forums.cubicle7.co.uk
archive

Have been thinking about how to make Body & Armour more important, and as a fan of GURPS I came up with these ideas:

Step 1. Determine Potential Damage (PT)

PT = Base Weapon Damage (BWD) + Body. Thus an 'average Joe' of Body 3 wielding a sword will do PT of 8pts on a normal success.
On a Great Success PT = BWD + Body x 2, so this is 5 + 2x3 = 11pts.
On an Xtra Success player can choose from the following options:

a) PT = BWD = 3x Body; this is 5 = 3x3 = 14pts.
b) PT = BWD x2 + 2x Body; this is 5x2 = 2x3 = 16pts.
c) As for a normal success (PT =8) and character can also apply a Called Shot effect (Disarm, Smash Shield etc.). A Piercing Blow effect is only possible if character is wielding a Piercing type weapon (arrow, spear etc.)
d) As for a normal success and character can reduce the Protection Value of Defender's armour by 1d
e) As for a normal success and character can choose an action such as Intimidate Foe as a Free Action
f) As for a normal success and character gets a bonus success die to use later (must be in same combat)

Step 2. Defender Rolls Protection Test to determine Effective Damage (ED).
So in this example the PT = 8, Defender is Unarmoured so just rolls the Feat die and gets a 6, so 8-6= 2 pts ED.

Step 3. Determine Actual Damage by checking Weapon Type.
Slashing Weapons do 1.5x damage (round up) to No Armour and half damage (round down) to metal armours (no change against leather); Crushing Weapons do half damage vs no armour (round down) and 1.5x vs metal armours (round up); Piercing Weapons do 1.5x vs leather armour (no change vs other types).

So in this example ED =2 x 1.5 = 3 pts actual damage.

What does everybody think??

Maximum damage for a body 4 becomes, say, 21 (body 4x3 + 9 for great weapon).
You meet an opponent with 4d+great helm. His average pt is 25.

I think we got a problem.

You're right Corvo, we have a problem ( Armour has become too powerful!!) .

What if I changed Step 2 to:

Step 2: Defender rolls Protection Test

The Defender rolls a Protection Test against the Injury Rating of the weapon, this roll is made even if no Piercing Blow was inflicted. If the Protection Test is successful, the Piercing Blow (if any) is ignored and any Endurance Damage is reduced by the amount the Protection Test was successful by:

thus the Injury Rating of a Sword is 14 and Defender gets a total of 16, this means that the Potential Damage is reduced by 2. A roll of Gandalf (or Eye for adversaries) counts as 12 for this test.

This still makes Body and Armour more important (as per some fans input in earlier messages) keeps it simple and also makes more use of individual weapon ratings.

So for this example PT = 8, reduced to 6 Effective Damage by the Protection Test, 6 x 1.5 = 9pts Actual Damage. I realise that this system makes combat more lethal (especially for Unarmoured or Lightly Armoured characters), but that was my intention anyway.

Robin S.

Robin,

I'm torn about this because on the one hand I like gear optimization to vary situationally, so that there's no "best" weapon or armor overall, but it varies based on circumstances.

That said, one of the things I love about this particular game is that it does keep the combat mechanics streamlined, and I'm loathe to give that up. But for people looking for something more this approach has merit.

A couple questions I have: is there a rationale for some weapons doing more damage against armor than against no armor, other than the overall need for balance/symmetry?

Also, how does one determine the armor type of adversaries?

As a general consideration, I would advise some caution about translating GURPS impact/cutting/impaling damage to TOR.
Impaling is the most powerful attack in GURPS, yet it is usually balanced by being thrusting attacks, less powerful than swinging attacks (picks and warhammers being the exception: but they are usually slow weapons, another quality that don't translate to TOR). Otherwise there is no reason to use a sword to swing, since the impaling attack is so much more powerful (no one in TOR is sans armour, not even wolves)

In answer to your queries:

The main concern was balance/symmetry - initially I wanted Crushing Weapons to do bonus damage against metal armours (because this has been mentioned before in other threads) - Endurance Damage represents the overall pain and effects of being hit, and one fan previously mentioned the 'hidden pain' caused by crunching blows on metal armour.

So that was my starting point, and I also recall reading somewhere (can't recall where) that slashing weapons are designed principally to deal with unarmoured or lightly armoured foes, and that arrows (at least in early-mid Medieval times)were extremely effective against leather-type armour - it required the longbow and crossbow for bows to be effective against mail. So given these ideas I decided to modify the actual damage accordingly - initially I had the modifier at 2x but realised this was too much.

In regards to adversaries, check what their Protection Test is for a human 'equivalent' - 1d lightly armoured, 2d leather, 3d or higher metal. I actually realise that my idea is an extension of a previous fan's idea called 'Absorb Impact', only this requires the warrior to have Armour Mastery.

I am running my campaign tomorrow night so will discuss these ideas with my players.

Robin S.

I tried making Body and armor more important as well.

In my campaign, Body modifies the base damage of your weapon. Someone with a Body of 5 does normal weapon damage. Someone with a Body of 6 does 1 extra damage, 7 does 2 extra, 4 does one less, etc (another way to look at it is this: normal weapon damage + body - 5). So a hobbit with a body of 3 only does 3 damage with his short sword. But the Beorning with a Body of 7 would do 7 damage with the same weapon. It makes sense that a bigger, stronger, faster man would be able to wield a weapon to greater effect.

Armor increases the amount of endurance gained after a short rest. instead of healing your heart score, you heal your heart score plus the number of dice your armor uses. So someone using a mail shirt would heal endurance equal to their heart + 3 (since their armor is 3d6). The rationale behind this is if you're wearing heavy armor, you find your wounds are lot less serious. Someone in a mail hauberk might find some bruising after a battle while the guy in a leather shirt might find that he has a lot of open wounds.

Robin, what did your players think? And Morgoth, has your approach worked well in-game? Does it add much to bookkeeping? I like the idea that someone bigger and stronger does more damage (and that mail armor would let you recover faster).

Morgoth wrote: In my campaign, Body modifies the base damage of your weapon. Someone with a Body of 5 does normal weapon damage. Someone with a Body of 6 does 1 extra damage, 7 does 2 extra, 4 does one less, etc (another way to look at it is this: normal weapon damage + body - 5). So a hobbit with a body of 3 only does 3 damage with his short sword. But the Beorning with a Body of 7 would do 7 damage with the same weapon. It makes sense that a bigger, stronger, faster man would be able to wield a weapon to greater effect.

Does it also apply in some way to adversaries with just Attribute Level?
Do you modify their damage too?

Rue and Falenthal,

It's worked out pretty good so far. It doesn't really add much to bookkeeping or anything; you just adjust your character sheet once. I don't change damage done by adversaries. Seemed like too much work, and I think it might make things more unbalanced. I definitely like the armor change. A lot more diversity in armor now. Before everyone was in light armor and now we have a good mix.