Change to weapon damage

[Lurker]

Ive been doing some thinking (well, OK while reading about Dewy & progressive educational theories my mind wandered) about changing the weapon damages. Instead of using different types of dice for the different weapons, all weapons do a d10 (possibly a d12, but that may be too much) with modification to the min amount of damage potential. If I remember correctly LA did something similar (used a d20 if Im right) but I cant go get my books without waking my wife and baby v2, so I cant check on the specifics.

Im basing this off real world experiences and from watching tooooo many military/history shows. A person that is skilled, or lucky, can be as fatal using a knife as someone using a much heavier weapon. However, a heavier weapon has the greater potential to be fatal. A knife fighter can kill an opponent with a single skilled strike to vital areas or a lucky strike that happens to nick a major blood vessel, but if it is a glancing blow then the opponent has a little blood loss and a cool scar in a week or so. A skilled swordsman can also kill with a single blow, but even with a glancing blow there is greater potential for serious injury just because the weight and momentum of the weapon is greater-

I also cant get my PHB to have a good break down of the similarities of weapons so with that being said, Im thinking about a knife/dirk etc doing a full d10, a hand axe mace etc having a min damage of 2, a long sword/broad sword battle axe etc having a min of 3, and two handed bearded axes, swords etc having a min of 4.

Would this unbalance or over complicate the game, would I need to also modify the damage due to spells, is there something Im missing?

*Edit, I guess I should have read the "Would these house rules cause imbalance?" posts, it covers some of the same ideas...
_________________
"And so I am become a knight of the Kingdom of Dreams and Shadows!" - Mark Twain

Forgive all spelling errors.

Knight Errant & Humble C&C Society Contributor
C&C Society

[Treebore]

Give it a try, but unless your getting rid of magic and strength bonus', and specialization from fighters, I think your going to find the average damage to be too high. So then your going to be looking at increasing the average HP of players and creatures, or introducing damage reduction from armors.

So my opinion is everything is scaled well enough as is.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

[CharlieRock]

Well, your going to end up with some players grabbing high end weapons just to min/max their weapon min damages ... and then those weapons would be doing the minimum over half the time anyway ... so, your basically going to a sort of Warhammer system where a lot of weapons have identical effects.
_________________
The Rock says ...

Know your roll!

[jaguar451]

The intent seems to be similar to exploding dice, which was recently discussed in another thread recently if looking for more info....

[Fizz]

Lurker wrote:
A person that is skilled, or lucky, can be as fatal using a knife as someone using a much heavier weapon. However, a heavier weapon has the greater potential to be fatal. A knife fighter can kill an opponent with a single skilled strike to vital areas or a lucky strike that happens to nick a major blood vessel,

I think this issue more represents an issue with hit points rather than the weapons themselves. In the real world, the most bad-ass tough soldier can still be killed by a single bullet (or stab wound, etc). Because hit points are an abstraction of luck, skill, ability to dodge, etc, and not a direct reflection of damage potential smaller weapons take much longer to get a kill than heavier ones.

Are you going for a more lethal system, where even a 10th level fighter needs to worry about a dagger attack? If so, i'd suggest modifying hit points, rather than the weapons. That would give you the effect you're suggesting- heavier weapons are scarier, but even a dagger can get a quick kill if used right.

I've used various systems where hit points are much more limited, and they work quite well- makes one think carefully before plunging into battle.

-Fizz

[CharlieRock]

Fizz wrote:
I've used various systems where hit points are much more limited, and they work quite well- makes one think carefully before plunging into battle.

-Fizz

I agree with that, however I would also like to think that the reason for playing C&C (and D&D before that) was so that I wouldn't have to worry about fighting multiple opponents everyday from wake-up to retire.

How carefully do we wish to mimic reality?
_________________
The Rock says ...

Know your roll!

[Fizz]

CharlieRock wrote:
How carefully do we wish to mimic reality?

True, it depends how gritty you want your game to be. If you want epic fights like LotR, your heroes slaying armies-worth of orcs, then this is not is not the system to use.

-Fizz

[serleran]

If I were to go with something like this, I would start by changing how HP work, and reducing them quite considerably... or, increasing the amount of damage a weapon can inflict. Additionally, an alternative system, such as an attack-to-damage ratio could be implemented so, say, a total roll of 15+ (if it hits, naturally) does +X damage, one of 20+ does +Y and one of 30+ does +Z damage (or save vs. poison or die.)

But, really, combat is a fundamental aspect of most RPGs and should be tweaked until it works the way you like it -- if it is "unfair" then players will learn to avoid it -- so that can be a good thing. It basically comes down to what you want the game to be.
_________________
If it matters, leave a message at the beep.
Serl's Corner

[CharlieRock]

Blended Approach to Damage:

All weapons and characters have the BTB amount of hit points and damage. However for every 8 points of damage taken the character moves one rank up the "Injured Table"

-8 HP = "Trauma Level A" A -1 to all SIEGE Checks, and Initiative

-16 HP = "Trauma Level B" A -3 to all SIEGE Checks and Initiative, and -1 To-Hit and Damage rolls, 10% Miscasting any spells.

-24 HP = "Trauma Level C" A -5 to all SIEGE Checks and Initiative, a 10% chance of Reroll ing every successful Attack, and 15% Miscasting any spell and -2 Damage rolls.

-32 HP = "Trauma Level D" A -10 to all SIEGE Checks and Initiative, 10% Lost action per round, 25% Rerolling successful attacks, 50% Miscasting any spell, Any succesful attack has 5% chance to Knock-out this character, and -4 to Damage rolls
_________________
The Rock says ...

Know your roll!

[Lurker]

Guys thanks for your thoughts.

Quote:
Well, your going to end up with some players grabbing high end weapons just to min/max their weapon min damages

I was planning on restricting starting weapons to cultural weapons and even then limiting the high end things. A knight is the only one to have access to a bastard sword, an experienced viking or dwarf will finally earn the bearded ax, etc.

Quote:
the real world, the most bad-ass tough soldier can still be killed by a single bullet (or stab wound, etc). Because hit points are an abstraction of luck, skill, ability to dodge, etc

Are you going for a more lethal system, where even a 10th level fighter needs to worry about a dagger attack?

Fizz I know what your talking about & I've seen "real world" in play with HP. Experienced well trained (or luck) guys live through what should be KIA and then a new guy (or unlucky) gets hard hurt from an almost laughable "attack"

For the 10th level fighter, Nope not at all, but I want everyone to worry about a dagger at level 1 or 2 and be very worried about the ax wielding viking standing there ready for you... Yes I want a little gritter than the average D&D but not real world (it is a fun game)

Serl I've thought about that and might use that to replace the "a nat 20 is a crit" for my game.

Charlie. I'd hate to have a character get worse as they get beat up. There have been way to many "I'm down to 8 HP and there are 3 orcs left, well let the dice fly and see if I'm a hero or not" which are the best memories of old games I have- to want to penalize the player. Just my opinion on that though

Again guys thanks, It might just be something that looks good on paper but the reality is that btb is better.

Have a good one
_________________
"And so I am become a knight of the Kingdom of Dreams and Shadows!" - Mark Twain

Forgive all spelling errors.

Knight Errant & Humble C&C Society Contributor
C&C Society

[lobocastle]

Lurker,

I have always felt that the D&D weapons do not do enough damage so I have tried a few things to correct it.

1. Start with 1d4 for unarmed damage and add 1d4 to all weapons for damage

2. Start with 1d4 unarmed damage and raise weapon damage by one die such as a dagger with 1d4 becomes 1d6. A weapon with 1d12 just add +2.

3. Start with 1d4 for unarmed damage and add +1 to all weapon damage. This is easy to handle for both PCs and monsters and it allows the CK to help the PCs a little by not adding the damage to monsters if needed.

A natural 20 does 2x maximum damage of the weapon. If you roll a 1 or the lowest damage result for a given weapon, then role one more time and add the results. This does not apply to unarmed damage except the Monks. I like that better than exploding dice.

I use number 2 now because I like to think of 1 damage as an insect sting or bite and 1d4 as the base damage of a unarmed attack.

JLL

[CharlieRock]

If you really want weapons to do more, just roll on the I.C.E. crit tables for every attack. Hit or miss.
_________________
The Rock says ...

Know your roll!

[Lurker]

CharlieRock wrote:
If you really want weapons to do more, just roll on the I.C.E. crit tables for every attack. Hit or miss.

Now that was an evil and harsh damage system! I remember rolling a crit and then lopping of the head of a Uraki orc ... oh the cheer (we were out numbered and trying to survive a fighting withdraw & that orc was the leader of the goblin raiders we were fighting). Then the next round the GM rolled a crit and a lowly goblin shattered my leg. I laid there as the rest of the group finished withdrawing and the orcs and goblins pummeled, poked and generally walloped me until I expired! Evil nasty crit table we hates it yessss we hates it!

From your 4 choices I think I like #2 also. I'll give that a try. Thanks
_________________
"And so I am become a knight of the Kingdom of Dreams and Shadows!" - Mark Twain

Forgive all spelling errors.

Knight Errant & Humble C&C Society Contributor
C&C Society

[Fizz]

Lurker wrote:
For the 10th level fighter, Nope not at all, but I want everyone to worry about a dagger at level 1 or 2 and be very worried about the ax wielding viking standing there ready for you... Yes I want a little gritter than the average D&D but not real world (it is a fun game)

Well in that case, an easy solution might be to just cut everyone's hit points in half. An average fighter would have just 2.75 hit points at 1st level, 5 at most. A long sword and even dagger is quite intimidating with so few hit points. And it's very easy to implement.

-Fizz

[lobocastle]

One problem I have had with D&D and C&C is hit points. As far as I am concerned a character gets to few HPs at 1st level and far to many at higher levels.

One of the things I liked about 4th Ed D&D is the way they handled HPs. That is one of the few things I liked about 4th Ed D&D.

Cutting HPs in half for PCs is not something I favor because the Monster Manual scales up based upon the C&C Players Handbook. You could also adjust monsters HPs.

What I have done is reduce the die size for all character class expect for Wizards and Illusionists.

Classes with 1d4 HD role 3d4 at 1st level then 1d4 for levels 2 - 10

Classes with 1d8 HD role 3d6 at 1st level then 1d6 for levels 2 - 10

Classes with 1d10 HD role 3d8 at 1st level then 1d8 levels 2 - 10

Classes with 1d12 HD role 3d10 at 1st level then 1d1o levels 2 - 10