Help with converting third edition description into actual mechanical statistics

[Phoenix]

So I found myself in need for a creepy UFO in my game. Then lazy me remembered the crashed saucer from the book "Wrath of the Seven Horsemen" YAY pre-generated map. Reading the book I was saddened by the lack of a write-up of any type, other then a few sparse notes. Some of the notes are easer then others to convert, except for one that has stumped me. Now this may be because of the way it was written or the fact I had a stroke a while back ( I'm fine and well on the way to full recovery from the rogue blood clot from appendix surgery ), but anyway.

 

The sentences I'm stuck on are: 

"Many physical attacks may glance off the hull, due to its slickness. Anyone attacking the hull must make a DEX roll. If the DEX roll is failed the attack will be decreased by 15 active points per point the DEX roll was failed by. Extra time could be used to set, for an additional 1 to 3 levels."  

 

So how should this work mechanically, or should I just reluctantly hand-wave it.

[Duke Bushido]

15 points of additional DEF with an activation roll.

 

 

If I recall correctly, it ahould be PD versus PD attacks, but I honestly,haven't read that module since it was new.

 

[unclevlad]

First, felicitations on your health.  

 

Duke:  How is it an activation roll?  The attacker is the one making the DEX roll, so it's his skill that's being challenged.  Plus, 15 points off the attack's active points doesn't translate to 15 DEF.  Nor does it scale with how bad the DEX roll went.

 

I'm thinking a very large Dispel.  It's normally all or nothing, so, ok, need a pretty hefty advantage to allow partial success, like Transform.  (Transform is another option but its rules are so wonky, I'd MUCH rather not.  Suppress is another choice, and fits in most ways, but it'll be VERY!!!! expensive.)

 

I'm going with 12d6...basically 4d6 per point the roll's missed, is my goal, to a max of missing by 3.  Then...All or Nothing is -1/2 for Transform.  I'd start with +1/2 for Suppress Power, but it might need to be higher.  It's gonna need Variable Effect, another +1/2, and if this is on the hull, I'm thinking AoE Surface Damage Shield.  How big's the hull?  Ewww.  Plus 0 END, Persistent, from the sound of things.

 

Now we get to the Limitation.  It's sizable...at least -1.  This is where you can make it dependent on the attacker...it's 4d6 per point the DEX check is missed, to the maximum of 12d6.

 

For simplicity, and if points are just not a concern, raise it to 15d6, so it's 5d6 per point missed...and Standard Effect makes that 15.  Happy joy!

[Tymefyre]

Personally, I think this would be a Drain. When the attack hits, it may or may not be affected by the UFO's "slickness".

I'm thinking something like:

25d6 Drain Damage Shield, 0-END, Persistent, Standard Effect, Always On, Limited (5d6 per point Dex roll missed by), OAF - Immobile (the UFO).

Every 5d6 on Standard Effect gets 15 points, so at 25d6 you're covered up to a 5-pt miss, which basically nullify any damage at all with the UFO's on DEF

[unclevlad]

Drain lingers.  Plus, it's 10 points per, so you're starting at 250 points...with many advantages still to come.  Also, Drain lingers...the return rate is 5 points per turn.  This is a form of attack deflection;  the damage is reduced tor this attack, but not for any follow-ons.  Heck, for that matter, I might argue it'd be *completely* transient...that is, if Smasher the rock troll wants to multiple attack and hits twice...BOTH strikes start at full damage.  That's how I read the SFX...it's like swinging an axe against a log.  If your axe goes off vertical enough?  It'll slide off the side.  And *possibly* into your foot or leg.  That might be rolling an 18 on your attack roll, mind, but...it can happen.  

 

The whole saucer is bought as a vehicle, and the power is being bought for the vehicle;  Focus would mean there's a device that's producing this field.  Not impossible, but it doesn't automatically get Focus.

 

 

[Phoenix]

4 hours ago, unclevlad said:

First, felicitations on your health.  

 

Thanks unclevlad, not ashamed to say I had to look that up.

 

Alright, based on the debate it's not just my brain, this seems to be a poorly worded ability.

For the record: I keep looking at some type of Change Environment effect to reproduce the description. 

 

Duke, I keep my copy in a comic-book sleeve in a filing cabinet, in my basement. with the exception of a few books (4th ed Horror Hero, whatever 4th ed book numbered 501 is, whatever 2nd ed books numbered 07, 13 & 14 are) I have the whole collection through fourth edition, I even have3 of the Fusion 'New Millennium' books out of however many there were and a few fifth edition books. Yes I still play 4th Edition, but I'm a stubborn old man now, and addicted to "Hero Creator"

Edited March 12 by Phoenix
typo

[Duke Bushido]

5 hours ago, unclevlad said:

First, felicitations on your health.  

 

Duke:  How is it an activation roll?

 

Let's see....

 

 

Worked both jobs for a total shift length of nineteen and a half hours, then it was my anniversary.  Wife wanted to go to Bike Week.

 

Left for Daytona- five-ish hour ride from here.  Spent the day, with a brief nap on the beach. 

 

Got back in time to take a shower and go to work.  Got home and she was called in to her job, which left me to pick up the boy when he got back from his band competition.  Decided to cruise the board as one of several "gotta stay awake" distractions."

 

Finally got the "come pick me up" call just before midnight.

 

Got to bed about four hours ago.

 

 

_That_ is how it is an activation roll.

 

 

For whatever reason, upon waking, I thought "you said 'Activation roll,' but in modern parlance, there is a non-homebrewed modification of that called 'requires a roll.'  The difference?  Essentially the name, but this guy might be new to the game, or might not see the essential sameness; it might be helpful to log on and correct yourself.

 

Chuckled thinking "at this point, LL or Hugh has probably already made that direction for you.

 

Log on to correct myself.

 

Find an "Explain yourself!  Justify this horse manure!" tirade instead.

 

Remind myself that I do not need this crap.

 

 

Peace.

 

[LoneWolf]

You already have the mechanics of how it works.  The attacking character makes a DEX roll and if he fails the attack loses 15 active points per point he failed by. Why do you need to write it up any further?  This does not look like it was written up with points under 3rd edition, so why does it need to be written up in later editions.  Unless this is something a PC wants his character to use, or an NPC is using something like a VPP for it, it does not need to be formally written up.  

[Chris Goodwin]

15 hours ago, Phoenix said:

The sentences I'm stuck on are: 

"Many physical attacks may glance off the hull, due to its slickness. Anyone attacking the hull must make a DEX roll. If the DEX roll is failed the attack will be decreased by 15 active points per point the DEX roll was failed by. Extra time could be used to set, for an additional 1 to 3 levels."  

 

So how should this work mechanically, or should I just reluctantly hand-wave it.

 

You could handwave it.  But that seems unsatisfying and not what you're looking for.  So let's look at it a little more closely.

 

"...attack will be decreased by 15 Active Points..." sounds like Damage Negation for 3 Damage Classes.  "Slick Hull" also sounds like the perfect SFX for the Damage Negation Power.

 

"...per point the DEX Roll is failed by..." sounds like Requires A Roll (RAR), with some slight modifications. 

 

From a mathematical standpoint, the power user's roll to activate is the same as the target's (or in the case of a defense power, the attacker's) roll to avoid.  This definitely has "must be made each Phase or use" modifier (-1/2 more Limitation) for -1 total.  "Uses Characteristic Roll" doesn't modify the value.  Normally there would be an Active Point penalty to the user of the power, which can translate to an Active Point bonus to the attacker.  We can reduce the initial value of the RAR Limitation to compensate, to -1/2.

In this case, the user of the power (the UFO) gets some effect on a failed roll (or, a successful roll by the attacker).  How to handle this?  Multiple buys of Damage Negation, with increasing difficulty. 

 

Essentially, you're buying 3 DC worth of Damage Negation, with "Only If Attacker Fails DEX Roll", another 3 DC with "Only If Attacker Fails DEX Roll by more than 1", another 3 DC with "Only If Attacker Fails DEX Roll by more than 2", and so on. 

 

I'd put the value of the Limitation for the initial buy at -1/2, per Requires A Roll, and probably -1/4 per additional reduction.  Make sure to factor the previous Limitation values in, so -1/2 for the first, -3/4 for the second, -1 for the third, and so on. 

 

Allowing Extra Time to grant bonuses is already handled in the Skill Use rules; I'd use the current rules rather than the ones given in the original writeup.

 

Edited March 12 by Chris Goodwin
More appropriate RAR values

[Christopher R Taylor]

Chris Goodwin posted what I was thinking, its damage negation / damage reduction with an activation roll.  If you really want it to be based on the player's roll, then you can add that as a side effect: does not work if attacker makes DEX roll, -1 DC of DN per x points DEX roll made by.

 

I have to add though; I cannot puzzle out exactly what the DEX roll is meant to simulate.  Is this supposed to be some Gun Fu move where you do Kung Fu as you shoot?  How does being particularly agile result in a reduction of the UFO's protection?

Edited March 12 by Christopher R Taylor

[unclevlad]

I'm thinking the DEX roll, which is being made by the attacker, is to keep the attack on line, so that the weapon doesn't deflect on impact.  But, yeah, that mechanic is rather easier to envision when it's a melee attack, and rather harder to justify against a ranged attack.

 

It really would be MUCH simpler to do it as Negation on an activation roll, and blow off the less-than-clear original text.    Chris's works OK *for melee*...but is this applicable to a gunshot?  A DEX roll by the attacker makes no sense.

 

Side point about the limitation, from Chris's suggestion.  An 18 DEX means a 13-...which means the equivalent activation is a 7-.  That's not -1/2, it's -1 1/2, and it doesn't get worse.    

[Phoenix]

This is sounding real good however I'm unfamiliar with this "damage negation" ability. What is the source book/edition?

FYI I am a Fourth/some Fifth edition user.

[Rails]

Damage Negation is a 6th edition power--basically, it's 5 points (per level) to subtract 1 damage class from the attack hitting you, and bought for each type of damage you want to negate.

[Phoenix]

7 minutes ago, Rails said:

Damage Negation is a 6th edition power--basically, it's 5 points (per level) to subtract 1 damage class from the attack hitting you, and bought for each type of damage you want to negate.

Sigh, don't own that edition yet. Thank you Rails. With what you've posted I can most likely figure it out soon enough.

[Christopher R Taylor]

Even if you don't go completely over to 6th edition, there are a bunch of good ideas in the rules worth splicing into an earlier version