Quote from: Phillip;643674Regarding one of Gleichman's pet peeves, "hit points":

If damage dealing accelerates too rapidly with experience,there is a tendency for duels between fencing masters to resemble gunfights -- over quickly, and often in favor of whoever got off the first shot.

I think the problem is right there in your assumptions, actually. And frankly, inflating hit points to balance out that issue is an approach that means you're effectively not actually increasing in relative power as you "level up".

Quote from: Grymbok;643859

Quote from: Phillip;643674Regarding one of Gleichman's pet peeves, "hit points":

If damage dealing accelerates too rapidly with experience,there is a tendency for duels between fencing masters to resemble gunfights -- over quickly, and often in favor of whoever got off the first shot.

I think the problem is right there in your assumptions, actually. And frankly, inflating hit points to balance out that issue is an approach that means you're effectively not actually increasing in relative power as you "level up".

I'm afraid I can't make head or tail of what "your assumptions" is supposed to mean. The rest suggests that you do not grasp the actual design issues at hand, probably meaning I did not explain them clearly enough.

I beg your forgiveness, but I don't feel up to another try just now.

For what it may be worth, here's another try (from a somewhat tired brain).

First, it is a bit complicated to increase damage (however represented) dealt to inferiors without also increasing damage dealt to peers. Some relatively straightforward methods to accomplish the trick inherently involve mathematical artifacts that accelerate the growth of odds ratios.

If that is just what you happen to desire, there's a 'problem' that solves itself! Likewise if having extreme statistical outliers become increasingly likely to be the sudden cause of the demise of characters as they gain experience suits your taste.

The standard of good design, in my view, is not whether I happen to share your taste (or you mine), but whether a design elegantly accomplishes whatever the goals at hand happen to be.

Increasing hit points is (A) an independently scaling factor that (B) is very straightforward to adjust. It is on that account a relatively simple way to accomplish the end of creating a situation in which:

1. High-level figures have just the advantage over lower-level ones you want.
2. High-level figures in full fighting trim can count on being able to avoid some number of occasions of death; they have "extra lives," as it were.
3. Fights among such figures tend to take about as long to resolve as seems to you appropriate.

Quote from: Phillip;643877I'm afraid I can't make head or tail of what "your assumptions" is supposed to mean. The rest suggests that you do not grasp the actual design issues at hand, probably meaning I did not explain them clearly enough.

I beg your forgiveness, but I don't feel up to another try just now.

My point was that the problem is "damage dealing accelerating too rapidly with experience". It would seem more sensible to address that rather than to try to patch the issue by using escalating hit points.

I do appreciate that the benefit of your approach (escalating damage potential matched by escalating hit points) is that you can then wade in to a crowd of lower-level characters and feel like a god. I just think that it can lead to a sameness of challenge at all power levels.

Ultimately of course if comes down to what you want to model. If you want to do D&D style escalation all the way from farm boy to demi-god, then there may actually not be a better solution available for escalating hit points. Personally I prefer to play within narrower power curves in any single campaign, and so would generally prefer to use approaches other than escalating hit points.

Quote from: Grymbok;644033My point was that the problem is "damage dealing accelerating too rapidly with experience". It would seem more sensible to address that rather than to try to patch the issue by using escalating hit points.

I do appreciate that the benefit of your approach (escalating damage potential matched by escalating hit points) is that you can then wade in to a crowd of lower-level characters and feel like a god. I just think that it can lead to a sameness of challenge at all power levels.

Ultimately of course if comes down to what you want to model. If you want to do D&D style escalation all the way from farm boy to demi-god, then there may actually not be a better solution available for escalating hit points. Personally I prefer to play within narrower power curves in any single campaign, and so would generally prefer to use approaches other than escalating hit points.

My preferred system is one where hit points are mostly fixed (possibly where characters can increase their CON score somewhat), perhaps with damage bonuses being generated by comparing attack/defense. A higher level (or higher skill) attacker thus gets a damage bonus against a lower level target.
I'd admit this doesn't quite do big monsters/fireballs so well, however - a big & slow monster is a fair match defensively for a highly skilled attacker since the attacker gets damage boosts from skill, but the monster retaliates with a low % chance of inflicting probable squishy death.

Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;644283My preferred system is one where hit points are mostly fixed (possibly where characters can increase their CON score somewhat), perhaps with damage bonuses being generated by comparing attack/defense. A higher level (or higher skill) attacker thus gets a damage bonus against a lower level target.
I'd admit this doesn't quite do big monsters/fireballs so well, however - a big & slow monster is a fair match defensively for a highly skilled attacker since the attacker gets damage boosts from skill, but the monster retaliates with a low % chance of inflicting probable squishy death.

This is similar to what TORG players called the "Glass Ninja" problem.  But then, against Godzilla, almost any human is a Glass Ninja.

JG

Quote from: James Gillen;644323This is similar to what TORG players called the "Glass Ninja" problem.  But then, against Godzilla, almost any human is a Glass Ninja.

If I understand BSJ's suggestion actually he's avoiding Glass Ninja. Glass Ninja came about because in TORG, your damage was based on your attack roll, with no comparison to the defender's defence score. So if you attack someone with a really high defence relative to your ability, such that you need to roll really well to hit them at all, then any hit will be a massive damage one.

BSJ seems to be saying that damage should come from degree of success, so in practise it would likely produce Iron Ninja, who only ever take glancing blows. I think it would probably work OK for big slow guys actually as long as their base damage is high enough, so that a baseline success is still a lot of damage.

You can combine the two options (glass and Iron Ninjas )
I am looking at this now but you can give a base damage then run criticals from attack roll above target.

So in a system that scales attack and defense with level but where damage stays relatively static you can start to introduce levels of criticals.

On a D20 scale if a sword does 1d8 you can introduce an additional d8 if you exceed the to hit by 10, an additional if you exceed 15 (or run it by 5,10,15...etc)

So a Sword always does 1d8 minimum. A great attack roll does extra damage.
Against a low level target a 'master' will often be doing additioanl damage.

Take 10th Level Guy v 4th level guy (direct link attack and defense to level)
10th level guy will hit 10th level guy with a base sucess - call it TN 13 .
10th level guy will be hitting the 4th level guy on  a TN 7.

If we use 5 step for criticals the 10th level guy will deal and additional d8 on a roll of 18 v another 10th level guy
However against the 4th level guy he will deal an additional d8 on a 12; additional 2d8 on a 17.
The 4th level guy will need a 19 to hit the 10th level guy and won't be doing any criticals unless he can suspend the 10th level guys entire defence bonus.

This is how my heartbreater works now (but with 10 step crits which has actuall not come up in combat yet thus my thinking of dropping to a 5 step).
It has very slow HP accrual 1-2 points per level on a 6, 8, 10 or 12 point 1st level score

Quote from: jibbajibba;643692Actually I think that is his entire point.
How can I hit you with a sword and not wound you.
I have bypassed your armour and landed an effective blow behaps even landing the perfect blow the rules allow, with a 3 foot length of sharpened steel but you are still not wounded.

Yeah, D&D rules are lovecraftian, thinking too much about them leads only to madness and non euclidean contortions

Quote from: Grymbok;644325If I understand BSJ's suggestion actually he's avoiding Glass Ninja. Glass Ninja came about because in TORG, your damage was based on your attack roll, with no comparison to the defender's defence score. So if you attack someone with a really high defence relative to your ability, such that you need to roll really well to hit them at all, then any hit will be a massive damage one.

BSJ seems to be saying that damage should come from degree of success, so in practise it would likely produce Iron Ninja, who only ever take glancing blows. I think it would probably work OK for big slow guys actually as long as their base damage is high enough, so that a baseline success is still a lot of damage.

That matches what I'd heard of 'Glass Ninjas' as well.

The system I was suggesting wouldn't have any problems with highly skilled opponents, just with big creatures whose base damage is more than a human-sized target's hit points.

D&D type games model a big creature like a giant or dragon pretty much the same way they do a high-level character; the Ftr10 has 10 hit dice and does extra damage (extra attacks and such), the giant has 10 hit dice and gets hefty bonuses for large weapons and Strength.  So there's not much difference between fighting a giant and another fighter; the giant even gets a THAC0 or base attack like the fighter does, generally.

A game where the system is more realistic though, probably gives the giant lots of hit points and a lot of damage from mass/impact. So giants (or dragons or Godzilla) past a certain size will squash a human-type target if it hits. They might or might not get combat skills at a high level for free; its sort of equally bad either way (either the monsters are superhuman and a PC is never really a match for a giant, or combats are games of russian roulette where you chip away at the hit points and hope the giant doesn't hit successfully in the meantime).

Quote from: jibbajibba;644329You can combine the two options (glass and Iron Ninjas )
I am looking at this now but you can give a base damage then run criticals from attack roll above target.

So in a system that scales attack and defense with level but where damage stays relatively static you can start to introduce levels of criticals.

On a D20 scale if a sword does 1d8 you can introduce an additional d8 if you exceed the to hit by 10, an additional if you exceed 15 (or run it by 5,10,15...etc)

So a Sword always does 1d8 minimum. A great attack roll does extra damage.
Against a low level target a 'master' will often be doing additioanl damage.

Take 10th Level Guy v 4th level guy (direct link attack and defense to level)
10th level guy will hit 10th level guy with a base sucess - call it TN 13 .
10th level guy will be hitting the 4th level guy on  a TN 7.

If we use 5 step for criticals the 10th level guy will deal and additional d8 on a roll of 18 v another 10th level guy
However against the 4th level guy he will deal an additional d8 on a 12; additional 2d8 on a 17.
The 4th level guy will need a 19 to hit the 10th level guy and won't be doing any criticals unless he can suspend the 10th level guys entire defence bonus.

This is how my heartbreater works now (but with 10 step crits which has actuall not come up in combat yet thus my thinking of dropping to a 5 step).
It has very slow HP accrual 1-2 points per level on a 6, 8, 10 or 12 point 1st level score

Sounds pretty good  

Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;644334D&D type games model a big creature like a giant or dragon pretty much the same way they do a high-level character; the Ftr10 has 10 hit dice and does extra damage (extra attacks and such), the giant has 10 hit dice and gets hefty bonuses for large weapons and Strength.  So there's not much difference between fighting a giant and another fighter; the giant even gets a THAC0 or base attack like the fighter does, generally.

A game where the system is more realistic though, probably gives the giant lots of hit points and a lot of damage from mass/impact. So giants (or dragons or Godzilla) past a certain size will squash a human-type target if it hits. They might or might not get combat skills at a high level for free; its sort of equally bad either way (either the monsters are superhuman and a PC is never really a match for a giant, or combats are games of russian roulette where you chip away at the hit points and hope the giant doesn't hit successfully in the meantime).

That's probably fair though isn't it? I mean, I acknowledge that it's not necessarily good gameplay, but if you're producing a system where people scale up within broadly human capability levels (probably in the badass normal zone, but certainly no elephant juggling), then ultimately you have to acknowledge that you can't fight Godzilla.

If you want PCs to be able to do that then you pretty much have to give them superhuman durability (either at character creation or through "levelling up"). D&D is just this weird sort of edge case where Fighters become superhuman in some respects but not in others, and everyone tries not to think about it too hard.

I realise that the "official" response is that HPs represent (amongst other things) luck, so Mr 15th level fighter is still technically in human norms, he's just actually dodging Godzilla still instead of being hit, even though Godzilla scored "a hit" and rolled damage. But as is well known the system is rather inconsistent about these things (absent magical healing, your "luck" comes back at only a couple of points a day of bed rest).

Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;644283I'd admit this doesn't quite do big monsters/fireballs so well, however - a big & slow monster is a fair match defensively for a highly skilled attacker since the attacker gets damage boosts from skill, but the monster retaliates with a low % chance of inflicting probable squishy death.

In concept it can do them very well indeed. We've had two fights with Dragons over the years and both were blasts (especially the last one).

The chance of Squishy death now and then isn't a bad thing.

Quote from: gleichman;644340In concept it can do them very well indeed. We've had two fights with Dragons over the years and both were blasts (especially the last one).

The chance of Squishy death now and then isn't a bad thing.

Oh true, in moderation...

BTW I've ordered Age of Heroes now

(Mostly I'm curious about the more strategically based (Princess Bride Style?) combat system -  but it seemed reasonably priced for 262 pages. Should be interesting, anyway).

Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;644356Oh true, in moderation...

BTW I've ordered Age of Heroes now

(Mostly I'm curious about the more strategically based (Princess Bride Style?) combat system -  but it seemed reasonably priced for 262 pages. Should be interesting, anyway).

:eek:

I've try to warn people away from that. It's drier than the Sierra and since it was intended for people who already played the game- explains nothing. But as you have a interest in pure rules there may be some fun stuff in there for you, if not in combat than in some of the subsections.

In any case, PM me if you have any questions and I'll try to help.

The price was just a little over cost, since it only uses public domain art and again was targeted for my groups- I didn't price it to make money. More like a night's pizza fund to celebrate it being done.

Pizza fund, right. More like drug cabinet.