Cola Wars Online - Comments Requested

[Matt Steflik]

Hey All -

I put the current version of the Cola Wars up at the following address so everything is in one place:

http://geocities.com/grifflik/ColaWars.html

Please give it a glance when you have a few minutes.  I'm looking for feedback, specifically with how I'm handling mutations, Buzz, combat and initiative.

Well...OK...basically feedback on everything - lol.

Any/all comments gleefully accepted and appreciated!

[Mike Holmes]

Warning: as the resident Sim-head, I take a pretty close look at Sim designs. And I calls 'em like I sees 'em. Remember, you asked.


Why the attribute hierarchy? I can't see a purpose to it. Just make skills be Smarts x 4 or (Smarts x 3)+(Marbles). The Speed bonus for initiative can be based on Hands + Feet with a slight change to the chart (right now a three spills into the next round, BTW). If Beef is actually size, bulk, etc. make it more important by being totally responsible for the wound levels. What I'm saying is that you can simplify a lot. The problem with averages is that players will take particular stats so that the averages round in their favor. Which will be very odd with such a small range. This is a classic "currency" issue.

And why are physical skills based on mental facility? Because a person is educated and brainy they know how to play baseball better, or shoot a gun? How about Skill levels equal to Smarts, Marbles, Hands, and Feet, related to those attribhutes specifically. So if I have 4 Hands, I get 4 skill points in stuff related to hands. Less math, more intuitive. And you won't get every character with colossal Smarts.

The d6 system that you use has problems. There will be times when players cannot succeed at a roll becuse they have too little Stat+Skill, and there will be times where a character cannot fail. Is this intentional? In the contested melee system this will happen less often, but there will be times when characters cannot be hit, or cannot hit. In ranged combat, any average Joe who has never fired a pistol before is unable to miss from point blank range.

A system that uses a Base Damage which is added to have the problem that large weapons never scratch people. Your fireaxe example will never do less than 3 (or maybe 4 depending on the reading), points of damage. So, in the case of a four point base weapon, that can never hit a person and leave them "Unhurt" they will always be at least "Medium" wounded. Seems like limitation. While large weapons are more likely to cause large wounds, that doesn't mean they can't cause small ones.

Your initiative system is, well, somewhat baroque. And it doubly rewards speedy characters by having them go not only earlier, but more often. A speed six character will likely get eight actions per round, as opposed to the average joe who will get only three or four usually. And heaven forfend that you have a Speed 2 character who only gets two actions unless he rolls really well. I see lots of speed six characters. See Hero System (Champions) for classic details on this problem.

Um, GURPS characters would get sixty actions in a minute, BTW. While this is the extreme, most games will allow characters from ten to twenty actions in a minute. Even Rolemaster and D&D allow at least six for everyone.

I suggest something a bit easier to memorize, and more fun to adjudicate.

As for as movement, A character with six speed who rolls well and gets the maximum nine actions, and is allowed to move (Speed 6 +Running Skill 6)*2 Yards every action, will take six minutes to do a mile. I once did that. If you use x 3 and allow running skill like I did, you can get four minute miles for fast characters.

Oh, and what happens if two characters of the same speed (pretty likely actually) go on the same phase (have the same Initiative roll)? Do they act simultaneously?

For Mutations, is the naming word limit meant for balance or something? At cost two my Telekinetic character could define "Crush Earth" skill, no? Not that it still wouldn't be any more effective than a gun given the rules below. Why the limit?

Defects will be very common, I think. I think the average control+skill will be about seven. leaving about a 45% chance of defect on every use? Is that intended to keep Mutation use down? Or promote characters with a high brains, again? This all seems pretty loose, still.

All-in-all, the focus on combat inthe rules will lead to, you guessed it, combat. Is that what the game is supposed to be all about? If so, fine.

Mike

[Matt Steflik]

Warning: as the resident Sim-head, I take a pretty close look at Sim designs. And I calls 'em like I sees 'em. Remember, you asked.

Well, then you're exactly someone I'd like to hear from!  Yes, I certainly did - fire away! :-)

Why the attribute hierarchy? I can't see a purpose to it. Just make skills be Smarts x 4 or (Smarts x 3)+(Marbles). The Speed bonus for initiative can be based on Hands + Feet with a slight change to the chart (right now a three spills into the next round, BTW). If Beef is actually size, bulk, etc. make it more important by being totally responsible for the wound levels. What I'm saying is that you can simplify a lot. The problem with averages is that players will take particular stats so that the averages round in their favor. Which will be very odd with such a small range. This is a classic "currency" issue.

Simplification is a good thing.  As is, this version is cut down from a 20+ page chart filled monstrosity.  1-6 as you pointed out to me before is definitely a small range just begging for abuse.  I just went with it because it was so extremely opposite from the previous incarnation (overly complex IMO) of 2d10 roll (0 to 18) of trait (modified by level of trait) + skill (modified by level of skill) compared to TN (determined by difficulty of task).  Prehaps I dipped too far into the absurd, eh?  Would a 10 point range be more appropo IYO?

And why are physical skills based on mental facility? Because a person is educated and brainy they know how to play baseball better, or shoot a gun? How about Skill levels equal to Smarts, Marbles, Hands, and Feet, related to those attribhutes specifically. So if I have 4 Hands, I get 4 skill points in stuff related to hands. Less math, more intuitive. And you won't get every character with colossal Smarts.

Very true, and reminiscent of an earlier version.  I agree - more intuitive.

The d6 system that you use has problems. There will be times when players cannot succeed at a roll becuse they have too little Stat+Skill, and there will be times where a character cannot fail. Is this intentional? In the contested melee system this will happen less often, but there will be times when characters cannot be hit, or cannot hit. In ranged combat, any average Joe who has never fired a pistol before is unable to miss from point blank range.

Well, the use of Buzz was intended to take care of this somewhat. Since it can get used on any roll, as long as you have Buzz available, you can't fail.  Unfortunately the more Buzz you use, the greater the modifier and the faster you use it.  Finding classic cola to feed your "mutational monkey" is a driving force in the game. Without the use of Buzz, you are absolutely correct in your observations.

A system that uses a Base Damage which is added to have the problem that large weapons never scratch people. Your fireaxe example will never do less than 3 (or maybe 4 depending on the reading), points of damage. So, in the case of a four point base weapon, that can never hit a person and leave them "Unhurt" they will always be at least "Medium" wounded. Seems like limitation. While large weapons are more likely to cause large wounds, that doesn't mean they can't cause small ones.

This was another problem I was noting in running random rolls to test the system.  A possible solution I was toying with was giving each weapon a low/medium/high scale damage rating (meaning if you hit, you would at minimum do x, on average do y, and at maximum do z). What do you think?  While on the subject of damage, does the wound system work?

Your initiative system is, well, somewhat baroque. And it doubly rewards speedy characters by having them go not only earlier, but more often. A speed six character will likely get eight actions per round, as opposed to the average joe who will get only three or four usually. And heaven forfend that you have a Speed 2 character who only gets two actions unless he rolls really well. I see lots of speed six characters. See Hero System (Champions) for classic details on this problem.

"Baroque"?  Mike, you really are too kind.  This thing is a dinosaur carried over from ancient V&V influences - by far the clunkiest thing about the game.  I simply kept it tacked in there because I hadn't seriously thought of anything to replace yet.  You are absolutely dead-on with the problems here.  "Easier to memorize and adjudicate" is what I'm looking for.  Any/all suggestions seriously considered.

As for as movement, A character with six speed who rolls well and gets the maximum nine actions, and is allowed to move (Speed 6 +Running Skill 6)*2 Yards every action, will take six minutes to do a mile. I once did that. If you use x 3 and allow running skill like I did, you can get four minute miles for fast characters.

Which would obviously be retweaked a bit if I go to a 10 point range.

Oh, and what happens if two characters of the same speed (pretty likely actually) go on the same phase (have the same Initiative roll)? Do they act simultaneously?

Oh, you devil's advocate, you (wagging finger).  Um, flip a coin? Back to the drawing board on initiative overall.  Loud and clear.

For Mutations, is the naming word limit meant for balance or something? At cost two my Telekinetic character could define "Crush Earth" skill, no? Not that it still wouldn't be any more effective than a gun given the rules below. Why the limit?

You're right - it's not really neccessary.  Don't really have a good reason.  LOL

Defects will be very common, I think. I think the average control+skill will be about seven. leaving about a 45% chance of defect on every use? Is that intended to keep Mutation use down? Or promote characters with a high brains, again? This all seems pretty loose, still.

No, mutation use is actually encouraged...as is using Buzz.  Again, if Buzz is available, you can modify the roll to succeed.  Is the use of Buzz not clear in the current cludged rules?  I'll have to re-read it again - thought it was.  Trying mutation use without Buzz pretty much guarantees defect mutation.

All-in-all, the focus on combat inthe rules will lead to, you guessed it, combat. Is that what the game is supposed to be all about? If so, fine.

Well, combat is intended to be a part, but that's not what I want it to be solely based around.  All that I've got up right now is some background, character creation and combat resolution stuff, and that IMO, does not a game make.  Just wanted to get through it so I could get on to other things.  I'm hoping through discussion more aspects can emerge as i continue the design process.

Thanks very much for the critical lens...looking forward to more!  Seriously folks, don't spare my feelings!  Please - all comments accepted!

[Matt Steflik]

Warning: as the resident Sim-head, I take a pretty close look at Sim designs. And I calls 'em like I sees 'em. Remember, you asked.

Well, then you're exactly someone I'd like to hear from!  Yes, I certainly did - fire away! :-)

Why the attribute hierarchy? I can't see a purpose to it. Just make skills be Smarts x 4 or (Smarts x 3)+(Marbles). The Speed bonus for initiative can be based on Hands + Feet with a slight change to the chart (right now a three spills into the next round, BTW). If Beef is actually size, bulk, etc. make it more important by being totally responsible for the wound levels. What I'm saying is that you can simplify a lot. The problem with averages is that players will take particular stats so that the averages round in their favor. Which will be very odd with such a small range. This is a classic "currency" issue.

Simplification is a good thing.  As is, this version is cut down from a 20+ page chart filled monstrosity.  1-6 as you pointed out to me before is definitely a small range just begging for abuse.  I just went with it because it was so extremely opposite from the previous incarnation (overly complex IMO) of 2d10 roll (0 to 18) of trait (modified by level of trait) + skill (modified by level of skill) compared to TN (determined by difficulty of task).  Prehaps I dipped too far into the absurd, eh?  Would a 10 point range be more appropo IYO?

And why are physical skills based on mental facility? Because a person is educated and brainy they know how to play baseball better, or shoot a gun? How about Skill levels equal to Smarts, Marbles, Hands, and Feet, related to those attribhutes specifically. So if I have 4 Hands, I get 4 skill points in stuff related to hands. Less math, more intuitive. And you won't get every character with colossal Smarts.

Very true, and reminiscent of an earlier version.  I agree - more intuitive.

The d6 system that you use has problems. There will be times when players cannot succeed at a roll becuse they have too little Stat+Skill, and there will be times where a character cannot fail. Is this intentional? In the contested melee system this will happen less often, but there will be times when characters cannot be hit, or cannot hit. In ranged combat, any average Joe who has never fired a pistol before is unable to miss from point blank range.

Well, the use of Buzz was intended to take care of this somewhat. Since it can get used on any roll, as long as you have Buzz available, you can't fail.  Unfortunately the more Buzz you use, the greater the modifier and the faster you use it.  Finding classic cola to feed your "mutational monkey" is a driving force in the game. Without the use of Buzz, you are absolutely correct in your observations.

A system that uses a Base Damage which is added to have the problem that large weapons never scratch people. Your fireaxe example will never do less than 3 (or maybe 4 depending on the reading), points of damage. So, in the case of a four point base weapon, that can never hit a person and leave them "Unhurt" they will always be at least "Medium" wounded. Seems like limitation. While large weapons are more likely to cause large wounds, that doesn't mean they can't cause small ones.

This was another problem I was noting in running random rolls to test the system.  A possible solution I was toying with was giving each weapon a low/medium/high scale damage rating (meaning if you hit, you would at minimum do x, on average do y, and at maximum do z). What do you think?  While on the subject of damage, does the wound system work?

Your initiative system is, well, somewhat baroque. And it doubly rewards speedy characters by having them go not only earlier, but more often. A speed six character will likely get eight actions per round, as opposed to the average joe who will get only three or four usually. And heaven forfend that you have a Speed 2 character who only gets two actions unless he rolls really well. I see lots of speed six characters. See Hero System (Champions) for classic details on this problem.

"Baroque"?  Mike, you really are too kind.  This thing is a dinosaur carried over from ancient V&V influences - by far the clunkiest thing about the game.  I simply kept it tacked in there because I hadn't seriously thought of anything to replace yet.  You are absolutely dead-on with the problems here.  "Easier to memorize and adjudicate" is what I'm looking for.  Any/all suggestions seriously considered.

As for as movement, A character with six speed who rolls well and gets the maximum nine actions, and is allowed to move (Speed 6 +Running Skill 6)*2 Yards every action, will take six minutes to do a mile. I once did that. If you use x 3 and allow running skill like I did, you can get four minute miles for fast characters.

Which would obviously be retweaked a bit if I go to a 10 point range.

Oh, and what happens if two characters of the same speed (pretty likely actually) go on the same phase (have the same Initiative roll)? Do they act simultaneously?

Oh, you devil's advocate, you (wagging finger).  Um, flip a coin? Back to the drawing board on initiative overall.  Loud and clear.

For Mutations, is the naming word limit meant for balance or something? At cost two my Telekinetic character could define "Crush Earth" skill, no? Not that it still wouldn't be any more effective than a gun given the rules below. Why the limit?

You're right - it's not really neccessary.  Don't really have a good reason.  LOL

Defects will be very common, I think. I think the average control+skill will be about seven. leaving about a 45% chance of defect on every use? Is that intended to keep Mutation use down? Or promote characters with a high brains, again? This all seems pretty loose, still.

No, mutation use is actually encouraged...as is using Buzz.  Again, if Buzz is available, you can modify the roll to succeed.  Is the use of Buzz not clear in the current cludged rules?  I'll have to re-read it again - thought it was.  Trying mutation use without Buzz pretty much guarantees defect mutation.

All-in-all, the focus on combat inthe rules will lead to, you guessed it, combat. Is that what the game is supposed to be all about? If so, fine.

Well, combat is intended to be a part, but that's not what I want it to be solely based around.  All that I've got up right now is some background, character creation and combat resolution stuff, and that IMO, does not a game make.  Just wanted to get through it so I could get on to other things.  I'm hoping through discussion more aspects can emerge as i continue the design process.

Thanks very much for the critical lens...looking forward to more!  Seriously folks, don't spare my feelings!  Please - all comments accepted!

[Mike Holmes]

Simplification is a good thing.

?? Does that mean that yo uintend to simplify the set of secondary characteristics?

1-6 as you pointed out to me before is definitely a small range just begging for abuse.

It's not the range that's the problem, its where you put the average. Consider the ramifications of, say, calling 3 average, and allowing 28 points for Chargen. Characters will be less defined by their weaknesses then their strengths.

Well, the use of Buzz was intended to take care of this somewhat. Since it can get used on any roll, as long as you have Buzz available, you can't fail.  Unfortunately the more Buzz you use, the greater the modifier and the faster you use it.  Finding classic cola to feed your "mutational monkey" is a driving force in the game. Without the use of Buzz, you are absolutely correct in your observations.

The section is understandable, but as a note, I'd suggest stating that Buzz raises the Stat+Skill instead of saying it lowers the roll. Same effect, more intuitive. "My Buzz has made me strong!". I like that end.

Still, buzz can only make you succeed. There will still be cases where you can't fail. OTOH, perhaps this is OK, too.

Trying difficult tasks will be interesting. You will be risking needing to chug big on a bad roll to succeed. Which is risky itself.

This was another problem I was noting in running random rolls to test the system.  A possible solution I was toying with was giving each weapon a low/medium/high scale damage rating (meaning if you hit, you would at minimum do x, on average do y, and at maximum do z). What do you think?

Maybe. That's more reference, however. OTOH, there's no easy way around this problem. There is no way to use a single die roll read only one way to produce a damage as well as the hit/miss effect. You either live with the problems of the single die roll, or you have to have another roll.

Or read the roll more than once. For illustration I'll give you a method that won't really work, but will give you an idea of what I'm talking about: Take the lowest value off the dice rolled as damage and the weapon is rated by the number of low dice you can ignore. Not a good system, but it gives you an idea of the multiple pass system.

OTOH, the second roll thing is really not as bad as it sounds. Use your system as is, except that the "damage produced" is the number of dice the woundee has to roll his Beef against to see if he resisted the wound. Success means he shrugged it off. For every three, or part thereof that he misses the roll, he accumulates one die worth of wound. If a character takes a whole ton all at once, to the point that he's useless (4, 5, 6 dice of penalty), then the player can rule that he's dead. Otherwise he's out. Accumulation of wounds means that the character may be concious or not, but is inneffective, anyhow (of course if they can chug, they can act!). I'm using something (slightly better) like this in another game I'm working on.

While on the subject of damage, does the wound system work?

Well, it's not broken. But it's pretty simplistic. I'm not sure about the realism level that you're looking for here. But simply stated, wounds do not add together linearly to make you dead. As I like to point out, you can hit me in the arm about a jillion times and I'll never die from the impacts. I may bleed to death, but that's a separate issue, and one that takes longer than combat, for the most part.

After combat roll first aid for each wound. For each failure, accumulate another die of penalty (bleeding out) and roll again. Assess the difficulty for the roll by the size of the wound.

This thing is a dinosaur carried over from ancient V&V influences - by far the clunkiest thing about the game.

I knew I had seen it somewhere!

How's this? Take a five second round. Roll Balls+Speed+Combat Veteran Skill against two dice (more if you're stunned by something or distracted). Failure means you don't get to initiate a new activity that round (if you're running, you can still run, if attacking you can continue to attack). Success means you initiate and resolve in the order of the margin of success, highest first. Then failures go smallest margin first if they are continuing an action. Same margin go simultaneously.

That should be fun.

No, mutation use is actually encouraged...as is using Buzz.  Again, if Buzz is available, you can modify the roll to succeed.  ...  Trying mutation use without Buzz pretty much guarantees defect mutation.

Cool. I do see the players trying to have their characters carry as much cola around with them as possible. How do you prevent that?

Well, combat is intended to be a part, but that's not what I want it to be solely based around.  All that I've got up right now is some background, character creation and combat resolution stuff, and that IMO, does not a game make.  

What sort of adventures do you forsee being undertaken? That's sorta a big hole right now. You mention the pro-and anti-cola factions. That gives something to fight for or against. Is that to be the focus? It makes the whole cola mechanic central. Anti-cola mutants would be fighting so that one day they woudn't be able to use their powers. And they'd always be tempted by the dark side.

Mike

[Matt Steflik]

?? Does that mean that you intend to simplify the set of secondary characteristics?

It's not the range that's the problem, its where you put the average. Consider the ramifications of, say, calling 3 average, and allowing 28 points for Chargen. Characters will be less defined by their weaknesses then their strengths.

Ah.  Now I think I see what you mean.  Sorry, sometimes I need to be beaten with a brick.  You suggest just going with Speed, Bod, Brains and Spirit, as the secondary traits seem unneccessary.  Fair enough, and perhaps you've got something there.  Now, if I continue to read you, if I continue to use a six point range, with 3 as an average, starting characters off with less points for character generation might be better, yes?  For example, if I went as low as 12, one could be average at everything.

The section (on Buzz) is understandable, but as a note, I'd suggest stating that Buzz raises the Stat+Skill instead of saying it lowers the roll. Same effect, more intuitive. "My Buzz has made me strong!". I like that end.

Excellent suggestion.  Thank you.

Still, buzz can only make you succeed. There will still be cases where you can't fail. OTOH, perhaps this is OK, too.

My thinking on this particular issue is, in fact, "that's OK".  Adds to the "Wahoo Factor" of the game.

Trying difficult tasks will be interesting. You will be risking needing to chug big on a bad roll to succeed. Which is risky itself.

And THAT is exactly the point! :-)

OTOH, the second roll thing is really not as bad as it sounds. Use your system as is, except that the "damage produced" is the number of dice the woundee has to roll his Beef against to see if he resisted the wound. Success means he shrugged it off. For every three, or part thereof that he misses the roll, he accumulates one die worth of wound. If a character takes a whole ton all at once, to the point that he's useless (4, 5, 6 dice of penalty), then the player can rule that he's dead. Otherwise he's out. Accumulation of wounds means that the character may be concious or not, but is inneffective, anyhow (of course if they can chug, they can act!). I'm using something (slightly better) like this in another game I'm working on.

Hmmm.  Not let me see if I understand this.  Using the system as is, let me run through an example with you (I'll boil it down to 4 traits):

I shoot someone with "range weapon x" at short range which does "3" damage.  I try to roll 5 or under (Speed trait(3)+"range weapon" skill(2)) on 1d6. I get a 4 which succeeds by 1, so adds +1 bonus to the damage, making it a "4".  My target then has to roll 4d6 (1, 3, 4 and 6) and compare the result to his Bod (3) to resist the wound.

Well, I guess I could do a few things here.  I could:

1. Total the amount, divide by Bod (rounded up)= # of wounds.  So a total of 14 would be 5 wounds.  

2. Roll less than or equal to Bod trait (3) on 4d6.  If target is a mutant, chug like hell to bring your Bod trait up.  Otherwise, they get the values above for a total of 14.  Subtract Bod stat for a total of 11 wounds or go with the divide by Bod method in #1.

3.  Treat the dice as 4 seperate "attacks".  Roll Bod or less for each individual die.  Ummm...nah.

All of this, of course, using the wound system "as is"...now on to that:

Well, it's not broken. But it's pretty simplistic. I'm not sure about the realism level that you're looking for here. But simply stated, wounds do not add together linearly to make you dead. As I like to point out, you can hit me in the arm about a jillion times and I'll never die from the impacts. I may bleed to death, but that's a separate issue, and one that takes longer than combat, for the most part.

Yes, I know wounds don't add "linearly" - I had considered use of a hit location system, but in the spirit of keeping things simple, I dropped it.  However, if (well, actually when) I get into things like armor, a hit location system - even a simple one - will probably be helpful.

After combat roll first aid for each wound. For each failure, accumulate another die of penalty (bleeding out) and roll again. Assess the difficulty for the roll by the size of the wound.

Hmm...let me think about this one a bit and get back to you.

I knew I had seen it somewhere!
How's this? Take a five second round. Roll Balls+Speed+Combat Veteran Skill against two dice (more if you're stunned by something or distracted). Failure means you don't get to initiate a new activity that round (if you're running, you can still run, if attacking you can continue to attack). Success means you initiate and resolve in the order of the margin of success, highest first. Then failures go smallest margin first if they are continuing an action. Same margin go simultaneously. That should be fun.

Well, if I lose the heirarchy and just go with the basic 4 traits I suppose that would be Speed trait + skill (if any) against 1d6.  Order as follows if I understand right:

successes by highest to lowest degree
failures by lowest to highest degree

Actually, that's nice and simple.  Hmmm.

Cool. I do see the players trying to have their characters carry as much cola around with them as possible. How do you prevent that?

Well, one thing we used to do was say to get the most out of your cola you had to keep it cold.  Warm cola just sucks (hard, fast rule was that if you couldn't get it cold, it only performed at half-potency for you).  But aside from that, for some more detail:

"New" cola is readily available.  This stuff protects individuals from background radiation, but thats it - no Buzz.

"Classic" cola is extremely rare.  This is the stuff that caused the mutations in the first place, and most of it was "confiscated" or destroyed by the corporation.  Some small caches can still be found horded by various groups.

Black market cola is probably what most mutants are going to have to "feed the monkey" with.  the thing about this stuff is, like with many drugs, purity is a dicey thing.  Some recipes give Buzz like you want.  Others only have half the kick you need.  Still others might actually be poisonous or cause other effects.  This is where you end up with your various wacky soda flavors and such I suppose.

What sort of adventures do you forsee being undertaken? That's sorta a big hole right now. You mention the pro-and anti-cola factions. That gives something to fight for or against. Is that to be the focus? It makes the whole cola mechanic central. Anti-cola mutants would be fighting so that one day they woudn't be able to use their powers. And they'd always be tempted by the dark side.

There (at one point, probably still will be) were different tech levels in the game, so you could anything from a low-tech Mad-max wastelands scenario, or exploring rad-blasted ruins for old bottling companies (mutant hillbillies with cola stills), to high tech so you could run cyber-punkish corporate espionage type scenarios (even had "alien technology in the mix at one point).  Based on the type of adventure everyone wanted to play (or the GM wanted to run), players based their concepts around the tech level of the setting. I'm sitting on a lot of background information on different factions in the Cola Wars post-nuke world that contribute further to this.  I didn't see any point posting that until I had a better handle on the rules...was I wrong in this?

Again, thanks for the continued comments Mike - this is really helpful.

[Mike Holmes]

You suggest just going with Speed, Bod, Brains and Spirit, as the secondary traits seem unneccessary.  

I'm not being clear, sorry. I was calling the stats above "Secondary" because they were calculated from the others (Hero System indoctrination). Anyway, I was proposing getting rid of the Stats above and keeping the eight. But you could simplify further to the four set. Just don't have two sets. There's little point.

Now, if I continue to read you, if I continue to use a six point range, with 3 as an average, starting characters off with less points for character generation might be better, yes?  For example, if I went as low as 12, one could be average at everything.

That's it. But I suggest that you use slightly more than average distribution. Say 3.5 per stat. Or more for more for more heroic characters.

Hmmm.  Not let me see if I understand this.  Using the system as is, let me run through an example with you (I'll boil it down to 4 traits):

I shoot someone with "range weapon x" at short range which does "3" damage.  I try to roll 5 or under (Speed trait(3)+"range weapon" skill(2)) on 1d6. I get a 4 which succeeds by 1, so adds +1 bonus to the damage, making it a "4".  My target then has to roll 4d6 (1, 3, 4 and 6) and compare the result to his Bod (3) to resist the wound.

So far, so good. Actually, I was going to suggest Beef+tough skill+armor. Then my suggestion was to take the difference of the roll - Beef, in this case 11 and divide by 3 and round up. Or four inthis case. Looking at it I'd change that to divide by five. So about 3 dice penalty worth of damage for a nice axe blow.

Note how strongly the "to hit" margin affects the gunshot. One die per point. Might need work still. But something like that. The nifty thing is that a large range of damage is available. In this case fom one (assuming an unarmored character with no tough and average beef or three, he cannot save entirely against a four die axe blow) to five  (probably dead).

Note that a beefy guy (Beef 4) who knows how to roll with the punches (tough 4) and wearing kevlar (armor 4) would take only one point of blunt trauma damage in the example as the gunshot glanced of his high-tech vest. A low roll would fail to harm him at all.

In this case, I'd make a damage bonus of three only for really big weapons. Fists would get a zero. Perhaps a one die bonus per two full  points that the roll was made by. That would be more reasonable. In the example that would have reduced it to only three dice (and kevlar guy is likely unharmed).

Yes, I know wounds don't add "linearly" - I had considered use of a hit location system, but in the spirit of keeping things simple, I dropped it.  However, if (well, actually when) I get into things like armor, a hit location system - even a simple one - will probably be helpful.

I'm not suggesting a Hit Location system. I'm suggesting that you just don't add wounds together for any reason other than penalties. Make rolls for death if and when it seems reasonable.

Well, if I lose the heirarchy and just go with the basic 4 traits I suppose that would be Speed trait + skill (if any) against 1d6.  Order as follows if I understand right:

successes by highest to lowest degree
failures by lowest to highest degree

Actually, that's nice and simple.  

And stolen more or less from a number of other games. But it works fine.

I didn't see any point posting that until I had a better handle on the rules...was I wrong in this?

Well, it's just that we need to have an idea of the activities of the characters if we are to help with the design.

Mike

[Matt Steflik]

I'm not being clear, sorry. I was calling the stats above "Secondary" because they were calculated from the others (Hero System indoctrination). Anyway, I was proposing getting rid of the Stats above and keeping the eight. But you could simplify further to the four set. Just don't have two sets. There's little point.

Ah-ha.  OK.  So if I kept Feets, Hands, Beef, Brawn, Smarts, Marbles, Style and Balls, start with 28 character points (3.5 pts. per stat.).  Gotcha.

So far, so good. Actually, I was going to suggest Beef+tough skill+armor. Then my suggestion was to take the difference of the roll - Beef, in this case 11 and divide by 3 and round up. Or four inthis case. Looking at it I'd change that to divide by five. So about 3 dice penalty worth of damage for a nice axe blow.

Why "divide by 5"?

In this case, I'd make a damage bonus of three only for really big weapons. Fists would get a zero. Perhaps a one die bonus per two full  points that the roll was made by. That would be more reasonable. In the example that would have reduced it to only three dice (and kevlar guy is likely unharmed).

Yeah, every two points does seem better.  Good suggestion.

Okay, example redux, tweaked.  What about this?:
I whack someone with a big axe which does "3" damage. I try to roll 5 or under (Speed trait(3)+melee axe skill(2)) on 1d6. I get a 4 which only succeeds by 1, so I don't add any bonus to the damage. My target then has to try to roll 5 or under (Beef trait(3)+tough skill(1)+light armor(1))on 3d6. He gets 1+4+6=11.  He takes the diffference of this total - (Beef+skill+armor) (11-5=6), then divides it by Beef, rounding as needed (6/3=2) for a grand total of 2 wounds.

How's that?

I'm not suggesting a Hit Location system. I'm suggesting that you just don't add wounds together for any reason other than penalties. Make rolls for death if and when it seems reasonable.

Huh?
Alright, you're not suggesting a hit location system.  I had been thinking about one because of things like partial armor/armoring specific parts of the body and called shots (I've got Deadlands and Cyberpunk on the brain).  Your "hit me all day in the arm" example just made me make an incorrect intuitive leap.  However (perhaps I just need to be whacked with a brick again) I'm still confused regarding what you're trying to explain to me on this issue.  IYO, how many wounds would equal a penalty?  And how would this not be like "linear tallying" like what I've already got? Please give me some examples here if you could.

Well, it's just that we need to have an idea of the activities of the characters if we are to help with the design.

Well, characters could be doing anything across a pretty wide range (tech level of the campaign will help establish how much characters can know and what resources are available); ruin exploration, finding ingredients to attempting to make their own black market cola, be hired guns/mercs/body guards/trouble shooters for a variety of scenarios, straight thievery to espionage, starting their own businesses, working for the government, the Corporation, both or neither (really depending on the set up and what the player desires to accomplish...I'm not that big on a, b, c scenarios and like providing plenty of options for my players).  I'll have to see about getting some more of the background material up I guess.

[Mike Holmes]

Ah-ha.  OK.  So if I kept Feets, Hands, Beef, Brawn, Smarts, Marbles, Style and Balls, start with 28 character points (3.5 pts. per stat.).  Gotcha.

OK, now were starting to connect. The above is what I was thinking (though the four stat method has advantages, too...). Anyhow, it's still just a suggestion, and you should still play around with it until it feels right to you. I was just hoping to show you how to tweak it yourself.

Why "divide by 5"?

Because if yo udivide by Beef ass in your example, characters will be pretty frail. Every die will likely represent another level of wound to a Beef 3 character, and 3 or 4 for a Beef 1 character. Dividing by five, you get less than a full wound level per die added. Which means that really good rolls aren't automatically lethal.

I'm not suggesting a Hit Location system.

Who's Dave Holmes?

Huh?
Alright, you're not suggesting a hit location system.  I had been thinking about one because of things like partial armor/armoring specific parts of the body and called shots (I've got Deadlands and Cyberpunk on the brain).  Your "hit me all day in the arm" example just made me make an incorrect intuitive leap.  However (perhaps I just need to be whacked with a brick again) I'm still confused regarding what you're trying to explain to me on this issue.  IYO, how many wounds would equal a penalty?  And how would this not be like "linear tallying" like what I've already got? Please give me some examples here if you could.

What I'm saying is that you should use a retroactive sort of "hit location" system. If you take a one die penalty wound, that obviously wasn't a big blow to the head or anything life-threatening. So, if I get five of these, I have five total dice of penalty (for simplicity), but am not really any closer to being dead. They should be recorded as five separate one point wounds for purposes of first aid and other health related rolls. OTOH, if I get dealt a five die penalty in one hit, well, that probably was a blow to the head or a well placed chest shot. That is life threatening. So, perhaps now I have to roll to see if I'm still alive.

This means you can't be nickle and dimed to death, which means greater (and more realistic) character survival. Did you take a big wound despite being armored? That means you were hit deftly in an unarmored spot like your face. Did you take little damage in part due to the armor? Then perhaps the shot hit the armor and did blunt force impact damage, or perhaps it hit you square in the arm. Retroactive damage assignment.

If you want to add a hit location system, well, I like them, but a lot of people don't. The added complexity is often seen as unnecessary. And there's the question of effect of damage to different body parts. It can become very complicated. The one advantage of HitLocs is that you can assign the penalty dice more judiciously. An arm hit may not slow your flight from your enemy at all, but may very well affect your aim. The pain of a wound may affect your ability to concentrate on a math program, but you may find your ability to fast-talk unnaffected.

So, I like HitLocs, but prefer non-random retroactive assignment. Perhaps the GM just decides on what makes sense. Was it a knife blow? then it probably didn't hit your ankle. Or the attacker hits something close to what he was aiming for, or the player gets to assign where it goes (with GM monitoring, no assigning a four die wound to your left hand).

Just some ideas. I hope they make sense. There's probably even better ways to do it, and noting that I've proposed is particularly original.

Mike

[Matt Steflik]

OK, now were starting to connect. The above is what I was thinking (though the four stat method has advantages, too...). Anyhow, it's still just a suggestion, and you should still play around with it until it feels right to you. I was just hoping to show you how to tweak it yourself.

Oh, absoultely.  Couldn't agreee more.  Just thrilled that I finally understand what you were trying to explain to me. :-)

Because if yo udivide by Beef ass in your example, characters will be pretty frail. Every die will likely represent another level of wound to a Beef 3 character, and 3 or 4 for a Beef 1 character. Dividing by five, you get less than a full wound level per die added. Which means that really good rolls aren't automatically lethal.

Ah.  Yes, after running some numbers this seems to be a pretty fair analysis.  I'll play around with this - thanks.  

In the meantime, here's -one more- combat example, with a bit more detail.  Tell me what you think:

Example redux II, tweaked.  

I try to whack someone with a big axe which does "3" damage. I try to roll 5 or under (Feets trait(3)+melee axe skill(2)) on 1d6. I get a 4 which only succeeds by 1, so I don't add any bonus to the damage. My target has an available action and a sword. He attempts to use the sword to parry my blow. He tries to roll 5 or under (Feets trait(3)+melee sword skill (used to parry)(2)) on 1d6.  He gets a 6, which fails - he gets hit with the axe.  

(-pause-)
I have a thought here regarding the bonus dice you get from hitting I'd like your thoughts on.  In addition to this adding a die for every 2 points you beat the roll by, what if it adds a die of difficulty in the task of defending from the blow?  In the above example, if I had hit with a 3, I would have gotten the bonus die for damage.  What if that bonus die -also- made the parrying attempt a 2d6 instead of a 1d6 roll? We resume the example already in progress.
(-play-)

So my target is getting struck with an axe.  He now has to try to roll 5 or under (Beef trait(3)+ tough skill(1)+light armor(1)) on 3d6. He gets 1+4+6=11. He takes the diffference of this total - (Beef+skill+armor)(11-5=6), then divides it by 5, rounding as needed (6/5=1.2 rounds to 1) for a grand total of 1 wound.

Who's Dave Holmes?

(blink, blink) Um...the product of a tired brain apparently.  Sorry 'bout that, Mike.  

What I'm saying is that you should use a retroactive sort of "hit location" system.

(-snip explanation-)
Ah, now I think I see where you're coming from. I don't think I've played a system that handles wounds -quite- this way.  Deadlands is probably the closest to it.  This is kind of neat.  So I create different wound categories like so:

Light (1 wound)
Medium (2 wounds)
Heavy (3 wounds)
Critical (4 wounds)

I then keep track of how many individual wounds of each severity type I aquire. Again, for simplicity's sake, each wound regardless of severity is a 1 die penalty to actions.  There is no "death save" for taking light wounds, just the possibility of accumulating penalties from taking lots of them. As for the rest a death save could be checked against your Beef trait+skill (if any..."tough" or "thick skinned" type skills might fit into this again) on a # of d6 equal to the severity of the wound (Buzz could be used on these of course):

Medium 1d6
Heavy 2d6
Critical 3d6

Using first aid (or something similar, like a biokinetic "healing" mutation) to repair wounds and get rid of penalties would be checked vs. the severity of the individual wound.  Lights (1d6), Crits (4d6).

If you want to add a hit location system, well, I like them, but a lot of people don't.

Right.  I like them too. In this case, with the "retroactive damage assignment" and in the spirit of simplicity, I might not -need- one, though huh?  In fact, adding one might overcomplicate things.  Hmm.  I'll have to think on this - maybe play out some combats without one and see how it works.  Thanks.

l
Just some ideas. I hope they make sense. There's probably even better ways to do it, and noting that I've proposed is particularly original.

Of course there may be better ways to do it.  Original or no, I'm looking for simple simulationist mechanics to make my game work and thats exactly what you've been sharing.
I appreciate the ideas and your willingness to discuss them with me.  Unfortunately I haven't gotten more hits on the thread so far, as I'd love to hear some other takes.  Meanwhile, thanks for the creative boots to the head. Keep 'em coming - I've got a thick skull.  :-)

[Mike Holmes]

(-pause-)
I have a thought here regarding the bonus dice you get from hitting I'd like your thoughts on.  In addition to this adding a die for every 2 points you beat the roll by, what if it adds a die of difficulty in the task of defending from the blow?  In the above example, if I had hit with a 3, I would have gotten the bonus die for damage.  What if that bonus die -also- made the parrying attempt a 2d6 instead of a 1d6 roll? We resume the example already in progress.
(-play-)

Well, that's a whole nother can o worms that I was hoping to avoid. But since we're here...

Want a really simple way to get past the whole initiative issue? Just don't have one.

Instead, make all combat a series of contested rolls between the combatants. The higher roll gets the advantage. This means that the character's skill and ability are factored into the whole matter of "initiative". Essentially, If you beat your opponent, then you may have gotten initiative, or at least got around his. In the end, what are we really worried about? Who attacked first? No, we're really only worried about who got hurt. So, again, retroactively assign a description of the "round" that fits the outcome.

Ex: My margin of success is one, but yours is two. So you get a one point success against me (the difference) and roll damage. Looking at the result you narrate that your character and mine swung almost simultaneously, but you managed to duck my blow while scoring one yourself. Very dramatic. I first stole this from Paul Elliot's game Zenobia which you can check out on his website.

Now that's simple.

So my target is getting struck with an axe.  He now has to try to roll 5 or under (Beef trait(3)+ tough skill(1)+light armor(1)) on 3d6. He gets 1+4+6=11. He takes the diffference of this total - (Beef+skill+armor)(11-5=6), then divides it by 5, rounding as needed (6/5=1.2 rounds to 1) for a grand total of 1 wound.

When using division, I always use the "or part therof" rule. So a 1-5 difference is one wound. 6-10 is two. Usually easier on the brain, and meaans that 1-2 won't round to zero. So two points in the example. This is easily tweaked.

I don't think I've played a system that handles wounds -quite- this way.  Deadlands is probably the closest to it.  This is kind of neat.  So I create different wound categories like so:

Light (1 wound)
Medium (2 wounds)
Heavy (3 wounds)
Critical (4 wounds)

I then keep track of how many individual wounds of each severity type I aquire. Again, for simplicity's sake, each wound regardless of severity is a 1 die penalty to actions.

Nope. (What am I doing wrong?) You'll note that I was refering to the results of the combat examples in previous posts in terms of dice, not wounds, for ease. You can label them by severity if you like, but it's not necessary. Use the same calcualtion, but instead of wounds of a certain size you get penalty dice. So the penalty is proportional to the size of the wound (in fact is defined by it).

In the example above, with the axe (using my "part therof" math), the result is a 2 die penalty. The simplicity part is allowing them to add together for a total penalty. So, if I get a 2 die wound, and another 2 die wound, yes I have a four die penalty for most actions.

The less "simple" way to handle this is to consider the hit locations. The GM then decides which wounds count as penalties for which actions. If in the example One wond had been to the leg, and the other to the arm, the GM might assess only the two die penalty on the leg wound for a running task. For sword fighting with that arm, he might assess all four dice.

There is no "death save" for taking light wounds, just the possibility of accumulating penalties from taking lots of them. As for the rest a death save could be checked against your Beef trait+skill (if any..."tough" or "thick skinned" type skills might fit into this again) on a # of d6 equal to the severity of the wound (Buzz could be used on these of course):

Medium 1d6
Heavy 2d6
Critical 3d6

That exmple is exactly the right sort of idea. Roll against the worst wound minus one die. Actually, make it two, or that's pretty lethal.

Using first aid (or something similar, like a biokinetic "healing" mutation) to repair wounds and get rid of penalties would be checked vs. the severity of the individual wound.  Lights (1d6), Crits (4d6).

Precisely. Though I would probably subtract a die from this difficulty as well; anyone should be able to bandage a scratch and have a chance at a two die wound. Failures on bleeders and such would make the wound one die worse and require another roll. Without aid, say this automatically happens every couple to few minutes.

In this case, with the "retroactive damage assignment" and in the spirit of simplicity, I might not -need- one, though huh?  In fact, adding one might overcomplicate things.  Hmm.  I'll have to think on this - maybe play out some combats without one and see how it works.  Thanks.

Or maybe you can find a better way. But give it a try and see what you think. Maybe you'll go with a chart in the end. It's gotta work for you.

I appreciate the ideas and your willingness to discuss them with me.  Unfortunately I haven't gotten more hits on the thread so far, as I'd love to hear some other takes.

You're welocome, I get a kick out of discussing design. And, yeah, where are the rest of all y'all Simmies.

Eh, probably out designing something of their own. :-)

Mike

[Matt Steflik]

Instead, make all combat a series of contested rolls between the combatants. The higher roll gets the advantage. This means that the character's skill and ability are factored into the whole matter of "initiative". Essentially, If you beat your opponent, then you may have gotten initiative, or at least got around his. In the end, what are we really worried about? Who attacked first? No, we're really only worried about who got hurt. So, again, retroactively assign a description of the "round" that fits the outcome.

Ex: My margin of success is one, but yours is two. So you get a one point success against me (the difference) and roll damage. Looking at the result you narrate that your character and mine swung almost simultaneously, but you managed to duck my blow while scoring one yourself. Very dramatic. I first stole this from Paul Elliot's game Zenobia which you can check out on his website.

Now that's simple.

Wow.  Do away with initiative.  Must...not...panic...

Seriously, though - this is interesting.  Just trying to get my head around it in terms of Cola Wars mechanics thus far.  So for melee, skills like "dodge", "shield use" (really just a skill that lets you use extra armor...oh, yuck...so how would I deal with the skill bonus from -using- the shield skill and the armor bonus from the shield?) and even "parrying" would be added in along with Beef+skill(s)+armor to check against damage once you're hit, right?  I'd like to talk about this some more.  To use Cola Wars mechanics, I've got two combatants:

1.  Feets(3), Axe Skill(2), Dodge Skill(2), Beef(3) with a big axe(3) and light armor(1)

2.  Feets(3), Sword Skill(2), Shield Skill(2), Beef(3) with a sword(2), light armor(1) and a small shield(1)    

How would you see the combat going with no initiative?  Could you give me an example round with some fudged numbers?

When using division, I always use the "or part therof" rule. So a 1-5 difference is one wound. 6-10 is two. Usually easier on the brain, and meaans that 1-2 won't round to zero. So two points in the example. This is easily tweaked.

Or just say "round up".  Yeah, fair enough.

Nope. (What am I doing wrong?) You'll note that I was refering to the results of the combat examples in previous posts in terms of dice, not wounds, for ease. You can label them by severity if you like, but it's not necessary. Use the same calcualtion, but instead of wounds of a certain size you get penalty dice. So the penalty is proportional to the size of the wound (in fact is defined by it).

In the example above, with the axe (using my "part therof" math), the result is a 2 die penalty. The simplicity part is allowing them to add together for a total penalty. So, if I get a 2 die wound, and another 2 die wound, yes I have a four die penalty for most actions.

(-smacking forehead-) OK, let me try again.  I'll name the wounds just because...I, um...like to name stuff (light=1, medium=2, heavy=3, critical=4). When wounded, the player keeps track of how many and how big their wounds are.  A wound = A die penalty.  So, a character with a Medium (2) and two Light (1+1) has 4 penalty dice to actions.  Lets say this is also the order he got the wounds in.  He has to make a "death save" at the level of the highest wound -2.  A medium is a 2 and since he was unwounded before this, this effectively cancels the need for a save.  He doesn't need to save against light wounds.  So at the end of combat, he's not dying, but he's at 4 dice worth of penalties because of his wounds.  

If he had gotten the wounds in reverse order, again he wouldn't have to save against the lights.  However when he got the medium, he is now already at 2 dice of penalty from the lights.  He has to make the save vs. the highest wound -2, then factor in other penalty dice (in this case 2-2=0+2).  This time he has to death save on 2d6.  If he makes the roll, he's still got 4 dice worth of penalties and perhaps seems a bit worse for wear than the previous wound order.

So, how am I doing now?

Precisely. Though I would probably subtract a die from this difficulty as well; anyone should be able to bandage a scratch and have a chance at a two die wound. Failures on bleeders and such would make the wound one die worse and require another roll. Without aid, say this automatically happens every couple to few minutes.

Okay, so if you (or someone with you) has a first aid or appropriate skill and spends the time to use it, you can eliminate Light wounds out of combat easily.  Mediums (1d6), Heavies (2d6), Criticals (3d6).  Blow the roll on healing attempt with a Medium, it becomes a Heavy (etc).  Untreated Lights become Mediums (etc) every (insert time incriment here).

How's that?

Oh yeah - and it just hit me "Dave" Holmes was/is a VJ on MTV.

[Mike Holmes]

So for melee, skills like "dodge", "shield use" (really just a skill that lets you use extra armor...oh, yuck...so how would I deal with the skill bonus from -using- the shield skill and the armor bonus from the shield?) and even "parrying" would be added in along with Beef+skill(s)+armor to check against damage once you're hit, right?

Well, no. In such a system things are much more simple. You have a skill in some sort of fighting. Say it's Club and Shield. Or Brawling. You just add that. There is no separate "offense" and "defense". Which is eminently realistic. When fighting in a particular manner one's ability to do either are tied together. A fencer does not learn entirely separate offensive skills, and defensive skills, they all work together. Using a shield (I'm assuming this is being included at all due to the "Low-Tech" outback scenario), without skill in a style that includes it should cause a penalty to the combat die roll. But a bonus under any circumstances to the roll to Soak damage.

You can include a dodge skill, but this is simply the "unarmed defense" style. To make it worthwhile it should also be usable against ranged weapons. No, you can't dodge a bullet, but one can certainly make a harder target of themselves. And its a dramatic way to keep characters alive and encourage HTH combat.

I'd like to talk about this some more.  To use Cola Wars mechanics, I've got two combatants:

1.  Feets(3), Axe Skill(2), Dodge Skill(2), Beef(3) with a big axe(3) and light armor(1)

2.  Feets(3), Sword Skill(2), Shield Skill(2), Beef(3) with a sword(2), light armor(1) and a small shield(1)    

How would you see the combat going with no initiative?  Could you give me an example round with some fudged numbers?

OK, round one #2 holds his ground as #1 charges him. #2 rolls 2 dice against his Sword+Feets = 5. The extra die is for hitting the charging opponent. #1 rolls two dice as well, the extra die for doing two things (charging and attacking) against his Axe+Feets = 5. #2 rolls a 7 and thus has a -2 margin (and does not or cannot chug). #1 rolls and gets a 5, and just connects. He gets a bonus of two dice for charging, so he does a whopping five dice for damage. #2 rolls this against his Beef+Armor+shield  = 5 to tosee how badly he is hurt. The dice come up with a total of 18. Subtract 5 divide by five round up is 3, or what you refer to as a Heavy (3 die) wound. #2 is in serious trouble. The GM interperets the result as #1 slaming his axe into #2's chest fairly squarely by avoiding the shield and just crushing through the armor (without both of which this would have been a Critical wound).

One neat thing is that you can make shields and armor have a pretty big range in this system. Light armor (1) in this case would probably by denim. (2) leather jacket. (3) football pads. (4) sharkmail (only 1 against a blunt weapon). (6) Trashcan armor. (7) thicker metal armor. (8) Bullet resistant kevlar vest. (10) Bullet Proof vest. (12) Flak Jacket. (16) Combat armor. Like that. If you want a shield skill, allow a player to carry a shield that is rated twice as large as his skill with no penalty, but otherwise a die penalty equal to half its rating (or the difference). So with skill 4 you could carry an (8) shield, but be at a one die penalty with a (10) shield. So a character with full combat armor, a bullet proof swat shield, and a kevlar helmet might have as much as a thirty defense.

Looking at all this, the problem is that we're trying to squeeze mechanics together to work. There are some scale issues here. Again just trying to give an idea of how to build mechanics, these specifically would still need a lot of work to make work just right. For example, I'd expand the range of stats to 10 (maybe more) and make five average with 6 CP per stat for CharGen.

So, a character with a Medium (2) and two Light (1+1) has 4 penalty dice to actions.

At most, using the simple rule. Note this incapacitates characters long before they are in danger of dying. I highly suggest applying the Hit Location logic and only applying the penalties from each wound that would affect the action.

Lets say this is also the order he got the wounds in.  

Order makes no difference. Always roll against the worst penalty for survival. In other words this is using the Hit Location logic saying that a wound to the arm does not make it more difficult to survive a bullet wound to the chest.

Okay, so if you (or someone with you) has a first aid or appropriate skill and spends the time to use it, you can eliminate Light wounds out of combat easily.  Mediums (1d6), Heavies (2d6), Criticals (3d6).  Blow the roll on healing attempt with a Medium, it becomes a Heavy (etc).  Untreated Lights become Mediums (etc) every (insert time incriment here).

How's that?

Eh, that's how I wrote it, but now that I think of it, I'd just record these failures on First aide as extra dice of penalty due to blood loss, which would be added to the highest wound for survival roll purposes. So if I fail on a Medium (shame on me, only 1d6) it becomes a "Blood Loss" penalty die. Which means my next survival roll will be against my worst wound plus one die.

Oh yeah - and it just hit me "Dave" Holmes was/is a VJ on MTV.

Yep, sounded familiar to me, too. No relation, though.

All-in-all, we're going into way to much detail over specifics, here. Just consider all this stuff for a while before trying to use it as is. Mix it up and consider other options, before posting it again.

Mike

[Matt Steflik]

All-in-all, we're going into way to much detail over specifics, here. Just consider all this stuff for a while before trying to use it as is. Mix it up and consider other options, before posting it again.

Yeah, I agree - I'm going back to the drawing board on a bunch of stuff.  I really appreciate all the input, Mike.  You've forced me to think "outside the box" in several areas and this is working out to be a really good design exercise.  Much obliged!

[Walt Freitag]

Hi Matt,

I know you've been looking for other people to add their comments. This is just to let you know that I've been following this discussion closely and I really can't disagree with anything Mike's been saying. I could suggest different details in different areas of the combat system, but that would just blur the main points Mike's been making.

I think one of the driving forces behind the general direction of Mike's suggestions is making your combat mechanics not overshadow the mutation mechanics during runtime. After all, what's more unusual about your setting, people fighting each other with weapons or people swigging cola and gaining Buzz? The mutation system is, at least in principle so far, simple and flexible (you've opted for powers based on numbers of words, IIRC) and the combat system should be the same way. So, I'll ask, why not also have combat skills whose scores are linked to the number of words used to describe them?

Speaking of the word-based abilities, one of the peculiarities of such systems is they have to deal with the fact that the fewer words, the more general the ability usually appears to be. For example, "resistance" is more general than "cold reesistance" which is more general than "cold water resistance." So why would anyone make use of their higher control score to use more words in a power description? One possibility is to link the effectiveness to how specifically the use of the power matches the description. Someone with three dice of "cold water resistance" would be able to apply two dice of "cold resistance" not involving water, or one die of just plain "resistance" to something not cold and not water, or one die of something involving the use of "cold" that's not resisting it and doesn't involve water. Meanwhile, someone who only has the one-word "resistance" would only ever be able to apply the single die.

One more question: do I really have to drink the cola to play the game? I've been trying to stop drinking the stuff, doing pretty well, and I'm afraid one session of Cola Wars would get me re-addicted. :)

- Walt