Combat System Help

[linux]

I need help in fine-tuning a Combat system i'm developing. I am at an impass:

Combat System 1:

roll of 2d10 (d100%) to determine attack (hit chance v evasion/defense)
compare d100% roll to Critical Range (ex: 81-100 is critical)
from above comparison, determine if roll is normal or critical
add appropriate skill bonus, magickal effect etc.
roll for damage...etc...etc.

Combat System 2:

roll 2d10 (d100%) to determine attack (hit chance v. evasion/defense)
apply appropriate skill bonus, magickal effects
take difference from d100% roll and target defense
(ex. say you have a bonus of +10 and your target requires a modified roll of 60 to be hit successfully. Say you roll an 86 which modified (+10) is 96. You would subtract 96 from 60 (36) and add that to damage dealt (or maybe even half that number rounded down) to represent the ability to make a 'critical hit)
roll normal damage...etc...etc.

I just would like to see some input into which system is better, or maybe a combination of the above systems.
Thanks in advance.

[Emmett]

How do you know what the critical range is in system 1?

I'm not really sure I see that much of a difference, maybe it's just too late at night, but arn't you just assigning a difficulty number and rolling against it? I guess I don't understand how criticles are deturmined, what I'm trying to roll against etc. Is this only for ranged attacks? Can you give an example of how both would be used in a simple combat situation?

I think when penguins start asking you questions, it's too late at night. Good night.

[M. J. Young]

Congratulations, Linux, you've piqued my interest.

If I'm understanding correctly, you're contrasting the use of a fixed critical range with a relative success system. That is, something like this:

In both cases, we would hit a target with any roll of 60 or higher.

In case one, if the roll is 81 or higher, it's critical and gets bonused.

In case two, the roll is automatically bonused by the degree to which the modified roll exceeds the target number, 60.

The other distinctions are that in case two special ability bonuses are added before determining bonus values, and in case one such special ability bonuses are added only after its been determined that a crit has been scored.

I'm a fan of relative success systems myself; I think they give a more fluid outcome (no sudden jumps from ordinary to extraordinary) and used them for the core damage system in Multiverser and for most other damage outcomes. But there's much to be said for a crit range. For example, if your crit range is 81 up, then the guy who is so good that a twenty is sufficient to hit isn't going to do more criticals than the guy who needs at least a seventy to hit--he's just going to do more ordinary rolls. That's probably where the difference lies: does the guy with the better chance to hit have better odds on crits, or not?

Yeah, I'm probably biased on this. I think it's silly to have a system in which in the situation where you almost can't miss, very few of your hits are crits, but when you can hardly hit at all every hit that lands is a crit. I'd go with the fluid approach.

But maybe I didn't parse it right?

--M. J. Young

[linux]

I want characters that are more skilled with a weapon to be able to do more damage, and be more likely to hit. I also have an ability system already in place that would allow for developing of a 'Critical-range' (and the critical ranges depend on the weapon, and the aformentioned ability) bonus so that being more skilled at hitting someone is synergistic to being more able to pass steel through someone's neck.

The 'sudden jump' from just a little bonus to a critical (possibly lethal) strike could be explained by the fact that if you hit 1 cm off an artery in the leg, you hit cappilaries, but if you hit the artery (as in a critical strike) the opponent will lose a lot of blood and will likely die.

In response to Emmett, this is for melee and ranged attacks. Below is your example.

Your Character: Weapon Skill: + 20
Weapon: Sword  Damage: 2d10  *Crit Range: 95-00  Crit Damage: (I honestly don't know, Possibly x2 damage...for the sake of the example) x2 Damage

* If critical system is used. See Round 3 Case 2

Your Enemy: Armor Defensive Bonus: + 10
Evasion (natural dodging) Bonus: + 5

You must roll 50 (Enemy is same size as Character) + 10 + 5 = 65

Round 1: You roll 45 + 20 = 65 HIT you do 2d10 damage
Round 2: You roll 55 + 20 = 75 HIT you do 2d10 +10 damage
Round 3: You roll 95 + 20 = (Here is where it gets complicated)
  Case 1: HIT you do 2d10 + 50 damage (ouch)
  Case 2: CRITICAL you do 2d10 x 2 (4d10) + 50 damage (OUCH)

I'm still undecided. What happens when the enemy has a defense of 119 (unlikely).
You roll 00 (100 the way i see it) + 20 for 120 HIT and CRITICAL (but you're only one point over)

See, the relative success works but lacks that extraordinary critical strike.

[Emmett]

I think I'm starting to catch on. Sorry, I was out of it last night. What you're trying to accomplish is simulating a really effective action that happens almost randomly. In both instances that seems to be the effect. It's just a question of how effective you can be in that critical range.

If I do have that right, and I may very well be off kilter. Then this is an issue of how much damage (or whatever other effect) is being delt. I guess that all depends on your system and how many hit points an opponent has, buuuuut let me also ad this thought.

As you get more and more successful rolls the 2d10 almost becomes insignifigant and any weapon that you use will do simmiler damage. This can almost be brushed aside with damage to humans (since even a knife can kill), but a knife shoudln't hurt a car much (aside from puncturing the wheels).

I would favor adding more die of the same kind for a critical strike, it keeps weapon scales more accurate.

I'm still undecided. What happens when the enemy has a defense of 119 (unlikely).
You roll 00 (100 the way i see it) + 20 for 120 HIT and CRITICAL (but you're only one point over)

On the other hand. In this instance you loose all the range of effect your looking for. The attacker can only get a critical strike in this instance (assuming the use of a critical strike). That would not make a whole lot of sense, but I suppose it could be rationalized.

I usually make the success of a critical strike dependant on the defender. A heavily armored defender is less likely to get a critical strike delt to him than one in his underwear. this would work with the car analogy. If you use the knife on the tires, you have a very high chance of a critical strike. If you use it on the hood you have a rather low chance, but a slim one. If you use the knife on the roof, you have almost no chance of any critical strike.

But critical strikes can be very cool in a game, they add a lot of uncertanty, and exitement when a player delivers one.

[Andrew Martin]

I want characters that are more skilled with a weapon to be able to do more damage, and be more likely to hit. I also have an ability system already in place that would allow for developing of a 'Critical-range' (and the critical ranges depend on the weapon, and the aformentioned ability) bonus so that being more skilled at hitting someone is synergistic to being more able to pass steel through someone's neck.

Are you sure this is the goal you're working towards? Because what you've got doesn't seem to lead to it. :-/ At the moment, what you've got seems like a bad version of Mayfair's system or a older version of Chaosium/Avalon Hill RuneQuest III. Perhaps reading and studying these systems would allow you to avoid recreating them? I think one of Mike standard rants could be applicable.

[Jack Aidley]

It's fairly obvious from the mechanics you've presented that the damage from getting over the target number will be more significant than the damage from the critical. So in your over by 1 example, you'll still have a relatively low average damage (23), comparible to say getting a 80 when you needed 65 (26).

[ADGBoss]

It's fairly obvious from the mechanics you've presented that the damage from getting over the target number will be more significant than the damage from the critical. So in your over by 1 example, you'll still have a relatively low average damage (23), comparible to say getting a 80 when you needed 65 (26).

Although one way around this would be to say that Criticals by-pass armor or other protection and do damage directly.  Normal hits subtract protective devices FIRST (since I did not see them in the equation only evasion/defense) and then do damage.  

So if Basic Armor has a (10) subtraction, then criticals become more important.  However, be sure not to make Armor too tough or regular hits will become useless.

Sean