| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14034
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
 Posted: Fri Nov 04, 2011 1:09 am Post subject: |
 |
|
To show there is a difference in how damage is dealt out.
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Bren
Vice Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 04, 2011 3:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| garhkal wrote: | | To show there is a difference in how damage is dealt out. |
OK. Is there a particular reason you (a) what to differentiate and (b) what to make skill matter most for adding damage with brawling and least with ranged weapons? That seems odd. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14034
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 04, 2011 3:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Just themantic.. Most combats are ranged affairs, with few brawling. Most go melee. Well to my pov.
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atgxtg
Rear Admiral
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 05, 2011 11:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="garhkal"]
Plus by the raw, spending CP on inc damage garners a DSP. [/qyuote]
Might garner a DSP. It isn't automatic. It depends on why the character wants to increase the damage.
I've been using one of the RoE options. The one where you trade off skill dice for damage in advance. I thik it works better than the other options for several reasons. First, it is a trade off, so people are hesitant to do it. Secondl, the effect is more subdued that the other options since a hot hand on the attack roll won't give absurd results, and lastly, it favors the major characters, since flunkies won't have the dice to split. So I doN't have to worry about a PC getting blown away from a mook, just because I rolled well with the wild die and got a 72 attack total. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bren
Vice Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 05, 2011 3:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| atgxtg wrote: | | The one where you trade off skill dice for damage in advance. |
Are you using a 1-1 trade off or a different ratio?
Generally I worry that a 1-1 ratio leads to far too much damage.
Also, do you allow the same trade off when using a FP? That could increase damage to absurd levels, especially when the Wookiee wants to hit the just-standing-there-and-not-dodging door or table. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16178
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 05, 2011 4:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bren wrote: | | As you outlined it there would be no penalty, only extra damage to go with the cheaper skill increase. |
No penalty apart from the fact that you would only be able to receive the extra damage bonus when using a specific weapon...
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bren
Vice Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 05, 2011 8:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| crmcneill wrote: | | Bren wrote: | | As you outlined it there would be no penalty, only extra damage to go with the cheaper skill increase. |
No penalty apart from the fact that you would only be able to receive the extra damage bonus when using a specific weapon... |
That's not a penalty. That is just part of the RAW definition of weapon specialization. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16178
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2011 12:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Bren wrote: | | crmcneill wrote: | | Bren wrote: | | As you outlined it there would be no penalty, only extra damage to go with the cheaper skill increase. |
No penalty apart from the fact that you would only be able to receive the extra damage bonus when using a specific weapon... |
That's not a penalty. That is just part of the RAW definition of weapon specialization. |
You say po-tay-to, I say po-tah-to. Assuming I did put this rule into use, limiting it to the weapon specialized in is sufficient penalty for me.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fallon Kell
Commodore
Joined: 07 Mar 2011
Posts: 1846
Location: Tacoma, WA
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2011 10:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| crmcneill wrote: | | Bren wrote: | | crmcneill wrote: | | Bren wrote: | | As you outlined it there would be no penalty, only extra damage to go with the cheaper skill increase. |
No penalty apart from the fact that you would only be able to receive the extra damage bonus when using a specific weapon... |
That's not a penalty. That is just part of the RAW definition of weapon specialization. |
You say po-tay-to, I say po-tah-to. Assuming I did put this rule into use, limiting it to the weapon specialized in is sufficient penalty for me. |
This may be more a case of "you say po-tay-to, I say cab-bage. I just happen to like cabbage better."
_________________
Or that excessively long "Noooooooooo" was the Whining Side of the Force leaving him. - Dustflier
Complete Starship Construction System |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16178
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2011 11:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Fallon, you appear to be channeling Random Numbers... 
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fallon Kell
Commodore
Joined: 07 Mar 2011
Posts: 1846
Location: Tacoma, WA
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2011 11:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| crmcneill wrote: | | Fallon, you appear to be channeling Random Numbers... |
Random Vegetables actually. 
_________________
Or that excessively long "Noooooooooo" was the Whining Side of the Force leaving him. - Dustflier
Complete Starship Construction System |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bren
Vice Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2011 12:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Fallon Kell wrote: | | crmcneill wrote: | | Fallon, you appear to be channeling Random Numbers... |
Random Vegetables actually. |
Now cut that out, or I'm getting my lightsaber and making some Jedi-style coleslaw. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jmanski
Arbiter-General (Moderator)
Joined: 06 Mar 2005
Posts: 2065
Location: Kansas
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2011 5:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You guys are making me hungry...
_________________
Blasted rules. Why can't they just be perfect? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atgxtg
Rear Admiral
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 08, 2011 11:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Bren wrote: | | atgxtg wrote: | | The one where you trade off skill dice for damage in advance. |
Are you using a 1-1 trade off or a different ratio?
Generally I worry that a 1-1 ratio leads to far too much damage. |
I've been using the 1:1 ration from RoE. So far there hasn7t been any problems with the Pcs doing lots of damage. Most of the time, the Pcs hate to give up skill dice. The few times that somebody has gone for a big damage boost they've flubbed the shot and so have beome a bit cautious.
In starship fights, I have used the 2:1 ratio fom the 1E Rules Upgrade, and I suspect that might be a better arragementt in the long run. I might alos consider capping the damage dice to double, but so far it hasn't been a problem. My players rarely use the option, and few NPCs are good enough to do so.
| Quote: |
Also, do you allow the same trade off when using a FP? That could increase damage to absurd levels, especially when the Wookiee wants to hit the just-standing-there-and-not-dodging door or table. |
I do, but such action might merit a DSP, since the character would be using the Force to do more damage (like spending CPs). So my players need to be cafeful when upping thier damages. Doing a called shot on a Rancor so it doesn't eat your buddy, or on a charging reek so it doesn't trample you is one thing, doing in a fleeing shopkeeper so you don't leave any "loose ends" is something else. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14034
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 08, 2011 12:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
In the past where i HAVE used the 3/2/1 ratio, i have not really seen any significant change in combat.
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
