Damage Reduction in DCC RPG

[geordie racer]

The additional damage reduction would almost guarantee that he wins the combat. Which would be appropriate for someone with far superior equipment. Even if he got lucky in combat, it would be a tough fight to win the battle. Those extra HP's from DR would be key in winning a fight. Just like in classic literature. The better AC opponent (especially in plate armor) will win most fights.

The idea of combat consisting of unimaginative hacking with the better armoured person winning does not sound like Leiber to me. The less-armoured guy would not fight toe-to-toe, because that would be dumb.

Agility and guile should play their part, especially when there is such an imbalance in armour class. In the example you give of the two 8th level fighters, the one with less AC will probably manouevre to get the first hit in with a good chance of an MDoA or a Crit (as it sound like 8th level is gonna be high in DCC) if the hit lands. And if the GF is still there too...

DR requires careful handling or it relegates combat to 'whoever has shopped for the best armour'.

[mshensley]

DR requires careful handling or it relegates combat to 'whoever has shopped for the best armour'.

Too true. I found this out the hard way when I was running wfrp 2e. As soon as most of the party could get their hands on plate armor, they could beat damn near anything. If you have dr, armor also needs to have its penalties- it's hard to climb or jump, impossible to swim, hard to see or hear, hot, tiring, noisy, you need help to put it on, etc.

[finarvyn]

You could even do a chart like this:

Code: Select all

Armor            AC Bonus      DR    MAX AGL Bonus
Leather               +1            1            +5
Studded Leather   +2            1            +4
Ring/Brigadine       +2            2            +3
Chainmail             +3            2            +2
Banded/Split         +3            3            +1
Plate                   +4            3            +0
Shield                  +1            -            -1 modifier

Please note all numbers are raw numbers right now... just for the basis of discussion.

That table still lets AC have a value, more hits would land but the DR would be the major difference in the combat.

In general I like your chart, Andy. I may have to consider my position on this again.

Do I undersand correctly that you are proposing all three (AC, DR, and AGL Bonus) at the same time?

It's a neat chart!

[JRR]

But what happens to the fragile mage with a 10 dex? Sure he shouldn't be in melee, but sometimes you can't help it. The brainy mage with a crappy physique is an archetype I'd like not to go away.

[Hamakto]

In general I like your chart, Andy. I may have to consider my position on this again.

Do I undersand correctly that you are proposing all three (AC, DR, and AGL Bonus) at the same time?

It's a neat chart!

Yes. You also should and speed to the chart (i.e. heavier tanks are slower speed so tactical maneuvering and MDoA's are limited it it was agility based).

With the most recent chart... a warrior would could go with a lesser armor and still have the same base AC if they had a high enough AGL bonus. She would just miss out on the DR for the higher armor. But in exchange, they would be more maneuverable because of the higher speed. That would be the character combat trade off.

Missing a point of DR to pick up some speed? Character choice

Miss two points of DR to pick up even more speed? Character choice.

Note sure what movement rates would be in DCC RPG, but using the DnD 30' per round table so could get something like this:

30' no, leather, studded leather
25' chain and close allies
20' banded/plate

Don't be too concerned with the exact numbers and breakdowns. If you go back to 1e distances.... you could start at 12" and drop incrementally 1" for each armor type.

But the DR system will only really work if the HP ranges are tighter than they are right now. (i.e. d6 wizards, thief, cleric... d8 warrior classes) or even maybe a d6-d10 range (d6 wizard, thief; d8 cleric; d10 warrior) The average HP difference from d6 to d10 is 2 points per level. So even at 9th level (possible max for rolled hp), you are taking an average of 18hp between a fighter and a wizard. That is not a large amount even with DR, since the warrior will be taking a great deal more pounding in combat.

The point I am trying to get at is to bring into the game the literary concept that armor matters. Is DR the solution? Not positive.

Let me pose a question out there to people who are against DR. How do you handle mystical armor types:

Adamantine
Darkwood
Dragonhide
Iron, Cold
Mithral

Because AC's are going to be compressed more, how would you equate them to the game in a literary (i.e. Tolkien sense). 3e DnD did not do them justice to be honest, but that is just my opinion. I believe they were locked into the legacy DnD AC mechanic so they were limited in their choices on how to do mystical armor types.

Using Tolkien as an example... Frodo got hit when where Mithral armor... instead of the blow killing him, does it not really hurt him at all physically (knocks the wind out of him instead). That is some nifty DR.

I just had another thought, but this would require a little more book keeping for characters. So hear me out...

Character has a total number of HP. As in normal DnD, you can take lethal and non-lethal damage. What if we do the following:

Leave AC bonuses as classic DnD bonuses... (i.e. leather +2, plate +7 to ac)
Plate would have a DR of 5 or 6.

The first X points of damage (up to DR) is converted to non-lethal damage. The blow did still land and they are still getting battered. But since it is not as telling as a regular blow, that non-lethal damage is recovered very quickly after combat... matter of minutes not hours.

The HP loss is till real... so the character still has X hp... and if a lethal blow knocks them under zero, they could still die.

The only problem is that this idea requires the tracking of two HP loss types.

This would sorta go along with my idea in the HP/Cleric/Healing thread. Where if someone had a serious illness, they would start at 50% of their max HP for the day. Those HP would be non-lethal damage that would not heal because of the illness. A progressive terminal illness could do d10 non-lethal damage every day that does not heal. If we tie DR into that, you get an interesting mechanic.

[Hamakto]

But what happens to the fragile mage with a 10 dex? Sure he shouldn't be in melee, but sometimes you can't help it. The brainy mage with a crappy physique is an archetype I'd like not to go away.

The monsters are not going to do any more damage than they already do. So I do not expect his life expectancy to be any less than it is now. He will not survive as long as someone in armor, but then again he never has.

[JRR]

How are they not even more fragile? A dr of 3 effectively gives you 3 extra hit points per attack against you. So, if you get in combat and something hits you 4 times, that's 12 extra hit points. Get in 3 of these in a day and it's 36 hit points. I can't see anyone not wanting armor in that system. Unless I'm missing something, it will make playing a wizard very unattractive. Perhaps you can spell it out for me a bit more? I'm very familiar with the DR in WFRP and it's very broken.

[finarvyn]

I understand your concern, JRR, because that was my initial problem with the whole DR system as well.

I'm wondering if adding the AGL bonus for defense slightly offsets the problem, but with a straight 3d6 stat roll it's possible that there won't be too many AGL bonuses among the characters.

I'm still torn on the issue.

[smathis]

Let me pose a question out there to people who are against DR. How do you handle mystical armor types:

Adamantine
Darkwood
Dragonhide
Iron, Cold
Mithral

Well, I don't want to put myself in the position of being a "hater". I mean, I see the value in what you're pursuing. It just doesn't appeal to me. That said, I think your approach is a better first step than a lot of "Armor as DR" systems.

But since you've asked...

I'd make base AC 12. Yup, 12. It works really well in LotFP. Then, just like LotFP, I'd make Leather Armor AC 14. Chainmail AC 16. Some in-between type like Scale or Ring AC 18. Plate Armor AC 20. And those funky types? AC 22. Some of them maybe AC 22 against some attacks and AC 18 against all others.

Works well. No muss. No fuss. Sure, it lacks the verisimilitude of Armor as DR. But... If you were to take armor into the 4-5 points of DR, you'd find the verisimilitude breaking down on the other end of the spectrum. So what would Armor as DR do for these armor types? I see the wisdom of keeping DR between 1-3 in the proposed system. But that's an additional problem with the mechanic. A DR of 1 (especially at levels above third) is pointless. 2-3 is really the sweet spot, IMO. If you get into the 4-5 point range, you find yourself having to mess with the weapons or making ruling that run counter to the "true to life" benefit of wearing heavier armor. So there's not much room to go up or down with DR. This is why most systems increase the damage dice.

Because if you have a dagger doing 1d6 damage... suddenly that sweetspot with DR is expanded from 2-3 to 2-5.

[joela]

What is everyone's take on damage reduction and its place in DCC RPG?

Have no problem with it in the prior 3.x SRD / Pathfinder ruleset and don't see any major issue with it included unaltered into the DCC RPG. I'm looking into retrogames, C&C, True20, and the DCC rpgs for less complicated rules -- not more -- especially for so-called more "realism".

[Hamakto]

Let me try one more thing out there...

If we go with my table like this (DR really stops at 3)

Code: Select all

Armor            AC Bonus      DR    MAX AGL Bonus
Leather               +1            1            +5
Studded Leather   +2            1            +4
Ring/Brigadine       +2            2            +3
Chainmail             +3            2            +2
Banded/Split         +3            3            +1
Plate                   +4            3            +0
Shield                  +1            -            -1 modifier

And with the following changes to HP generation:

All characters get d6 per level.
Wizards d6
Thief d6
Cleric d6+1 (same average as d8)
Warrior d6+2 (same average as d10)

This has two effects... a Warrior will have the same average # of hp... but will have a lesser chance of less HP. Maybe even a +3 hp per level for warriors...

Let look at a first level warrior with max staring HP of 8

If he has chain mail (DR 2).

That means he effectively has at least 10 hp... maybe 12 depending on how the blows land. Maybe a bit more. But it allows the Warrior to survive several lesser blows but still fall to a mighty blow.

A single roll of 10 damage will still take him down.
2 lesser blows of 5 damage have him at 50% health.

Lets look at a Wizard with max HP at first level 6:

The first lesser blow of 5 will nearly kill him
The second takes him down.

The first blow of six or more will take him down.

Thief with max HP at level 1: 6

With the DR1 on his leather armor, he will get one more HP of safely than the Wizard.

Maybe 2 more points because of leather armor if the opponents rolled damage dice low.

As levels do grow, monsters and opponents will be doing more damage not less. So the DR becomes less important, but it will still add up over the 100's of hits a character will take in their career.

Someone else mentioned doing AC like this:

Start at AC14 for no armor.
Leather grants AC13 DR1 (AC -1 penalty)
Chain grants AC 12 DR2 (AC -2 penalty)
Banded/Split AC 11 DR3 (AC -3 penalty)
Plate AC 10 DR4 (AC -4 penalty)

We do not restrict agility in this model. So AGL bonus always counts and can counteract some of the AC 'penalty'.
Note: Plate+3 would be 13 AC base

We can also have class abilities that counter armor penalties (i.e. Warrior gets to ignore 1 points of AC penalty every 2 levels, cleric 1 point of AC penalty every 3 levels)

But at this point, is the complexity too much for DCC RPG? It looks like it would play out at low levels pretty well. Just not sure how well it would work in mid to upper tiers.

[smathis]

We do not restrict agility in this model. So AGL bonus always counts and can counteract some of the AC 'penalty'.
Note: Plate+3 would be 13 AC base

I like this approach better. But it seems that higher AGL characters would be at a serious advantage. So a Fighter with 18 AGL would have an AC of 14 in Plate. That means he moves around better than most people with Leather.

Which doesn't make sense (to me). Seems like Strength or Stamina should be more helpful in a big heavy suit of plate mail.

We can also have class abilities that counter armor penalties (i.e. Warrior gets to ignore 1 points of AC penalty every 2 levels, cleric 1 point of AC penalty every 3 levels)

Seems like this would make armor almost too good past a certain level. You'd get the high AC and the DR. Seems to run counter to the intent of the last chart.

But at this point, is the complexity too much for DCC RPG? It looks like it would play out at low levels pretty well. Just not sure how well it would work in mid to upper tiers.

I haven't seen DCC rpg. So maybe? I don't know. I could certainly see it as an optional rule or variant. Much like that Wounds thing. I think it's fine as a variant or option for groups who like it to use it. But I think the Wound system is just too different from traditional D&D for it to be part of DCC core. It's not complex. But it's just far enough off the beaten path to alienate some roleplayers. And that doesn't sit well with me.

While I don't feel the same about DR, I do think it ups the complexity a bit. And I think it needs some serious going over at the mid and high levels. Because it will break things in unexpected ways.

If it were part of the core rules, it would be a part I'd house rule out -- for a simpler more traditional AC system. So I'd rather see it as a variant or optional rule that's available to groups who prefer that sort of mechanic. Because, just like I wouldn't want "my" system of FATE-like Wounds/Consequences to alienate roleplayers who don't gel with that idea, I too would rather not be alienated because I prefer just a straight AC system.

[Black Dougal]

If it were part of the core rules, it would be a part I'd house rule out -- for a simpler more traditional AC system.

It perhaps goes without saying that I would do the same thing. The traditional AC system plus good narration from the GM works well for me. I like simple math and simple mechanics at the playing table. I will whip out a calculator during character creation, but things need to move fast at the table. I also dislike having to flip through the rulebook at the table. Lately I have been playing lots of time-limited games (Pathfinder Society where sessions are limited to four hours and also four hour long Con sessions) which need to keep rolling along. A simple system run by an imaginative GM removes the need for complex mechanics which model the source material for me and keeps the game from bogging down. YMMV.

[damonjynx]

Hey Everyone,

I'm a newb here and DCC RPG looks very promising (my gaming group is a bit over 3.x & 4E D&D, so we've been looking for alternatives). Currently we are playing WFRP and Runequest (MRQII), both are fine games. I also looked at Basic Role Playing (BRP), however the amount of optional rules required to run a fantasy game in the S&S style was over the top and MRQII was BRP tweaked for my type of game. Personally I prefer MRQII as the careers in WFRP simply don't do it for me, but enough of that.

I don't like DR as stated in 3.x and PFRPG. DR sucks. Just an opinion, but it's mine.

I don't like D&D's handling of armour either. How does waddling about in 40 kilograms (don't know if that's the right weight for armour, but you get the idea) of steel, plate, chain, scale or whatever, make you harder to hit? It doesn't. Yes, it makes it harder for opponents to DAMAGE you, but it doesn't make it harder for them to hit you, quite the opposite in fact: it slows you down, impairs your ability to dodge and so on. So therefore your armour should reduce the amount of damage, and in some cases, negate it altogether. The ONLY viable and realistic (other than the use of magic) form of DR IMHO.

MRQII, and in particular, The Elric of Melnibone setting offers a fine example of how Appendix N material can be translated into a game system. Now, I'm not for one minute saying that MRQII is perfect - far from it. Just, that if you have a mind like a parachute - it only functions when it's open (I plagiarised that from somewhere), then it has some very good concepts that could be re-worked slightly to make very good use of the core D20 v3.0 mechanic and subsequently make DCC RPG an even better set of rules than it appears it's going to be on the limited information I have.

[jmucchiello]

I don't know if this is a pitch to get DR into the DCC RPG, at this point, or just an exploration of DR as a mechanic. Just from the level of complication involved, I'd be surprised if DCC featured DR....

But from the standpoint of Hamakto exploring an idea, I'm liking this thread. I'm enjoying his approach and willingness to discuss the topic. In the end, I think Hamakto could come up with something really, really good that no one has done before. Hence, I question, challenge and overall come across as a jerk. I don't want to see what's in Star Wars SAGA, Conan d20 or d20 Modern. We know those mechanics had shortcomings. Gimme something new, that's better and more elegant!

I'm pretty sure it's been done before. In fact it doesn't go far enough. For better verisimilitude you would have more types of damage and armors that were better or worse at DR. For example, 3e has the concept of blunt, piercing and slashing damage. So armors could have separate blunt, piercing and slashing DR. This would add far too much detail for the system it sounds like DCC is going for but it would also simulate the source material better. And it would add more interest to weapon choice.

For example, plate mail could have Blunt DR 4, Slash DR 6, and Pierce DR 1 (or 4/6/1). This would simulate how Plate is great in a sword fight, can buckle against a mace and doesn't help much against a crossbow. Leather could be 2/2/0, Padded 3/2/1, Hide 0/3/1, Chain 4/3/3.

It's very late in the development of DCC for this kind of change though. Fun as a thought exercise though.

[smathis]

For example, plate mail could have Blunt DR 4, Slash DR 6, and Pierce DR 1 (or 4/6/1). This would simulate how Plate is great in a sword fight, can buckle against a mace and doesn't help much against a crossbow. Leather could be 2/2/0, Padded 3/2/1, Hide 0/3/1, Chain 4/3/3.

It's very late in the development of DCC for this kind of change though. Fun as a thought exercise though.

Good point. Some types of armor might even get negative DR. Think about chainmail and a musket. A good argument for that would also be Plate Mail against a Crossbow.

[Hamakto]

For example, plate mail could have Blunt DR 4, Slash DR 6, and Pierce DR 1 (or 4/6/1). This would simulate how Plate is great in a sword fight, can buckle against a mace and doesn't help much against a crossbow. Leather could be 2/2/0, Padded 3/2/1, Hide 0/3/1, Chain 4/3/3.

It's very late in the development of DCC for this kind of change though. Fun as a thought exercise though.

Good point. Some types of armor might even get negative DR. Think about chainmail and a musket. A good argument for that would also be Plate Mail against a Crossbow.

I did think about including differing levels of DR in my tables based on weapon type. Chain works well against slashing, but not as well against blunt and/or piercing. But at that point, it was getting far beyond the KISS principle of:

DM: I rolled a 15 for 6 damage
Player: That hit and I only take 4 damage due to DR.

The point of this discussion was to see if adding basic DR to the game at a low level would be beneficial to the game. I personally think it would and after thinking about this more, I do not see some some of the problems that other people have brought up.

But to make DR work, the following changes (at a minimum) need to be put into the game:

• HP's have to be brought more into alignment. (i.e. d6 for Wizard/Thief, d6+1 for cleric, d6+2 for fighter).
• DR needs to be kept low. (1-3 range). It is important and it does add up, but it cannot grow to large
• magical enhancements and magical materials increase the AC of the armor (i.e. chance that it is completely blocked), but not the DR. DR is based on how much of the body is covered and how well.
• provides an in game mechanic for DR for monsters and creatures. Yes, I know you can wing it. But having a framework is

At very low levels, it allows a warrior to possibly take one extra hit before they go down. (If they have good armor)

It allows well armed NPC (i.e. town guardsmen to have a 'few' more HPs in combat w/out raising their levels. Plus, if the warrior rolls really bad on the damage dice, the low level guard could last a few rounds).

example: 7hp in plate armor ---- DR 3 ---- It could take quite a few rounds to take someone out if you roll really bad on the damage dice. Which is fitting for a classic story environment. It creates and environment where a low level opponent can be more than a speed bump. Also note, that in stories only Knights really had that level of armor due to speed and balance issues).

A wizard will definitely suffer from not wearing armor, but that is the price of spell casting.

At higher levels, I do not see the DR really causing balance issues for the PC's. Because of the following reasons:

• Opponents will slowly do more damage as you gain levels. (i.e. giants will not do Long Sword damage). DR becomes less effective as we level up.
• Makes fighters with heavy equipment more powerful, but a warrior on average will get hit 25% more often in plate armor than if he had no armor. So the HP difference is no where near as big appears on first glance
• Provides an in game advantage to being a warrior without armor (i.e. more speed, higher AC, but you will take more damage). With AC being the only difference on getting hit, being a warrior without armor is not beneficial at all except for speed)

[jmucchiello]

I did think about including differing levels of DR in my tables based on weapon type. Chain works well against slashing, but not as well against blunt and/or piercing. But at that point, it was getting far beyond the KISS principle of

I mentioned that. The real sticking point is monsters. Does a roper do blunt damage? Slashing? Heck, is a bear's claw doing slashing damage or blunt damage or both?

It would be nice if the weapons vs armor table were something people could actually use. Of course, this leads to the concept going back to charts and making armor class truly a classification: Make no-armor AC "A", leather AC "B", padded AC "C", plate would be something like "I". Remove the numbers completely and just treat them as abstractions of varying degrees of protection versus mobility. Then a monster with AC "B" would be affected by weapons as if its hide were leather armor. Additional, non-real armor AC's (J-Z) would be used to abstract the protection of chitin on giant insects, and AC "Z" would be for the nigh-invulnerable dragon scales.

If you are going to go too far, go really far, I say.

[Hamakto]

I like this approach better. But it seems that higher AGL characters would be at a serious advantage. So a Fighter with 18 AGL would have an AC of 14 in Plate. That means he moves around better than most people with Leather.

Which doesn't make sense (to me). Seems like Strength or Stamina should be more helpful in a big heavy suit of plate mail.

There was a really cool RPG that was put out in the 80's called Fantasy XXXXX (forgot it...will fill it in tomorrow after I look it up). This game had a really good system for weapons and armor. You want to use the 2 handed sword? You need 14 STR (and/or AGL depending on weapon type) to be able to use it w/out penalty.

You want to wear plate armor? You needed X STR (and/or AGL depending on armor type) to be able to move around well w/out some sort of penalty. (i.e. you do not make the minimums you take a -1 to AC)

[quote="smathis]

We can also have class abilities that counter armor penalties (i.e. Warrior gets to ignore 1 points of AC penalty every 2 levels, cleric 1 point of AC penalty every 3 levels)

Seems like this would make armor almost too good past a certain level. You'd get the high AC and the DR. Seems to run counter to the intent of the last chart.[/quote]

Not really. If you look at the chart. If you had two characters with 18 AGL. One in leather and one in plate. They would have AC's of 17 and 14 respectively. That means the person in plate is going to get hit 15% more often than the person in leather. That 15% does add up more than you think. This is especially true with the use of two combat dice when rolling. Those middle ranges are more likely to be hit than the outside ranges. So three points of AC for 2 additional DR? To me, that is a definite trade off based on how you feel your character should be represented in the game.

I do not think the advantage of heavier armor is overwhelming in the game. Yes, it does add up. But you also lose tactical mobility.