PDA

View Full Version : Another way for damage



Cilvyn
2010-03-27, 03:50 AM
Hello everyone,

I'm trying to make another combat system. This sytem will be played in a high realistic historical setting.

Attacks and defences

Whenever you want to hit an enemy you make an attack roll. The formula below shows you how to get to your total attack bonus. You roll a d20 and add your bonus to the outcome of the roll.

Half level + Strength +proficiency+ bonuses = Total Attack bonus

Example:
Garret has is level 8 so has a bonus of +4. His strength modifier is +2. He is proficient with the longsword with which he makes the attack. This gives him another +2 bonus. His total attack bonus is now 1d10+8

When an opponent tries to hit you, you can make a defense dice roll. Your attacker only makes a succesfull hit when his attack roll is a higher number than your defense roll. The formula below shows you how to get to you total defense bonus.

Half Level + Dexterity + shield bonus + bonuses = Total Defence Bonus

Example:
Wayne wants to block Gerrets attack. His level is 6 and therefore has a bonus of 3. His dexterity modifier is 4. Wayne carries a bow and has no shield in his hands. His total defense bonus is now 1d10+7

Applying Damage


Here is the problem. I don't know how to apply damage. The normal way would be weapon+strenght. But, now it comes, as you've seen armor doen't apply to your defence. instead it gives you damage reduction.
(Some examples: leather :1 chainmail:4 full plate: 7,+3 defence. yes some heavy armor do give you a small defence bonus)
So if you would do the normal method you would hardly do any damag at all against a warrior in full plate (1d6+4 = an avarage of 7,5 max=10. so only 50% of the time you deal damage this is ok. But then against a leaher wearing enemy you would deal 1d6+4 damage then you would deal so much more damage. but that is normal since the DR difference is 7 so you wil always receive more damage. This should be balanced with an higer amount of damage (so the defender and striker role are born)

The idea is that players have very low HP. i don't know howmuch yet but you should die in about 4 of 5 good hits.
Also specials like sneak attack will be cut. because extra damage is to unbalanced for the game i think.

My question is: is there a way to make this system balanced? Is everything i want to cut and add not overpowered or making characters to weak?

Another idea was to cut standart weapon damage and let the damage dealt be decided by how big the difference is between the attacking and defending diceroll.

I hope you can help me

Lord Vukodlak
2010-03-27, 04:15 AM
If your going for realistic then armor and AC is more realistic then damage reduction. Just the AC might be different vs different types of damage. A flexible chain shirt may be great against a slashing weapon but horrible vs a bludgeon. Armor was worn with the intention of nearly negating the attack more then softening the blow

As others have said NO amount of strength is going to get a dagger through a suit of fullplate. You aim for the gaps.

The truth is a realistic armor would have both, a chain shirt wouldn't block a hammer strike very well but it would at least absorb some of the impact.

Scow2
2010-03-27, 12:08 PM
As others have said NO amount of strength is going to get a dagger through a suit of fullplate.

I beg to differ... but it would require dealing enough raw damage to overcome the armor's Hardness...

Lord Vukodlak
2010-03-27, 12:21 PM
I beg to differ... but it would require dealing enough raw damage to overcome the armor's Hardness...

He's trying to it more realistically, and realistically a dagger would never penetrate a suit of platemail armor. The dagger would snap first.

Going strictly by D&D rules it would also never penetrate as it be a sunder attempt and you can't sunder worn armor.

This is why D&D uses armor for avoiding attacks rather then absorbing damage.

Spiryt
2010-03-27, 12:31 PM
If you mounted a dagger on some massive, quick moving hydraulic arm, it certainly could penetrate some plate.

It won't really always snap too.

And generally speaking about "dagger" and "platemail armor" is like talking about "car". So many designs, weights, that one should generally speak more concretely :smallwink:

I would agree that most things that were used as a daggers in medieval, cannot be expected to puncture plate defenses of average thickness with great success.

"Platemail" is also pleonasm AFIKN, and is generally D&D-sque word. "Plate armor" is just alright, and "mail" is this (http://www.brondawna.pl/uzbrojenie/max/kolczuga2b.jpg).

Lord Vukodlak
2010-03-27, 12:34 PM
My point still remains armor as avoiding damage is more realistic then simply as DR.

Spiryt
2010-03-27, 12:37 PM
I generally agree. I don't like armor as DR, beacuse in few systems that uses it, it generally behaves very poorly. Maybe if used well it works better - I don't know.

Although generally, for "realistic" purposes, some more complete suits of mail, plate, linen/whatever could also use some minor DR.

Scow2
2010-03-27, 12:37 PM
I do like how the SRD has variants that allow armor to absorb/convert damage, because at some point armor does diminish otherwise-lethal blows, or, conversely, it doesn't protect against blows it should, and some damage seeps through.

And I continue to disagree with your assessment of the dagger's effect against platemail. Since it's blow is concentrated against a tiny spot of 3-5 mm of metal, enough force in a straight jab could have it punch through. Of course, it also has to penetrate the padding, so I could see Plate Armor granting something like DR/12 (10 for hardness of Steel, 2 for Hardness of the Padding) and 100% Fortification if it successfully defends agaisnt a piercing blow. Heavy armor such as plate and half-plate should give DR/2 against piercing and slashing weapons that aren't blocked by AC, because even the chinks in the armor are well-padded.

Slashing damage doesn't have the penetration ability of a piercing weapon such as a pick or a dagger attached to the end of a Chuck Norris Roundhouse KickTM

On the subject of attack bonuses, you should just use the Base Attack Bonuses already granted... a Fighter knows how to strike and parry better than a Wizard of the same level.

Also, weapon damage needs to be buffed considerably, and Bows should get a damage bonus over long ranges, since Gravity helps with penetration.

Critical threat ability should be made more dependant on weapon skill, such as by beating AC by 10+(threat range-20).

-OR-

You can let WotC do the work for you and just institute Unearthed Arcana's "Armor as Damage Reduction", "Armor Damage Conversion", and rolling AC variants, which should achieve the goal you are looking for.

Spiryt
2010-03-27, 12:57 PM
And I continue to disagree with your assessment of the dagger's effect against platemail. Since it's blow is concentrated against a tiny spot of 3-5 mm of metal, enough force in a straight jab could have it punch through. Of course.

Generally, nah.

Reenactors, historians, and generally interested people discuss this armor things to death, but really almost nobody argues that dagger(like) weapons could be used to anyhow reliably puncture solid steel defences.

Manuals show us that one should generally aim for joints with poleaxe, let alone a dagger.

Here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZNdK_z0OcvI) a test that shows that's hard to penetrate coat of plates with heavy lance like object, bashed into laying, unmoving target in laboratory. Dagger is really rather out.

Unless you have some serious tests that people haven't seen yet.



Also, weapon damage needs to be buffed considerably,
Nah, armors AC should be buffed, beacuse it's rather not enough for "Realistic" gameplay.

Weapon damage is already sufficiently high with proper use (feats etc.)

Of course there's a lot of flaws in this (crossbows), but 3.5, let's face it, will suck as "realistic" stuff without major overdoing.


and Bows should get a damage bonus over long ranges, since Gravity helps with penetration.

No. Arrow has certain velocity when it leaves the bow. It only can, naturally lose it later. Over great distance, it will gain it again falling from the arch, but obviously, it won't have greater velocity than in the beginning.

Some speculate that well designed, heavy arrows from heavy bows can retain have as much as 70% of starting velocity if their arch of flight ends at ~200 meters, but noone really tested it well.



You may just want to go with Unearthed Arcana's "Armor as Damage Reduction" and rolling AC variants, which should achieve the goal you are looking for.

Most people say it's rather bad variant. Haven't tried myself. But it looks like plate with 4 AC and 4 DR doesn't do anything well. Any more damaging attack will do big damage, way too many attacks will hit without problem.

Cilvyn
2010-03-27, 01:11 PM
Thanx for the reactions for so far.

I think you make a point when you say armor should still function as AC and not as DR. I also discussed with a friend in real life and he shares that statement too.

But as you also have mentioned. some kind of damage is better against plate then leather. so i was thinking about some new rules.

http://img202.imageshack.us/img202/132/armoure.png
The % is the damage reduction it provides
The armour gives the normal bonus to AC as in the normal DnD

- I dont know how to balance piercing damage. Though just a few weapons deal this kind of damage so maybe it is OK this way.
- I don't know what bludeoning damage should be like.

How did i balance the great bonusses of medium and heavy armour.
- Heavy armor costs A LOT more than leather armor. The first few levels you can't even affort buying one.
- You get a penalty on attack bonus. the armour is heavy to wear and it makes it more difficult to dilliver optimal attacks
- Heavy armour will make you faster fitugued than light armour.

I want to work with fatigue-points. This means you can fight with maximum bonusses for a given amount of turns. after those rounds you get a penalty which increases while you fight longer. ofcourse endurance will have a major role in this.

Maybe you guys have more ideas and tips. i really hope so.

Cil

Lord Vukodlak
2010-03-27, 01:20 PM
More realism would certainly mean adding in armor penetration for stuff like crossbows or a longbow and the painfully slow reload on the crossbow would make it useless to PC's.

Most people fail to understand that made the crossbow scary was not that it was this efficient killing machine. Its the crossbow was an easy killing machine. If I'm a farmer and a hostile knight with a decade of training is charging at me with intent to kill. There is no way I could defend myself with any bludgeon, blade or bow. I simply don't have the training, my only hope is to run for cover.

But I could pull out a crossbow kill him with relative ease at long range. The crossbow was considered a weapon of terror for that reason. It made killing easy. A highly trained longbow men could fire ten arrows a minute. But that required years of practice and training and good upper body strength.

Your DR vs different damage types would actually depend on the style of the armor rather then the weight class.

A Chain shirt would be good against slashing weapons but very poor vs bludgeoning. You'd probably halve the AC vs a bludgeoning weapon and it absorb little if any damage.

Spiryt
2010-03-27, 01:42 PM
If I really wanted to try somehow "high realistic" (touuuuuugh job) armor in 3.5, I would try something like that:

{table=head]"Material | Coverage (or whatever) Light | Medium | Heavy
Quilted | light | medium | -------
Layered cloth | light |medium | -------
Mail | light | medium | heavy
Full Plate| light (?) | medium | heavy
Coat of plates | light | medium | -------
Scale | ------- | medium | heavy
Lammellar | ------- | medium | ----- (?)
[/table]

Generally, you take a material of armor, choose amount of coverage (how substantial and complete is an armor) to determine how well armor protects, and how much it impairs movement. Some armor generally cannot have certain coverage, although accurate ideas would require someone way less lame at this than me.

Anyway, for example plate scale generally won't be light, while plate potentially can be. Quilted defenses will generally get to bulky and restrictive to provide real "heavy" status. But maybe sometimes.

So one can take material and coverage, to determine final armor.

For example one takes fairly light mail than covers from a bit below shoulders to a bit below waist. It's "light" mail, that have certain stats.

At the same time mail that covers from palms to knees, with the head, is generally medium, while mail with double layers here, and there, more substantial padding, smaller rings, or something can be "heavy".

Stats would depend on it.

Cilvyn
2010-03-27, 01:45 PM
Plate (good against slashing poor against piersing avarage against bludgeoning)

Scale (good against piercing rest ??)

Chain ( avarage gainst bludgeoning poor against piercing shashing ??)

Hide (poor against all)

Leather (poor against all)

so i should adjust the AC of the armors for the different kinds of damage.
What should the AC be of the armours? or can i make it more simple by only applying DR? what do you say?

EDIT: i get your point. the only thing is it will make the armour system a bit to complecated i think. and how should the different armours react to all the types of damage.. it will give so many tables :P

Scow2
2010-03-27, 01:49 PM
More realism would certainly mean adding in armor penetration for stuff like crossbows or a longbow and the painfully slow reload on the crossbow would make it useless to PC's.

Most people fail to understand that made the crossbow scary was not that it was this efficient killing machine. Its the crossbow was an easy killing machine. If I'm a farmer and a hostile knight with a decade of training is charging at me with intent to kill. There is no way I could defend myself with any bludgeon, blade or bow. I simply don't have the training, my only hope is to run for cover.

But I could pull out a crossbow kill him with relative ease at long range. The crossbow was considered a weapon of terror for that reason. It made killing easy. A highly trained longbow men could fire ten arrows a minute. But that required years of practice and training and good upper body strength.

Your DR vs different damage types would actually depend on the style of the armor rather then the weight class.

A Chain shirt would be good against slashing weapons but very poor vs bludgeoning. You'd probably halve the AC vs a bludgeoning weapon and it absorb little if any damage.
10 arrows a minute means the highest Rate of Fire any archer should achieve is 1/round, not the 10+/round seen at higher levels.

Crossbows definately need buffed damage and improved critical striking capability.

I'd think a chain shirt would be good against bludgeon and slashing both because the flexibility pads the user. The rigid construction of plate armors are less effective against bludgeon because the entire section of armor tries to move with the blow without regard for how the structures under it (The body) care about the movement. And, if it dents the armor (It's not extraordinarily thick plating), the armor stays immobilizing for the wearer.

And as far as the Dagger w/ sufficient strength puncturing a suit of fullplate, I was imagining the Dagger in the hands of a Giant or human with similar strength. (A +10 STR mod is required to penetrate steel plating.)

Leather and hide would be excellent against Bludgeoning damage.

And don't reduce damage by a %... it's better to use Damage Reduction. At some point with damage, it doesn't matter what type of damage it's dealing... it's all raw physical pain and penetration. Or maybe STR modifier Damage could be considered Piercing, Slashing, AND Bludgeon at once.

Cilvyn
2010-03-27, 01:53 PM
another change i make is a maximum of 1 (maybe 2?) attacks per round. like the 4.0 version. just for the record.

Scow2
2010-03-27, 01:55 PM
I prefer the multiple attacks from a high BaB... in reality, I think the strongest anyone has ever become is level 6 or 8 as far as level equivalents are concerned. (In 1e, 8 HD was the max any character could have for that reason.)

That is only 1 or 2 melee attacks/round. Once you go beyond Level 8, you venture into Charles Atlas Superpowers mode.

Have you seen the E6 game variant?

Spiryt
2010-03-27, 01:58 PM
Generally:

Plate - good against all. Bludgeoning generally are best against it.

Scale - Similar to plate. Possibly better against missiles (highly disscusable)
Generaly worse than plate in general

Lammellar - Similar to scale for game uses

Coat of plates - As above

Mail - good against pierc. & slash. Bludgeon probably
somehow weak spot

And similary. Generally all mostly slashing weapons ought to be highly poor against any form of armor. At most they will do some damage that's somehow bludgeoning in nature.


Leather and hide would be excellent against Bludgeoning damage.

Well, aside from the fact that such armors that were mainly from leather or hide are big no in attempt at "highly realistic" system, why should something like that be particularly effective against bludgeoning force?

Lord Vukodlak
2010-03-27, 02:07 PM
Because leather and hide armor is stiff and ridged, not flexible like modern leather clothing.

Spiryt
2010-03-27, 02:13 PM
Because leather and hide armor is stiff and ridged, not flexible like modern leather clothing.

I would like to ask:

How do you know that ? We had a thread about it some time ago, and generally consensus was that very little is known about purely "leather" armor. For sure, it wasn't really used in Europe.

The thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=145518)

And generally somehow stiffened leather armor would be obviously better than regular clothing - but there's no indication that it would be particularly good.

Cilvyn
2010-03-27, 02:14 PM
So many things I should think about when making the system.. pff

ok. I think the constructing your own armor by choosing materials and stuff is great and high realistic. Though i think this creates to many options and one would lose himself in surging the right table for his armor and the different kind of damages and stuff. So i prefer the normal armor types.

The armours with different specialties against the damage types is somthing i realy like. But (I watched the movies on yotube about how good armor is against weapons) then i think plate armour should absorb as much armor as possible (Except piercing). but will penalize the wearer when struck with bludgeoning damage when he is hit again and again. until the wearer falls phrone or somthing.

What do you think about that? The full plate then is very good but also risky to wear.

lesser_minion
2010-03-27, 02:16 PM
I haven't seen anything made of leather (hardened or not) that would survive a credible attempt to cause harm to someone.

Padded armour - made of lots and lots of layers of silk or canvas - would offer much better protection.

Hide is a bit more tolerable, because you could always argue that it's the pelt or carapace of some exotic creature that doesn't exist in the real world. However, leather is useful only for fashion and remaining dry, really.

Spiryt
2010-03-27, 02:17 PM
Generally, it's probably sensible idea, but it shouldn't be anything severe.

If somebody is being struck so hard that his plate deforms, his mobility will suffer, but someone in armor that doesn't absorb trauma in such way will be probably disabled.


However, leather is useful only for fashion and remaining dry, really.

Quite many Asian tribes would probably disagree.

Leather can be somehow applied to form resilient bits. I don't know (and even specialists are not sure) how it was historically done.

The trick is obviously, that metals like steel or bronze are way better material to form a lammellar or scale.

When people didn't have access to such metals from whatever reason, they tried something else. Leather in some cases.

Lord Vukodlak
2010-03-27, 02:21 PM
Sorry but no, Fullplate is made of stiff metal and has padding it be VERY good against bludgeoning and absorbing the impact. Anyone hit really hard with a bludgeoning weapon may be knocked over the difference with plate mail is your less likely to be dead from the trauma.

All armors are not created equal some where much more protective then others. And a suit of Full Plate Mail armor was as protective as it got.

Piercing weapons would work well because their accurate and better able get at the gaps in a suit of armor where its only chain links.

Cilvyn
2010-03-27, 02:26 PM
so you sugest that only when struck hard the plate armor should imobilizethe wearer a bit.

Can someone come up with some numbers so we can discuss that? i'm very bad in overwiewing numbers and the like that is why i ask someone to do it. I hope one of you can do that.

The armor types i want to use are:
Padded
leather
studded leather

scale mail
chain mail
breast plate

splint mail
half plate
full plate

EDIT: A table with an overwiew with the damage types against the armour types.

Krazddndfreek
2010-03-27, 02:32 PM
Quick-n-dirty (http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/UA:Damage_Conversion)

Jack of Spades
2010-03-27, 02:35 PM
Also specials like sneak attack will be cut. because extra damage is to unbalanced for the game i think.


Then what fun is it to be a rogue?



No. Arrow has certain velocity when it leaves the bow. It only can, naturally lose it later. Over great distance, it will gain it again falling from the arch, but obviously, it won't have greater velocity than in the beginning.


Well, if the archer chose to shoot at an angle greater than ~60 degrees, then the arrow would actually not lose any velocity, as physics say that if the starting and ending elevation are the same, then gravity will accelerate the arrow to very nearly the same speed at which it was shot. In this case, the penetration bonus would actually make sense, assuming the archer has open air in which to shoot the arc.



I haven't seen anything made of leather (hardened or not) that would survive a credible attempt to cause harm to someone.


Excuse my presumption, but I'm going to guess that you are basing this off of today's leather, which is generally made for style more than protection. Legitimate leather armoring would not only be supplemented by several layers of thick silk/cloth, but would also be hardened to the point where it can protect against blows. Mongols and Samurai, two of the more formidable fighting forces in history, both used leather armor.

Lord Vukodlak
2010-03-27, 02:37 PM
so you suggest that only when struck hard the plate armor should imobilizethe wearer a bit.

No I suggest that ANYONE struck really hard might be knocked over, platemail would not only help keep the person from being dead but absorb some of the impact making it more difficult.



Well, if the archer chose to shoot at an angle greater than ~60 degrees, then the arrow would actually not lose any velocity, as physics say that if the starting and ending elevation are the same, then gravity will accelerate the arrow to very nearly the same speed at which it was shot. In this case, the penetration bonus would actually make sense, assuming the archer has open air in which to shoot the arc.


Which is why firing a gun into the air can kill, but bullets dropped of a building can not.

Spiryt
2010-03-27, 02:40 PM
Well, if the archer chose to shoot at an angle greater than ~60 degrees, then the arrow would actually not lose any velocity, as physics say that if the starting and ending elevation are the same, then gravity will accelerate the arrow to very nearly the same speed at which it was shot. In this case, the penetration bonus would actually make sense, assuming the archer has open air in which to shoot the arc.

It could possibly achieve the close to the same velocity in vacuum.

It's still wouldn't achieve the velocity from point "0", as you stated yourself.

So I can't see why bonus to penetration should be valid.

If archer shoot from some solid elevation, then yes, in some cases certainly arrow can reach greater velocity at some point of flight.

Not in most "normal" cases though.

Jack of Spades
2010-03-27, 02:44 PM
It could possibly achieve the same velocity in vacuum.
It's still wouldn't achieve the velocity from point "0", as you stated yourself.

So I can't see why bonus to penetration should be valid.

Because regular penetration assumes that the arrow is being shot straight-ish, and suffering the deceleration caused by air resistance alone. Shooting with a steep arc would create a period of acceleration, which would cause the arrow to gain enough speed to come to very nearly the velocity of a point blank hit.

Krazddndfreek
2010-03-27, 02:45 PM
It's not really enough to change the rules for it though. Using dexterity as a bonus and weapon proficiency assumes these things readily.

Spiryt
2010-03-27, 02:52 PM
Because regular penetration assumes that the arrow is being shot straight-ish, and suffering the deceleration caused by air resistance alone. Shooting with a steep arc would create a period of acceleration, which would cause the arrow to gain enough speed to come to very nearly the velocity of a point blank hit.

As I said, even most "enthusiastic" archery guys doesn't think that arrow can retain more than 70% of it's velocity at greater distance.

Have you any proof that arrow sent on such steep arc would reach the target with greater vel. That one sent traditionally - at the distance of, say 70 meters?

Leaving the fact, that shooting with such steep arc at 70 meters is honestly pointless. It will be in air too long, while situation can change rapidly.
Accuracy of such shot will be practically non existent. Winds at bigger heights would screw things even more.

There could be reasons to shoot arrows in such steep arc, but penetration wouldn't be one of them.

Ashtagon
2010-03-27, 02:57 PM
The amount of acceleration provided by gravity is insignificant over any distance that an archer is likely to loose an arrow.

Assuming level ground, and assuming the arrow is loosed at a velocity of 250 fps (typical starting velocities are 150-350 fps), and further assuming no air resistance/drag effects worth noting...

At a range of 1000 feet (near the upper end for longbows, and much farther than the average D&D character normally shoots), you have a flight time of 4 seconds. Of that, you get 2 seconds in which the arrow climbs, and 2 seconds in which it falls.

In two seconds, it will fall a total distance of ~96 feet, and its final vertical velocity will be 96 fps. 96 fps vertically compared to 250 fps horizontally. And bear in mind of course that you really want your arrow to be approaching the enemy at a horizontal angle, in order to maximise the target area.

At a more usual range of 200 feet, the final vertical velocity will be a mere 26 fps.

Jack of Spades
2010-03-27, 03:02 PM
I'll concede the arrow point: the practicality of an arc is really none other than in situations where two armies are facing one another and accuracy isn't necessary. Also, if you're creeping about in a dank, goblin-infested tunnel, you're not gonna have that much sky anyhow.

Scow2
2010-03-27, 03:05 PM
Because regular penetration assumes that the arrow is being shot straight-ish, and suffering the deceleration caused by air resistance alone. Shooting with a steep arc would create a period of acceleration, which would cause the arrow to gain enough speed to come to very nearly the velocity of a point blank hit.

Lab tests show a longbow fired point-blank at a suit of Armor cannot penetrate, while a long-range shot that has gathered momentum from gravity, has more momentum than the point-blank shot. Despite the loss of velocity to air-resistance, the additional force from gravity increases the penetrating power. Unlike a point-blank shot, a descending arched shot's penetrating velocity is still accellerating when it impacts.

@ the math: The velocity is the square root of the sum of the velocities. That vertical velocity was almost half the horizontal velocity, making it not-insignificant. And again, it's still accellerating.

And hardened leather, while not anywhere near as durable as steel per inch, is thicker, granting more padding and has more space to decelerate a blow, and the wax coating makes it effective at blocking a strike. Its also more resiliant than steel, and by bending it absorbs the impact energy.

Plate armors aren't as effective against Bludgeon weapons because they are rigid. The force applied to the side cannot be dispersed over the entire surface area, so the entire piece of armor moves with the blow, breaking the fragile stuff underneath. The padding allows some dispersion, but not all armors have that much padding.

Slashing weapons aren't effective against anything (Even the target's body is built to withstand slashing and blunt damage), but their advantage was they were accurate in warfare. There are always five ways to dodge a piercing weapon (Dodge left, dodge right, back off), only two to dodge a vertical strike (Back off or duck), and three to dodge a gravity-assisted downward slash or armor-defying upward slash (dodge left, dodge right, or back up).

But yeah, Full Plate armor is good against everything. The problem with full plate is it costs a bloody fortune, and crossbows are cheaper.

Cilvyn
2010-03-27, 03:05 PM
Go go arguing about arrows shooting and stuff.. EDIT: i realy like it, you can actualy learn alot from your arguments and statements nice...

About the nonlethal damage.. interesting.. that means that if you deal not enough damage to actualy 'hit' you can still beat him. like an enemy in plate armor who will still be 'damaged' when you hit him even you didn't cut a wound.

Why i wanted to cut the sneak attack: humans have not that many hp. and you will not gain more than 1-3 hp per level. maybe not even any hp at all. so if a rogue would deal 1d6+4 +3d6 then a rogue will one shot every enemy caught flat fooded..:P i will therefore adjust the damage system. I will add for compensation more abilities (like utility powers in 4.0 and 'specials'in 3.5)

I think the non-lethal damage is the best system to use for now. But i will merge it with the damage types vs armor types.

Spiryt
2010-03-27, 03:07 PM
Much more typical velocities of longbow/any battle bow arrows would be 170 - 200 fps.

Any more is generally hard to achieve with "average" longbow, more often attainable with shorter, reflexive bows, with arrows used just for distance/velocity, not any actual practical use.

And my arrows generally tend to spend more time, in air, as far as I can see. I may be wrong, but there are a lot of factors here.


You've got to be careful with math.


other than in situations where two armies are facing one another and accuracy isn't necessary.

Even hitting an "army" isn't so simple, and certainly not with such shot. With bow any bit of accuracy is helpful.


Lab tests show a longbow fired point-blank at a suit of Armor cannot penetrate, while a long-range shot that has gathered momentum from gravity, has more momentum than the point-blank shot. Despite the loss of velocity to air-resistance, the additional force from gravity increases the penetrating power. Unlike a point-blank shot, a descending arched shot' penetrating velocity is still accellerating when it impacts.

Any sources of those "lab tests"?
It's absolutely against physics. Arrow from bow won't be faster at the end of the flight. Thus won't have more momentum. Simple.


Plate armors aren't as effective against Bludgeon weapons because they are rigid. The force applied to the side cannot be dispersed over the entire surface area, so the entire piece of armor moves with the blow, breaking the fragile stuff underneath. The padding allows some dispersion,

Plate armors are effective against bludgeon beacuse they are rigid.

The force applied is certainly dispersed over the surface are.

In case of less rigid armor, energy is dispersed, beacuse surface is not absorbing the energy. It therefore isn't so damaged - beacuse body underneath receives energy - with rather bad effects.

Although point about deformation is of course, still correct - deformed plate will of course be definitely harmful and restrictive.

imp_fireball
2010-03-27, 03:10 PM
Hello everyone,

I'm trying to make another combat system. This sytem will be played in a high realistic historical setting.

Attacks and defences

Whenever you want to hit an enemy you make an attack roll. The formula below shows you how to get to your total attack bonus. You roll a d20 and add your bonus to the outcome of the roll.

Half level + Strength +proficiency+ bonuses = Total Attack bonus

Example:
Garret has is level 8 so has a bonus of +4. His strength modifier is +2. He is proficient with the longsword with which he makes the attack. This gives him another +2 bonus. His total attack bonus is now 1d10+8

When an opponent tries to hit you, you can make a defense dice roll. Your attacker only makes a succesfull hit when his attack roll is a higher number than your defense roll. The formula below shows you how to get to you total defense bonus.

Half Level + Dexterity + shield bonus + bonuses = Total Defence Bonus

Example:
Wayne wants to block Gerrets attack. His level is 6 and therefore has a bonus of 3. His dexterity modifier is 4. Wayne carries a bow and has no shield in his hands. His total defense bonus is now 1d10+7

Applying Damage


Here is the problem. I don't know how to apply damage. The normal way would be weapon+strenght. But, now it comes, as you've seen armor doen't apply to your defence. instead it gives you damage reduction.
(Some examples: leather :1 chainmail:4 full plate: 7,+3 defence. yes some heavy armor do give you a small defence bonus)
So if you would do the normal method you would hardly do any damag at all against a warrior in full plate (1d6+4 = an avarage of 7,5 max=10. so only 50% of the time you deal damage this is ok. But then against a leaher wearing enemy you would deal 1d6+4 damage then you would deal so much more damage. but that is normal since the DR difference is 7 so you wil always receive more damage. This should be balanced with an higer amount of damage (so the defender and striker role are born)

The idea is that players have very low HP. i don't know howmuch yet but you should die in about 4 of 5 good hits.
Also specials like sneak attack will be cut. because extra damage is to unbalanced for the game i think.

My question is: is there a way to make this system balanced? Is everything i want to cut and add not overpowered or making characters to weak?

Another idea was to cut standart weapon damage and let the damage dealt be decided by how big the difference is between the attacking and defending diceroll.

I hope you can help me

Give a static defense bonus for all types of armor and when an attack falls within that bonus, damage reduction applies.

Sneak attacks could do other things like ignore armor, or stun or whatever - possibly depending on the weapon you use too. Say, if you use a garrote, you can grapple and strange at the same time - if you have a certain terrain advantage you can ignore the penalty you get to grapple when all your doing is yanking the garrote (because the enemy can't reach you - maybe because you have a height advantage or whatever).

Strong creatures like bears and horses and such should have more hp then humans obviously. You can go all over the place with damage values due to weapons. If the game is tactics focused, survival in the wilderness should be even harder - not only are there predators, but disease too. In trench warfare, many of your soldiers will die if it rains a lot (allowing other lifeforms to cultivate and spread disease), but since disease is contagious you could use this against the enemy too (use catapults to catapult human body parts into enemy trenches; heh).

Some weapons are specially made to kill animals (ie. elephant rifle) and do ridiculous damage in order to 1 shot animals on high attack rolls, but might be expensive or heavy or whatever - or so loud when firing that using them against humans is a bad idea.
---

Another idea:

When a player levels up, instead of the gaining HD, they have attribute points where they wanna invest attributes (alternatively, they can invest in a constitution maneuver/feat to increase their hp if that really concerns them).

Say, if they invest in intelligence, then they get bonuses on skills they already know or acquire more skill points (skills could take a bit from both standard D&D and modern and should be more drastic and dynamic in this game if its less combat intensive) and a few minor maneuvers or feats.

If they invest in dexterity, they can take a few additional minor maneuvers (combat or otherwise; these are usually small things - some more powerful/useful maneuvers would have a level requirement or require a player to save points). If they invest in strength, they get some strength maneuvers and a higher strength score. If they invest in constitution, they get more hp and a higher constitution score. If they invest in wisdom, they get more determination (which could be like action points or whatever)/will power (morale, resist mind altering drugs, etc.)/perception (see below), which provides bonuses to your perception score and allows intuitive based feats/maneuvers to be bought. If they invest in charisma, they can invest in either bluff, intimidate, diplomacy, or in feats and maneuvers based in inspiring, fooling, scaring, or coddling others.

Alternatively, they can be spread across multiple attributes.

Perception would not be a skill - rather it'd work more like initiative and can be increased with wisdom, feats and maneuvers. Other things like jump and tumble wouldn't be skills either, and work more like special maneuvers that everyone knows (you invest in feats and maneuvers to increase these scores; jump still uses strength while tumble still uses dexterity).

Hp - Like you said, hp would be low, or perhaps it could be high for some classes but weapons would deal drastically more damage depending on circumstances to counter act this.

Say, Joe has 5 hp, and he suffers 4 damage. Now his hp is 1. That's not hard to figure out. But say, he suffers something like 6 damage. This is where he must make a 'threshold' save, which uses either constitution or fortitude (or will/wisdom if you have the right feat).

In any case, he makes a con/fort save of a DC equal to say, 15 + how much damage the attack surpassed his hp by. Say he rolls a 17? Then he falls prone and stabilizes automatically (-1 hp). If it's a 15, then he falls prone and is dying (-1 hp). If he rolls well below 16, like say, 9 or 11, then he's dead, or maybe he suffers the damage die of the weapon a second time (don't factor in strength bonus again). If he rolls way beyond 16, like say, 22, then he receives 1d4 damage reduction for this attack. He rolls a 2. The damage is now 4 and he's at 1 hp.

Note that this only applies to attacks that bypass hp. -10 still means you're dead. 0 hp still means you are staggered. -1 hp still means you are dying. Rolling to stabilize still works as normal.

Feats and maneuvers can increase the special damage reduction die Joe receives. Usually, the only way Joe could stop himself from dying at -10, however, is if he were of some other race or was part man/machine or whatever. Items like adrenaline would give Joe the ability to increase his special damage reduction die temporarily.

Proficiencies: Proficiency in a weapon or armor only applies to weapons or armor sized appropriately for the character. Weapons that take longer then 1 round to operate (such as artillery) require no proficiency, but may require other resources like a crew.

Proficiency in a weapon can be taken from investing in either a character's prime attribute or in an attribute related to the weapon. A light weapon may require dexterity as standard, while a complex weapon might require intelligence. There's three levels of proficiency, modicum, decent, and excellent. In order, they provide either poor (1/2), medium (2/3) or good (1/1) BAB progression. BAB increases per level as normal.

Modicum proficiency requires only 1 point from the appropriate attribute point pool, with decent requiring 2 and excellent requiring 3.

Proficiency in armor is 1 pool point for light, 2 for medium or 3 for heavy.

Non-proficiency in anything is as normal D&D for armor, weapon or shield.
----

Classes

Classes are generally standard and not made to encompass a particular 'fluff'; they might involve a niche, although that's up to player choice, and classes shouldn't have to involve any niche at all (I'm assuming the OP doesn't wanna make this work like standard D&D).

Some feats and maneuvers might require special prestige classes, although PRCs shouldn't make as much of an impact in this game (compared to modern where PRCs are necessary). It might only apply if say, your character understands a special way of killing that only shaolin monks know. He can use 5-point exploding heart technique, but only after investing a whole bunch in dexterity, saving up his 'dexterity feat/maneuver pool' and taking a level of the Shaolin Monk PRC class.

Attribute investment:

Whenever a character levels up, they receive 1d4 attribute points, although this may increase depending on their class. These points can be put into any one of the six attributes - strength, wisdom, dexterity, constitution, charisma, or intelligence. Whenever an attribute is invested in, it increases in rank/point. All attributes have a maximum of 4 ranks at level 1, and increase by 1 rank per level; ultimately coming down to level +3.


The Fighter
http://jeet-kune-do.gungfu.com/mainpic.jpg
Hoo Ha!

Fighters in this game are the maneuver/feat artists. They train in excelling in all the ways of physical technique. They have a choice of selecting dexterity, constitution or strength as their prime attribute. Whatever their prime attribute is, they receive additional pool points for every point they invest in that attribute (1.5, rounded down, instead of 1).

However, fighters are also among the most ambitious in terms of self perfection, and thus they also have more points to invest in attributes for each level - as such, a straight up fighter who invests in mostly strength and constitution, but also charisma, can become a front liner who inspires his men on the battlefield.

HP: Like all classes, fighters have 1d6 hp and 1d4 damage reduction threshold, which remains that way until they invest in constitution. However, unless they make dexterity their prime attribute, their fortitude save is their only good save (which begins at +2 at level 1 and then increases depending on how pool points are spent within constitution).

Attribute Points: Fighters have 1d6 attribute points per level.

Drive: A class's drive is what truly makes it differentiate from other classes. The fighter's drive is his proficiencies. If he invests even one rank in dexterity or strength (prime attribute not withstanding), he receives eight free excellent /heavy armor proficiencies, which can be spread amongst weapons or armor. Alternatively, any one of the excellent proficiencies can be broken down into modicum or decent proficiencies. The total point value is 24.
NOTE: A fighter can select unarmed as their primary proficiency, however it must be 'excellent' to grant the affects of improved unarmed strike. Modicum merely removes the non-proficiency penalty, while decent increases the damage die and turns it to lethal but still provokes AoOs.

Jack of Spades
2010-03-27, 03:18 PM
Even hitting an "army" isn't so simple, and certainly not with such shot. With bow any bit of accuracy is helpful.


Yes, but if your 100 archers and 2000 infantrymen are facing another army of the same size from across a field, neither of you is going to be too worried about whether each individual arrow hits someone as long as it goes into the crowd somewhere :smallbiggrin: In such a case the arc is actually helpful because it offers a chance (no matter how minuscule) of the arrows flying over the grunts and into the throat of a commanding officer who wasn't paying attention. Look at early-gunpowder tactics where the strategy was to fire the inaccurate muskets until they maybe hit a guy, and you'll notice taht the "fire-en-mass-and-pray" strategy wasn't all that rare back then.

Shooting in RPG's is generally more driven by the hunting mindset of "I have 3 arrows and am expected to kill something." Where accuracy is definitely a must.

Dienekes
2010-03-27, 03:19 PM
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=134353&page=2

This thread may be of use to you. It isn't of damage reduction as armor per se, but of more realistic armors, what existed, when, where, and how effective they were.

For armor as DR you may wish to look for other games such as Riddle of Steel. A game based around realistic combat and is given approval by ARMA if memory serves, so I'm under the impression that it's fairly accurate.

There book flower of battle has DR as something like this (a note RoS weapons do less damage and the character has less health)

Heavy Padded Cloth = 1
Leather = 2
Light Mail and Hardened Leather = 3
Scaled Armor, Mail, Light Plate = 4
Double or Banded Mail, Plate = 5
Heavy Plate = 6

With optional rules on different effectiveness's of armor as
Padded Cloth = weak against slashing
Leather= weak against slashing and bludgeoning, strong against piercing
Hardened Leather= strong against bludgeoning
Scale= strong against slashing, weak against piercing
Mail= strong against slashing, weak against bludgeoning
Double Mail= strong against slashing and piercing, weak against bludgeoning
Banded Mai strong against slashing and piercing
Light Plate=
Plate or Heavy Plate= strong against slashing and bludgeoning.

Hope this helps as a means of doing what you're trying to do.

Spiryt
2010-03-27, 03:25 PM
Yes, but if your 100 archers and 2000 infantrymen are facing another army of the same size from across a field, neither of you is going to be too worried about whether each individual arrow hits someone as long as it goes into the crowd somewhere :smallbiggrin: In such a case the arc is actually helpful because it offers a chance (no matter how minuscule) of the arrows flying over the grunts and into the throat of a commanding officer who wasn't paying attention. Look at early-gunpowder tactics where the strategy was to fire the inaccurate muskets until they maybe hit a guy, and you'll notice taht the "fire-en-mass-and-pray" strategy wasn't all that rare back then.


Nope, I'm talking about the fact that even hitting big group of infantry, say 8 rows of 100 man each, isn't really so easy. And the flatter the trajectory, the easier hit is.

"Fire en mass and pray" strategy requires accuracy, especially at greater distances. Bow is a weapon where user must calculate quite a lot things at the same time (his string, bow, so both hands, arrow position etc), as well as ground, wind etc.

People assume that hitting large formations is just shooting without problem. It's certainly way easier than hitting individual man, but certainly not easy, or "automatical".
_____________

Anyway, this is why making an "highly realistic" system is bloody difficult.

Professional historians cannot agree on this stuff, let alone hobbyists...

Historian is telling silly things, beacuse he has no practical experience.

Reenactor is doing some silly things, because he has not enough academical knowledge.

And so on.

imp_fireball
2010-03-27, 04:22 PM
Anyway, this is why making an "highly realistic" system is bloody difficult.

Professional historians cannot agree on this stuff, let alone hobbyists...

Historian is telling silly things, beacuse he has no practical experience.

Reenactor is doing some silly things, because he has not enough academical knowledge.

And so on.

Actually I think the re-enactor fails because of his lack of imagination, or because he's never been there.

Academics merely repeat what has already been written down and then boast about their ability to cite things.

So really, I'd trust an officer on the field who's studied military science more than a historian.
----

As for actual battlefield warfare, you can probably just turn the system around and make it into a wargame.

Or go by this method: If every archer is making an attack roll, one of them will hit - even if they can't see the enemy or are way out of range (1000 feet = -20 attack penalty, 50% chance of miss due to total concealment). That means something like 1 in 40 archers will hit. If you have 400 archers, then 10 will hit. And this is per round. Battlefield engagements can take hours.

Pretty good advantage.

A good maneuver/feat could be the ability to repeat the attack roll of the top archer who actually did hit (although it's very difficult to tell), as long as the enemy formation doesn't move in that time period. A character that combines intelligence and charisma could probably command a line of archers to do that sort of thing (use charisma to give them the 'morale' to all fire into the same spot; morale might be more then just an attack bonus, it could also work like competence in some cases, allowing extraordinary feats of magnitude well beyond the scope of an archer's regular abilities - the kind of thing charisma junkies would probably go for).


People assume that hitting large formations is just shooting without problem. It's certainly way easier than hitting individual man, but certainly not easy, or "automatical".

Obviously, it requires the right leader to tell them where to shoot. The archer merely needs to know how to shoot that far. In real life, they've probably trained in groups before, learning how to place arrows in the same general location but not to hit actual targets. You'll note that in the movies, the archer formation always angles each of their bows in the same way, drawing each string to the same amount of tension as well.

Spiryt
2010-03-27, 04:32 PM
Actually I think the re-enactor fails because of his lack of imagination, or because he's never been there.

Academics merely repeat what has already been written down and then boast about their ability to cite things.

So really, I'd trust an officer on the field who's studied military science more than a historian.
----


Except for re-enactor who fails because his overactive imagination, and recreates hell knows what that never was used. Like viking claymore or helmet with grill crate. :smallbiggrin:

And "academics" also means excavations, microscopes, analysis of artifacts, and stuff. At least if I'm not wrong about word in english.

And such knowledge is crucial.


Obviously, it requires the right leader to tell them where to shoo
Without leader they'll will know where to shoot as well.

Although obviously somebody who can find the best target and guide the archers would be of course crucial for higher level tactics.


The archer merely needs to know how to shoot that far

drawing each string to the same amount of tension as well

And that's what I'm talking about. People automatically assume that's as easy natural thing.

It's not. Placing arrows in consistent way is pretty challenging thing, even for good bowman.

imp_fireball
2010-03-27, 04:35 PM
Except for re-enactor who fails because his overactive imagination, and recreates hell knows what that never was used. Like viking claymore or helmet with grill crate.

Nah, that's just a lack of imagination. They use references from modern times as fillers for major imagination holes that otherwise can't be filled. :smallamused:


And "academics" also means excavations, microscopes, analysis of artifacts, and stuff. At least if I'm not wrong about word in english.

I thought that was science. I haven't looked up the definition, but I'm pretty sure academics merely involves reading books.



And such knowledge is crucial.

I didn't refute that. Note that military scientists have a lot of knowledge. The level of appropriateness is what matters.


Shooting in RPG's is generally more driven by the hunting mindset of "I have 3 arrows and am expected to kill something." Where accuracy is definitely a must.

The reason for that is pretty clear.

The hero is more bad ass if he uses skill to defeat the villain than luck. Also, it's made to delude players into thinking that it isn't all pure chance in a die roll anyway. :smallamused:


and you'll notice taht the "fire-en-mass-and-pray" strategy wasn't all that rare back then.

It was really only the soldiers that were doing the praying. The result of the battle depended even more on leadership thinking and tactics then ever before (whereas in the stone/dark ages, the leader merely had to be good at fighting and a source of inspiration for everyone else).

Spiryt
2010-03-27, 04:49 PM
Nah, that's just a lack of imagination. They use references from modern times as fillers for major imagination holes that otherwise can't be filled. :smallamused:


Not really.

Too many stuff doesn't resemble anything from modern times.

Those are just things that "Would make sense" "It works" "It would be cool" "I wonder...".

Products of imagination.

imp_fireball
2010-03-27, 05:41 PM
Not really.

Too many stuff doesn't resemble anything from modern times.

Those are just things that "Would make sense" "It works" "It would be cool" "I wonder...".

Products of imagination.

Exactly what were you referring to, again?

Something about a grille?

Note that a lot of stuff is derived from modern inventions (modern being 16th century and onwards - beyond viking times).