02-07-2019, 09:30 AM | #1 |
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Durham, NC
|
is there a minimum damage? how...
With different groups I have seen this done different ways. I wanted to see if there is a consensus for how the rules intended this to be done.
If you have a Saber (2-2) and roll 2, is the damage: 0: since 2 minus 2 is zero 1: since some believe their is a minimum damage (I cannot find it in the rules) 2: some believe each die has a minimum of 1 (ditto) Similarly, I do see that missile spells now have a minimum of damage equal to the ST put into the spell. But is that per die or after summing it all up? -kind regards -Alan |
02-07-2019, 09:50 AM | #2 |
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: North Texas
|
Re: is there a minimum damage? how...
I have ruled in other games that a successful hit always deals at least 1 point of damage even when there is a die-modifier that allows '0' as a possible result.
__________________
“No matter how subtle the wizard, a knife between the shoulder blades will seriously cramp his style.” -Vladimir Taltos |
02-07-2019, 10:00 AM | #3 |
Join Date: May 2015
|
Re: is there a minimum damage? how...
RAW there is no minimum damage unless specified (which at the moment I'm not thinking of anything that does).
(In GURPS there is - cutting and impaling type weapons hitting someone without armor will do a minimum of 1 in that game.) |
02-07-2019, 10:27 AM | #5 |
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Durham, NC
|
Re: is there a minimum damage? how...
Okay, now this makes sense. If you have a GURPS back ground you see 1 as the minimum and if you do not, you see 0 as the minimum.
I will go along with the GM. And then make the call when I am GM. thank you all for your replies. -Alan |
02-19-2019, 09:04 AM | #6 | |
Join Date: Jul 2018
|
Re: is there a minimum damage? how...
Quote:
Damage Rolls with a Minus Modifier: Minimum 0 or 1? http://forums.sjgames.com/showthread.php?t=158885 Personally, I don't like penalizing weapons such as the dagger or cutlass to do zero damage, so I typically see the minimum damage as being one point no matter what the minus is. I mean, if the cutlass can occasionally strike with the flat of the blade to do no effective damage, so could any other sword. However, to account for the fact that typical unarmed attacks should not be as instantly lethal as most weapon-based or magical attacks, I would rule that attacks without a weapon have a minimum damage of zero while attacks with weapons or magic have a minimum damage of one. Best wishes to find whatever works for you and your gaming group!
__________________
"What you don't know can't hurt y ... OUCH!" Last edited by flankspeed; 02-19-2019 at 09:08 AM. |
|
02-19-2019, 10:38 AM | #8 | |
Join Date: May 2015
|
Re: is there a minimum damage? how...
Quote:
Also there would be a major balance shift for all the existing minor 1d-X damage effects, and a major added effect/incentive to wear Cloth or take Toughness to stop all the min-1 damage results (not that that part of it wouldn't make sense - it does work well in GURPS where it's part of the design, but the TFT damage values weren't written with min 1 in mind). However I do agree that "all weapons should be capable of an ineffective hit" is a good point. In particular I don't tend to like to have a high minimum damage (like you get with magic or fine weapons unless you convert some of the + amount to dice). When I have made various house-rules to account for such, they have added such a chance of zero damage to more powerful weapons (e.g. add 1d-4 or 2d-7 to every weapon damage), instead of removing that chance from less powerful weapons. It's also perhaps easier and more appropriate to put such a chance in the to-hit roll, and/or deem that it's already in the to-hit roll. |
|
02-19-2019, 12:17 PM | #10 |
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Arizona
|
Re: is there a minimum damage? how...
To me, if the weapon doesn't do any damage to the figure even though it hit, that just means that it wasn't a strong enough or direct enough hit to do anything important to the character -- it glanced off, or the victim flinched (and changed a potentially dangerous hit into a mere nick by sheer chance), or it penetrated clothing but maybe only put a thin cut on the person's arm, or whatever. Them's the breaks, and insisting that every hit cause harm is one sure way to kill lots and lots of characters in TFT.
So from both a reality standpoint (sometimes a person gets lucky) to a gaming standpoint (I don't like killing characters unnecessarily -- if you earn it, great, but just engaging in combat under the "minimum damage is always 1 rule" guarantees short careers and even shorter dungeon delves) in my games minimum damage is none, period. |
|
|