|
|
Post by Adam of The Old Kingdom on Jan 12, 2014 23:16:37 GMT
I took the standard human scale sword, not giant scale battle axe to be consistent with a normal character.
if there is no emphasis on math and simulation you are just making another rule to fudge as you GM and making the physics of the world random to the players.
While I agree that dangerous creatures should be dangerous, taking the KS approach of lifting effective HP/SDC is it's own trap.
Mechanics simulations aside, what was the toughest creature you play tested this on?
and if you could provide the AR, HP /SDC of the dragon beast it would save me another 12 hours till I can get to my books.
|
|
|
|
Post by damianmagecraft on Jan 12, 2014 23:17:37 GMT
Hmm... possibly just allow it to all criticals not just nat 20 maybe? largest crit range to date AFAICT is in N&S Bok Pai 16+.
|
|
|
|
Post by Adam of The Old Kingdom on Jan 12, 2014 23:23:46 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). ah, thats a different mechanic. I dislike Nat20 only actions, it's a 1 in 20 chance and leaves nothing to player level or skill (unless granded in the last few levels of the table). I have always been a fan of Crits going to HP directly, bypassing SDC. and I like to link that to threat range as we talked about previously. this also works well for all attacks, ranged and sword etc. In another game, once HP was reached it would confer fatigue with minor penalties to actions as the creature/player got in touch with their mortality. a factor is if a crit is the roll of the dice before bonuses or the after bonus. I treat it as the number rolled, to keep the probability vs character skill/level to my liking |
|
|
|
Post by damianmagecraft on Jan 12, 2014 23:30:19 GMT
Beast Dragon AR: 12, HP: 6d6x10+PE (PE:5d6), SDC:3d6x10 main body, 1d4x10+20 each head (3 heads).
Largest creature tested? Horned Ramhorn AR 14 SDC:1d6x100 HP:3d6x10
toughest creature actually slain? 4 Waghalters (Chaos Lands pg 47/48) AR 15 SDC 3d4x10 hp:(2d6+8)x3 The high AR and the desire to leave the carapace intact made killing them difficult for the party.
That is not to say larger and tougher critters were not put out there for them to test their mettle against...
The parties as a whole looked for alternate solutions instead of combat as the answer with them.
|
|
|
|
Post by damianmagecraft on Jan 12, 2014 23:39:12 GMT
When designing and playtesting rules there comes a point when either you put it out there and use it regularly or you will never achieve the level of play your are seeking.
I have a friend who has been building his own system for 20 years. It has never been play tested or used because its not "perfect" yet.
20 years.
I have seen his rules system... it is solid, it will play well, and like every system it will have hiccups.
But because this or that rule encourages this or that play style it has never seen actual play.
Why? Because the math is "off" in this spot or that spot.
No system is or ever will be perfect and to pursue that perfection is chasing the unicorn.
|
|
|
|
Post by damianmagecraft on Jan 12, 2014 23:42:56 GMT
Just in the last day since I posted this House rule I have had some interesting new ideas come about related to it.
Spells that allow weapons to by pass DR, actual mundane weapons designs that by pass DR, etc...
Things I would develop but possibly not implement except as PC quests.
|
|
|
|
Post by damianmagecraft on Jan 12, 2014 23:54:47 GMT
And if you think these rules are wonky...
You should see the play test I am preforming on the Pally system where I converted the resolution systems over to a 2d10 mechanic...
bonuses to skills have become much more important.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jaymz on Jan 12, 2014 23:54:49 GMT
In regards to arrows.....they are designed to penetrate by and large. What if you applied the same rules for Armour Piercing to the appropriate arrows that Rifts has for Missiles?
a roll of 18+ bonuses included do double damage and on a natural 20 they do triple damage. You could apply the same rule to spears and other specifically designed thrusting weapons as they are meant to punch through armour and such.
|
|
|
|
Post by damianmagecraft on Jan 12, 2014 23:59:33 GMT
In regards to arrows.....they are designed to penetrate by and large. What if you applied the same rules for Armour Piercing to the appropriate arrows that Rifts has for Missiles? a roll of 18+ bonuses included do double damage and on a natural 20 they do triple damage. You could apply the same rule to spears and other specifically designed thrusting weapons as they are meant to punch through armour and such. not a bad idea... Glad I thunk of it...  it would work well for missile weapons for sure. would have to consider carefully on spears/thrusting weapons. (all of it would work well with the 2d10 mechanic I think...) now that I think on it... the idea of crits achieved with bonuses dealing 2x and nat rolled crits bypassing DR would be an interesting resolution mechanic. |
|
|
|
Post by Adam of The Old Kingdom on Jan 13, 2014 0:01:12 GMT
Just in the last day since I posted this House rule I have had some interesting new ideas come about related to it. Spells that allow weapons to by pass DR, actual mundane weapons designs that by pass DR, etc... Things I would develop but possibly not implement except as PC quests. Yeah, this thread has be tops fun. I too was hoping to find different approaches to problems I have and to understand other solutions people have found. I hope to do as you have done and post simple but effective changes to the PB system. |
|
|
|
Post by Adam of The Old Kingdom on Jan 13, 2014 0:03:14 GMT
And if you think these rules are wonky... You should see the play test I am preforming on the Pally system where I converted the resolution systems over to a 2d10 mechanic... bonuses to skills have become much more important. Wonky? this is Pb we are working with!!! (<== I wend all KS on the exclamation points) I call it a jumble after I looked up the word Jumble and System on the dictionary. it seemed more apt. |
|
|
|
Post by damianmagecraft on Jan 13, 2014 0:05:30 GMT
Just in the last day since I posted this House rule I have had some interesting new ideas come about related to it. Spells that allow weapons to by pass DR, actual mundane weapons designs that by pass DR, etc... Things I would develop but possibly not implement except as PC quests. Yeah, this thread has be tops fun. I too was hoping to find different approaches to problems I have and to understand other solutions people have found. I hope to do as you have done and post simple but effective changes to the PB system. old saw i use when developing rules... KISBNTS Keep It Simple But Not Too Simple Sometimes Simple is more complex than you give it credit to be. |
|
|
|
Post by Adam of The Old Kingdom on Jan 13, 2014 0:06:48 GMT
Just in the last day since I posted this House rule I have had some interesting new ideas come about related to it. Spells that allow weapons to by pass DR, actual mundane weapons designs that by pass DR, etc... Things I would develop but possibly not implement except as PC quests. Yeah, this thread has be tops fun. I too was hoping to find different approaches to problems I have and to understand other solutions people have found. I hope to do as you have done and post simple but effective changes to the PB system. That sort of tries to fix the pumped sdc/mdc that PB likes. but I do endorce a +1 or more to threat as a weapon and arrow quality. magic or mundane (and even through WP archery). to make longbowman the true marksman/sniper, with big effective ranges and threat ranges to show they can hit your heart and kidney (magic arrow) from 1000ft. *stops self from going on a tangent into range increments on longbows vs crossbows* |
|
|
|
Post by Adam of The Old Kingdom on Jan 13, 2014 0:18:40 GMT
Yeah, this thread has be tops fun. I too was hoping to find different approaches to problems I have and to understand other solutions people have found. I hope to do as you have done and post simple but effective changes to the PB system. old saw i use when developing rules... KISBNTS Keep It Simple But Not Too Simple Sometimes Simple is more complex than you give it credit to be. indeed, which is why I use excel to simulate alot of rolls of the dice to understand the statistical changes made. Last time I thought it would be simple to redistribute the attribute table for bonuses to start at 12. Bah, it made the reliance on attributes easier but the effects larger. the HtH bonuses became a blip and made the Level 1 loading of classes even worse. considering I had another goal to make leveling more aparent in the numbers I had achieved the opposite and needed to find a new starting point. |
|
|
|
Post by Jaymz on Jan 13, 2014 0:41:08 GMT
Damian - I think we came to a consensus between us that starting at 14 the way I did it is very workable in regards to attributes didn't we?
|
|
|
|
Post by Adam of The Old Kingdom on Jan 13, 2014 0:53:31 GMT
When designing and playtesting rules there comes a point when either you put it out there and use it regularly or you will never achieve the level of play your are seeking. I have a friend who has been building his own system for 20 years. It has never been play tested or used because its not "perfect" yet. 20 years. I have seen his rules system... it is solid, it will play well, and like every system it will have hiccups. But because this or that rule encourages this or that play style it has never seen actual play. Why? Because the math is "off" in this spot or that spot. No system is or ever will be perfect and to pursue that perfection is chasing the unicorn. but thats not what is happening here. we are using all our tools and knowledge to make it fit within the parameters that you want the rules to work in. that means we look at the math, the encounters and we should also be putting in player and GM style. because a creature that is by the math 2.5 time harder to kill can still be brought down by the coopdegrass mechanic of incapacitation and slaughter. |
|
|
|
Post by damianmagecraft on Jan 13, 2014 1:00:05 GMT
Damian - I think we came to a consensus between us that starting at 14 the way I did it is very workable in regards to attributes didn't we? I think I said I thought it would work. But it was not a direction I was looking to pursue. And IIRC your method starts the bonuses 2 points earlier at 14 but by 30 is inline with the bonuses as already presented. |
|
|
|
Post by Jaymz on Jan 13, 2014 1:32:27 GMT
actually it is back in line by the time you get to 19
|
|
