Damage modifiers

[badside bill]

I have just got hold of the MRQ rulebook and have just browsed quickly through it once or twice.

One thing i wondered a bit about is the new damage modifiers wich have been applied. What strikes me is that is has become a lot more difficult fore a huge, strong monster to inflict a lot of damage.

For example, a giant ( the one at p. 112 in the MRQ rule book) have now an average damage modifier on 2d12 instead of, say 4d6? ( i don`t remember the damage modifier table right at this moment).
So say the giant has a human adventurer in a tight spot and chooses to swing a finishing blow at him with his club (damage 2d6), game master rolls an average 7 on the club damage, but an embarresing roll of 2 on the damage modifier.
The poor, but rather supriesed, adventurer parrys with his target shield which absorbs almost all the damage, the rest vanishes in his ringmail armor.

I think one of the things which made the monsters very dangerous in previous RQ versions, wasn`t the huge damage they were able to do, but the fact that even if they rolled a lousy damage, still would be able to beat the life out of you.

 

[gamesmeister]

I'm not sure 2D12 will that much difference over 4D6 in the majority of cases. Sure, the minimum damage is slightly lower, but 2D12 still has an average of 13 (only slightly lower than the 14 provided by 4D6).

When you take into account the lower protection provided by parrying in MRQ, these things tend to even themselves out.

 

[RosenMcStern]

And do not forget that now the average giant strikes twice per round, too. And that your kite shield now blocks just 10 points of damage instead of 16!

The one thing I do not like about damage modifiers is that they are applied in full when Dodge reduces weapon damage to a minimum. A mightier blow should not be more difficult to dodge!

 

[gamesmeister]

The one thing I do not like about damage modifiers is that they are applied in full when Dodge reduces weapon damage to a minimum. A mightier blow should not be more difficult to dodge!

Really? I must admit I've been playing that all damage is reduced to a minimum, not just weapon damage. Where does it say only minimum weapon damage is used? (don't have the books to hand).

If what you say is correct it becomes fairly pointless trying to dodge huge creatures, as they're still going to do massive damage to you if you're using an opposed roll on the combat tables.

 

[ninthcouncil]

I'm not sure 2D12 will that much difference over 4D6 in the majority of cases. Sure, the minimum damage is slightly lower, but 2D12 still has an average of 13 (only slightly lower than the 14 provided by 4D6).

The more extreme results will occur more often, however. With 4d6, the probability of a result of 4 is less than 0.1%. With 2d12, the chance of rolling 4 or less is around 4%.

Personally, I'm also against anything which expands the use of "marginal" die types, such as the d12. Better to get rid of them entirely.

 

[RosenMcStern]

Really? I must admit I've been playing that all damage is reduced to a minimum, not just weapon damage. Where does it say only minimum weapon damage is used? (don't have the books to hand).

SRD, chapter 3 (combat), p.5: "Damage modifiers, such as that derived from statistics, are not minimised."

However, I house rule that DM is minimized, too.

Personally, I'm also against anything which expands the use of "marginal" die types, such as the d12. Better to get rid of them entirely.

Play GURPS then

No, seriously, the old all-d6 way was better, but d12 are not evil.

 

[ninthcouncil]

Play GURPS then

Why would you wish such a thing upon me? :shock:

 

[CthulhuFnord]

Play GURPS then

Why would you wish such a thing upon me? :shock:

Heh, I used to feel the same way myself. Then I tried to wrap my head around Champions.

 

[Utgardloki]

I have the opposite opinion regarding dice. The more times I get to use D12s and D8s, the happier I am.

In D&D, I once had a character who wielded great-axes. I decided to make that character because the great-axe does 1D12 damage. 8)

With regard to dodge and damage, I have decided that a successful dodge negates all damage. Being able to dodge a giant or a construct is one of the few ways a PC has to survive an attack from one of these. If I wanted PCs to go splat all the time, I'd play Call of Cthulhu.

I don't have an opinion yet on the damage table, except that in expanding it I slowed down the advancement even farther past the end of the existing table. I suppose that once you get past a certain size, a square/cube law gets you or something.

 

[badside bill]

i think nithcouncil was getting my point here, what i think is visible is that with 2d12 you will have a bigger chance of scoring a low damage, at least comparing with 4d6.

now i took another look at the ap of some armors and shields and i see that ringmail hasn`t been changed that much and target shield has just gotten its AP reduced by 2, so i don`t know how much this count for yet. I guess i ought to try it in practice.

But my point is that when it comes to damage modifiers i think it somewhat is meant to descripe the sheer force which is behind a strike. When i see this giant STR and SIZ and the fact that it is supposed to be 5m tall and the fact that the minimum damage of its damage modifier is 2, it all seems to me that the damage modifier is too low. i don`t think it describes well a 5m giants strenght at all. say it used it hands and chose to hit the adventurer, the fistdamage becomes a 2 and the damage modifier is an 2, that damage would hardly hurt an elf i think.

in addition to this we got the fact (from ninthcouncil) that there is a significant bigger chance to score a 4 or lower damage on 2d12 than on 4d6. with 4d6 you will averagely get higher rolls i think. therefore i think it is a better way to describe a huge creatures damagemodifier.

 

[ninthcouncil]

Of course, the flip side is that it is also easier to roll very high damage for the bonus, so that giant is going to be adding 24 rather more frequently than he was under previous editions, which is enough to give anyone a sore head.

 

[Trifletraxor]

Of course, the flip side is that it is also easier to roll very high damage for the bonus, so that giant is going to be adding 24 rather more frequently than he was under previous editions, which is enough to give anyone a sore head.

No, it's not easier to roll a higher damage bonus. It's way harder.

To have a damage modifier of 2D6, you currently need a combined STR+SIZ in the range of 61-70. In RQ3 the range was 41-57.

Big, strong creatures are not that dangerous anymore. I guess Mongoose wants to give the game a more "heroic" feel by giving the players a chance in a fight with opponents that would normally just squash them.

SGL.

 

[badside bill]

Of course, the flip side is that it is also easier to roll very high damage for the bonus, so that giant is going to be adding 24 rather more frequently than he was under previous editions, which is enough to give anyone a sore head.

Yea i see that point and that makes them still quite dangerous.

Though i think for the giants and all large creatures selfasteem sake, many of them without the luxury of a "true claw" or a "iron tooth" spell, that we gave them a higher chance of a good adventuring punch even on bad day.

i mean if that giant struck an elf with a punch of 3 points of damage, that would hardly negotiate bark armour...
if i was that giant i would start wondering if there is any point fighting any more.

and it was also mentioned that a giant has 2 attacks...
well an elf on lucky day can actually throw out a whopping 4 attacks due to its high dex roll. And furthermore, if you consider giving it a high damage weapon like greataxe for example, and some spells like bladesharp, and of course 2 to 3 other elves to back him up, that giant could actually be in a bit of trouble...[/quote]

 

[Trifletraxor]

For example, a giant ( the one at p. 112 in the MRQ rule book) have now an average damage modifier on 2d12 instead of, say 4d6? ( i don`t remember the damage modifier table right at this moment).

It's 2D12 instead of 5D6.

I think one of the things which made the monsters very dangerous in previous RQ versions, wasn`t the huge damage they were able to do, but the fact that even if they rolled a lousy damage, still would be able to beat the life out of you.

Highly skilled human fighters used to fear great trolls no mather how lousy skilled they was, because of the amount of damage they would inflict if they hit. Sadly, I don't think they will be that afraid anymore.

SGL.

 

[ninthcouncil]

It's 2D12 instead of 5D6.

Yes, that would make a bit of difference...

 

[gamesmeister]

Highly skilled human fighters used to fear great trolls no mather how lousy skilled they was, because of the amount of damage they would inflict if they hit. Sadly, I don't think they will be that afraid anymore.

I think you may be underestimating how dangerous a Great Troll is under MRQ, particularly if your PC is not skilled in the use of a shield. An average of 12 points of damage (assuming no bonuses) is still enough to hurt if your parrying weapon is only absorbing 3-4 points each time.

Compare that to earlier editions where the GT was typically doing 2D8+2D6 (off the top of my head), but where weapons were far more effective at parrying.

Changing the damage bonus table is a simple houserule though if you're not happy with it...

 

[badside bill]

Highly skilled human fighters used to fear great trolls no mather how lousy skilled they was, because of the amount of damage they would inflict if they hit. Sadly, I don't think they will be that afraid anymore.

no i am definately not that afraid any more, besides these days highly skilled elven fighters would be better. they have usually more combat actions and they strike before the giant. the one thing i could imagine would be a logic consequence to all this is large scale giant hunting..i mean if you have a party of newbees and who wants a kick start, why not take out a giant?

 

[gamesmeister]

no i am definately not that afraid any more, besides these days highly skilled elven fighters would be better. they have usually more combat actions and they strike before the giant. the one thing i could imagine would be a logic consequence to all this is large scale giant hunting..i mean if you have a party of newbees and who wants a kick start, why not take out a giant?

Why not take out a giant? Because when the giant hits and your newbie fails to parry/dodge, he's one dead newbie. If you take the 6m tall giant from the Monsters SRD, he will average 20 pts of damage per hit, and given his massive STR his starting skill is also very high. Even if this is parried you've still got a 2m knockback to worry about, on top of the damage that gets through.

I suggest you run some practice combats and see how long your group of newbies lasts...

 

[Trifletraxor]

Highly skilled human fighters used to fear great trolls no mather how lousy skilled they was, because of the amount of damage they would inflict if they hit. Sadly, I don't think they will be that afraid anymore.

I think you may be underestimating how dangerous a Great Troll is under MRQ, particularly if your PC is not skilled in the use of a shield. An average of 12 points of damage (assuming no bonuses) is still enough to hurt if your parrying weapon is only absorbing 3-4 points each time.

Which is why no-one will parry with a weapon anymore. Why would anyone try to parry with a sword when it only subtracts 4 points of damage? Everyone will walk around with shields.

Compare that to earlier editions where the GT was typically doing 2D8+2D6 (off the top of my head), but where weapons were far more effective at parrying.

Weapons will just not be used for parrying anymore with the new rules.

Changing the damage bonus table is a simple houserule though if you're not happy with it...

Actually, it's not that easy. I would have preferred to use RQ3, as that system isn't full of broken rules that need houseruling before play (dedicated POW, incorrect tables, bypass armor attacks, etc.), but I still want to use MRQ'a adventures. If I houserule the damage modifiers, I'll have to change it for all the opponents in future supplements too.

SGL.

 

[Trifletraxor]

no i am definately not that afraid any more, besides these days highly skilled elven fighters would be better. they have usually more combat actions and they strike before the giant. the one thing i could imagine would be a logic consequence to all this is large scale giant hunting..i mean if you have a party of newbees and who wants a kick start, why not take out a giant?

Just remember to bring those 2d8 long bows and the 3d6 skybolt spell.

And be elves of course.

SGL.