|
Post by powerfull on Sept 5, 2006 19:27:02 GMT -5
New revamped rule for energy and health for MTR. I have modified my first post on this thread to include it.
|
|
|
Post by powerfull on Sept 6, 2006 13:26:18 GMT -5
added a somewhat different way of dealing with 2x dammage. Check number eight in my first post. I also tried to make the energy new energy rule a bit more easy to understand and corrected a typo it it. Professor Gavier's cad should write energy: 2/3p instead of energy : 3/2p.
|
|
|
Post by Ricochet on Sept 7, 2006 1:14:40 GMT -5
Just one thing on number 7: The guide to Avengers actually mentions using lines of experience to buy stones. The only difference with your version is that the guide says 2 lines for one red stone. Now this doesn't have to be more balanced, I mean if you read that section through you'll find at least one thing isn't right. I'm just saying this so you know, and everybody else knows. We kinda used the same system for challenges in Gene Nation.
|
|
|
Post by beryl on Sept 7, 2006 6:26:51 GMT -5
Don't like it.
The way firearms work is (like you said) if they hit, it's gonna hurt. That's not always the case with melee weapons. A glancing blow seems more common, I think. With this rule, even a glancing blow is still quite painful. That doesn't seem quite right.
Really, it comes down to this: if you get shot, you now have a hole in your body. If you get cut, there are a million different degrees to which you could be cut. There are shallow cuts and deep cuts.
If you choose to proceed, be aware that many powers are going to be altered, and should be repriced accordingly. Claws, for example, now do 2x Damage. Force Blasts might, depending on your mood.
But, now, let met just clarify something for these rules as a whole: is this for people who want to play normal humans with no super powers?
Because it's all fine and dandy with me if you want to change how the basic concepts of the game work, like stats and damage and stuff. But once you start saying that you can't put "No 2x damage on Toughness", it seems less like you're reworking the system and more like you're limiting characters in the powers they can have. That's not what MURPG is about, IMO.
Now, if you wanted to make it more expensive (and if you're making 2x damage more common, you should), great. But taking it out entirely seems wrong to me.
|
|
|
Post by powerfull on Sept 7, 2006 7:44:31 GMT -5
Ricochet : So a rule for it already exists! Cool! I have modified my first post with the rule already in the book. Beryl : Well, that's not always the case with firearms also. Firearms cause very little dammage in proportion to body mass. I bet most of us would prefer to get shot from a .22 rather then getting choped at with an axe any day of the year. Only heavy weapons such as shotguns and heavy assault rifles cause dammage that JUST MIGHT be considerable in proportion to body mass. It's just as easy for a gun to strike a glancing blow. As a matter of fact, the only way a weapon can incapacitate a determined opponent is by strinking at his nervous system (the head or the spine), or cause (eventually) enough blood loss to drop the blood presure. Even a direct hit to the heart, still leaves the opponent with about 10 seconds of willful action. There have been reports of people taking as many as 25 shots from low caliber firearms without being incapacitated. They eventually died of course, but that's not the point. The point is, swords are dangerous. Not as dangerous as a firearm when wielded by the average joe, since the average jow has a str of 1, but very dangerous non the less. It really comes down to this : If tou get shot, there are million different degrees to which you could be shot. There are strikes that just graze your body, or pass right through soft tissue without hitting a bone or an artery or a major organ, or hitting a bone at an angle and get deflected. You can also get pierced by a sword or a knife instead of getting sliced. And only a high calliber gun striking with great precission at the bone could cut your arm off. Claws are CERTAINLY going to be altered, since I intend to make all melee weapons modifiers. But remember also that under the new rule, an opponent can't opt to KO if struck by a <<killing>> attack, meaning that you probably gonna end up killing or seriously injuring those you fight with. That's fine if you play Wolverine on a Wolverine comic, but if you play Wolverine in an X-Men comic, you will end up using your claws only to look intimidating, or as a beer opener, or to strike at robots, aliens, buildings,etc. This is intended for people who want to play anything. Also I'm not sayng that you can't put no2x, I'm just saying that you're gonna have to justify it accordingly. I actualy intead to add no2x option to powers like healing factor, transformation, etc allowing for even more people to buy it. . Being a mass of ion energy, or having a healing factor that would make a pierced lung just a temporary 1cm hole in the body and a 70% skin burn just a temporary aesthetic problem, does the trick. Just having very tough skin doesn't. If it passes through it, you receive 2x (it should be pretty obvious by now that I believe wolverine would suffer no 2x dammage).
|
|
|
Post by Ricochet on Sept 7, 2006 8:03:13 GMT -5
Yeah, the point is that the rule only applies to options and that there are currently no options for actions with a fixed cost, rather than additional action numbers. The only options that have a fixed cost are the ones from modifiers, and modifiers can't be improved by lines.
So this rule is useless, at least the way it's written up in the book. I think this might be a good alternative.
|
|
|
Post by powerfull on Sept 7, 2006 16:47:22 GMT -5
I have thought of another rule to differenciate between strong and skilled characters, that also heps determined if the opponent has made contact at all, but seems quite complicated. The point is , CC only combines with str, but there are differences. It goes something like that : When you attack, you decide how many stones you spend on CC and how many on str. Toughness and forcefields are more effective against skill, and drop CC damage by 1 WHITE stone for every red stone. Meaning that if the str points are not enough to overcome the opponent's toughness or forcefield, than your close combat skill is much less helpful against him (it does help a little though, maby you can locate a weak point). Reflective Dodge on the other hand is more effective against str and reduces str by 1 white stone for each red stone in it. Meaning that if your skill is not enough to overcome the opponent's reflexes, then your str has a much tougher time at doing so (it does help a little though, maby your incredible strength forces him to lose balance and slam against a wall). CC and STR cancel out each other as usual. Example: Captain America decides to go up against a sentinel robot, but unfortunately he forgot his shield home (this is complicated enough as it is, lets not make it more so). He takes the robot by surprise and strikes it from behind. He uses 5CC and 4STR attack. The robot did not spend any stones for defence that round. But the sentinel has a toughness of 5. Captain's str of 4 negates 4 stones from the robot's toughness, but still 1 stone remains, canceling 3 of Captain's CC stones, leaving a mere 2 points of damage. The sentinel decides to respond with a hand to hand attack of it's own. It spends 9 stones in str and 4CC stones. Captain uses 5 stones in CC trying to defend against the robot's leathal attack. His 5CC stones, easily reduce the robot's CC stones to 0, leaving 1 stone to defend against the robot's strength, further reducing it to 8. His reflective dodge of +2 is particularly effective against the slow moving robot, further reducing it's attack score by 6, leaving only 2 points, that come short against his toughness of +1 and chain mail armor of +1. Let's think of another example, a dammaged sentinel suddenly becomes reactivated and attacks rogue. This sentinel has no access to the database and is not aware of rogue being super tough. It spends 6 stones of str and 4 stones of CC to attack rogue, that doesn't bother with defence and spends 3 stones to CC and 8 to str to attack it. Rogue did not defend, so all of the sentinel's CC stones pass to damage. However his str is only 6, and falls short against rogue's 8 points of toughness. She still has 2 toughness defence, and sentinel's 4CC stones can only drop it by 1 more point, so it doesn't hurt rogue. Rogue on the other side strikes at it with an 8str and 3CC attack. Sentinel has no defence, so all of rogue's CC stones pass uncontested. rogue's 8 str stones easily penetrate sentinel's toughness of 5, reducing it to 0, and inflicting 3 damage. Adding 3 more from the 3CC stones that passed, deals 2 white stones of damage to the robot. So as you see from the examples, captain america could never hurt the thing, since the thing's toughness would negate his 4 str and still had 3 points in it, more than enough to negate Captain america's 7CC stones (3CC stones are required to penetrate a single toughness stone), even if it stood there and didn't try to defend it self at all. On the other hand, it would also be very difficult for the hulk to strike against spiderman (captain america could pull the trick however). Did anyone got how all this stuff is supposed to work? I barely did so my self.
|
|
|
Post by Scriptus on Sept 9, 2006 11:19:49 GMT -5
i think i get this one. i've been working on a similar system myself. while your solution is complicated i do think it is more realistic than the current format of the game. good idea. i'm pretty sure that cap's shield should supplement his strength if we are going to add that in. (i still think a +6 is ridiculous for that shield)
|
|
|
Post by powerfull on Sept 9, 2006 13:14:03 GMT -5
Well, now that it is a more reasonable hour to work than last time, I actually managed to write down the rule behind the (quite bad) example. However it needs some more tuning, since I haven't figured out how weapons are gonna be used just yet, and I also want to figure it out as a whole rule to be used in most circumstances, not just in combat. It goes something like this :
STR : Strength CC : Close Combat RD : Reflexive dodge Tgh : Toughness FF : Force Field WM : Weapon modifier
CC only combines with STR. CC means skill and finess, ans STR means brutality. Defences also get seperated in two. Active and passive. Active defence is your RD value + the stones you put in CC. Passive defence is your FF and/or TGH. RD is more effective against STR, and Tgh is more effective against CC.
When you attack, you decide how many stones you're gonna pun into str and how many into CC and your opponent does the same (it is always better for him to spend in CC and then STR however) . You first compare your CC against the opponent's active defences, CCvsCC, CCvsRD and CCvsSTR in that order. CC Negates those on on a 1to1 basis. Now there are 2 things that might happen.
1) If your attack doesn't have enough stones to pass the enemy's active defences, you use your STR and/or WM to do so (as stated above this rule is primarily intended to be used with the rules presented in Marvel Total Realism. Under these rules, all CC weapons would probably be treated like modifiers. If you decide to use it in mainstream MU, you should use STR OR WM) . Your STR and WM negates CC and STR on a 1to1, but negates RD on a 3to1, meaning that you need a full WHITE stone to remove a red stone of RD with STR. What remains of your STR and/or WM, goes against the opponent's Passive defences on a 1to1 basis.
2)If your attack has enough stones to pass the enemy's active defences, you use your STR and/or WM against the opponent's passive defences. They negate passive defences on a 1to1 basis. If you get past them like this, you add your remaining CC stones to damage. if you don't get past the opponent's defences with your STR and/or WM, you use the remaining CC stones to do so, but CC negates FF and Tgh on a 3to1, meaning that you need a full WHITE stone from your CC to negate one point of toughness. Those that pass through, get to dammage your opponent.
Some things should be pretty obvious here. It's a LOT tougher (although possible, maby he hit a nerve) to use martial arts to hurt a very tough opponent. It's also A LOT EASIER for a person with good reflexes to defend against opponents with great strength but little skill in hand to hand, but it would take a good combatant nontheless to hold it's own against a guy with enough strength to destroy a tank (maby he avoided the blow but not the bricks from the wall the hulk smashed behind him) . I think this is almost as close to reality as it can get for a superhero game.
With slight modifications the rule above can be used in every sittuation to differenciate between Skill and Raw Power in a more comic-like fashion. Ranged combat would use RC + Targeting like CC, and WM like STR or WM in pretty much the same function. Energy blasting heroes and enemies that don't combine their power with RC however, use only their targeting for aim, wich makes them almost worthless against fast opponent's without additional modification however.
|
|
|
Post by pathfinderap on Nov 22, 2007 11:46:13 GMT -5
I agree with some of this (like the STR+WEAPON for damage) but not most of it, I really like the idea of pushing forward the system,
I would take out the weapon modifer to hit UNLESS... it was an area effect it was a continued beam, or auto fire,
and ALL ranged attacks need ranged combat to hit (or DEX)
I'd add a PRESENCE ability (for social skills, magic, and PSI) along with the FATE one I'm talking about in another thread right now,
I'd add a "reflex action" where you can buy certain actions at any time like maybe the added option of a soak sub system, you can draw red stones any time you take non lethal damage, up to your DUR and just shrug off the damage,
And a way to buy a modifier to make actions cheaper to power up, so it doesn't take 10 stones to fly at 10 etc,
and maybe getting rid of the lines system, and having a 0.1 rating to your abilitiy or action instead, that way you can see progression, and could have the option to say that someone with a flight 5.9 is faster than someone with flight at 5.0
|
|