Advanced Combat Skills - Page 7

Steve Jackson · 07-14-2018, 07:02 PM

Let me encourage those with comments to post them here, where others can see them, rather than writing me directly.

I have been on this most of the day and have created more than a few characters and rolled a couple of dice. The last version posted is internally consistent (modulo typos) but needs nerfing.

I also had a prolonged "Wha . . . ?" moment, which is why in a minute I'll go open a separate thread on the main-gauche.

Chris Rice · 07-14-2018, 07:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Jackson

Let me encourage those with comments to post them here, where others can see them, rather than writing me directly.

I have been on this most of the day and have created more than a few characters and rolled a couple of dice. The last version posted is internally consistent (modulo typos) but needs nerfing.

I also had a prolonged "Wha . . . ?" moment, which is why in a minute I'll go open a separate thread on the main-gauche.

We must be frying your brain Steve! I feel for you, but we all want this to be a massive hit.

larsdangly · 07-14-2018, 07:13 PM

Is it intentional to have punches do more damage than kicks at UC IV and V? Seems counter intuitive...

tomc · 07-14-2018, 08:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Rice

Yes, that puts into words what I've been thinking!

Whirling Dervish/Dancing Warrior: Extra attacks.
Cunning Warrior/Seasoned Fighter: Better defence.
Mighty Blow/Battle fury: extra damage.

That sounds like a better/more interesting route to go down. I hope Steve is reading this!

Eventually you have to roll the dice and hit or miss. Does how you got there matter more if you're playing a one-off combat or an rpg campaign?

Maybe there's a third aspect, a character design game? It's like building a Magic the Gathering deck. Choose your stats, choose your weapons and talents, then hop into the arena and see what happens.

If it gets too complicated there will be too much to test, and you won't be sure that everything still works.

Steve Jackson · 07-14-2018, 10:58 PM

Running over points raised above -

Talent that improves shields - Will be in next draft so we can all think about whether this is a good idea.

Need to define critical hits and misses on defend roll - I will look at it.

Damage bonuses for Expert and Master - Trying that in next draft.

The plan is for the old Fencing ability to go away, replaced by the new advanced weapon skills.

No, Two Weapons does not work with two empty hands.

I think it should indeed be difficult to hit a Master who is only defending.

Should we leave these changes out completely if we are not confident in them? Yes, we should - though that doesn't mean I expect 100% consensus on anything at all, ever.

Would it be better to have advanced weapon use as a later addition? I hate to have additions that invalidate, or even obsolete, earlier character designs. It will no doubt happen but I prefer not to.

Thrown Weapons should still exist.

Two Weapons should still exist for weapons in general.

Expert Fencer should just be Fencer. I agree.

Skarg · 07-14-2018, 10:59 PM

Here's some of the stuff I sent to SJ that I think might add to considerations here.

Originally-suggested new kick damage compared to old Advanced Melee bare hand damage, old damage at UC 3-5, weapon damage, and the new kick damages:

Code:

            old          new   new   new   new   new
       AM  UC 3-5 weapon UC 1  UC 2  UC 3  UC 4  UC 5
ST 8  1d-4  1d-1   1d-1  2d-3  2d-2  3d-4  3d-2  4d-4
ST 9  1d-3  1d     1d    2d-2  2d-1  3d-3  3d-1  4d-3
ST 11 1d-2  1d+1   2d-1  2d-1  2d    3d-2  3d    4d-2
ST 13 1d-1  1d+2   2d+1  2d    2d+1  3d-1  3d+1  4d-1
ST 15 1d    1d+3   3d*   2d+1  2d+2  3d    3d+2  4d

In old TFT, UC III damage actually seemed high for what it represents, and was starting to be a realism issue in that people of ST 10 or below could do as much damage with UC III as they could with the heaviest normal hand weapon they could get (barring fine quality or magic). Hopefully you'd agree that any more than that would be logically wrong, and that there's actually a realism issue with it being equal. But at least at higher ST, more damage would be done if you had a weapon.

In the new proposal, even UC I does as much damage with a kick as a ST 11 person can do with weapons, or MORE damage than someone with ST 9 can do with a weapon. Yes you have a DX penalty, but to me, this is an obviously wrong point, based on making sense. I think values such as damage being realistic enough to not seem wrong is an essential quality/theme in TFT.

Of course, it gets worse - far, far worse. UC II kick does more damage than weapons at ST 8-11, same damage at ST 13-14, nearly as much at ST 15. At UC III there is zero DX penalty to kick (removing any reason to punch outside HTH) and give kick damage generally better than weapons.

Also compare to damage for animals:
Wolf: 1d+1 (like ST 8 new UC I)
Crododile: 2d (like ST 13 UC I or ST 11 UC II)
Troll (ST 30-60): 2d
Bear: 2d to 3d-1 (grizzly is like ST 13 UC III or ST 9 UC IV)
Dragon claws:
1 hex, ST 12: 1d-1 (worse than any human with UC)
2 hex, ST 16: 1d (worse than any human with UC)
4 hex, ST 30: 2d-2 (like ST 9 UC I or ST 8 UC II)
7 hex, ST 60: 2d (like ST 13 UC I or ST 11 UC II, worse than ST 9 UC III)
14 hex, ST 100: 2d+2 (like ST 15 UC II, ST 13 UC III, worse than ST 8 UC V)

Skarg · 07-14-2018, 11:03 PM

These talents offer massive increases in ability per talent. Two major issues with that are:

1) They result in massive shifts in ability between when a character has them, or not, which creates tiers of ability, as seen in level-based games (groan) and especially unrealistic over-the-top martial arts films. It replaces the gradual grain of TFT improvement with gigantic chunky globs of uber-ness. That's also gamey in play, as players are rightly motivated to figure out who is at what level, and avoid fighting superiors or otherwise act with the knowledge "well that guys' an Expert, but Bob is a Master..." which is cheesy/gamey/meta/OOC. In original-TFT play, we already had funny situations where players would say things like "is he tough, or REAL tough?" (code for does he have Warrior or Veteran talent) which has funny but also gamey, and that was only for a +1/2 armor effect.

It means everyone will want to take them, and consider themselves not cool till they get them, etc. For weapons, it creates "the noobs/mooks" with ordinary talents, then the competent people with an Expert talent, and then the Masters.

2) It dwarfs the abilities of other talents. I assume you're tossing out the original Fencing as obsolete? What about Warrior and Veteran? (At 2 + 3 memory points for +1 armor improvements, they're balanced on a very different scale from these new talents).

Consider:

Weapon Expertise gives the equivalent of at least around 4 points' worth of attribute effects (even discounting there are unique abilities there), for 3 memory points and (sort of) 2 opportunity attribute points by taking IQ 10.

Weapon Mastery gives the equivalent of something like another 5 points (even discounting the unique abilities), for another 3 memory points and another two points of minimum IQ.

All in one efficient lump.

3) The weapon versions are so good that they create a situation where warriors should plan to get IQ 10 at some point, or else they're probably being stupid. "Oh, but I could put those points in ST or DX!" Well, yes, but these talents give you more than that it to-hit, avoiding being hit, and damage potential, as well as the disarming thing. Almost the only reason not to plan on raising IQ to get them (at least at some point when adding attribute) is if you're not really trying to focus on being a competitive warrior.

4) At some point during a campaign, when someone gains one of these talents, they suddenly become a lot more powerful in a variety of ways than they were the day before.

5) It's also pretty bland having only two catch-all weapon expertise levels.

6) Unless you relent from the IQ memory limit again, there seems to be not much chance of anyone ever being an expert/master in more than one weapon, because it would seem a really bad choice considering the number of points required.

Skarg · 07-14-2018, 11:05 PM

These new super talents are accessible to beginning-point characters. Although they seem intended for more experienced characters, and will be even more effective on them, these talents imbalance even the 32-point arena game. Consider, original Melee is pretty balanced for most fighter designs, and the best-performing 32-point Melee arena duelists were balanced folks who do about 2 dice damage, stop 0-3 hits, and have adj DX in about the 9-12 range:

The statistical top 10:

ST13;DX11(11);MORNINGSTAR;NO_ARMOR;SMALL_SHIELD
ST13;DX11(10);MORNINGSTAR;NO_ARMOR;LARGE_SHIELD
ST13;DX11(9);MORNINGSTAR;LEATHER;SMALL_SHIELD
ST12;DX12(11);BROADSWORD;NO_ARMOR;LARGE_SHIELD
ST12;DX12(10);BROADSWORD;LEATHER;SMALL_SHIELD
ST12;DX12(9);BROADSWORD;LEATHER;LARGE_SHIELD
ST12;DX12(12);BROADSWORD;NO_ARMOR;SMALL_SHIELD
ST13;DX11(8);MORNINGSTAR;LEATHER;LARGE_SHIELD
ST11;DX13(10);MACE;LEATHER;LARGE_SHIELD
ST11;DX13(10);SHORTSWORD;LEATHER;LARGE_SHIELD
ST11;DX13(13);SPEAR;NO_ARMOR;NO_SHIELD

(Source: https://sites.google.com/site/fuhrma...evealtoprivals )

So what can we do with 32 points and the new talents? Well, for example:

ST 9 DX 13 IQ 10 UC III
kicks at 13 for 3d-3 (avg 7.5)
foes are at -2 to hit, stops 2/attack

ST 8 DX 13 IQ 11 UC IV
kicks at 13 for 3d-2 (avg 8.5)
foes are at -3 to hit, stops 3/attack
Eyes Behind

ST 9 DX 12 IQ 11 UC IV
kicks at 12 for 3d-1 (avg 9.5)
foes are at -3 to hit, stops 3/attack
Eyes Behind

ST 8 DX 12 IQ 12 UC V
kicks at 12 for 4d-4 (avg 10) + NERVE STRIKE
foes are at -3 to hit, stops 4/attack
Eyes Behind

ST 9 DX 11 IQ 12 UC V
kicks at 11 for 4d-3 (avg 11) + NERVE STRIKE
foes are at -3 to hit, stops 4/attack

All of these characters clearly overpower even the most competitive normal 32-point Melee characters in an arena duel.

The best one is clearly the UC V ST 8 one, the least powerful one the UC III one, and the others would depend a bit on who they were facing.

Is it not immediately clear to you? (You can't match/beat even the weakest (UC III) one on any of damage, DX, or protection without losing on the other points).

That's not even weighing that these people have no equipment. You can't tell they're deadly, can't disarm them without tying them up, they don't need to buy or carry anything, and most important to me, it's entirely illogical that it would be anywhere near as good to me unarmed as armed.

These characters clearly make it so people with these unarmed combat talents are just a lot better than anyone, even at 32 points. If that's your design intention, I'd like to know what you're thinking!

* The armed expert/master talents are less unbalanced than the unarmed ones.

Consider the following examples, first at 32-points:

The most balanced:

ST 11 DX 11 IQ 10 Sword Expert
Attack at 12 for 2d-1
Attack at 9 for 3d-1
-1 to be hit, 1 armor from small shield

This guy is more or less balanced with ST 11 DX 13 IQ 8, ok.

Let's try taking advantage of the "shrewd" blow:

ST 9 DX 13 IQ 10 Axe Expert
Attack at 14 for 1d
Attack at 12 for 2d
-1 to be hit, 1 armor from small shield

This guy is sort of like ST 12 DX 12 IQ 8, but a little different, ok.

Then there are:

ST 9 DX 11 IQ 12, Axe Master
Attack at 13 for 1d.
Attack at 11 for 2d+2.
-3 to be hit, 1 armor from small shield.

and:

ST 8 DX 12 IQ 12, Dagger Master
Attack at 14 for 1d-1
Attack at 12 for 2d+1
-3 to be hit, 1 armor from small shield.

These guys will tend to beat all non-Master 32-point characters by a bit. They are a little better than ST 13 DX 11 IQ 8, AND they're -3 to be hit (which will usually mess up most normal 32-point fighters).

Not to mention that there would presumably logically also be:

ST 11 DX 11 IQ 10 Spear Expert
Attack at 12 for 1d+1,
Attack at 9 for 2d+1, charge for 2d+1 x 2, or 1d+1 x 2 + 1d?
-1 to be hit

And certainly not to mention higher-point versions with polearms.

Consider at 36-points:

ST 12 DX 14 IQ 10 Sword Expert
Attack at 15 for 2d
Attack at 12 for 3d
-1 to be hit, 1 armor from small shield

Compare to:

ST 12 DX 16 IQ 8
Attack at 16 for 2d
1 armor from small shield

If these two 36-point fighters fight, the non-expert will be reduced to 15 to hit, making them equal except for the option of the expert to attack at 12 for 3d.

or try:

ST 15 DX 13 IQ 8
Attacks at 13 for 3d

This guy also gets reduced to 12 for 3d, so he's equal to the only having the shrewd option, and trades 1 hand/armor for 3 points of ability to get injured before dropping.

So, slightly worse than non-experts, and you have 2 less IQ but 1 more memory point available for an IQ 8 talent.

With Master level:

ST 11 DX 13 IQ 12, Mace Master
Attack at 15 for 2d-1.
Attack at 13 for 3d+1.
-3 to be hit, 1 armor from small shield.

compare to:

ST 11 DX 17 IQ 8
Attack at 17 for 2d-1
1 armor from small shield

This guy fights the master at DX 14, so slightly inferior just based on the DX adjustments, but the master can one-shot him with a shrewd attack (but he'd get hit first).

or try:

ST 16 DX 12 IQ 8
Attack at DX 12 for 3d+1

This guy is reduced to DX 9 by the master, and so is probably just toast. The master has an easier time hitting with a shrewd attack than this guy does with his normal attack (even against a normal target).

Skarg · 07-14-2018, 11:09 PM

* All the +1 die damage effects seem to be out of proportion to traditional TFT damage levels, which has the effect of emphasizing having these talents over other existing things, like monsters, or using weapons, or the size of weapons, or taking ST to get more weapon damage, or the effects of armor.

* Heavy armor (chainmail, sometimes leather, certainly non-fine plate) is already a pretty disadvantageous deal for competetive duellers in TFT until/unless you get high enough DX to offset it and still keep enough DX to keep hitting. If various talents are adding 1d or more of damage, it becomes even less of a good idea.

* Kick to-hit penalties going away makes using them a non-choice.

* There should (logically) be a way to be skilled at hitting people even when wearing armor.

* There should be something for shields, too, at the very least, a way to have anyone's shield rush not be ignore-able by a 3/ST roll.

JLV · 07-15-2018, 12:38 AM

One suggestion would be to not stack the UC talents. UC II does more Damage than UC I does, but it isn't additive to UC I's damage. Thus, each level of UC would effectively "replace" the previous level's damage with the new level of damage inflicted.

In effect, maybe damage only increases by a point or two with each level of expertise. Likewise, defense bonuses and DX penalties/advantages would only adjust by a single point per level of UC.

This would both justify the lower IQ cost, and lower "point" cost for the talents, while avoiding turning even a UC V person into an invincible engine of destruction. He'd be a lot better than a basic unarmored figure, but still not the equivalent of a Giant or a Dragon, and an armored figure would be a real problem for him.

07-14-2018, 07:02 PM	#61
Steve Jackson President and EIC Join Date: Jul 2004	Re: Advanced Combat Skills Let me encourage those with comments to post them here, where others can see them, rather than writing me directly. I have been on this most of the day and have created more than a few characters and rolled a couple of dice. The last version posted is internally consistent (modulo typos) but needs nerfing. I also had a prolonged "Wha . . . ?" moment, which is why in a minute I'll go open a separate thread on the main-gauche.

07-14-2018, 07:13 PM	#63
larsdangly Join Date: Dec 2017	Re: Advanced Combat Skills Is it intentional to have punches do more damage than kicks at UC IV and V? Seems counter intuitive...

07-14-2018, 10:58 PM	#65
Steve Jackson President and EIC Join Date: Jul 2004	Re: Advanced Combat Skills Running over points raised above - Talent that improves shields - Will be in next draft so we can all think about whether this is a good idea. Need to define critical hits and misses on defend roll - I will look at it. Damage bonuses for Expert and Master - Trying that in next draft. The plan is for the old Fencing ability to go away, replaced by the new advanced weapon skills. No, Two Weapons does not work with two empty hands. I think it should indeed be difficult to hit a Master who is only defending. Should we leave these changes out completely if we are not confident in them? Yes, we should - though that doesn't mean I expect 100% consensus on anything at all, ever. Would it be better to have advanced weapon use as a later addition? I hate to have additions that invalidate, or even obsolete, earlier character designs. It will no doubt happen but I prefer not to. Thrown Weapons should still exist. Two Weapons should still exist for weapons in general. Expert Fencer should just be Fencer. I agree.

07-14-2018, 10:59 PM	#66
Skarg Join Date: May 2015	Re: Advanced Combat Skills Here's some of the stuff I sent to SJ that I think might add to considerations here. Originally-suggested new kick damage compared to old Advanced Melee bare hand damage, old damage at UC 3-5, weapon damage, and the new kick damages: Code: old new new new new new AM UC 3-5 weapon UC 1 UC 2 UC 3 UC 4 UC 5 ST 8 1d-4 1d-1 1d-1 2d-3 2d-2 3d-4 3d-2 4d-4 ST 9 1d-3 1d 1d 2d-2 2d-1 3d-3 3d-1 4d-3 ST 11 1d-2 1d+1 2d-1 2d-1 2d 3d-2 3d 4d-2 ST 13 1d-1 1d+2 2d+1 2d 2d+1 3d-1 3d+1 4d-1 ST 15 1d 1d+3 3d* 2d+1 2d+2 3d 3d+2 4d In old TFT, UC III damage actually seemed high for what it represents, and was starting to be a realism issue in that people of ST 10 or below could do as much damage with UC III as they could with the heaviest normal hand weapon they could get (barring fine quality or magic). Hopefully you'd agree that any more than that would be logically wrong, and that there's actually a realism issue with it being equal. But at least at higher ST, more damage would be done if you had a weapon. In the new proposal, even UC I does as much damage with a kick as a ST 11 person can do with weapons, or MORE damage than someone with ST 9 can do with a weapon. Yes you have a DX penalty, but to me, this is an obviously wrong point, based on making sense. I think values such as damage being realistic enough to not seem wrong is an essential quality/theme in TFT. Of course, it gets worse - far, far worse. UC II kick does more damage than weapons at ST 8-11, same damage at ST 13-14, nearly as much at ST 15. At UC III there is zero DX penalty to kick (removing any reason to punch outside HTH) and give kick damage generally better than weapons. Also compare to damage for animals: Wolf: 1d+1 (like ST 8 new UC I) Crododile: 2d (like ST 13 UC I or ST 11 UC II) Troll (ST 30-60): 2d Bear: 2d to 3d-1 (grizzly is like ST 13 UC III or ST 9 UC IV) Dragon claws: 1 hex, ST 12: 1d-1 (worse than any human with UC) 2 hex, ST 16: 1d (worse than any human with UC) 4 hex, ST 30: 2d-2 (like ST 9 UC I or ST 8 UC II) 7 hex, ST 60: 2d (like ST 13 UC I or ST 11 UC II, worse than ST 9 UC III) 14 hex, ST 100: 2d+2 (like ST 15 UC II, ST 13 UC III, worse than ST 8 UC V)

07-14-2018, 11:03 PM	#67
Skarg Join Date: May 2015	Re: Advanced Combat Skills These talents offer massive increases in ability per talent. Two major issues with that are: 1) They result in massive shifts in ability between when a character has them, or not, which creates tiers of ability, as seen in level-based games (groan) and especially unrealistic over-the-top martial arts films. It replaces the gradual grain of TFT improvement with gigantic chunky globs of uber-ness. That's also gamey in play, as players are rightly motivated to figure out who is at what level, and avoid fighting superiors or otherwise act with the knowledge "well that guys' an Expert, but Bob is a Master..." which is cheesy/gamey/meta/OOC. In original-TFT play, we already had funny situations where players would say things like "is he tough, or REAL tough?" (code for does he have Warrior or Veteran talent) which has funny but also gamey, and that was only for a +1/2 armor effect. It means everyone will want to take them, and consider themselves not cool till they get them, etc. For weapons, it creates "the noobs/mooks" with ordinary talents, then the competent people with an Expert talent, and then the Masters. 2) It dwarfs the abilities of other talents. I assume you're tossing out the original Fencing as obsolete? What about Warrior and Veteran? (At 2 + 3 memory points for +1 armor improvements, they're balanced on a very different scale from these new talents). Consider: Weapon Expertise gives the equivalent of at least around 4 points' worth of attribute effects (even discounting there are unique abilities there), for 3 memory points and (sort of) 2 opportunity attribute points by taking IQ 10. Weapon Mastery gives the equivalent of something like another 5 points (even discounting the unique abilities), for another 3 memory points and another two points of minimum IQ. All in one efficient lump. 3) The weapon versions are so good that they create a situation where warriors should plan to get IQ 10 at some point, or else they're probably being stupid. "Oh, but I could put those points in ST or DX!" Well, yes, but these talents give you more than that it to-hit, avoiding being hit, and damage potential, as well as the disarming thing. Almost the only reason not to plan on raising IQ to get them (at least at some point when adding attribute) is if you're not really trying to focus on being a competitive warrior. 4) At some point during a campaign, when someone gains one of these talents, they suddenly become a lot more powerful in a variety of ways than they were the day before. 5) It's also pretty bland having only two catch-all weapon expertise levels. 6) Unless you relent from the IQ memory limit again, there seems to be not much chance of anyone ever being an expert/master in more than one weapon, because it would seem a really bad choice considering the number of points required.

07-14-2018, 11:05 PM	#68
Skarg Join Date: May 2015	Re: Advanced Combat Skills These new super talents are accessible to beginning-point characters. Although they seem intended for more experienced characters, and will be even more effective on them, these talents imbalance even the 32-point arena game. Consider, original Melee is pretty balanced for most fighter designs, and the best-performing 32-point Melee arena duelists were balanced folks who do about 2 dice damage, stop 0-3 hits, and have adj DX in about the 9-12 range: The statistical top 10: ST13;DX11(11);MORNINGSTAR;NO_ARMOR;SMALL_SHIELD ST13;DX11(10);MORNINGSTAR;NO_ARMOR;LARGE_SHIELD ST13;DX11(9);MORNINGSTAR;LEATHER;SMALL_SHIELD ST12;DX12(11);BROADSWORD;NO_ARMOR;LARGE_SHIELD ST12;DX12(10);BROADSWORD;LEATHER;SMALL_SHIELD ST12;DX12(9);BROADSWORD;LEATHER;LARGE_SHIELD ST12;DX12(12);BROADSWORD;NO_ARMOR;SMALL_SHIELD ST13;DX11(8);MORNINGSTAR;LEATHER;LARGE_SHIELD ST11;DX13(10);MACE;LEATHER;LARGE_SHIELD ST11;DX13(10);SHORTSWORD;LEATHER;LARGE_SHIELD ST11;DX13(13);SPEAR;NO_ARMOR;NO_SHIELD (Source: https://sites.google.com/site/fuhrma...evealtoprivals ) So what can we do with 32 points and the new talents? Well, for example: ST 9 DX 13 IQ 10 UC III kicks at 13 for 3d-3 (avg 7.5) foes are at -2 to hit, stops 2/attack ST 8 DX 13 IQ 11 UC IV kicks at 13 for 3d-2 (avg 8.5) foes are at -3 to hit, stops 3/attack Eyes Behind ST 9 DX 12 IQ 11 UC IV kicks at 12 for 3d-1 (avg 9.5) foes are at -3 to hit, stops 3/attack Eyes Behind ST 8 DX 12 IQ 12 UC V kicks at 12 for 4d-4 (avg 10) + NERVE STRIKE foes are at -3 to hit, stops 4/attack Eyes Behind ST 9 DX 11 IQ 12 UC V kicks at 11 for 4d-3 (avg 11) + NERVE STRIKE foes are at -3 to hit, stops 4/attack All of these characters clearly overpower even the most competitive normal 32-point Melee characters in an arena duel. The best one is clearly the UC V ST 8 one, the least powerful one the UC III one, and the others would depend a bit on who they were facing. Is it not immediately clear to you? (You can't match/beat even the weakest (UC III) one on any of damage, DX, or protection without losing on the other points). That's not even weighing that these people have no equipment. You can't tell they're deadly, can't disarm them without tying them up, they don't need to buy or carry anything, and most important to me, it's entirely illogical that it would be anywhere near as good to me unarmed as armed. These characters clearly make it so people with these unarmed combat talents are just a lot better than anyone, even at 32 points. If that's your design intention, I'd like to know what you're thinking! * The armed expert/master talents are less unbalanced than the unarmed ones. Consider the following examples, first at 32-points: The most balanced: ST 11 DX 11 IQ 10 Sword Expert Attack at 12 for 2d-1 Attack at 9 for 3d-1 -1 to be hit, 1 armor from small shield This guy is more or less balanced with ST 11 DX 13 IQ 8, ok. Let's try taking advantage of the "shrewd" blow: ST 9 DX 13 IQ 10 Axe Expert Attack at 14 for 1d Attack at 12 for 2d -1 to be hit, 1 armor from small shield This guy is sort of like ST 12 DX 12 IQ 8, but a little different, ok. Then there are: ST 9 DX 11 IQ 12, Axe Master Attack at 13 for 1d. Attack at 11 for 2d+2. -3 to be hit, 1 armor from small shield. and: ST 8 DX 12 IQ 12, Dagger Master Attack at 14 for 1d-1 Attack at 12 for 2d+1 -3 to be hit, 1 armor from small shield. These guys will tend to beat all non-Master 32-point characters by a bit. They are a little better than ST 13 DX 11 IQ 8, AND they're -3 to be hit (which will usually mess up most normal 32-point fighters). Not to mention that there would presumably logically also be: ST 11 DX 11 IQ 10 Spear Expert Attack at 12 for 1d+1, Attack at 9 for 2d+1, charge for 2d+1 x 2, or 1d+1 x 2 + 1d? -1 to be hit And certainly not to mention higher-point versions with polearms. Consider at 36-points: ST 12 DX 14 IQ 10 Sword Expert Attack at 15 for 2d Attack at 12 for 3d -1 to be hit, 1 armor from small shield Compare to: ST 12 DX 16 IQ 8 Attack at 16 for 2d 1 armor from small shield If these two 36-point fighters fight, the non-expert will be reduced to 15 to hit, making them equal except for the option of the expert to attack at 12 for 3d. or try: ST 15 DX 13 IQ 8 Attacks at 13 for 3d This guy also gets reduced to 12 for 3d, so he's equal to the only having the shrewd option, and trades 1 hand/armor for 3 points of ability to get injured before dropping. So, slightly worse than non-experts, and you have 2 less IQ but 1 more memory point available for an IQ 8 talent. With Master level: ST 11 DX 13 IQ 12, Mace Master Attack at 15 for 2d-1. Attack at 13 for 3d+1. -3 to be hit, 1 armor from small shield. compare to: ST 11 DX 17 IQ 8 Attack at 17 for 2d-1 1 armor from small shield This guy fights the master at DX 14, so slightly inferior just based on the DX adjustments, but the master can one-shot him with a shrewd attack (but he'd get hit first). or try: ST 16 DX 12 IQ 8 Attack at DX 12 for 3d+1 This guy is reduced to DX 9 by the master, and so is probably just toast. The master has an easier time hitting with a shrewd attack than this guy does with his normal attack (even against a normal target).

07-14-2018, 11:09 PM	#69
Skarg Join Date: May 2015	Re: Advanced Combat Skills * All the +1 die damage effects seem to be out of proportion to traditional TFT damage levels, which has the effect of emphasizing having these talents over other existing things, like monsters, or using weapons, or the size of weapons, or taking ST to get more weapon damage, or the effects of armor. * Heavy armor (chainmail, sometimes leather, certainly non-fine plate) is already a pretty disadvantageous deal for competetive duellers in TFT until/unless you get high enough DX to offset it and still keep enough DX to keep hitting. If various talents are adding 1d or more of damage, it becomes even less of a good idea. * Kick to-hit penalties going away makes using them a non-choice. * There should (logically) be a way to be skilled at hitting people even when wearing armor. * There should be something for shields, too, at the very least, a way to have anyone's shield rush not be ignore-able by a 3/ST roll.

07-15-2018, 12:38 AM	#70
JLV Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: Arizona	Re: Advanced Combat Skills One suggestion would be to not stack the UC talents. UC II does more Damage than UC I does, but it isn't additive to UC I's damage. Thus, each level of UC would effectively "replace" the previous level's damage with the new level of damage inflicted. In effect, maybe damage only increases by a point or two with each level of expertise. Likewise, defense bonuses and DX penalties/advantages would only adjust by a single point per level of UC. This would both justify the lower IQ cost, and lower "point" cost for the talents, while avoiding turning even a UC V person into an invincible engine of destruction. He'd be a lot better than a basic unarmored figure, but still not the equivalent of a Giant or a Dragon, and an armored figure would be a real problem for him.