Jump to content

Asymmetrical BRP/D100 Games?


Recommended Posts

16 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

I understand you point, but it's not so much a failing of Strombringer per say. It can happen in most RPGs.

To some extent, it's a necessary evil. If you take away that element of risk then the players get complacent and things get boring.

It is not a failing of Stormbringer, it is a problem with the variable armor rule that caused this problem, but this rule originated in Stormbringer and is present in all it's inheritors: I systematically rolled 1 on the dice and thus had 0 armor.

Edited by Kloster
typing mistake
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Kloster said:

It is not a failing of Stormbringer, it is a problem with the variable armor rule that caused this problem, but this rule originated in Stormbringer and is present in all it's inheritors: I systematically rolled 1 on the dice and thus had 0 armor.

Ah, yeah. I think the real problem with the variable armor rule is two fold:

1)The armor die was completely random, instead of a bell curve, making it totally unreliable. 

2) The armors average protection was usually lower than it's fixed counterpart, making it even less effective. 

Now both of the above were partially offset by using generally hit points, but not enough. 

 

I think variable armor could work out better if the armor used a bell curve with a higher average value. For instance, if Plate protected for 2D6 instead of 1D10.

 

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Atgxtg said:

I think variable armor could work out better if the armor used a bell curve with a higher average value. For instance, if Plate protected for 2D6 instead of 1D10.

Light Armor= 2d4 mean 5

Medium= 2d6 mean 7

Hvy= 2d8 mean 9

If a short sword is 1d6+1+db and a greatsword is 2d8+1+db, this would be a decent starting point for armors I think.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/8/2020 at 2:07 PM, hix said:

Light Armor= 2d4 mean 5

Medium= 2d6 mean 7

Hvy= 2d8 mean 9

If a short sword is 1d6+1+db and a greatsword is 2d8+1+db, this would be a decent starting point for armors I think.

Yup. If we keep the average values close to the fixed armor values used in other BRP games we should get somewhat similar results to the fixed armor. So if Plate armor is 8 points in the fixed system, it should arage around 8 points in a  variable system. So 2d6 (7), 2d8 (9), 3d4 (7.5) would be the sort of die roll we want. Maybe 2d6+1 (8) or 2d4+3 (8)? The important thing is to have it average about 8 points, and to be better than "lesser" armors".

The thing is in that fixed armor value version old BRP 8 point armor will usually  (87.5%) stop a sword that does 1D8+1 damage, and even when it doesn't only a point gets through, barring a special success or critical. With variable armor as written, armor rated at  1d10 will only stop that same sword about half the time, but could let as much as 8 points through. That's a huge difference. With 2d8, or 2d6, or one of the other variants noted above, the results are much close to the fixed hit point system, while still keeping armor variable.

As long as the variable ratings average out close to the old fixed ratings, we will get results more in line with the fixed ratings. 

 

 

Since I've been getting a lot of likes to this post, I threw together a tentative table of variable armor values. TO keep things simple and consistient, I just rated the armor by fixed AP score rather than by type. I put samples of the BRP variable ratings too, so we can see just how much things varied in the past, as well as how of an increase in protection we'd get compared to the old values.

 

Fixed AP Random AP New Random AP
1 1D6-1 or 1D2-1 1D3-1
2 1D6 1D3
3 2D3 2D2
4 1D4 2D3
5 1D6 2D4
6 1D8-1 or 1D6+2 or 2D4-1 1D6+1D4
7 1D8 2D6
8 2D6 or 1D10 2D6+1 or 1D8+1D6
9   2D8
10 2D4+2 or 1D10+2 2D8+1 or 2D6+3
11   2D10
12   2D10+1
13   2D10+2
14 2D6+2 4D6
15   4D6+1
16 4D4 4D6+2
17   4D8-1
18   4D8

Note that these are just what I consider to be good possible values, we could alter things around if we want to play with the bell curve. For instance we could use 4d4 instead of 2D8+1 or some such. It all depends on just how much we want the armor to vary. We could even factor in for coverage this way, with better coverage resulting in less variable armor, with half plate (7) being 2D6, while full plate (8) might be 3D4 or 2D4+3

 

 

 

 

Edited by Atgxtg
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/8/2020 at 1:23 PM, Atgxtg said:

 ... Maybe 2d6+1 (8) or 2d4+3 (8)? The important thing is to have it average about 8 points, and to be better than "lesser" armors".

... It all depends on just how much we want the armor to vary. We could even factor in for coverage this way, with better coverage resulting in less variable armor, with half plate (7) being 2D6, while full plate (8) might be 3D4 or 2D4+3

The +add on a XdY roll not only changes how much it varies; it raises the floor, the minimum APs.

2d4+3 has a floor of 5AP, which frankly is pretty damned good!  Just raising that floor is a great asset in a given armor...

Edited by g33k
Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, g33k said:

The +add on a XdY roll not only changes how much it varies; it raises the floor, the minimum APs.

Indeed.

40 minutes ago, g33k said:

2d4+3 has a floor of 5AP, which frankly is pretty damned good!  Just raising that floor is a great asset in a given armor...

Yes it is, and it's could be argued that it is justified, as full plate armor actually means several layers of armor, overlapped to limit the vulnerable areas. It's actually kinda tough to hit someone in a spot that isn't protected by something. But, we could go with 2d6+1, 2d8-1 or whatever value we think a more appropriate for the armor. 

 

I'm just saying that the 1D10 used currently isn't on par with the fixed protection, where 2d4+3 or 2d6+1 would be.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/9/2020 at 6:23 AM, Atgxtg said:

Yup. If we keep the average values close to the fixed armor values used in other BRP games we should get somewhat similar results to the fixed armor. So if Plate armor is 8 points in the fixed system, it should arage around 8 points in a  variable system. So 2d6 (7), 2d8 (9), 3d4 (7.5) would be the sort of die roll we want. Maybe 2d6+1 (8) or 2d4+3 (8)? The important thing is to have it average about 8 points, and to be better than "lesser" armors".

The thing is in that fixed armor value version old BRP 8 point armor will usually  (87.5%) stop a sword that does 1D8+1 damage, and even when it doesn't only a point gets through, barring a special success or critical. With variable armor as written, armor rated at  1d10 will only stop that same sword about half the time, but could let as much as 8 points through. That's a huge difference. With 2d8, or 2d6, or one of the other variants noted above, the results are much close to the fixed hit point system, while still keeping armor variable.

As long as the variable ratings average out close to the old fixed ratings, we will get results more in line with the fixed ratings. 

 

 

Since I've been getting a lot of likes to this post, I threw together a tentative table of variable armor values. TO keep things simple and consistient, I just rated the armor by fixed AP score rather than by type. I put samples of the BRP variable ratings too, so we can see just how much things varied in the past, as well as how of an increase in protection we'd get compared to the old values.

 

Fixed AP Random AP New Random AP
1 1D6-1 or 1D2-1 1D3-1
2 1D6 1D3
3 2D3 2D2
4 1D4 2D3
5 1D6 2D4
6 1D8-1 or 1D6+2 or 2D4-1 1D6+1D4
7 1D8 2D6
8 2D6 or 1D10 2D6+1 or 1D8+1D6
9   2D8
10 2D4+2 or 1D10+2 2D8+1 or 2D6+3
11   2D10
12   2D10+1
13   2D10+2
14 2D6+2 4D6
15   4D6+1
16 4D4 4D6+2
17   4D8-1
18   4D8

Note that these are just what I consider to be good possible values, we could alter things around if we want to play with the bell curve. For instance we could use 4d4 instead of 2D8+1 or some such. It all depends on just how much we want the armor to vary. We could even factor in for coverage this way, with better coverage resulting in less variable armor, with half plate (7) being 2D6, while full plate (8) might be 3D4 or 2D4+3

 

 

 

 

I wanted to try Random AP but it seems just too bad to give it a go... But this new table make it attractive again! :) 

How about  helmet though? What's your suggestion?

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Lloyd Dupont said:

I wanted to try Random AP but it seems just too bad to give it a go... But this new table make it attractive again! :) 

Feel free to tweak it.

3 minutes ago, Lloyd Dupont said:

How about  helmet though? What's your suggestion?

Depends on how you want to go. You could just give them a flat +1 or +2. Alternatively, you could just give them a better die roll with the same average. For instance 2d4+3 instead of 2d6+1 to reflect the fact that their head isn't exposed. 

Hmmm, you know, with a little tweaking we could add up the point values of armor on various parts of the body and covert that to a random die roll. That could handle stuff like mail byrnies, a coat of plates, and half plate armor,  If anybody wants to go that route. Or just give a base value/die for the torso armor, and add ones for the helmet and limb protection. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
On 8/8/2020 at 6:09 PM, Atgxtg said:

Ah, yeah. I think the real problem with the variable armor rule is two fold:

1)The armor die was completely random, instead of a bell curve, making it totally unreliable. 

2) The armors average protection was usually lower than it's fixed counterpart, making it even less effective. 

Now both of the above were partially offset by using generally hit points, but not enough. 

 

I think variable armor could work out better if the armor used a bell curve with a higher average value. For instance, if Plate protected for 2D6 instead of 1D10.

Sure, but random armor already turns damage as a whole into pseudo-curve bells (trapezoidal distributions, in fact). In BRP, most 1 handed weapons tend to have damage expressed as a single die : 1d4+2 for daggers, 1d8+1 for broadswords, 1d6+1 for shortswords, and so on. When hitting someone in a platemail with a broadsword, you do 1d8-1d10+2 damage, which is not linear. Damage bonus also helps in "delinearizing" damage.

I'm not sure rolling that many dice is necessary, honestly, and I think reducing the amplitude of random protection could be sufficient.

Edit: a solution could be to always roll the same 2 dice (2d4 or 2d6) for a triangular distribution, adding weapon factor and damage bonus, and subtracting armor factor to it.

Edited by Mugen
Link to post
Share on other sites

This could work. My problem with the current armor rule is that most armor (in fact, in Stormbringer, all except one) are expressed as 1Dx-1, which means the possibility of 0 (Zero) protection. Combined with the major wound rule (standard in BRP with the variable armor rule, that means that even with a fairly ordinary damage roll and a standard damage bonus (+1D4 is average), a character is dead or unusable in 1 hit. This is what occurred to me several times.

In addition, I agree with Atgxtg, the average value of the variable armor is below the value of the equivalent armor in fixed value, as the damage value is the same. This devaluate the armors and his proposal at least solve those problems. If a plate armor had a non zero min value (let's say half the average value), an average value equal to the fixed value, and a max value equal to 150% of the average, I would be perfectly happy with it. But not with current rule.

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

If a plate armor had a non zero min value (let's say half the average value), an average value equal to the fixed value, and a max value equal to 150% of the average

Isn't this what a 2-die bell curve accomplishes, more or less?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

it doesn't mater if the random armor goes very high.. sometimes it just block all the damage, what's important is that sometimes it goes down, and then the damage could be anything (high or low).. and also the player is aware that happens and that increase the drama and reduce the felling of invincibility...

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/22/2020 at 11:12 AM, Mugen said:

Edit: a solution could be to always roll the same 2 dice (2d4 or 2d6) for a triangular distribution, adding weapon factor and damage bonus, and subtracting armor factor to it.

Note I meant weapon and armor factors as fixed values, and not another die to add or subtract. Same for damage bonus. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, hix said:

Isn't this what a 2-die bell curve accomplishes, more or less?

Yes. That's why I agree with Atgxtg.

14 hours ago, Lloyd Dupont said:

and also the player is aware that happens

Agreed.

14 hours ago, Lloyd Dupont said:

and that increase the drama

I don't feel that. For me, it decrease it, reducing player and GM's options.

14 hours ago, Lloyd Dupont said:

and reduce the felling of invincibility...

Frankly, with RQ, I never felt invicible. Quite the contrary. But with SB or Hawkmoon, I always felt vulnerable. Very vulnerable, and according to my experience, rightly so, even if the probability of what occurred to me is quite low.

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

Of course.

You won't believe how happy I was readying that message. Less so for the content and more so because it meant I got my computer back on line after the boot manager got corrupted. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
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.

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...