Jump to content

Trifletraxor

Administrators
  • Posts

    2,718
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    20

Posts posted by Trifletraxor

  1. 3 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

    I'd suggest dropping negative damage modifiers and instead bump weapon damage. So instead of 1D8-1D4 you just downgrade to 1d6 or even 1d4 damage.

    For the purpose of avoiding the instances of negative damage dealt?

    Quote

    That might even be a good way to handle damage bonuses too, if you like. .

    Mixing bumping and adding would be confusing, so bumping up and down would make sense if one chose to use that mechanic. Is this the houserule you use in your games Atgxtg?

    Quote

    I'd also suggest having the db progresses with one formula/rate rather than the three different rates you have now. It will make it easier to remember and get rid of the big jumps when you hit the break points. For example, as written something with STR 90 would get a 9D6 db (average damage of 31.5) while something with a STR 100 would get a 1D100 db (average damage 50.5). That's a big jump! 1D100 is more like 14D6 than 10D6 so you end up with about a 40% difference!

    Easily memorable and simple math is difficult to combine with a single formula. STR 99 -> STR 100 is a big jump on average damage modifier dealt, but I'd actually prefer my PC getting 1D100 damage to 9D6 damage. With 1D100 you'd at least have a chance of survival! ;)

     

     

  2. With a 0,1% chance for a human to have a -1D4 damage modifier with the old RQ3 rules, negative damage modifier wasn't much of an issue with the old rules either. But it sort of makes it just a damage bonus instead of a modifier. 3/5 have 0, while 2/5 have +1d4.

    A more granular damage modifier emphasizes the importance of the STR characteristic for melee combat I think. I just started playtesting the rule now - with the result that one of the partymembers dropped from a +1D4 to a +1 modifier, but otherwise the rest stayed the same.

    From what I can calculate the new modifier have a human average of +0,273, while the old had a human average of +1,002.

    • Like 1
  3. That's a valid point, but affects only one in 216.

    I just checked the percentile distribution:

    Damage mod,: New% vs. Old RQ3%

    • -1d4:  9,3% vs.  0,1%
    •   -1: 16,7% vs.  0
    •    0: 36.6% vs. 60,0%
    •   +1: 21,3% vs.  0
    • +1d4: 11,6% vs. 39,2%
    • +1D6:  4,2% vs.  0,7%
    • +1D8:  0,5% vs.  0

    Sort of surprised me to see how low the chance of having a +1d6 modifier with a natural roll the old rule actually gave.

  4. I should add that SIZ as a characteristic have been dropped from D100rules. The above rule should be easy enough to remember after hearing it once or twice. What do you think?

  5. Damage dealt in combat by natural, melee and thrown weapons are modified by the damage modifier, an attribute derived from a character's strength characteristic:

    Strength (STR) : Damage modifier

    • 01-06: -1D4
    • 07-08: -1
    • 09-11:  0
    • 12-13: +1
    • 14-15: +1D4
    • 16-17: +1D6
    • 18-19: +1D8
    • ≥ 20:  (STR/10)D6
    • ≥ 100: (STR/100)D100

    * Round all fractions down

  6. So I've started to thinker with our houserules again and decided to bring the drools forum out from the inactive ones again. I've hidden the others threads that were present in this forum as the rules have evolved or changed at least. ETA is probably a couple of years away, so this will function as a rules-laboratory forum until then.

    • Like 4
  7. 1. Having skills over 100% is not important in my opinion. I've capped skills at 100% - calling this Mastery, and then given some small ability related to the skill for each successful experience roll after this.

    2. Not that important - I think the better question is how fast should a character become more powerful - and the driving force for this is usually gear and magic. In my group I allow for experience rolls after each session of game play.

    • Like 1
  8. It's not a huge difference as you say. Can't really see how it's an improvement over the old roll over current skill way of resolving the experience roll though. It makes INT a more important stat, but it's not more intuitive and the rule is a tad more complex than the old one.

    • Like 1
  9. On 3.3.2017 at 8:06 PM, David Scott said:

    You got it.

    By the way, browser have started to flag any site without a SSL certificate as unsafe to write in a passwords for, as the passwords are not encrypted if the site is hacked. So, we'll have to get us one of those.

    • Like 2
  10. Avatars are being moved back to the original storage in hope that it will fix some of the problems. Trouble was that the images were moved just when Amazon's servers were down. Might be that some avatars was lost in the process and have to be reuploaded.

  11. Hello Hive!

    As we were getting close to our maximum storage space, a measly 5 GB, and did not want to pay a lot for an upgrade at IPS, some of the files are now stored externally with Amazon.

    Please tell if you have any problems with downloads, attachments or images - these are the main files affected.

    Cheers, Trifletraxor.

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...