Topic: Rolling over weapon maximum

[shnar]

Out of curiosity, what do you do when a player rolls really well and goes over the weapon maximum? Most Arm's Law attack charts the weapon max is at 150, though Martial Arts and animal attacks have those maximum ranks.  However, if you have a *really* good roll, like Open Ended 4 times or something, it sucks to only do a 150 attack. And with the introduction of the Condensed Combat System in the Combat Companion,you have a lot more weapons with a smaller max amount (i.e. 100, etc). You'd think the player should have some kind of bonus for such an amazing roll/attack.

I've seen three different systems, and was wondering which you use:

Fancy Formula
I've seen I think 2 or 3 different formulas for how to handle such high rolls. I think RM2 Companion IV had one of these formulas. Something like take the max amount on the column, divide by the total amount, multiply by the rotation of the sun, and add the attackers hair color to get the extra damage and crits.

Simple Formula
Rasyr has offered on some threads a very simple way for handling it. For every 10 points over the roll, you get +1 to the crit roll. For example, a 187 Attack Roll would give a +3 to the Crit Roll ( (187-150) / 10 = 3.7, so +3 to the roll). One of our players likes that system, with a +1 Crit Severity for every +30 over attack roll (and all crits use the same crit roll instead of multiple rolls for each crit). This attack represents a very powerful one-hit attack, a Haymaker if you will.

Roll-over Chart System
I think RMC:Arms Law has this optional rule. Basically take the maximum allowed by the weapon, subtract it and reapply to the chart. So, an attack of 241 would be one attack of 150 and a second attack of 91. This style of attack, I see it as an attacker as doing so well that round, he effectively has had multiple attacks done against his target that round.

IMHO, the last of these systems seems to make the most sense when using lower maximum weapons, like the Condensed Combat System. For example, someone with a Dirk (Type II, maxes out at 110) would be able to make more effective attacks in a round than someone with a Short Sword (Type IV, maxes at 150).  The main drawback is that most attacks will need to be more than 50 over the maximum before doing /anything/ extra. But if you used the Simple Formula, a result of 30 over the max would give a +3 to the crit, which gives you /something/. Maybe a mix between the two systems?

Anyways, thoughts? How do you handle rolling over the max?

-shnar

[vroomfogle]

One problem with the Roll-over Chart system (which I used to use and does work fine most of the time) is that the logic falls apart when using missile weapons (or spells).  Missile weapons are not a series of attacks, it is always just one shot.   So if it results in two critical rolls that hit different parts of the body...well you get the idea.

I've recently switched to the bonus to the critical roll - it also helps mitigate the 'wiff' problem - whereby you max out the chart then roll very low on your critical for a very ineffective attack.

The Roll-over logic still works well for melee - you could always use Roll-over for melee and crit bonus for missiles/spells.

[shnar]

My players were wondering if they could just decide which to apply. I kind of like both, the roll-over or the bonus-to-crit system, so I would have no problem letting a player decide which to use. I'm a little torn though if they should declare before or after the roll...

I do see your point about 1-shot effects. We'll mull that over for a bit.

-shnar

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

Crit Roll ( (187-150) / 10 = 3.7, so +3 to the roll).

I would say that was a 4 -- i.e. round off to nearest whole number.

[markc]

 The house rule I use; is for every 5 points above 150 the weapon does an extra 1 hit of damage and for every 10 above 150 the player gets to add + or - 1 to the crit roll.

 In general I do not let players adjust the crit roll to 66 or 100 but allother results are valid. I read the top of the crit to the players for each result so they get an idea as to the crit location and severity.

MDC

[kevinmccollum]

Why apply any? The maximum damage a particular weapon can do is the top of the chart. end of story. That would apply to the "bad guys" as well as the characters.

[shnar]

Of course it would apply to the bad guys as well as the good guys. This is Rolemaster! The LETHAL Roleplaying Game!

The main reason for it is the really high open-ended rolls. When a hero open ends twice or three times, it seems kinda of lame that he gets the same attack as if he would have rolled high. For example, in most situations a 94 + OB - DB would max out, i.e. hit 150. Why should a roll of 94 do the same damage as a roll of 472? Just doesn't seem right nor does it give the flair that RM has by using Open-Ended rolls.

Previously, we've always thought that 150 was never really a weapon's 'maximum', just that it was unpractical to have the charts go higher than 150, so that's where the publishers arbitrarily decided the attack charts ended. That's why the RM Companions introduced a Over 150 optional rule. Now with the Condensed System and their "types" (aka marks in SM, or size in Claw Law) it's making us reconsider, how do we apply over-maximum attacks?

My players thought the Simple Formula was a good way to go just to speed up the game, but while that works for a maximum of 150, it doesn't work so well for a maximum of say 120. If you go over 120, why not just go up the chart instead of using some formula?

That's when we thought of the RMC optional rule of Roll-Over, and we started liking the justification of this. Normally, in RM, players are swinging many times in one round of combat, just one swing is the really good swing. If you use the Roll-Over rule, the idea is that for a *really* good attack, the player got more than one good swing in during the 10 seconds of a round. And for the lower maximum weapons, they're usually smaller anyways, so it sorta makes sense that a lighter, smaller weapon would get in more "good" swings, but simply not be able to do that much damage.

So, we kind of like both approaches, and we decided to throw it up on the community to see what they thought of it

-shnar

[Arioch]

Of course it would apply to the bad guys as well as the good guys. This is Rolemaster! The LETHAL Roleplaying Game!

ROFL, true! It should be written on the next edition's covers: RMLRPG 
Laugh point for you!

[kevinmccollum]

True, a warrior with a good OB will max the chart fairly often if the creature he is fighting has a low db and isn't parrying AND he is not wounded. Toss in a few hits and crits and now he might be fighting at -10 or 20 from hits, another -20 from slashed muscles or broken bones, etc. It adds up fast. He might need that high roll just to score an "A" critical.

My personal opinion, I'm against adding more damage or worse, adding to the critical roll from a really high hit. That is just me.

[markc]

 IMO for the "short" combat weapons [ie thoes that are set at below 150 do to what the weapon is] I the GM would have to look at the chart and figure out what formula I would use. IMO the formula should be worse than the chart. In english I mean that the formula I come up with would provide for less damage than the chart gave other weapons that use the chart.

 Another idea that just jumped into my head is take the damage difference from the short point and the actual point and devide it by 1/2 then add it to the max result.

 One point I have to also make is that the idea of short tables was to make the game use less charts and tables. When you do lose of the detail sometimes you can make up that detail and sometimes you cannot. Another point is some weapons just do not do that much damage and some other weapons have other abilities that make up for not having a lot of damage potential.

MDC

[Steve_990]

I just use a really simple method... I take the result and -150 and look at the chart again... if it's enough to score a second would I apply that as well. I reason it with the 150 is the maximum "reasonable" strike with the weapon, but if you go way past a normal strike it either classifies as a very deadly strike, or two (or more) blows in melee.

For the crits I apply the one roll to both (so it's the same body area).
Easy, and not too breaking unless it's a crazy good attack that's in the 230+ range...

[Temujin]

We used a method which for every 30 over limit, your crit increased one level (a E would give E+A, etc.) but concussion remained the same.

[shnar]

If you're justification is that a second hit has scored (which I agree), why apply the same crit roll?

-shnar

[Steve_990]

Well - it would depend more on the attack (and really, just what I felt like at the time..)

But generally I would treat it as a single attack with multiple effects to show the devistation caused. Something like.... you broke their arm, and in the process severed an artery - good job!

But I found it more important on definate single attack results such as bolts, arrows, thrown weapons etc... things that can only have a single attack, and unless it's the JFK magic bullet theory - only hit one location

I'd only get them to roll a second crit location usually if I figured it would make a more cinematic death.

Steve.

[yammahoper]

Giving a second roll makes it a much more powerful rule.  01 the E, 98 the A.

[shnar]

Which is actually why we like the second roll. Sometimes doing amazing on the tohit roll (to the tune of more than one "hit") then tick-poor on the crit-roll really sucks. Course, it goes both ways, if the PCs are hit by a baddie, they get 2 rolls too...

-shnar

[rdanhenry]

Yeah, I think you should get a second roll for the second crit in melee. You've been attacking for 10 seconds, you can get a second hit in. Likewise, if you let an elemental ball loop the chart, a fireball can hit in two place, so give an extra crit its own roll. Elemental bolts and physical missiles are single attacks (unless throwing a fistful of shuriken), so one roll for all crits. Not an extra hit, just a really good one.