Maiming rules showcase and review - Page 8 - Myth-Weavers

Notices


GM Workshop

A community-created and maintained place for Game Masters of all systems to bounce ideas around. It's a place for inspiration and sharing tips.


Maiming rules showcase and review

   
Quote:
Originally Posted by Veradux View Post
And then it's suddenly not when you add in your DR rules. Especially since Dex to Damage with Two-Weapon Fighting and Sneak Attack would require access to sources you do not allow. Either that or some awkward multiclassing whose progression would result in a less-than-ideal outcome. Doubly so when you know you likely won't be triggering Sneak Attack all the time.
You know, when I repeatedly mention using dex for damage, you might think "Hm. He must know a way to get dex for damage with this weapon set. Either something from the ruleboook or something homebrewed.". I have a feat for that. Granted, it's not like it affects all weapons, but it is a thing you can get.

Quote:
Being able to do 1d6+3d6+4 damage is pretty nice if you can hit consistently, but if your opponent is wearing armor that gives him DR 10 you're still doing less than the two-handed dude.
Boy, that's specific.

1. Weapon materials will usually increase that to 1d8 or 1d10.
2. Only having +4 is shameful for a PC, at 5th level having +6 or better is not only possible, but likely.
3. Don't forget to hit twice.

Quote:
That's not a problem with your houserules, it's a problem in the system that your houserules exacerbate, seemingly unintentionally. Doubly so when you considered that the Rules Compendium lists that Sneak Attack is not rolled at all if the basic weapon damage does not break DR. My TWF in your game would likely be using a two-hander+armor spikes.
Rules compendium can shove it. It seems like Wizard's best effort to forever prevent any class that isn't a caster from being even the tiniest, most minute, insignificantly bit useful. I'd suggest that if you own a copy, you find a nice concrete surface on which to set it on fire. Sneak attack is a damned good way to overcome DR, and Wizards can bite me.

Quote:
In fact, I have questions regarding similar things in your currently advertising game.
Ask them there, they're irrelevant here.

Quote:
Under your model, that's about (1d10+3)x2 for a 14 Strength Steel Spear.
Uh, no. That's (1d12+3)x2.

Quote:
Even against Tattered Layered Clothing, that's an average of 15 damage.
No, that's an average of 16 damage. And if you'd gotten the math right in the first place, it'd be 18 damage.

Quote:
Oh no, what a nightmare to my 5th level 14 Con Barbarian's average 48+20 Rage HP.
One time? Sure. Charge a spear wall and see if you only hit one spear. Also, don't you have a horse you're charging on to make that lance work? How is the horse going to handle slamming into spears at top speed?

Quote:
Slap on the thing to intended to be used for charging characters (Steel Assault Armor) and we're looking at an average of two damage from our spearman on a set vs. charge.
1. 4, actually. And that's assuming they aim for YOU, rather than your mount.
2. That's one spearman. Spear walls are a tactic of massed infantry.
3. A decent DM will stop your charge when you end up with more spears in you than Doogie Howser.
4. The strength check to overrule #3 would be your mount's, not yours.
5. Since a longspear has more reach than you do, you'll be stopped out of range.

Quote:
Even if we switch to the d10 Fighter or Paladin (or the d12 Knight), we're laughing off that damage unless it's coming in multiple times.
1. It will be.
2. A heavy warhorse has 30hp. I hope you've armoured them.

Quote:
This is why you rarely see the Set tactic used in play. If your opponent is telegraphing that he will charge, it's usually better to avoid the charge instead of hoping you can 1HKO him.
If you're a single character, sure. But what if you're a platoon of infantry who showed up because the PCs are on a rampage? I think the set mechanic makes more sense then, if they see a PC ubercharger on a horse.

Quote:
Unless the offense gets an ambush or wins initiative.
This is both unlikely, and goes without saying.

Quote:
We see why, but we don't see why it needs to affect the player in such a way. The player is MUCH more likely to be affected something. A vast majority of the time, an NPC is defeated at the end of combat and then they disappear from the player's story. However, the greatest subject of your injury rules will be the player purely by merit of being in multiple combats.
And how often does the player take 1/4 of their hit points all at once? When that happens, how often is it from a crit? Once you've figured those odds out, which may take a while, remember that the hit could easily be a chest or a head wound, AND that it isn't guaranteed to land on a stat the PC cares about even if it lands on the right option.

Quote:
If someone takes 4 points of ability drain to any one of the physical stats, at second worst they're either retired or a burden.
That's assuming it lands on a stat that is both critically important and idiotically low. It could also land on, say, a barbarian's charisma score. "And then he shrugged it off, because he's a PC barbarian and therefore a cookie-cutter 3 int retard, and he can barely talk anyway.".

Quote:
At best, you seek out a 7th level Cleric to hit you with a 290gp Restoration.
You mean, they might have to find a cleric two levels higher than they started and spend pocket change? How horrible. Why, there might only be two or three of them in their diocese! How will they ever find... They'll go to a church. They'll go to the church and ask where the nearest bishop is. Then they'll spend 1/30th of their WBL on a spell. Then it won't come up again for another 20-30 encounters, and by then their party's cleric will be able to do it himself and there will be zero issue.

Quote:
It seems like nothing more than an annoyance, but do you really need to pester your players with annoyances?
How much of an annoyance is a spell the party cleric can cast two levels after they started? That's like saying "Ooh, better watch out guys. These mummies have mummy rot. That'll totally be a problem for a whole day if we didn't prepare for it."

Quote:
Especially since the burden might be heavier than you think. You may not have access to such healing magic, like what I image your currently advertising game will be like.
What game are you looking at, exactly? Because the currently advertising one has two divine casters.

Quote:
And if the TWF gets hit with a Dex penalty, they may actually lose access to TWF due to the drain. Same with the Trip/Combat Maneuver Fighter and the Int requirement for Combat Expertise. Or Power Attack.

Or, god forbid, losing entire class features due to losing Dodge, a common prerequisite for Prestige Classes.
Is that a rules compendium thing? Because last I checked that didn't happen for the same reason you can't meet a requirement with bull's strength or a belt of giant's strength. I'm pretty sure it's your permanent, not current, ability scores you use for those.

Alright...lemee pick out the relevant bits...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Avianmosquito View Post
3. Don't forget to hit twice.
And apply DR twice.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Avianmosquito View Post
Rules compendium can shove it. It seems like Wizard's best effort to forever prevent any class that isn't a caster from being even the tiniest, most minute, insignificantly bit useful. I'd suggest that if you own a copy, you find a nice concrete surface on which to set it on fire. Sneak attack is a damned good way to overcome DR, and Wizards can bite me.
Whole-heartedly agreed, but I had to bring it up for posterity.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Avianmosquito View Post
One time? Sure. Charge a spear wall and see if you only hit one spear. Also, don't you have a horse you're charging on to make that lance work? How is the horse going to handle slamming into spears at top speed?

4. The strength check to overrule #3 would be your mount's, not yours.
5. Since a longspear has more reach than you do, you'll be stopped out of range.
Unless your houserules changed something, being hit during a charge does not stop the charge.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Avianmosquito View Post
How much of an annoyance is a spell the party cleric can cast two levels after they started? That's like saying "Ooh, better watch out guys. These mummies have mummy rot. That'll totally be a problem for a whole day if we didn't prepare for it."

What game are you looking at, exactly? Because the currently advertising one has two divine casters.
I mean the traveling portion. If someone gets hit by the drain and it's nothing more than an annoyance, why is the rule there?
In my old crit houserules (again, very untested, nobody gave proper feedback on it when I tried to post them, sadly), rather than specific ability damage, I included things like losing fingers. The mechanical effect was that a Nat 2 was treated as a Nat 1 (I never used Crit-Failures rules, only that they auto-miss attack rolls) when using that hand. Losing more fingers, up to two lost fingers on a given hand, further increased this chance. Losing a third counted as losing the hand for the purposes of wielding weapons and fine motor skills.

Two levels can be a long time, especially in PbP. I know of games that level once a session, but there's also ones that consider themselves lucky to level once a real-life year.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Avianmosquito View Post
Is that a rules compendium thing? Because last I checked that didn't happen for the same reason you can't meet a requirement with bull's strength or a belt of giant's strength. I'm pretty sure it's your permanent, not current, ability scores you use for those.
You actually CAN use an item to qualify for a feat or ability. It's not your permanent score, it's your current score, including any modifiers or bonuses. The PHB does not specify anything about "permanent" ability scores. In fact, it does not even define such a phrase. There is no "base ability score" either.

It's talked about in fluff text in the Complete Warrior and directly allowed in a Web Help article. Spells no, item yes.

However, it can be a bit cheesey (I'm looking at you, Ring of Divine Might) and I can wholly understand wanting to change it, but losing an ability score via poison, Curse, or ability drain can disqualify you from using a feat, but does not remove the feat from your list.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Veradux View Post
And apply DR twice.
Even so, more damage is being dealt as long as sneak attack is in effect. And do recall, not everything you fight is wearing armour, or even clothing, and two-weapon fighting will be MORE effective against the typical enemy than this.

Quote:
Unless your houserules changed something, being hit during a charge does not stop the charge.
The houserules didn't, but rules can't cover everything and running into a dozen spears is a lot like running into an especially death-inducing brick wall. You're not just being hit during a charge, you are effectively impacting a solid object you must push through. If I'm not mistaken, problems of this type are resolved with a strength check. Except, you're mounted and your mount is doing the pushing, so wouldn't it be your mount's strength check?

Quote:
I mean the traveling portion. If someone gets hit by the drain and it's nothing more than an annoyance, why is the rule there?
Because brain damage occurred, and having some consequence to that makes sense in-game and has the players respond to it. You know, the reason damage exists in the first place.

Quote:
Two levels can be a long time, especially in PbP. I know of games that level once a session, but there's also ones that consider themselves lucky to level once a real-life year.
Okay, so your contention is that play by post is slow. Well then, consider my PbP campaigns. Here are four links to each of them, from which you can find each thread. But to save you time, in case you are feeling lazy, two have levelled once, one is just getting up to speed and the fourth hasn't started yet. I am well aware of the slowness of play by post games, and yet I feel two levels is not that big of a deal even if it means you have an impediment for a lot of real-world time. It seems to me there's some inherent disconnect in our goals. And also, I'm not using these rules in my play by post games.

Quote:
You actually CAN use an item to qualify for a feat or ability. It's not your permanent score, it's your current score, including any modifiers or bonuses. The PHB does not specify anything about "permanent" ability scores. In fact, it does not even define such a phrase. There is no "base ability score" either.

It's talked about in fluff text in the Complete Warrior and directly allowed in a Web Help article. Spells no, item yes.

However, it can be a bit cheesey (I'm looking at you, Ring of Divine Might) and I can wholly understand wanting to change it, but losing an ability score via poison, Curse, or ability drain can disqualify you from using a feat, but does not remove the feat from your list.
This is really dumb, for a lot of reasons. I can get into them, but you saying this bit leads me to believe you already get the premise.

Quote:
However, it can be a bit cheesey (I'm looking at you, Ring of Divine Might) and I can wholly understand wanting to change it,
So then why can't you connect that bit to this bit?

Quote:
losing an ability score via poison, Curse, or ability drain can disqualify you from using a feat
If you understand why magic making you able to use a feat is stupid, why can't you understand the very same thing abut magic disabling a feat? Why is it wrong for a positive effect but right for a negative effect?







 

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Last Database Backup 2018-07-16 09:00:07am local time
Myth-Weavers Status