Re: Damage Rolls with a Minus Modifier: Minimum 0 or 1?
 

Thanks for the link -- plenty of food for thought there, but I definitely see what you mean.

I had envisioned your table as simply being the existing weapons table with the damages modified to take into account piercing/cutting/crushing damage for the existing weapons. I didn't realize how enormously you had expanded it.

Again, thanks for sharing.

In principle, I still think the idea has great merit, and if such a revised table (simply replacing existing damages with ones revised to reflect the nature of the weapon itself, rather than a simple mathematical progression of damage types), I think it would be an excellent way of demonstrating those differences without otherwise affecting any other rule.

Re: Rick's Piercing Weapons.
 

Rick, question on the crewed siege weapon.
You note "Often an extra crew member does not reload the weapon, only
fires it. This person does not need the minimum ST."
Would this be an officer? You would still be using the Firer's Dx, is that correct?

Re: Rick's Piercing Weapons.
 

Hi JohnPaulB,
The idea was that you had a very high DX figure who aimed it. He does not need the minimum ST to reload. The cost is that this adds an extra crew member to the team.

This high DX firer could be an officer, but he does not have to be.

Warm regards, Rick.

Re: Damage Rolls with a Minus Modifier: Minimum 0 or 1?
 

I play that a Cutlass 2d-2 capability (or similar weapon) that results in a 0, is a hit that doesn't hurt the person: A thin scar on the face, a sliced boot, an arrow impaling the bible in his pocket and bruising his chest, being hit by the flat part of the blade, could be some examples.

Perhaps a way to include the damage concept, but not making it permanent, is to make it a Fatigue damage.

• Joe hits Sam with his cutlass, rolls a 3 and 1 point of damage goes into Sam.
  
• Joe hits Sam with his cutlass, rolls a 2 and 0 points of damage goes into Sam. Convert that 0 damage to 1 point of fatigue.

This rare instance of a 0 damage roll now has some effect, a bruise perhaps or just being winded, and the fatigue contributes to the risk of dying. It can't be healed away, but its not permanent either.

Re: Damage Rolls with a Minus Modifier: Minimum 0 or 1?
 

I've toyed with the idea of a minimum of 1 point of damage for damage rolls that have a negative component but have simply left it at a minimum of 0 points damage. The Magic Fist spell specifically states minimum damage equal to the ST put into the spell. So, unless otherwise stated, minimum damage of 0. If a GM wanted to put a minimum of 1 point damage on such rolls, I wouldn't call that as being wrong-headed on it. We experimented with minimum damage of 1 point in our Classic TFT days and it didn't disrupt the balance of the universe. However, we tended to stick with the minimum of 0 unless otherwise stated approach. The thought was that there are times that even a hit would yield 0 points of damage for a variety of reasons such as the ones that you mentioned.

Your idea of a 0 point hit causing 1 point of fatigue is very interesting -- I never looked at it from that angle. It does have the same general effect in combat as a minimum damage of 1 and becomes another point of accounting that the GM and players must take on. So, it is up for a GM rule so far as what they are willing to do.

Re: Damage Rolls with a Minus Modifier: Minimum 0 or 1?
 

I'm OK with idea that certain weapons have the potential for ZERO damage on a successful hit, but I've always thought it was a mistake to put weapons like the cutlass/saber, javelins and the short bow in that category.

Re: Damage Rolls with a Minus Modifier: Minimum 0 or 1?
 

I've replaced 1d-2 with 1d4, 1d-1 with d5, 1d+1 with d7... etc. I've got loads of DCC dice kicking around and wanted to use them in my games.

Re: Damage Rolls with a Minus Modifier: Minimum 0 or 1?
 

That's a heck of an upgrade.

1d6 - 2 has an average damage of 10/6 = 1.66. 1d6 - 2 with a minimum 1 has an average damage of 12/6 = 2. 1d4 has an average damage of 2.5.

Note that a 1d5 damage roll has an average result of 3 hits, which isn't all that much better than the 1d4.

And 1d6 + 1 is downgraded from 4.5 average damage to 4 average damage on the other hand.

It's fine if you're okay with changed the expected damage, of course. It's your game. But it is worth noticing that moving from, say, the 1d javelin to the 1d+1 spear is less beneficial in your games. And also, throwing a rock using your rules (average damage 2.5) is a lot closer to using a dagger (average damage 3). According to RAW, the rock has an average damage 1.66 while the dagger has an average damage 15/6 = 2.5.

Re: Damage Rolls with a Minus Modifier: Minimum 0 or 1?
 

You are correct. It alters the average weapon damage. I've tweaked damage here and there to compensate somewhat, but it will never match the original rules. We find the combat enjoyable still. Steve did a great job with this system... even when we hacked the weapon damage/armor save rules to use polyhedral dice instead of modifiers/constant DR the game still delivers. Pretty solid design.

Re: Damage Rolls with a Minus Modifier: Minimum 0 or 1?
 

I stick with the rules. Some weapons will sometimes do zero damage.

If someone is so unfortunate to roll a zero damage attack after scoring a critical hit (double or triple damage), I "round it up" to 1 point of damage. That is 1 damage after doubling/tripling). This is the only variance I do now with weapon damage.