[Seven Systems Legacy] - stuck on new mechanics

[pilot602]

I'm trying to come up with a way to keep my "one-die" system but make it easier to manipulate the "effectiveness" of rolling for a hit/location but the most important thing is to make a flexible system. And that's why I've come up with the following.

Currently each robot has 12 locations randomly numbered (between one and 20)*. When a player has a weapon system that is in range they roll one, d20 for each weapon. The idea is to match one of the location tags to the roll for a given weapon. If the roll comes up a match, that location, on the target, is damaged for the output of the weapon firing upon it. If the roll comes up not matching that shot is considered a miss.

It's a very simple solution that has a bunch of "what-ifs" built into it. On the "standard" d20 you have about a 60-percent chance of hitting something. However, the problem is I think this system is too simple and in fact, as the designer, I'm finding it hard to manipulate the system to increase or decrease "effectiveness" (read, chance to hit) without getting into complicated point pools and whatnot.

I already have enough math in the game just dealing with the hitpoints on these machines. A fully "grown" robot has something like 1300 points per location! A point pool to keep track of I think would overwhelm the players.

So, my current idea is to re-number the location tags so that they are 1-12 (there are 12 locations on the robot, remember) and then use different dice for the hit/location roll when I want increase effectiveness or decrease effectiveness.

So, say Joe Pilot earns "super skill 1" he would then use (2)d6 (or a d12 if it exists) pretty much assuring a hit every time he rolled. On the other side, say Joe gets damaged or ticks off the GM, whatever, and gets "bad mojo 1" reducing his effectiveness. He would then make his rolls using a d30 thus inrceasing his chance to miss.

I know this latest idea is a pretty dramatic depature from my "one-die" idea but it's still relatively simple and certainly reduces the math involved. And trust me I'm working on away to reduce the hit point math but that's a minor fix right now.

I don't know, any other ideas? Would three different dice be too confusing? How do you all feel about the "randomness" of the base d20 (using 20 numbers to try and hit 12 spots) is it too random?




*For you visual types you can see the "hit location tags" on the SSM sheet, here: http://www.freepress.multiservers.com/ssmsheet.pdf

Note1:The tags are the boxes with the labe andthe number in a circle. The total points for that location would go on the left side of each slash and the damage on the right side. Note2: This sheet has changed again but for the purpose of this post it's good enough.

John

[Ben O'Neal]

Well, I'm not sure that the sort of massively advanced technology you have would ever be able to miss.... at all... so, my suggestion is to make a new hit-location-map with 20 areas. Have some areas be "vital" areas, so that if you're lucky enough to hit them, you deal extra damage or have the chance to take out a critical system (everything has a weaker point, for tanks it's the tracks, for helicopters it's the fuselage around the fuel tank etc).

If you want them to be able to miss, then make them roll twice. If they don't hit the same area, or the areas immediately adjacent, then they miss completely. If they hit the areas immediately adjacent to the first area, they only deal half damage.

Then if you wanted you could have upgrades which protect vital areas better, or cloaking technology which gives you a whole new hit-location-map that only goes up to 5 (75% miss chance), or whatever. You can play with the idea a bit I think.

One dice, maximum of 2 rolls to hit. I dunno, it's just a suggestion. Use it how you will. But I don't like the idea of being able to miss with that sort of advanced weaponry.

-Ben

[TonyLB]

I hate to say "tables", but... well, you're going to have them already with your randomly assigned damage locations.  Why not just make one, universal, table, with more desirable locations (cockpit, main reactor) higher on the chart.  Make 18-20 (or whatever) be "Attackers Choice", which allows people on high rolls to to peg legs, even if it's low on the chart, if they have a tactical reason to limit their targets mobility.  Then addidtive bonuses give a straightforward step up in accuracy.

I think this changes where the fortune is applied (since it implies that people choose to go for an aimed shot after getting the die roll that allows them to do so), but hey, maybe that's something you'll be content with.

Best of luck on getting the numbers worked 'round!  I applaud your overall goal of making the system simultaneously more flexible and more approachable.

[pilot602]

Thanks guys ... I like some ofthe stuff you've posted. And, hey, at the very least it's spurred some different thoughts on how to approach it.

Feel free to keep posting. I play through each "revision" a few times with my brother (who is a longtime player/gm of various RPGs) and with the current revision the game is highly mobile. We were moving all over the map and I liked that aspect but I grow more unhappy with the current "hit" system.

It works well for my encarnation of hand-to-hand but that's a different story/animal. But they way hand-to-hand works currently is that once it's engaged it's played out until one person tries to run or one person dies. THe rest of the players continue to play out in the normal sequence of things but the folks dueling it out with swords are kind of "drawn into" their own little world. It's cool and I like the "disconnection" from the rest of the field.

Back to the grind. ;)

[Tobias]

Side Note:
Ravien/Ben - you don't like advanced tech missing - but you do propose cloaking tech. When defense is as good as offense - what's wrong with missing?

Answering the question:
Another option, which I ripped from somewhere (Deadlands), is: depending on skill/positive modifiers, players may shift the number rolled up or down by X steps, thus going from miss to hit, or from hit to more-vital hit.

Say you have a 12 hit spots, and 4 of them are really vital, like the head (pilot/control), the heart (engine), the pelvis (movement) and the weapon (because it will really go boom if it is hit), you could number them like this:

1-miss
2- leg/foot of non-weapon side (non-vital)
3 - pelvis (vital)
4 - lower torso (non-vital)
5 - miss
6 - miss
7 - non-weapon arm (non-vital)
8 - heart (vital)
9 - upper torso (non-vital)
10 -miss
11 - leg/foot of weapon side (non-vital)
12 -  weapon (vital)
13 - arm at weapon side (non-vital)
14 - miss
15 -miss
16 -miss
17 - right should (non-vital)
18 - head (vital)
19 - left shoulder (non-vital)
20 - miss

... or anything similar that rocks your boat.

[Sydney Freedberg]

I loathe multiple die types myself. Question: Is random hit location that important to your game, or is it a BattleTech legacy? There are other systems (notably GURPS) that allow you to make a "called shot" where smaller, more critical parts of the body are harder to hit, and any shot with no specified target goes to the biggest, easiest to hit area, namely the torso. This kind of precision really rewards skill, which seems to me much more in keeping with your "cool pilot in personalized mech using martial arts-style special moves" idea than just blasting away randomly.

....say Joe Pilot earns "super skill 1" he would then use (2)d6 (or a d12 if it exists) ...

Important detail point (just in case you didn't know already): 2d6 and 1d12 have very, very different probability distribution -- e.g. a 2.8% chance of rolling a 12 on 2d6 vs. 8.3% on 1d12 -- with 7 being the most likely result on 2d6 and all results being equally likely on 1d12.

[pilot602]

Yes I'm not fond of the multiple dice thing either (nor is my brother). I'm going to simply decide to make a one-dice system work.

I think I might have a few ideas. I'll post them ASAP.

Oh, Sydney, did you happen to notice the power/speed settings on the sheet? What do you think of that idea? Each player gets x points to split between power and speed ( a newbie player with no mods would have a machine set at 10/10 .. a more advanced player could change that to 5/15 or 15/5 depending on the mission ... and ultmatiley the players will be able to put points into the system so that tha machine will ultimately max out at 20/20). Just wondered what you thought of that?

[Ben O'Neal]

Ravien/Ben - you don't like advanced tech missing - but you do propose cloaking tech. When defense is as good as offense - what's wrong with missing?

I'm working on the assumption that a weapon is designed to be as accurate as possible while delivering the biggest energy possible. Thus, in the future, there will be really powerful weapons (like railguns and such, which if anyone here has ever read about, are truly amazing), which fire imposibly fast projectiles and with incredibly complicated guidance systems. Thus, anything that doesn't have some super-spiffy projectile evading ability (like teleportation, which is really your only way of avoiding a shot from a railgun) would be hit, unless it had some way of evading the guidance system. Thus, cloaking. If you can't evade the projectiles (and that seems the most plausible at this level of technology) then you have to evade the systems that guide them. Cloaking and other forms of interference/jamming would all work great.

Each player gets x points to split between power and speed ( a newbie player with no mods would have a machine set at 10/10 .. a more advanced player could change that to 5/15 or 15/5 depending on the mission ... and ultmatiley the players will be able to put points into the system so that tha machine will ultimately max out at 20/20).

I'm not a huge fan, for one main reason: Which is more important in combat? If they are completely equal in combat, then no-one will want to deviate from 10/10. If they aren't, then everyone will pick up on that and max out the most beneficial option. For example, if a few points more speed means you are harder to hit, then this might completely overshadow the lower damage that you do, because you can just run rings around your enemy, constantly pelting them with weak attacks until they die without being able to hit you. If speed doesn't really do much for you except make you move faster when escaping or chasing, then everyone will pump up power so they can beat nine shades of crap out of the enemy.

I think you'd be better off just setting them at 10/10, and allowing players to purchase upgrades to either one seperately, and playtest it heaps so you can get an idea for how to balance the price of the upgrades to the benefits.

Also, are you planning on implementing collateral damage? What about strafing gun-fire? how do you handle damage when a weapon hits more than one area (like a missile)?

-Ben

[Sydney Freedberg]

Each player gets x points to split between power and speed ( a newbie player with no mods would have a machine set at 10/10 .. a more advanced player could change that to 5/15 or 15/5 depending on the mission ... and ultmatiley the players will be able to put points into the system so that tha machine will ultimately max out at 20/20).

I'm not a huge fan, for one main reason: Which is more important in combat? If they are completely equal in combat, then no-one will want to deviate from 10/10. If they aren't, then everyone will pick up on that and max out the most beneficial option.

Brother Ravien has an excellent point here. If you have lots of options that collapse in practice into one optimal solution, the options are illusory, and you might as well strip them out and save yourself the complexity.

The key is not providing options -- it's creating dilemmas. You want there to be no best choice, with a definite downside and a definite upside to either option, which is something you need to work towards consciously as a design goal.

[pilot602]

Which is more important in combat?

It depends on the mission. I think I'm trying to set more mission oriented goals vs. go out and kick the junk out of everyone. I think it's a lot more interesting to play "capture the flag" or "king of the hill" or "assasination" vs just toe to toe battles. So with this in mind if a certain mission requires a "grab and go" one player could set up for a speed while the others carry weapons to "cover" him.

I was also toying with the idea of tying power to offensive special moves and speed to defensive special moves.

Thse were the rough ideas, anyway.

I think you'd be better off just setting them at 10/10, and allowing players to purchase upgrades to either one seperately, and playtest it heaps so you can get an idea for how to balance the price of the upgrades to the benefits.

Might try that. It'd probably fit better with the points thing I had going anyway.

Also, are you planning on implementing collateral damage? What about strafing gun-fire? how do you handle damage when a weapon hits more than one area (like a missile)?

Yes. The current rules handled missed shots (but if I'm removing - or reducing greatly - the chance of missing this would render those rules pointless). On second thought I don't think it would take much to simply change the wording to "collateral" damage and use the same rules for missed just in a slightly different way.

Yes there is strafing (an SSM can move in any direction, including sidestepping) and I am planing on putting "splash" damage anda rea damage into the rule set but I just haven't got around to working on those specific rules yet.

[pilot602]

Ok how bout this for a change:
http://www.freepress.multiservers.com/location.pdf

The idea here is you roll twice for each weapon. The first roll determines if it will land on the left or right side (under 10 is left, over 10 is right). Then on the second roll if the player comes up with a number that corresponds to the side dictated by the first roll the damage dealt is 100% to the location rolled with the second roll. If the second roll comes up on the other side (as dictated by the first roll) damage is still done but at 50% to the location rolled.

(edit) [Note: disregard the last part of the note on the left side] Let's change it so that to hit the head or hands you must roll a ten first and then the corresponding location tag. To hit the torso the first roll can be any number so long as the second roll comes up a ten.

For "lower level" players a 1 or 20 on the second roll is a miss and for Level Zero pilots (the "highest" level pilot) a 1 or 20 is a players choice as to where the damage is allocated - exluding the head or hands.

How's this fit everyone's tastes? Better? Worse? Dumb? Cool?

Thanks for all the help thus far, by the way.

[pilot602]

Actually scratch that post above. Had a few problems you all probably already found. New version uses same figure but the numbers actually work out to leave 1 and 20 "open."

I think I'm just going to make it one roll for energy and balistic weapons (1 or 20 are still "misses" or "player's choice" depending on level) but for missile systems (and possible hand to hand, i.e. swords) you roll twice.

When you roll twice you're determining a spread. The first number is the origin point and the second would be the destination point. Damage would be allocated at a rate 50% of the outpt of the weapon to all locations that lie in a straight line between the origination and destination points (as viewed on the figure not in sequential order). Or, possible divide the damage out put by the umber of locations in the spread.

I dunno, different idea.

[Chris Lekas]

I really like the idea of having a spread of damage, but you need to be carefull to stipulate exactly what weapons it pertains to: i.e. burst fire balistic weapons, not single round ones.

[Ben O'Neal]

I would suggest three different types of spread: radial, linear, and punching.

Radial spread would be from stuff like missiles or large plasma beams or what-have-you. 100% damage is dealt to the target area, and 50% damage is dealt to all areas immediately surrounding that area.

Linear spread would be what you just mentioned. ie: a straight line between point A and point B, damaging all areas that lie in that line. My suggestion is to make all the areas each take 75% of the damage dealt. It doesn't make much sense to me to have point A and point B take more damage than all the areas in-between.

Punching damage isn't like *swings arm and punches you*, but is more like when a projectile actually exits out the other side of you. Maybe you might need a better name. But basically you would need to have two seperate location-maps, one for the front of these things and one for the back (this might make sense anyway, if they have stuff like engines on their backs or whatever). So you roll twice, and the second roll determines where the projectile exits. This exit wound can do like 150% damage to that area.

I dunno, I personally just love the idea of blowing a huge gaping hole right through one of these things, and this seems the logical way to do that. As always, just offering my friendly suggestions, take them how you will.

-Ben

[pilot602]

Here's some concept art for the "retrofit" armored version of an SSM.

http://freepress.multiservers.com/ssm.htm

I like the idea of punching through but I'm going to leave the extreme damge to the and-to-had (swords, unarmed combat etc.). You have to remember the ranged weapons are all "add-ons" just kind of slapped on the side of htese things. They weren't deisgned (at least as understood atthis point in the storyline) to carry anything but swords, spears and knives.

Hence the reason all the weapons are carried in the "Weapons Frame" as illustrated in the piece above.