Diceless damage

[Jaxom]

Re: Diceless damage

 

The ability to target a hex is an interesting point. That'd also become a very valuable tactic in any system like this because of the resulting low effective DCV. I assume that you'd do AE damage by simply lowering the DC in your damage distribution calculation... So if I hit a target hex with an AE with a roll of 18 would I do maximal damage to everyone in the blast radius?

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: Diceless damage

 

Well' date=' there is still a tradeoff, just a different one. Now a high damage, low OCV type is considerably less useful. Even if they manage to hit, it is guaranteed to not be for much damage. Unless of course they're going after a 3DCV by attacking the hex...[/quote']

I see this as a HUGE flaw in the idea.

If, say for example, a sniper is making a hail-mary, right out at the edge of maximum range attack against hideously bad odds, and actually manages to hit his target, I don't see any reason why his damage should be minimized just because his chance to hit sucked so bad.

Thanks, I'll stick with seperate damage resolutions.

I think there is a place for increasing damage based on how well one hits, but I'm pretty sure that there isn't a diceless system I'd be happy with for hero.

[archermoo]

Re: Diceless damage

 

That is exactly what I am doing because it is the only mathematical way to discuss the effects of changing the OCV for any fixed damage distribution. There is, in my posts, also an inherent assumption that the damage distributions under both systems is the same but even that is not required because the value of the +1 to OCV is independent of the shape of the damage distribution as long as it is monotonic.

 

This is simply because the nature of the three die six sum with a X- target number is not a linear distribution. Strictly speaking if you created a truly wonky damage distribution (something non-gaussian) then you could change the expected result but since your expected damage is just a product of the hit distribution with the expected damage the only thing that matters is whether you are adding most of your hit probability at a low-damage portion of the curve (like CV difference does) or at a high-damage portion (like Sean's proposal).

 

You can, of course, check this yourself pretty simply. Assume a 7- to hit someone and use Sean's table for 10d6. Then use any difference method you like for the same DC. 20 attacks should be enough to make it visible but 100 (if you're bored) would be better. Make your attacks at (adjusted) 7- to hit. Now make the same number of attacks at 8- to hit. Compare the amount of damage done.

 

If you roll any dice for damage (a la the suggestion by prestidigitator) then you'll need a lot more trials to make the results clear (because of the damage distribution the dice will create) but as long as you are dealing with any kind of fixed damage distribution it will be visible.

 

Ah, that's where the miscommunication was then. You said "any system" when you meant "any combined hit/damage system". I missed that assumption, and was comparing it to the standard system. I was looking for a reason that I would be interested in using Sean's system as compared to my current way of resolving damage, which is basically the standard system with "crits" thrown in to reward a solid hit. So far I haven't seen one.

[Jaxom]

Re: Diceless damage

 

I was looking for a reason that I would be interested in using Sean's system as compared to my current way of resolving damage' date=' which is basically the standard system with "crits" thrown in to reward a solid hit. So far I haven't seen one.[/quote']

 

Our group has a couple of Hero things going on and I would not use a system that modified damage distribution in either of those. It's a kind of interesting idea if I wanted to reward the light-fighter idea prestidigitator mentioned (which is a model that kinda appeals to me). It clearly has some issues like the sniper attacks (all guns for that matter) or how you would want to handle targetting a hex which is going to result in the "Close only counts in horseshoes, hand grenades and tac-nukes" situation. That'd make some sense in a low-power, low-tech situation but it doesn't fit my picture for Supers or guns.

 

 

Hrrmmmm... Looking at those thoughts... Maybe an Advantage or a Limitation (depending on how it is being applied) here? While I don't want a gun behaving this way, it might be interesting to apply some effects this way.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Diceless damage

 

I see this as a HUGE flaw in the idea.

If, say for example, a sniper is making a hail-mary, right out at the edge of maximum range attack against hideously bad odds, and actually manages to hit his target, I don't see any reason why his damage should be minimized just because his chance to hit sucked so bad.

Thanks, I'll stick with seperate damage resolutions.

I think there is a place for increasing damage based on how well one hits, but I'm pretty sure that there isn't a diceless system I'd be happy with for hero.

I second this.

 

Another thing to consider is how it punishes now DCV. How much more effective are AE attacks going to be using this system? VIPER agents use grenades you know...

[Ura-Maru]

Re: Diceless damage

 

Dream Pod 9’s excellent ‘Silhouette’ system uses something like this. Both sides roll their ‘attack,’ and the more you succeed buy, the more damage you do. That nicely includes both the ‘just nicked me’ and the ‘Use my skill to do more damage’ bits that are so hard for systems to get right.

 

That being said, much as I like it, I’m not sure how you could bring the concept over without rewriting three quarters of the game . . .

 

. . .

 

Keep in mind, any game that uses hit locations ALREADY is rewarding high OCV, and far more than Sean Water’s proposal. That’s why I’m not a big fan of how Hero’s hit loc system works.

 

As it is, High OCV is very good, but has a definite ‘diminishing returns’ point. If you add hit locations, the diminishing returns point vanishes. High OCV doubles your damage, and lets you bypass 95% of armor.

 

---

The system is really good. As straightforward as most of the ‘simple’ systems like tri-stat, but with a surprising amount of depth.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Diceless damage

 

Dream Pod 9’s excellent ‘Silhouette’ system uses something like this. Both sides roll their ‘attack,’ and the more you succeed buy, the more damage you do. That nicely includes both the ‘just nicked me’ and the ‘Use my skill to do more damage’ bits that are so hard for systems to get right.

 

That being said, much as I like it, I’m not sure how you could bring the concept over without rewriting three quarters of the game . . .

 

. . .

 

Keep in mind, any game that uses hit locations ALREADY is rewarding high OCV, and far more than Sean Water’s proposal. That’s why I’m not a big fan of how Hero’s hit loc system works.

 

As it is, High OCV is very good, but has a definite ‘diminishing returns’ point. If you add hit locations, the diminishing returns point vanishes. High OCV doubles your damage, and lets you bypass 95% of armor.

 

---

The system is really good. As straightforward as most of the ‘simple’ systems like tri-stat, but with a surprising amount of depth.

In my recently started fantasy game I have restricted called shots to the, "High Shot/Low Shot," level of resolution. That way you can, increase your random probability of hitting the head if you hit, but you can't assure it. You may, in fact, risk hitting areas like the hands and arms where you will actually wind up doing less damage (though there can be other benefits like wounding a weapon hand).

[archermoo]

Re: Diceless damage

 

As it is, High OCV is very good, but has a definite ‘diminishing returns’ point. If you add hit locations, the diminishing returns point vanishes. High OCV doubles your damage, and lets you bypass 95% of armor.

 

How does high OCV allow you to bypass 95% of armour? I suppose if you are using sectional armour it would allow you to potentially target locations that don't have any armour on them, but I don't understand where the 95% figure comes from. I mostly play Superheros, and though we don't use sectional armour, we do use hit locations. Always roll them for KAs, but you can use any attack to target.

 

And it "only" doubles your damage after defenses.

[Ura-Maru]

Re: Diceless damage

 

Right, you aim for unarmored areas. Since you’re almost certainly using a killing weapon, and most targets in Dark Champs, Star, or Fantasy Hero have no resistant defense on at least one location of their body, you effectively bypass almost all defenses. And since the hardest locations to armor are usually the best, damage wise, (eyes, neck) you’re almost always doing extra damage, too.

 

95% was an estimate. I don’t have any hard statistics to back it up. It’s better than CP2020’s “I AIM FOR THE HEAD!†system issue, but not much.

 

This is mitigated a lot if you don’t allow ‘targeted shots’ and use the high-middle-low shot thing like prestidigitator is saying.

 

Mekton had a nifty ‘called shot’ system where, basically, you chose which system you’d hit if you managed to get a critical, instead of rolling for it. So even if you were targeting the flight system, you could still hit the rest of the mech if you didn’t roll quite good enough. Not sure how you could bring that over, though.

 

---

But you couldn’t target the ‘best’ system, the power plant, you could only get it randomly. So non-targeted shots still had their place.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Diceless damage

 

I had an interesting idea (actually inspired by the Godless system, which I read about a while back). How about if you can take a -4 OCV penalty to set each of the dice for the random Hit Location Roll to a value you want? So if you wanted to hit the head you would take a -8 OCV to make two of the dice 1s, then roll the final die if you hit.

 

You can do this with one or two of the dice, but not all three except with express GM permission. There could be some optional modifications, like:

• Take an additional -4 OCV to turn the last die into your choice of 1d3 or 3+1d3.
  
• Take a -1 to choose which side of the body (in case of an arm or leg shot).
  
• Take a -2 and set the last die as well only if the total of the attack dice is odd.
  
• Take a -2 and declare which location (head, left arm, right hand, etc.) you wish to hit, and the specific area of that location you want (right ear, left eye, elbow, ring finger, etc.). If you do hit that location, your targetted shot hits right where you wanted it.

This is kind of like the High/Low shot stuff, but it could be more interesting.