armor care rules, to go along with how much damage armor can absorb before becoming useless. That is only if I can make it simple and easy to use/keep track of.
I also plan on using the RMU combat charts for a basic idea on crits and when they happen.
Bruce

[Bruce]

My plan thus far:
I have taken the max damage for each weapon size (tiny, small, etc..) and crit type (slash, crush, etc..). Those numbers will be the max damage at a total roll of "120" on these new combat charts. At this point some may complain that it takes larger rolls to reach the same amount of damage, e.g. a dagger's max damage was reached at an 80 on the old tables, but will be a 120 on the table I am developing. This is for balance issues. Currently the tables will go to "150". After 120 the damage will increase and should be similar to a wrap around effect. Now, the crits will not be as deadly as they are currently up to 120. IMHO it is to easy to kill or be killed in HARP with a death roll at 120 and as low as 110. Higher rolls is a common occurrence in my games so weapon max damage is reached often, resulting in repeating crits.  Besides, since the tables don't have any negative mods based on weapon size then it should be perfectly, at least I hope so.

Bruce

[Bruce]

For those that might read this and possibly have some input, any input.
I plan on doing something similar to the Hack and Slash supplements idea to include a simple crit table for the various hits. An optional rule will be to use the RM crit charts if the group using this wants to. I am also going to reference the RM crit charts in the mini crit charts I am developing.

Which version of RM would you forum members prefer I use? Yes, there are differences in the various editions of RM. Some are the same but not all.

This also applies to forum administrators and ICE employees/volunteers.

Bruce

[Zut]

Do you plan to make a single crit chart regardless of weapon type? Will it include info about hit location?

[Thom @ ICE]

Personally I love some of the ideas that Bruce is putting forth, but there are some parts I don't care for (at least not for my version of HARP).


What I like...  Simple Crit Table, Armor Damage Reduction Concept, Hit Location
What I don't like...  Damage Caps, RM Crit Charts, Armor Weakening


Now this is just my opinion, and I have some of my own thoughts regarding potential future changes, but for now I'll keep them quiet until they've been worked out and playtested.

[Bruce]

Personally I love some of the ideas that Bruce is putting forth, but there are some parts I don't care for (at least not for my version of HARP).

Thank you

What I like...  Simple Crit Table, Armor Damage Reduction Concept, Hit Location

Cool

What I don't like...  Damage Caps, RM Crit Charts, Armor Weakening

Well in these optional combat tables I am working on there aren't really damage caps per say, like HARP currently has. But every table does have a max result. Currently my tables go up to 150. The normal caps listed in the HARP Fantasy book are essentially the same except the target is reached for all attack types at 120. To break that you would have to roll something special or be using a special maneuver, or you could simply rule as a GM that the max is 150 on the charts. The RM crit charts and armor weakening rules (along with the damage reduction rules based on attack type vrs armor type) will be optional rules that the GM can use if she/he wants. I am attempting to make these tables as customizable as possible.

Bruce

[Bruce]

Do you plan to make a single crit chart regardless of weapon type? Will it include info about hit location?

Yes, hit locations will be included.
I am not sure what you mean by a single crit chart regardless of weapon type.
Do you mean a single generic crit table that will be used no matter the attack type  (e.g. puncture, slash, crush, etc..)? If that is the case I didn't plan on it but I could try to include something like that. No promises as of yet though.

Bruce

[GrumpyOldFart]

Okay, let's be clear on what we're going for. As I see it, we want as granular results as possible, using a single roll, a single, elegant (hopefully even fairly simple) mechanic, and the minimum possible number of reference tables consistent with the granularity we're going for. Please don't hesitate to correct and/or amend that. And yes, "the level of granularity we're going for" is going to be a compromise we settle for because anything more granular is not playable enough.

Armor degradation would be nice, but it's probably too fiddly for too little return.

Damage reduction according to various armors... if you try to differentiate by both the attack form and the target surface, it becomes an ever growing can of worms. There is just too much variation in what qualifies as "armor," and even more in what can qualify as "an attack form." To keep that variability to a manageable level, personally I would differentiate between armors, but not differentiate according to the attack types used against them. That costs you things like a realistic presentation of the weakness of chain armor against puncture attacks, but in practical terms I don't think it can be helped.

It might be possible to make that weakness in the mechanics less obvious by differentiating armors not only by hits of damage absorbed, but perhaps a round of stun cancelled, 1hit/rd in bleeding reduction, reduced penalty imposed by the crit (-10 to all action vs. -15), etc. The rationale for what benefit to assign to what type of armor needs to be carefully thought out. It makes a certain amount of sense for plate to reduce bleeder results, as reflecting the difficulty of getting to those areas that bleed profusely in the first place, and the likelihood therefore of getting near it instead of on it in the second. A nicked femoral artery is serious, but it's still orders of magnitude less serious than a severed one. With chain being nearly the same from an archer's point of view as no armor at all, it wouldn't make sense to give a bleeder reduction there.

Any of this might work. I'd want to see various ideas along those lines playtested before I committed myself beyond "might," though.