"Tightening the Curve" on damage

[Kristopher]

Has anyone put any thought into ways to reduce the variability of damage on weapons for a heroic campaign?

 

(OK, I know people have, that's just the easiest way to ask.)

 

Example -- a weapon that does 2d6 RKA could do anywhere from 2 to 12 BODY to a target with no Resistant Defenses. That makes balancing weapons, armor, and average lethality a little hard.

 

I don't want to make all the weapons Standard Effect, however -- I want some variability.

 

My first thought is to make the weapons Standard Effect for some of the Dice, and then rolled for 1 or 2 dice.

 

So for a 2d6 RKA, you'd actually roll 1d6+3 for the weapon, for a range of 4 to 9 BODY to an unprotected target.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: "Tightening the Curve" on damage

 

I think standard effect on some dice is the easiest approach.

 

You could also customize the dice. For example, instead of 1d6 equalling 1-6, it could be 1-3 + 1. That 2d6 RKA would now roll 2d3 and add 2 for a range of 4 - 8. This would tend to cluster a bit more to the average.

 

If you're openminded enough to consider Those Other Dice, the average of 1d6 is the same as 1d4+1, which would also tighten the range to 2-5 instead of 1-6.

 

Or you could use 1d6 with 1=2, 2-3 = 3, 4-5 = 4 and 6 = 5. Same range with a greater tendency to the middle of the range. I'd probably want to customize some dice for ease of use if I took that approach.

 

Any "different dice count" mechanic xould, of course, also be comined with some dice having standard effect so you're never rolling and adding huge handfuls of dice.

[Kristopher]

Re: "Tightening the Curve" on damage

 

Oddly, the huge handfuls of dice in a superheroic campaign tend to reduce the (IMO) real issue* here -- the more dice you have, the more the damage rolls seem to cluster around the average.

 

* I don't want the weapons to randomly be a minor wound or a one-shot on a regular basis -- it makes managing lethality hard.

[Vondy]

Re: "Tightening the Curve" on damage

 

Oddly, the huge handfuls of dice in a superheroic campaign tend to reduce the (IMO) real issue* here -- the more dice you have, the more the damage rolls seem to cluster around the average.

 

* I don't want the weapons to randomly be a minor wound or a one-shot on a regular basis -- it makes managing lethality hard.

 

This is standard bell curve behavior. The more dice you use the "flatter" the curve gets (on average).

 

Are you generally running heroic or superheroic games, and what reality distortion level are you looking for?

 

In terms of stun results, I've found using hit locations tends to remove the volatility without the draconian 6E 1d3 neuter.

 

In terms of body, I use talents and armor to offset the chances of one-shotting headlining protagonists and antagonists.

 

Without large numbers of DCs in play a little bit goes a long way.

 

I also use the mook rule that damage equaling half their body or a stunning result takes them out of the fight (to avoid DC inflation).

[Kristopher]

Re: "Tightening the Curve" on damage

 

This is standard bell curve behavior. The more dice you use the "flatter" the curve gets (on average).

 

Are you generally running heroic or superheroic games, and what reality distortion level are you looking for?

 

In terms of stun results, I've found using hit locations tends to remove the volatility without the draconian 6E 1d6 neuter.

 

In terms of body, I use talents and armor to offset the chances of one-shotting headlining protagonists and antagonists.

 

Without large numbers of DCs in play a little bit goes a long way.

 

I also use the mook rule that damage equaling half their body or a stunning result takes them out of the fight (to avoid DC inflation).

 

This is for my upper-heroic-level science fiction game. I'm looking for fairly realistic, but with PC lethality based more on their choices than on random factors. Offsetting the realism is the access to future equipment, cybernetics, bioenhancement, etc.

[Vondy]

Re: "Tightening the Curve" on damage

 

This is for my upper-heroic-level science fiction game. I'm looking for fairly realistic' date=' but with PC lethality based more on their choices than on random factors. Offsetting the realism is the access to future equipment, cybernetics, bioenhancement, etc.[/quote']

 

The simplest way is to use hit locations and some talents and armor. When you are operating with under 8DCs on average a little bit of defense can go a long way, esp. if the talents are constructed properly. Both DC and Pulp Hero have some good options to reduce lethality for headlining protagonists and antagonists. I think this is probably the best approach. Another would be to implement standard effects beyond X-DC and use hit locations, but this is still more random than the talent method.

[Panpiper]

Re: "Tightening the Curve" on damage

 

I allow my players to buy 'Lucky Damage Dice' for five points a pop. These allow a player to roll the lucky die again whenever that die rolls a one. This is very deliberately NOT on a six, rather a one. The idea is not to increase the upper limit of damage, but to raise the lower end to a more regularly decent damage, but still within the general range of the regular attack. These dice can be used for any damage roll with any attack. From a pure point cost effectiveness, they are not a particularly great deal, effectively costing the equivalent of ten points per damage class. But given that they apply to 'all' attacks and that I allow them 'without' them affecting any 'rule of X', they are a nice little bonus, well worth the taking.

 

A previous thread on this:

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php/76612-Lucky-Damage-Dice

[Kristopher]

Re: "Tightening the Curve" on damage

 

The simplest way is to use hit locations and some talents and armor. When you are operating with under 8DCs on average a little bit of defense can go a long way' date=' esp. if the talents are constructed properly. Both DC and Pulp Hero have some good options to reduce lethality for headlining protagonists and antagonists. I think this is probably the best approach. Another would be to implement standard effects beyond X-DC and use hit locations, but this is still more random than the talent method.[/quote']

 

Armor is a given in the setting. Fabrics exist that could give completely normal-seeming clothing 3 rPD/rED.

 

I don't have DC or Pulp. What sort of talents are you thinking of, and how do the address, say, the 2-12 result on a 2d6 RKA?

[Vondy]

Re: "Tightening the Curve" on damage

 

I don't have DC or Pulp. What sort of talents are you thinking of?

 

Mostly defenses with effects based limitations on when they apply.

 

One example is on the character sheet I posted in the thread about character sheets being one column in 12 point type ("Hard Bitten").

 

I'm not sure how much I can post without giving away the books for free...

 

Other examples are:

 

cinematic safety, which is hefty damage reduction that applies only when doing crazy insane cinematic stunts

tough as nails, which is damage reduction based on CON rolls

nobody could survive that, large amounts of luck dice only to avoid certain death and requiring a tortuous cinematic explanation for why the character isn't toast

[Kristopher]

Re: "Tightening the Curve" on damage

 

Mostly defenses with effects based limitations on when they apply.

 

One example is on the character sheet I posted in the thread about character sheets being one column in 12 point type ("Hard Bitten").

 

I'm not sure how much I can post without giving away the books for free...

 

Other examples are:

 

cinematic safety, which is hefty damage reduction that applies only when doing crazy insane cinematic stunts

tough as nails, which is damage reduction based on CON rolls

nobody could survive that, large amounts of luck dice only to avoid certain death and requiring a tortuous cinematic explanation for why the character isn't toast

 

"Lets first damage through, applies last" -- means that at least 1 BODY gets through, and the Def from the talent applies after all other defenses?

[Vondy]

Re: "Tightening the Curve" on damage

 

"Lets first damage through' date=' applies last" -- means that at least 1 BODY gets through, and the Def from the talent applies after all other defenses?[/quote']

 

Correct.

 

I should probably edit it to be "Lets first body through."

[Lucius]

Re: "Tightening the Curve" on damage

 

If you want to normalize the damage of Killing Attacks, how about doing just that -"Normalize" the damage?

 

Instead of a 2d6 Killing, make it 6d6 Normal.

 

Now the BOD damage ranges from 0 to 12, but will tend to cluster a lot more around the average.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Looking for an average palindromedary

[the fox]

Re: "Tightening the Curve" on damage

 

I'd allow a 1d3+1 in lieu of 3 points standard damage, not 1d4+1 in lieu of 1d6.

1d3+1 averages 3 points damage, with a little more variability, ala regular dice rolling.

1d4+1 averages 3 1/2 points damage; less variability (like standard damage), yet full average damage.

 

How about rolling 3 'normal' dice in lieu of 1 die 'killing', only to determine BODY of a killing attack?

This I would allow, since it only averages 3 BODY; if it states something like "3d6 N per 1d6 K, BOD dam. only".

 

more standard effect rule- whatever method used, if it results in a more standard effect, please pay for this effect with less average damage, ala 'standard effect'.

[Kristopher]

Re: "Tightening the Curve" on damage

 

If you want to normalize the damage of Killing Attacks, how about doing just that -"Normalize" the damage?

 

Instead of a 2d6 Killing, make it 6d6 Normal.

 

Now the BOD damage ranges from 0 to 12, but will tend to cluster a lot more around the average.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Looking for an average palindromedary

 

If it's done as normal damage, then the character's non-resistant PD and ED apply. Trying to think of how that will affect things.

[IndianaJoe3]

Re: "Tightening the Curve" on damage

 

Oddly' date=' the huge handfuls of dice in a superheroic campaign tend to reduce the (IMO) real issue* here -- the more dice you have, the more the damage rolls seem to cluster around the average. [/quote']

 

You could roll twice as many dice, and divide the total by two.

[BNakagawa]

Re: "Tightening the Curve" on damage

 

1 DC of KA gets you a binary 'die' that results in 0 or 1 body.

2 DC of KA adds a binary 'die' that results in 1 or 2 body.

3 DC of KA adds another binary die that results in 1 or 2 body.

 

DC higher than 3 loops. e.g. 4DC of KA gets you two dice that result in 0 or 1 and two that result in 1 or 2 Body.

 

Average body of 3DC of KA = 3.5 body.

 

It also discourages the cheese of using 1 DC of KA highly leveraged with advantages because there is a 50% chance of getting zilch.

[Ninja-Bear]

Re: "Tightening the Curve" on damage

 

Computer won't let me quote.

 

Remeber if you use the normal dice method, you can make them avld-defense is resistance. This shouldn't affect cost too much, and if the equipment is for free, then its not a problem. I know that this idea has been brought up before, but my search-fu is at white belt.

[the fox]

Re: "Tightening the Curve" on damage

 

yep, both your suggestions break the spirit of the 'standard effect rule' as I see it, which is to lower the effect/damage slightly in exchange for a more standard effect.

both roll more dice, 'standardizing' the damage without the simple -1/7th penalty.

perhaps your just goofin' on me; after all, adding 'standard' damage to a KA is as simple as +1, +2, +3 or more.

[Kristopher]

Re: "Tightening the Curve" on damage

 

I don't see standardizing damage to closer to the average as something that should draw some sort of compensation downside.

[the fox]

Re: "Tightening the Curve" on damage

 

If you wish to standardize the stun of a killing attack, and follow the 'spirit', simply subtract 1/7 from the effect.

'1d6-1, minimum 1' averages out to 2 and 2/3rds or 2.6667. -1/7 of 2 and 2/3rds is exactly 2.285714285, or 2 and 2/7ths, ergo;

very little stun 'lotto effect': 3,2,2,2,2,2 averages 2 and 1/6 (x2 stun, x3 stun on 6)

lesser stun 'lotto effect' : 4,3,2,2,1,1 averages 2 and 1/6 (x1/2 die stun, x4 stun on 6)

x2 stun 'averages' 2, no roll or lotto; loses too much effect compared to all other rolls that lose 1/7th of effect, or 12.5% (16/7; look at the numerator and subtract 2 from this, or 1 in 8; 1 in 8 equals 12.5%. -12.5% vs. other standard effects.

[Marcus Impudite]

Re: "Tightening the Curve" on damage

 

Dice rolls aren't everything. In some situations it's perfectly reasonable for rules such as the Chunky Salsa Rule to trump what the dice say.

[the fox]

Re: "Tightening the Curve" on damage

 

there is the benefit of reducing the chance of 'rolling low' , a benefit that may occasionally outweigh the penalty of not being able to roll high, which might even be superfluous.

 

plus add in the effect of the stun lotto. No more will you be wasting a high stun multiple on a small damage total.

 

Please pay a mere 14% for this benefit, standardize as much or as little as you want simply by addind a 1 or a 3.

 

either that or the book must be broken! Standard effect is a '3 or 4 stun' normal dice, and killing attack dice are 2d6/2 each (don't forget to round up). make it so!

 

[Kristopher]

Re: "Tightening the Curve" on damage

 

There's something to be said for turning killing damage into dice that work like normal damage dice, but still ignore non-resistant defenses. On 6d6, the odds of getting 12 BODY should only be 1 in 36, right?

[Lucius]

Re: "Tightening the Curve" on damage

 

There's something to be said for turning killing damage into dice that work like normal damage dice' date=' but still ignore non-resistant defenses. On 6d6, the odds of getting 12 BODY should only be 1 in 36, right?[/quote']

 

By my calculations, the odds of getting 12 BOD on 6d6 are less than 1 in 46,000.

 

Is that unlikely enough for you?

 

The odds of getting that same 12 BOD with a 2d6 Killing Attack are 1 in 36.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary checked the math

[Kristopher]

Re: "Tightening the Curve" on damage

 

By my calculations, the odds of getting 12 BOD on 6d6 are less than 1 in 46,000.

 

Is that unlikely enough for you?

 

The odds of getting that same 12 BOD with a 2d6 Killing Attack are 1 in 36.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary checked the math

 

Thanks.

 

OK... I don't do odds enough to always recall the correct math, I was waffling back and forth between 6*6, and 6^6, as I was posting that. Good to know.

 

Yeah, 1 in 46656 is rare enough for me.