I've had a similar question a few days ago... and I realized that I may have been asking the wrong question.  At that time, I was focusing on my damage curve and wondering about what type of dice to use for aesthetics.  Now I have a different view on the same question and I'm asking it again.  


What I have that I will keep:

2d10 + one  of four Talents ( each 1 – 8 levels... but in practice rarely more than 4) +2 if related to a free-form "Profession" vs. a TN.

A damage system that relies on rolling above a threshold called "Toughness" which is equal to a particular Talent + bonus from armor.  Surpassing this Toughness creates Wounds. (there are frequent "critical hit" chances that allow some types of weapons / combatants to score hits on high Toughness opponents)

A system in which many things that are not meant to overcome / surpass a TN instead add either a bonus to your chance of success, or an increase to the TN of an opponent's action.  These are generically called "Leverage" and "Interference", and are used for things like aiming, dodging, fencing, bolstering morale against morale attacks, dirty tricks, etc.  

Many special abilities which rely on creating extra dice rolls to either offer extra attacks or Leverage and Interfere rolls in certain situations (ie. Fencing Style: If you Interfere by fencing with a rapier against an opponent's attack, you gain a Leverage for your next attack).

Problem:

Right now, the damage roll is based on 2d6, and the Leverage and Interefere rolls add +1d6 to your roll or to opponent's TN.  

Which means game uses 1d10 and 1d6. Is that aesthetically un-pleasing?

When doing an action which has a Leverage Roll (and this is common), the dice would be 1d10+1d10+1d6+ Talent Level (usually between 3 to 6).  Is that to much addition?

I can change leverage and interfere to be a add dice and keep system, ie. Add an extra d10 and keep two highest / lowest).  This comes out to the same odds increase as adding 1d6... if there is only one Leverage / Interfere... but increases variability while reducing range.  Increased variability is not a problem.  Decreased range is not a deal breaker. I would need to introduce rules to have Interfere and Leverage cancel out, whereass with 1d6 added system, difficulty and attack chance both visably increase.  The problem is:

a.   Does this make it more or less cool?


b. does one way seem better than the other?

Aesthetics are subjective. If you don't like using d10's and d6's then don't use them. Personally I wouldn't mind it if I saw a good reason for it.

Too much addition, again is subjective. Some people really don't mind the little stacking bonuses of the d20 system.

A good rule of thumb though, often used in Euro games, is to keep your totals as close to 10 as possible.

When designing dice mechanics, always work backwards. Figure out what you want your expected outputs to be, and choose dice that will give you that desired outcome.

I've never been able to understand the idea of applying aesthetics to dice results, so I'm probably not your target audience:).

What I'd like to ask is about your example. Is there any advantage to not interfering with the opponent's attack using your rapier, that would make you possibly want to try something else;)?

Quote from: AsenRG;884845I've never been able to understand the idea of applying aesthetics to dice results, so I'm probably not your target audience:).

What I'd like to ask is about your example. Is there any advantage to not interfering with the opponent's attack using your rapier, that would make you possibly want to try something else;)?

Well... You can just attack. Or you can defend and you may have a special ability to take advantage of that defence to grant a bonus on a future attack.

Quote from: Jiaxingseng;884847Well... You can just attack. Or you can defend and you may have a special ability to take advantage of that defence to grant a bonus on a future attack.

But if I stand a decent chance to hit without the bonus, why would I take the risk of him rolling better on the attack and saddling me with a penalty afterwards;)?

Quote from: AsenRG;885504But if I stand a decent chance to hit without the bonus, why would I take the risk of him rolling better on the attack and saddling me with a penalty afterwards;)?

Glad you asked.  Here is an example of combat.  I just wrote this, but I think it will go into my game.  All dice rolls mentioned were actual dice rolls.  There was one round where both sides missed... I edited that out of this narrative.



Sartin the Thief

QuoteAggress: 1 Finesse 3 Envision: 2 Will: 2
Main Combat Mod 5  (Finesse 3 +2 Profession Bonus)
Dodge: 4  AC: 15 (with Leather armor)
Toughness: 6+2 Stability: 10+2
Wounds:  X   X   X   X

Professions (add +2 to anything a Profession can do):

Rogue.  Rogues are thieves who understand that the best way to gain wealth and power is to trick people in cons.  But Rogues also know the basic thief weapons and tools (and hidden places) to use when the con goes afoul.  Rogues know how to escape from combat and slide into the shadows.

Knacks:
Agile Fighter: When Maneuvering in melee, apply 1 Disadvantage to the opponent's next attack against you.  If the Maneuver was a Clear Success, gain 1 Advantage to use in the next attack or Maneuver Action.

Parry Repost:  (any fencing school) After making an Interfere Action against an opponent'when fencing with a Lite weapon and the opponent misses the attack, you may immediately make a Bonus Attack Dice Check against the opponent.

Weapons: Rapier and Blade

Armory Guard (NPC

QuoteLevel 3 NPC, Aggress: 4
Main Combat Mod: 4 Dodge: 1  AC: 15 (with Munitions Plate)
Toughness:  13 Stability: 9
Wounds:  X   X   X  

Knacks:
Power Attack:. you may add a Damage Die (1d10) to the Damage Roll, but you cannot use any Advantage dice on your attack Dice Check, and the opponent will get a Bonus Leverage Action to use against you if your attack misses.

Weapon: Great Sword

##The Fight##

Sartin, the wiry, lightly armored thief is attacked by the Armory Guard.  That's not how Sartin likes to start his battles, but in this case Sartin didn't get to choose.  Running away is not really an option.  

Sartin is wielding a saber with a blade in the off hand.  The Armory Guard wields a magic +1 Standard Magic Great Sword, Field Issue.  Importantly, the Armory Guard is wearing Munitions Plate. Because Sartin is faster, he still takes his turn first.  Sartin rolls a 2d10... gets a 4.  Add the main conflict bonus +5 equal 9... misses.  Guard rolls 2d10...  13... +3 for the Guard's bonus...it's 16.  That hits Sartin.  The Damage Roll is 13+3...16.  Which is twice Sartin's Toughness, so does 2 Wounds. The GM rules that this was a slash against Sartins side, creating a nasty gash.   Both Wounds go against Aggress (which means the GM was being nice and not applying the Wounds against Sartin's Finesse... his primary fighting Talent).


Next round.  Sartin is not happy with the situation.  If the guard hits with the Great Sword, he may be Taken Out .  Sartin moves to Close Quarters... a Manuever.  He rolls an 11 + 3 (Finesse)... gets into range.   The Guard attacks.  Because of Sartin's Agile Fighter Knack, the Guard's next attack has 1 Disadvantage.  It has another Disadvantage because it's in CQ.  Rolls 4d10, selects 2 lowest numbers... 6 ... misses.

Next Round.  Sartin attacks with his Blade.  Rolls a 14+5... 19. The Guard's AC is 15, but a Blade can  get a Clear Success with just 3 more than the AC (18).  So that's a Clear Success.  Sartin roll 14 on the damage roll ( double 7's... but there is no benefit for Doubles on the the Damage Roll).    Which is more than the Toughness of 13.. another Wound.  The Guard takes 2 Wounds.  Sartin decides that the attack hit the Guard in both shoulders, two successive strikes.  Wounds go against the Guard's Aggress.  

Next Round.  Sartin still does not want to be hit by that Great Sword and decides to use his special Parry – Riposte Knack and makes an Interfere against the Guard. Sartin is going to move under the Guard's .. guard, wait for the blade to come down and deflect it then counter-attack. The Guard should try to back up out of Close Quarters, but instead panics and attacks again, with two Disadvantages (1 because Great Sword in CQ, 1 because Sartin's Interfere).  The Guard rolls 4d10 and selects two lowest... still rolls an 11+4 is 15.  However, because the Guard has two Wounds to Aggress, the difficulty of his Dice Check (essentially, Sartin's AC) is now 17.  Guard misses.  Which means Sartin has a Bonus Attack (from the Parry-Riposte).  Sartin rolls a 13+5... 18.  Which is 3 more than the Guards AC of 15.  A Clear Success, causing a Wound.  The Guard goes down.  Sartin decides the Wound went through the elbow joint, causing so much pain that the Guard dropped, but is not dead.

Thank you, but that doesn't answer my question. Is there a situation where it's more advantageous for Sartin to use a defence other than Interfering with his weapon, for which he has a bonus, say, like having handy sand nearby?

Also, the description really short-sells plate armours.

Quote from: AsenRG;886019Thank you, but that doesn't answer my question. Is there a situation where it's more advantageous for Sartin to use a defence other than Interfering with his weapon, for which he has a bonus, say, like having handy sand nearby?

Also, the description really short-sells plate armours.

edit: To directly answer your question, 1) the chance is maybe not great to defeat the armor, but in terms of the armors AC (the chance to hit), and 2)the chance of the armor absorbing a blow.  If the chance was high, there would be no need.

Well... he can Interfere in any way.  By being sneaky and reducing the likelyhood of being found, Interfering with the opponent's search. By introducing evidence in a court hearing that disproves his opponent's case.

In combat... not really.  Or if he has a shield he can Interfere by blocking (and not attacking) or Guarding (which is to block an attack against another)... he can't do that with the weapons he has though cause he does not have a shield, and rapiers can only block other rapiers.

By Short - Sells, you are saying that Plates doesn't seem that good?

Quote from: Jiaxingseng;886025edit: To directly answer your question, 1) the chance is maybe not great to defeat the armor, but in terms of the armors AC (the chance to hit), and 2)the chance of the armor absorbing a blow.  If the chance was high, there would be no need.

I'm not sure what you mean here. He obviously defeats the armour here.

QuoteWell... he can Interfere in any way.  By being sneaky and reducing the likelyhood of being found, Interfering with the opponent's search. By introducing evidence in a court hearing that disproves his opponent's case.

In combat... not really.

I was talking about combat, obviously:). A strong point of LotW was that sometimes it paid to do stuff that wasn't exactly what you're used to doing all the time, if you knew that would work better.

QuoteOr if he has a shield he can Interfere by blocking (and not attacking) or Guarding (which is to block an attack against another)... he can't do that with the weapons he has though cause he does not have a shield, and rapiers can only block other rapiers.

If he had a shield, would it have been more advantageous to use it?

And I guess the rule "rapiers can only block other rapiers" isn't aimed at realism...

QuoteBy Short - Sells, you are saying that Plates doesn't seem that good?

I know nothing about the system other than the dice mechanic and damage (and knowing the other mechanics is unlikely to change that). What I see in your example is that the guy in plate gets 3 Wounds in 2 attacks of the knife-and-rapier guy, none of his attacks missing or being deflected by the plate armour.
You tell me whether that sells your plate as having decent protection;).
Of course, the guy with the sword seems kinda incompetent, too. He eats penalties in close combat, instead of choking on his blade or using the fact that his sword is two-handed. So maybe it's on him! But that's not clear from your example.

Quote from: AsenRG;886308I'm not sure what you mean here. He obviously defeats the armour here.

Yeah... i think I was on a train or on drugs or both when I wrote that.

Quote from: AsenRG;886308I was talking about combat, obviously:). A strong point of LotW was that sometimes it paid to do stuff that wasn't exactly what you're used to doing all the time, if you knew that would work better.

I don't want to mimic LotW's combat.  I'm not really taking anything from LotW.  The Lore Sheets yes, but in my game Lore Sheets will be, by default, just describe relationships and made between sessions... although I will provide rules for creating Lore Sheets in-game.  What I like about Lore Sheets is not how they were mechanically used in LotW, but rather how it can create non-mechanical rewards and tie characters to the game world.

As for LotW combat... it's too long for me .  I don't really like it.  I know "narrative crunchy combat" is the feature of the game... it's just not for me.  

In the example, this fencer has a special ability which utilizes this Interfere mechanic.  When a character has a mechanical advantage to do something, I expect that will be the tool the player will go to.  It is open to the player to describe this in any way though.

Quote from: AsenRG;886308If he had a shield, would it have been more advantageous to use it?

The Sartin does not have any shield-bash type skills.  A shield would increase his Ac though.  

Quote from: AsenRG;886308I know nothing about the system other than the dice mechanic and damage (and knowing the other mechanics is unlikely to change that). What I see in your example is that the guy in plate gets 3 Wounds in 2 attacks of the knife-and-rapier guy, none of his attacks missing or being deflected by the plate armour.

There were misses... but not because of the Plate Armor from a mechanical point of view.  I wrote this example as I rolled it.  But I think I got to do this again, and give an example that shows the relative effectiveness of armor.  Also need to buff up the armor a little... that's something I hope to get at through play-testing... if I ever manage to get a group together to help test.

Quote from: AsenRG;886308You tell me whether that sells your plate as having decent protection;).
Of course, the guy with the sword seems kinda incompetent, too. He eats penalties in close combat, instead of choking on his blade or using the fact that his sword is two-handed. So maybe it's on him! But that's not clear from your example.

What do you mean choking on his blade?  You say using the fact that his sword is two handed as if that is a benefit... could you explain?

BTW... your responses are totally awesome.  This is what I need and I'm very grateful.

Quote from: Jiaxingseng;886320Yeah... i think I was on a train or on drugs or both when I wrote that.

Both are understandable.

QuoteI don't want to mimic LotW's combat.  I'm not really taking anything from LotW.

I'm not talking about "taking LotW combat", I'm just giving an example I know you're familiar with:).

QuoteIn the example, this fencer has a special ability which utilizes this Interfere mechanic.  When a character has a mechanical advantage to do something, I expect that will be the tool the player will go to.  It is open to the player to describe this in any way though.

OK, the answer is "no", then (and the only problem is that the player will keep doing that even when it makes no sense and a different solution is easily presented - but lots of games fall in this trap, so I can't begrudge you that;)).

QuoteThe Sartin does not have any shield-bash type skills.  A shield would increase his Ac though.  

Fair enough.

QuoteThere were misses... but not because of the Plate Armor from a mechanical point of view.  I wrote this example as I rolled it.  But I think I got to do this again, and give an example that shows the relative effectiveness of armor.  Also need to buff up the armor a little... that's something I hope to get at through play-testing... if I ever manage to get a group together to help test.

Well, it would be interesting to see how much you decide to buff it.

QuoteWhat do you mean choking on his blade?

Easier to show than to explain.

Both of these guys had choked on their blades. (This is from a medieval treatise meant to teach swordsmanship, BTW). This grip allows you to use the sword in a much shorter distance than most people would expect.

QuoteYou say using the fact that his sword is two handed as if that is a benefit... could you explain?

Ahem, it is a benefit. The only downside is you don't have a shield. This is bad, but even on a battlefield, a heavier armour protects you better from missiles (and some armours are all but safe against one-handed weapons, which is all the guy with the shield has).

OTOH, you have more reach that you can shorten, and your blade moves faster (because you have a lever system between your arms). You have better control, because you're controlling it with two hands. It's less tiring and often requires less strength in the hands, because you actually have less weight per hand (at least with a longsword, never used a true two-hander), and again, you have a lever system. And good luck beating aside a two-handed sword with a one-handed sword, because...did I mention one of you has better control and a lever system:D?
Because he totally does;).
So, what he could have done, instead of or in addition to choking the blade? Well, he could beat the rapier blade away, for starters. Then: good luck deflecting the power stab from a short metal spear with the daggerhand, rapier guy! Remember, you better deflect it in a way that doesn't allow me to press the attack in any of a multitude ways.
Oh, and add to that that one of these weapons has, like, 5 valid targets, and the other can hit almost any target on the thief's body...because armour.

In short, based on the equipment, the match-up is known as "rapier guy surrenders or dies". Circumstancial and equipment bonuses take care of that. If your system delivers a different result, one can safely bet that the equipment of one of the sides was undervalued, and/or the system just isn't going for realism.
Both of which are fine, if that's what you want, but you'd better make it clear.
In LotW, armour isn't your best option, because it reflects a genre where most protagonists are unarmoured. But you can wear it, and it might provide some benefit.
OTOH, in Pendragon you generally want the best armour you can get, because knights.

QuoteBTW... your responses are totally awesome.  This is what I need and I'm very grateful.

Thank you. I'm trying to help;).

Quote from: AsenRG;886354Easier to show than to explain.

I'll reply to rest later as I'm about to do fatherly responsibilities.  I thought this was called "half-handing" the blade, putting the hands on the un-sharpened or "ricasso". I have a special ability (Knack, feat, whatever) for that.

Quote from: Jiaxingseng;886433I'll reply to rest later as I'm about to do fatherly responsibilities.  I thought this was called "half-handing" the blade, putting the hands on the un-sharpened or "ricasso". I have a special ability (Knack, feat, whatever) for that.

Never made sense to me, but it's as you wish:). I happen to think that it's something people just discover if their weapons allows it, unlike the rapier or sword and shield.
And it does allow to use a sword, spear or the like in closer quarters than you might think;).

Quote from: AsenRG;886019Is there a situation where it's more advantageous for Sartin to use a defense other than Interfering with his weapon, for which he has a bonus, say, like having handy sand nearby?
.

OK.  Interfering is the generic "throw a bag of sand in the opponent's face" mechanic.  This could be anything.  With a shield, Interfering is focusing on blocking and giving up an attack.  Why would someone do that when they don't have a special ability?  Because they see their opponent with too many Advantages.  Because they are Interfering for an Ally, etc.

Now Sartin has a rapier and abilities associated with that.  Which means that when he Interferes instead of attacks, it is much more likely to use that tool.  

Now below you said that I'm just giving players one mechanical way of doing things (actually three... attacking, Interfering, and Leveraging).  But within those three, always with the same equipment.  Is there a reason to Interfere, in combat, without the rapier?  I'm thinking...No... or... I could build in a way to make the attack to apply a non-Wound Condition.But why do this when the player can inflict a Wound condition (of which 4 would take out a PC)?  Taking Out an NPC has a narrative effect... the victor decides the fate... so there is no reason for this. (well... morale attacks cause non-Wound conditions, but that's a different issue)

Quote from: AsenRG;886308If he had a shield, would it have been more advantageous to use it?
And I guess the rule "rapiers can only block other rapiers" isn't aimed at realism...

I shield would increase the armor class by a little.

My impression is that rapiers could not block heavier weapons like spears, big swords, etc.  Block is maybe not the right word... beat out of the way.

Quote from: AsenRG;886019You tell me whether that sells your plate as having decent protection;).

Doesn't .  But PCs have a narrative armor with 4 Wounds... and the ability to out-fence the NPC who is wearing plate and with a great sword.  But just barely.  Which is what I wanted to go for.  If I was going for extreme realism... would there be any reason (besides heat and social norms) to wear plate an wield anything other than a Great Sword or Poleax?

This did get me thinking though... in this setting, blade weapons are retractable and ultra-light.   Which would change the nature of the weapons.  

Quote from: AsenRG;886354OK, the answer is "no", then (and the only problem is that the player will keep doing that even when it makes no sense and a different solution is easily presented - but lots of games fall in this trap, so I can't begrudge you that;)).

But this was the idea of offering a Leverage and Interfere actions.  It's for when the player feels that the only way to get in and damage the heavilly armored opponent is first to grapple them (Leverage), but in the process, expose the PC to attack.

Quote from: AsenRG;886019Ahem, it is a benefit. The only downside is you don't have a shield. This is bad, but even on a battlefield, a heavier armour protects you better from missiles (and some armours are all but safe against one-handed weapons, which is all the guy with the shield has).

Yeah... bunch of people on reddit argued the opposide with me.  And many have said that rapiers are battlefield weapons as well.  If so... why would one use that instead of a poleax or greatsword (on a battlefield)?

Quote from: AsenRG;886019Oh, and add to that that one of these weapons has, like, 5 valid targets, and the other can hit almost any target on the thief's body...because armour.

Yes... so they have almost the same armor in the example.  Only the thief's armor comes from being dodgy.  I feel I should re-think this.

Quote from: AsenRG;886019Never made sense to me, but it's as you wish. I happen to think that it's something people just discover if their weapons allows it, unlike the rapier or sword and shield.
And it does allow to use a sword, spear or the like in closer quarters than you might think.

WHAT never made sense?  Using purchase-able Knacks to signify the close-combat skill?  But... you feel that with a rapier or sword and shield it should be different?

Quote from: AsenRG;886354
Both of these guys had choked on their blades.

It is seldom done with lightsabers.

I do like that both of them are wearing feather boas whilst demonstrating swordmanship.