Zornhau Forums

higgins wrote:

nemedeus wrote:Btw, other question: is there going to be any kind of critical hit mechanic?

Rest assured, most of our level 4 wounds are far more cruel than virtually any critical hit system that I've seen. Only a select few get close or match it. And then there's the level 5 wounds, of course.

I guess that is kinda the answer i expected from you guys, heh.

Agamemnon wrote:

nemedeus wrote:

higgins wrote:For some reason, I have a feeling that gauntles and complex guards are going to be realllllly popular.

I alwas found it odd that it took people until the 14th or so century to come up with complex hilts. Particularly sidering or at least a nagel as seen on Messer is something without which i would not even want to wield a longsword.

That one's easy, actually. Shields.

Huh. Shoulda seen that.

nemedeus wrote: Btw, other question: is there going to be any kind of critical hit mechanic? Asking because out of all the nonsensical RPG staples, this is the one that i always felt was the most fun (and actually not even that nonsensical, really). Seriously, Crits are fun. I was surprised when i realized that about myself.

Yes and no, really. At least in the context of D&D, rolls effectively have four results: Critical failure, failure, success, and critical success.

Our core mechanic is situated on a d10 die pool, with difficulty being the number of individual successes you need to roll vs the number required. If you are rolling against an Ob2 task and get 2 successes, you win. The higher you go over said successes, the better off you are. This is your Margin of Success. If it's Ob2 and you roll 4 successes, you've got an MoS of 2. On a lot of rolls, MoS3+ and 5+ are significant, increasing your effect. Likewise, you can also have a Margin of Failure, so failing by 3 or more dice is worse than failing by 1.

So we already have a range of results to play with.

For sake of completeness, in the other Thread i talked about my system for a moment there, so allow me to explain my Crits.

My system uses D6 instead of D10, with rolls in the range of (less than 10) dice.
So first of all, Critical Hits only apply to checks for attacks.
An attack has a certain Critical Hit Rating that describes what is required of the attack roll to hit critically.

The ratings are as follows ("or C/B/A" as in, they are cumulative):

- S: 1 six or B
- A: six + five or B or C
- B: double-five or C
- C: double six

crit rating starts at C, but certain modifiers can increase it to the next higher (Precision Strike; Vulnerability Status on target; bloodloss-induced Self-Buff; or using fucking CURVED SWORDS)

So, what a critical hit in my system is is not just a damage increase, but rather an upgrade of the HIT LOCATION, because i use 6 hit zones (for D6):

- Head -> Neck
- Torso -> Groin
- Arm (left/right) -> Hand
- Leg (left/right) -> Knee

... to the effect of massively debuffing the poor victim for at least the remainder of the fight (Note that i also had different effects of crits depending on damage type).

As of the current draft, we also have exploding dice. If you roll a 10 on a d10, then you count it as a success and can roll that die again, adding any further successes to your total (including more 10s). This both adds a random element, and makes it possible to achieve Obs that are greater than your current die pool.

i'm not quite sure about exploding dice. i think they work well for Savage Worlds, but then again, you only ever roll two dice there...

Hej nemedeus, system sounds nice in general!

nemedeus wrote:because i use 6 hit zones (for D6):
- Head -> Neck
- Torso -> Groin
- Arm (left/right) -> Hand
- Leg (left/right) -> Knee

It is not that this would be a mandatory feature, but rolling hit locations on the complete body range has become a bit oldschool after playing TROS-like systems

A "vicious blow to the opponent's head" should really hit something in that area (shoulder, neck, head or even an upper arm) and not the shin or foot. That adds so much to the realistic feeling of the combat...

And you would never get a glancing blow to the hand, neck or groin, would you?

And with d6, you can't play with target numbers well. I like that in Blade of the Iron Throne with the d12 in a TROS system, but this is of course causing problems with availibility of dice. d10 is much more common due to World of Darkness storyteller ruleset.

d6 works best with fixed TN all over. Like Shadowrun. I've even painted all fives and sixs in black to see my results immediately...

EinBein wrote:Hej nemedeus, system sounds nice in general!

Thank you.

nemedeus wrote:because i use 6 hit zones (for D6):
- Head -> Neck
- Torso -> Groin
- Arm (left/right) -> Hand
- Leg (left/right) -> Knee

It is not that this would be a mandatory feature, but rolling hit locations on the complete body range has become a bit oldschool after playing TROS-like systems

A "vicious blow to the opponent's head" should really hit something in that area (shoulder, neck, head or even an upper arm) and not the shin or foot. That adds so much to the realistic feeling of the combat...

And you would never get a glancing blow to the hand, neck or groin, would you?

Well, it's not like it's mandatory in my system to target randomize, quite the opposite.

One idea that i had about that: Guard Positions as "Stances" that increase your opponent's activation cost for attacks against certain bodyparts - but not others; so it would be kinda like in sabre fencing irl. I guess this could easily be a Lever in Bastards (in case you want the abolished hit difficulties back... i'm kinda assuming Bastards is going to be pretty easily house-rulable with consistency in regards as such.)

I think there are still some situations where this can be useful; for example, ranged combat - even though this doesn't model the difference in difficulty to hit torso, head and extremities etc... It's a work in progress, really.

And of course, Bastards is doing it better with what seems to be basically no increase of rulekeeping effort.

And with d6, you can't play with target numbers well. I like that in Blade of the Iron Throne with the d12 in a TROS system, but this is of course causing problems with availibility of dice. d10 is much more common due to World of Darkness storyteller ruleset.

d6 works best with fixed TN all over. Like Shadowrun. I've even painted all fives and sixs in black to see my results immediately...

A i said somewhere else, i havent really had opportunities to test it. Maybe this is indeed the case, but there are other systems installed to alleviate the target number problem. In my system, the target number is 4 anyway, though, unless wounds (this i stole of BnB, as said before.)


If the interest is there, i could upload my documents - be warned though, they would be presented as-is, in a state of general disorganization.
My current plan, either way, is to hammer together a quick start booklet as quickly as possible.

I have a deep love of d6 systems. I have no idea why. Maybe it's just the simple availability of the dice. I suspect if i were re-writing 'Bastards again today, I'd have made it on a d6 base. I think I worry Higgins when I say things like that.

Agamemnon wrote:I suspect if i were re-writing 'Bastards again today, I'd have made it on a d6 base. I think I worry Higgins when I say things like that.

Honestly I'm not sure how much of it would break. Okay, the TN wound granularity definitely would, but then advantage and disadvantage would have waaaay more impact than they do now. And exploding dice would be silly common, which I'm not a huge fan of.

Well you could start out at TN 3 instead of TN 4 with d6.

I mostly chose d6 because i like numbers to stay small (i was contemplating D8 once, but other than d6 or d10, i dont have sets d8).

EDIT:

higgins wrote:And exploding dice would be silly common, which I'm not a huge fan of.

actually i'm not so sure about that...


Either way, D10 is still better than Blade of the Iron Throne's D12 nonsense.
Sorry, I read up about both the project's history on trosfans...
That said, my personal tastes coincide a lot more with Bastards than with Blade, like "1 success = you made it", or Difficulty Unitarity, as You called it, and generally small numbers.

... which brings me to talk even more about my own system:
Up until recently, i had an attribute range of 1 to... 3! (with 4 as an absolute peak.)
This was due to the Skill range, which was 1 to 12... However, the maximum of a Skill was 3 times the pertinent Attribute (Skill Rank 6 being dubbed "Master", so an average character could easily achieve it.)

But recently, I have decided to change the Attribute range to 1..5 again, and have the Skill maximum be twice the Attribute - 1..3 was making characters look same-y.
On the other hand, Derived stats would als be higher; i generally dislike calculating Derived stats by taking averages, i prefer adding together whhich avoids "disappearing Attribute points".

I like it when Skills weigh in stronger than Attributes. Which now that i think about it is meaningless when you only rolll (Skill) dice rather than (Attribute+Skill) dice. I'm not sure yet what i like more - low ranges with dice added, or higher ranges without. I would really have to test this.

Dice math is always a headache. But yeah, exploding dice are always something to keep in mind. On a d10, it's going to happen 10% of the time vs %16.66 on a d6. That may not sound huge, but you've now gone from one die exploding in ten, to one die exploding in 6.

When our average die pool thrown is around 6 dice? That means you've gone from one exploding die every two rolls to one every roll, on average.

On the other hand, our advantage/disadvantage mechanic would have a lot more impact, as each step is a 16.66% swing instead of a 10% swing. Wounds would have to be reworked though.

Sorry for no update last night. Got another chapter full of final edits submitted this week.

I'm also preparing for the national qualification tournaments. We had to submit photos for preliminary equipment review.



I've already committed to making myself poor through the purchase of full arm harness, but alas, I haven't received them yet, so, the old one it currently is.

higgins wrote:Sorry for no update last night. Got another chapter full of final edits submitted this week.

Are you guys using a version control system?
I mean, it makes sense, of course. I just never considered it for roleplaying games.

We were once doing it all in Google docs, but as we got to this last draft, I've moved everything into an InDesign document. As its mostly done already, this draft is mostly just layout or the occasional spelling error. At least until something breaks. Our current workflow involves me assembling the chapter in its final form in InDesign and exporting a pdf for Higgins to mark all up with virtual red pen via Foxit. We share versions of docs in Dropbox, where there is presently a shared folder that has all of our notes and references.

higgins wrote:Sorry for no update last night. Got another chapter full of final edits submitted this week.

Great news! Actually this week I'm not too sad to wait another seven days, because if you had published beta yesterday, it would have completely blown my preparations on my next exam

higgins wrote:I've already committed to making myself poor through the purchase of full arm harness, but alas, I haven't received them yet, so, the old one it currently is.

So you will not be allowed to use it at all in May? Just because it's not on the photo?

nemedeus wrote:Either way, D10 is still better than Blade of the Iron Throne's D12 nonsense.

Actually, d12 would be my preferred die. It feels well in the hand in pools of up to twelve dies and rolls smoothly

I think for a system like TRoS/Blade/Bastards which puts high emphasis on authentic melee fights, any granularity available is welcome and can be used for something. What exactly isn't too important, but it serves as a perfect setscrew for things like weapon handling differences or wound level. Just using more granuled dice is the way with smalles impact on gameplay speed compared to recalculating pools every two rolls.

In a system like Shadowrun, where melees are just very abstract pool vs. pool battles without any form of authenticity, you can use d6, d4 whatever. But you need more than that to be able to handle the outcome and hardships of battle in a TRoS like system.

I actually like the way Bastards is taking - away from weapon-bound TN's - but still the granularity is needed for the wound system and advantages/disadvantages. This same mechanic would definitely look clumsy in a d6 system...

EinBein wrote:So you will not be allowed to use it at all in May? Just because it's not on the photo?

Ah, naw. Just the photo would have looked twice as fabulous with the new gear.

They just want to make sure you own a kit and that it looks reasonable. For example, last year I was asked to polish off the patina on some of my gear, as they considered it unacceptable rust. The moment the patina came off, I started to have actual rust issues though, so, I gave my gear some more polishing and then applied a coat linseed oil, which has been working out fine. But now I look more shiny, which is what I guess they want for their photos and the image of the overall event.

Of course, the ironic part is that the fancy arms will be mostly covered up by tabard sleeves while my DYI unplanished greaves will be prominently visible.

While I'm a fan of granularity (to an extent), I'd put my vote in for d10s. More available than d12s, and I can't help but feel that the extra granularity of d12s is negligible when compared to the added difficulty/expense in purchasing large handfuls of the things. I would suggest that if you need to be modifying TNs by less than 10% per pip, things are getting a bit fiddly. I know there are those who would disagree with this, though, and I'm aware that, as I've gotten older, my preferences have tended towards faster systems. It is my great hope Bastards will maintain some of the feel of TRoS but reduce some of the clunkiness.

EinBein wrote:Actually, d12 would be my preferred die. It feels well in the hand in pools of up to twelve dies and rolls smoothly

I Say! Yuck on thee!
Kidding.
Iunno, i just think d12 is too damn much granularity.

Allow me to explain.
In my opinion, the primary purpose of rule systems that present modifications to rolls is to convey noticeable changes in odds of outcome.

High granularity systems often fail to convey that.
For example, in D12, a TN+1 decreases my chances by 8.3%. While it surely is noticeable over time, it is not quite as immediately noticeable in the moment to moment. I myself would often feel compelled to just default to TN+2 instead. At that point the granularity is moot.

Another example would be d100/d% systems.
I always feel like the additional d10 rolled is very superfluous; the number it lands on is relevant in 10% of rolls, which, in my Opinion, just adds a whole lot of nothing, compared to just dividing your character values by 10 and only rolling one d10.

Just using more granuled dice is the way with smalles impact on gameplay speed compared to recalculating pools every two rolls.

Alright, gonna admit this is a pretty solid argument, and i'm not going to argue against it.

But you need more than that to be able to handle the outcome and hardships of battle in a TRoS like system.

By that logic, your favorite system should be The Dark Eye. :p

I'm totally gonna write a system where you roll pools of d100 now...

I actually like the way Bastards is taking - away from weapon-bound TN's - but still the granularity is needed for the wound system and advantages/disadvantages. This same mechanic would definitely look clumsy in a d6 system...

I have to vehemently disagree with the notion that "high granularity is needed", for wounds in particular.

A wound is bad, there is no way around it. can you quantify HOW bad beyond "no big deal" and "hurts so much i can't stop crying"? I know i can't. I know i don't need to, even in a TROSlike (which is totally a word now, a kin to roguelike.)

You know, in video games, i care a lot about hit response. i guess this is also kinda appliccable to tabletop RPGs, in my view.
My game design philosophy is, i want to notice these things in the moment to moment gameplay - this is actually why i think abolishing weapon TN is a great idea! it allows decreases in granularity.


Of course, all of this... This is my preference. There are many preferences different from it, but this one is mine.

So... Is the beta out yet?