Damage Limits

[mhd]

How do you handle damage limits during your campaigns? Do you have some specific maximum values for the different contributing parts (combat skills, martial arts DC increases etc.), an absolute limit or do you judge things on a case by case basis? (And of course it would help if you'd say what type of campaign it is, esp. regarding lethality and realism)

[Narf the Mouse]

Re: Damage Limits

 

How do you handle damage limits during your campaigns? Do you have some specific maximum values for the different contributing parts (combat skills' date=' martial arts DC increases etc.), an absolute limit or do you judge things on a case by case basis? (And of course it would help if you'd say what type of campaign it is, esp. regarding lethality and realism)[/quote']

The default for Heroic is x2 your weapon's DCs. So if you have a 1/2d6 k dagger, you can do up to 1 1/2d6 k with it.

[Old Man]

Re: Damage Limits

 

Wouldn't that be 1d6+1k?

 

We always handled damage limits in a relatively mooshy way based on CV, average armor, and other considerations, with final approval resting with the GM. For a 150cp game, 2d6+1k was your typical highest 'average' damage as wielded by PCs, but you could go higher if your OCV was going to be, like, 3.

[mhd]

Re: Damage Limits

 

The default for Heroic is x2 your weapon's DCs. So if you have a 1/2d6 k dagger' date=' you can do up to 1 1/2d6 k with it.[/quote']

 

Isn't that just for damage added for STR beyond the minimum? The Toolkitting column on 6E2 99 does suggest it as a general rule, though. Although even that column has no upper ceiling for unarmed attacks (haymaker + MA DC + DC from CSL…).

[Narf the Mouse]

Re: Damage Limits

 

You're both correct, I think.

[Ockham's Spoon]

Re: Damage Limits

 

In the past I have always defaulted to the rule that you can't do more than double the number of DCs from a weapon. If you want to add more damage, you have to start with a more powerful weapon.

 

I have toyed with the idea of basing the maximum DCs on the character's point total, something like MaxDC = (Total points)/20; the exact formula would depend on the power level of the campaign and whether it was 5e or 6e. In a similar fashion the max CV and number of levels would be capped by some fraction of the total character points. The idea here is to simulate a feeling of level advancement ala D&D, but I have never actually gotten to try it out so I don't know how well it would work.

[Markdoc]

Re: Damage Limits

 

I've never bothered with a damage limit for physical weapons (though I do enforce the "no more than 2x base damage - from all sources" rule for real weapons). I do limit damage from powers, though, because it is easy to get those well out of whack in a fantasy game. In general, magic powers and the like either don't do more damage than weapons, or only do so if heavily limited. My basic philosophy is if you want to make someone dead get a warrior or an assassin. If you want to talk to the dead, you need a mage.

 

Since the biggest weapons tend to run around 6 damage classes that means that weapon damage tends to top out around 4d6 HKA or 12d6 normal, in most games. I think we took about 2 years (real time) in my last campaign before we hit that 4d6 ceiling, but then the game stayed there for the next 3 years, right up until the endgame part of the campaign when the players got their hands on a magical uber-spear that let them tackle some of the big bads*. That was your fairly standard fantasy setting, with lots of monsters crawling out of holes in the ground and the players ended up pretty much all tanked out in heavy armour.

 

In the campaign before that, we peaked around the same level, but since everybody spent most of their time wearing clothes, that put a lot of emphasis on killing people fast, before they killed you. That was a Japanese fantasy Chambara-style game: pretty much everyone had martial arts, and fights tended to be verrrry short ... but exciting. The PCs could go through a lot of mooks in an evening! Unlike the Fantasy game, it was not unusual to have several set-piece fights in an evening, because they were over pretty fast.

 

This approach has a couple of advantages: once the PCs max out their weapons, the whole arms race thing tends to peter out. Armour is still useful, but no longer a must-have (a good hit will put you down, armour or no), so players are more prepared to come out of their iron shells. Hardcore combat monsters will boost their CVs, but there's a natural limit to that, as well - once you have a +3 CV over your common foes, spending more on it is not very productive. So players start to spend points on other things - especially skills/powers - which leads to some interesting builds.

 

However, it only works because I'm real stingy with magic items. In the Japanese game, I gave away one magic sword in nearly 5 years of play, and one quasi-magic sword (the PCs gave them both away ). In the Standard fantasy game I gave away 2 magic wands, some magic armour, 1 magic sword, one badass magic spear and a bunch of minor charms and trinkets over the course of more than 5 years play (plus some plot-item devices the players got some use out of before they were taken/given away).

 

cheers, Mark

 

*note, since magic weapons can have higher base damage than normal weapons, this makes them highly desirable to players!

[Narf the Mouse]

Re: Damage Limits

 

I tend to avoid magic weapons and armour which have higher numbers. I do this for a few reasons:

 

1) The easiest way to not get into an item power arms race is not to play.

2) Items of +Numbers are boring.

3) Making Items of +Numbers tends to kill my creativity.

[Old Man]

Re: Damage Limits

 

That's one of the things I really like about FH--there are many ways to easily represent magic weapons in the system. You can increase the damage, obviously, or give it +1 OCV. Or you can reduce the STR min. Or give it AP, or penetrating, or +10 STUNx, or +levels to Sweep, or range bonuses, and so on. And these are all for "generic", somewhat-superior-to-ordinary, magic weapons.

[Narf the Mouse]

Re: Damage Limits

 

That's one of the things I really like about FH--there are many ways to easily represent magic weapons in the system. You can increase the damage' date=' obviously, or give it +1 OCV. Or you can reduce the STR min. Or give it AP, or penetrating, or +10 STUNx, or +levels to Sweep, or range bonuses, and so on. And these are all for "generic", somewhat-superior-to-ordinary, magic weapons.[/quote']

Or OIF, so the axe returns to the wielder. Or Images, so it glows. Or Detect so it glows in the presence of orcs. Or Physical Manifestation, so it can never be stolen or lost. Or inobvious, so it's hard to notice if it's not being used.

 

...Yeah, Hero is fun.

[bluesguy]

Re: Damage Limits

 

I like creating magic items that are unusual and not particularly combat useful. I am also perfectly happy to let magic items get taken, lost or stolen.

 

So recently the players found a blanket that always stays warm or cool depending the outside temperature. There was a fair bit of arguing about who in the party would get it. That was fun.

[NuSoardGraphite]

Re: Damage Limits

 

I like +number magic items. I tend to hand out a lot of them at very low scale of power. But then again, I also tend to hand out effect items as well. Also I like to design or modify existing creatures and give them high levels of Damage Reduction that doesn't work against "magic weapons or spells". So that simple +1 OCV, +1DC mace now becomes very important, since it has the "Magic" SFX and it's damage isn't reduced 50% when you hit the creature.

 

I agree though that one of the reasons I like to use HERO for fantasy is because there are so many ways to represent magical weapons in the system that the mechanics support, I have never felt like I have had to pull something out of my buttocks to represent an effect for a magical item in the game.

[mhd]

Re: Damage Limits

 

One additional question: Assuming I adopt the doubling damage parameters from 6E2 99, what's your suggestion on dealing with martial arts and/or general unarmed combat? Those will reach the ceiling pretty easily. It's probably not a big issue if your STR 15 guy gets limited to a 6d6 haymaker in the occasional brawl, but I'm not so sure about "proper" martial artists, i.e. PCs who mainly use unarmed combat. As far as I read it, the only thing that adds to the base damage of an Offensive Strike is STR and MA DC. So to actually get something out of it (compared to Martial Strike), you'd need STR 15-20 and/or 1-2 DCs, right? Which generally increases the power level of the fighter, of course.

 

Not sure whether I'd just deal with that, make an exemption for MA maneuvers or have some Offensive Strike-specific perk/power.

[Ninja-Bear]

Re: Damage Limits

 

I have a question (hopefully not a threadjack), when looking at DC what about armor def? Should you have a x2 DC vs DEF to have a fairly bloody game? I just ran a fantasy game over Easter and it was fun but my 8 body goblins took awhile to kill, and they only had 2 PD res and average DC was 5 DC (11/2D6 hka, and the Dwarves had 15 STR). I did use the hit locations.

[Markdoc]

Re: Damage Limits

 

That's one of the things I really like about FH--there are many ways to easily represent magic weapons in the system. You can increase the damage' date=' obviously, or give it +1 OCV. Or you can reduce the STR min. Or give it AP, or penetrating, or +10 STUNx, or +levels to Sweep, or range bonuses, and so on. And these are all for "generic", somewhat-superior-to-ordinary, magic weapons.[/quote']

 

My standard magic items simply remove the "real weapon" and "STR min" limitations. The players got, towards the end of the game, some suits of magic armour. They were PD/ED8, just like regular plate harness. Unlike regular plate harness, they didn't rust, encumber or get you overheated. The players just loved them to bits. The same for magic weapons. Just removing STR min makes a magic sword greatly desirable.

 

In general, though, there tends not to be much in the way of magic swords and the like in my game. Face it, if you could make a magic item, would you make slightly sharper sword, or something that would let you zap your enemies safely at range? Or simply summon something big savage, toothy and slavishly loyal? Or more to the point, something that would be useful every day, like an anti-aging and disease charm? Or something to let you fly? I'm guessing better pointy sticks would be quite along way down the priority list.

 

Before anyone cries that "magic swords are traditional!" I should point out that as far as I can see, easy access to magic swords is traditional only as far back as D&D. Prior to that, magic swords tended to be rare beasties, where often their ability to inflict wounds was a minor part of the whole package.

 

cheers, Mark

[mhd]

Re: Damage Limits

 

That assumes your magical weaponsmith actually has a choice where he puts in his "points" /and/ that having a sharper sword and a zappy sword are roughly equal in difficulty. Which seems a somewhat outlandish assumption.

 

The "default" abilities of magical weaponry is just an extension of mundane sword qualities, i.e. I'm only taking the difference in real-world steel to a magical extreme. Ranged combat abilities would be coming out of nowhere. The same benefits that would make a sword more unbreakable and less dependent on maintenance would seem to make it deal a bit more damage - a blade can hold a pretty decent edge, but not for long.

 

And while D&D increased the overall level of magical item availability, of all magical items, swords where probably the most well-represented in myth and legend. Excalibur, Durendal, Balmung, Kusanagi…

 

Even in D&D I often wondered who makes those magical items (disregarding the ridiculously low time constraints of something like third edition D&D for once). For a tower-based wizard, it seems like a bad deal. Yes, he would probably be better served by something zappity, i.e. a wand. He might create something to impress a local ruler, but that just needs some basic level of "magic", as he probably won't use it anyway. This is why swords often glow. Doesn't rust is impressive, being able to cut some candles is okay, more effort into combat abilities doesn't seem worthwhile - if it's in there at all. I think it was the "Master of 5 Magics" novel that had magical daggers as status symbols, daggers that perfectly and noticeably molded themselves to your hand, but couldn't cut warm butter, as they were perfectly blunt.

 

So that's the +1 jewel-encrusted glowing sword you'll find. Beyond that, it gets more difficult. Craftsmanship is one excuse, which would either require something like dwarves and elves of legend, or wizards of decent enough ability, but pretty low status. No lone "name level" sorcerers, but basically better weapon- and armorsmiths. Out of the occult and/or academia and into guilds, lodges etc.

Or churches, given god-given magic. Historically, they tended to have some enemies, and actual demons, devils (or angels, archons) don't make things easier. I would expect more "+X vs. church enemy" weapons here, although the occasional + done by a priest/weaponsmith as a special divine task (or penance) can happen, too.

[Markdoc]

Re: Damage Limits

 

That assumes your magical weaponsmith actually has a choice where he puts in his "points" /and/ that having a sharper sword and a zappy sword are roughly equal in difficulty. Which seems a somewhat outlandish assumption.

 

The "default" abilities of magical weaponry is just an extension of mundane sword qualities, i.e. I'm only taking the difference in real-world steel to a magical extreme. Ranged combat abilities would be coming out of nowhere. The same benefits that would make a sword more unbreakable and less dependent on maintenance would seem to make it deal a bit more damage - a blade can hold a pretty decent edge, but not for long.

 

Really? You have some actual magic items we can compare? No? Well, in that case, we can fall back on the rues. 1d6 HKA is 15 points. 1d6 RKA is also 15 points. So yes, a zappy wand is no more expensive to create than a magic sword. And "coming out of nowhere"? Seriously, in a world where we have magic spells, complaining that magic is ... well, magical, seems a bit odd.

 

And while D&D increased the overall level of magical item availability, of all magical items, swords where probably the most well-represented in myth and legend. Excalibur, Durendal, Balmung, Kusanagi…

 

Each of these swords were wielded by the realm's mightiest heroes. What were their powers? Excalibur? None, apparently. It was the scabbard which was magical. Durendal? No powers that we know of: it was just really hard to break. Balmung? Might have had magical powers: the legends don't say. Kusanagi, is the real deal: it had the power to control winds ... but it was the sword of the gods, and part of the imperial regalia: not exactly something your average wandering adventurer is likely to get his hands on.

 

You're kind of making my point for me: in old myths, magic swords tend to be rare beasties. Not non-existent: just rare. That's how they are in my games: I've given away 3 or 4 magic swords over the last ten years of gaming, I think.

 

cheers, Mark

[Christopher]

Re: Damage Limits

 

I have no idea where to put the effective Damage Caps (no experience with the heroic side). This is a function of the allowed armor and how deadly you want games to get. What is usually most important is the DC/Defenses ratio. For Superheros it tends to be around 1/2 or 1/3 with 50-75% Resistant. For Heroic more like 1/1.5 or 1/2 with 50% Resistant.

For deadlier games, lower the DC/defenses Ratio and/or Resistant protection Percentage.

 

For the unarmed/martial arts problem:

Either establish a Limit of STR times 2, or just let it.

Sure, you can get to the cap but you sink a LOT of character points into that. Not money, Character Points - the one resource that truly matters.

With the same points Sword wielder guy has easily outclassed you in a fight.

 

Where to put Martial Arts:

I generally think that for the mater of OCV, DCV and DC caps Martial arts should be considered. For a Rule of thumb I would say it counts like +1 OCV, +1 DCV and +1 DC*. It's just Fighting Ability that cost no Endurance and has limitations.

The Warrior whou just buys +1 OCV, +1 DCV and +5 STR instead of MA is certainly better off, but will also pay more endurance and (perhaps) more points.

 

*Plus any Martial Arts DC you have bought. So with 5 MA-DC this would count around +1 OCV, +1 DCV and +6 DC.

 

 

Where to put CSL:

I think they should count too and would say (rule of thumb) 2 CSL should count as +1 OCV, +1 DCV and +0.5 DC for the Limits.

 

 

Some things for more realism:

- Just because you have a Greataxe doesn't means you can carry it on the market place. One point of lighter weapons (shortswords, daggers, knives) is to fall not under weapons regulations. Or be hard to detect if they do.*

- same goes with armor. You don't want somebody running around in armor your guards can't crack. That is why most tanks (even without gun) are not allowed for everyday citizens*

- OCV modifiers based on Weapon reach (6E2 202) and environment. This also helps to counterweight any "unarmed combat imbalance", because every 1m of Weapon reach means -1 OCV for the martial Arts guy**. Again, there is a place for shortswords and daggers, it's wherever a longsword or greatsword can't be used. A Helbard or is a good weapon to defend a Staircase.

- Mind small bonuses. Limited ability to wield swinging weapons + higher ground bonus + longer range + cheap CSL mean a heabard can be really a pain in the butt when trying to storm a stairwell.

 

*Of course for that, you can always get a Perk like Nobility/Knighthood or a similar weapons permit. If the GM allows...

**When the get in under the reach it goes inverse, but they always start with that penalty.

 

 

And just to avoid nitpicking by some, the definition for Rule of Thumb from Wikipedia:

"A rule of thumb is a principle with broad application that is not intended to be strictly accurate or reliable for every situation. It is an easily learned and easily applied procedure for approximately calculating or recalling some value, or for making some determination."

[mhd]

Re: Damage Limits

 

Really? You have some actual magic items we can compare? No? Well' date=' in that case, we can fall back on the rues.[/quote']

 

Rules as the primary arbiter of a fantasy world? I guess I don't need a lot of points to reduce infant mortality to almost zero, probably just a few levels of Paramedics per village. Why would I create a blade then, zappity or not? Or heck, 1 point of SS and I've got my black powder.

 

You're kind of making my point for me: in old myths' date=' magic swords tend to be rare beasties. Not non-existent: just rare.[/quote']

 

I'm not saying that they weren't rare, I'm just saying that they were definitely more common than almost every other magical item. Tolkien and his Galadriel Easter Bunny excepted.

[Ninja-Bear]

Re: Damage Limits

 

That assumes your magical weaponsmith actually has a choice where he puts in his "points" /and/ that having a sharper sword and a zappy sword are roughly equal in difficulty.

 

I pressumed here that you mean in the campaign, the wizard is required to have the right weaponsmith skill or Professional skill in order to correctly create said item? I.e to make rings you need PS Jeweller and for sword, weaponsmith (with sword) and for armor, p.s. armor.

 

I thought that that was the default magic rule in Fantasy hero for 4th ed. But I can't seem to find it right now. The closest example from fiction would be Sauron when he created the rings. I take it as created he actually made the rings before imbueing them with power.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Damage Limits

 

What are the various reasons for having Damage Limits in a campaign?

 

1. To make the task of creating fun* (combat) challenges for the PC's easier for the GM.

(Fun in the sense that success vs. the challenge is not guaranteed but also not impossible)

 

This is important for the start of any campaign but not as much later on as both the Players and the GM get more and more familiar with the character's capabilities. At some point those helpful 'hard caps' or damage limits start to become limits for no reason other than "that's the way we've always done it!". They should be used as training wheels, nothing more.

[Narf the Mouse]

Re: Damage Limits

 

What are the various reasons for having Damage Limits in a campaign?

 

1. To make the task of creating fun* (combat) challenges for the PC's easier for the GM.

(Fun in the sense that success vs. the challenge is not guaranteed but also not impossible)

 

This is important for the start of any campaign but not as much later on as both the Players and the GM get more and more familiar with the character's capabilities. At some point those helpful 'hard caps' or damage limits start to become limits for no reason other than "that's the way we've always done it!". They should be used as training wheels, nothing more.

Caps provide for character progression. Without something to measure by, numbers are contextless.

[Christopher]

Re: Damage Limits

 

Caps provide for character progression. Without something to measure by' date=' numbers are contextless.[/quote']

It's just a though, but when spending XP I would try to not get over the limit of the next higher Power Level (225 for 175 point heroic characters). Once the characters total point reach that powerlevel (you spend neough XP to get to 225), look at the next higher level (275).

[Narf the Mouse]

Re: Damage Limits

 

It's just a though' date=' but when spending XP I would try to not get over the limit of the next higher Power Level (225 for 175 point heroic characters). Once the characters total point reach that powerlevel (you spend neough XP to get to 225), look at the next higher level (275).[/quote']

Or the GM slowly bumps the caps, or pregenerates a progression.

[mhd]

Re: Damage Limits

 

I pressumed here that you mean in the campaign' date=' the wizard is required to have the right weaponsmith skill or Professional skill in order to correctly create said item? I.e to make rings you need PS Jeweller and for sword, weaponsmith (with sword) and for armor, p.s. armor.[/quote']

 

Erm, no, I was just talking about the meaning (or lack thereof) of "points" in a setting.

 

Regarding actual crafting and enchanting, there's a dozen different possible explanations for combining that - or not. Your average dwarven miracle smith will enchant and craft at the same time, probably with no meaningful difference between those two steps. Probably influenced by the superstitious actions done by actual smiths, who tried a lot of arcane and often superfluous stuff to get the right kind of steel for their swords, as they didn't really understand the science of metallurgy.

 

Your D&D-esque wizard on the other hand might take a finished product and just add some enchantment to it. The original might have to be as perfect as possible, or could be any ordinary sword.

 

As a third popular option, magical weapons aren't even made per se. They gain powers by being carried around by heroes and demigods, partaking in their aura.

 

Tolkien is definitely more on the mythical, legendary side of things, were actual crafting was more important.