Parry, Dodge, Block

[Bilharzia]

2 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

But RQ3 armor points weren't  size based. A long wooden spear didn't have more AP than a shortsword.

Yes they were, as a combination of size and materials. Smaller weapons have fewer AP than larger weapons, in general, but metal is better than wood, in general.

So a dagger has AP6, a hoplite shield AP18. Quite a difference, and as I said, Mythras effectively abstracts this.

 

2 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

But faster and less bookkeeping isn't always better. 

I said nothing about what was better. It is a preference, but I note with some irony that Mythras/RQ6 is often claimed to be more crunchy and fiddly than BRP but the reality is often the reverse.

[Lloyd Dupont]

11 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

Heck, considing that Lloyd is working on a Sci-Fi setting, we might even bring up stuff from Futureworld or even Ringworld. 

well... there is that.. and also the fact my group like to go dungeoneer and kill stuff and I cant find a version of my vision MoO that supports that... (my vision being a of well organised, heavily industrial, expansionist competing empires)(trying to find a place for with maverick independent entrepreneurial adventurers) So while I haven't totally polished the rulebook, it's almost done! Struggling with the important bit! adventure ideas! 😮 

We tried Cthulhu.. my group lost interest somewhat... now doing Classic Fantasy stuff...

But yea, I dont mind big impervious armor.. but I rather have them degrade quickly... and generally, I like when equipment break (under heavy assault, mind you!)

Last Dungeon last Sunday was quite exiting.. 🙂 but I think I can fine tune combat further for more situation... and player were a bit too safe... (though they exhausted all their magic point, so there is that...)

Edited June 27, 2021 by Lloyd Dupont

[Atgxtg]

On 6/26/2021 at 4:49 PM, Bilharzia said:

Yes they were, as a combination of size and materials. Smaller weapons have fewer AP than larger weapons, in general, but metal is better than wood, in general.

I think it was more a case of typing AP to mass.,a though this would be very similar as both size and material would affect mass. 

On 6/26/2021 at 4:49 PM, Bilharzia said:

So a dagger has AP6, a hoplite shield AP18. Quite a difference, and as I said, Mythras effectively abstracts this.

But does that abstraction really simply anything? 

On 6/26/2021 at 4:49 PM, Bilharzia said:

I said nothing about what was better. It is a preference,

Yup.

On 6/26/2021 at 4:49 PM, Bilharzia said:

but I note with some irony that Mythras/RQ6 is often claimed to be more crunchy and fiddly than BRP but the reality is often the reverse.

That's because there is no real difination of just what is BRP anymore. Orginally BRP was a 16 page booklet of trimmed down RuneQuest rules. Then it became RQ3 with all the RQ and Glroantha references removed. Then it became a collection of various rules from various Chasoium RPGs, none of which were actually BRP. So just how complex it is depends on what rules or rule variants you are using. I'll add a bit of irony myself in that adding more options and variant rules to the rulebook makes the rules more "crunchy and fiddly" as it means a GM will need to make choices rather than use something "as is".

I think it's more accurate to say that BRP can be  less "crunchy and fiddly" than Mythras/RQ6 or it can be more "crunchy and fiddly" depending on what version of BRP you use. 

[Bilharzia]

58 minutes ago, Atgxtg said:

But does that abstraction really simply anything? 

Not sure what you mean. As I said, again, it is a preference of abstraction Vs book-keeping. The older RQ style of tracking every single attack/parry clash with AP attrition I found was tedious, but you do you. Mythras still allows weapon and armour damage, but you have to call it out by using Sunder.

 

Quote

 I'll add a bit of irony myself in that adding more options and variant rules to the rulebook makes the rules more "crunchy and fiddly" as it means a GM will need to make choices rather than use something "as is".

That's not irony, that's expected, but relying on clichés about Mythras does yourself and others a disservice. Mythras is detailed, adaptable and consistent, and with that it does demand more from a GM than most BRP games or the BGB. The BGB itself is all over the place since it was never re-written from scratch as a consistent ruleset, it was and remains a compilation of rules from different games.

[Atgxtg]

14 hours ago, Bilharzia said:

Not sure what you mean.

Me either considering the typo. Sorry.  What I meant to say is that does the abstraction really simply anything? Based on your comment latter on in the post it does, but at the cost of restricting weapon breakage to deliberate attacks, eliminating weapon damage (other than complete breakage), and apparently eliminating the ability of weapons to blow through a successful defense with a lot of damage.

 

14 hours ago, Bilharzia said:

As I said, again, it is a preference of abstraction Vs book-keeping. The older RQ style of tracking every single attack/parry clash with AP attrition I found was tedious, but you do you.

And you do you. But the purpose of this thread was to help Lloyd do Lolyd. He wants a Master of Orion style of game with shields that get slowly chewed up by energy weapons. That's why he started this thread. Maybe I missed something in your posts but how do the Mythras rules emulate that? Now if you are trying to convince him that he shouldn't use such a weapon attrition system, then you need to explain why Myhras would be a better fit for what he is trying to accomplish, or why he should abandon his current idea for the Myhras method. 

14 hours ago, Bilharzia said:

 

Mythras still allows weapon and armour damage, but you have to call it out by using Sunder.

Which is a radical change, both in terms of weapon durability and in defense.  It is also one that wouldn't work towards Lloyd's goal of emulating Master of Orion, where energy weapons slowly destroy shields. 

14 hours ago, Bilharzia said:

 

That's not irony,

It is when the game is titled "Basic" role playing. Even Jason noted that the BGB was misnamed. 

14 hours ago, Bilharzia said:

 

that's expected, but relying on clichés about Mythras does yourself and others a disservice.

Who relied on cliches. You're the one who brought up claims of Mythas being more "crunchy and fiddly"  than BRP. No one was doing anyone a disservice, and I'm glad you are so pleased with Mythras.  Now if you prefer Mythras that's perfectly fine, lots of people do. But not everyone does (that's okay too), nor does Mythras' method for handling weapon (and shield) damage seem to emulate  what Lloyd is trying to do, and the latter is what this thread is all about. If the weapon damage rules from Mythras, do not help to do what Lloyd has already stated he wants, then it doesn't matter if they are good or not. 

We were all trying to list options for Lloyd to use for his campaign, specifically things that would fit his previously stated desires for how things should work, based upon his idea of capturing the style and feel of Master of Orion. As he wants energy weapons to slowly wear down shields during combat, I suggested the RQ3 model as a good way to do that. 

 

 

[lawrence.whitaker]

Mythras treats a weapon's damage-reducing abilities when used to parry or block, separately from the weapon's own resistance to damage. It also bases damage-reducing abilities on the relative sizes of the attacking and parrying weapons. This means that a character armed with a dagger (size Small) just isn't going to inflict any damage at all on someone parrying with a kite shield (size Huge), but would inflict some damage on an opponent parrying with a shortsword (size Medium).

The default position Mythras adopts is that, in general use, weapons don't break as frequently as they might in say older iterations of RQ, and for that reason doesn't have rules for weapon attrition when used for parrying successful blows. Of course in reality, bronze blades are more brittle than iron ones, and iron more brittle than steel - but we decided to forgo such fine distinctions in favour of a simpler approach where all metal weapons are treated in much the same way. It is a compromise, but it also simplifies book-keeping because one doesn't need to worry about how many Hit Points your weapons lose when used to do something they're designed to do, in the hands of people trained to use them (which is another important factor in weapon breakage).

However, it is possible to target a weapon directly, making it, rather than the wielder, the focus of an attack, and so Mythras has rules for this under its Sunder mechanic. Some weapons have Sunder as an available Special Effect, and these tend to be weapons designed for inflicting lots of damage (a greataxe, say) and/or being equipped with specialised surfaces (such as the spike of certain polearms) to puncture armour and shields. Damaging weapons in Mythras is therefore a deliberate, rather than an incidental  act, but there are certainly rules for it. Sunder is very useful if an attacking character is being kept at range by an opponent within a longer weapon (a spear or pike, for instance). It may be an effective tactic to attack the weapon and damage it beyond use, allowing the attacker to then close with the (now disarmed) opponent.

For Lloyd's situation, where shields or other protection degrade when absorbing or ablating damage, it would be quite simple to give certain weapons the Sunder trait, meaning that whenever a shield is used to defend against them, their Hit Point value reduces if the shield's Armour Points are overcome. It's really all about defining what certain weapons can do when coming up against certain defensive types. Lloyd likes this fine level of detail, so assuming the additional book-keeping isn't an issue, then using the Mythras Sunder mechanics might be a solution to consider.

[Lloyd Dupont]

To be perfectly accurate (not that there is a need to be) I am kind of stuck at the world build (or more precisely adventure building) stage for MoO at the moment and so we are doing some Classic Fantasy adventures.. Though the combat rules are shared... And yes I like breakage.. or something that avoid long winded stalemate when both side have good skills and tools... Though breakage is good, get rid of annoying items... and create expenses and unexpected tragedy.

Lots of different and good ideas here, I am all set thanks! 🙂

To take a side, sort of, I don't think there is a best method, people have their preferences or things that work for them. I am the only non D&D GM here of all my friends so I follow no one else example, and maybe my games are different to others with the same ruleset?
(I haven't fully converted them here.. though one of us is thinking to do a Fallout campaign! 😄 )

I think I (and this style of homebrew rule discussion) might come up as annoying to some, but hey it's a game and a rough simulation of conflict story telling, there is no single correct answer, no need to get upset! 🙂  Hell some people are even known to like D&D! 😮 😛 

Edited June 29, 2021 by Lloyd Dupont

[olskool]

I use a "crunchier" method tied to skill and a weapon's damage.  

THE PARRY:

Weapon sizes matter here.  Parrying a Great Sword or Poleaxe with a Dagger is going to affect your PC's PARRY SKILL...

Weapons are sized from Small, to Medium, to Large, to Huge.  Each "difference" in sizing results in a reduction for Parrying skill.  Parrying a Medium weapon with a Dagger (a Small weapon) results in one Difficulty Shift in skill (ie reducing an Average chance to Fairly Difficult under MY system).  Trying to Parry a Large weapon would reduce it TWO levels of Difficulty (to Difficult in my system).  You can Parry with your bare hands but all damage inflicted will go to your Arm.  The IRONHAND Parry allows "martial artists" to Parry weapons with their bare hands but this is a special Skill that must be learned. 

A Successful Parry allows the blocking of damage equal to the PARRYING Weapon's DAMAGE ROLL + 1/10th the user's Skill Level (adjusted for Difficulty of course) rounding up.  ALTERNATELY, you can just use the Weapon's MAXIMUM DAMAGE + 1/10th Parry Skill for the amount of Damage that is blocked.  I use a damage roll to vary the amount of damage that is Parried from attack to attack. 

Weapons possess BOTH an Armor Rating (AP) and Hitpoints (HP) just like the older MONGOOSE PUBLISHING Runequest rules.  Any damage blocked which exceeds the Weapon's AP causes the loss of ONE HP (which comes out of the PARRIED damage, NOT the damage that gets through the Parry) and any damage which is NOT PARRIED goes through to the target.  IF the blocked/parried damage EXCEEDS AP multiple times, then multiple HP of damage can be inflicted on the Parrying weapon at the rate of 1 HP per time the weapon's AP is exceeded.  Shields have both AP and HP and are treated as weapons under my rules.    

THE DODGE:

The Dodge is an ENHANCED evasion technique that must be learned like "Professional Skills."  When a character Dodges, they reduce an enemy's DAMAGE by 1/10th Skill +1 rounding up.  A person with a 56% Dodge can reduce Damage by up to 7 points. This requires an ACTION (I use MYTHRAS' ACTIONS system) AND can be combined with a Parry.  BOTH defensive Skills will suffer a one-level Difficulty Shift when you combine the two though.    

[Lloyd Dupont]

You forgot to say, I would guess looking at your description, that you increase damage with user skill!

And STR damage is strangely ignored when parrying...

Interesting that parry and dodge work somewhat the same I have to give it some thought...

[olskool]

On 6/29/2021 at 8:06 PM, Lloyd Dupont said:

You forgot to say, I would guess looking at your description, that you increase damage with user skill!

And STR damage is strangely ignored when parrying...

Interesting that parry and dodge work somewhat the same I have to give it some thought...

Yes, you increase the Damage Parried with higher skill levels.

I didn't include STR damage because I DON"T USE the RAW STR Damage Bonuses.  As I have posted in a couple of other threads in the past, I give EVERY WEAPON a required STR & DEX score, and the damage bonus comes from having STR in excess of the STR score needed to wield a weapon.  This bonus damage is just "folded into" the weapon's damage during character generation or when the player records the new weapon's "stats."  Thus, since any bonus is added into the weapon's damage, I do not list it separately.    

[Darius West]

On 6/27/2021 at 4:20 AM, Atgxtg said:

And the orginal Stormbringer way was even faster with less bookkeeping. . But faster and less bookkeeping isn't always better. 

Agreed.  One of my favorite examples of Murphy's Rules was that as written in the original Stormbringer rules, any improvised object that you parried with had infinite HP.  As a result, rule bending players would parry with handkerchiefs, beer steins, old shoes, etc.  Basically anything other than a weapon, a body part or a shield.  Of course good GMs would "house rule" fix this problem, but it was funny to allow it and watch characters create their specific personalized signature abuse of the system.

Edited July 12, 2021 by Darius West

[Atgxtg]

23 hours ago, Darius West said:

Agreed.  One of my favorite examples of Murphy's Rules was that as written in the original Stormbringer rules, any improvised object that you parried with had infinite HP. 

Murphy's Rules. I still love how someone in RQ with a low CON can survive having both arms cut off but someone with a high CON cannot, due to higher hit points in each location. MUrphy's Rules  were funny but not all the examples give were feasible, but then they didn't have to be.

23 hours ago, Darius West said:

As a result, rule bending players would parry with handkerchiefs, beer steins, old shoes, etc.  Basically anything other than a weapon, a body part or a shield.  Of course good GMs would "house rule" fix this problem, but it was funny to allow it and watch characters create their specific personalized signature abuse of the system.

It might be a Murphy Rule, but in actual game play no player ever tried to parry with a hankie. It doesn't really matter if the hankie can block infinite damage if you can't make the parry roll. It might be a funny Murphy Rule, but it's not funny enough to kill your character over -especially when the character already has a weapon on hand that they can use with some proficiency.  I've yet to see a player opt to parry with an old shoe at 5% when they could just parry their broadsword at a much higher percentage.

I suppose a character who gets into a lot of bar fights could develop some skill with a beer stein to the point where it might be a legitimate option, but that also has some inherent drawbacks, such as the risk of spilling beer! A Pyrrhic victory at best.

 

[SDLeary]

13 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

Murphy's Rules. I still love how someone in RQ with a low CON can survive having both arms cut off but someone with a high CON cannot, due to higher hit points in each location. MUrphy's Rules  were funny but not all the examples give were feasible, but then they didn't have to be.

Come now! You know it can happen!! 

 

SDLeary

[Lloyd Dupont]

To be fair, this was only a flesh wound! 😛 

[Mugen]

On 6/26/2021 at 8:20 PM, Atgxtg said:

And the orginal Stormbringer way was even faster with less bookkeeping.

It depends on what you mean by "fast". Fights between protagonists with high or very low skill values could last very long, and be very boring too.

[Darius West]

On 7/14/2021 at 12:55 AM, Atgxtg said:

It might be a funny Murphy Rule, but it's not funny enough to kill your character over -especially when the character already has a weapon on hand that they can use with some proficiency.  I've yet to see a player opt to parry with an old shoe at 5% when they could just parry their broadsword at a much higher percentage.

In Stormbringer you could choose what you had skill in parrying with during character creation.  Hankies all round I'm afraid.

[Darius West]

18 hours ago, Lloyd Dupont said:

To be fair, this was only a flesh wound! 😛 

Except for the bony bits, but I'm sure they are completely superfluous.

Edited July 14, 2021 by Darius West

[Atgxtg]

22 hours ago, SDLeary said:

Come now! You know it can happen!! 

But those were just flesh wounds.😉

 

22 hours ago, Lloyd Dupont said:

To be fair, this was only a flesh wound! 😛 

Beat me too it.😎

 

BTW, Can I play a rabbit for my next character? 😁

Edited July 15, 2021 by Atgxtg

[Atgxtg]

18 hours ago, Mugen said:

It depends on what you mean by "fast". Fights between protagonists with high or very low skill values could last very long, and be very boring too.

Sounds more like a general criticism of BRP games rather than Stormbringer specifically, as the same hold true for CoC, RQ, etc. Stormbringer does have ripostes, which speeds things along. Probably the fastest BRP based method is the Pendragon mechanic of replacing alternating turns with an opposed roll. Barring ties or special combat maneuvers, somebody is going to hit every round.

Personalty, I prefer the attack/parry/serious injury method to the increasing hit point attrition method used in a lot of RPGs. A 5, 10 or even 20 point wound loses context when a character's hit points can double, triple or more as they gain experience, especial for non-fantasy settings. It's gets kinda silly when two gunfighters empty their pistols into each other and then have to stop and reload before finishing the fight. 

[Atgxtg]

 

4 hours ago, Darius West said:

In Stormbringer you could choose what you had skill in parrying with during character creation.  Hankies all round I'm afraid.

Good thing SAN rules are optional in  Stormbringer. Now I can just picture a sorcerer making DEMON-Hankies to hand out. 

Groups with hankies all around should run into beings from a lawful plane with grenade launchers and napalm. Something bad should happen to their characters, too.

[Lloyd Dupont]

43 minutes ago, Atgxtg said:

BTW, Can I play a rabbit for my next character?

As long as it's not a vampire rabbit. Those are too OP! 😮 😛 

[Joerg]

53 minutes ago, Atgxtg said:

BTW, Can I play a rabbit for my next character?

1, 2, 4, ,,,,

[Bill the barbarian]

55 minutes ago, Atgxtg said:

BTW, Can I play a rabbit for my next character? 😁

Bunnies and Burrows it is, let me get my dice!

[Lloyd Dupont]

2 minutes ago, Bill the barbarian said:

Bunnies and Burrows it is, let me get my dice!

D&D is sooo passe.. B&B is the way to go! 😄

[Bill the barbarian]

or T&T... same author as Stormbringer!

Honestly though, I do not decry the dark side. Some do prefer D&D, who am I to judge.