dove@mit-bug.UUCP (Web Dove) (09/30/85)
While we are on the subject of game balance, here are some changes we are playing. They have to do with damage. 1) Roll all damage All adjustments to the damage of a weapon (magical plusses, ranger bonus vs giants, elf bonus with sword/bow, monk bonus with weapon, strength bonus ...) contribute to an additional die that is rolled and added to the basic dice of the weapon. For example, a 10th lvl 18/00 str ranger swinging a +3 two-handed sword against a hill giant gets 10 (ranger) + 3 (sword) + 6 (strength) = d19 in addition to the basic 3d6 of the weapon. Of these pluses, only the ones directly attributable to the magic of the weapon are unlimited (e.g. a +20 sword is possible though unlikely). The sum of the pluses of the other catagories cannot exceed the maximum roll of the basic weapon. So in the example above, if the ranger only had a +5 daggar, the adjustment for ranger and str would be limited to +3 (the maximum roll of a daggar vs giants) which when added to the (unlimited) +5 of the weapon itself yields d8 additional damage. Notice that this reduces the damage in the first case from 3*3.5 + 19 = 29.5 (avrg) 22 (min) to 3*3.5 + 10 = 20.5 (avrg) 4 (min) More importantly for us, it makes the damage RANDOM again. Guaranteed damage takes a lot of the excitement (and frustration) out of the game and replaces it with enourmous monsters that kill you in the first/second round. Also, it makes big weapons worth having (before this everyone gravitated to longswords). (The pain of rolling a d13 or d17 isn't too bad.) 2) damage reduction AC lower than 9 allows you to roll a damage reduction at the end of the round (i.e. after all creatures have swung at you). For each point below 9, the reduction die gets an additional face (ac 8 means no roll is necessary, it is always a 1). The reduction can NEVER exceed the cumulative damage for that round (if you are hit you always take at least 1 point). For purposes of this reduction, the only things that count are inherent creature AC and non-magical ARMOR (not shield). Magical contributions to AC DON'T COUNT. Dex adjustments DON'T COUNT. (We are right now counting monk AC, but that may change). So for humans, leather gives AC 8 (1 pt reduction), plate gives AC 3 (d6 reduction). These are the limits for humans. For monsters, a demon with AC -10 gets d19 points of reduction! This reduction applies to most damage (e.g. fireball, falling). However, some cases can be excluded (metal armor won't reduce electrical damage). See the section in the DM guide under saving throw adjustments from armor for guidance. This rule has several purposes: it gives low level fighters/clerics some help (since they tend to be the front line in melee) it puts some significance back into wearing armor (Previously everyone was gravitating to bracers where possible. Now armor is definitely worth it) it is a big help for monsters. (doesn't mean much to low levels, but biggies are MUCH tougher to kill). -- Both rules are easy to implement. They were intended to give monsters a hand and put some randomness back into high level battles.
slb@drutx.UUCP (Sue Brezden) (10/05/85)
>dove@mit-bug.UUCP (Web Dove) writes: >1) Roll all damage >All adjustments to the damage of a weapon (magical plusses, ranger >bonus vs giants, elf bonus with sword/bow, monk bonus with weapon, >strength bonus ...) contribute to an additional die that is rolled and >added to the basic dice of the weapon. I rather like this. I do get tired of characters who do 22 points damage or such just by connecting with a target. (Probably because I never seem to be one of those characters :-) It seems a bit unrealistic that some characters always do incredible damage when they hit. I would probably have a mutiny on my hands if I used this, but might give it a try. My only argument is when you say: >(e.g. a +20 sword is possible though unlikely). I had thought that +6 or so was the max. I don't have my books with me here at work, so I may be wrong. Not that it matters much, but who is playing the variant here, us or you? (We play it so variant, that I lose track.) >2) damage reduction >AC lower than 9 allows you to roll a damage reduction at the end of >the round (i.e. after all creatures have swung at you). Not so sure about this one. After all, your lower AC already means you are harder to hit. Are you sure this doesn't unbalance the game? It does make logical sense, though. Thanks for some interesting things to think about. This is the kind of posting I like to see in this group. -- Sue Brezden Real World: Room 1B17 Net World: ihnp4!drutx!slb AT&T Information Systems 11900 North Pecos Westminster, Co. 80234 (303)538-3829 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Your god may be dead, but mine aren't. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
west@onion.cs.reading.UUCP (Jerry West) (10/16/85)
The brief discussion on AD&D damage makes several valid points on limiting damage from weapon blows but is it necessary to do so? I am fully aware of the horrors which can be perpetrated by high level, high magic worlds, but isn't that part of the fun? The grossest damage of each weapon (assuming +5 max) is nothing compared to the additions characters add up on top of this. If girdles of giant strength are added in, and the the high-level fighter attacks at his full rate per round - with a weapon in each hand, of course, oh, and you'd better not forget the haste he has on him.... Towards the end of a very high power campaign I was privileged(?) to watch, damage per round was into three figures! BUT, since the opposition was equally powerful, the balance was maintained. Since no real advantage was to be gained by sheer brute force, the characters had to resort to politics. This produced many shifting power bases in the campaign and although melee sometimes proceeded at a snails pace (say 1 melee round / hour - don't forget the psionics have 10 segments to get their oar in), the campaign often played for weeks without any combat. This was during the off-season at University, and so play would go ahead maybe four days in the week. I suppose the point I'm trying to make is that damage is fairly irrelevant, provided that everything else scales up to match. I don't like to see 145 htk being taken off one opponent in one round, but since the DM used little tricks to beef up the enemy (eg, devils in hell (their own plane) are about 10 times bigger & better than on the Prime Material), the players rarely expected to knock anything out in one blow. But it was such fun to roll all those dice! And that's what it's all about. FUN. It was summed up in an old A&E some while back as being a choice of possible systems (I summarise) - a) The 'realistic' school (but not too realistic, 'cos if you loose a leg in reality and have no healing you stop there - so we'll use those bits of realism we want and ignore the rest). b) The 'have fun inflicting Enormous Damage to your enemy (Take THAT, Swine!) whilst Laughing off his Puny Blows' school. I say, with pride!, that I am firmly in the latter camp. In my own system, the "high-level" guy (note the quotes - there are no levels really) can cream a peasant in virtually one blow. But if 24 peasants gang up on him, they will wear him down (eventually!). If you've ever read the superb Niall of the Far Travels stories you'll have an idea of the sort of melee I'm happy with. Hmmm, I seem to have ranted on a bit to no real purpose here, and I don't have very strong views on the matter either way, so I'll stop. (well, it passes the time....) Jerry -----