|
|
Post by damianmagecraft on Jan 12, 2014 0:37:55 GMT
As anyone who has played Palladium for any length of time Knows.
Once combat bonuses reach a certain point Armor becomes (to put it politely) moot; due to the average rolls for attack and defense exceeding the ARs.
The follow Optional rules seek to remedy that issue.
In addition to the current AR rules have AR act as a damage reduction mechanic as well as a "to hit" mechanic.
It would function as follows.
Rolling below the AR the armor takes damage minus the amount of the AR (the damage reduction in action). Reduce Armor SDC appropriately.
Rolling above the AR the wearer of the armor takes damage minus the amount of the AR. Additionally the damage "absorbed" by the Armor is subtracted from the Armors SDC.
AR is reduced by one point for every 3 to 12 SDC lost (See chart below).
Armor AR SDC AR Loss rate
Padded 8 15 every 3 SDC
Soft Leather 10 20 every 3 SDC
Hard Leather 11 30 every 4 SDC
Stud Leather 13 38 every 4 SDC
Chain Mail (Full) 14 44 every 4 SDC
Chain Mail (half) 9 20 every 4 SDC
Double Mail (full) 15 55 every 5 SDC
Double Mail (half) 10 28 every 4 SDC
Scale (full) 15 75 every 6 SDC
Scale (half) 11 35 every 5 SDC
Splint (full) 16 82 every 7 SDC
Splint (half) 12 40 every 5 SDC
Plate & Chain (full) 15 100 every 9 SDC
Plate (full) 17 160 every 12 SDC
Plate (half) 14 60 every 6 SDC
Formula for determining AR loss rate is SDC/(AR-4) and Rounding the result down to the nearest whole number.
Example:
Pete the Palladin is battling Oscar the Orc.
Pete is decked out in full plate mail (AR 17 SDC 160) And wields a Long Sword (2d6)
Oscar is outfitted with a Full suit of Scale mail (AR 15 SDC 75) And wields a War Hammer (3d4)
Pete rolls to strike (14 with bonuses) Oscar but his roll is not above Oscars AR.
Oscars armor takes the hit.
Pete rolls damage (7) Oscars Armor deflects the first 15 points of damage from any attack (in this case the armor takes no damage).
Oscar rolls to attack Pete (19 with bonuses) The roll is above Petes AR so the damage plows through the armor.
Oscar rolls damage (8) the Armor absorbs the first 17 points of any attack (in this case the armor takes all 8 points).
If Petes Armor takes an additional 4 points (total of 12) of damage his AR will drop from 17 to 16.
Natural AR would function similarly to how it does in the books.
With the exception that under these optional rules Any roll over the AR is now subject to a DR before damage is assessed.
Example:
Minotaur has a NAR of 12
Any roll (with bonuses) over a 12 will do damage to the Minotaur minus 12 points which his tough hide (NAR) managed to deflect.
Magical ARs would function identically to either normal AR or NAR (Dependent upon spell description or active designation of type by the spell).
Thoughts?
Questions?
Flames?
|
|
|
|
Post by Jaymz on Jan 12, 2014 1:59:26 GMT
Interesting...if a bit of additional math to deal with during combat...
|
|
|
|
Post by damianmagecraft on Jan 12, 2014 2:08:54 GMT
It plays out fairly rapidly if you do the major calculations pre-game... (AR loss rate)
Then its just a matter of tracking damage.
and applying the modifiers as they occur.
The AR loss rate is just an extrapolation of an already existing rule that states that Armor loses 2 points of AR at 1/2 damaged and another 2 points at 2/3 damaged.
|
|
|
|
Post by Adam of The Old Kingdom on Jan 12, 2014 2:36:21 GMT
I like the idea.
how does the Damage reduction work in practice, it looks like it's too high just reading it.
as a starting point, how does halving the AR as DR work, by comparison.
Padded armour would soak 4 points, plate 8.
I ask this because padded armour has a 100% soak chance for more than 50% of the probable damage from a 1 handed sword.
or, is your intention to make the armour soak 100% of the time and the AR just determine if armour takes damage or not and thus, simulate AR reduction over time due to damage. which is again, not a bad solution but I would still be looking at how much DR each armour type has.
I suppose it's just how you word it.
PS: just realised, DR drops with AR....Have you playtested this much? curious as to how your live feedback went.
|
|
|
|
Post by damianmagecraft on Jan 12, 2014 2:48:32 GMT
I like the idea. how does the Damage reduction work in practice, it looks like it's too high just reading it. as a starting point, how does halving the AR as DR work, by comparison. Padded armour would soak 4 points, plate 8. I ask this because padded armour has a 100% soak chance for more than 50% of the probable damage from a 1 handed sword. or, is your intention to make the armour soak 100% of the time and the AR just determine if armour takes damage or not and thus, simulate AR reduction over time due to damage. which is again, not a bad solution but I would still be looking at how much DR each armour type has. I suppose it's just how you word it. PS: just realised, DR drops with AR....Have you playtested this much? curious as to how your live feedback went. My intention is to have armor soak/deflect 100% of the time and have the AR be the threshold before armor takes actual damage. I have playtested this (and earlier iterations of it) quite extensively. This version was the most acceptable by all testers involved. the earliest version didnt have the DR drop with AR and allowed for stacking of DR it proved to be broken rather quickly. This latest iteration has proven highly effective (if a tad bookkeepish) and outside of one or two testers (who hate book keeping of all kinds) its proven to be popular with most players. |
|
|
|
Post by Adam of The Old Kingdom on Jan 12, 2014 4:08:37 GMT
your test results match what I would expect from reading it. very pleasing.
my only continuing concern is the actual DR vs the perceived DR the armour type provides.
What are your actual written rules describing how armour works?
--------------------
additionally, have you thought of consolidating some armour types? the half suits get funny as they sit in the table. I liked the detail of half suits, but with only monetary considerations they never really figured in play. unless you have other Spd and dodge considerations for armour type.
|
|
|
|
Post by damianmagecraft on Jan 12, 2014 4:17:13 GMT
your test results match what I would expect from reading it. very pleasing. my only continuing concern is the actual DR vs the perceived DR the armour type provides. What are your actual written rules describing how armour works? -------------------- additionally, have you thought of consolidating some armour types? the half suits get funny as they sit in the table. I liked the detail of half suits, but with only monetary considerations they never really figured in play. unless you have other Spd and dodge considerations for armour type. Outside of the addition of the DR aspect Armor functions exactly as per the Palladium rules. The Half suits while odd looking in the chart are direct pulls from the core rules in PFRPG. Just realized I didnt explain how these rules effected Natural AR... will have to go back and put that in... |
|
|
|
Post by Adam of The Old Kingdom on Jan 12, 2014 4:46:58 GMT
yes, I recognised the where they came from. which is why I questioned the practical use of half suits and if you had added in game effects for the half suits. I implied but will state outright, why include half suits?
as to NAR, you imply that NAR and DR reduce with the "creatures" SDC (as opposed the the armours)? is this correct?
taking this to the further end of AR, tough creatures are AR10 to 14. this is going to make any attampt to kill them magnitudes harder than before, and a broad sword doing 2d6+(dam) this will mean that the damage soak of the beast will almost break the mechanic. the SDC of these sorts of creatures 3 to 6 thousand for a hydra will be a challenge.
as a bonus, do humans still have a natural AR of 4, of was that reworded.
|
|
|
|
Post by damianmagecraft on Jan 12, 2014 5:39:46 GMT
yes, I recognised the where they came from. which is why I questioned the practical use of half suits and if you had added in game effects for the half suits. I implied but will state outright, why include half suits? as to NAR, you imply that NAR and DR reduce with the "creatures" SDC (as opposed the the armours)? is this correct? taking this to the further end of AR, tough creatures are AR10 to 14. this is going to make any attampt to kill them magnitudes harder than before, and a broad sword doing 2d6+(dam) this will mean that the damage soak of the beast will almost break the mechanic. the SDC of these sorts of creatures 3 to 6 thousand for a hydra will be a challenge. as a bonus, do humans still have a natural AR of 4, of was that reworded. Technically humans do not have a NAR 4 RAW. A 4 or less is a flat out miss RAW. Why keep half suits? because I am not looking to re-work the entire system only enhance it. Monetary constraints and aesthetics will always ensure that half suits have a demand. I dont see where I imply the NAR & DR reduce as SDC reduces (as I have it NAR and its associated DR remain static). Yes this does have the side effect of making creatures with NAR tougher to kill. but seeing as that was the original intention of NAR to begin with... As with "regular" AR there comes a point with bonuses when the NAR is rendered moot. This redresses that issue fairly well. it also has the added benefit of making Damage Bonuses more relevant since higher damages will mean exceeding the DR thresh hold more often. |
|
|
|
Post by Adam of The Old Kingdom on Jan 12, 2014 6:13:44 GMT
"Rolling above the AR the wearer of the armor takes damage minus the amount of the AR" and the AR changes as the armour takes damage at a rage of 1 per 4 SDC.
RAW? if the book says something, you need to state that it is overruled or clarify the proper rule for your use. do you care to give me page numbers on this or just leave it that 4 or less is a fail, and leave it at that. (I will also assume it's a bonus modified number)
and right there, you have to be a strength character. PP will do you little good if you are not a strength and damage machine. because even a 2 handed sword, with Str of +5 will still only average 3d6+5 (PS: 20) will as a mean value do 15 - AR. I hope you can see where I am coming from, that once past an AR of 10, you are more often than not just dealing Str not weapon damage. Bow weapons are use less. and without changing HP and SDC, you are double or tripling its the effictive SDC.
Maybe that works with your campaign, but you propose a core change without clearly defining the feel of game you have, so I would need to ask
are you running high fantasy, with regard to gear?
what sort of gear do your players get?
how many vassals and mercs are employed or is it not a player funded company.
do you consider that any creature with an AR above the mean value of any given weapon should be seen as much tougher than originally portrayed.
I'm thinking I need to understand your context better.
|
|
|
|
Post by damianmagecraft on Jan 12, 2014 7:45:34 GMT
"Rolling above the AR the wearer of the armor takes damage minus the amount of the AR" and the AR changes as the armour takes damage at a rage of 1 per 4 SDC. RAW? if the book says something, you need to state that it is overruled or clarify the proper rule for your use. do you care to give me page numbers on this or just leave it that 4 or less is a fail, and leave it at that. (I will also assume it's a bonus modified number) and right there, you have to be a strength character. PP will do you little good if you are not a strength and damage machine. because even a 2 handed sword, with Str of +5 will still only average 3d6+5 (PS: 20) will as a mean value do 15 - AR. I hope you can see where I am coming from, that once past an AR of 10, you are more often than not just dealing Str not weapon damage. Bow weapons are use less. and without changing HP and SDC, you are double or tripling its the effictive SDC. Maybe that works with your campaign, but you propose a core change without clearly defining the feel of game you have, so I would need to ask are you running high fantasy, with regard to gear? what sort of gear do your players get? how many vassals and mercs are employed or is it not a player funded company. do you consider that any creature with an AR above the mean value of any given weapon should be seen as much tougher than originally portrayed. I'm thinking I need to understand your context better. RAW = Rules As Written (a typical method of referencing Book Rules). Source of the 4 or less rule is found on page 43 of PF2eMB under step two. Second sentence "If the roll is 4 or less (counting bonuses), the attacker misses" Yes critters with greater than mean value AR are supposed to be tough. other wise their ARs would not be set so high. The mean value of NAR in the Monsters and Animals book for PF is ~10. Creatures with the higher NARs are covered in Heavy scales and Plates. I am not basing this off of any one type of game because I do not run a single type. I have run High Fantasy, Low Fantasy, and everything in between. I started developing this rule after a I had a player new to palladium (but not RPGs) point out that his level 2 Orc Merc was better off not wearing armor since his defense bonuses totaled +7 and any roll that beat his defense would end in the same result with or with out armor. RAW states armor only takes damage if the roll does not exceed the AR and for any roll that does exceed the AR; the damage is assessed to the character not his armor. By level 2 his armor had become rendered effectively useless. And issue would only become more pronounced as the character continued to advance in levels. I do notice (now that you point it out) an unforeseen issue with ranged weapons and NAR... (figures I would miss that in playtest... 10 years of refining and I never noticed that... heh.) The easiest solution to which is to add a wider range to criticals for ranged or to award them earlier for ranged specialists or to allow for a bonus to damage based on draw weight or a combination of all three. Or as you have suggested having the NAR/DR drop as damage is sustained. (looks like more playtesting is in order). |
|
|
|
Post by Adam of The Old Kingdom on Jan 12, 2014 9:43:46 GMT
I too have had issue with PB AR system. due to the range of my house rules I ended up just to RAW. mostly, with a dash of KS spirit.
I would still want to allow accuracy of strike to be a factor, to allow those with PP or stacked strike bonuses like longbowman (archery, sniper...) off the top of my head, it may be that there is a spend or penetration relationship. there is not alot in the system that does this except the sniper skill.
I have toyed with Threat Range (crit range) within HtH and as a Weapon Quality, to add more depth to equipment posibilities and magic properties. HtH: MA lumps it all in at Level 6, which is the only mile stone any one really has in HtH until Level 9. which is 35 exp further than the 20k they already have)
So without running off at the hands will all posibilities, I'll voice my musing over threat range.
Allow some weapons a penetration quality to Reduce AR and or DR. at the least, a +/- 1 on arrow heads for flavour.
Called shots, they are -3 to strike (for a specific small target) so that might allow a reduction of DR. though an Eye is effectively a 15 to hit.
as a magical property, does no extra damage (directly), is just sharper (or something).
Allow threat range to increase by +1 at 3 ,4 or 5 level increments depending on HtH type. so a HtH MA could have +5 to threat, or 15 to 20 by L15. Basic is only +3 (18-20)
While Threat can increase damage, it's sort of doing the same as the old AR by sitting in the narrow range above the AR and the max the dice can roll. just something to keep in mind.
As to Heavier draw, it's again a bias to PS. not that is should not be an option, just that I like to stand on the desk.
I'm enjoying this. my own solution to AR was to more closely emulate d20, but that often meant a lot of trickle down of changes. At the moment I am sitting on what makes the PB combat round the PB combat round. and fundamentally how is it popular with some gamers. (I'll make a new threat for that when I frame the question right)
Another question of implementation. How does it work with magic like, Fire whip or Fire ball or other projected energy magics? does their "thick hide" apply a DR to that? again, the wording of the implementation of AR is what I am looking at.
|
|
|
|
Post by damianmagecraft on Jan 12, 2014 10:33:23 GMT
I have just treated it as: if the spell requires a strike roll then the AR rules should apply weather its RAW AR rules or some house ruled version.
|
|
|
|
Post by Adam of The Old Kingdom on Jan 12, 2014 11:29:22 GMT
fair call. how about fire ball? it only requires a dodge.  |
|
|
|
Post by Jaymz on Jan 12, 2014 13:35:26 GMT
Personally I wold say it automatically does damage to the armour. Reasoning it is almost more of an area effect weapon than a penetrating one....but that's just me. However IIRC Firebolt does not need an attack roll nor does call lightning....Both sould have a possibility of penetrating the armour imo.
|
|
|
|
Post by damianmagecraft on Jan 12, 2014 18:26:37 GMT
For spells that have no strike roll (fire ball, call lightning, etc...) AR is irrelevant.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jaymz on Jan 12, 2014 20:13:38 GMT
How so? They automatically do damage to the armour or to the person? They should still receive a change of getting through in my opinion but that's just me.
|
|
|
|
Post by damianmagecraft on Jan 12, 2014 20:42:29 GMT
damages the person in the armor.
or in the case of NAR damages the critter.
I would still allow the DR to kick in however.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jaymz on Jan 12, 2014 20:59:28 GMT
so in another words against magic AR is pointless so why bother with it by the RAW if you know you are facing a mage?  Just doesn't seem to be right is all. |
|
|
|
Post by damianmagecraft on Jan 12, 2014 21:23:02 GMT
Thats the actual RAW...
Its also common most RPGs.
Magic gets a lot "instant" hits.
Like I said in my games I would still allow the DR of both types of AR to still apply however.
and keep in mind in the instances of spells of the nature of Fireball and Call Lightning unlike many rpgs in Pally its save for zero effect.
Or as I like to call it...
The All or Nothing syndrome.
|
|
|
|
Post by Adam of The Old Kingdom on Jan 12, 2014 21:35:46 GMT
Jaymz: Except that while magic can bypass the AR, DMC is saying the armours DR will still apply. leaving any spell bellow 2d6 as mostly ineffective. (unless a new increase in damage is applied based on spell strength or something fresh in the class combat scaling.)
I had pondered much of this last night (+11 GMT) and I find it troubling that the HP/SDC is not reduced. not because they (the creatures) are week, but because PBs only mechanic for making them strong is heaping on HP/SDC. with ARs over a common strike bonus (L6 ish would be +5 + PP) then it is halving the damage of a 2d6 sword (which is all short swords and small 2 handers)
I still do not know the group make up that tested against the Minotaur, because of it's AR of 10, it is acting like it has 2 to 3 times as much HP/SDC (this is a conservative estimate)
while this does depend on feel, it will make these sorts of fights quite epic, or long winded.
Anyway, the discussion point was this presentation of AR while still using the PB norm of stacking HP/SDC to simulate toughness.
Also, how does this go with stacking armour? as in NAR with actual armour. because even Minotaurs like a mail shirt now an then.
I hinted at it before, have you considered differing penalties for heavier armour? like -1/4 base AR to dodge. and -1/2 AR to SPD. (just off the top of my head numbers, they can be set numbers to cut apparent bookwork) because this would give those half suits a tactical reason as well as cost? I have rewritten gear tables in my search for a better combat system. considering you are there right now, why not fully explore the ranging effects of different properties.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jaymz on Jan 12, 2014 21:41:36 GMT
Call lighting has no save that I recall...either way, I understood what you were saying damian...I was just pointing out that completely ignoring AR by RAW is rather .... unfair to the players in some regard. To the point of possible instant kill for a barely mid level mage if damage and such allows for it.
Your way it makes sense as you will still get some protection from the armour either way so I like it.
|
|
|
|
Post by damianmagecraft on Jan 12, 2014 22:17:34 GMT
Jaymz: Except that while magic can bypass the AR, DMC is saying the armours DR will still apply. leaving any spell bellow 2d6 as mostly ineffective. (unless a new increase in damage is applied based on spell strength or something fresh in the class combat scaling.) I had pondered much of this last night (+11 GMT) and I find it troubling that the HP/SDC is not reduced. not because they (the creatures) are week, but because PBs only mechanic for making them strong is heaping on HP/SDC. with ARs over a common strike bonus (L6 ish would be +5 + PP) then it is halving the damage of a 2d6 sword (which is all short swords and small 2 handers) I still do not know the group make up that tested against the Minotaur, because of it's AR of 10, it is acting like it has 2 to 3 times as much HP/SDC (this is a conservative estimate) while this does depend on feel, it will make these sorts of fights quite epic, or long winded. Anyway, the discussion point was this presentation of AR while still using the PB norm of stacking HP/SDC to simulate toughness. Also, how does this go with stacking armour? as in NAR with actual armour. because even Minotaurs like a mail shirt now an then. I hinted at it before, have you considered differing penalties for heavier armour? like -1/4 base AR to dodge. and -1/2 AR to SPD. (just off the top of my head numbers, they can be set numbers to cut apparent bookwork) because this would give those half suits a tactical reason as well as cost? I have rewritten gear tables in my search for a better combat system. considering you are there right now, why not fully explore the ranging effects of different properties. The most telling point of this AR/DR set up is the elimination of what I like to call the "run and gun" strategy. Just plowing in and beating it with your strongest weapon isnt going to always work. Now the group has to ponder "how do we defeat that beast dragon thats been terrorizing the locals?" Just charging the thing and beating on it isnt enough. They strategize, they intel gather, and so on. Now an adventure that, for many groups, would be over in 4 hours and barely net more than a handful of XPs has become another grand quest that may take 4 or 5 sessions to complete and probably has spawned at least one side quest per PC that may or may not in turn spawn more grand quests; all of which are now guaranteed to generate more than a mere 300 XP for defeating a great menace. |
|
|
|
Post by damianmagecraft on Jan 12, 2014 22:19:27 GMT
Call lighting has no save that I recall...either way, I understood what you were saying damian...I was just pointing out that completely ignoring AR by RAW is rather .... unfair to the players in some regard. To the point of possible instant kill for a barely mid level mage if damage and such allows for it. Your way it makes sense as you will still get some protection from the armour either way so I like it. Call Lightning: PF2eMB PG 198 under save: Nat 20 or modified 24+ to dodge. |
|
|
|
Post by Adam of The Old Kingdom on Jan 12, 2014 22:42:07 GMT
Jaymz: Except that while magic can bypass the AR, DMC is saying the armours DR will still apply. leaving any spell bellow 2d6 as mostly ineffective. (unless a new increase in damage is applied based on spell strength or something fresh in the class combat scaling.) I had pondered much of this last night (+11 GMT) and I find it troubling that the HP/SDC is not reduced. not because they (the creatures) are week, but because PBs only mechanic for making them strong is heaping on HP/SDC. with ARs over a common strike bonus (L6 ish would be +5 + PP) then it is halving the damage of a 2d6 sword (which is all short swords and small 2 handers) I still do not know the group make up that tested against the Minotaur, because of it's AR of 10, it is acting like it has 2 to 3 times as much HP/SDC (this is a conservative estimate) while this does depend on feel, it will make these sorts of fights quite epic, or long winded. Anyway, the discussion point was this presentation of AR while still using the PB norm of stacking HP/SDC to simulate toughness. Also, how does this go with stacking armour? as in NAR with actual armour. because even Minotaurs like a mail shirt now an then. I hinted at it before, have you considered differing penalties for heavier armour? like -1/4 base AR to dodge. and -1/2 AR to SPD. (just off the top of my head numbers, they can be set numbers to cut apparent bookwork) because this would give those half suits a tactical reason as well as cost? I have rewritten gear tables in my search for a better combat system. considering you are there right now, why not fully explore the ranging effects of different properties. The most telling point of this AR/DR set up is the elimination of what I like to call the "run and gun" strategy. Just plowing in and beating it with your strongest weapon isnt going to always work. Now the group has to ponder "how do we defeat that beast dragon thats been terrorizing the locals?" Just charging the thing and beating on it isnt enough. They strategize, they intel gather, and so on. Now an adventure that, for many groups, would be over in 4 hours and barely net more than a handful of XPs has become another grand quest that may take 4 or 5 sessions to complete and probably has spawned at least one side quest per PC that may or may not in turn spawn more grand quests; all of which are now guaranteed to generate more than a mere 300 XP for defeating a great menace. but the AR/DR requires your strongest weapon. unless you mean you simulate the battle of endore. or find the mechanic to shoot the troll in the mouth. well, at 3000hp and the size of an intelligent magic using barn, a dragon is not a stand up fight. these rule do not in themselves stop any combat style from being tried. for the record a 2 handed sword with PS 20 will still take an average of 150 hits (above AR) to kill a 3000hp monster. that goes up to over 400. I see no appreciable difference in the amount of effort or planning required to take out a 3000hp menace or an effectively 8500hp (based on mean 3d6+5 damage rolls vs an AR of 12) menace. it has been my experience that when you toughen a creature with DR, you need to scale the hp/sdc correctly and I strongly feel applying PB HP scalling will reach a breaking point too quickly. |
|
|
|
Post by damianmagecraft on Jan 12, 2014 22:58:29 GMT
Beast Dragon =/= Dragon
two different animals.
Beast Dragon can found on page 24 of M&A2e
|
|
|
|
Post by Adam of The Old Kingdom on Jan 12, 2014 22:59:33 GMT
what's the HP/SDC and AR?
|
|
|
|
Post by damianmagecraft on Jan 12, 2014 23:04:45 GMT
Also you are placing too much emphasis on the math.
Sure the optimizer is always going to go for the most powerful weapon (Giant sized Battle axe at level 2 with wp its a 5d6 weapon).
Not the point of the rule though that type of attitude is going to be prevalent regardless because all mechanics "encourage" the "bigger is better" approach.
|
|
|
|
Post by damianmagecraft on Jan 12, 2014 23:08:47 GMT
A minor rule adjustment I have been toying with is to have a Natural 20 critical (only the nat 20) ignore AR/DR entirely still not sure how well the would play out though (early brain storm stage no play test or refinements made).
|
|
|
|
Post by Jaymz on Jan 12, 2014 23:12:44 GMT
I think the critical hit ignoring makes it s true critical hit as opposed to extra damage, a good chunk of which will just get absorbed.
|
|
