Topic: Q on Combat Companion part 2

[jeff]

I've noticed a huge difference in the effects of magic in the combat companion. AR 1 you need a 83 to get an A crit while in Spell law AT 1 you only need a 13 for an A crit. Why the big difference?

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

The combat tables in CC use a completely different set of paradigms than the Arms Law and Spell Law tables do. They reflect the overall protectiveness of the armor (as opposed to the individual ATs representing a specific suit of armor). This also pretty much reduces/eliminates how the ATs have variable amounts of protectiveness against certain attacks (i.e. eliminating the "but this AT is so much better than that higher AT" types of arguments).

Some folks like the attacks tables, some folks don't.  But that is the way it is (and will be) with any optional rule.

[jeff]

Rasyr

Have you used this system a lot. I really like the concept and would like to try it with out next game? I think it will speed up combat and make it interesting!

Thanks for the feedback again!

Jeff

[pastaav]

It might also be worth mentioning that Express Addition 14 has yet another take on about how to build combat tables and handle armor by piece rules.

I have not had time to test it, but it might be worth to give it a look.

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

It might also be worth mentioning that Express Addition 14 has yet another take on about how to build combat tables and handle armor by piece rules.

I have not had time to test it, but it might be worth to give it a look.

Actually, these (the rules from EA 14) are my favorite of the various possibilities. And they have seen a pretty fair amount of playtesting (about 2 years worth, just for RM Cyradon alone) as they combine tables that are more along the lines of what is found in Arms Law, and they retain the variations that some others prefer, while still being more compact overall, and allowing for a more compact version of the flexible armor rules.

Plus, you can use them with the combat styles from CC without any problems either (and if you don't like the truncated Critical tables, you can use the full versions from Arms Law/Spell Law).

[Nders]

I think the EA#14 concept of adding scalearmor is a fine idea but I would like very much for it to be done with the traditional arms law tables (adding another 4 armor types for scale) so as to keep the one attack table pr weapon tradition that makes rolemaster combat so special.

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

I think the EA#14 concept of adding scalearmor is a fine idea but I would like very much for it to be done with the traditional arms law tables (adding another 4 armor types for scale) so as to keep the one attack table pr weapon tradition that makes rolemaster combat so special.

Oh, I fully intend on doing 1 attack table per weapon at some point in the future using that system. (that would give 2 attack tables per page). And space for a little art or range modifiers maybe or other weapon stats, etc...

But why add 4 more armor types? And what would they be?

[Fidoric]

And why only 4 additional armor types ? The more the better ! We all know how much Rasyr craves for making up new attack tables ! 

[jolt]

And why only 4 additional armor types ? The more the better ! We all know how much Rasyr craves for making up new attack tables ! 

Even more than making new Critical Hit tables?  I just can't bring myself to believe that. 

jolt

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

New  attack tables are pretty easy, especially with the tables from EA #14 as a starting point.

It is critical tables that as so hard to do. A single full page table has 95 entries on it. 95 unique bits of flavor text, 95 bits of damage that have to be checked to make sure you haven't overdone it and made the criticals over-powered.

10 critical tables? And we are talking nearly 1,000 entries... and so on and so on...

[Nders]

well they should be scale and 4 more armor types because each category of armor has four types of armor within them covering armors that protect only the torso for the first, protection for arms and legs for the second and then further increased protection on all body parts for the next two. Regarding critical tables there is a certain mechanics to how they are don and making new ones using that very same mechanics should be fairly easy if time consuming. I do not entirely understand why you need more critical tables though I look very much forward to seeing the EA#14 system increased to have one table pr. weapon I just hope you will stick to the formular from the original arms law and have the various types of criticals (Slash, Puncture, Crush) be included in the attack table and not be a matter of "the typical crit for this weapon is slash" etc.

I have a personal prayer for when you get to the hand axe: please stick with the concept from arms law and leave the one from CC well alone (it's a handaxe not a hatchet you know)

[markc]

 Just thinking about editing a crit table makes my eyes hurt.
MDC

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

well they should be scale and 4 more armor types because each category of armor has four types of armor within them covering armors that protect only the torso for the first, protection for arms and legs for the second and then further increased protection on all body parts for the next two.

The Ea 14 tables are designed around the concept that the armor that covers the torso is what is important, and that beyond that, additional armor pieces add to DB rather than create an all new armor type.

Regarding critical tables there is a certain mechanics to how they are don and making new ones using that very same mechanics should be fairly easy if time consuming. I do not entirely understand why you need more critical tables though I look very much forward to seeing the EA#14 system increased to have one table pr. weapon I just hope you will stick to the formular from the original arms law and have the various types of criticals (Slash, Puncture, Crush) be included in the attack table and not be a matter of "the typical crit for this weapon is slash" etc.

Actually, I was thinking more along the lines of a critical table for short blades, one for long blades, one for bows, one for crossbows, etc... The generic critical tables are fine for generic attacks, but some of the results do not make sense for some weapons...

[thrud]

One critical table for each type of weapon sounds reasonable.

Short blades, long blades, ...
Maybe short single edged blades, short double edged blades, long s.e. blades, long d.e. blades, ...
Something along those lines?

The damage doesn't have to be 100% unique. Some crits can be made with a broad sword as well as a dagger, but some should be  unique to the weapon type.

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

One critical table for each type of weapon sounds reasonable.

Short blades, long blades, ...
Maybe short single edged blades, short double edged blades, long s.e. blades, long d.e. blades, ...
Something along those lines?

The damage doesn't have to be 100% unique. Some crits can be made with a broad sword as well as a dagger, but some should be  unique to the weapon type.

More likely something along the lines of the table listed below (which is from CC) --  1 critical table per entry in the left hand column - that is what I would like the end result to be. But more likely it would end up being a smaller, slightly truncated version of that table (for example, combining the  single edge and double edged long blade into just long blades and having double edged just increase any bleeding by 1 point)

Then each weapon would have its own unique EA14 type attack table, and the stats to go along would include range information, as well as which critical table to use. The generic crit tables would remain as they are, and be there for unusual attacks and/or other things that might not use a weapon specific table.

[thrud]

That's pretty much exactly what I was aiming for but was unable to comunicate.
If I'm allowed to make a whish: please design the attack tables like they are done in Arms law but with armour ratings instead.
This includes constructing the tables with the specific weapon characteristics in mind. Some weapons do better vs some armours and worse against others, just like in arms law.

[jolt]

New  attack tables are pretty easy, especially with the tables from EA #14 as a starting point.

It is critical tables that as so hard to do. A single full page table has 95 entries on it. 95 unique bits of flavor text, 95 bits of damage that have to be checked to make sure you haven't overdone it and made the criticals over-powered.

10 critical tables? And we are talking nearly 1,000 entries... and so on and so on...

*sigh*  I suppose this means that Critical Hit Table Law is still being delayed.  Man, I'm beginning to think I'm never going to see that book. 

jolt

[PiXeL01]

I know it is a lot of ask but one thing I really missed when reading Combat Companion was the sheer amount of criticals divided by severity. Having a real coloum for A to E criticals are something that really makes Arms Law shine, instead of using a single coloum with a severity modifier as done in CC.
The CC armor system is great though otherwise

[thrud]

+1 to PiXeL01 but, and this is a big but!
The new variant with one crit table per weapn type and mods depending on crits is actually working very well.
It takes care of some difficulties on the fly without even missing a step.
Maybe it introduces some balance issues but all in all it works really well.
Especially when most of us are badgering Rasyr to start building a Arms Law 2 with all new tables for each and every weapon.