Topic: Combat tables questionnaire

[Bruce]

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.

I am not going for simple, if I wanted that I would stick with the combat tables as presented in the HARP Fantasy book, as they do work well for what they were intended to do. I prefer and some others have indicated they prefer a more detailed (or granular) route. Many people prefer (as my players and I do) the two roll method, one for hits the other for crits.
I agree with most of what you said GoF. I am going to make this as simple as I can but still give more varied and balanced results.  But like I said there will be options to go the further route (e.g. armor vrs attack type mods) if one so prefers.
I have an idea for a "level of complexity" table to show how much more complex these rules will be the more options one uses. Just a basic idea for now and I am not sure if I will put that in there.

My tables are based a great deal on existing ICE combat tables (RM and HARP) so as to keep some fluidity and familiarity between them.

Just to give you an idea:
Currently my tables resemble the H&S tables as the columns are separated by attack sizes (Tiny, small, med, etc..) and the current max results are at 150.
Where they differ is I use the max damage results in the HARP Fantasy combat tables per weapon sizes, at a result of "120" on the tables. So they are balanced with the current HARP combat guidelines only you don't need the weapon size mods on each chart. 
A result of "120" on the tables I am developing is a max damage line but the tables go up to 150 for now. That line can be crossed though I haven't decided on to use the HARP rule of a natural die roll of 99 or 100 to break that or some other maybe easier way to break max method (any suggestions?).
Currently the crits on a result of "120" will indicate the same exact results as in the HARP Fantasy book per weapon type and size (HARP Fantasy; 80 was tiny, 90 was Small, etc..).
For example: In HARP fantasy a dagger's max damage result (25 hits) is the same result at 120 on my tables. The crits will differ a little though and I can tell you that if the crit result in HARP fantasy didn't kill at it's max damage (i.e. 80, 90, etc..) then it will not kill at "120" on my tables.
I am also making conditions so even in a 2 roll method they will not kill, unless certain conditions are met (i.e. power strike, charging, etc...) This  is part of my plan with being able to break "120". 
Also I am using only crit levels "A" to "E" with a # (1,2, or a 3) next to it. For one to reference the simple crit table (like H&S) and also for those to use the RM crit tables if they so prefer. One idea I am toying with is the #'s  next to the crit letter (A1, A2, etc..) will indicate a mod to the actual crit roll on the two roll method.

This system I am developing is essentially a combinational rewrite of the other optional tables out there for HARP. Though I have developed something like this before when I didn't have access to any RPG stuff (also didn't know about the H&S or HARP to RM combat tables).
Bruce

P.S. I am not sure if "combinational" is actually a word but it fit so well...lol

[Bruce]

In HARP fantasy a dagger's max damage result (25 hits) is the same result at 120 on my tables. The crits will differ a little though and I can tell you that if the crit result in HARP fantasy didn't kill at it's max damage (i.e. 80, 90, etc..) then it will not kill at "120" on my tables.

I found a problem with that statement. If I guarantee a no kill result on the tables I am working on, I have to guarantee a kill result for the other crits that kill at cert results (i.e. Large and Huge crits always kill at the perspective maxes). I think I will just have to make it harder to get a kill result for the smaller weapon crits and comparatively easier to get a kill result for the heavier weapon crits.
I think I will move or add these posts to a Journal type post... as it is moving away from the question type that I started.
Bruce

[Turbs]

In HARP fantasy a dagger's max damage result (25 hits) is the same result at 120 on my tables. The crits will differ a little though and I can tell you that if the crit result in HARP fantasy didn't kill at it's max damage (i.e. 80, 90, etc..) then it will not kill at "120" on my tables.

I found a problem with that statement. If I guarantee a no kill result on the tables I am working on, I have to guarantee a kill result for the other crits that kill at cert results (i.e. Large and Huge crits always kill at the perspective maxes). I think I will just have to make it harder to get a kill result for the smaller weapon crits and comparatively easier to get a kill result for the heavier weapon crits.
I think I will move or add these posts to a Journal type post... as it is moving away from the question type that I started.
Bruce

this is the one thing i personally dislike  about the current harp combat system.
(DISCLAIMER; I think its an awesome system)

you should be able to get a kill with a tiny weapon. even if its only the remotest of chances (i.e. a natural 100 roll or something) The thing that irritated me most in HARP was that even though Im doing max damage with a dagger / short sword I can't outright kill the enemy.

[GrumpyOldFart]

Gotta admit, you should be able to one-shot someone with a hat pin.

It should take OMG amounts of luck, or OMG amounts of skill and still at least some luck, but it should not be flatly impossible.

[Thom @ ICE]

At least 2% of the time the damage cap is ignored.   Should it be higher?  That's a personal decision. If you want it higher, then make it any OE high roll can exceed damage cap, or set another level.


You can also use combat action power strike with any melee weapon, which effectively removes the damage cap.

[Turbs]

correct me if I'm wrong. but even if I do exceed the damage cap with a dagger attack,
I still get -20 to the attack roll simply due to wpn size modifier?

this generally prevents me from hitting the 120 limit.

[Bruce]

correct me if I'm wrong. but even if I do exceed the damage cap with a dagger attack,
I still get -20 to the attack roll simply due to wpn size modifier?

this generally prevents me from hitting the 120 limit.

I believe you are correct in that. Yes it does put a damper on things. Which is one of the reason I don't like the core crit system. One my players a few years ago had a character that occasionally used small bladed weapons to fight with and he noticed it was way easier for a small weapons to hit their maxes than the larger weapons. Though, IMHO and in ICE's defense, I can understand why they used those tables. HARP is supposed to be a more simple, yet complete game, than most and they had to make a few sacrifices to get the product they wanted. A complete set of rules in one book. The tables in the core book work pretty well. But people like me knew of something better and want something similar to that. The H&S tables do work great as long as you reduce the modifier to a -2 per PP scaled above the original, but to me they do more damage than they should. We'll see if my tables work the way they are supposed to and if ICE likes them enough.
Bruce

[dagorhir]

correct me if I'm wrong. but even if I do exceed the damage cap with a dagger attack,
I still get -20 to the attack roll simply due to wpn size modifier?

this generally prevents me from hitting the 120 limit.

Not really, if you roll high enough even with the -20 you can still reach 120.

Let say you do a power strike attack on a creature with a DB of 60 and your final attack result is 200 (roll + all modifiers) your damage would then be exactly 120 (200 - 60 - 20 = 120).

 

[Bruce]

Not really, if you roll high enough even with the -20 you can still reach 120.

Let say you do a power strike attack on a creature with a DB of 60 and your final attack result is 200 (roll + all modifiers) your damage would then be exactly 120 (200 - 60 - 20 = 120).
 

Yes, but you still have to achieve the natural "99" or "100" on the die roll to break the max per weapon size, and that very rarely happens. I see plenty of people achieving high total rolls but not the open ended rolls to go along with it. Or open ended rolls without high results....

Bruce

[Falenthal]

Dagorhir's example included a Power Strike Attack, which ignores damage caps.
Only that, in his example, he forgot to add the modifiers of the maneuver  :
-20 to the "to hit" roll, +10 to the critical damage.

[dagorhir]

Dagorhir's example included a Power Strike Attack, which ignores damage caps.
Only that, in his example, he forgot to add the modifiers of the maneuver  :
-20 to the "to hit" roll, +10 to the critical damage.

True, forgot the +10 to damage. So the final would be 130. The 200 attack roll included all modifiers, so the -20 was also included. I would generally only see high level characters getting those results on a "regular" basis. 

[Bruce]

Dagorhir's example included a Power Strike Attack, which ignores damage caps.
Only that, in his example, he forgot to add the modifiers of the maneuver  :
-20 to the "to hit" roll, +10 to the critical damage.

Oops, I didn't notice the power attack reference... 
But still a power attack is a special attack and it does have its own drawbacks.

Nruce

[Falenthal]

Not really, if you roll high enough even with the -20 you can still reach 120.

Let say you do a power strike attack on a creature with a DB of 60 and your final attack result is 200 (roll + all modifiers) your damage would then be exactly 120 (200 - 60 - 20 = 120).
 

Yes, but you still have to achieve the natural "99" or "100" on the die roll to break the max per weapon size, and that very rarely happens. I see plenty of people achieving high total rolls but not the open ended rolls to go along with it. Or open ended rolls without high results....

Bruce

At least 2% of the time the damage cap is ignored.   Should it be higher?  That's a personal decision. If you want it higher, then make it any OE high roll can exceed damage cap, or set another level.


You can also use combat action power strike with any melee weapon, which effectively removes the damage cap.

As Thom said, I make every Open Ended roll ignore damage caps when using the Core Book Combat Tables. It is frustating to roll an open ended to see that nothing special happens.
Alas, enemies also get this benefit. 

I change from Hack&Slash to the Core Book depending on the importance of the combat. The important (and deadly) combats are resolved with H&S, so that more strategy and defense (DB to OB) is needed, and every roll counts and hurts.
 The bandits, bunch of goblins, etc. are resolved with the Core Book.

[Falenthal]

Dagorhir's example included a Power Strike Attack, which ignores damage caps.
Only that, in his example, he forgot to add the modifiers of the maneuver  :
-20 to the "to hit" roll, +10 to the critical damage.

Now that I see it: the +10 to damage is in addition to the -20 to hit?

I've always played that, if it hits, the total roll gets a -10 (ignoring damage caps), but that may not be the case.

Example: My total result to hit (OB -BD +/-Misc.) = 100
              I substact the -20 from the Power Stike and still get a result above 01.
              When looking at the damage, should I look at the 90 result (100 -20 "to hit" +10 "to damage") or to the 110 (100 +10 "to damage")?

[Thom @ ICE]

You need to apply the -20 on the hit because it may make your roll go low enough to result in a complete miss.
Once you have determined a hit was delivered you add the +10 (similar to weapon size modifiers) and ignore caps. 

[Falenthal]

You need to apply the -20 on the hit because it may make your roll go low enough to result in a complete miss.
Once you have determined a hit was delivered you add the +10 (similar to weapon size modifiers) and ignore caps.

I get that, if your total roll + modifiers is, let's say, 15, the -20 makes it miss.

But then, if the result is, as said, 100, the "to hit" modifier (-20) isn't high enough to make the hit miss.
The damage will then be looked at 110 (100 +10) or at 90 (100 -20 +10)?
Caps are ignored in both cases, of course.

Sorry, but I'm still not sure of the calculation of the damage after you're answer. 

[Thom @ ICE]

Correct -
On a roll of 60 that after modifiers becomes an 85... apply the -20 and you get 65 (hit) then apply the +10 and get 75 and that's your result for the crit chart.


Power Strike used by unskilled combatants can allow them to deliver that killing strike, but is more likely to reduce the overall damage delivered.  By a skilled combatant...  with a high OB they can use a dagger and deliver a killing blow often.


As you progress in levels this becomes a more and more common attack against low level foes.