Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > GURPS

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-09-2011, 03:09 AM   #21
vierasmarius
 
vierasmarius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Oregon
Default Re: Rejiggering Muscle-Powered Weapon Damage

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ze'Manel Cunha View Post
Oh, and my general comment on this type of thread, just do away with the ST Swing Table and simply add +1 to the value in the Thrust Table for single handed swing, and +2 to value for two handed swing.
A counter-proposal: eliminate the Swing table, and instead use Thrust*0.7 for thrust attacks and Thrust*1 for swing attacks.
vierasmarius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2011, 05:30 AM   #22
Ze'Manel Cunha
 
Ze'Manel Cunha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: The Antilles, it's hot...
Default Re: Rejiggering Muscle-Powered Weapon Damage

Quote:
Originally Posted by vierasmarius View Post
A counter-proposal: eliminate the Swing table, and instead use Thrust*0.7 for thrust attacks and Thrust*1 for swing attacks.
The Thrust*0.7 isn't very playable, making it a flat -1 would work, but only if coupled with a +1 for weapon skill at DX +1.
Ze'Manel Cunha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2011, 05:41 AM   #23
Kraydak
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Default Re: Rejiggering Muscle-Powered Weapon Damage

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ze'Manel Cunha View Post
The Thrust*0.7 isn't very playable, making it a flat -1 would work, but only if coupled with a +1 for weapon skill at DX +1.
Swing->Thrust-2
Thrust->Thrust-3
+1 damage/die at DX+1, +2 damage at DX+2 with a reduced-price Weapon Master.

I tend to feel that "armor X is proof against weapon Y" means, at a minimum, that armor X's DR is equal to the average AOA-strong damage from weapon Y, because, if the armor is near-proof, people know they need to swing hard. So, here I am assuming that AOA or Committed attacks form the majority of actually damaging hits, and that Crits aren't an uncommon sub-population of damaging hits (which, given that they bypass active defenses, turns out to be somewhat true).
Kraydak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2011, 06:45 AM   #24
Landwalker
 
Landwalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Cumberland, ME
Default Re: Rejiggering Muscle-Powered Weapon Damage

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ze'Manel Cunha
That 4.5 is for a two handed spear thrust, the normal spear thrust is 3.5, that's reasonable damage wise.

Remember, the base system sets the proof at the average damage, so DR 4 is proof against single handed spear, and proof against "all but the heaviest spear thrusts".
The description of fine mail never limits it to "resisting all but the heaviest one-handed spear thrusts." But more important, at least to the assumptions I've made, is that I don't consider a ST-10 user to be regularly capable of "the heaviest sword cuts and spear thrusts." Setting proof at 50% (which doesn't really seem very proofed to me) means that a full half of Average Joe's stabs with a spear fall into the "heaviest spear thrust" category. And that just doesn't seem believable to me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kraydak
I tend to feel that "armor X is proof against weapon Y" means, at a minimum, that armor X's DR is equal to the average AOA-strong damage from weapon Y, because, if the armor is near-proof, people know they need to swing hard. So, here I am assuming that AOA or Committed attacks form the majority of actually damaging hits, and that Crits aren't an uncommon sub-population of damaging hits (which, given that they bypass active defenses, turns out to be somewhat true).
That strikes me as a good way to look at it. Sure, Average Joe's stabbing might fall into the "heaviest thrust" category 50% of the time—but only if he's putting everything he's got behind it, with no regard to his own well-being.

So, to add to the earlier examples and factor in AoA, and how it affects things:

ST 10

Realistic Broadsword: 1d (3.15) cut / 1d-1 (2.45) imp —— AoA 1d+1 (4.55) cut / 1d (3.85) imp

Realistic Spear (1H/2H): 1d-1 (2.45) imp / 1d (3.15) imp —— AoA 1d (3.85) imp / 1d+1 (4.55) imp

ST 12

Cinematic Broadsword: 1d+3 (6.5) cut / 1d+1 (4.5) imp
Realistic Broadsword: 1d+1 (4.55) cut / 1d (3.15) imp —— AoA 2d-1 (5.95) cut / 1d+1 (4.55) imp

Realistic Axe: 1d+2 (5.25) cut —— AoA 2d or 1d+3 (6.65) cut

ST 14

Realistic Broadsword: 1d+2 (5.6) cut / 1d (3.85) imp —— AoA 2d (7) cut / 1d+2 (5.25) imp

Realistic Axe: 2d (7) cut —— AoA 3d-2 or 2d+1 (8.4) cut

Realistic Spear (1H/2H): 1d+1 (4.55) imp / 1d+2 (5.25) or 1d+1 (4.9) imp —— AoA 2d-1 (5.95) imp / 1d+3 or 2d (6.3 or 6.65) imp


Looking at that actually has me feeling pretty good—Average Joe still doesn't beat DR 4 with the sword or spear most of the time, but if he makes an All-Out Attack (Strong), he can reach the 50% mark.

This seems like a pretty believable outcome, at least to me—fine mail was the staple of armies for centuries, and it wasn't because it was 50% effective against the average schmuck who was handed a pointy stick.

The clear side-effect of all this, of course, is making hit location more important, as well. If Average Joe can't reliably get through that mail vest (which he shouldn't be able to), maybe he'll decide to start going for arms and legs, or even necks and faces.
Landwalker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2011, 07:20 AM   #25
borithan
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Default Re: Rejiggering Muscle-Powered Weapon Damage

Quote:
Originally Posted by Landwalker View Post
This seems like a pretty believable outcome, at least to me—fine mail was the staple of armies for centuries, and it wasn't because it was 50% effective against the average schmuck who was handed a pointy stick.
I thought Fine Mail's description suggests it is mainly a secondary armour, ie for wearing under something else or for protecting secondary areas. I thought it was "Heavy" (or is it something else... haven't got Low Tech with me) Mail which is described as the standard for Mail armour which is designed as primary protection.
borithan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2011, 07:28 AM   #26
vierasmarius
 
vierasmarius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Oregon
Default Re: Rejiggering Muscle-Powered Weapon Damage

Quote:
Originally Posted by borithan View Post
I thought Fine Mail's description suggests it is mainly a secondary armour, ie for wearing under something else or for protecting secondary areas. I thought it was "Heavy" (or is it something else... haven't got Low Tech with me) Mail which is described as the standard for Mail armour which is designed as primary protection.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Low Tech pg 107
Made from small links of light wire, this material flows through the fingers like metallic cloth, yet can resist all but the heaviest sword cuts and spear thrusts.
Something to keep in mind is that "resist" may not be the same as "block all damage from." At least for cutting attacks, we have the Edge Protection rules, which draw a clear (if possibly arbitrary) line between an attack which inflicts damage without penetrating, and one which cuts through the armor itself. And for highly flexible armor, it's possible to sustain "sharp" damage even if the material isn't breached. For example, I once sliced my knee open by falling against a sharp piece of metal, but my jeans weren't cut. This would be harder to do with something like chainmail, but could explain why 1 point of impaling damage gets through despite the armor not being breached.
vierasmarius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2011, 07:41 AM   #27
Landwalker
 
Landwalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Cumberland, ME
Default Re: Rejiggering Muscle-Powered Weapon Damage

Quote:
Originally Posted by borithan View Post
I thought Fine Mail's description suggests it is mainly a secondary armour, ie for wearing under something else or for protecting secondary areas. I thought it was "Heavy" (or is it something else... haven't got Low Tech with me) Mail which is described as the standard for Mail armour which is designed as primary protection.
To elaborate a bit from vierasmarius' answer, I believe you're thinking of Light Mail, which is explicitly identified as being mostly common as an underlayer for other armor, whereas Fine and Heavy Mail are "primary armors". Unfortunately, I won't be at my books for a good nine hours (what ever happened to eighthour work days?), so I don't remember which one lorica hamata falls under. I think that might be Heavy Mail (but, quite possibly, cheap heavy mail, giving it DR 4 anyway, based on the munitions grade lorica segmentata in the Roman legionary sample loadout).
Landwalker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2011, 07:56 AM   #28
vierasmarius
 
vierasmarius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Oregon
Default Re: Rejiggering Muscle-Powered Weapon Damage

Quote:
Originally Posted by Landwalker View Post
To elaborate a bit from vierasmarius' answer, I believe you're thinking of Light Mail, which is explicitly identified as being mostly common as an underlayer for other armor, whereas Fine and Heavy Mail are "primary armors".
Exactly right. Light Mail has a much looser weave the Fine Mail, making it less protective, despite using the same (or thicker) wire.

Quote:
Unfortunately, I won't be at my books for a good nine hours (what ever happened to eighthour work days?), so I don't remember which one lorica hamata falls under. I think that might be Heavy Mail (but, quite possibly, cheap heavy mail, giving it DR 4 anyway, based on the munitions grade lorica segmentata in the Roman legionary sample loadout).
I don't see mention of which grade of mail Lorica Hamata is, but it does indicate Heavy Mail was primary armor in the Roman era.
vierasmarius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2011, 09:05 AM   #29
Perfect Organism
 
Perfect Organism's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: United Kingdom of Great Britain and some other bits.
Default Re: Rejiggering Muscle-Powered Weapon Damage

Quote:
Originally Posted by Landwalker View Post
Setting proof at 50% (which doesn't really seem very proofed to me)...
Isn't that exactly the standard of 'proof' that modern armour is given against firearms though?
Perfect Organism is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2011, 09:16 AM   #30
DouglasCole
Doctor of GURPS Ballistics
 
DouglasCole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Burnsville, MN
Default Re: Rejiggering Muscle-Powered Weapon Damage

Quote:
Originally Posted by Perfect Organism View Post
Isn't that exactly the standard of 'proof' that modern armour is given against firearms though?
This is precisely the standard. Even if you don't agree, if you don't use this method you will have consistency and verisimilitude issues with whatever system you come up with.

Having an AoA be at the 50% level probably will meet both criteria, though. That was a really good suggestion.

I had the beginnings of an alternate damage system that was going to be part of the Armor as Dice article in Pyramid #3/34. But it got cut (by me) as being a big can o' worms. :-)
__________________
The Deadly Spring "...probably the most infamous Pyramid article of all time."-Jeffro's Car Wars Blog
Gaming Ballistic: Home of Gaming Ballistic, LLC and my blog.
DouglasCole is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
combat, house rules

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:42 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.