<html>
<head>
<style><!--
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 10pt;
font-family:Tahoma
}
--></style>
</head>
<body class='hmmessage'>
IMO the damage-issue in RQ(3) suffers from not introducing armor-piercing-rules. In my setting, I tried to introduse slashing, piercing and blunt-damage values, and having the armor allso having different AP vs. theese different attack-types, a chainmail for instance would protect some 10 ap against slashing, 1 ap against bashing and perhaps 5 ap against thrusts<BR> <BR>
> From: nikk.effingham@gmail.com<BR>> Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2010 09:05:16 +0000<BR>> To: runequest@rpgreview.net<BR>> Subject: [Runequest] Weapon Damages<BR>> <BR>> Dagger damage was always nuts. Average damage is 4.5 which is a bit<BR>> absurd, Unarmed attacks are equally absurd just because of the damage<BR>> bonus. IMG we've reduced dagger damage to 1d6 and knife to 1d4. I've<BR>> stipulated that unless you have Martial Arts you don;t get a damage<BR>> bonus on your unarmed attack unless you special or better. To balance<BR>> this, I've introduced 'Boxing' and 'Wrestling' as martial arts, so<BR>> that even your occidental characters get to have access to deadly<BR>> unarmed combat if they want.<BR>> <BR>> We've actually gone further, and changed the rules for what happens<BR>> when you special. IMG when a weapon specials you roll it's 'Special<BR>> Effects Die' (say a d6 for a dagger, or a d10 for a heavy mace). That<BR>> comes in both as extra damage and if you roll high enough you get a<BR>> special effec. So a dagger causes you to bleed out on a 4 or higher,<BR>> does an extra 10 damage if you roll a 6 (simulating hitting something<BR>> vital, which isn't as bad as you think - it is more or less equivalent<BR>> to saying it penetrates armour). A mace ignores soft armour on an 8+<BR>> (and 'crushes' which is to do with the fatigue system I'm<BR>> playtesting).<BR>> <BR>> I've just noticed the same thing seems to apply to flails (2d6+2) -<BR>> same average damage as a greatsword (2d8), but the minimum damage is 4<BR>> and not 2, which is more deadly, as the maximum damage is irrelevant<BR>> more or less. Sure the flail only causes a max of 14 damage, but it's<BR>> not often that you're going to be in a situation where 14 damage plus<BR>> your magic and damage bonus don't do the trick, but the greatsword's<BR>> damage of 15 or 16 is superior. The only upside is that there's about<BR>> a 10% chance of doing 14+ with a greatsword and only 2% chance of<BR>> doing that with a flail. But given that the average damage is 9, 9<BR>> plus damage bonus and magic is likely to be enough (unless you're a<BR>> rune lord in a flush culture loaded down with enchanted iron, where<BR>> that higher damage will be useful) and if you roll below average,<BR>> you'll roll higher with the flail, it looks to me that the Military<BR>> Flail is the best weapon in the game (as I say, this will change when<BR>> you get to rune level and suddenly that greatsword's higher likely<BR>> hood of scoring iron-plate defeating damage will kick in). I'm sitting<BR>> here wondering whether this is a good thing or not.<BR>> <BR>> Nikk<BR>> <BR>> _______________________________________________<BR>> Runequest mailing list<BR>> Runequest@rpgreview.net<BR>> http://rpgreview.net/mailman/listinfo/runequest_rpgreview.net<BR> </body>
</html>