| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Tupteq
Commander
Joined: 11 Apr 2007
Posts: 285
Location: Rzeszów, Poland
|
 Posted: Thu Jul 04, 2019 11:33 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Bren wrote: | | Tupteq wrote: | | I'm using just one table table, no matter what STR value is, in other words it's absolute, not relative. |
That's what I thought, but I wanted to be sure.
Given that, it comparison to what I proposed your table makes stun damage more hazardous for high strength characters like Wookiees and less hazardous for low strength characters like normal STR 2D humans. Not that there is necessarily anything wrong with it, but it isn't what I want. |
I was sure you'll tell me that, I even wanted to respond to this (not spoken yet) note, but finally I didn't 
Anyways - I disagree it's more hazardous for high strength characters because stronger characters roll more for their STR, which makes them more resistant to stun damage. The only "problem" is that this doesn't scale linearly (e.g. 4D is not twice as good as 2D, but it's still better than 2D and worse than 5D). But IMO it's not a problem, because I don't think D values are meant to be linear at all.
In other words - STR value is still strongly correlated with probability of being stunned (higher STR always means smaller chance of being stunned). Moreover, in my table "special effects" (like instant unconsciousness) start at rather high damage level of Mortally Wounded, which means that the same shot at the same target but with lethal setting would also eliminate target.
Main advantage of my table is addition of special hit effects without adding any complication - table similar to standard damage table players are used to, no need for many table variants, no additional rolls needed etc. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Bren
Vice Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 04, 2019 11:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Tupteq wrote: | | I was sure you'll tell me that, I even wanted to respond to this (not spoken yet) note, but finally I didn't |
I can be predictable. 
| Quote: | | Anyways - I disagree it's more hazardous for high strength characters because stronger characters roll more for their STR, which makes them more resistant to stun damage. |
I may not have made my meaning clear. I didn't mean you were making stunning more hazardous for high STR characters than it is for low STR characters. What I meant was that your system makes stunning more hazardous for high STR characters in your system than it is for high STR characters in the RAW. And it makes stunning less hazardous for low STR characters in your system than it is for low STR characters in the RAW.
That's an observation. It isn't intended as a criticism. I can easily see doing that as a design goal.
In fact, the old 1E rule where all characters are automatically given one level of stun when shot regardless of their STR resistance roll and the 1E rules supplement change that allows no effect only if 2x Damage < Resistance Roll both have somewhat of a leveling effect between low and high STR characters when compared to the 2E and 2R&E rules were Damage < Resistance is no effect. Personally I like the supplement change as high STR characters who routinely and completely shrug off blaster shots damages my suspension of disbelief. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ninja-Bear
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 26 Sep 2016
Posts: 209
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 09, 2020 4:02 am Post subject: Re: Stun Damage Optional Rule |
|
|
| CRMcNeill wrote: | A while back, I suggested an alternate version for Stun Damage. I've had some additional thoughts on it, and so, to avoid hijacking Whill's topic, I'm giving it its own topic. So, here we go...
My basic premise is that, rather than the RAW's version of Stun Damage ("treat any result more serious than Stunned as Unconscious for 2D minutes"), treat Stun damage like Ionization Damage for organic beings.
So, if a weapon is set on Stun, roll damage on the following chart:Stun Damage > Strength / Stamina Roll = Effect
0-3 = 1 Stun
4-8 = 2 Stuns
9-12 = 3 Stuns
13-16 = 4 Stuns
17-20 = 5 Stuns
21-24 = 6 Stuns
25-28 = 7 Stuns
29-32 = 8 Stuns
33+ = One additional Stun for every 4 points of Damage
Each Stun inflicts a temporary -1D penalty to all actions, which rolls off at a rate of 1D per round (subject to the "affecting" rule listed on pg. 97 of the 2R&E Rulebook).
If a character's total "affecting" Stun Dice reduces their Strength to 0D, the character is Unconscious for 1D minutes, +1D minutes for every D by which the total Stun dice exceeds their Strength.Example: Thannik is hit by a Stun blast that brings his total "affecting" dice to 6D, effectively reducing his Strength of 3D+2 to -2D+1. He is knocked Unconscious for 3D minutes (1D, plus 1D for every D by which his total Strength dice was exceeded). |
Wanted to say that I like this. I haven’t gotten the chance to really use it but a preliminary test showed me that it worked. And frankly when I first saw the Ionization table, that’s what I thought it was used for. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16174
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 11, 2020 11:30 pm Post subject: Re: Stun Damage Optional Rule |
|
|
| Ninja-Bear wrote: | | Wanted to say that I like this. I haven’t gotten the chance to really use it but a preliminary test showed me that it worked. And frankly when I first saw the Ionization table, that’s what I thought it was used for. |
Positive feedback is always appreciated. I don't get a lot of opportunities to playtest this stuff, so if you get a chance to try it out, please let me know how it works.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
|
