Wars Damage

[Anonymous]

8) I see that Wars has a massive damage save. Is it based on con like d20 modern? Ie do more damage than the targets con and rolls massive damage save.

Also I see that Wars has damage rule for limb loss and organ damage. Is this similar to the rule found in Starship Troopers?

Dave2

Posted this wrong spot sorry.

 

[GregLynch]

8) I see that Wars has a massive damage save. Is it based on con like d20 modern? Ie do more damage than the targets con and rolls massive damage save.

Also I see that Wars has damage rule for limb loss and organ damage. Is this similar to the rule found in Starship Troopers?

1. No. Since WARS is a space opera with some really nasty high-damage weapons, I kept it as a hit point thing. Of course, there's nothing preventing you from changing it - though you might go through a lot of PCs that way. :twisted:

2. Yes, it's similar.

 

[Anonymous]

8) Since massive damage is based on hit points I guess it is 50 hit points?

On the limb and organ damage rules what triggers these things. Is it based on critical hit or something else like take so much damage then have the limb loss or organ damage.

thanks Dave

 

[Anonymous]

Well, it would have been nice if it had been based on CON, or if Star Wars vp/wp system had been used. I really cannot even understand why some authors cling so desperately to the basic hitpoint system of dnd, when most of the fan favorite games (conan, star wars, wfrp v1 and v2) feature easier to kill characters.

And unfortunately it is not very easy to house rule such things for a variety of different reasons.

 

[Samvail1]

Well, it would have been nice if it had been based on CON, or if Star Wars vp/wp system had been used. I really cannot even understand why some authors cling so desperately to the basic hitpoint system of dnd, when most of the fan favorite games (conan, star wars, wfrp v1 and v2) feature easier to kill characters.

And unfortunately it is not very easy to house rule such things for a variety of different reasons.

You can't always blame the author for this type of decision. In this case, Mongoose would have their own brief for how the system played, and I suspect Decipher had a big hand in affing their own restrictions to the game.

Sam

 

[Anonymous]

Well, it would have been nice if it had been based on CON, or if Star Wars vp/wp system had been used. I really cannot even understand why some authors cling so desperately to the basic hitpoint system of dnd, when most of the fan favorite games (conan, star wars, wfrp v1 and v2) feature easier to kill characters.

And unfortunately it is not very easy to house rule such things for a variety of different reasons.

You can't always blame the author for this type of decision. In this case, Mongoose would have their own brief for how the system played, and I suspect Decipher had a big hand in affing their own restrictions to the game.

Sam

WIth all due respect, you should really, really read the entire thread before posting a reply.

However, overall I agree you are correct, the publishing company does impose some restrictions/thoughts/ideas. However, in this case the decision was solely the authors, as he has said so himself in this thread. Which you would have realized had you bothered to actually read the thread.

 

[Samvail1]

Well, it would have been nice if it had been based on CON, or if Star Wars vp/wp system had been used. I really cannot even understand why some authors cling so desperately to the basic hitpoint system of dnd, when most of the fan favorite games (conan, star wars, wfrp v1 and v2) feature easier to kill characters.

And unfortunately it is not very easy to house rule such things for a variety of different reasons.

You can't always blame the author for this type of decision. In this case, Mongoose would have their own brief for how the system played, and I suspect Decipher had a big hand in affing their own restrictions to the game.

Sam

WIth all due respect, you should really, really read the entire thread before posting a reply.

However, overall I agree you are correct, the publishing company does impose some restrictions/thoughts/ideas. However, in this case the decision was solely the authors, as he has said so himself in this thread. Which you would have realized had you bothered to actually read the thread.

Thanks for the admonishment "Guest". Next time, sign in and whine using your real name.

My point, however, is still valid. The authors were under some pretty heavy restrictions when writing the game. You really, really shouldn't bother to reply.

Sam

 

[Anonymous]

8) That is cool on the massive damage my guess is it is the 50 hit point deal. I wll probably use variant rule out of Unearthed Arcana. Base it on con and use the scaled threshold rule ie for every 10 points above con save goes up by 2 :twisted:


Sam or someone elso could you let me know what trigers the limb or organ damage rule? Dave2

 

[Samvail1]

8) That is cool on the massive damage my guess is it is the 50 hit point deal. I wll probably use variant rule out of Unearthed Arcana. Base it on con and use the scaled threshold rule ie for every 10 points above con save goes up by 2 :twisted:


Sam or someone elso could you let me know what trigers the limb or organ damage rule? Dave2

Hey Dave

Massive Damage is when a character receives 30 or more points of damage from a single attack. It isn't going to happen on a regular basis as 30 points of damage is pretty difficult to get to, what with damage reduction.

If you receive 30+ points in an attack, you immediately roll a Fort save with a DC equal to half the damage inflicted. Failure results in the character dropping to -1 hit point and losing 1 per round.

Permanent Injuries
Whenever a character goes below zero hit points, there is the potential of a permanent injury. The character must immediately make a Fortitude saving throw with a DC equal to 15 + the number of hit points below zero to which he was reduced by the attack. If it fails, you roll randomly on the Permanent injury table. Results go from Impressive Scar, up to Lost Leg and Extreme Damage (roll twice on this table).

Hope that helps.

Cheers

Sam

 

[Anonymous]

You can't always blame the author for this type of decision. In this case, Mongoose would have their own brief for how the system played, and I suspect Decipher had a big hand in affing their own restrictions to the game.

Sam

WIth all due respect, you should really, really read the entire thread before posting a reply.

However, overall I agree you are correct, the publishing company does impose some restrictions/thoughts/ideas. However, in this case the decision was solely the authors, as he has said so himself in this thread. Which you would have realized had you bothered to actually read the thread.

Thanks for the admonishment "Guest". Next time, sign in and whine using your real name.

My point, however, is still valid. The authors were under some pretty heavy restrictions when writing the game. You really, really shouldn't bother to reply.

Sam

No one is whining here. Also, if Samvail1 is your 'real' name then no wonder you have stability issues.

Anyhow, if you will take the time to read the author's own reply just a few posts above, you will (hopefully) come to the rational conclusion that it was his choice alone in the matter of damage.

 

[Samvail1]

No one is whining here. Also, if Samvail1 is your 'real' name then no wonder you have stability issues.

Anyhow, if you will take the time to read the author's own reply just a few posts above, you will (hopefully) come to the rational conclusion that it was his choice alone in the matter of damage.

If you had bothered to read my previous post, you will see that I have already answered Dave2's original post and we have moved on. Perhaps you should get your head out of your arse and do the same.

Sam

 

[Samvail1]

Also, if Samvail1 is your 'real' name then no wonder you have stability issues.

Get a life you annoying little twat!

 

[Anonymous]

There's no need to start getting offensive. You have been the one consistently not reading through posts and coming to false conclusion. When pointed out you were wrong you refused to acknowledge the fact and have now resorted to childish namecalling.

Not very mature is it? Heck, I think you may have quite a bit more up your ass than just your head.

 

[Anonymous]

8) Sam Thanks for the info. It did help. The massive damage save is different than the standard D&D and srd versions. Which is 50 hit points make fort save of 15 or die. Like the massive damage save from wars as you described it. It does seem to be pretty similar to conan's if you simply reduce the hit point total from 30 to 20. So it (information) did help a great deal.

The organ and limb damage rule sounded good too. Now there are consequences for dropping below 0 hit points. That sounds interesting.

Ps did get my first copy of Wars today. Got another on the way from amazon.

Next purchase will be Battlefront which looks good. Dave2

 

[Samvail1]

There's no need to start getting offensive. You have been the one consistently not reading through posts and coming to false conclusion. When pointed out you were wrong you refused to acknowledge the fact and have now resorted to childish namecalling.

Not very mature is it? Heck, I think you may have quite a bit more up your ass than just your head.

What's the point? Just let it go. I don't talk to twats, so I'm not wasting my time on you any more.

Sam

 

[Dpetroc]

There's no need to start getting offensive. You have been the one consistently not reading through posts and coming to false conclusion. When pointed out you were wrong you refused to acknowledge the fact and have now resorted to childish namecalling.

Not very mature is it? Heck, I think you may have quite a bit more up your ass than just your head.

What's the point? Just let it go. I don't talk to twats, so I'm not wasting my time on you any more.

Sam

Of course, Sam might be more annoyed at the fact that you are criticizing without bothering to sign in. I mean, if you are going to engage in a pissing match, at least sign in and stop being anonymous.

 

[Anonymous]

There's no need to start getting offensive. You have been the one consistently not reading through posts and coming to false conclusion. When pointed out you were wrong you refused to acknowledge the fact and have now resorted to childish namecalling.

Not very mature is it? Heck, I think you may have quite a bit more up your ass than just your head.

What's the point? Just let it go. I don't talk to twats, so I'm not wasting my time on you any more.

Sam

Of course, Sam might be more annoyed at the fact that you are criticizing without bothering to sign in. I mean, if you are going to engage in a pissing match, at least sign in and stop being anonymous.

I don't have a profile and decipher's boards (where I am registered) are down. Also, your statement is ludicrous; how could someone (anyone who is sane anyway) be annoyed by the lack of my handle, when what I am saying is correct?

Now I agree samvail appears to be quite mentally unstable, but if he can still read and write well enough he should realize that I was only stating the obvious, that he did not read the thread before replying obnoxiously; and now he is too ashamed to admit that he was indeed wrong and has since taken to making insulting remarks and indulging in childish behaviour.

Its people like him that stain society in general with their ignorance, and try to pollute the minds of others with their own depraved lunacy and lies.
I feel sorry for anyone that has to work with or interact with such a rigid, forthing maniac.

 

[Dpetroc]

What's the point? Just let it go. I don't talk to twats, so I'm not wasting my time on you any more.

Sam

Of course, Sam might be more annoyed at the fact that you are criticizing without bothering to sign in. I mean, if you are going to engage in a pissing match, at least sign in and stop being anonymous.

I don't have a profile and decipher's boards (where I am registered) are down. Also, your statement is ludicrous; how could someone (anyone who is sane anyway) be annoyed by the lack of my handle, when what I am saying is correct?

Now I agree samvail appears to be quite mentally unstable, but if he can still read and write well enough he should realize that I was only stating the obvious, that he did not read the thread before replying obnoxiously; and now he is too ashamed to admit that he was indeed wrong and has since taken to making insulting remarks and indulging in childish behaviour.

Its people like him that stain society in general with their ignorance, and try to pollute the minds of others with their own depraved lunacy and lies.
I feel sorry for anyone that has to work with or interact with such a rigid, forthing maniac.

Actually, he's one of the most respected individuals on these boards -- whereas you are an anonymous person attacking said respected individual. The lack of a handle (easily acquired by registering with this board) is important -- as I'm sure you already know. If you want to remain anonymous, fine. But any validity to your arguments is undermined by the perception of cowardice in hiding in anonymity.

Also, when you state that you 'agree' that Sam is unstable, who exactly are you agreeing with? Certainly not me or most other persons on this board. Although I will admit that Sam was probably having a bad day and flew off the handle, getting an anonymous finger wagged at me would probably piss me off too...right or wrong. So, considering the rest of your ill-chosen but passably well written insults (which, actually lend credence to the thought that you are a paranoiac and therefore mentally unstable yourself), I'll go ahead and consider you a troll and stop feeding you. Have a nice day.

 

[Anonymous]

Of course, Sam might be more annoyed at the fact that you are criticizing without bothering to sign in. I mean, if you are going to engage in a pissing match, at least sign in and stop being anonymous.

I don't have a profile and decipher's boards (where I am registered) are down. Also, your statement is ludicrous; how could someone (anyone who is sane anyway) be annoyed by the lack of my handle, when what I am saying is correct?

Now I agree samvail appears to be quite mentally unstable, but if he can still read and write well enough he should realize that I was only stating the obvious, that he did not read the thread before replying obnoxiously; and now he is too ashamed to admit that he was indeed wrong and has since taken to making insulting remarks and indulging in childish behaviour.

Its people like him that stain society in general with their ignorance, and try to pollute the minds of others with their own depraved lunacy and lies.
I feel sorry for anyone that has to work with or interact with such a rigid, forthing maniac.

Actually, he's one of the most respected individuals on these boards -- whereas you are an anonymous person attacking said respected individual. The lack of a handle (easily acquired by registering with this board) is important -- as I'm sure you already know. If you want to remain anonymous, fine. But any validity to your arguments is undermined by the perception of cowardice in hiding in anonymity.

Also, when you state that you 'agree' that Sam is unstable, who exactly are you agreeing with? Certainly not me or most other persons on this board. Although I will admit that Sam was probably having a bad day and flew off the handle, getting an anonymous finger wagged at me would probably piss me off too...right or wrong. So, considering the rest of your ill-chosen but passably well written insults (which, actually lend credence to the thought that you are a paranoiac and therefore mentally unstable yourself), I'll go ahead and consider you a troll and stop feeding you. Have a nice day.

Umm no. The lack of a handle does not mean that one should ignore the validity of what I am saying. Is that your name in real life? No, ofcourse not. When you go to a restaurant and order something to eat, do the servers ask your name, or do they listen to what you have to say, i.e. your order?

Just because your handle is Sgt Zim does not mean you are correct in what you say, or that your arhuments have any weight without having any validity.

Just because my handle is guest does not mean that my words should be ignored, nor the fact that I am correct and that I was the one subjugated to insults by a supposedly 'respected' member of these boards, should be summarily ignored as well.

When I 'agree' with samvail's mental unstability I am agreeing with any sane, educated and well mannered person who can read and write. That does not seem to include you, unfortunately.

This may be a hard lesson for you perhaps due to your elders not providing you with a good education and a moral and ethical base from which to distinguish between right and wrong, but just because someone has a higher 'post' count does not mean he/she is correct. It may just mean said person enjoys hearing/reading himself speak.

 

[lastbesthope]

Just because my handle is guest does not mean that my words should be ignored, nor the fact that I am correct and that I was the one subjugated to insults by a supposedly 'respected' member of these boards, should be summarily ignored as well.

When I 'agree' with samvail's mental unstability I am agreeing with any sane, educated and well mannered person who can read and write. That does not seem to include you, unfortunately.

This may be a hard lesson for you perhaps due to your elders not providing you with a good education and a moral and ethical base from which to distinguish between right and wrong, but just because someone has a higher 'post' count does not mean he/she is correct. It may just mean said person enjoys hearing/reading himself speak.

Well first 'Guest' is not anyone's handle it is a generic one.

Second, I am sane, educated, well mannered and have a background in Psychology. I have met SamVail in person and he is a perfectly nice and well adjusted chap.

You post anonymously, you do not even sign your posts with any identifying marks which needs no profile to do. So we tend to ignore these people as spammers, if you don't care enough to own your opinion, we won't care enough to adopt it.

As for 'moral and ethical base' where are the morals and ethics in proclaiming someone as mentally unstable when you are in no position to make such a judgement?

I bid you good day sir, if you have nothing more construictive to say, or can't be bothered to register with these forums, then I sincerely hope that you do not return to these forums. Leave them to those of us who come here in a spirit of cooperation and friendship.

LBH
(One of the other more respected persons on these here boards)