Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

[prestidigitator]

Re: Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

 

This I don't necessarily agree with.

 

We are modeling comic book/cinematic situations. A guy wearing hard armor gets hit with a sword and the armor takes the blow, there is little or no Stun effect, because the armor effectively stopped the blow.

 

Cinematic? Armor NEVER stops a sword in cinema!!!

[SteveZilla]

Re: Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

 

That is not a bad notion: maybe 1d6-2 (min 1).

 

Making the multiple results be: 1, 1, 1, 2, 3, 4 -- for an average of 2?

 

I get the 2nd part of your objection. What I don't get is how 1d6-2 is an extra step from 1d6-1.

 

Becaus of this:

Maybe one multiplier less if there's no body done?

 

Emphasis mine. The extra step is in comparing the BODY rolled to the targets defenses to determine what method of determing STUNx.

[pinecone]

Re: Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

 

Working on different ideas. I know there are a lot of complaints about KA and the Stun lottery.

 

Has anyone considered doing optional on the Stun? What I'm thinking is normally, you roll the KA damage, then roll the Stun X. Consider instead rolling Stun X only against the amount of effective damage from the KA.

 

2D6 KA, average 7 Body, 21 Stun. Against someone that has resistant defenses, let's say one level of Combat Luck, 3 rPD, we now have 4 Body, 12 Stun.

 

At the very least, they won't be hammered by a freight train with the Stun X.

 

Well, thats sorta how most use hit locs...so it should do the job...

[Greywind]

Re: Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

 

Cinematic? Armor NEVER stops a sword in cinema!!!

Depends on if the hero has the sword or the armor...

[Guest steamteck]

Re: Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

 

M

 

 

The extra step is in comparing the BODY rolled to the targets defenses to determine what method of determing STUNx.

 

 

Oh. I see. I just didn't consider that an extra mental process but I suppose it is.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

 

If someone hits you with a sword and your armor stops it, you know you've been hit. Lots of stun.

 

If someone hits you with a sword and you have no armor, you can have your arm chopped off before you feel any pain. Low stun.

 

That makes the stun lottery seem pretty accurate to me. You could however make a case that the stun lotto should be weighted toward the high end.

 

Doc

 

Swords, bullets, fire, radiation - all could be the sfx of killing attacks, and all could be used to illustrate different points.

 

As for swords, well, I'd have to argue that if the armour stops all the Body then, at most, you should be doing stun on par with a normal attack - the mechanical differences at that point being negligible. Never having had my hand cut off I can not say how much it hurts, but I'm betting a lot, even if the shock delays the pain for a sew seconds. You can cut someone's hand off with 3 Body, and the pain could be incapacitating, maybe even making you pass out. The Body mechanic doesn't model that at all (max Stun is 15). The 'Wounding' optional rule goes some way to covering it, and you could have other optional rules which emulate that kind of shock.

 

My point is you are not going to create a killing attack mechanic that covers it all. Hmm let me re-phrase - the current KA mechanic doesn't cover it all on its own and often gives daft results. Special cases should be dealt with by special rules designed to increase the grittiness/feel of a game, not a generic attack mechanic.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

 

As for swords' date=' well, I'd have to argue that if the armour stops all the Body then, at most, you should be doing stun on par with a normal attack - the mechanical differences at that point being negligible.[/quote']

 

Yeah. Wearing plate armor and getting hit by edge-wise by a broadsword should hurt about as badly as wearing plate armor and getting hit by a club/metal rod of about the same mass and weight distribution. The only difference is whether that cutting edge or tip can penetrate or not. Then again, if it is a stab with that same broadsword, it's only effect is probably going to be to knock you on your ass. Likewise, how much is a low-mass arrow or bullet going to hurt if it doesn't penetrate? It's quite dependent on the type of attack....

[SteveZilla]

Re: Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

 

Hmmm. Arrow: 1d6 RKA,

+1d6RKA - Only If 1st d6 rolled a 6 (-3/4),

+1d6RKA - Only If 2nd d6 rolled a 6(-2),

+1d6RKA - Only If 3rd d6 rolled a 6(-4)

 

Sorta of a "built-in" cirtical hit system?

[Greywind]

Re: Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

 

Yeah. Wearing plate armor and getting hit by edge-wise by a broadsword should hurt about as badly as wearing plate armor and getting hit by a club/metal rod of about the same mass and weight distribution. The only difference is whether that cutting edge or tip can penetrate or not. Then again' date=' if it is a stab with that same broadsword, it's only effect is probably going to be to knock you on your ass. Likewise, how much is a low-mass arrow or bullet going to hurt if it doesn't penetrate? It's quite dependent on the type of attack.... [/quote']Arrows tend to penetrate plate, where a bullet will mushroom on impact. Unless it is steel jacketed, titanium tipped...

[prestidigitator]

Re: Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

 

Arrows tend to penetrate plate' date=' where a bullet will mushroom on impact. Unless it is steel jacketed, titanium tipped...[/quote']

 

Well yeah, but the point is, what should the effect be when it doesn't penetrate (as often or as rarely as that may be)?

[prestidigitator]

Re: Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

 

I wonder if we should consider buying Stun damage and Body damage separately for an attack (even if they wind up being rolled on the same dice). Then we could stand a chance at defining what happens to each if the Body damage "penetrates" or "is stopped by" some kind of defence. That might allow us to define quite different mechanics for, say, a mace vs. a sword; a bullet vs. a spear. Hmm.

[Greywind]

Re: Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

 

We might get something that actually makes sense to most of us?

[Ockham's Spoon]

Re: Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

 

I wonder if we should consider buying Stun damage and Body damage separately for an attack (even if they wind up being rolled on the same dice). Then we could stand a chance at defining what happens to each if the Body damage "penetrates" or "is stopped by" some kind of defence. That might allow us to define quite different mechanics for' date=' say, a mace vs. a sword; a bullet vs. a spear. Hmm.[/quote']

 

That sounds like a good idea at the risk of being more complicated. You could sort of achieve that now by using Increased STN Multiplier for lots of STN and the inverse by putting a limitation like "Defenses count double against STN damage", but that is kind of clunky and certainly there isn't much that is currently modelled that way.

 

Of course I think that KA are fubar anyway, and while I see that their inherent volatility is a good match for some kinds of attacks, I find that they tend to skew gameplay, even if you fix the STN lotto with one of the dozen house rules that have been mentioned on the boards.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

 

We might get something that actually makes sense to most of us?

 

On these boards? Best of luck

[GoldenAge]

Re: Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

 

I wonder if we should consider buying Stun damage and Body damage separately for an attack (even if they wind up being rolled on the same dice). Then we could stand a chance at defining what happens to each if the Body damage "penetrates" or "is stopped by" some kind of defence. That might allow us to define quite different mechanics for' date=' say, a mace vs. a sword; a bullet vs. a spear. Hmm.[/quote']

I like this! Don't we already do this with Defense by purchasing PD, rPD, ED and rED separately? Perhaps there could be a creation process wherein we choose how much Physical or Energy Normal of killing damage (+ KB) an attack does? It might extend the creation process but I doubt it would hamper actual play.

[kjandreano]

Re: Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

 

I use a Flat 3 for the StunX... has worked so far nicely.

 

I use a 1/2 D6 + 1 stun multiplier for all killing attacks in my games. It has worked very well for several years.

[The Main Man]

Re: Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

 

*dusts off 6th ed discussion cap*

 

Since the average BODY of 3 Killing DC's is not significantly different from 3 Normal DC's, it generally follows that Killing Damage could be a simple +0 Power Advantage that means that the BODY damage rolled on the dice requires Resistant Defenses to reduce.

 

This would streamline the system in several important ways:

- Damage becomes completely consistent, since Killing Attacks are anomalous to the rest of the system in that they are the only instance of dice rolling straight up BODY and then a multiplier is applied - where else do we see anything like this?

 

- This being said, now all damage is rolled to have certain numbers represent certain levels of BODY (i.e. 1=0, 2-5=1, 6=2) for whatever purposes - no exceptions

 

- That means that teaching the system becomes much simpler in turn, since players only have to learn what rolling the damage dice means once

 

- Lastly, a whole column on the Hit Location Chart is eliminated as well as the STUN Lotto, and the system is thusly smoothly altered.

[SteveZilla]

Re: Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

 

I would be in favor of "Lethal" being a 5-10 pt Adder for attacks that do BODY & STUN instead of an Advantage.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

 

*dusts off 6th ed discussion cap*

 

Since the average BODY of 3 Killing DC's is not significantly different from 3 Normal DC's, it generally follows that Killing Damage could be a simple +0 Power Advantage that means that the BODY damage rolled on the dice requires Resistant Defenses to reduce.

 

This would streamline the system in several important ways:

- Damage becomes completely consistent, since Killing Attacks are anomalous to the rest of the system in that they are the only instance of dice rolling straight up BODY and then a multiplier is applied - where else do we see anything like this?

 

- This being said, now all damage is rolled to have certain numbers represent certain levels of BODY (i.e. 1=0, 2-5=1, 6=2) for whatever purposes - no exceptions

 

- That means that teaching the system becomes much simpler in turn, since players only have to learn what rolling the damage dice means once

 

- Lastly, a whole column on the Hit Location Chart is eliminated as well as the STUN Lotto, and the system is thusly smoothly altered.

 

I have the exact opposite view:

 

Killing Effect: Total on Dice = Body Damage Done

Dispel Effect: Total on Dice = Active Points Dispelled

Transform Effect: Total on Dice = Points of Body Transformed

Mind Control Effect: Total on Dice = EGO Score to compare

 

looks like KAs are normal effect rolls.

 

It's the counting of Body on Normal Attacks that's the weird step child. It's the only Mechanic that has us derive a value from "1 pip = 0; 2-5 pip = 1; 6 pip = 2" ... THAT'S the weird Body count. Not Killing Attacks.

 

Having to multiple against a number is a small thing, and a normal Mathematical formula. Counting pips to determine something is not.

 

If you're going to radically change the system:

 

change Energy Blast to Stun Attack (Effect Roll = Stun Damage) and Killing Attack remains the same name (Effect Roll = Body Damage).

 

But then you have the issue that Killing Someone can also knock them out. So, you could do this:

 

Stun Attack - Effect Roll = Stun Damage (5pts per 1D6)

Killing Attack - Effect Roll = Body & Stun Damage (15pts per 1D6; also applies against Resistant Defenses).

[prestidigitator]

Re: Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

 

What about Entangles and Str contests (e.g. for Grabs)? We do "Body counts" in more than one place too. I'm not horrified by the two methods of counting effect myself.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

 

Forgot about those.. Flashes too.

 

huh... you know, why not increase the cost of Flash and have Flesh Effect work off the total on the dice as well.

 

Either way, Killing Attacks are not a strange counting method.

[The Main Man]

Re: Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

 

Ya got me on Transforms, but I wouldn't lump Dispel nor any Mental power in with the damaging basis - to me at least, they are a completely different affair as their purposes are not about directly physically harming a target like Killing or Normal attacks.

 

I'll let Transform count because it's logic is based off of Killing dice.

 

I'd like to call this an agreement to disagree, but I would agree that Flash can easily be modified as described, but if it was then there would be no point to counting any "BODY" because one could just say that the number on the dice is the number of Segments that the target is flashed ...

 

Man, I'm steering this way off-topic.

 

Continue on.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

 

Forgot about those.. Flashes too.

 

huh... you know, why not increase the cost of Flash and have Flesh Effect work off the total on the dice as well.

 

Either way, Killing Attacks are not a strange counting method.

 

Methinks the gentleman doth protest too much - it is not how we count that is the problem, it is how we then multiply the result by another random factor: that is something none of the other mechanics do, and that is why the KA mechanic is freaky and wrong.

 

Even accepting what you say, then why don't we do leave KAs, and then say that normal attacks are a -1/4 or -1/2 limitation (normal defences reduce both stun and body)?

 

That is, of course, a rhetorical question, but I specifically mention that as I fear there may be those who do not see it as such.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

 

Ya got me on Transforms, but I wouldn't lump Dispel nor any Mental power in with the damaging basis - to me at least, they are a completely different affair as their purposes are not about directly physically harming a target like Killing or Normal attacks.

 

I'll let Transform count because it's logic is based off of Killing dice.

 

The logic here is spurious: KA and transform work superficially in similar ways but transform has a much less common and usually much less potent defence than KAs. Moreover a transformed opponent (foe to friend) can be much more useful than a dead one.

 

The 'logic' should never have been suggested. You can't make transform much more expensive without making it useless in combat at reasonable AP levels. You just have to accept it and trust GMs to not let players get carried away (and vice cersa, of course).

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

 

I have the exact opposite view:

 

Killing Effect: Total on Dice = Body Damage Done

Dispel Effect: Total on Dice = Active Points Dispelled

Transform Effect: Total on Dice = Points of Body Transformed

Mind Control Effect: Total on Dice = EGO Score to compare

 

looks like KAs are normal effect rolls.

 

As well, if we ditch "count the BOD as 0 - 2" used for normal attacks and Flash, how do Penetrating attacks work? Even penetrating KA's use this count the BOD method.