| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
pakman
Commander
Joined: 20 Jul 2021
Posts: 487
|
 Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2025 7:06 pm Post subject: Minimum Damage Result Optional Rule - or - No Soaking. |
 |
|
TLDR:
What do people think of this optional rule;
| Quote: | Minimum Damage Result
If the modified damage die code is equal to or greater than the modified resistance die code, the target suffers at least a STUN result (or its equivalent).
|
example;
Mike the bounty hunter is hit with a stick from an ewok, that does 2D damage. Mike has a 3D Strength, so no minimum result.
Fred shoots the rancor with his hold out - it has 3D+1, rancor has 8d - no minimum result.
Longer Version;
to start off....
yes, I know this has been brought up before. I read the various threads - there did not seem to be any strong rules or consensus in those threads - although they did validate that some folks feel soaking damage is indeed immersion breaking).
This is more about making solid hits with decent weapons (i.e. NOT a slingshot against a Rancor) FEEL more effective when playing the game.
Call soaking dangerous hits just immersion breaking, or demoralizing on the players part (especially if they spent character points to make the shot hit) and then you just roll terrible (or the opponent rolls really well) - and get nothing - repeatedly in combat.
(yes, our houserules already have ways to increase damage - but soaking dangerous attacks just feels... well, not fun and or immersive - and feels like it happens more than just once in a while).
I based it on damage dice as that covers blasters most of the time - but also other really damaging attacks (as opposed to be hit with a rock... that does 2D damage - unless you are an Ewok.... but I digress).
This should cover most blaster attacks and other big things (thermal detonator , vehicle accidents, falls from great heights etc.) but allow characters to have a better chance of not getting stunned like crazy from really weak attacks.
Note - I put in Modified - to represent armor, or extra whatever from other sources (your house rules may vary).
Questions / Thoughts?
_________________
SW Fan, Gamer, Comic, Corporate nerd.
Working on massive House Rules document - pretty much a new book. Will post soon....
Last edited by pakman on Tue Jul 01, 2025 10:45 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16402
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2025 10:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
My thoughts...
_________________
"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 |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14347
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 30, 2025 12:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
As that other thread mentions, before we got off onto the whole template vs making your own pc tangent, you have two extremes..
Stun locking (where any hit causes a stun, and enough stuns ko a target, no matter how strong they are.
and the "bullet proof wookie"..
The latter is BTB, the former, though makes big 'tough' monsters, easy to lock up...
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pakman
Commander
Joined: 20 Jul 2021
Posts: 487
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2025 10:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| garhkal wrote: | As that other thread mentions, before we got off onto the whole template vs making your own pc tangent, you have two extremes..
Stun locking (where any hit causes a stun, and enough stuns ko a target, no matter how strong they are.
and the "bullet proof wookie"..
The latter is BTB, the former, though makes big 'tough' monsters, easy to lock up... |
That is why my rule is designed that way - to 100% avoid this.
I am guessing that was not clear?????
I should have put in an example;
Mike the bounty hunter is hit with a stick from an ewok, that does 2D damage. Mike has a 3D Strength, so no minimum result.
Fred shoots the rancor with his hold out - it has 3D+1, rancor has 8d - no minimum result.
Both of the concerns are addressed in my house rule.
_________________
SW Fan, Gamer, Comic, Corporate nerd.
Working on massive House Rules document - pretty much a new book. Will post soon.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14347
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2025 4:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
So only when the base weapon damage is above the resistance rating base, BEFORE rolling, is there any min damage possible.
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pakman
Commander
Joined: 20 Jul 2021
Posts: 487
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2025 10:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| garhkal wrote: | | So only when the base weapon damage is above the resistance rating base, BEFORE rolling, is there any min damage possible. |
Yes, this means tougher characters (or those in good armor - as it is the modified dice) are not going to get shaken from attacks from small critters, or weak attacks.
Likewise - bigger tougher creatures etc. are also immune to automatic results as well - so shooting a rancor with a blaster pistol - will result in no minimum result either.
_________________
SW Fan, Gamer, Comic, Corporate nerd.
Working on massive House Rules document - pretty much a new book. Will post soon.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14347
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2025 1:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
Ahh.. Gotcha.. But there's no issue with say a wookie completely shurgging off an e-web shot!
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pakman
Commander
Joined: 20 Jul 2021
Posts: 487
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2025 11:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| garhkal wrote: | | Ahh.. Gotcha.. But there's no issue with say a wookie completely shurgging off an e-web shot! |
I am not sure if this is a joke, a question or an observation.
This topic is getting a lot less engagement than I was hoping for.
But assuming that was a ....validating conditional statement..
A target with a modified STR of less than the hitting weapon modified STR WOULD have shaken as a minimum result.
Target: 5D, Damage: 8D
Minimum result - Stunned.
But lets not go down the wookie hole....
_________________
SW Fan, Gamer, Comic, Corporate nerd.
Working on massive House Rules document - pretty much a new book. Will post soon.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14347
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2025 1:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It was a statement of my now understanding you...
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Whill
Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)
Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 10516
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 03, 2025 12:57 am Post subject: Re: Minimum Damage Result Optional Rule - or - No Soaking. |
|
|
| pakman wrote: | to start off....
yes, I know this has been brought up before. I read the various threads - there did not seem to be any strong rules or consensus in those threads - although they did validate that some folks feel soaking damage is indeed immersion breaking). |
I'm sure Soaking Blaster Bolts was a thread that you read, but perhaps you missed the post in that thread that as a "strong rule" of mine from and linking to my Rancor Pit subdomain: Star Wars D6 Damage, which is devoted to damage-related house rules. It is also a minimum damage rule, but when applied it eliminates the "soak" result specifically for blasters on the normal damage setting, which was the greatest source of broken immersion for me in the RAW damage system.
Regarding "consensus", please be advised that this site does not officially venerate consensus as it can have the effect of marginalizing minority views on things. I would like every GM to feel empowered to make the best judgments for their own game, so consensus seems like a more worthy goal within your own player group than among multiple GMs around the world who don't game with each other. That being said, of course you can still value and hope for consensus if you find it helpful, but based on my experience, you should not expect to find much consensus here about almost anything anyway.
| pakman wrote: | TLDR:
What do people think of this optional rule;
| Quote: | Minimum Damage Result
If the modified damage die code is equal to or greater than the modified resistance die code, the target suffers at least a STUN result (or its equivalent).
|
example;
Mike the bounty hunter is hit with a stick from an ewok, that does 2D damage. Mike has a 3D Strength, so no minimum result.
Fred shoots the rancor with his hold out - it has 3D+1, rancor has 8d - no minimum result.
Longer Version;
This is more about making solid hits with decent weapons (i.e. NOT a slingshot against a Rancor) FEEL more effective when playing the game.
Call soaking dangerous hits just immersion breaking, or demoralizing on the players part (especially if they spent character points to make the shot hit) and then you just roll terrible (or the opponent rolls really well) - and get nothing - repeatedly in combat.
(yes, our houserules already have ways to increase damage - but soaking dangerous attacks just feels... well, not fun and or immersive - and feels like it happens more than just once in a while).
I based it on damage dice as that covers blasters most of the time - but also other really damaging attacks (as opposed to be hit with a rock... that does 2D damage - unless you are an Ewok.... but I digress).
This should cover most blaster attacks and other big things (thermal detonator , vehicle accidents, falls from great heights etc.) but allow characters to have a better chance of not getting stunned like crazy from really weak attacks.
Note - I put in Modified - to represent armor, or extra whatever from other sources (your house rules may vary).
Questions / Thoughts? |
I really like this idea. It is simple (easy to remember and implement), and would seem to address the general "soak" issues you identified. However, my initial thought about it is to only apply it to normal damage, meaning soak is still possible for stun and ion damage even when the modified/rolled damage dice value is more than the rolled resistance value.
And this rule would need a specification of comparing the average result values of the die codes involved, because modified/rolled dice values can end up outside of the unmodified stats die code value progression (e.g. 2D+6 vs 3D+3 = 13 vs. 13.5).
And I'm thinking of using this rule in conjunction with my Minimum Blaster Damage rule which would supersede it, meaning that a lower rolled blaster dice value against a higher resistance rolled dice value would still often have a minimum result of stun.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration/Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Star Wars D6 Damage |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pakman
Commander
Joined: 20 Jul 2021
Posts: 487
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 03, 2025 11:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
Fair points Whill - perhaps I should say "consistent perspective" rather than consensus.... 
Once of my goals in all my house rules is to make them as streamlined as possible - one goal is "don't need to look it up on a chart" ....
Can that be done with everything? no - but where we can - the better.
Also - yes - I had read your damage rules and other threads - and my rules was in spired by the idea of not wanting to make a lot of exclusions (except for rancors etc.) so the rule I came up with - was not based on specifics - just a simple comparison.
| Quote: | And this rule would need a specification of comparing the average result values of the die codes involved, because modified/rolled dice values can end up outside of the unmodified stats die code value progression (e.g. 2D+6 vs 3D+3 = 13 vs. 13.5).
|
Interesting - in my game there are usually no values like that - the 2D + 6, 99% of the time never have modifiers like that - pips are converted to die codes, and typically use shifting difficulty ranges etc. However - if you have the need for that in your game - makes sense.
I will keep it for stun affects - it makes sense from a simplicity and consistency stand point.
Still - may have to play with it a bit - I will keep track in our next sessions to see how many times it would come into play. One of the benefits of an active game with a bunch of trigger happy players.... (or sometimes very trigger happy NPCs....depending on other factors).
_________________
SW Fan, Gamer, Comic, Corporate nerd.
Working on massive House Rules document - pretty much a new book. Will post soon.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
