Trifletraxor Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 With kind of damage modifier system to you use? Dice based (+1d4, 1d6, etc) like RQ3, MRQ and BRP, or number based (+1, +2, +3, etc.) like RQ4? If you have an opinion about which is best, what are your arguments? Dice based is good since rolling dice is always fun, while the number based has more granularity to it. I'm currently not sure which one to go with. SGL. Quote Ef plest master, this mighty fine grub! 116/420. High Priest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
threedeesix Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 With kind of damage modifier system to you use? Dice based (+1d4, 1d6, etc) like RQ3, MRQ and BRP, or number based (+1, +2, +3, etc.) like RQ4? If you have an opinion about which is best, what are your arguments? Dice based is good since rolling dice is always fun, while the number based has more granularity to it. I'm currently not sure which one to go with. SGL. Pure BRP baby. Quote Join my Mythras/RuneQuest 6: Classic Fantasy Yahoo Group at https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/RQCF/info "D100 - Exactly 5 times better than D20" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cjbowser Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 I learned BRP through CoC, so I stick with the die based modifers. Quote Various RPGs I've worked on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nightshade Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 I always prefed the dice based approach, though I understand the attraction of the fixed adders; they just seem to produce a little too predictable a damage output for my taste. That said, I prefer to break down the steps as finely as possible (I'm not averse to using a D2 for the bottom step for example). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atgxtg Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 I use adie variable. I do prefer to smooth out the progression a little though, rather than +1D6/16 points. One idea that I've seen and like is a "die shift" approach. That is, rather than an add, the damage modifer adjust the die used by the weapon. For example, changing a weapon that does 1D8+1 to 1D10+1. The only drawback to this approach in BRP is how BRP handles critical and specials. Quote Chaos stalks my world, but she's a big girl and can take of herself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frogspawner Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 (edited) Number based (+1, +2, +3, etc.). For historical reasons, having evolved my game from D&D (I'd love to say it was RQ4 influence, but...) My players might have balked at dice-for-bonuses, but I can't just blame them - I actually prefer the plain plusses myself. The weapon dice give enough randomness, and having to roll more dice just slows it down - finding the darn things to roll (which takes some players a horribly long time!) and adding them all up is harder. And the finer-grained flat bonuses are clearly better for the low-powered gaming that I aim for. PS: Also, when the weapon dice are the only dice being rolled, there's no room for 'confusion' (let's call it) over which are to be doubled for various types of special hits. Edited March 14, 2009 by frogspawner PS Quote Britain has been infiltrated by soviet agents to the highest levels. They control the BBC, the main political party leaderships, NHS & local council executives, much of the police, most newspapers and the utility companies. Of course the EU is theirs, through-and-through. And they are among us - a pervasive evil, like Stasi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trifletraxor Posted March 14, 2009 Author Share Posted March 14, 2009 Number based (+1, +2, +3, etc.). For historical reasons, having evolved my game from D&D (I'd love to say it was RQ4 influence, but...) What table or calculation do you use? I was thinking of: - if STR 1-10; damage modifier = 0. - if STR 11+; damage modifier = +(STR-10)/2 SGL. Quote Ef plest master, this mighty fine grub! 116/420. High Priest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frogspawner Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 What table or calculation do you use? I was thinking of: - if STR 1-10; damage modifier = 0. - if STR 11+; damage modifier = +(STR-10)/2 Sounds good. I use the straight D&D3.x bonuses, i.e. the same as your 11+ formula (if rounded down) - but continued down below 10. That may be a bit harsh (especially on any STR 9-ers!) considering there are also minimum STRs for weapons (is that why you'd cut it off at 10?). But I say - what the heck. Quote Britain has been infiltrated by soviet agents to the highest levels. They control the BBC, the main political party leaderships, NHS & local council executives, much of the police, most newspapers and the utility companies. Of course the EU is theirs, through-and-through. And they are among us - a pervasive evil, like Stasi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soltakss Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 I use D4/D6 etc. There were a lot of interesting ideas in RQ4 but the base rules were not that good, in my opinion. Having a straight add results in potentially less damage, which I don't like. Also, it takes away all the fun of rolling lots of D6s when using big, strong NPCs. Quote Simon Phipp - Caldmore Chameleon - Wallowing in my elitism since 1982. Many Systems, One Family. Just a fanboy. www.soltakss.com/index.html Jonstown Compendium author. Find my contributions here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RosenMcStern Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 Yes. There is nothing that scares players more than picking up D6s from all around the game table while saying "It is for the damage modifier." It improves PC stealth and diplomatic skills big time. Quote Proud member of the Evil CompetitionTM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trifletraxor Posted March 14, 2009 Author Share Posted March 14, 2009 Sounds good. I use the straight D&D3.x bonuses, i.e. the same as your 11+ formula (if rounded down) - but continued down below 10. That may be a bit harsh (especially on any STR 9-ers!) considering there are also minimum STRs for weapons (is that why you'd cut it off at 10?). But I say - what the heck. Yes, the STR minimums for weapons allready keep the damage down enough I think. Also, it takes away all the fun of rolling lots of D6s when using big, strong NPCs. That is true. :ohwell: Quote Ef plest master, this mighty fine grub! 116/420. High Priest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frogspawner Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 There is nothing that scares players more than picking up D6s from all around the game table while saying "It is for the damage modifier." That is true. :ohwell: Maybe I got the "handfuls of d6's"-kick out of my system back in the days spent playing Tunnels & Trolls. PS: Or maybe not - Fireball-type spells still give a buzz... Quote Britain has been infiltrated by soviet agents to the highest levels. They control the BBC, the main political party leaderships, NHS & local council executives, much of the police, most newspapers and the utility companies. Of course the EU is theirs, through-and-through. And they are among us - a pervasive evil, like Stasi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tywyll Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 Personally I use the flat bonus, ala RQ4 ((Str+Siz-25)/5=DB). Though to be fair, I'm thinking of removing SIZ from the equation, though if I do that, i haven't figured out how I'll figure it. I dislike the randomness of the multiple d6 approach, finding it a bit lacking in veracity. I also strongly dislike the lack of PC attribute significance (to be fair, this has always been one of my complaints about BRP in its various incarnations, especially in the versions that don't use category bonuses). there is little difference between a barely above average strength character and an extremely strong character in the d4/d6 system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaddawang Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 I was a bit surprised to see the damage-bonus mechanic in the new BRP-book unaltered. It was one of the things I expected would change, as it is a bit wonky. That being said, I use the standard dice-mechanic, because -it says so in the BB(big book) -it works -and, since it works, I don't think much about it. And dice are always fun:) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdavies2720 Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 ...I also strongly dislike the lack of PC attribute significance (to be fair, this has always been one of my complaints about BRP in its various incarnations, especially in the versions that don't use category bonuses). there is little difference between a barely above average strength character and an extremely strong character in the d4/d6 system.Yeah, this is one thing that bothers me too. I was thinking about using the MRQ system of +1% per attribute point, but decided to stay with canon. Steve Quote Bathalians, the newest UberVillians! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nightshade Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 I dislike the randomness of the multiple d6 approach, finding it a bit lacking in veracity. I also strongly dislike the lack of PC attribute significance (to be fair, this has always been one of my complaints about BRP in its various incarnations, especially in the versions that don't use category bonuses). there is little difference between a barely above average strength character and an extremely strong character in the d4/d6 system. Well, that's one reason I prefer a smaller die-step approach; you can make smaller increments matter. And of course I wouldn't run the game without category bonuses. But then, I'm an RQ grognard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tywyll Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 Yeah, this is one thing that bothers me too. I was thinking about using the MRQ system of +1% per attribute point, but decided to stay with canon. Steve I started with BRP as written on cat bonuses, but they quickly became too fiddly for my tastes, especially with POW being a factored attribute. So I switched to RQ4's system of +1% per point over 10, typically only two attributes figuring into any category, and dropping POW from any category. I can kind of understand its inclusion, but I think POW gets enough play that it doesn't need to get an added helping of influencing skills as well. But ultimately, yes, I hate how little variation there is in human level strength modifiers. I'll grant that with the smaller number of hit points, you don't need a huge range, but frankly, I think you need some for human scale. Maybe when you get to a +4 bonus you can then switch to the +d6 normal system because at that point you are dealing with things like bears and horses and even bigger things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nightshade Posted March 16, 2009 Share Posted March 16, 2009 I started with BRP as written on cat bonuses, but they quickly became too fiddly for my tastes, especially with POW being a factored attribute. So I switched to RQ4's system of +1% per point over 10, typically only two attributes figuring into any category, and dropping POW from any category. I can kind of understand its inclusion, but I think POW gets enough play that it doesn't need to get an added helping of influencing skills as well. I never quite understood the problem with this; unless you shifted skills for temporary alterations in Power (which we never did), it always seemed easy enough to remember that when you improved or decreased Power you needed to adjust all of (category) skills by X amount. I suppose if you had extremely frequent changes here it could be a problem (in our local experience, people got up to whatever Power they thought they wanted and tended to threshold at that, sacrificing any Power above that for divine magic or other benefits). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason D Posted March 16, 2009 Share Posted March 16, 2009 Given the chance to completely rewrite the damage system, I'd keep it as dice rather than a static modifier, but I'd certainly add more granularity and lower it so it's not as high a value as most weapons. For example: STR+SIZ 20-24 = +1d2 25-28 = +1d3 (1d6/2) 29-32 = +1d4 33-36 = +1d6 37-40 = +1d8 41-44 = +1d10 45-48 = +1d12 49-52 = +2d8 53-56 = +2d10 57-60 = +2d12 etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RosenMcStern Posted March 16, 2009 Share Posted March 16, 2009 It's certainly more realistic. But how do you halve it for missile weapons? Quote Proud member of the Evil CompetitionTM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickMiddleton Posted March 16, 2009 Share Posted March 16, 2009 It's certainly more realistic. But how do you halve it for missile weapons? Reduce it one die step? So if your melee damage bonus is +1d6, your missile weapon bonus is +1D4? Cheers, Nick (also a fan of the "linear dice" damage bonus idea) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
threedeesix Posted March 16, 2009 Share Posted March 16, 2009 Reduce it one die step? So if your melee damage bonus is +1d6, your missile weapon bonus is +1D4? Cheers, Nick (also a fan of the "linear dice" damage bonus idea) I literally halve it. 2D6 becomes 1D6, 1D6 becomes 1D3, etc. I have to admit though, not sure how you half a penalty. I assume a penalty of -1D4 halved, would actually be -2D4. It is confusing though and still don't know if thats right. Player: I throw my dagger. GM: Don't you have a damage penalty? Player: Yes I do. GM: Then do something else. Rod Quote Join my Mythras/RuneQuest 6: Classic Fantasy Yahoo Group at https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/RQCF/info "D100 - Exactly 5 times better than D20" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMS Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 I've also contemplated giving a different damage bonus for 2-handed weapons vs. 1-handed weapons. Perhaps, one step higher for 2-handed weapons in the above list, or one step down on the one in the BPR book for 1-handed weapons. Thoughts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trifletraxor Posted March 17, 2009 Author Share Posted March 17, 2009 I've also contemplated giving a different damage bonus for 2-handed weapons vs. 1-handed weapons. Perhaps, one step higher for 2-handed weapons in the above list, or one step down on the one in the BPR book for 1-handed weapons. Thoughts? Might make 2H weapons too powerfull, as 2H weapons usually do higher damage to start with. I can understand the reasoning though. SGL. Quote Ef plest master, this mighty fine grub! 116/420. High Priest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RosenMcStern Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 Reduce it one die step? So if your melee damage bonus is +1d6, your missile weapon bonus is +1D4? It's a good idea, and I like the "2H weapons get 1 step up in the db scale" idea, too. But isn't it too complicate for the average player? Quote Proud member of the Evil CompetitionTM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.