Jump to content

Recommended Posts

On 3/30/2021 at 9:04 AM, Nozbat said:

I had to look that up and found you were referring to an RPG as opposed to where my thoughts went when I read it.

Sorry. Flashing Blades was a Swashbucking RPG published by FGU in the 80s. It is similar to RQ/BRP in some ways. My point in mentioning It was that in Flashing Blades hits that roll over half the hit chance do the basic weapon damage (usually around 2 points but thatvaries by weapon type and type of attack) but a hit that rolls half the hit chance or less does an extra d6 damage, and that ususally turns a light wound into something serious. 

 

On 3/30/2021 at 9:04 AM, Nozbat said:

On a more serious note this might work well if you want to stop increasing the amount of one-limbed people who must inhabit most of the places that PCs move through with lethal intent but, it does make it more complicated.

I don't think it's all that complicated, We do something similar already with impales, and invoke yet another special damage rule for criticals. So I think if we could reduce it down to a standardized doubling mechanic it could end up being simpler than what we do now. 

But then, I'd like to get rid of most of the weapon adds too, so as to avoid weapons always being able to piece certain types of armor (i.e. daggers vs. leather). 

 

On 3/30/2021 at 9:04 AM, Nozbat said:

 

and does it not take away from MGF? 

MGF Sorry I don't know what you mean there. Could you explain what MGF stands for.

On 3/30/2021 at 9:04 AM, Nozbat said:

I have never run or played a combat heavy game since the early days of D&D and only briefly AD&D so perhaps it is not as important to me. Surely combat should carry a certain amount of risk? Otherwise the power balance shifts too much to the PCs?

Certainly it should carry some risk. I think the question here is does the level of risk as portrayed in the game match up with the level of risk the weapons have in reality, or in the setting being emulated. That's something that can be debated, as we don't have a lot of data from actual swordfights to aid us in designing games. Even data for more modern weapons is somewhat lacking as people in fights tend to have more pressing matters to deal with, like surviving the fight, rather than collecting data for game designers. 

 

I think we can generally agree that the chances of breaking a limb with a punch are somewhat higher in BRP than in reality. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

MGF Sorry I don't know what you mean there. Could you explain what MGF stands for

Sorry... it means 'Maximum Game Fun'

6 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

I think we can generally agree that the chances of breaking a limb with a punch are somewhat higher in BRP than in reality

I would always rule punching type damage as bruises, dead arms etc.. unless it's a single damage that does double the amount of HPs in a location .. then you have broken limbs, concussion, ruptured muscles, etc. Bruises are recovered quickly unlike weapon damage.

I still think what it comes down to is... if you don't like a rule .. change it.. we are not bound to RAW.. It is really about having fun.. mechanics are there to assist, not to take over

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

My point in mentioning It was that in Flashing Blades hits that roll over half the hit chance do the basic weapon damage (usually around 2 points but thatvaries by weapon type and type of attack) but a hit that rolls half the hit chance or less does an extra d6 damage, and that ususally turns a light wound into something serious.

Steve Perrin's Quest Rules also had a similar success level at half success chance. As I never purchased the combat rules, I don't know what is the impact on combat.

IIRC, James Bond 007 also had such a success level step.

14 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

I think we can generally agree that the chances of breaking a limb with a punch are somewhat higher in BRP than in reality. 

Definitely.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Mugen said:

IIRC, James Bond 007 also had such a success level step.

In fact, In JB007, the Quality of Result was the main factor of the damage. You could easily kill someone with a Quality 1 (a critical, in BRP linguo), even with the lightest weapon

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Kloster said:

In fact, In JB007, the Quality of Result was the main factor of the damage. You could easily kill someone with a Quality 1 (a critical, in BRP linguo), even with the lightest weapon

As I recall (and I've not read the rules in decades) a PC could buy down the damage Quality to survive otherwise fatal attacks.  A plot immunity mechanism that worked well for a James Bond RPG. 

Some RPGs ask, "How good/powerful is the weapon?" and others ask, "How good are you WITH using the weapon?".  A typical D100 system asks BOTH those questions in reverse order with a hit roll, then damage roll.  I'm not so sure they should be quite so separate.

Edited by ORtrail
Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, ORtrail said:

As I recall (and I've not read the rules in decades) a PC could buy down the damage Quality to survive otherwise fatal attacks.  A plot immunity mechanism that worked well for a James Bond RPG. 

Yes, a hero point can raise or lower the quality of result by 1. The survival point of a NPC can only affect the result he receives, but can not affect the one a PC receives.

24 minutes ago, ORtrail said:

Some RPGs ask, "How good/powerful is the weapon?" and others ask, "How good are you WITH using the weapon?".  A typical D100 system asks BOTH those questions in reverse order with a hit roll, then damage roll.  I'm not so sure they should be quite so separate.

Agreed.

Edited by Kloster
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/1/2021 at 4:14 AM, Nozbat said:

Sorry... it means 'Maximum Game Fun'

Ah. In that case I think it depends upon what a give group considers to be fun. That can vary tremdoubly from group to group.

On 4/1/2021 at 4:14 AM, Nozbat said:

I would always rule punching type damage as bruises, dead arms etc.. unless it's a single damage that does double the amount of HPs in a location .. then you have broken limbs, concussion, ruptured muscles, etc. Bruises are recovered quickly unlike weapon damage.

Yes, but that's your house rule, not RAW. So you can't really expect everyone else to handle things thesame way.

On 4/1/2021 at 4:14 AM, Nozbat said:

I still think what it comes down to is... if you don't like a rule .. change it.. we are not bound to RAW..

Yes, somewhat. I disagree with the idea of changing something just because you don't like it. A GM should have some sort of reason as to changing a rule, ususally becuase it doesn't make sense, doesn't work well well, or leads to some other problems. 

On 4/1/2021 at 4:14 AM, Nozbat said:

 

 

It is really about having fun.. mechanics are there to assist, not to take over

Again I will question the "It is really about having fun" bit. I once played with a group of D&Ders, some of who never wanted to plan and would just charge recklessly into combat claiming that they "just wanted to have fun." At the end of the session all their characters were dead, and I asked "are we having fun yet?".  To me, taking the time and effort to come up with a plan was more fun that having to write up a new character every game session. So we must have had different ideas of what was fun. I originally spoke up because after seeing the same half of the group die off week after week, that maybe they'd have more fun changing their tactics and having their characters survive a session, but no, apparently that wasn't fun to them.

If we just threw out the rules on the basis of "more fun" then people would do all sorts of  stuff that they could claim would be n"more fun" for them, like not letting player characters fail or get injured. Part of what makes a game enjoyable, and fun, is that the players can fail, get hurt, and ever die. That's what makes the players success all the sweeter. So a campaign needs to have "un fun" stuff, to make the fun stuff "more fun".  It's pretty much the same thing as with so called "Monty Hall" dungeons where players get too many rewards. In thery it seems more fun to have more and better stuff, but in practice it just devalues what the characters do have. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Kloster said:

Yes, a hero point can raise or lower the quality of result by 1. The survival point of a NPC can only affect the result he receives, but can not affect the one a PC receives.

Indeed, and sometimes a player could spend a HERO point to alter an encounter, or even to alter reality a bit. For instance a PC who just escaped from a castle dungeon might spend a Hero Point to find a sword or mace conveniently placed along a wall. 

2 hours ago, Kloster said:

Agreed.

Bond was probably one of the best RPGs in that regard, as skill with the weapon was generally far more important than the caliber of the weapon. A Beretta .25 in Bonds hands was far more lethal than a .44 Magnum in the hands of a novice, or even a AK-47 in the hands of a typical soldier. Not just in terms of hitting, but in terms of shot placement and lethality.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Kloster said:

In fact, In JB007, the Quality of Result was the main factor of the damage. You could easily kill someone with a Quality 1 (a critical, in BRP linguo), even with the lightest weapon

Not quite. A weapon had to be capable of inflcting at least a Heavy Wound (HW) result to be able to kill with a single attack, which required a Damage Class of D or greater, and probably a specific show or blow for increased damage. 

This meant that most people (anyone with a STR below 14) couldn't kill someone with a single knife strike. They could incapacitate (IN) then and then finish them off with a second attack, though. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...