Need Help: Costing MoS Based Hero

[Vondy]

I could use some number crunching help.

Note: this is not for superheroic games, which I don't run anymore.

For some time I've been running a distilled version of hero that boils the system down to 3d6 opposed/unopposed tests and damage rolls.

The critical changes you need to be cognizant of are as follows:


For every point in a characteristic beyond a breakpoint the character can add +1 to a characteristic roll 1 time. So, for instance, a character with a 17 strength who has a default characteristic roll of 12- can, four times during play, make a strength roll at 13-.
DCV has been replaced with a skill based combat system. Most combat skills are Dex based, but some, alternatively, might rely on other stats.
I use an alternate, heroic scale strength chart that lists normal lift as opposed to max lift.
Characters can attempt to exceed normal lift with increasing penalties for increased weight.
Grab contests are adjudicated as opposed strength rolls and decided by MoS, not body counting.
Presence attacks are adjudicated as opposed presence and/or ego rolls with level of effect indicated by MoS.
PD/ED have been collapsed into Defense (DF) at a cost of 2:1 with the caveat that, for builds that require it, they can be parsed back out, or purchased at their usual 1:1 ratio.
I've replaced SPD with an Action Point system.
In general there is a skill maxima with skills only exceeding it via characteristics with rolls that exceed it, or 3-8 point skill levels.
The only skill enhancer is expert. The others are gonners.
All skills have one cost schema: Fam 8- (1), Gen 11- (2:1) 9+Char/5 (3:2).
Languages have skill rolls.
Unskilled attempts are characteristic roll -6.
I generally cap primary characteristics at 28 (a 15- roll).


At run time primary characteristic numbers are not listed. Instead, a character with a strength of 17 would be expressed thus: ST 12- (3).

With the exception of calculating certain figured characteristics, I don't actually need the numbers for the primary characteristics, just the rolls. As a result, as a matter of carrying this to its logical conclusion, I want to find a way to:

1) streamline the primary characteristic cost and have characters purchase characteristic rolls. I was thinking about having all of them cost 2:1 with a cost sheet looking something like this:

Characteristic Roll 8- (Free)
Characteristic Roll 9- (1 Point)
Characteristic roll 10- (2 Points)
Characteristic Roll 11- (3 Points)
Characteristic Roll 11- with +1 on 1 roll (4 Points)
Characteristic Roll 11- with +1 on 2 rolls (5 Points)
Characteristic Roll 11- with +1 on 3 rolls (6 Points)
Characteristic Roll 11- with +1 on 4 rolls (7 Points)
Characteristic Roll 12- with +1 on 1 roll (8 Points)
Characteristic Roll 12- with +1 on 2 rolls (9 Points)
Characteristic Roll 12- with +1 on 3 rolls (10 Points)
Characteristic Roll 12- with +1 on 4 rolls (11 Points)
Characteristic Roll 13- with +1 on 1 roll (12 Points)
Characteristic Roll 13- with +1 on 2 rolls (13 Points)
Characteristic Roll 13- with +1 on 3 rolls (14 Points)
Characteristic Roll 13- with +1 on 4 rolls (15 Points)
Characteristic Roll 14- with +1 on 1 roll (16 Points)
Characteristic Roll 14- with +1 on 2 rolls (17 Points)
Characteristic Roll 14- with +1 on 3 rolls (18 Points)
Characteristic Roll 14- with +1 on 4 rolls (19 Points)
Characteristic Roll 15- (20 Points)

2) replace the characters Body and Stun with a wound level system, which can be calculated from Con/Ego. This system will ideally incorporate Flesh Wounds (FW), Light Wounds (LW), Serious Wounds (SW), Grievous Wounds (GW) and Instant Death (ID). It will also include a wound total extrapolated from Con and Ego that marks the characters unconsciousness limit. Flesh wounds will not count towards this limit, but will impose a -1 penalty on all of the character's rolls in the next action phase. Flesh wound pens are cumulative. All other wounds impose a -1 penalty to all rolls until they are healed. The stunning rules come into play with light-grevious wounds, with characters making Con/Ego rolls to ignore the effect.

This leaves me with a few issues, however:

a) setting the actual wound thresholds. I had used this as a starting point:

Flesh Wound: Body X .5 (or less)
Light Wound: Body X 1 (down to FW+1)
Serious Wound: Body X 2 (down to LW+1)
Grevious wound: Body X 3 (down to SW+1)
Instant Death: Body X 3 + 1

So, 10 Body Man would have FW 1-5, LW 6-10, SW 11-20, GW 21-30, ID 31+

The problem I keep seeing is that (see #3) its hard to jimmy this into line with the damage system. I need different thresholds or a different MoS margin for modifiers. It also works well for normal guys, but as body increased characters become nigh impossible to do anything serious too. Also, I'd like to drop Body and just use a Con/Ego extrapolation for this.

b) determine how many wounds a character can take (excluding flesh wounds) before going down. I had initially thought of (Con + Ego)/6, but this can produce as many as 7 hits before a character goes down, with an average being more like 4-5, which results in longish combats. I'm not sure that's for the best. On the other hand, if I reduce the numbers to dramatically we end up with tinfoil characters. The current norm (for published products) seems to be 2-3 solid hits.

c) determining a mechanic that allows for recovery. I was thinking that flesh wounds would not be tracked, and that they would only impose a -1 to rolls on the next action phase and then go away. I was also thinking light wounds could be turned into flesh wounds if the character took a recovery action and made a Con roll. I'm not sure.

3) commensurate with #2, replace the damage rolls as currently expressed with an MoS based result. I think this can be done without changing the basic damage class to defense ratios by using standard effect and then implementing an MoS based damage multiplier or bonus system. My initial thought was what I would term a "tall" result from the basic die roll.

An example: Joe Shmoe has a Broadsword skill of 11-. His opponent, Joe Average has a Shield skill of 11-. Joe Average rolls an 8 giving him an MoS of 11 - 8 = 3. Joe Average rolls a 13 giving him an MoS of 11 - 13 = -2. The character with the greater MoS wins the contest, so Joe Shmoe hits Joe Average with his broadsword. A tie would go to the defender. That's the easy part.

Now lets calculate damage. I was thinking it might be modified as by both the attacker and defenders MoS. Something like this:

Attacker:

Roll 18: -3 on next attack action.

MoS 0-2 X1
MoS 3-4 X2
MoS 5-6 X3
MoS 7-8 X4
MoS 9+ X5

Defender:

Roll 18: -3 on next evade, block, etc. action.

MoS 0 BD (Base Damage)
MoS Minus 1-2 BD+1
MoS Minus 3-4 BD+2
MoS Minus 5-6 BD+3
Mos Minus 7-8 BD+4
MoS Minus 9+ BD+5

So, in our example, Joe Average (Assume 10 ST and no bonus) has a broadsword, which when rendered as standard effect, has a base damage (BD) of 4. His opponent's -2 MoS gives him a +1BD for a BD of 5. His own MoS of +3 gives him a Damage Multiplier of X2 for a final result of 10. This result would be higher if he had a strength bonus.

All of this is well and good except that there's a lot of math under the hood to make it work. Namely:

1) setting the wound levels so that, when damage - defenses is calculated combat is neither too lethal or ridiculously drawn out.

2) setting the MoS margins for the Damage Multiplier and Damage Bonus so that they jive with both defenses and wound levels in a comfortable manner.

If someone with a better innate grasp of this sort of thing would propose some better numbers to work with in terms of where to set the MoS levels for modifiers, and the wound levels, I'd appreciate it.

General comments on how to make it work, or potential problems that need to be addressed are also welcome.

[jtelson]

Maybe it's just early here and I haven't slept but MoS? All I can come up with are Motor Only Sync or Military Occupational Specialty. I assume S is Skill?

[Vondy]

Maybe it's just early here and I haven't slept but MoS? All I can come up with are Motor Only Sync or Military Occupational Specialty. I assume S is Skill?

Margin of Success.

For an unopposed test you would calculate Target Number - 3d6 = MoS. A 0 or better is a success. For example: Filchy Francine has a lockpick skill of 14-. She rolls an 11 on 3d6. Her MoS is 14 -11 = 3. It may be pass/fail, or you may have levels of success based on the quality of the roll.

For straight opposed test the better MoS wins. So, Barbarian Bob and Fighter Frank are having it out. Both have relevant skills of 13- (remember, I dropped CVs in favor of skills). Bob rolls an 11, which gives him 13 -2 = MoS 2. Frank rolls a 12, which gives him 13 - 12 = MoS 1. Bobs MoS is better so he hits frank.

A tie would go to the defender. In terms of "to hit rolls" its a straight hit/miss result, but the damage may be affected by the size of the margin.

[jtelson]

Margin of Success.

For an unopposed test you would calculate Target Number - 3d6 = MoS. A 0 or better is a success. For example: Filchy Francine has a lockpick skill of 14-. She rolls an 11 on 3d6. Her MoS is 14 -11 = 3. It may be pass/fail, or you may have levels of success based on the quality of the roll.

For straight opposed test the better MoS wins. So, Barbarian Bob and Fighter Frank are having it out. Both have relevant skills of 13- (remember, I dropped CVs in favor of skills). Bob rolls an 11, which gives him 13 -2 = MoS 2. Frank rolls a 12, which gives him 13 - 12 = MoS 1. Bobs MoS is better so he hits frank.

A tie would go to the defender. In terms of "to hit rolls" its a straight hit/miss result, but the damage may be affected by the size of the margin.

Thanks, I was pretty sure it wasn't Metal-Oxide-Semiconductor

[Doc Democracy]

Sorry for the delay - am trying to dig out the time to make a well considered response...


Doc

[Doc Democracy]

OK, I've had a look at this and it is an interesting way to set up the game.

My thoughts are that there is a lot going on and it is difficult to do it exactly the way you have been looking at - the difficulties arising as soon as we move away from average Joe Average and Joe Schmoe.

I think we need a currency to trade between the systems, one I have called hurts.

I thought to define a hurt as a quantum of damage that would be unique to each character based on their BODY. So for Joe Average he would have a hurt value of 4 (2*BODY/5). Doing BODY damage to Joe of less than 4 causes a flesh wound but each 4 BODY that is done qualifies for 1 hurt (so 2 hurts for 8 BODY, 3 for 12).

A light wound is sustained by an attack that does 1 hurt, a serious wound by 2 hurts, a grievous wound for 4 hurts and instant death for 8 hurts.

With the margin of success I have a couple of questions.

I presume an attack that has no margin of success misses completely. What if the defender makes a great parry roll and the attacker misses? Can the defender have some kind of test to disarm or pin the weapon of the attacker?

What happens if the defender has a positive margin of success - can he then reduce the BODY damage? If so (and I see no reason why not) I would do this subtraction after the multiplication for the attacker's MoS.

Beyond that, I am tempted to try the system for myself in the next HERO game I run.


Doc

[Vondy]

OK, I've had a look at this and it is an interesting way to set up the game.

My thoughts are that there is a lot going on and it is difficult to do it exactly the way you have been looking at - the difficulties arising as soon as we move away from average Joe Average and Joe Schmoe.

I agree, and my initial method showed a lot of discrepancy even with small deviations, which is why I wanted to ask for help.


I think we need a currency to trade between the systems, one I have called hurts.

I thought to define a hurt as a quantum of damage that would be unique to each character based on their BODY. So for Joe Average he would have a hurt value of 4 (2*BODY/5). Doing BODY damage to Joe of less than 4 causes a flesh wound but each 4 BODY that is done qualifies for 1 hurt (so 2 hurts for 8 BODY, 3 for 12).

A light wound is sustained by an attack that does 1 hurt, a serious wound by 2 hurts, a grievous wound for 4 hurts and instant death for 8 hurts.

This is elegant. I like it a lot. Would you apply negative modifiers to Con rolls based on the number of hurts, or the seriousness of individual wounds? For simplicity sake I'm inclined towards -1 X hurts.


With the margin of success I have a couple of questions.

I presume an attack that has no margin of success misses completely.

Okay, there are two factors in play:

1) Static MoS: your roll vs. your attack skill

Example: Joe Shmoe has a Sword 13- skill. He needs to roll a 13- to hit. If he rolls 14+ he misses no matter what.

2) Relative MoS: your MoS vs. your opponents MoS.

Example: Joe Shmoe has a 13- and rolls a 13. His MoS is 0. However, Joe Average has Shield 12- and rolls a 12-. His MoS is also 0. A tie favors the defender, as does a roll where the defender's relative MoS is greater than the attackers.


What if the defender makes a great parry roll and the attacker misses? Can the defender have some kind of test to disarm or pin the weapon of the attacker?

My initial thought was that fumbles would result in a penalty on your next action phase. So, if the attacker had a negative MoS (blew his roll) and the defender had a positive MoS, then the attacker would take a penalty. The same would apply in the reverse scenario - where the defender flubbed his roll and the attacker made his. It was an abstract way of giving a shifting tactical edge - which would be beneficial with evenly matched opponents.

I like your idea better. You could allow a "half phase action" for such a situation - such as a disarm/pin/tactical half-move, etc. You could also allow an attack of opportunity if the defender blows his roll. It might be best, however, if there was a set margin person gaining the edge had to make their roll by. Its something that would have to be play-tested.


What happens if the defender has a positive margin of success - can he then reduce the BODY damage? If so (and I see no reason why not) I would do this subtraction after the multiplication for the attacker's MoS.

This seems logical, as does your proposed order of operators. My only concern would be: what does this do to combat length in games where armor is common? Does it make it onerously long? Does the number of hurts make it fast and deadly? Or does it sit right for the style of play you go in for. For me that's adventurous (somewhere between gritty and cinematic) with occasional cinematic flair.


Beyond that, I am tempted to try the system for myself in the next HERO game I run.

If you do I would love to get some play test feedback.

Thank you for your considered response - it was very helpful.


Doc[/QUOTE]

[Doc Democracy]

Would you apply negative modifiers to Con rolls based on the number of hurts, or the seriousness of individual wounds? For simplicity sake I'm inclined towards -1 X hurts.

I agree, one you have the hurts in place they are the best thing to count modifiers from.

I like the idea of tracking larger wounds if you want to make more difficult healing checks or magic.


Okay, there are two factors in play:

1) Static MoS: your roll vs. your attack skill

Example: Joe Shmoe has a Sword 13- skill. He needs to roll a 13- to hit. If he rolls 14+ he misses no matter what.

2) Relative MoS: your MoS vs. your opponents MoS.

Example: Joe Shmoe has a 13- and rolls a 13. His MoS is 0. However, Joe Average has Shield 12- and rolls a 12-. His MoS is also 0. A tie favors the defender, as does a roll where the defender's relative MoS is greater than the attackers.

Nice to have the options there.


I like your idea better. You could allow a "half phase action" for such a situation - such as a disarm/pin/tactical half-move, etc. You could also allow an attack of opportunity if the defender blows his roll. It might be best, however, if there was a set margin person gaining the edge had to make their roll by. Its something that would have to be play-tested.

Nice mechanic for it. Play testing would be essential but it could make for far more interesting combats. You could almost call it an attack of opportunity. :)


This seems logical, as does your proposed order of operators. My only concern would be: what does this do to combat length in games where armor is common? Does it make it onerously long? Does the number of hurts make it fast and deadly? Or does it sit right for the style of play you go in for. For me that's adventurous (somewhere between gritty and cinematic) with occasional cinematic flair.

Again, I think an operators thing. I think you have to start with x1 damage, then x2. The question is whether the next set is x3 and x4 or x4 and x8. So extreme advantage provides extreme value.

I think that armour will have the potential for things to drag - which might mean you have to raise the base value of some common weapons. You might also make sure armour is heavy and cumbersome to use - meaning that while it provides good protection that fast agile opponents are more likely to get higher multipliers.


If you do I would love to get some play test feedback.

It wont be soon. My group will be finishing a D&D 4th edition game and then moving to a Mongoose Glorantha game. I might be ready to run a Vondy style FH Glorantha after that - maybe early in the New Year.


Thank you for your considered response - it was very helpful.

It desreved a bit of thought - things like this demonstrate the value of GMs putting a bit of effort in and getting HERO to give them the game they want.

Repped for innovation. :D


Doc

[Utech]

Fair warning: This is nothing but a quick knee-jerk response.

I'd consider a system for damage not unlike the Sanity system for Call of Cthulhu. The idea being that an uninjured person is unlikely to be severely injured by all but the most devastating of attacks. Once injured, however, he is more and more likely to take serious damage from attacks.

You can do this either through

ever-more severe minuses to their skill rolls, or
ever-more severe minuses to a "damage save" roll.


You've included minuses to skill rolls through flesh wounds. I assume that more serious injuries also produce this minus. Perhaps they should produce a greater minus -- and the minuses should not go away!

My first reading of what you've written above suggests that you've not included a "damage save" roll. You might want to consider it. Armor, for example, might add to a damage save roll while lowering a skill roll (to hit or avoid being hit). Certain weapons might add to (or even subtract from) a damage save roll while raising or lowering a skill roll.

A great damage save roll would suggest that the character took no damage. A normal damage save roll would suggest that the character took a flesh wound. A poor damage save roll would suggest that the character took a light wound. And so on and so forth.

I'd recommend that characters cannot recover damage while in combat, but they can "reset" their skill rolls (and damage save rolls) in some fashion. Perhaps by successfully avoiding damage. Perhaps by running away...

You can certainly give characters a certain number of wounds. You'll have to experiment with the balance among


wounds,
armor, and
weapon damage.


You can also simply modify what you've written above to rule that characters are either:


Uninjured,
Slightly Wounded,
Lightly Wounded,
Seriously Wounded,
Grieviously Wounded,
Dead


Each level assigns penalties to skill (and damage save) rolls.
Missed damage save rolls take you one (or more) steps down the chart.

[Vondy]

Again, I think an operators thing. I think you have to start with x1 damage, then x2. The question is whether the next set is x3 and x4 or x4 and x8. So extreme advantage provides extreme value.

I'll have to make some quick mock-up characters and fiddle with it this week.


I think that armour will have the potential for things to drag - which might mean you have to raise the base value of some common weapons. You might also make sure armour is heavy and cumbersome to use - meaning that while it provides good protection that fast agile opponents are more likely to get higher multipliers.


Also something to fiddle with. One option might be to have armor impose penalties to Dex rolls. I'm more inclined to adjust weapon damage.

Thanks again.

[Vondy]

Fair warning: This is nothing but a quick knee-jerk response.

Fair enough.


I'd consider a system for damage not unlike the Sanity system for Call of Cthulhu. The idea being that an uninjured person is unlikely to be severely injured by all but the most devastating of attacks. Once injured, however, he is more and more likely to take serious damage from attacks.

You can do this either through

ever-more severe minuses to their skill rolls, or
ever-more severe minuses to a "damage save" roll.


This adds another level of complexity. I will need to test the "basic system" before trying this on for size. It is an interesting idea, however.


You've included minuses to skill rolls through flesh wounds. I assume that more serious injuries also produce this minus. Perhaps they should produce a greater minus -- and the minuses should not go away!

I probably wasn't very clear in my initial post. My original thought was that each wound - let's use "hurt" - would impose a cumulative -1 penalty to all "action tests" (any roll the character has to make). The penalty was intended to be applied at least for the duration of combat, though I hadn't decided if "until the wound is healed" would be in play. The exception was going to be flesh wounds, which would impose a -1 penalty, but only on your next action phase, after which they would "go away."


My first reading of what you've written above suggests that you've not included a "damage save" roll. You might want to consider it. Armor, for example, might add to a damage save roll while lowering a skill roll (to hit or avoid being hit). Certain weapons might add to (or even subtract from) a damage save roll while raising or lowering a skill roll.

A great damage save roll would suggest that the character took no damage. A normal damage save roll would suggest that the character took a flesh wound. A poor damage save roll would suggest that the character took a light wound. And so on and so forth.

My concern here is that damage or combat luck, etcetera, may already make doing any real damage difficult without adjusting base weapon damage. Also, while its implied in the system, I didn't state it outright - a character is assumed to be "evading" at 9+(Dex/5) at all times, or making use of some item such as a shield. They also have the option of parrying.


I'd recommend that characters cannot recover damage while in combat, but they can "reset" their skill rolls (and damage save rolls) in some fashion. Perhaps by successfully avoiding damage. Perhaps by running away...

Hurts have to be healed. Stunned results are avoided with Con rolls. A full phase action spent "recovering" could be a way to do what you describe.

You can certainly give characters a certain number of wounds. You'll have to experiment with the balance among



wounds,
armor, and
weapon damage.


You can also simply modify what you've written above to rule that characters are either:


Uninjured,
Slightly Wounded,
Lightly Wounded,
Seriously Wounded,
Grieviously Wounded,
Dead


Each level assigns penalties to skill (and damage save) rolls.
Missed damage save rolls take you one (or more) steps down the chart.[/quote]

I'm going to fiddle with "hurts" for the present, but I'll keep this in mind if I need to mine for a new idea, or if I need to make the current system more robust.

Thanks for your feedback.

[Sean Waters]

Quick suggestion. You now me, I can't help myself.

In a MoS system record all skills as the modifiers to the base roll, so a character with CHAR of 15 and 2 skill levels would be SKILL 3+2.

Do combat as a straight 3d6 roll, succeeding on 11- and modified by (Attacker Skill-Defender Skill).

Apply the MoS in the following damage formula:

(MoS+DC of attack)-(DEF/3) where DEF is the relevant defence for that attack.

(DC of attack)-(DEF/3) will, in a balanced game, yield a result of 3 or 4 generally.

Take the result and apply as follows:

Up to 3: Flesh Wound, -1 non-cumulative penalty to all future rolls
4 or 5: Light Wound, -2 non-cumulative penalty to all future rolls
6 or 7: Serious Wound, -3 non-cumulative penalty to all future rolls
8 or 9: Grievous Wound, -4 non-cumulative penalty to all future rolls
10+: Instant Death

Roll penalties from non-killing attacks improve (RECOVER) 1 point per PS12.
Roll penalties from killing attacks improve (RECOVER) at 1 point per week (or regeneration interval)

You don't need cumulative penalties because the non-cumulative ones make more serious injury more likely next time you are hit.

[Vondy]

רק רגע, בבקשה

One moment, please.


Quick suggestion. You now me, I can't help myself.

In a MoS system record all skills as the modifiers to the base roll, so a character with CHAR of 15 and 2 skill levels would be SKILL 3+2.

Do combat as a straight 3d6 roll, succeeding on 11- and modified by (Attacker Skill-Defender Skill).

Let me see if I understand your intent, which seems to be a method of reducing the equation to one roll. The attacker rolls 3d6 against a target of 11 + (AS-DS). So, for instance, if I have an attacker with an AS5 and a defender with an DS3 the attacker would roll 11 + (5-3) = 13-. Is that correct? If so... I LIKE IT!



Apply the MoS in the following damage formula:

(MoS+DC of attack)-(DEF/3) where DEF is the relevant defence for that attack.

(DC of attack)-(DEF/3) will, in a balanced game, yield a result of 3 or 4 generally.

Take the result and apply as follows:


Okay, next question. I'm feeling mildly obtuse, partially because (above) we were defaulting to standard effect for DCs. When you say "DC" do you mean a 4DC attack would have a Damage Value (DV) of 4? I would calculate MoS + 4 = Damage? If so, also good. I could also simplify the formula by simply dividing armor values at design time. I like the hurt system D-Squared proposed, but I think it would take more play-testing and adjustment.


Up to 3: Flesh Wound, -1 non-cumulative penalty to all future rolls
4 or 5: Light Wound, -2 non-cumulative penalty to all future rolls
6 or 7: Serious Wound, -3 non-cumulative penalty to all future rolls
8 or 9: Grievous Wound, -4 non-cumulative penalty to all future rolls
10+: Instant Death

Roll penalties from non-killing attacks improve (RECOVER) 1 point per PS12.
Roll penalties from killing attacks improve (RECOVER) at 1 point per week (or regeneration interval)

You don't need cumulative penalties because the non-cumulative ones make more serious injury more likely next time you are hit.

Basically, they just take the penalty for the worst wound they receive during the course of the fight, correct?

Also, for non-killing attacks, would you translate "Instant Death" as Stun -30 (GM Discretion)?

If I understand it correctly, this is a remarkably elegant solution. Combined with a skill based magic/powers/etc system (that I proposed in another thread), this could be the "skin" for the system I've wanted to put in place to make it seem more user friendly.

[Sean Waters]

That's the idea - single 'opposed' roll, MoS modifies the DC of the attack (as in 4d6 normal = 4) and that is modified by DEF to get a result. :thumbup:

I'm sure it will need lots of tinkering, but it should be pretty fast especially if, as you mention, you pre-calculate a DEF etc. It would be nice if Doc's 'hurt' system could be used too because that is very nice. Instant Death for non lethal attacks would be a coma. You could also do something like any attack with a result over CON/3 (or CON/4 maybe) is a stun result.

[Vondy]

That's the idea - single 'opposed' roll, MoS modifies the DC of the attack (as in 4d6 normal = 4) and that is modified by DEF to get a result. :thumbup:

I'm sure it will need lots of tinkering, but it should be pretty fast especially if, as you mention, you pre-calculate a DEF etc. It would be nice if Doc's 'hurt' system could be used too because that is very nice. Instant Death for non lethal attacks would be a coma. You could also do something like any attack with a result over CON/3 (or CON/4 maybe) is a stun result.

I think the two go together fairly well.

One is how serious the wound is, and what your penalty is.

The other is how many wounds you can take before "going down."

[Doc Democracy]

Just thought I'd do a little bit of number crunching on this system (it was less time consuming that coming up with a custom character sheet! :) )

Looking at someone with a 2D6K attack facing an opponent with 9rPD.

If the MoS is 0, then the result will be 6-3 = 3 and result in a flesh wound.

The chance of getting instant death from this encounter is 1.85% (4 or less on the roll). So in in every 50 rolls will be an instant kill. This is either a bug or a feature - depends on the feel you are looking for.

It got me thinking though that tying in the MoS to the damage means that a highly combat advantaged opponent with a 1 pip killing attack might get lucky more often.

To have the same chance of an instant kill with a 1 pip killing attack you need to have a CV advantage of 5. Be careful what bonuses you give for hitting from behind etc.

With a 7 CV advantage you get 9.26% chance of an instant kill and with a 9 CV advantage you get 25.93% chance of an instant kill.

These are figures worth the GM having at their finger tips.


Doc

[Vondy]

Thanks for running the numbers. Those are very helpful. It would lead to a potentially lethal game, especially when there is a disparity of skill levels. With PCs vs. Mooks this is probably a feature. With PCs I can allow them to avoid ID by burning a hero point if I want to avoid too much lethality.