Armor Reduction – new weapon damage variant

[bigdamnhero]

I’ve had an idea for my low-fantasy FH campaign, and could use some second+ opinions.

 

I’m looking for a way to model weapons that are either slightly magical or else just very high quality. (And the line between those two categories can be blurry in low fantasy; perhaps the smith used magic when making them to make a better quality sword, but the sword itself is not inherently magical?) Rather than just adding to OCV or damage outright, I’m thinking more like they’re just a little better at cutting through armor compared to normal weapons. Armor Piercing is the obvious choice, but I’m actually looking for something a little more modest and also maybe a little more granular. Typical defenses in this game run around 6 rDef, so 1 level of AP gets you past ~3 points of armor, and buying additional levels only counteracts Hardened/Impenetrable. Penetrating has similar issues. I’m looking for something with a smaller effect that can be increased incrementally.

 

So I’m thinking about using something along the lines of Reduced Negation, but that applies against standard defenses instead of against Damage Negation. Working title: Armor Reduction.* 1 point of Armor Reduction lets the attack ignore/bypass 1 point of the target’s armor. So if your sword has 1 point of AR and you hit someone with 6rPD armor, their armor is effectively reduced to 5 for that attack.

 

This is a Heroic game and for the most part the PCs will not be paying points for these weapons, so the exact cost/build isn’t critical. But I always like to stat things out to see what they might look like, and in case I want to port them over to other games/genres. I first thought about building it as Drain PD, but that gets ridiculously expensive for such a modest effect, in some cases doubling the cost of the weapon. Instead, I’m thinking of it as a Limited 1 pip HKA, Only to reduce effectiveness of Resistant Defenses (-1?). Adding that to the standard broadsword build [31 AP, 12 RP] yields:

 

Masterwork Broadsword:  (Total: 38 Active Cost, 14 Real Cost)

• Killing Attack - Hand-To-Hand 1d6+1, Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2) (30 Active Points); OAF (-1), STR Minimum 12 (-1/2), Real Weapon (-1/4) (Real Cost: 11) plus
• Killing Attack - Hand-To-Hand 1 point, Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2) (7 Active Points); OAF (-1), Limited Power Only to reduce effectiveness of armor or other Resistant Defenses (-1), STR Minimum 12 (-1/2), Real Weapon (-1/4) (Real Cost: 2) plus
• Medium (1m) Reach: (1 Active Points) (Real Cost: 1)

Or to make the write-up simpler, we just make it an Adder like Reduced Negation:

 

Masterwork Broadsword II:  (Total: 34 Active Cost, 13 Real Cost)

• Killing Attack - Hand-To-Hand 1d6+1, Armor Reduction (+1), Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2) (33 Active Points); OAF (-1), STR Minimum 12 (-1/2), Real Weapon (-1/4) (Real Cost: 12) plus
• Medium (1m) Reach: (1 Active Points) (Real Cost: 1)

The cost is a little lower on this build. Given that adding conventional Armor Piercing to the same sword only pushes it to 36 AP and 14 RP, I’m thinking this lower cost is more appropriate.

 

Anyway, that’s my idea. What do you think? Interesting? Useless? Broken? Over/underpriced? Thanks for the feedback.

 

* Suggestions for a better name are welcome too.

[Christopher R Taylor]

Reminds me of the old "Piercing" Power in Champions 3, did basically the same thing.  I can't remember the cost but I think it was like 1 point per normal and 3 per resistant defense you ignored.  I really liked the mechanic.

[Hyper-Man]

I think there were 3e-4e era versions of a similar ability called Piercing.

 

It's one of those tweener abilities that falls just short of getting it's own power/talent write up since it technically is just damage limited to the defenses of a target.  As such it seems more consistent to create it as a variant of Deadly Blow and Weapon Master that just gets applied to a specific weapon instead of a character.  Using the 8 point CSL's as a base also removes the need for Reduced END on the build.

 

HM

[rravenwood]

I like the idea, but I'd be inclined to go with the cost of 2 pts. per pip of Armor Reduction.  This seems to better follow the design principle of "defenses should be cheaper".  (1 pt. of Resistant Protection essentially costs 1.5 pts., so allowing that to be negated by a 1-point adder seems too effective for the cost.)

[Crusher Bob]

For killing damage, this feels like it should cost closer to 5 points per pip than 1 point per pip.  Not 5 points, but something like 3 points... 

 

If we assume that 90% of our targets are going to be wearing armor, points of armor piercing are going to be just as effective as points of damage 90% of the time.

 

So I guess it depends on how common armor is?  Is armor in this game going to have activation rolls?  Are 'common monsters' not going to have resistant defenses?  Then I can see the disadvantage of Killing AP being reduced.  But it 'everyone' wears armor, then killing AP is almost as good as regular killing damage.

[Armitage]

A 6e version of Piercing appeared in the first Advanced Player's Guide.

 

Normal Defenses: 2 points.

Resistant Defenses, Mental Defense, Powers Defense, Flash Defense: 3 points.

[Christopher R Taylor]

Stuff like that is really useful for Fantasy Hero treasures.  A sword that ignores 1-2 points of armor is magical and has power, but isn't game-breaking.  Its going to make a difference in combat, but not ignore armor.

[Sean Waters]

This works well, I think.  I might suggest limiting it further, so, for instance, it only works against metal armour (The Sword IronBiter).  That is flavour though, rather than anything else: the basic idea is sound.

 

You could, as it is good at chewing through armour, add a small Power Drain to the attack.  That means more bookkeeping though.

 

As Christopher Taylor says, it is not game breaking.

 

One tiny, tiny objection though, because I simply can not help myself: should this get such a cost break for reducing defences?

 

I say this because I assume that the vast majority of opponents will have some armour of other resistant defences, and there is then no practical difference between increasing the damage by 1 point and reducing the defence by one point if they have at least that much defence.  Well, maybe knockdown/knockback.

 

-1 is a lot, if that is the case.

[Chris Goodwin]

Keep in mind that each point of this is essentially one Damage Class, Standard Effect.  Three DC of Killing damage will either reduce three points of armor for one hit (with the Limitation) or do a maximum of 6 BODY as a wound (without the Limitation, non-Standard Effect).  So I don't see a major problem with it.  Is -1 too much?  I don't think so.  Even if it weren't Standard Effect, 3 DC of it would never wound the target for 6 BODY, nor do any STUN damage.

[bigdamnhero]

A 6e version of Piercing appeared in the first Advanced Player's Guide.

 

Normal Defenses: 2 points.

Resistant Defenses, Mental Defense, Powers Defense, Flash Defense: 3 points.

Y'know, if I had a nickel for every time I posted a "Hey, check out my cool new totally original idea!" and someone responded with "Yeah, it's in the APG..."

 

Yeah, that's pretty much exactly what I was looking for. Not crazy about the name tho, too close to AP. And I think it works easier as an Adder rather than a separate Power. But I like the pricing structure. Thanks!

 

I like the idea, but I'd be inclined to go with the cost of 2 pts. per pip of Armor Reduction.  This seems to better follow the design principle of "defenses should be cheaper".  (1 pt. of Resistant Protection essentially costs 1.5 pts., so allowing that to be negated by a 1-point adder seems too effective for the cost.)

I had it as 2 AP; it just came out to 1 RP after Limitations.

 

For killing damage, this feels like it should cost closer to 5 points per pip than 1 point per pip.  Not 5 points, but something like 3 points... 

 

If we assume that 90% of our targets are going to be wearing armor, points of armor piercing are going to be just as effective as points of damage 90% of the time.

 

So I guess it depends on how common armor is?  Is armor in this game going to have activation rolls?  Are 'common monsters' not going to have resistant defenses?  Then I can see the disadvantage of Killing AP being reduced.  But it 'everyone' wears armor, then killing AP is almost as good as regular killing damage.

Also valid points. For this game, armor is very common, but people don't wear it everywhere. The PCs have already gotten into a couple fights sans armor in cities and so forth. Plus armor is mostly sectional and not always 100% coverage, so 1 pt vs armor is not going to always be the same as +1 Damage. But in other more traditional fantasy campaigns, I can see the math working out very differently.

 

This works well, I think.  I might suggest limiting it further, so, for instance, it only works against metal armour (The Sword IronBiter).  That is flavour though, rather than anything else: the basic idea is sound.

Definitely!

 

You could, as it is good at chewing through armour, add a small Power Drain to the attack.  That means more bookkeeping though.

I first tried to build it as Drain rPD. But because of defensive doubling, you need at least 2d6 of Drain to reduce a point of Def. Add on 0 END and you're up to 30 AP, which almost doubles the cost of the sword!

[Armitage]

Y'know, if I had a nickel for every time I posted a "Hey, check out my cool new totally original idea!" and someone responded with "Yeah, it's in the APG..."

 

Yeah, that's pretty much exactly what I was looking for. Not crazy about the name tho, too close to AP. And I think it works easier as an Adder rather than a separate Power. But I like the pricing structure. Thanks!

 

 

The way they presented it in the APG, it practically was an Adder.  For example, a 2d6 RKA, 1 point Piercing, Armor Piercing (+1/4) was listed as a 41 Active Point Power.

(30 + 3) x 1 1/4

[Sean Waters]

I'm going to be a whiny little bitch about this but, Piercing...

 

So 2 points to reduce 1 point of resistant defence.  OK, sounds like a sort of 'instant and specific' defence drain.

 

If we look how that works:

 

Say the target has 20PD

 

Compare (1) 8d6+5 points of Piercing to (2) a straight 10d6 attack.

 

1. applies 8d6 (average 28) to a defence of 15: 13 through defences

2. applies 10d6 (average 35) to a defence of 20: 15 through defences

 

Advantage more damage.

 

The other issue - and this used the example in AGP1: if you add Armour Piercing to your attack the Piercing adds to base damage but reduces defences before you apply damage

 

Compare (1) 8d6+5 points of Piercing +AP to (2) a straight 10d6 attack +AP.

 

1. applies 8d6 (average 28) to a defence of 15, halved to 8: 20 through defences

2. applies 10d6 (average 35) to a defence of 20, halved to 10: 25 through defences

 

Advantage more damage NB in this example both attacks have a roughly equal chance of getting some Body damage through as well.

 

Piercing may seem like a different mechanic but what it is doing is adding 1 more point of STUN for 2 character points, or 3.5 extra Stun for 7: an extra 1d6 damage is still a better bet.  Piercing is more predictable, but a 5 point spend increases damage by 2.5, so you are worse off 2/3 of the time.

 

OK.  Let's look at resistant defences.

 

(1) 2d6 KA + 5 Piercing against (2) 3d6 KA, both against 10rPD/20PD

 

(1) 7 Body and 14 Stun (averages) applies to 5rPD and 15PD: 2 Body through defences, no Stun through defences (but, and I don't know if this is an actual rule or a house rule, always require a target takes at least 1 Stun per Body through defences)

 

(2) 10.5 Body and 21 (averages) applies to 10rPD and 20PD: .5 Body through defences and1 Stun

 

Advantage Piercing

 

So, Piercing is much better against KAs than it is against normal attacks compared to the same point cost of base attack, at least in these examples.

 

Add in AP as an advantage and see what happens..

 

(1) 7 Body and 14 Stun (averages) applies to 5rPD and 15PD, halved to 3rPD and 8 PD: 4 Body through defences, 6 Stun through defences 

 

(2) 10.5 Body and 21 (averages) applies to 10rPD and 20PD halved to 5rPD and 10PD: 5.5 Body through defences and 11 Stun

 

Advantage more damage - again Piercing only really works (at least in these examples) when applied on its own.  That is because 1 point of Killing Damage costs 15/3.5 = 4.28 character points , and you are getting the defence reduction (which is the same as extra damage if resistant defences are common) for 3.  Put another way 15 points in Piercing effectively adds 5 points to Body damage rather than 3.5.

 

I mean, it is certainly an option, and relatively easy to administer, but I'm not convinced that it is entirely balanced.

 

I'd best not start on Flash/Mental/Power defence because then it really weird.  15 points of Piercing gives you 5 'extra damage' and 15 points of drain gives you 5.25 'extra damage' - OK that is marginal.

 

Flash: 15 points of Piercing - again 5 extra damage, 15 points of Flash is 3 extra damage - big advantage Piercing.

 

Mental powers - 5 for Piercing, 10.5 for Mental attack powers - definitely not worth it

 

PLUS Piercing is only any use if you the opponent has those defences.

 

So, it does not apply as intuitively as it seems.

 

OTOH, it does describe what you are after: a sword that only works better against armour.  Cool.  Mind you, if you balanced the point cost it is worse against an unarmoured opponent, and that does not seem like the intent.

 

 

(1) 7 Body and 14 Stun (averages) applies to 5rPD and 15PD: 2 Body through defences, no Stun through defences (but, and I don't know if this is an actual rule or a house rule, always require a target takes at least 1 Stun per Body through defences)

 

(2) 10.5 Body and 21 (averages) applies to 10rPD and 20PD: .5 Body through defences and1 Stun

[Christopher R Taylor]

All of that is probably why Piercing was dropped from the rules but I'd argue that its a tool that gives useful flexibility, particularly at the low end, for heroic games (particularly Fantasy).

[Sean Waters]

Here is an idea for you.  It is quite a big change, but produces interesting results.

 

When you buy an attack power you have to define each DC as 'Penetration' or 'Damage'.  When you attack with a 'Standard Attack', like normal Strength, or a combat manoeuvre, half the DCs rounded up go to Penetration.  All attacks in frameworks should be considered Standard Attacks unless they are the only attack of that type in the framework.

 

The way this works is that you roll your 'Penetration dice and, if you equal or exceed the defences of the target then all your damage dice cause damage.This makes weapons generally less damaging and armour generally more effective, which can be good for heroic games.  It also means that if you do not exceed the armour threshold the attack bounces which, personally, I like as it makes it harder to nickel and dime the heroes.  This is good for Heroes v Hordes as generally heroes have better armour, but usually makes EOL Bosses tougher.

 

This also better differentiates the qualities of individual weapons and makes a magic sword that cuts through armour easy to build.

 

 

 

Example 1: you have  Lightning Blast attack that is particularly good at ignoring armour.  It is a 9d6 attack, and you decide that 5 dice go to Penetration and 4 dice to Damage (it will always be in that ratio once bought).  You cast your spell at Gruntor the Mighty who has 8PD and 8ED and wears The Armour of the Ancestors which provides 7rPD and 5rED, so you need to roll 13 or more on 5d6 to do 4d6 Stun damage.  You are never going to equal 13 with the Body damage, so ignore that.  You average 14 Stun damage.

 

Example 2: you have a Sword which does a 1 1/2d6 KA (3d6 with 20 STR).  You have decided that swords are better at cutting flesh than armour so 1 DC is Penetration and 4DC is allocated to Damage.  The +4 DCs from STR go 2 to AD, and 2 to Damage, so you roll 1d6 (3DCs) and see if you can exceed the defences of the target.  If we are aiming at Gruntor then you can not exceed 6 Body damage, so can not do Body as he has 7rPD, but if you do 13 or more with your Stun multiplier factored in (you are going to need to roll a 3x Stun multiplier and have 5 or 6 on your first roll), all 6DCs of Stun Damage get through and you roll 2d6 and a 1/2 d6 Stun multiplier.  You will average no Body and 14 Stun if you get through defences.

 

Example 3: not happy that you are struggling to damage the heavily armoured barbarian you come back with a Warhammer that is defined as 4 DCs Penetration, and 1DC Damage, so 6 DCs of Penetration: 2d6 Kill - you have a better than even chance of exceeding the Body armour of 7 and a pretty good chance of exceeding the Stun threshold of 13 too: if you do the Barbarian takes 3DCs of damage (1d6 KA), which would average 3 or 4 Body and 7 Stun.

 

Comparison: you would expect 9DCs of Killing damage to average 10.5 Body and 21 Stun (i.e. 3 or 4 Body and 8 Stun through defences).   A 9DC normal attack will average 31.5 Stun and 9 Body, so 18 or 19 damage.

 

Obviously Grunthor has pretty good armour so is quite hard to damage anyway.