The Campaign Builder's Guild

Examining Rules: XP Issues

This is the last Skills post. Starting next post, I want to talk about combat. Because killing Evil and taking its stuff.

Time in Grade

Getting too specific about the relationship between game mechanical values and the real world is an exercise fraught with peril. Nonetheless, as a very rough guide, each XP point represents roughly 400-500* hours of efficacious training, studying, practice, or field experience.

(Less effective teaching, interruptions, flawed study materials, and many other factors can lengthen the time necessary. Natural aptitude can shorten it, sometimes significantly. Real life is complicated, and more's the pity.)

Roughly speaking, a Bachelor's degree (or equivalent) is equivalent to 7 Skill Points in the major, a Master's about 10 SP, and a Doctorate approximately 12 SP. These correspond to 7 XP, 10 XP, and 14 XP in the skill, respectively. (Assuming the character has an Attribute of 10.)

This is fewer XP than the "training hours" figure might lead you to expect. School is a lot of work, but it's unrealistic to expect that all those hours in college go directly to studying a major. Some go to your minor, some to other classes, and some to learning how to drink through a beer bong or scream with the crowd during football games. (Or matches. Depending on your location.)

[*In The Weeds Note: This is an approximate median value, which is lower than the mean. Most people take longer than this, but a few take less and very few much less. Training by time isn't a big part of an action-movie game, and is horribly inefficient compared to, you know, actually playing the game (see next subheading), so this is a really obscure and mostly moot point. You're welcome.]

XP Per Module

It's assumed that each module will earn the PC's 2-3 XP on average. Obviously, 2-3 XP per module represents a huge discount on the time necessary to improve a skill. There are three reasons for this:

1. Real world experience in dire circumstances. Frankly, training and practice are good for learning the basics, but not as valuable for actually mastering something. It's not enough for soldiers to practice on the gun range, sooner or later actual combat experience is necessary. (But practice on the range comes first. Learn the basics, then risk your life in a desperate struggle not to get shot.) You learn more in a minute of combat than you do in a month of target shooting.

2. Action Movie Heroes. This is an action movie system, and player characters are action movie heroes. They advance much faster than NPC's because they have lots to do, and need a lot of skill points just to survive.

3. It's a Game. This is, above all, a role playing game and no matter the real world theory behind the mechanics, it needs to be enjoyable. Too-slow advancement is frustrating. On the other hand, too-fast advancement is boring. Fortunately, 2-3 XP per module is a good compromise between "Are we ever gonna get there?" and "God Mode Cheat Code".

Before we start Combat proper, I have to drop back and discuss two quick rules, which are somewhat related: Partial Success and "Tens Are Wild" (the latter coming tomorrow).

Partial Success

The Success Level chart is all about consequences — what happens after the Skill Challenge. (If there are no consequences, nothing at stake, you shouldn't be rolling in the first place.)

• Failure means something bad happens.

• Success means something good happens. (Specifically, what you were trying to do.)

Partial Success is a little different. It means you Succeeded, but not as well as you'd hoped, or you got exactly what you wanted, but the cost of doing so was higher than usual. Exactly what this means is up to the GM to improvise, but as a general rule of thumb: either the cost was twice as much or the benefits were halved.

Here are some examples:

• Suppose you're bribing a bureaucrat. A Success means they'll stamp your papers for $500. A Partial Success means it costs $1000.

• You're breaking into a safe. Success means it takes an hour. Partial Success means it takes 2 hours.

• You're trying to persuade a farmer to sell you some scarce ammo (which he needs for home defense). Success means he sells you twelve cartridges. Partial Success means he's only willing to part with six.

• You're in a science fiction setting, and using nanopaste to fix an engine. Success means you only need to use 1 unit, Partial Success means it costs 2.

• You're a spellcaster, and Success on a Casting Challenge means the spell works and you take 1 Fatigue. Partial Success means you take 2 Fatigue. (Or the spell might have a lower range, lower duration, be less effective, and so forth.)

• You're calling on the divine for miracles, which costs you some of your Divine Favor. Success means you lose 2 points of Favor, but the miracle works. Partial Success means the miracle works, but you lose 4 Favor.

In general, Partial Success means half benefits or double cost. GM's option which, and if neither really applies, feel free to treat it as a Success. This comes into play with all Skill Challenges, but also Pushes (which I'll talk about later).

Yeah, that sucked. Let's try again. Punch-up time!

Partial Success

With a Success, you achieved your goal — jumped from one zeppelin to another, fast-talked a doorman into letting you in the building, identified the strange substance left at the scene of the crime. You did it. You succeeded.

But that's not always how it works out. Sometimes you barely succeed, by the skin of your teeth. Failure loomed large, and for a moment you were sure you failed, but at the last second you pulled it out. That's a Partial Success.

All Skill Challenges have goals: what the character wishes to accomplish. Make the jump. Get in the door. What is this crap? On a Success, they achieve those goals. On a Partial Success, they only partially achieve them.

Maybe the cost was higher than expected. Maybe the benefit of succeeding is less than it would be otherwise. Maybe there will be complications down the line. The key is: this was almost a disaster, and the character only barely succeeded.

Example: Stephen leaps from one zeppelin to the other in midair, aiming for a guy wire. On a Success, he grabs the wire, taking Fatigue from the exertion. Unfortunately, in this case he just misses it, and begins to slide down the side of the blimp. He grabs ahold of a protrusion, and pulls himself up. Because of this Partial Success, the GM rules he takes an extra point of Fatigue.

Example: Paul and Robert are trying to blow a safe. On a Failure, they scorch all the money in the safe, rendering it worthless. On a Success, they can crack it open and make off with the loot. On a Partial Success, they burn a large part of the money, but can still make off with a substantial payday.

Example: Chandra is part of a autoplas crew, and the weapon overheats, blowing the governor. The enemy is bearing down, so she makes a desperate attempt to repair the weapon. On a Success, the weapon would function normally. But with a Partial Success, it will blow out again in a minute or so.

Higher cost: money, units of whole blood, or time.

Reduced benefit: not as much information, lesser quality, grudging acquiescence.

Later complications: someone saw you, the judge wants revenge, you burnt out the motor.

These are not the only options, of course. Anything that fits the general theme, and would make the game more interesting, is perfectly acceptable. Just remember that the character did actually succeed, so they do get to benefit from the Partial Success.

Conclusion

This is what the rule should have been from the beginning. It's simple, easily understood, and (used properly) can increase the tension in a scene.

Thanks to all the commenters who kept pushing against the earlier versions, especially winston inabox and Dominick.

So, this is really almost the last post before I begin Combat. So lets talk Tens.

Tens Are Wild

Rolling one 10 (but not two) during a Challenge means either a lucky or unlucky event has taken place. If it's a Cold 10, something bad has happened, called a Mishap. If it's a Hot 10, something good has happened, a Fluke. (If both dice are 10's, neither occurs. It's a bonus of 0, like always.)

When a 10 happens, determine Success or Failure normally (using the standard rules for that type of Challenge), then stick on the event as a side effect.

Fluke: If the Hot dice comes up 10, a Fluke (as in "fluke of luck") has occurred. A Fluke is a small bit of good luck that happens as a side effect of the character's actions.

An enemy drops his weapon. While you're riffling through someone's mail, an apartment key falls out. You miss the dog, but it's startled and runs off anyway.

Flukes are small bits of luck that make a character's life easier for a little while. They shouldn't short circuit major parts of an adventure (unless it'd be a good idea, just this once) but they should be noticeable.

Mishap: If the Cold dice comes up 10, the character suffers a Mishap, a small piece of bad luck that happens as a side effect of their action. A key piece of equipment is dropped (or broken), the character trips and falls, their weapon jams, etc.

You jumped to the moving semi, but dropped your gun. You shot the mook, but set fire to the pool of oil. You knifed the sentry, but woke up the guard dog.

Mishaps are not meant to be crippling occurrences, rather they are minor events that will make the character's life a little more difficult. Characters should be able to recover from Mishaps with a little effort. (That said, if something a little more severe is apt and interesting, go for it.)

Campaign specific uses: Some specific settings and campaigns use Mishaps or Flukes to invoke certain effects. In Dead Man's Land, a Mishap can be a sign that the character's incipient zombieism has suddenly surged, causing them difficulties.

Each setting will include its own rules for dealing with such occurrences. In many cases, they will be more severe or beneficial than default Flukes and Mishaps. (And yes, in Storm Knights, a Mishap can mean you've disconnected.)

And, as always, if the best outcome for the game would be to ignore the rule just this once, feel free to do so.

Behind The Scenes

So, how does the rule work and why does it work that way? One quick caveat: this is another case where the explanation can make things appear more complex than they are.

Generating a bonus involves rolling two 10-sided dice, and using the smaller (but ignoring the larger). If the smaller is Hot, you add it to your skill, if it's Cold you subtract. When you roll doubles, you add 0.

So when you roll a single 10, you always use the other die (as that single 10 is always the largest die). As a result, a Hot 10 means your bonus will be -1 to -9, a Cold 10 means it's +1 to +9.

This rule piggybacks off that fact. A Hot 10 gives you something good, when your bonus is going to be negative, and a Cold 10 gives you something bad, when the bonus would be positive.

This rule makes the game more interesting and enjoyable, but also a bit more cinematic. You've all seen the scene: the hero shoots a bad guy, and he slumps to the ground, pulling down a lever as he dies. Suddenly machinery whirs to life around. Things just got more dangerous. That's a Mishap: the hero Succeeded, but a minor bit of bad luck also happened.

Flukes are the same thing, but in a good way. You shoot the bad guy, but he drops a grenade that rolls underneath their car and detonates it. A Fluke of luck.

If you watch movies, these happen all the time. (French farces are built almost solely out of Flukes and Mishaps, piled atop each other pell-mell.) One scene in Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade illustrates both: the fight on the tank. The driver is shot, and in dying steers the tank in a bad direction. Mishap. Indy somehow shoots three enemies, instead of one. Fluke.

This mechanic means you can Fail, and still have something good happen. It means you can Succeed and have something go wrong. Both can occur in the real world and action movies, so both can occur in the game.

(For those lusting after hard core math, Flukes happen about 9% of the time and so do Mishaps.)

I've got some GM advice, which I'll post tomorrow.

Combat Basics

Down to brass tacks. I want the system to be as simple and easy to use as possible. That starts with the core mechanic of the game.

• Roll the dice, get a bonus.
• Add that to the Skill Rating.
• Compare the Skill total to the Challenge Rating to get Success Levels.

This is the core mechanic: everything else is built off it. As long as you can count by threes, you can play the game. Simple, easy to understand, easy to do.

And it makes sense. Skill Rating, sometimes you do better (+ bonus), sometimes you do worse (- bonus). Success Levels to measure that.

Ideally, combat should be just as simple, just as clear, just as straightforward. I'll start with attacks.

Attack and Damage

When a person swings a sword and hits someone, the damage they do is caused by where they hit the target, the amount of force they applied, the characteristics of the blade, the characteristics of any protection the target was wearing, and many other factors.

No one of these is clearly and simply "To Hit", nor is any one clearly and simply "Damage". It's just an attack. The hitting and dealing damage occur at the same time, for the same reasons. If you did well on the attack, you hurt the target more. If you did poorly, you didn't.

So rather than splitting these two up, as is traditional, I'm keeping them together:

Skill + Damage = Attack Rating

And, on the other side, the same thing:

Skill + Defense = Defense Rating

The mechanic works exactly like you'd expect: Roll the dice, get a bonus. Add that to the Attack Rating. Compare the Attack total to the Defense Rating to get Success Levels, which indicate Damage.

Damage
0 SL = 1 Fatigue
1 SL = 1 Wound + 1 Fatigue
+1 SL = +1 Wound

And there it is. Simple, direct, obvious. An attack is just an Attack. And it causes Damage.

I'll talk about other elements of the Combat system next post.

The purpose of these little posts is to get some feedback and, having gotten some, to change such things as needs be changed.

I posted. I got feedback (thanks, Phil and harermuir) and I've changed some things.

All mechanics induce oddities, even those which work. After some discussion, I've been convinced that the first combat mechanic induces oddities which most players won't accept, for good reasons. So, Take II.

This is the mechanics for a Combat Challenge. It's a little different from a Skill Challenge, but uses the same Skill Ratings, the same dice rolls, the same SL chart, etc.

Combat Challenges use a traditional To-hit and Damage split: Skill vs. Skill on Attack, modified Damage vs modified Toughness on Damage. It's a little more involved, but that's the basic idea and it's pretty straightforward.

To-Hit

For "to-hit", the attacker's Attack Rating (plus a rolled bonus) is compared to the defender's Defense Rating (no roll, unless they're expending an action on defense). A simple Success (0 SL) is all it takes to hit the target.

That's pretty simple. Attack 12, Defense 10. Quick — do they hit or not? Of course they hit, because 12 is > 10. It's easy to tell.

Attack Rating is your Skill in the appropriate weapon: Hand-to-Hand for fists, clubs, swords, etc. Firearms for pistols, rifles, shotguns, etc. Missile Weapons for crossbows and bows.

Defense Rating is your Skill in the appropriate defensive skill: Hand-To-Hand against fists, clubs, etc. Dodge against guns, bows, crossbows, etc.

Damage

Damage is more involved. It involves the Effective Damage (plus that same rolled bonus) being compared to the Effective Toughness of the target. The result is read as Damage: 1 Wound for each SL, plus 1 Fatigue. (So 0 SL does 0 Wounds and 1 Fatigue.)

Effective Damage is the Damage of the weapon, plus your Attack skill.

Effective Toughness is your Endurance, plus any Armor worn, plus your Defensive skill.

(I could, at this point, regale you with 23 years of history and arguments behind the Effective Toughness and Effective Damage. I won't, but know there's a good reason: if I didn't add the Skill to Damage and Toughness, high Skill characters would be missed a lot. But when they got hit, they'd always, always, always take a lot of damage, even from wimpy little weapons. The math makes it inevitable. This way, a low Skilled attacker will do low amounts of damage, even if they somehow manage to hit. A high Skilled attacker, the opposite. It works.)

Analysis

This mechanic entails one roll. One simple (and very quick) comparison for "to-hit", and a simple SL mechanic for Damage.

Is this more complex than the first post? Clearly, yes. But it avoids the oddities that method induced.

Last question is this: "What about the quality of the attack? Hitting better should do more damage, and all that?" Good question. The answer is this: it's baked into the second half, determining Damage. Effective Damage vs. Effective Toughness includes it. It's not obvious, but it's in there.

I may figure out some way to patch the earlier method. Until I do (if I do), I'm going to assume this one.

With this out of the way, I should be able to continue with the Combat posts fairly soon.

Attacks

Looking back on yesterday's post, I may have made it seem more complicated than it is. This is the most important combat mechanic, so I want it to be as clear as possible before I go on.

Let's start with the simplest aspect: "to-hit".

When you attack, you use a combat skill: Firearms, to shoot guns. Makes perfect sense.

The defender has his own skill. In the case of Firearms, it's called Dodge.

To attack, you roll the dice, get a bonus, and add it to the character's attack Skill. If it equals or beats the defense Skill, you hit.

Simple. Clear. Straightforward.

Damage is straightforward as well. All weapons have a Damage Rating (called "Damage" or DR). A small pistol might do 16, a large one 18, an assault rifle 22.

Here's the thing about skill: the more you know about using a weapon, the more deadly you become with that weapon. A guy who's never handled a knife might be able to score a hit, but he'll never be as lethal with it as a trained expert.

So we add the attack Skill to Damage. The higher your Skill, the more Damage you do. (I called this "Effective Damage". I may use a different term in the finished writeup.)

The converse is also true: the more you know about defending yourself, the less damage you take (because you block better, or parry better, and so forth). So we add the defense Skill to Toughness.

All objects have an innate Toughness. For people, their Toughness is their Endurance. To this, we add their Skill. (And if they wear armor, this gives a bonus as well.) This is the character's Effective Toughness.

So far, so good. Everything makes sense.

This is how the above is used:

Roll a dice, get a bonus. Add to attack Skill. See if you hit (equal to or higher than defense Skill).

Add that same bonus to Effective Damage. Compare to Effective Toughness to determine how much Damage they took.

That's how simple it is.

Two attacking values: Skill and Effective Damage. Two defensive values: Skill and Effective Toughness.

Compare Skills to see if hit, compare Effective Damage to Effective Toughness to calculate Damage taken.

That's it. One roll, one bonus, one mechanic.

I realize I may have made it seem more complicated than it is. My apologies for that. It really isn't complicated at all.

So, combat hit a hard speedbump, and I had to do some deep thinking and conferring with the playtesters. That being completed, I'm almost ready to start the combat posts all over again. Again.

But first, some news:

Dan Davenport (http://gmshoe.blogspot.com) has unexpectedly and graciously invited me to participate in his interview series in the RPG.net IRC channel, discussing "Storm Knights" (my Torg revamp) and the ∞ Infinity Gaming System.

I'll be joining the rough-and-ready chat crowd on:

Thursday, 27 February 2014 at 7 PM – 9 PM Central Time

at http://tinyurl.com/rpgnetchat

So drop in and watch me get torn to pieces by people who have no idea who I am or why I'm there. It'll be fun!

If you can't make it, he saves the chat transcripts on his blog at:

http://gmshoe.blogspot.com

P.S.: The combat posts will begin again real soon now.

What is an "Action Movie RPG"?

I've described this system as "my own little action-movie RPG". Just yesterday, the question came up: What do I mean by that? Since this goes to the heart of what I intend the system to be, I thought I'd give a good answer.

1. It's an RPG. It's not a storygame, not a larp, not a wargame. You sit around the table, rolling dice, joking with each other. The players play characters, the GM runs everything else. If you're good and decent people, there's soda, pizza, and chips involved at some point.

Everything else is subordinate to this. If something ruins the RPG-ness of it, or ruins the play of the game, it's out.

2. It's an action movie game. The mechanics of the game are meant to allow for, and encourage, the feel and events of action movies: fast-paced scenes, furious combats, confrontations and duels, sardonic quips, and heroism.

So how do I do that?

Fast-paced action depends on mechanics that are as simple as they can be, keeping in mind other considerations. Combat is 1 roll, 1 stat for each combatant, and one simple mechanic for damage (said mechanic being used everywhere else). The other mechanics are equally straightforward.

Simple, clear, direct. That's my motto.

Furious combats are implemented by giving players something to fight for every single round. Combat isn't just about killing the enemy, it's a fight to gain or keep the Initiative. (I'll explain this in a bit.)

Confrontations and duels depend on the combat and social rules, so I've made sure that the same rules that work for parties also work for individuals.

Sardonic quips? Combat Interaction skills. Taunt, Intimidate, Overbear, and so on. These provide benefits in combat, and can be quite useful.

Heroism? Well, other than the bit in the XP rules, that's pretty much up to the players and GM. Everyone has a different definition of heroism — some like or prefer anti-heroes, others don't — so I leave that to them. A smidgen of subtle nudging here and there, but nothing overbearing.

Then I made the rules amenable to description, so GM's can bring the world to life. Plus a mechanic to encourage player descriptions of character actions. This doesn't directly implement any of the action-movie goals, but it does make the game world come alive a little bit more.

The above goals and ideas may not be obvious to people reading these posts, but I do have a clear concept of what I want the game to be. Everything in the game is built to support that.

(With that out of the way, I'm gearing up to start Combat again. Hopefully tomorrow.)

Part 1, Again. Again.
Combat, pt. 1

Since the last post, I've had some discussions with The List and my playtesters, run some numbers in Numbers, prototyped weapon damage and Wound variants, and put together at least 5 different versions of the central combat mechanic. The following rule (which will seem very familiar) is the end result of all that.

We'll start with skills. Everything, including combat, is based around skills.

Your Firearms skill is used for guns and energy weapons, your Melee skill is used for punching and swords, your Missile Weapons skill is used for bows and crossbows. Like all skills, you have Skill Points (reflecting your training and experience) and a bonus from an Attribute.

Example: 7 Skill Points +3 bonus = 10 Skill Rating.

Then there are defensive skills, like Dodge and Melee. (Melee both attacks and defends.) Skill Ratings for these are calculated exactly the same way.

Weapons have a Damage Rating (calculated in different ways for different weapons). For an assault rifle, this is a flat value: an AK-47 does Damage 18.

Last, armor. All characters and objects have a Toughness, which measures their resistance to damage. For people, this is their Endurance attribute, plus a modifier for the armor worn, if any: a leather jacker provides +2, a Kevlar vest +5.

Example: Endurance 10, +0 (no armor) = Toughness 10.

So how do we do combat? The attacker picks a weapon, say the AK-47. They take their Firearms Skill and add it to their Damage Rating. That's their Attack Rating.

The defender takes their defense Skill (in this case, Dodge) and adds it to their Toughness. That's their Defense Rating.

Like all mechanics in this system, you roll a bonus and add it to the Attack. Compare that to the Defense, and calculate Success Levels (1 SL for every 3 Points). Each Success Level is 1 Wound, plus 1 Stun for 0 SL.

Let's run the numbers, using the examples above:

Attack Rating: Firearms Skill 10 + AK-47 Damage 18 = Attack 28

Defense Rating: Dodge Skill 10 + Toughness 10 = Defense 20

The Attack: Roll +0. Attack 28 - Defense 20 = result 8. This is 2 Success Levels, or 2 Wounds + 1 Stun.

That's it. 1 game value for attacker and defender, 1 roll, period, 1 simple mechanic for damage (the same that's used everywhere else). There is no fundamental difference between combat and any other skill check. If you can count by threes, you can play the game.

Wait! I Got A Question!
Combat, pt. 2

"You add your Damage Rating to your Skill to Attack. Doesn't this mean a really big Damage Rating helps people hit more often?"

It's a really good question, with a really simple answer that operates in two dimensions, the theoretical and the practical: No. No, it doesn't.

Theoretical: No, because you're not hitting more often, you're doing better on an attack.

When you thrust with a sword, loose an arrow, or squeeze the trigger of a sniper rifle, there's no "to-hit" or "damage".  There's just the attack.

You do well, you do more damage. You screw the pooch, you don't. Either way, there's just the attack.

And more powerful weapons make for more effective attacks. By definition.

There are four elements in each Combat Challenge: weapon Damage, attacker Skill, Toughness, and defender Skill. The role of each must be comparable to the rest: no one element can predominate. To see if weapon Damage does, I ran the numbers.

I took all sorts of characters, from the most pathetic specimens of humanity imaginable to experienced PC's, and gave them all sorts of weapons, from large caliber assault rifles to plasma weapons designed to burn holes in the side of tanks. I then faced the characters off against each other, and recorded the results.

At every level, bigger guns meant more damage. (Obviously.) But the damage was never disproportionate to the (very favorable) shooting conditions: the target was 4 meters (12 feet) away, in the open, standing still, not wearing any armor. (This maximized the damage done, to make the rule look as bad as possible.)

Even in such overwhelmingly favorable conditions, against an assault rifle, wholly incompetent attackers didn't enjoy walk-away victories. They killed equally statted people, but average people were only hurt, not killed (assuming a roll of 0). As for the experienced characters... sometimes not even that.

In other words, the outcomes made sense. Which is fairly high praise for a game mechanic.

In other, other words, no — a high damage weapon doesn't make bumbling jackasses into supa ninjas. It does, however, allow them to do better on an attack.

Now, playtesting is very different from number crunching. And it can reveal flaws that have previously gone overlooked.

If playtesting indicates weapon Damage is still too high, I've already prototyped two different solutions. So I'm not real worried about this.

On the other hand, it is a very good question and exactly the sort of thing I need to pay attention to. Thanks to the two commenters who brought it up: Dominick Reisland (back in 2012, I believe) and Phil Dack.

I'll start covering the effects of damage — Wounds and Shock — tomorrow.

[Sorry about the posting gap. I've been writing up material for Storm Knights that's being posted in a couple of places. I hope to get back to a regular schedule soon. Also, if you're interested in the Q&A session about ∞ Infinity and Storm Knights, check it out here: http://gmshoe.wordpress.com/2014/02/28/qa-jasyn-jones-infinity-gaming-system/.]

Pixie Problems?
Combat, pt. 3

Over on theRPGSite, "Warp9" asked a good question about very tiny and very fast targets, like pixies. The suggestion is that these tiny, fast targets should be difficult to hit, but that characters wielding high DV weapons would be able to hit them and kill them quite easily.

The proposition: A character with a high defensive Skill but a low Toughness will be treated unfairly under the rules.

To test this proposition, I ran the numbers with a high Skilled but low Toughness character. To make my rule look as bad as possible, I gave the test character a ridiculously high Skill (without resorting to actual superhero stats). With a superhuman Dexterity of 21 (Dex bonus +7) and 10 Skill Points in Dodge, the pixie has a Skill Rating of 17. He has an Endurance of 1 and wears no armor, making his Toughness a 1.

The assumed conditions were the same as the earlier tests: the target was 4 meters (12 feet) away, in the open. (This maximized the damage done, to make the rule look as bad as possible. And, as with the other test, we're assuming a roll of 0.)

I then shot at the pixie with the other sample characters, from the most pathetic specimens of humanity imaginable to experienced PC's, who each used three different weapons, ranging from a large caliber assault rifle (an AK-47), to a highly lethal laser pistol, and even a plasma rifle designed to burn holes in the side of tanks.

So, how did the rule fare?

The least skilled characters did nothing with any weapon less powerful than the AK. Even with the AK, they only barely succeeded, getting 0 SR (meaning they only did Shock damage). Even if we assumed a roll of +9, the best possible attack, they still couldn't have killed the pixie. Upgrading to the laser pistol did more damage, obviously, but it took the insane damage of a plasma rifle for them to kill the pixie outright.

The other characters fared better, as all were better shots, but none could 1-shot the pixie with the AK except the AK-wielding pixie I threw into the mix. And there, obviously it was the skill of that character which made the difference.

With the laser pistol, only the two most experienced characters got 1-shot kills, and it wasn't until the attackers broke out their plasma rifles, the highest damage non-heavy weapon in the game (so far), that 1-shots became the norm.

This rule does not, and will never, exactly duplicate the results of a traditional "to-hit, then damage" mechanic. And a more deadly weapon (higher Damage) will make for a more potent Attack.

So, yes, an increased Damage will, to a certain extent, substitute for Skill. This is inevitable. But is it a problem?

IMHO, it would only be a problem if a high Damage weapon was so significant that it broke the game. To test for this, I've ran the numbers for various defenders and attackers, and the most incompetent human character possible — 0 Skill Points, +1 Attribute bonus — cannot reach godhood even with a DR 30 weapon. He's dangerous, but not to an unreasonable or unbalanced extent.

Even when shooting at a pixie.

In other words, while the results don't exactly duplicate a traditional split, the mechanic didn't break down even in this extreme situation. (I even ran the numbers with a ninja pixie, Skill 22 or "one of the best in the world", and a super-pixie, Skill 30 or "the best in all history". Even with that extreme a character, the rule didn't break.) I'm not saying it's perfect, adjustments may yet need to be done, but so far it appears solid.

Warp9's question is a good one: it could very be a problem in this kind of system if the Damage Ratings were too high. I'm not discounting that.

All I'm saying is that, so far, with the weapon values I'm currently using, it doesn't seem to be. (Especially once the Skill Penalty rules — the subject of the next post — come into play.)

Skill Penalties
Combat, pt. 4

In general, penalties represent anything that makes a Challenge harder to accomplish. If you're trying to drive along a road, and it's icy, a penalty applies. The penalty either reduces your Skill total or it increases the Challenge Rating. The effect is the same.

(One of the nice aspects of the core mechanic is that it doesn't matter which: add to CR, subtract from the Skill, it's all the same. Bonuses are equally flexible: +3 Skill and -3 CR are both identical in effect. Stack 'em up wherever it's easier or makes the most sense.)

Skill Penalties are a specific type of penalty that applies to Combat Challenges only (and hence, only affects attackers). Skill Penalties actually reduce the effective Skill of the Attacker. All Skill Penalties stack, no matter their cause.

If an Attacker's effective Skill is reduced to 0 (or less), they can no longer pick their targets. More, they are Stymied.

Example: Billy Bumbles, Skill 1, is shooting an AK at Medium range. Because Medium range applies a Skill Penalty of -3, his Skill is reduced to -2 (meaning he is Stymied and can no longer choose whom to shoot at). If he had a Skill of 4, he'd still suffer a penalty, but not the other effects.

Picking Targets: If Skill Penalties reduce your effective Skill to 0, you can no longer pick your targets. This is a fancy way of saying that you can't choose a specific enemy to attack. You can attack an area (rules for this later) but not a specific target within that area. You might still get lucky and hit a target (anyone entering the chosen space could be hit), but you can't choose a specific target to attack.

Example: Billy is shooting at a target behind a car. The car provides very little cover — bonus to the defender's Toughness — but it does provide concealment. Because the penalty for concealment reduces his effective Skill to -4 (in this case), Billy can't shoot directly at the person. Instead he has to hose down the car, hoping to catch them behind it.

Stymie: When you are Stymied, you only roll a Cold die for your bonus (treating "0" as 0). This gives you a bonus of 0 to -9.

[Note: There is an equal and opposite mechanic to the Stymie, the Up. When you're Up, you roll a Hot die for your bonus, treating a "0" as 0. Up's apply to Reactive Defenses.]

Between the Stymie and being unable to pick targets, Skill Penalties can make an Attacker's life very difficult. Fortunately, they're rare. As of right now, there are only three categories of Skill Penalties: distractions, impairments, and situational penalties.

Distractions: Most of the time, Combat Interaction skills (Overbear, Intimidate, Trick, etc.) cause a distraction, represented by a -2 Skill Penalty per Success Rating. This means that not only does the victim do worse on attacks, and have a lower defense, they can be Stymied if their Skill dips low enough. Characters who are distracted and disoriented can't pick their targets, and aren't very effective combatants.

Impairments: Both Shock damage and Wounds cause characters to become Impaired (as does non-lethal Attacks and being drunk, among other things). The Impaired condition imposes a -3 Skill Penalty. Multiple Impaired conditions stack.

Situational Penalties: Range modifiers impose Skill Penalties, as does weapon accuracy, concealment, firing blind, and auto fire. Unusually fast or small targets (relative to the attacker) also apply a Skill Penalty. (Other situational penalties may be added, as needed.)

There are many possible penalties, but only these three categories are Skill Penalties. Only they reduce a character's effective Skill.

The converse of the Skill Penalty is the Skill Bonus (provided by, for example, a laser sight). A Skill Bonus provides a bonus to the Attack Challenge, by raising the effective Skill of the attacker. This can counteract Skill Penalties which might be in effect.

Analysis

After running the numbers on various attackers and defenders, fighting with various high-damage weapons, the combat mechanic works well for most combatants. A few cases, like pixies, aren't perfectly addressed by the rule. Fortunately, no mechanic exists in a vacuum, and Skill Penalties and Skill Bonuses allow it to address a much wider range of situations.

Wounds
Combat, pt. 5

Lethal attacks are very straightforward: each attack does 1 Wound per Success Rating, plus 1 point of Shock for any level of Success.

SR's = Damage
Failure = You did no damage.
0 SR = 1 Shock (2 if Encumbered)
1 SR = +1 Wound
2 SR = +2 Wounds
3 SR = +3 Wounds
+1 SR = +1 Wounds

Characters who are encumbered, due to heavy armor or excessive weight, take an additional point of Shock.

Wounds

Wounds are an abstract representation of physical damage done to a character, the accumulation of which can kill them.

Wounds accumulate with each successful attack. A character with 1 Wound who takes 2 Wounds now has 3 Wounds.

Taking Wounds causes impediments and eventually death.

Wounds = Effect
1 Wound = None
2 Wounds = Impaired
3 Wounds = Dying
4 Wounds = Dead

Impaired: Characters who take 2+ Wounds (cumulatively or in one attack) receive the Impaired Condition. This gives them a -3 Skill Penalty to all Challenges. (Skill Penalties from multiple Impaired conditions stack.)

Dying: Characters with 3 Wounds begin Dying: they will expire in a number of rounds equal to their Endurance. They are also considered Incapacitated (can only take Simple Actions, and will go Unconscious if they receive another Incapacitated).

Dead: A character with 4 Wounds is Dead. Immediate and extraordinary medical (or other) intervention might be able to save their lives, but the chances are dim. (A character with 5 Wounds is just dead. Period.)

Characters (and objects) can take Wounds in excess of 4. 6 Wounds represents dismemberment and 8 vaporization.

I'll talk about Shock damage next post. (Unless, well, you know.)

(A quick tangent, to explain some important stuff.)

It's Easy To Hit
pt. 1

I want you to do an experiment for me. Set up a man-sized target. It can be a person, a cardboard cutout, or whatever, so long as it's 6 feet tall or so (2m for our non-American readers).

Then stand 12 feet (4m) away from it and make a pistol with your fingers. (You know, like you did as a kid.) Now point at the target. Imagine pulling the trigger on a pistol.

How easy would it be to hit that target?

According to knowledgeable people I consulted, even those with no experience shooting pistols would be able to hit that target at that distance, 6 times out of 6. It's a dead easy shot.

Using the CR scale of ∞ Infinity, that's CR 0, Routine. Most people never even have to roll, we just take it as read that they'd hit it.

Unless some kind of adverse circumstances apply — darkness, fear, the target moving — it's really easy to shoot a man-sized target at that range. (I'll talk about these circumstances in a bit.)

Punching someone who's standing next to you? Also pretty easy.

There's news footage of people standing on the street, minding their own business, when an assailant runs up, smacks them across the back of the head, and runs off. The person drops to the ground, and later dies.

It's much easier to shoot or smack people — and kill them — than is generally assumed, at least so far as the mechanics are concerned.

I'll talk more about the mechanics next post.