|
Post by maxstone on Jun 9, 2014 7:35:27 GMT -8
First of all, many thanks for the feedback guys! Right. I'd like to give players the chance to focus on evasion, damage reduction or a balanced mix of both things. Yes, the opposed roll mechanic should be applied for every attack. As a GM one should determine how much DR a creature could have. The basic idea is to give a +15 DV to everyone who's not wearing armor ( you can look it up in the attached file). It symbolizes the ease of movement you have when not carrying burdens. SV starting value needs play testing to be tuned but I would say that 50 is fine. I'd personally go with 40 because I like low level players to have a really hard time! As told before, Gm should decide. If you want a quick way to determine it, calculate a default percentage off the total DV, as Providence suggested for humanoid armors. This was one of the first things to decideif the system worked for humans I planned 95% to be the top value SV and DV can have, reserving the remaining % for "always miss" and "fumble" (100). My other idea was to put no limit to SV and DV and to subtract percentile points over 100 of the higher from the lower, whenever opposed rolls are made . I hope this is written in an understandable way, if it isn't, here's an example. SV 120 opposed to DV 60 ->>>>becomes->>>>> SV 100 opposed to DV 40 I'll have to test both methods. Totally agree with you !
|
|
|
Post by maxstone on Jun 9, 2014 7:44:42 GMT -8
To Providence 13
yep, makes totally sense. Also makes the whole thing much more interesting. I'm going to add DR values right now!
|
|
|
Post by providence13 on Jun 9, 2014 8:00:06 GMT -8
Looking at the table on pg 223, the DV for Armored Car and Light Tank were the first things I noticed. The first has a DV of -50. That means an Uzi can eventually cause damage..? I love the simple ME system. I don't like this aspect of the rules. This got me thinking about the rest of armors, DV, SV and the mechanics of the game. You've made something cool. I'm just trying to work it into my games.
Even with a 20% DR rule, it only stops the first 10 pts/hit. I'm going to change it to "-100DV and it can't be crit by small arms fire". Now you need over 20 pts each shot to even cause damage. If you factor in WE skill, my system sort of falls apart. Unless skill damage bonus doesn't affect armored cars..
Give a Light Tank -200DV and you would need 40 pts to even damage it. This makes a rocket launcher about right.
|
|
|
Post by maxstone on Jun 9, 2014 10:31:16 GMT -8
Looking at page 223 I'd simply take a DR EQUAL to the basic DV.
some examples:
Armored car : DV-30 DR 30 light tank : DV-40 DR 40 gunboat : DV-20 DR 20
and so on.
I would feel much safer now in an armored car! Occupants could benefit of DR too. Would this work in your game Prov?
|
|
|
Post by rexbannon on Jun 11, 2014 5:26:07 GMT -8
This is a great topic and way over do! DR rules would add much more surviability to characters in the game and make some opponents more challenging. But what about Armor Degradation? How many Hits can armor take before it no longer provides the DR bonus? I think it would be equal to the DV as maxstone pointed out. Armored Car DV-30 DR 30 after the armored car takes 30 points of damage the DR no longer applies and all hits will automatically do damage, due to holes or structural damage points. Does that sound about right?
|
|
|
Post by maxstone on Jun 11, 2014 6:10:02 GMT -8
Hi Rexbannon! That could work! If an armored car takes 30 points of damage that make it through the DV AND DR it means either it has been pierced several times or that it has been hit by a rocket or something similar. At that point, if it could still run, it would be in pretty bad shape and the armor would destroyed. But what about the gunboat ? 20 DR is not that hard to overcome
|
|
|
Post by providence13 on Jun 11, 2014 8:29:00 GMT -8
Hi Rexbannon! That could work! If an armored car takes 30 points of damage that make it through the DV AND DR it means either it has been pierced several times or that it has been hit by a rocket or something similar. At that point, if it could still run, it would be in pretty bad shape and the armor would destroyed. But what about the gunboat ? 20 DR is not that hard to overcome I read it as the 20 DV is to hit (and damage) the boat. It's a big boat and not that hard to hit. They usually have a wooden frame (speedboat) with some metal tacked on here and there. The occupants are protected by -30. That's the same as "behind wooden construction", pg 105. I could see that.
|
|
|
Post by providence13 on Jun 11, 2014 9:03:56 GMT -8
This is a great topic and way over do! DR rules would add much more surviability to characters in the game and make some opponents more challenging. But what about Armor Degradation? How many Hits can armor take before it no longer provides the DR bonus? I think it would be equal to the DV as maxstone pointed out. Armored Car DV-30 DR 30 after the armored car takes 30 points of damage the DR no longer applies and all hits will automatically do damage, due to holes or structural damage points. Does that sound about right? When considering DR, I'm looking for a rule that applies to all armors, if possible. (Unless we're talking about ablative/reactive armors that appear to be worn down with each hit. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reactive_armor ) From a rules standpoint, I don't think that scrap relic (-20DV) should be able to take 20 penetrating hits. You could see through it after taking half as many. I could see 50% as a general, easy to remember rule across the board. You'd sacrifice a little protection here and give a bit there, but it's easy to figure out. Just for argument, we go with Maxstone's 100% rule. Example: Chainmail Vest (-7DV). -7 modifies the attacker SV which gives a SR (strike rating ) and then the dice are rolled. If the attacker hits, the defender ignores the first 7 pts of damage. All the damage above 7 go straight to the defender's END. The armor now has a hole/gap/opening/weakness. With the "armor's DV = # of DR attacks rule", a chain vest could defend 6 more hits before being worthless as armor. "OK, I think. That's not too crazy. I feel this rule might work.." Let's try it with better grades of armor. Tactical Armor (-30DV/DR): -30 DV modifies the attacker SV which gives a SR and then the dice are rolled. If the attacker hits, the defender ignores the first 30 (!) pts of damage and the armor can take 30 (!) penetrating hits before it's useless. "That is a bit too powerful for my game" says me. Your game may vary.
|
|
|
Post by providence13 on Jun 11, 2014 9:23:05 GMT -8
My basis for keeping DR low is the average END Trait established in RAW. Average END is 25. I will say that you have to be above average for any kind of military service, but I'm considering the average guy/gal. Scrap Relic ain't cheap, but I use it for my examples 'cause -20DV is a good average for all the armors in the book. If the avg END is 25 and we say Scrap' can withstand 20 hits that would be near lethal, then that's some damn fine protection. For me (a civilian), wearable armor is designed to minimize some damage. It shouldn't protect vs lethal blows unless it is far future tech. Those armors exist in ME, but aren't made from piecemeal recovered leftovers. Ballistic vests have indeed saved lives in real life. In ME should they be able to save your life 20 times over? This is why I think a lower % of DV should be DR and the number of times it can provide this protection should be lower than DV. Sorry for so many multiple posts, but I am truly working on brevity!
|
|
|
Post by maxstone on Jun 11, 2014 15:23:02 GMT -8
This is a great topic and way over do! DR rules would add much more surviability to characters in the game and make some opponents more challenging. But what about Armor Degradation? How many Hits can armor take before it no longer provides the DR bonus? I think it would be equal to the DV as maxstone pointed out. Armored Car DV-30 DR 30 after the armored car takes 30 points of damage the DR no longer applies and all hits will automatically do damage, due to holes or structural damage points. Does that sound about right? When considering DR, I'm looking for a rule that applies to all armors, if possible. (Unless we're talking about ablative/reactive armors that appear to be worn down with each hit. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reactive_armor ) From a rules standpoint, I don't think that scrap relic (-20DV) should be able to take 20 penetrating hits. You could see through it after taking half as many. I could see 50% as a general, easy to remember rule across the board. You'd sacrifice a little protection here and give a bit there, but it's easy to figure out. Just for argument, we go with Maxstone's 100% rule. Example: Chainmail Vest (-7DV). -7 modifies the attacker SV which gives a SR (strike rating ) and then the dice are rolled. If the attacker hits, the defender ignores the first 7 pts of damage. All the damage above 7 go straight to the defender's END. The armor now has a hole/gap/opening/weakness. With the "armor's DV = # of DR attacks rule", a chain vest could defend 6 more hits before being worthless as armor. "OK, I think. That's not too crazy. I feel this rule might work.." Let's try it with better grades of armor. Tactical Armor (-30DV/DR): -30 DV modifies the attacker SV which gives a SR and then the dice are rolled. If the attacker hits, the defender ignores the first 30 (!) pts of damage and the armor can take 30 (!) penetrating hits before it's useless. "That is a bit too powerful for my game" says me. Your game may vary. I meant to apply the 100% rule for vehicles only, I believe that could work with some little tweak here and there,but not for body armors. Your examples prove it would be quite overpowered. Sorry if I didn't explain myself right guys.
|
|
|
Post by providence13 on Jun 11, 2014 17:00:27 GMT -8
Maybe bullet proof, "armored" vehicles could only take 1/2 damage vs ballistics. There are other armors in the book designed vs specific damaging types. Some (but not all) of the acid, fire, bomb, etc armors/mutations only take 1/2 damage.
Just a thought.
|
|
|
Post by providence13 on Jun 11, 2014 17:35:23 GMT -8
I do like the idea of random hit roll for body parts but I would make a bit of a change myself as follows:
1: Head
2: Right Arm 3: Left Arm 4-8: Torso 9: Right Leg 10: Left Leg
(I like the idea of possibly hitting equipment but for most people causing damage is more desirable than damaging someone's sword. If you want a possibility of damaging equipment *as well* as causing damage you can rule that in addition to the damage there is a chance that equipment <other than armor> is also struck. Since it only happened on a 1 in 10 you could just have a flat 10% chance or tweak it up a bit) This is a dandy hit location table and reminds me of tables used in a lot of old games. The best part, is "4-8: Torso". This is the largest area/center of mass and is where most people will be shooting even if they aren't aiming. The table in the book is detailed to a point, but only has a 5% chance to hit center mass and the same chance for everything else. Also, having "buttocks" on the list is specific, but might not make sense in a 3 sec rnd when facing disagrees.
|
|
|
Post by ecocola on Jun 11, 2014 20:45:55 GMT -8
One of my players tried to justify using the random hit location table for every attack by saying "Maybe it catches on the armor."
ugh. I know i use the hit location table from Only War, since you don't even have to roll a second time ,you take the number you rolled, reverse it and use the table associated with hit locations, it was great.
|
|
|
Post by xhaosdaemon on Jun 12, 2014 6:07:20 GMT -8
One thing that could be done regarding vehicle armor (at least for the heavier vehicles like APCs and such) would be to have a specific modifier word. In Savage Worlds there is a modifier for armor called HW or Heavy Weapons. It basically means that small arms fire and normal muscle-powered weapons have no effect on it whatsoever. It would be easy enough to graft that onto TME (and I have often thought of it but vehicles have not come up yet). It really makes sense as one should not be able to stop an APC with bows, swords, and small-arms fire. MAYBE armor-piercing rounds might work on an APC but not a tank unless it was an armor-piercing .50 cal round. I definitely do not consider a Barret 50 to be a "small arms" firearm considering it is used in an anti-material role. Even with that you may just want to flat-out halve the damage small-arms and muscle-powered weapons do against vehicles that don't have the HW modifier as it is not exactly easy to chop a rowboat into pieces. Just some thoughts of my own.
|
|
|
Post by ecocola on Jun 12, 2014 12:22:09 GMT -8
Even a mutant using bodkin point quarrels with a crossbow and 200 strength?
|
|