Basically, I want to have the to-hit
roll target be the opponent's AC (per SotU), roll under on 3d6.
Modifiers (please remember that this is roll under so a negative modifier is a Good Thing):
Character Type Bonus
Adventurer
Burly -1/2 Levels
Cunning -1/3 Levels
Magician -1/5 Levels
Damage will be determined by the degree
of success of the to-hit roll:
Simple Success (Roll≤AC)
deals 1D
Great Success (Roll≤AC-2)
deals 2D
Stunning Success (Roll≤AC-4)
deals 3D
In all cases, the damage die is d6. In
the case of multiple dice, only like numbers are considered, with the
highest being totalled. Light weapons are -1 to all dice counted,
Medium weapons are unmodified, and Heavy weapons are +1 to all dice
counted.
So, how about some percentages?
A 1st level Burly Adventurer
vs Opponent in Chain (AC6)
Refired
Level +1
Opp. AC +6
Roll Needed 13
Chance to-hit 40%
3d6
Level -1
Target 6
Roll Needed 7
Chance to-hit 16%
So, obviously something needs to be
done here. Bearing in mind that the roll “to-hit” is more
accurately described as a roll “to-damage”, we can explore the
following. Historically maces were brought to bear against opponents
in metal armors. They didn't damage the opponent by penetrating the
armor, they wore the opponent down by knocking him around inside
the armor. Sooooo . . . what if we apply the following:
Metal
armors (Chain and Plate) are +2 vs bludgeoning weapons. Then we get
the following chance to-hit:
Level -1
Target 8 (AC6 +2vs Mace)
Roll Needed 9
Chance
to-hit 37.5%
That
is much more in line with the other numbers. It has the added option
of providing a layer of tactical choice at a small complexity
premium. To offset the beneficial to-hit, as well as maintaining a
degree of accuracy, damage degrees are calculated without
the modifier. Thus, the damage degrees for the above scenario would
be:
Original
unmodified AC 6
Roll
needed for Simple Damage (1D) ≥9
(37.5%)
Roll
needed for Great Damage (2D) ≥4
(1.9%)
Roll
needed for Stunning Damage (3D) ≥2
(0%)
Ok,
that's all done considering a 1st
level adventurer. I believe the numbers will hold up because after
you reach a target number of 10 on 3d6, the bonuses hit a law of
diminishing returns. Also, there is the fact that, in all truth, I
was forced to device this so that low level characters can have any
hope against heavily armored foes. Still and all, though, it seems
reasonable to me, and at least gives a nod to accurately modeling the
effects of bludgeoning weapons against metal armors, insofar as the
system I am presenting.
Thoughts,
comments, criticisms?
PS>
The percentages above were arrived at using the Dice Probability
Calculator link at the bottom of my Hall of the Sages column at left.
I made a 3d6 system a while back, which you might find interesting:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.theskyfullofdust.co.uk/?s=3%266+system
Thanks, Simon. I picked up so many followers all at once the other day, I haven't had the chance to see how many of you have blogs and so forth. Yours looks pretty damn cool. I've added it to my Halls of the Sages column. I like what you've done with characteristics; the names, what they represent, and how they combine. I haven't read the rest yet, just wanted to say thanks for the link.
ReplyDelete