Topic: No attack tables, just crits

[Arioch]

Has anyone ever tried handling attacks without using the attack tables, but keeping the criticals?
I mean, much like in HARP combat but with regulare RM crits... I know it sounds crazy, but it's something I've been thinking of lately.
So, has anyone done something similar?

[Cory Magel]

Not crazy at all.  I'd actually like to see any new version of RM have a single chart that includes both the damage and the critical.  The real problem is how large that chart would need to be... it might end up covering two pages still, but at least you would only be rolling once.

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

Has anyone ever tried handling attacks without using the attack tables, but keeping the criticals?
I mean, much like in HARP combat but with regulare RM crits... I know it sounds crazy, but it's something I've been thinking of lately.
So, has anyone done something similar?

Yup. IIRC, I set something like DB+50 as the "to hit" threshold, and then for every 20 points above that, did a critical.

So if DB was 50, then 100 meant you hit and did some damage. 120+ == A crit, 140+ == B crit, and so on...

I have done it where the base hit damage was 1 for every 5 points over the to hit number, or where I rolled damage dice, with the weapon's size being what determined the size of the die rolled...

[Ecthelion]

I see no use in this. In fact we'll probably switch back from HARP's (1 roll) H&S combat system to the more RM-like (2 roll) HB#11 combat system. In most cases there is only one roll anyway, so the advantage of having only one roll is IMO neglectable. OTOH I like the thrill of a second critical roll and the higher diversity of the attack results when having a combat system like that of RM or HB#11.

[GrumpyOldFart]

I have to admit, a possible 2 roll resolution does provide a certain amount of "Ooo, I won!" when you get to go for the second roll.

[Witchking20k]

I have used 50+DB and then a D6 Style spread.  Its pretty cool; but you miss the Damage cuased by larger weapons being a factor....I suppose a +/- weapon/armour similar to HARP
would integrate easily....


+1-20 = Tiny
21-40 = A
41-50 = B
61-80 = C
81-100 = D
101+ = E

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

Here we go, based on a "Simplified Rolemaster" article I once wrote (adjusted for keeping crit rolls - the original article did away with them)....

• Divide weapons into 5 categories (Tiny, Small, Medium, Large, Huge) Each now does damage according to its size (Tiny = d6, Small = d8, Medium = d10, Large = d12, Huge = d20).
  
  
• A successful hit is determined by OB+roll-(Foe’s DB+50) = 100 or higher. If the hit succeeds, then roll 1 die for damage. (Note: this is only an approximation of the “to hit” process).
  
  
• Subtract foe’s AT from any damage rolled. If the result is 0 or less, then the attack hit but did no damage.
  
  
• For every 20 points above the basic “to hit” threshold of 100, roll an additional die of damage.
  
  
• For every 20 points above the basic "to hit" threshold of 100, roll for a critical (120+ = A crit, 140+ = B crit, etc.)
  
  

[Marc R]

I suspect that "roll - calculate - roll a crit if needed" would end up being as slow or slower than "roll - look up result - roll crit if needed" in actual use, based on my experiences lookup tables save time over calculations on the fly, unless you can't find the #$@% table. . .

It does also tend to drastically reduce the result spread.

The two table method is the number of rows on the attack table that don't have a critical + (The number of rows that do have a critical x the number of rows on the critical table)

That's X + (Y x Z) for easy talk sake.

Having a multiplication in there means the reduction of variation of removing X is limited, but pulling Y or Z out of play causes the number of potential results to crash. . .

There's a thread around here somewhere where we did the math on it, and the contrast is dramatic. . .and anecdotal comments from people who have played 2 roll RM and any of the lower variation versions like HARP, RMX or the Combat Companion rules have a lot of comments in the line of "I keep seeing the same result over and over and over again."

Some of the HARP combat variations offer more variety, but in the end, the 2 roll method in RM offers the highest level of variability.

Some people love the lower variation results, so likely it's a YMMV thing, what suits your personal preferences.

[Ecthelion]

Nice summary, Marc.

[Marc R]

I found those other two threads, just so we don't need to do all that math all over again they're here if you're interested in the probability and variety of result issues that were raised:

The inverse of this thread "The End of Critical Tables?"
http://www.ironcrown.com/ICEforums/index.php?topic=10253.0

And "One roll Attack & Critical for RM"
http://www.ironcrown.com/ICEforums/index.php?topic=10387.0

[Arioch]

Thanks all for the answers!

@ Witchking20k: what do you mean by "d6 style spread"?

@ Rasyr: why 100 as the "to hit" number? Seems pretty high to me, IIRC many attack tables start hitting before reaching 100

thanks also for the links, having the math explained without having to do it by mayself is quite handy! 

[Cory Magel]

Pretty much my round about point too.  All other considerations aside, the size of the chart needed to not lose a good range of results would likely become a problem.

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

@ Rasyr: why 100 as the "to hit" number? Seems pretty high to me, IIRC many attack tables start hitting before reaching 100

Most of the attacks start hitting around 50 or so (thus targets get a built in bonus to DB -- one of the things I screwed up in HARP is missing this built in DB bonus).

The 100+ TN is basically the threshold for a "successful skill roll".    As I said, the idea came from a "Simplified Rolemaster" article I did..

[Witchking20k]

Sorry Arioch

I started a new thought without finishing the previous one.  D6 uses a set HP range and Wound scale.  This is not exactly it, but its close.....(The RM version worked off of increments of 10 Hits)

1-3 Hits = Dazed (-1 to actions until next round)
4-8 Hits = Wound* (-1 until healed)
4-8 Hits = Severely Wounded (-2 until healed)
9-12 Hits = Incapacitated**(-3 until healed, check for Knock Out)
13-15 Hits = Mortally Wounded***(-5 Until Healed, Unconcious)
16+ = Dead
*if you take 2 Wounds you automatically become Severely Wounded

In case you are unfamilliar with D6; you rolled a Soak Roll vs. Damage.  Depending on the Heroic Scale of the campaign your character could use their stat + armour, or just armour to soak damage vs. stat + weapon or just weapon.

[VladD]

If I'm not mistaken, the original thread sounds quite a lot like my idea for a new RM-like resolution; based on critical-like tables:

Thoughts on a new combat resolution system:

http://www.ironcrown.com/ICEforums/index.php?topic=10850.0

IMHO the other resolutions proposed above are the opposite of what the original poster intended.

Game on!

[yammahoper]

Has anyone ever tried handling attacks without using the attack tables, but keeping the criticals?
I mean, much like in HARP combat but with regulare RM crits... I know it sounds crazy, but it's something I've been thinking of lately.
So, has anyone done something similar?

Yup. IIRC, I set something like DB+50 as the "to hit" threshold, and then for every 20 points above that, did a critical.

So if DB was 50, then 100 meant you hit and did some damage. 120+ == A crit, 140+ == B crit, and so on...

I have done it where the base hit damage was 1 for every 5 points over the to hit number, or where I rolled damage dice, with the weapon's size being what determined the size of the die rolled...

I really like this idea because armor can be both simplified and its range of protection accurrately expressed.

For example, We would increase the range of the next crits to show an armors protection.  An armor could be +7 vs slash, +11 vs puncture and -9 vs crush.  Additional mods for martial arts and claws, grapple, entangles, horns, bash, firebolts, etc could all be created.

[Arioch]

@ Witchking20k: thank you for the explanation!

Has anyone ever tried handling attacks without using the attack tables, but keeping the criticals?
I mean, much like in HARP combat but with regulare RM crits... I know it sounds crazy, but it's something I've been thinking of lately.
So, has anyone done something similar?

Yup. IIRC, I set something like DB+50 as the "to hit" threshold, and then for every 20 points above that, did a critical.

So if DB was 50, then 100 meant you hit and did some damage. 120+ == A crit, 140+ == B crit, and so on...

I have done it where the base hit damage was 1 for every 5 points over the to hit number, or where I rolled damage dice, with the weapon's size being what determined the size of the die rolled...

I really like this idea because armor can be both simplified and its range of protection accurrately expressed.

For example, We would increase the range of the next crits to show an armors protection.  An armor could be +7 vs slash, +11 vs puncture and -9 vs crush.  Additional mods for martial arts and claws, grapple, entangles, horns, bash, firebolts, etc could all be created.

I'm also thinking that you could use just d10s for damage. This way you can use 2 dice of a different color when you roll for calculating damage, that will be used to generate the crit result 

@ VladD: I'm reading your thread right now, very interesting indeed!

[VladD]

Thanks

As of yet I'm a little busy, but I seriously like to develop it further, for my own use, or possibly commercially. I'll revitalize the thread with some new thoughts when my schedule permits

Play fair!