| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14168
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
 Posted: Sun Jun 30, 2019 1:20 am Post subject: Re: Stun Damage Optional Rule |
 |
|
| CRMcNeill wrote: | | Leona Makk wrote: | | Interesting....perhaps its worth doing a little rewrite on the Force Power "Resist Stun." Let me think..... |
Resist Stun always seemed somewhat silly to me. Personally, I'd rather just fold it into an expanded version of Absorb/Dissipate that allows the user to absorb the energy from physical attacks as well. That would also get rid of Lesser Force Shield, too. |
I disagree Ab/Dis energy would work on physical attacks..
| Leona Makk wrote: |
Would you rewrite Absorb/Dissipate to allow Control to replace Strength for damage resistance? The Iron Toad Skin Martial Arts fans would approve, but it would need something to prevent it from being too overpowered. Is having to declare a power use for each attack enough? |
As it is, with the ability to absorb blaster bolts, jedi are rather powerful. Add in the ability to absorb physical attacks, then they potentially become god like..
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Leona Makk
Lieutenant
Joined: 03 Feb 2018
Posts: 91
Location: Minneapolis, MN
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 30, 2019 2:37 am Post subject: Re: Stun Damage Optional Rule |
|
|
| garhkal wrote: |
As it is, with the ability to absorb blaster bolts, jedi are rather powerful. Add in the ability to absorb physical attacks, then they potentially become god like.. |
True. If Kenobi and Luke have taught us anything, it is that Anakin Skywalker can not absorb a solid kick. He goes down every time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Naaman
Vice Admiral
Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 3190
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 30, 2019 10:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
I kinda feel like resist stun should be an "auto-activate" power:
Character suffers a stun, immediately rolls control. On a successful result, the stun basically never happened, but the player pays a small price of some kind (like losing his next action, but reactions can still be made).
As for brawling damage, I'm inclined to think that brawling skill should matter. If we consider the damage rule from RoE, we could use a variation:
If the attack roll is x above the reaction roll, the damage can be (potentially) lethal at the attacker's option. If the damage is x+y above the reaction, then the hit also does y more damage (or y÷3 or y÷5 more damage).
In other words, we would want to retain the possibility (and high probability) that a dedicated boxer/martial artist could consistently deliver a knockout punch to 90%+ of the mooks he encounters the first time he lands a hit (via the "incapacitated" result on the wound chart). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14168
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 30, 2019 2:21 pm Post subject: Re: Stun Damage Optional Rule |
|
|
| Leona Makk wrote: | | garhkal wrote: |
As it is, with the ability to absorb blaster bolts, jedi are rather powerful. Add in the ability to absorb physical attacks, then they potentially become god like.. |
True. If Kenobi and Luke have taught us anything, it is that Anakin Skywalker can not absorb a solid kick. He goes down every time. |
Vader also did it to luke in ESB when he threw those things at him, on cloud city.
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16281
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 30, 2019 6:10 pm Post subject: Re: Stun Damage Optional Rule |
|
|
| garhkal wrote: | | I disagree Ab/Dis energy would work on physical attacks.. |
The only thing that surprises me about this is that it took you 11 hours and 32 minutes to tell me about it
| Quote: | | Leona Makk wrote: |
Would you rewrite Absorb/Dissipate to allow Control to replace Strength for damage resistance? The Iron Toad Skin Martial Arts fans would approve, but it would need something to prevent it from being too overpowered. Is having to declare a power use for each attack enough? |
As it is, with the ability to absorb blaster bolts, jedi are rather powerful. Add in the ability to absorb physical attacks, then they potentially become god like.. |
And yet, the ability to harden one's skin against physical attacks is a well-known trope of mystic martial arts moves. Since Jedi are the ultimate expression of mystic martial arts, I don't see the problem. It's not like the Jedi is completely dissipating the object hitting him, either, just the kinetic energy it's imparting. And considering that Absorb/Dissipate can't be used as a reaction, the only way it works is if the Jedi knows it's coming (has Danger Sense or Lightsaber Combat up) and declares Absorb/Dissipate as a normal action at the beginning of the round.
IMO, allowing this would explain how Jedi can get hit by starfighter-scale laser blasts (Obi-wan vs. Slave One at Kamino), get tossed through the air but suffer no lasting damage.
As far as other Jedi still managing to get in kicks and the like, I refer you to both my remark above about not being able to use Absorb/Dissipate as a reaction and the fact that, when two Force users face each other, precognitive abilities like Danger Sense and Lightsaber Combat are muddled by the fact that two Force users are involved.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bren
Vice Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 01, 2019 1:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| CRMcNeill wrote: | | I addressed that above, by saying it would only occur on a Wild Dice failure by the attacker. |
Yes I saw that. And if that works better for you that's great. You are already using a confirmation roll so it's no increase in steps.
But for me, I don't like using a roll to confirm wild die results, so using a confirmation roll would add a step for me and I don't want that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14168
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 01, 2019 3:28 am Post subject: Re: Stun Damage Optional Rule |
|
|
| CRMcNeill wrote: | | garhkal wrote: | | I disagree Ab/Dis energy would work on physical attacks.. |
The only thing that surprises me about this is that it took you 11 hours and 32 minutes to tell me about it |
Well, in the prior thread, where it was discussed i was against it.. Back iirc in 2016..
So that shouldn't surprise you one bit.
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tupteq
Commander
Joined: 11 Apr 2007
Posts: 285
Location: Rzeszów, Poland
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 01, 2019 11:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Bren wrote: |
Stun Damage > Stamina Roll = Effect
0-3 = 1 Stun
4-8 = 2 Stuns
9-12 = 3 Stuns; character is unconscious for 2D minutes.
13-16 = 4 Stuns; as above plus character is Wounded.
17-20 = 5 Stuns; as above plus character is Wounded x2.
21-24 = 6 Stuns; as above plus character is Incapacitated.
25-28 = 7 Stuns; as above plus character is Mortally Wounded.
29-32 = 8 Stuns; Killed.
|
I did something similar in my HRs, but in slightly simpler and more brutal way. My table looks like that (I put in parentheses standard wounds for reference):
1x Stun (Stunned)
2x Stun (Wounded)
3x Stun (Incapacitated)
Unconscious (Mortally Wounded)
Incapacitated (Killed)
I added instant unconsciousness result to make even wookiees to afraid of stun setting. I have also slightly wider range of results in this table (Killed = 20+), so spectacular results are rarer (although still possible). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bren
Vice Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 01, 2019 3:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Tupteq wrote: | | I did something similar in my HRs, but in slightly simpler and more brutal way. |
Is your table one size fits all, i.e. a 2D STR character and a 5D STR character each takes the same number of stuns?
Or is it relative?
In case it wasn't clear, the table of mine you quoted is only for a resistance 3D character. It looks different for characters with different STR/Stamina totals. (I wouldn't use different table for 2D, 3D, 4D, etc. I'd just do the math on how many stuns inflicted and compare that to the resistance dice. I only used that table to try to make it easier for folks to grok what I meant. I hope doing that made things less rather than more confusing.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tupteq
Commander
Joined: 11 Apr 2007
Posts: 285
Location: Rzeszów, Poland
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 01, 2019 5:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bren wrote: | | Tupteq wrote: | | I did something similar in my HRs, but in slightly simpler and more brutal way. |
Is your table one size fits all, i.e. a 2D STR character and a 5D STR character each takes the same number of stuns?
Or is it relative?
In case it wasn't clear, the table of mine you quoted is only for a resistance 3D character. It looks different for characters with different STR/Stamina totals. (I wouldn't use different table for 2D, 3D, 4D, etc. I'd just do the math on how many stuns inflicted and compare that to the resistance dice. I only used that table to try to make it easier for folks to grok what I meant. I hope doing that made things less rather than more confusing.) |
I'm using just one table table, no matter what STR value is, in other words it's absolute, not relative. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16281
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 02, 2019 12:13 pm Post subject: Re: Stun Damage Optional Rule |
|
|
| garhkal wrote: | | So that shouldn't surprise you one bit. |
You missed my point.
The fact that you disagree with this isn't surprising. What surprised me was that it took you almost half a day to sniff out this heresy and respond to it. In fact, when I originally hit the Submit button on it, I thought, "somewhere garhkal is going about his life and suddenly paused and says 'I sense a disturbance in the Force.'"
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16281
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 02, 2019 12:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bren wrote: | Stun Damage > Stamina Roll = Effect
0-3 = 1 Stun
4-8 = 2 Stuns
9-12 = 3 Stuns; character is unconscious for 2D minutes.
13-16 = 4 Stuns; as above plus character is Wounded.
17-20 = 5 Stuns; as above plus character is Wounded x2.
21-24 = 6 Stuns; as above plus character is Incapacitated.
25-28 = 7 Stuns; as above plus character is Mortally Wounded.
29-32 = 8 Stuns; Killed. |
I remembered where I used something like this; it was an Ionization Damage optional rule, whereby if Ionization passed a certain level, it started inflicting permanent EMP damage to the electronic systems. Basically, you had to massively overload the ionization damage on a target, but if you did, a portion of the damage didn't automatically roll off, and stuck with the target until it was repaired. This replaced the Controls Dead result with an open-ended Ionization chart that started to stick after the 4D-5D ionization range (IIRC)
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14168
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 02, 2019 5:04 pm Post subject: Re: Stun Damage Optional Rule |
|
|
| CRMcNeill wrote: | | garhkal wrote: | | So that shouldn't surprise you one bit. |
You missed my point.
The fact that you disagree with this isn't surprising. What surprised me was that it took you almost half a day to sniff out this heresy and respond to it. In fact, when I originally hit the Submit button on it, I thought, "somewhere garhkal is going about his life and suddenly paused and says 'I sense a disturbance in the Force.'" |
I was too busy out mowing the lawn when you were posting. That's why it took some time to get to it..
And the only "Disturbance" i detected, was a massive case of wind... Smelly wind that is! 
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bren
Vice Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 02, 2019 5:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Tupteq wrote: | | I'm using just one table table, no matter what STR value is, in other words it's absolute, not relative. |
That's what I thought, but I wanted to be sure.
Given that, it comparison to what I proposed your table makes stun damage more hazardous for high strength characters like Wookiees and less hazardous for low strength characters like normal STR 2D humans. Not that there is necessarily anything wrong with it, but it isn't what I want. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bren
Vice Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 02, 2019 5:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CRMcNeill wrote: | | I remembered where I used something like this; it was an Ionization Damage optional rule, whereby if Ionization passed a certain level, it started inflicting permanent EMP damage to the electronic systems. Basically, you had to massively overload the ionization damage on a target, but if you did, a portion of the damage didn't automatically roll off, and stuck with the target until it was repaired. This replaced the Controls Dead result with an open-ended Ionization chart that started to stick after the 4D-5D ionization range (IIRC) |
Either I didn't see that or I forgot it. In either case, I like that idea. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
