Forums of the Megaverse®

Zer0 Kay · **Posted:** Wed Aug 05, 2020 6:34 pm

Warshield73 wrote:

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:

As it stands, though, RAW, Palladium is Super Old School. 90% of your characters are likely to have no attributes that give bonuses.

I think rolling the attributes during character creation is the biggest areas of house rules. I have never seen a group just roll the number of dice without some kind of chance to improve the attributes. weather its rolling one extra D6 and throwing out the lowest, re-rolling 1's, Being able to re-roll your attributes a set number of times before you are stuck with the last set.

I really love how the attributes were changed in the new Robotech where players chose the attribute track they wanted and would get one super attribute that is usually 20 or above, another that is 16 to 20 area and then all the others are just above average 9 to 15 range. I have started using this basic set up for all of convention pre-gen characters just to make them more interesting to play.

Yeah. I've always done:
If N= number of dice rolled
and S= the number of sides
bonuses and multipliers aren't counted and applied only to original roll after exploding dice is considered
so in 3D6 N=3 and S=6

Now here we go
humans usually get 3d6 + a bonus dice if the roll is 16+ all other creatures that have a 3d6 stat can also benifit from exploding dice... however, anything different you get nothing.

I say roll the NdS and if the sum is greater than (N*S)-N you roll a bonus die (+1S) if that = S roll another +1S. Continue until the roll <S or you've rolled a number of bonus die =N

So a human's first bonus roll is anything higher than (3*6)-3 [16+] and with two sixes on the first two bonus die they can effectively get 6d6

If I'm feeling magnanimous players roll +1S with the first roll and remove the lowest die. If I'm planning on it being a tough ride reroll 1s.

But now creatures with 2d4 can roll bonus die if they roll higher than a 6. If they have 2d4+2 or 2d4*10 it is still higher than a 6 as the modifiers aren't considered until after the roll.

1d10 has to roll higher than a 9

Some have said this would break the game but if people actually follow the die roll and don't make up numbers then the chances for
3d6 to get
+1S=18% ish
+1S2=3% ish
+1S3=<1% ish

10D10
+1S=11.12%
+1S2=.99%
+1S3=.13%
+1S4=.01%

kiralon · **Posted:** Thu Aug 06, 2020 12:29 am

The dice roll is more confusing then that
16, 17, 18 = +1d6, if 6 is rolled add another 1d6

Zer0 Kay · **Posted:** Sat Aug 08, 2020 3:32 pm

kiralon wrote:

The dice roll is more confusing then that
16, 17, 18 = +1d6, if 6 is rolled add another 1d6

How so?
3d6 gets a bonus d6 on a 16+ that explodes on a six upto two more times.

2d10 gets a bonus d10 on 19+ that can explode once on a 10.

Why? Because something that rolls 3d10 would be stupid to get a d6 bonus die if they roll a 16,17 or 18. A bonus die that get you to a max of 24 or 30 with an additional exploding die is kinda dumb with the max standard roll of 30. On the other hand stats less than 4d4 or 3d6 or 2d10 would have no exceptional rolls.

Again claiming only humans (3d6) stats are regularly exceptional. Only humans and specific stats from other species may "mutate" producing an exception every other stat either incapable of rolling the required 16-18 or less likely to roll it are somehow genetically stable.

drewkitty ~..~ · **Posted:** Sat Aug 08, 2020 4:09 pm

Warshield73 wrote:

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:

As it stands, though, RAW, Palladium is Super Old School. 90% of your characters are likely to have no attributes that give bonuses.

I think rolling the attributes during character creation is the biggest areas of house rules. I have never seen a group just roll the number of dice without some kind of chance to improve the attributes. weather its rolling one extra D6 and throwing out the lowest, re-rolling 1's, Being able to re-roll your attributes a set number of times before you are stuck with the last set.

I really love how the attributes were changed in the new Robotech where players chose the attribute track they wanted and would get one super attribute that is usually 20 or above, another that is 16 to 20 area and then all the others are just above average 9 to 15 range. I have started using this basic set up for all of convention pre-gen characters just to make them more interesting to play.

Yes I like the way the players can choose to have a couple stats boosted in the die rolls too. But I also like how they made this a choice to use the modified die rolls or just using the normal die rolls for attributes.
My rolling system is that I re-roll 1s and 2s. And from the pile of die start them to the stat piles (typically I have to assign the 1st pile roll and re-roll the whole once more). If I want a normal char w/o any bonuses or penalties (see RUE char creation text) from that stats this works fine. Yes, if I go Full Munchkin, it can get one or two stats really high.

Hotrod · **Posted:** Mon Aug 10, 2020 12:37 pm

I've had a side-bar conversation going over the last few days about the armor rules I put forward here and what level of damage absorption is appropriate. In the context of that discussion, I found some fascinating arrow vs armor test videos.
Arrows vs Leather and Cloth Armors
Arrows vs Chainmail
Arrows vs Plate

tl;dw: it's hard to penetrate the softer armors and basically impossible to penetrate the metal ones.

As I see these rules playing out:
Light armor makes characters effectively immune to weaker blunt weapons and can hold up pretty well for a time against edged weapons, but cannot hold up in prolonged combat
Heavy armor makes characters effectively immune to all but the strongest melee weapons or most-skilled enemies, and it can hold up well for a while against magic weapons.

And in terms of making melee equipment choices interesting:
Arrows offer a workable approach to taking down enemies in armor by bypassing the armor (countered by using a shield), but archers will need some backup weapons to survive in melee combat.
2-handed weapons offer a workable approach to taking down enemies in armor by smashing through AR absorption, but they leave the wielder vulnerable to arrows and dual-wielders.
Armored Dual-wielders have a better chance to bypass armor against non-dual wielders (since one of the two strikes cannot be defended), but they're vulnerable to arrows, and multiple attackers will tend to bypass their defenses, since they lose their auto-parry.
Armored Shield-users are great at staying alive, but will take a lot longer to kill enemies in armor.
Unarmored, un-shielded fighters get wrecked by any of the above in armor pretty quickly.

Thus a melee character in combat will have plenty of viable choices. Unsling a shield for the off-hand or draw a knife? Use a Bastard Sword as a 1-hander with a knife or take a 2-handed grip? Cover behind a shield or charge the enemy archer? Of course, this is how I see things going, and playtesting trumps my own internal modeling. There's also the concern that making armor more effective will prolong combat or make it less intense and exciting.

What do you think?

Veknironth · **Posted:** Tue Aug 11, 2020 5:03 pm

Well, I was the side bar in interest of conversation what I recommended was lowering the amount of damage absorbed by the armor on a roll that was over the AR. Hotrod recommended the amount of damaged absorbed being equal to the AR for each hit. I recommended making it half the AR. I did this because I tried the full AR and no matter what the strike roll was, everything was coming off of the armor - even with just Studded leather. Essentially, all the PCs and NPCs had to chop the armor off before they could affect the body. It was like full environmental armor! So I hope with the half AR abrsorbtion it makes for a middle ground.

-Vek
"They're all getting arrested anyway."

Hotrod · **Posted:** Wed Aug 12, 2020 8:38 am

Veknironth wrote:

Well, I was the side bar in interest of conversation what I recommended was lowering the amount of damage absorbed by the armor on a roll that was over the AR. Hotrod recommended the amount of damaged absorbed being equal to the AR for each hit. I recommended making it half the AR. I did this because I tried the full AR and no matter what the strike roll was, everything was coming off of the armor - even with just Studded leather. Essentially, all the PCs and NPCs had to chop the armor off before they could affect the body. It was like full environmental armor! So I hope with the half AR abrsorbtion it makes for a middle ground.

-Vek
"They're all getting arrested anyway."

A few ideas for you if you're looking for more of a "capture/arrest the P.C.'s"
1. Have the NPCs throw nets on them. You can't dodge/parry, which makes bypassing the armor a lot easier.
2. Threaten them with bows, which are more likely to bypass armor thanks to the hefty defensive penalty.
3. Bring superior numbers and/or armored folks to make the arrest (the medieval equivalent of a SWAT team)
4. Use magic/psionics/toxins to subdue them (the fantasy SWAT team?)
5. Send in a lone N.P.C. to talk the P.C.'s into coming quietly (medieval police negotiator)
6. Have the arrest happen when the P.C.'s don't have their armor on (dinner party, bathing, sleeping, et cetera)
7. Dogpile them (wrestling skill: body block/tackle with multiple arresting folks; pin them down while their buddies disarm them)
8. Give some of the capturing folks the "knock out from behind" attack move. Bonk! P.C. is down for the count.

If I have an opponent hacking away at my armor, I'm not thinking "oh, I'm under arrest." I'm thinking "oh, they're trying to kill me, so I'd better kill them!" I'm actually totally OK with a character coming through combat unscathed due to armor; that's the whole point of armor, after all.

What I worry about with these rules is armor being so effective that it slows combat way, way down into a slow attrition between two people who rarely deal a telling blow.

What if we did this: make all edged weapons and reinforced blunt weapons do damage direct to hit points? We could have physical S.D.C. apply only to unarmed strikes, staff and light clubs, whips, and environmental damage like knockdowns, falls, getting dragged, et cetera. This way, it's your characters' main protection against taking hit point damage.

Veknironth · **Posted:** Wed Aug 12, 2020 11:14 am

Well, the arrest was easy. But that's for another thread.

I also worry about the armor being too formidable. While I have a lot of CQB and hand to hand combat training, I have never really swung a sword, mace, flail, etc., been in any kind of mideival armor, or done bother simultaneously. Maybe someone who has can tell us how difficult it is to get past armor. Maybe that's how it actually works. You bash the armor off first.

-Vek
"I like the mix of real and cinematic. Just more the former."

Hotrod · **Posted:** Thu Aug 13, 2020 8:24 am

I guess that, when it comes to lethal weapons, I'd rather have the armor get bashed off first than the character's physical SDC get bashed off first.

Veknironth · **Posted:** Thu Aug 13, 2020 12:58 pm

I sure would as a person but I wouldn’t want armor to just be extra HP.

-Vek
“It would make things easier.”

Orin J. · **Posted:** Thu Aug 13, 2020 1:18 pm

Veknironth wrote:

I sure would as a person but I wouldn’t want armor to just be extra HP.

-Vek
“It would make things easier.”

it's not extra HP. it's extra SDC, which is more or less how modern armor works now.....

Veknironth · **Posted:** Thu Aug 13, 2020 3:17 pm

Well, I appreciate the distinction but SDC is essentially extra hit points. There are very few things that go directly to hit points and weapons aren’t one of them. It’s why I hate SDC for living creatures.

-Vek
“And it’s why I don’t use it in my games.”

Mark Hall · **Posted:** Thu Aug 13, 2020 4:10 pm

Veknironth wrote:

Well, I appreciate the distinction but SDC is essentially extra hit points. There are very few things that go directly to hit points and weapons aren’t one of them. It’s why I hate SDC for living creatures.

-Vek
“And it’s why I don’t use it in my games.”

I like SDC for living creatures BUT I think it was messed up in how it was implemented.

SDC for living creatures works GREAT for "bumps and bruises and other things that will heal pretty quickly", partially because SDC does heal faster than HP. And if SDC increased with level, that would work fine at a conceptual level... but that's not the route Palladium picked, so SDC is just... THERE. A pile of HP that doesn't DO anything mechanically interesting.

Veknironth · **Posted:** Thu Aug 13, 2020 4:49 pm

Well, I think Mark and I should have our SDC opinions automatically placed in every post, just so we don’t keep doing this.

-Vek
“If SDC were some differently I’d probably feel different about it.”

Mark Hall · **Posted:** Thu Aug 13, 2020 4:53 pm

Veknironth wrote:

Well, I think Mark and I should have our SDC opinions automatically placed in every post, just so we don’t keep doing this.

-Vek
“If SDC were some differently I’d probably feel different about it.”

If we didn't want to rechew old cud, we wouldn't be on the PMB.

Hotrod · **Posted:** Thu Aug 13, 2020 5:06 pm

Veknironth wrote:

I sure would as a person but I wouldn’t want armor to just be extra HP.

-Vek
“It would make things easier.”

I wouldn't want armor to just be extra HP either. In Rifts, it makes sense due to the MDC mechanic.

In Fantasy, physical SDC makes sense in the context of nonlethal combat: unarmed combat, light clubs, whips, staffs, that sort of thing. Against penetrating trauma and lethal varieties of blunt weapons, I prefer to have damage go straight to hit points, which makes the prospect of getting stabbed, axed, or slashed terrifying, as it should.

I like the idea of armor providing a major defensive advantage that doesn't become irrelevant as combatants become more skillful. I also want it to be something that can be
1. Bypassed through luck, skill, or striking when the wearer can't defend
2. Penetrated through by blows of sufficient power
3. Destroyed by weapons to which that type of armor is vulnerable.

This is why I wrote the house rules this way. I'm very curious to hear how they work out in practice, and how they influence player decisions.

kiralon · **Posted:** Thu Aug 13, 2020 6:17 pm

i used sdc in N&S for unarmed combat, weapons went straight to hp
I still dont use sdc for people in fantasy (some monsters with exo skeletons do though)

What most games armours don't do however is show that they rarely stop all the damage. I dont care what sort of padding is under your chainmail when an arrow hits you, it still hurts and can break ribs, and if you watch the tournaments where the guys do wear full plate and fight with real (but blunted) weapons, when they take a hit or 2 on the noggin they certainly don't want to take anymore. Armour should be able to stop a certain amount of damage, but only the rigid types should have a chance at stopping all the damage from going through. (Chain mail does bugger all against cricket bats)

Prysus · **Posted:** Thu Aug 13, 2020 7:54 pm

Hotrod wrote:

In Fantasy, physical SDC makes sense in the context of nonlethal combat: unarmed combat, light clubs, whips, staffs, that sort of thing. Against penetrating trauma and lethal varieties of blunt weapons, I prefer to have damage go straight to hit points, which makes the prospect of getting stabbed, axed, or slashed terrifying, as it should.

Greetings and Salutations. Well, according to Kevin S.D.C. on people works the same as Hit Points.. So, mechanically, I guess they really are just more Hit Points. With that said ...

I often thought of the blunt vs. lethal damage approach. I suppose in a thread about Equipment, this is the more practical approach as well. However, more recently, I've been thinking about what S.D.C. and Hit Points represent. S.D.C. is really the attacks you can just shrug off. I recall (and I don't recall where I read this) that S.D.C. was basically the John Wayne movie where he takes half a dozen gun shots and at the end just walks off because they're flesh wounds. RUE, page 287, specifically includes "shot, stabbed or takes a beating" (Note: This also says this is "realistic" ... so getting shot and stabbed, then just walking it off is apparently realistic to Palladium). This may not be the most realistic, but it is more common with movies. Hit Points are supposed to be the life threatening stuff that puts you in real danger. So while the non-lethal vs. lethal damage makes sense and may be the better overall game mechanic, I'm not sure that it captures the difference between S.D.C. and Hit Points.

The way some people play damage now is closer to the way S.D.C. should work. You take damage, but it doesn't really impact the character until you're at 0. Hit Points however should have additional affects. Rules such as Blood Loss (you won't stop bleeding without medical attention and take additional H.P. damage, though something like First Aid may at least work as a temporary measure), Saves vs. Pain (which can incapacitate characters), etc. being implemented once a character takes any Hit Point damage may better represent the danger. These exists in some places, but typically as "Optional" rules and usually not in the main book. Something like this might put actual consequences into taking Hit Point damage.

Anyways, a bit off topic of equipment in general, but I just wanted to share some thoughts. Farewell and safe journeys.

Veknironth · **Posted:** Thu Aug 13, 2020 8:05 pm

Well, before we descend back into an SDC discussion in Hotrod's combat thread, I'm calling for a halt!

-Vek
"I know I started it."

Hotrod · **Posted:** Wed Sep 02, 2020 11:48 am

Prysus wrote:

Hotrod wrote:

In Fantasy, physical SDC makes sense in the context of nonlethal combat: unarmed combat, light clubs, whips, staffs, that sort of thing. Against penetrating trauma and lethal varieties of blunt weapons, I prefer to have damage go straight to hit points, which makes the prospect of getting stabbed, axed, or slashed terrifying, as it should.

Greetings and Salutations. Well, according to Kevin S.D.C. on people works the same as Hit Points.. So, mechanically, I guess they really are just more Hit Points. With that said ...

I often thought of the blunt vs. lethal damage approach. I suppose in a thread about Equipment, this is the more practical approach as well. However, more recently, I've been thinking about what S.D.C. and Hit Points represent. S.D.C. is really the attacks you can just shrug off. I recall (and I don't recall where I read this) that S.D.C. was basically the John Wayne movie where he takes half a dozen gun shots and at the end just walks off because they're flesh wounds. RUE, page 287, specifically includes "shot, stabbed or takes a beating" (Note: This also says this is "realistic" ... so getting shot and stabbed, then just walking it off is apparently realistic to Palladium). This may not be the most realistic, but it is more common with movies. Hit Points are supposed to be the life threatening stuff that puts you in real danger. So while the non-lethal vs. lethal damage makes sense and may be the better overall game mechanic, I'm not sure that it captures the difference between S.D.C. and Hit Points.

The way some people play damage now is closer to the way S.D.C. should work. You take damage, but it doesn't really impact the character until you're at 0. Hit Points however should have additional affects. Rules such as Blood Loss (you won't stop bleeding without medical attention and take additional H.P. damage, though something like First Aid may at least work as a temporary measure), Saves vs. Pain (which can incapacitate characters), etc. being implemented once a character takes any Hit Point damage may better represent the danger. These exists in some places, but typically as "Optional" rules and usually not in the main book. Something like this might put actual consequences into taking Hit Point damage.

Anyways, a bit off topic of equipment in general, but I just wanted to share some thoughts. Farewell and safe journeys.

I don't hate S.D.C. as it's implemented; taking a hit points-only approach to combat comes with its own problems, and to be fair, it is possible to sustain a superficial, grazing injury from a gunshot, knife, or hammer and walk it off. Using S.D.C. makes combat more forgiving. It also makes combat take longer, and my house rules for armor will tend to compound things to slow combat between armored opponents way, way down. Since this thread is about tweaking the mechanics, I'm OK with changing changing the character S.D.C. rules.

As for creating or incorporating hit point side effects, that's an interesting topic. I like the idea of a telling blow having additional effects. It would help fights end faster, and it would make players pay more attention to their gear/armor, which is what this thread is all about.

It would also be interesting to see more specific injuries that aren't just points, but require some skill or power to heal.

Prysus · **Posted:** Sat Sep 05, 2020 7:20 pm

Hotrod wrote:

Since this thread is about tweaking the mechanics, I'm OK with changing changing the character S.D.C. rules.

Greetings and Salutations. And I'm okay with that. I just wanted to point out actual rules, and different thoughts.

Hotrod wrote:

As for creating or incorporating hit point side effects, that's an interesting topic. I like the idea of a telling blow having additional effects. It would help fights end faster, and it would make players pay more attention to their gear/armor, which is what this thread is all about.

I decided to make this thread about additional affects of Hit Point damage: viewtopic.php?f=5&t=167819

I thought about posting them here, but I don't want to have that as a side topic (especially since it could involve tweaking rules and pros and cons of specifics to those).

Hotrod wrote:

It would also be interesting to see more specific injuries that aren't just points, but require some skill or power to heal.

I'll consider adding something more like that in the future.

And, before I go, I will say this topic of S.D.C. just being additional Hit Points made me thinks of this scene ...

Spoiler:

Thank you for your time and hope everyone is well. Farewell and safe journeys.

Veknironth · **Posted:** Fri Oct 16, 2020 11:29 am

Well, I was thinking about the strength bonus in combat. The way it's written, a person with a 20 STR gets +5 damage on every shot. However, that seems to assume just a one handed strike. There is no increase in damage if you use a weapon with two hands. I think we all know that swinging a weapon with two hands, is almost always going to generate more force and thus damage than a single weapon. Hotrod somewhat addresses this with two handed weapons doing double damage, but that's essentially upping the damage for two handed weapons. It seems to be that either the 20 STR gives +5 to damage at a maximum, i.e. somoene using both hands to hit, or that using two hands would increase that damage bonus.

So, do you guys think it should be using two hands on a weapon (that has enough room to do so) would increase strength bonuses, or using weapons one-handed would reduce strength bonuses? I lean towards the latter, because what do you do about someone with a 15 STR swinging a weapon 2 handed? Do they suddenly jump up in strength? You could say that using 2 hands increases the strength bonus by a set amount but that doesn't take into account the different increases in force for people with different strenghts. Halving the strength bonus (round up or down?) for someone using only one hand seems easier.

-Vek
"Yeah, I have a really strong PC who's a problem."

Hotrod · **Posted:** Fri Oct 16, 2020 1:10 pm

Veknironth wrote:

Well, I was thinking about the strength bonus in combat. The way it's written, a person with a 20 STR gets +5 damage on every shot. However, that seems to assume just a one handed strike. There is no increase in damage if you use a weapon with two hands. I think we all know that swinging a weapon with two hands, is almost always going to generate more force and thus damage than a single weapon. Hotrod somewhat addresses this with two handed weapons doing double damage, but that's essentially upping the damage for two handed weapons. It seems to be that either the 20 STR gives +5 to damage at a maximum, i.e. somoene using both hands to hit, or that using two hands would increase that damage bonus.

So, do you guys think it should be using two hands on a weapon (that has enough room to do so) would increase strength bonuses, or using weapons one-handed would reduce strength bonuses? I lean towards the latter, because what do you do about someone with a 15 STR swinging a weapon 2 handed? Do they suddenly jump up in strength? You could say that using 2 hands increases the strength bonus by a set amount but that doesn't take into account the different increases in force for people with different strenghts. Halving the strength bonus (round up or down?) for someone using only one hand seems easier.

-Vek
"Yeah, I have a really strong PC who's a problem."

Per the house rules in the OP here (which I've been updating and tweaking as this thread has developed), the double-damage of 2-handers doubles all bonuses, including those from strength. Mathematically, it's

(weapon damage + bonuses) x 2 = two-hander damage.

I can definitely see the perks of reducing 1-handed damage bonuses instead, and that's a perfectly legitimate way to go. It will make 1-handers less damaging and less of a threat.

Given what I've done with armor and shields becoming more effective at protection, I think that it's important to give characters the option to do more damage, not so much for the sake of realism as much as for the sake of keeping combat relatively fast-paced. Reducing damage bonuses would seem to work against that. Additionally, reducing these bonuses from strength, but not from other sources, might complicate things, whereas "figure up your damage, then double it" is fairly simple. Thus, while I could see your approach being effective on its own or in the context of a different set of house rules, I think it's not as well suited to the other rules changes I've proposed here.

The Beast · **Posted:** Sat Oct 17, 2020 9:04 pm

Veknironth wrote:

Well, I was thinking about the strength bonus in combat. The way it's written, a person with a 20 STR gets +5 damage on every shot. However, that seems to assume just a one handed strike. There is no increase in damage if you use a weapon with two hands. I think we all know that swinging a weapon with two hands, is almost always going to generate more force and thus damage than a single weapon. Hotrod somewhat addresses this with two handed weapons doing double damage, but that's essentially upping the damage for two handed weapons. It seems to be that either the 20 STR gives +5 to damage at a maximum, i.e. somoene using both hands to hit, or that using two hands would increase that damage bonus.

So, do you guys think it should be using two hands on a weapon (that has enough room to do so) would increase strength bonuses, or using weapons one-handed would reduce strength bonuses? I lean towards the latter, because what do you do about someone with a 15 STR swinging a weapon 2 handed? Do they suddenly jump up in strength? You could say that using 2 hands increases the strength bonus by a set amount but that doesn't take into account the different increases in force for people with different strenghts. Halving the strength bonus (round up or down?) for someone using only one hand seems easier.

-Vek
"Yeah, I have a really strong PC who's a problem."

Someone's been watching the Kenpachi vs Nnoitra battle from Bleach.

Stone Gargoyle · **Posted:** Sun Oct 18, 2020 9:48 am

Father Goose wrote:

This is really good stuff! I have tried a few times to make combat more interesting and been mostly dissatisfied. The proposals here are exactly what I have been looking for!

I find that Palladium's rules need quite a bit of fine tuning and modification. Rules like this make the game more realistic. Yes, very well done!

Stone Gargoyle · **Posted:** Sun Oct 18, 2020 9:56 am

Veknironth wrote:

Well, I appreciate the distinction but SDC is essentially extra hit points. There are very few things that go directly to hit points and weapons aren’t one of them. It’s why I hate SDC for living creatures.

-Vek
“And it’s why I don’t use it in my games.”

I think attacks should go direct to HP on a Natural 20 whether you make a called shot or not. Sometimes you should be able to just get lucky. Natural 20 and Natural 1 don't seem to be as big a deal in Palladium games as they are in others.

Zer0 Kay · **Posted:** Sun Oct 18, 2020 2:02 pm

Stone Gargoyle wrote:

Veknironth wrote:

Well, I appreciate the distinction but SDC is essentially extra hit points. There are very few things that go directly to hit points and weapons aren’t one of them. It’s why I hate SDC for living creatures.

-Vek
“And it’s why I don’t use it in my games.”

I think attacks should go direct to HP on a Natural 20 whether you make a called shot or not. Sometimes you should be able to just get lucky. Natural 20 and Natural 1 don't seem to be as big a deal in Palladium games as they are in others.

They aren't, in part due to the greater amount of time for character creation and therefore the greater emotional investment.

If your gonna do critical like other games, do it like other games and require a double roll to kill.

Stone Gargoyle · **Posted:** Sun Oct 18, 2020 3:08 pm

Zer0 Kay wrote:

Stone Gargoyle wrote:

I think attacks should go direct to HP on a Natural 20 whether you make a called shot or not. Sometimes you should be able to just get lucky. Natural 20 and Natural 1 don't seem to be as big a deal in Palladium games as they are in others.

They aren't, in part due to the greater amount of time for character creation and therefore the greater emotional investment.

If your gonna do critical like other games, do it like other games and require a double roll to kill.

Of course. I wasn't speaking strictly of killing though. Just because an attack goes to HP it doesn't mean it kills you. Also, even if you go to zero HP, in Palladium there's this thing called save vs. coma/death.

Zer0 Kay · **Posted:** Tue Oct 20, 2020 4:25 am

Stone Gargoyle wrote:

Zer0 Kay wrote:

Stone Gargoyle wrote:

I think attacks should go direct to HP on a Natural 20 whether you make a called shot or not. Sometimes you should be able to just get lucky. Natural 20 and Natural 1 don't seem to be as big a deal in Palladium games as they are in others.

They aren't, in part due to the greater amount of time for character creation and therefore the greater emotional investment.

If your gonna do critical like other games, do it like other games and require a double roll to kill.

Of course. I wasn't speaking strictly of killing though. Just because an attack goes to HP it doesn't mean it kills you. Also, even if you go to zero HP, in Palladium there's this thing called save vs. coma/death.

You forget there are two other "steps" one optional.
1. (Only in MDC afaik) G.I. Joe rule
2. It isnt just 0 it is 0 - P.E. before death.

Stone Gargoyle · **Posted:** Tue Oct 20, 2020 8:01 am

Zer0 Kay wrote:

Stone Gargoyle wrote:

Zer0 Kay wrote:

Stone Gargoyle wrote:

I think attacks should go direct to HP on a Natural 20 whether you make a called shot or not. Sometimes you should be able to just get lucky. Natural 20 and Natural 1 don't seem to be as big a deal in Palladium games as they are in others.

They aren't, in part due to the greater amount of time for character creation and therefore the greater emotional investment.

If your gonna do critical like other games, do it like other games and require a double roll to kill.

Of course. I wasn't speaking strictly of killing though. Just because an attack goes to HP it doesn't mean it kills you. Also, even if you go to zero HP, in Palladium there's this thing called save vs. coma/death.

You forget there are two other "steps" one optional.
1. (Only in MDC afaik) G.I. Joe rule
2. It isnt just 0 it is 0 - P.E. before death.

Anyhow, Natural 20s are not that common amongst my group so it's really not a big thing.

Home

FAQ

Search

Forums of the Megaverse®

Login

Register

Options

How to Make Melee Equipment Choices Interesting?

Topic Options

Who is online