(HR) Char/Skill & damage rolls

[Crypt]

DISCLAIMER => this can be seen as a heretical thread. But i'm convinced roleplayers are (can be) open-minded people

 

 

 

Do you think there would be any technical trouble with those 2 house rules ? =>

 

 

1. Converting Char and Skill rolls to xD6 (EDIT: in the WEG D6 way.)

 

 

Thus instead of rolling 3D6 under 17 (+/-mods) i would roll 5D6 VS 11 (+/-mods.)

There would be no change in modifiers. A +3 would keep being a +3 (added to the xD6 roll).

Skills are computed as usual, then converted.

For instance a skill computed from INT 15 and 2 skills levels = 9+(15/5)+2 = 14 ===> 4D.

 

Opposed rolls would be faster than usual. (xD6 vs xD6, the higher the winner.)

 

Attack Roll = 3D6 + Attacker's OCV - Target's DCV.

eg. DCV = 6 ; OCV = 8 => Attacker rolls 3D6+2 VS 11.

eg. DCV = 9 ; OCV = 5 => Attacker rolls 3D6-4 VS 11.

 

As an option it would be possible to convert OCV and DCV to xD6 rolls by adding 11 and consulting the table:

example :

OCV = 8 ==> +11 = 19 ==> 5D+2

DCV = 6 ==> +11 = 17 ==> 5D thus Attacker and Defender could both roll versus each other. (or the Attacker could roll 5D+2 vs 17 in order to use static defense.)

Thus if DCV = 0 ==> Attacker would roll 5D+2 vs 11.

You may note that this way an OCV 5 could hit a DCV 15 without using critical rules (i don't like using "3X1 or the like" critical rules. IMO that's too artificial.)

(Without critical rule, untrained skill rolls need at least a +4 bonus to succeed VS a standard 11 target.)

 

Fumbles could occur if "1" is rolled on every die. The more die are rolled, the more unlikely are fumbles. That's the way i see fumbles.

 

-------------------fix------------------------

EDIT : replace "11" by "10"

updated version =

---------------------------------------------

 

 

 

 

 

2. Instead of rolling damages i would use the success margin and the damage dice code to obtain the damage result : (EDIT: CANCELLED / not so good idea)

For instance: margin 3 and a 5D6 dmg code => 19(6)

= 19 body for a killing attack or 19 Stun and 6 body for a normal attack.

 

It's based on the optional rule page 382 : "Or, for every point by which a character makes his Attack Roll, increase the average damage of his attack by 10%" but in this HR the average values start at margin 2 instead of 0.

[Maur]

Re: (HR) Char/Skill & damage rolls

 

Looks like you are recreating WEGs D6 System for skill rolls. Statistically, D6+3 and 2D6 fall on almost the exact same probability distribution curve and so shouldn't be used. This is why D6 does 1d6, 1d6+1, 1d6+2, 2d6...

[Crypt]

Re: (HR) Char/Skill & damage rolls

 

Looks like you are recreating WEGs D6 System for skill rolls.

 

yes, WEG is an inspiration.

 

I've always prefered "rolling high" rather than "rolling under."

 

 

(i like harp, rolemaster, d6, t&t, etc....

HERO is great but i'm not fond of "rolling under" like in Gurps, Chaosium, etc.....)

 

 

ICE is an inspiration too as you can see in the second house rule where damages result from the attack quality.

[Crypt]

Re: (HR) Char/Skill & damage rolls

 

The first option (Hero D6) leads me to this question = what is the reason behind the p34 STR Rolls rule ? (damage rolls: Normal Body damage contest.)

Why is it the default STR contest rule ? (as opposed to the 9+STR/5 roll)

[Crypt]

Re: (HR) Char/Skill & damage rolls

 

it seems my heretical house rules are not quite popular

[Maur]

Re: (HR) Char/Skill & damage rolls

 

It isn't a house rule really, you're just mixing the elements of an already existing game system in

 

Can't wait for Septimus to be released from WEG...

[Crypt]

Re: (HR) Char/Skill & damage rolls

 

It isn't a house rule really' date=' you're just mixing the elements of an already existing game system in [/quote']

 

Yes but this is not an originality contest, there is nothing to win, i'd just like to hear your technical opinion. Please

[Crypt]

Re: (HR) Char/Skill & damage rolls

 

expanded version of the damage table:

http://cryptmaster.free.fr/HERO/MODS/Damages.xls

[Maur]

Re: (2 House Rules) Char/Skill & damage rolls

 

Thus instead of rolling 3D6 under 17 (+/-mods) i would roll 5D6 VS 11 (+/-mods.)

There would be no change in modifiers. A +3 would keep being a +3 (added to the xD6 roll).

Skills are computed as usual, then converted.

For instance a skill computed from INT 15 and 2 skills levels = 9+(15/5)+2 = 14 ===> 4D.

 

Opposed rolls would be faster than usual. (xD6 vs xD6, the higher the winner.)

 

So, it looks like you are converting to approximately what HERO calls DCs, then subtracting 2 and determining Dice by dividing by 3.

 

e.g. (14 - 2)/3 => 4D, (15 - 2)/3 => 4D+1

 

 

Attack Roll = 3D6 + Attacker's OCV - Target's DCV.

eg. DCV = 6 ; OCV = 8 => Attacker rolls 3D6+2 VS 11.

eg. DCV = 9 ; OCV = 5 => Attacker rolls 3D6-4 VS 11.

Not sure I completely understand what is being presented here. If I'm correct in assuming that you are attempting to roll 11 or higher, then I don't think the probabilities work out.

 

3D6+2 >= 11 is 74.0741%

3D6 <= 13 is 83.7963%

 

If the >= is changed from 11 to 10, then they work out correctly which is what one would expect since the mean of 3d6 is NOT 11, it is 10.5. So reversing the inequality requires a change from 11 to 10 to keep the distribution around the mean correct.

Fumbles could occur if "1" is rolled on every die. The more die are rolled, the more unlikely are fumbles. That's the way i see fumbles.

 

This falls into line with what FASA did for Shadowrun (2nd or 3rd Ed).

 

 

2. Instead of rolling damages i would use the success margin and the damage dice code to obtain the damage result :

For instance: margin 3 and a 5D6 dmg code => 19(6)

= 19 body for a killing attack or 19 Stun and 6 body for a normal attack.

 

It's based on the optional rule page 382 : "Or, for every point by which a character makes his Attack Roll, increase the average damage of his attack by 10%" but in this HR the average values start at margin 2 instead of 0.

 

An interesting concept as it reduces the number of dice rolled to determine a single attack. Just roll to hit and compare the amount of success with the damage of the attack. Does reduce the oddity of rolling really good on the hit roll and crap on the damage roll

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: (HR) Char/Skill & damage rolls

 

The problem with these "how much you hit by determines how much damage you do" is that they significantly increase the value of OCV and DCV compared to damage classes and defenses. So what if you have 40 defenses if you have a 4 DCV? I'll pretty much always hit for maximum damage anyway, so my 10DC attack will generally punch through 20+ STUN.

 

But if I have a high DCV, you'll never get a solid hit on me, so I'm pretty much invulnerable.

 

I will now ask The Dreaded Question which these systems never seem able to answer: how does this work when the attack targets a hex instead of the target character's DCV?

[Crypt]

Re: (HR) Char/Skill & damage rolls

 

So, it looks like you are converting to approximately what HERO calls DCs, then subtracting 2 and determining Dice by dividing by 3.

 

I've simply started at 11 = 3D6 whose average is 10.5 then add 1 pip for each +1.

Dice codes's averages are roughly equals to the hero's rolls.

eg. 18- ===> 5d+1 avg=18.5

But there are some minor differences for rolls under 11 and over 19 because of the average 1.5 step at each +3 pips.

9- ===> 2d+1 (avg 8)

24- ====> 7d+1 (avg 25.5)

I think this is not a big issue (?)

 

 

 

Using

....

3D-5

3D-4

3D-3

3D-2

3D-1

for values under 11

 

and

 

5D+3

5D+4

5D+5

5D+6

......

for values beyond 19

prevents this issue.

 

updated version =

 

 

 

 

So reversing the inequality requires a change from 11 to 10 to keep the distribution around the mean correct.

 

yes

 

 

 

But if I have a high DCV, you'll never get a solid hit on me, so I'm pretty much invulnerable.

 

Because of the lack of automatical success/failure ?

Putting this appart, high DCV are not more invulnerable than in the official version.

I prefer that PCs make tactical choices to improve their OCV rather than relying on critical probability. But this is a matter of taste.

 

 

I will now ask The Dreaded Question which these systems never seem able to answer: how does this work when the attack targets a hex instead of the target character's DCV?

 

Normal range modifiers are applied and "it's easier to hit the hex the target's standing in because the DCV of a hex is 3 or 0 if the hex is adjacent" (p381)

==> so i see no issue here. Why should it be differerent than against a moving target ?

[Tonio]

Re: (HR) Char/Skill & damage rolls

 

Because of the lack of automatical success/failure ?

Putting this appart, high DCV are not more invulnerable than in the official version.

I prefer that PCs make tactical choices to improve their OCV rather than relying on critical probability. But this is a matter of taste.

 

 

 

 

Normal range modifiers are applied and "it's easier to hit the hex the target's standing in because the DCV of a hex is 3 or 0 if the hex is adjacent" (p381)

==> so i see no issue here. Why should it be differerent than against a moving target ?

 

I believe Hugh was referring to the part where rolling better to-hit translated into more damage (and vice versa). With high DCVs, not only would you be hit less often, but when you DID get hit, it'd be for less damage, effectively double-dipping on DCV. Also, when an attack targets a hex, how do you determine damage to the character? Based on how well the attacker hit the hex? Hexes having such low DCVs, that'd make AoEs inordinately powerful.

[Crypt]

Re: (HR) Char/Skill & damage rolls

 

Also, when an attack targets a hex, how do you determine damage to the character? Based on how well the attacker hit the hex?

 

In fact i think that margin damage should only apply to melee combat.

 

IMHO Ranged attacks are more "all or nothing" than melee. You hit or not.

So i think i would keep the classical xD6 damages for that (or a straight average value because the only variation in ranged damage comes, imho, from location.)

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: (HR) Char/Skill & damage rolls

 

Because of the lack of automatical success/failure ?

Putting this appart, high DCV are not more invulnerable than in the official version.

I prefer that PCs make tactical choices to improve their OCV rather than relying on critical probability. But this is a matter of taste.

 

Normal range modifiers are applied and "it's easier to hit the hex the target's standing in because the DCV of a hex is 3 or 0 if the hex is adjacent" (p381)

==> so i see no issue here. Why should it be differerent than against a moving target ?

 

I think Tonio explains this for you quite accurately and concisely below.

 

I believe Hugh was referring to the part where rolling better to-hit translated into more damage (and vice versa). With high DCVs' date=' not only would you be hit less often, but when you DID get hit, it'd be for less damage, effectively double-dipping on DCV. Also, when an attack targets a hex, how do you determine damage to the character? Based on how well the attacker hit the hex? Hexes having such low DCVs, that'd make AoEs inordinately powerful.[/quote']

 

In fact i think that margin damage should only apply to melee combat.

 

IMHO Ranged attacks are more "all or nothing" than melee. You hit or not.

So i think i would keep the classical xD6 damages for that (or a straight average value because the only variation in ranged damage comes, imho, from location.)

 

So now melee attackers are placed at a significant advantage. Ranged attackers either hit or they don't. If they hit, they roll their (say) 10d6 and average 35. If they roll a 3 to hit, they still average 42. But the melee attacker with a good roll gets to do 60 STUN.

 

And a melee attack can still be AoE - 1 hex area, or 1 hex accurate, on a hand attack, for example. Still waiting for how that's going to work with your table.

[Crypt]

Re: (HR) Char/Skill & damage rolls

 

Well, i think you're right and margin damage are not actually adaptable to HERO (mainly because of CSL used for increase Damage Classes and several other rules.)

So i will keep using the normal rule.

 

---------

 

Now, what about the first idea ? => CHAR and SKILL rolls converted to xD6 (in the WEG way, the higher the better.)

I know the curves shapes would be different but would it be an actual issue ?

 

---------

[Crypt]

Re: (HR) Char/Skill & damage rolls

 

Even simpler =

Obviously the curves trouble can be cured by using straight modifiers and 3D6 vs 10. (again, the higher the better. Only the normal 3d6 curve is used.) =>

normal roll / 3D6 +

... etc

9- / -2

10- / -1

11- / 0

12- / +1

13- / +2

etc....substract 11 from the normal roll.

 

So 3D6 under 16- would become 3D6+5 vs 10.

If CHAR = 25, the Char roll is +3.

A 15- skill becomes a +4 skill, etc......

 

This way automatic failure and success may still be used and combat is still simple = 3D6 + OCV - DCV vs 10.

Hidden modifiers are easy to handle here because there is no need to ask for the success margin. This is an actual argument against the "roll under" method, not a psychological one.

(please do not speak about D20....I do not play D20.)