Rethinking Damage Bonus: Brawn / Finesse

[Chaot]

Back when Mongoose put out their Lankhmar book I started thinking about stating up the Twain. The Mouser's a tiny guy and seems to get short shrift under BRP. Then I started thinking about dividing a character's damage bonus into two categories.

Brawn would be determined by Strength and Size.

Finesse would be determined by Strength and Dexterity.

I started making a list on which weapons would utilize which form of DB, but set it aside. Someplace I have an incomplete listing sitting on a hard drive.

What do the good folks here think of this idea? Is it worth pursuing? Is it just adding another layer of things to pay attention to?

[sdavies2720]

I think AD&D3.5 had a feat something like Finesse where you could substitute your DEX bonus for your damage bonus. In BRP I would think you could either offer this to everyone or have a Finesse skill that worked like Martial Arts (Roll under both attack % and Finesse to get the benefit).

I'd allow successful use to substitute DEX for SIZ in the damage bonus calculation. Maybe a Special allows you to substitute DEX for either SIZ or STR, and Critical allows you to substitute it for both?

Never tried this, but that might be a decent formulation.

Steve

[Chaot]

Is it necessary to make it into a skill check? I guess it could be integrated easily into one roll. When someone is shooting a bow from horseback I have them make one roll and compare it both to their Ride and their Bow skill. I guess this could be the same sort of situation.

I'm wondering if just having it as a default would be too overpowering though. Let's assume the Twain have an equal DB, Fafhrd's derived from Brawn and the Mouser's derived from Finesse. Using the Dex rank system for initiative, the Mouser has an edge. But Fafhrd's superior Size gives him more hit points than the Mouser. Is this a fair trade off?

Edit: and would weapons really need to be categorized for Brawn/Finesse, or could the two DBs be applied across the board and chalked up to combat styles?

[sdavies2720]

I err on the side of making things skill checks -- and I'd do as you suggest, handle this with one attack role.

I don't think Finesse being a universal opton is too powerful per se, but it does increase the usefulness of DEX, which will in turn nudge the players to make slightly different character trade-offs. I thiink you'll end up with a greater number of dextrous/swashbuckling characters than you otherwise might have. That could be just what you're lookng for.

For my game, it's usually the tanks who are complaining,so I'd probably offer it as a skill. That also means that it's a special-case rule, and the campaign stays a little closer to RAW (one of my stated goals).

I'm in more of a rule-light and player-choice mode now, so I'd say forget about categorizing the weapons. Once you come up with how to handle FInesse, it can apply to any weapon -- far more player-friendly that way.

Now that I think about it, there is a Dwarf in my campaign that would take this skill in a heartbeat, probably bumping his damage to the next category. I'll see if I can test it next month.

Steve

[sdavies2720]

I'm wondering if just having it as a default would be too overpowering though. Let's assume the Twain have an equal DB, Fafhrd's derived from Brawn and the Mouser's derived from Finesse. Using the Dex rank system for initiative, the Mouser has an edge. But Fafhrd's superior Size gives him more hit points than the Mouser. Is this a fair trade off?

As I was signing off, I thought about this little more. Assuming the two heroes are relatively evenly matched, Fafhrd's SIZ advantage will net him only a few hit points -- and possibly 0-1 per hit location if you use those rules. The Mouser's only going to use Finesse if it bumps his damage by a category.

Mouser's higher damage bonus will probably at least eliminate Fafhrd's hit point bonus on the first hit. That sounds too powerful to me as an option. Add to it earlie strikes and all the other things a high DEX does for you, I am uncomfotable having Finesse as a default option.

Steve

[Chaot]

You make good points Steve. You've convinced me. When I get a chance to actually institute it, I think I'll use Finesse as a skill.

If you do test it out, please let me know! I'd love to hear how it actually works out in game.

[Thalaba]

Doesn't the concept of finesse already exist - being highly skilled? I mean, why not just give the Mouser a higher skill with the sword than Fafrd and have done? This seems like added complexity, to me, but if you really want to add the concept, I think you need to think about 'What does 'finesse' actually simulate?' that isn't already similated by having a higher skill with the weapon, or a higher manipulation bonus?

In regards to size: Larger size has some significant drawbacks, too (at least it did in RQ3, which is the version I play) - armour is much heavier and more expensive for big people (which also means a greater reduction to skills like sneaking or jumping). Small people might get a bonus to hit big people and be more difficult to be hit themselves. Big people have a greater -ve contribution to their agility modifier. I know the skill modifiers are different in BRP (I can't now remember what they are). Are these negatives no longer applicable in BRP?

Thalaba

[Chaot]

It may balance out better in RQ than it does in Elric! (which is the general flavor of BRP that I use). Cost of armor and fatigue don't enter into the equation much, and bonuses to hit due to Siz difference are at a bit of an extreme (and easily forgotten during the heat of battle).

In my games, people usually put special consideration on the Siz stat because it effects both DB and HP. Hence, I end up with a lot of burly fighters. I'd like the players to feel that they can make a small and scrappy fighter and not automatically be outclassed by the big boys.

Edit: As for Fafhrd and the Mouser, I'd say they probably have similar fighting skill levels, just radically different styles. This rule would go to emulating that.

Edited October 26, 2009 by Chaot

[Thalaba]

OK, then...

I find that when I want to tinker with the rules, it usually helps to figure out exactly what I'm trying to simulate with the change, so please allow me to brainstorm, here...(if I'm overthinking this it's because I'm bored at work today;))

Does finesse represent a better chance to hit, or a better chance to target a specific location, or a better change to cause damage in general.

If it's the latter, how does it cause more damage - does it cause more damage because because finesse allows the blow to penetrate armour better (i.e. doing more damage than the armour worn) or does it allow the person with finesse to bypass armour more (i.e. doing a critical).

If it's the latter, maybe an alteration to the chance of a critical is more appropriate than a new damage bonus.

If it's the former, then...

In thinking about powering blows past armour to cause more damage, what are the factors. Strength is one, for the force of the blow. Size is one for leverage. Both of these are accounted for in the existing damage bonus. You would like to discount the advantage due to leverage and replace it with something else. Dexterity represents your ability to position yourself in a quick and easy manner. Intelligence, however, lets you position yourself in a strategic manner, and thus perhaps use a wall, the floor, or your opponent to get the leverage you lack by being short. So, what if you allowed people to sub their INT for SIZ in the damage bonus calculation?

As for having some weapons that allow finesse damage bonuses and others that allow brawn bonuses - this seems like needless complexity. Are there weapons that don't cause more damage when you have more brawn?

Thalaba

[Al.]

Get thee to Chivalry and Sorcery which has an exhausting/exhaustive list of attribute pairs and weapons.

XD&D allows on to finesse with a smaller weapon (missus) than character. So IIRC (which is unlikely) anyone can finesse with a dagger but halflings cannot finesse with shortswords.

I'd do this without a skill roll but have a concept of minimum size for each weapon to be finessed.

[SDLeary]

Edit: As for Fafhrd and the Mouser, I'd say they probably have similar fighting skill levels, just radically different styles. This rule would go to emulating that.

The Mouser is always depicted with a rapier... perhaps Martial Arts: Fencing is a way to bring things into line? This would end up handling the damage due to style.

SDLeary

[Toadmaster]

It seems to me they are already fairly balanced.

Dex gives a skill bonus, so better chance to hit, better chance for a crit, better dodge, parry etc.

Str / Siz provide bonuses in damage done, ability to take damage and Str provides a lesser bonus to hit than Dex.

I would think trying to add more to Dex would give the advantage to the quick fighter over the big strong fighter. I generally think of dex based fighters as death from a thousand papercuts, while the siz / strength based fighters are more of repeated swing and a miss, but when they finally connect its all over.

[Chaot]

Does finesse represent a better chance to hit, or a better chance to target a specific location, or a better change to cause damage in general.

If it's the latter, how does it cause more damage - does it cause more damage because because finesse allows the blow to penetrate armour better (i.e. doing more damage than the armour worn) or does it allow the person with finesse to bypass armour more (i.e. doing a critical).

Both? It allows the character to position themselves in combat to strike strongly at weak spots. Keep in mind, I'm using Elric! rules. Combat is a bit more abstract then RQ rules. Instead of using leverage to bludgeon their way through they use position.

Dexterity represents your ability to position yourself in a quick and easy manner. Intelligence, however, lets you position yourself in a strategic manner, and thus perhaps use a wall, the floor, or your opponent to get the leverage you lack by being short. So, what if you allowed people to sub their INT for SIZ in the damage bonus calculation?

You know, if someone came up to me and said that their character's shtick was an ascetic warrior who could take apart opponents by applying the character's complex knowledge of physiology I might say, 'yeah, let's try giving you a DB from Str and Int and see how it works.' It's kind of a cool concept actually.

Thing is, I'm trying to encourage players to think outside the Siz stat. The genre examples I was thinking of are the swashbucklers. Tying Dex into DB seems an easy and obvious way to do it. It seemed like a decent trade off too. Going back to the ascetic warrior for a moment, if he's going to concentrate on his Str and Int to be a good fighter, it's likely that his Siz and Dex would suffer a bit. Both important stats when it comes to combat. This also seems like a good trade off to me, especially as it's dragging in a stat that isn't normally used in combat. It could make for a good spell-sword type character.

If it doesn't break the system and opens up options so the player doesn't feel like their shooting themselves in the foot if they don't dump points into Siz, I'm tempted to give it a go.

I'd do this without a skill roll but have a concept of minimum size for each weapon to be finessed.

Yeah, I'm thinking small and medium weapons. Chivalry and Sorcery has been on my too buy list for years. It's right there with Harnmaster.

The Mouser is always depicted with a rapier... perhaps Martial Arts: Fencing is a way to bring things into line? This would end up handling the damage due to style.

Dual wields a dirk and a rapier. Would Martial Arts: Fencing cover both? Honestly, I don't know. I'll have to look at my book. It's currently in the room where my son is sleeping, so it will have to wait for tomorrow, unless someone wants to give a Martial Arts skill run down.

But Fafhrd dual wields a longsword and a poignard. If Mouser was running around using a Martial Arts skill in conjunction with his weapons, I'm sure Fafhrd would be complaining to the GM that he should be able to use one too. Then we're back at Mouser being short shifted.

Anyway, I'm really enjoying the ideas here. It's got me thinking about going through the rules and playing around with fighter types.

[Chaot]

Dex gives a skill bonus, so better chance to hit, better chance for a crit, better dodge, parry etc.

I never really used skill bonuses. PCs in my fantasy games routinely start with combat skills above 100% anyway, so I'm not sure how much impact a few extra skill points would make. In the Elric! rules, Dex's benefit is to determine when you go on the initiative round and not much else (I'm thinking the 'Special Aim' spot rule, but that's the only instance I can think of where Dex gives a bonus in combat).

So, Str/Siz will give you a brawler who can both dish and take a lot of damage. Str/Dex will give you a quick and effective guy who will try and land the first blow but who is at a disadvantage as the fight wears on.

So, I guess I'm saying that I may agree with you. My flavor of BRP doesn't use the bonuses, as I go mostly by Elric!/SB5 rules. I'd have to take a look to see how much bonuses would throw the thing off.

[SDLeary]

Dual wields a dirk and a rapier. Would Martial Arts: Fencing cover both? Honestly, I don't know. I'll have to look at my book. It's currently in the room where my son is sleeping, so it will have to wait for tomorrow, unless someone wants to give a Martial Arts skill run down.

Roll under skill and Martial Arts skill on same roll, do double damage, not including damage bonus. Thats Martial Arts at its core, but depending on the art, you could say that it does different things.

It could be Marital Arts: 2 weapon fencing, or Martial Arts: Fencing combined with the riposte and 2 weapon rules discussed a while back.

But Fafhrd dual wields a longsword and a poignard. If Mouser was running around using a Martial Arts skill in conjunction with his weapons, I'm sure Fafhrd would be complaining to the GM that he should be able to use one too. Then we're back at Mouser being short shifted.

Mouser has Martial Arts, Fafhrd simple high skill with the two weapon and riposte rules.

Anyway, I'm really enjoying the ideas here. It's got me thinking about going through the rules and playing around with fighter types.

If you have a copy of LoN around, look in there too. Some interesting ideas built specifically around Japanese arts of parrying missile weapons, etc.

SDLeary

[Byron Alexander]

You know, if someone came up to me and said that their character's shtick was an ascetic warrior who could take apart opponents by applying the character's complex knowledge of physiology I might say, 'yeah, let's try giving you a DB from Str and Int and see how it works.' It's kind of a cool concept actually.

Nice. Particularly as, apart from a high Idea, a high Int is not normally useful for a fighter but you might not want to play stupid just because you're in that role.

I think you ought to write a Complete Fighter monograph with some of these ideas at its core. Seriously, my problem with fighter-esque characters is always that they seem such a boring concept to me but I really like this notion of fighter-characters that concentrate on unusual attributes.

This is a really cool thread, actually. :thumb:

[Chaot]

*snip Martial Arts rules*

Thanks for the run down. Your suggestion is a way to model the Mouser effectively. Just looking at how the rules fall out though, say I'm a player who wants to make a Fighter type as effectively as possible mechanics wise. I'm still going to be dumping points into Size over Dex because of the DB bonus and increased HP. Then I'll pick up Martial Arts: Big Ass Weapon as well as getting my main weapon skill as high as possible. Including Martial Arts as a skill doesn't seem to encourage different kinds of fighters.

If you have a copy of LoN around, look in there too. Some interesting ideas built specifically around Japanese arts of parrying missile weapons, etc.

Yeah, that's a great book. I wish more had been done with the RQ3 Earth line.

I think you ought to write a Complete Fighter monograph with some of these ideas at its core.

Thanks. I'm not sure if I'm actually up to writing a monograph. I do agree with you that BRP fighters get kind of bland. It would be nice to have an option to mix things up a bit. I've got some sketched out ideas along the lines of Combat Banter, fleshed out Piece-meal Armor, a Mass Combat system based off of the ship rules, and a Reputation system. There maybe some more wacky ideas that I jotted down someplace.

[vagabond]

This is one of the reasons I liked the old SB1-4 way of splitting attack

and parry and use the attribute bonuses. Attack got a benefit from Dex,

Pow, Siz and Str, but Parry only got benefit from Dex, Pow and Str - Siz

gave a penalty if you were "big".

Then, with high enough Attack and Parry, you could Riposte (a free attack

with a successful Parry). So, a higher Parry meant more possible Ripostes.

Ian

[fulk]

fleshed out Piece-meal Armor, a Mass Combat system .

I'd definitely like to see these two...

I'm mostly familiar with RQ2 and RQ3. As I remember it, in RQ3 Int and Dex were primary attributes. Thus the mouser would have a better chance to hit, higher special success rate and higher critical rate than a brawn fighter.

Since Dex is used in initiative, you might also let high dex characters lower their initiative to 'target'. I believe in RQ3 you could lower your SR to target. In a system w/o hit locations, you might sacrifice dex for initiative to lower the opponents AP.

Either way, I'd certainly like some system that made dextrous but not super strong figthters more fun....

[Chaot]

I'd definitely like to see these two...

The biggest hurdle is finding my various notes and putting them together in a presentable form. If I ever accomplish that feat, I'll probably just post them to the files section here.

[Mugen]

Latest edition (at least, the one that has been translated in french) of the Spanish RPG "Aquelarre" uses a variant of BRP in which "light" weapons use DEX to determine damage bonus instead of STR.

D&D 3.5 Finesse only adds DEX to the attack roll, but has no effect on damage, which is still determined by weapon & STR.

D&D 4 has a more interesting view on the subject : the general rule is to use the same stat to hit and for damage. That is a Fighter will typically use STR as a bonus for attack and damage roll, a Rogue will use DEX for both, a Cleric its WISdom and a Wizard its INT.

In BRP, this would lead to 3 or 4 different damage bonuses, with INT and/or POW for magical attacks.

An other way would be to use the 10s of the attack roll as base damage (counting criticals as 10), and then add a bonus depending on the weapon. This means considering that the skill roll is a global measure of the attack effectiveness, and not only of its accuracy.

[Al.]

D&D 3.5 Finesse only adds DEX to the attack roll, but has no effect on damage, which is still determined by weapon & STR.

Does it? That'll teach me to assume things. (Based mainly it must be said upon a poor secondhand knowledge of XD&D and the dashing swordsman from the order of the stick, who I believe used CHA for his to hit roll).

An other way would be to use the 10s of the attack roll as base damage (counting criticals as 10), and then add a bonus depending on the weapon. This means considering that the skill roll is a global measure of the attack effectiveness, and not only of its accuracy.

Specials and Criticals kind of do that already. But your idea sounds pretty workable to me

[Atgxtg]

Timelords (and it spinn offs) has a skill called Wounding that might be just the thing to balace out the Mouser (and finesse fighters) in BRP.What the skill did was raise the damage rating of a weapon based on the skill roll (max of twice the normal weapon rating). Each weapon skill was a separate wounding skill (so knowledge of sword didn't help to do more damage with a mace). Benefiting from it required a called shot.

For BRP:

Wounding (05%)

-Required a sucessful called shot (as per normal called shot rules in BRP).

-If the called shot is successful the character can use his wounding skill with the weapon to try and increase the weapon's base damage.

Fumble: -1 die step

Failure: No Change

Success: +1 die step (d3, becomes d4, d4 becomes d6, etc.)

Special Success = +2 die steps

Critical +3 die steps

This would make a highly skilled knife fighter (1d3+1 or 1d4+2 base damage) with wounding more of a threat to some semi skilled combatant with some heavy weapon and a good damage bonus.