All right, I'm a believer.

[Bankuei]

But there is NEVER a minimum raw damage a weapon can do. Getting stabbed CAN result in a nick or a flesh wound, depending on the depth of the stab, and whether it penetrates or slides off. And depending on where it is, a stab isn't a stab. A stab that goes far enough left of center (without missing) is a shallow cut.

There's also the quantum possibility that every atom in your body might just randomly dissapate and reform at the other side of the universe.  Small, but still existant :P

To give better examples: I recall Jake saying that a level 1 wound is equivalent to spraining your wrist or ankle, or any wound that would cause you to favor a certain side or actions to compensate for the pain.  So really anything less than that isn't registered in TROS.  So a nick, scrape, or surface wound, may not even count as damage, period(aka a tied defense).

A Sledgehammer to the foot can fail to crush it, even if someone is TRYING to crush your foot with it. You move your foot, and it nicks it, or strikes it at a weird angle, and does less than really impressive damage (though it still hurts like a ...)

Move your foot= defense.  Weird angle= Luck.
Taa daa!  simply done.  Of course, if you want to volunteer to see how often luck and bad angling play into the odds of your foot surviving, by all means, be my guest :P

Again, games are based on the odds of highest probabilities.  If you want a game that takes into account rubber bullet theory, people surviving after failed skydiving attempts, or remaining functional after emergency cranial hemispherectemies(losing half your brain), I'd simply call it at Luck dice and leave it there.

Chris

[Bob Richter]

But there is NEVER a minimum raw damage a weapon can do. Getting stabbed CAN result in a nick or a flesh wound, depending on the depth of the stab, and whether it penetrates or slides off. And depending on where it is, a stab isn't a stab. A stab that goes far enough left of center (without missing) is a shallow cut.

There's also the quantum possibility that every atom in your body might just randomly dissapate and reform at the other side of the universe.  Small, but still existant :P

To give better examples: I recall Jake saying that a level 1 wound is equivalent to spraining your wrist or ankle, or any wound that would cause you to favor a certain side or actions to compensate for the pain.  So really anything less than that isn't registered in TROS.  So a nick, scrape, or surface wound, may not even count as damage, period(aka a tied defense).

A Sledgehammer to the foot can fail to crush it, even if someone is TRYING to crush your foot with it. You move your foot, and it nicks it, or strikes it at a weird angle, and does less than really impressive damage (though it still hurts like a ...)

Move your foot= defense.  Weird angle= Luck.
Taa daa!  simply done.  Of course, if you want to volunteer to see how often luck and bad angling play into the odds of your foot surviving, by all means, be my guest :P

Again, games are based on the odds of highest probabilities.  If you want a game that takes into account rubber bullet theory, people surviving after failed skydiving attempts, or remaining functional after emergency cranial hemispherectemies(losing half your brain), I'd simply call it at Luck dice and leave it there.

Chris

And you can do that. Personally, I'd prefer allowing (in cases of a single success that causes damage) an AG roll against the value of the highest attacker die minus the ATN to "step down" damage.

:)

I'll talk to my GM -- er -- seneschal about it.

[Valamir]

And you can do that. Personally, I'd prefer allowing (in cases of a single success that causes damage) an AG roll against the value of the highest attacker die minus the ATN to "step down" damage.

Me thinks you've been watching too many movies.

[Bob Richter]

And you can do that. Personally, I'd prefer allowing (in cases of a single success that causes damage) an AG roll against the value of the highest attacker die minus the ATN to "step down" damage.

Me thinks you've been watching too many movies.

Probably less than you.

Let me ask you something, though. How many times have YOU been hit in the foot with a sledgehammer?

[Valamir]

You're missing the point.  Minor injuries of the sort you are describing with agility rolls leading to just suffering a cut, or a sledgehammer just causeing pain but no damage are not modeled in RoS.  So if you get 0 successes and hense 0 damage, that very well may be the sort of wound you suffered.

Getting a success means "you got hit".  It does not mean "you got hit just barely".  Since it means "you got hit" you are going to take whatever damage is typical for a weapon of that type.  For some weapons the only options are Major Hurt or REALLY Major Hurt.  "just a scratch" ISN'T an option, because "just a scratch" isn't modeled.

Can you possibly conceive of a situation where a major weapon only inflicts a minor injury.  Sure.  But thats absolutely irrelevant.  Often times accounting for every possible outcome makes a model LESS realistic not more.  Thats just a fact of statistical modeling, no matter what kind of model you're talking about.  Giving something a chance to happen that makes it dramatically more frequent in the model than it would be in reality is LESS realistic than leaving it out altogether, in many cases.

That is the route Jake took with RoS.  As someone who has far more knowledge of these weapons and what they are likely to do if they connect with flesh at speed...I'm inclined to accept his judgement on that.

[Jaif]

But there is NEVER a minimum raw damage a weapon can do.

Granted.  So what?  It's a model, not a computer simulation (which is still just a model).

Ok, you agree with that (I assume), but want that level of detail in your model.  What I have to ask is; why?  What's so important about it?

Personally, I'd prefer allowing (in cases of a single success that causes damage) an AG roll against the value of the highest attacker die minus the ATN to "step down" damage.

What are your sources for this addition?  What evidence, besides your intuition, are you using to inject this new rule into the model?  Do you find that agility is undervalued in the game compared to your experience as a swordsman?

-Jeff

[Lyrax]

"It's only a model."

[Bob Richter]

But there is NEVER a minimum raw damage a weapon can do.

Granted.  So what?  It's a model, not a computer simulation (which is still just a model).

Ok, you agree with that (I assume), but want that level of detail in your model.  What I have to ask is; why?  What's so important about it?

Personally, I'd prefer allowing (in cases of a single success that causes damage) an AG roll against the value of the highest attacker die minus the ATN to "step down" damage.

What are your sources for this addition?  What evidence, besides your intuition, are you using to inject this new rule into the model?  Do you find that agility is undervalued in the game compared to your experience as a swordsman?

-Jeff

Well, I hate to break it to you, but the model's pretty unrealistic already. People come stock (in our model) with 1-10 points of something that acts just like armor. In our model, Natural toughness can be better than the best metallic armor.

On the other hand, I have some good experience (that's not to say a good AMOUNT of experience) of rolling with blows from fists, quarterstaves, swords (even very big ones swung by guys more stong than I am well-built),  and even cars (which have a whole lot over a mace swung by the strongest guy *I* can imagine.) And I will tell you that agility is a VERY important difference between "That blood looks SO real" and "Oh my God! They killed that guy!"

Requiring only a single net success to even make the test is 1) To reflect its rarity and 2) to put it in exactly where it needs to be, in an extreme low-end blow (which very well CAN be a 5, under the "right" circumstances.)

As to why it's important. Hm. I guess I'm just not too keen on my Body 4 guy being ENSURED a messy death if Strength 6 Guy ever CLIPS him with a two-handed longsword. (+2 for the sword, +1 for the success.)

[Lance D. Allen]

A chain vest with leather sleeves and a set of bracers will do wonders in reducing the effectiveness of a "clip".

In our model, Natural toughness can be better than the best metallic armor.

But it is, for the most part, canceled out by the attacker's strength. Armor is vital because it is ON TOP OF your natural toughness.

Also, think of what exactly you're talking about.. the difference in ST of 2 is a fairly sizeable difference in TRoS mechanics. That would mean that the guy is considerably stronger than you are tough, and is wielding a fairly nasty weapon with the intent of killing you... Chances are, if you fail to get out of the way or keep that weapon from meeting your one and only body, a messy death is pretty much ensured... So die with it, or learn to not get hit.

Okay, so what have we learned? Nothing new. We were aware that TRoS was an imperfect model to begin with... Hell, Jake knew it. But it's better than any other at emulating real combat... which can safely be taken as a given in this forum. Can it be improved? I don't doubt it. Will it be? Probably, as Jake's already stated he's going to be trying. For now, I'll play the system as is, and continue to take part in discussions which dissect the system.. But simply knocking it for it's (acknowledged) imperfections isn't constructive.

[Rattlehead]

As to why it's important. Hm. I guess I'm just not too keen on my Body 4 guy being ENSURED a messy death if Strength 6 Guy ever CLIPS him with a two-handed longsword. (+2 for the sword, +1 for the success.)

Invest in your future - Purchase Armor.

;-D

But, seriously, no one wants to get "nicked" even. The combat in TROS is supposed to be messy. The important things are: How do I avoid this fight? If I can't avoid it, how do I get the drop on this guy? If I can't do that, how can I stay out of the way of his sword long enough to poke him first?

A cunning and thoughtful swordsman is the one who dies of old age in Weyrth...

Brandon

[contracycle]

As to why it's important. Hm. I guess I'm just not too keen on my Body 4 guy being ENSURED a messy death if Strength 6 Guy ever CLIPS him with a two-handed longsword. (+2 for the sword, +1 for the success.)

Don't get into fights, then.  More seriously, what the system is telling you is that if it scored even the minimum success he WASN'T nicked.  Nicking is too fine for the system to resolve - it does not address that scale.  The minimum success it records is sufficient to do the above damage - which I think is a perfectly plausible interpretation of "successful use of a sword".

I say, if a Strength 6 guy SUCCESFULLY USES A TWO-HANDED LONGSWORD on someone, they are fuckin' dead and no bones about it.

[Bob Richter]

As to why it's important. Hm. I guess I'm just not too keen on my Body 4 guy being ENSURED a messy death if Strength 6 Guy ever CLIPS him with a two-handed longsword. (+2 for the sword, +1 for the success.)

Invest in your future - Purchase Armor.

;-D

But, seriously, no one wants to get "nicked" even. The combat in TROS is supposed to be messy. The important things are: How do I avoid this fight? If I can't avoid it, how do I get the drop on this guy? If I can't do that, how can I stay out of the way of his sword long enough to poke him first?

A cunning and thoughtful swordsman is the one who dies of old age in Weyrth...

Brandon

Armor is as much a plague as a boon. It drains your combat pool, which increases his chance for a devastating success.

And, actually, the only swordsmen who ever die of old age in Weyrth are those who moonlight as Sorcerors (as they get old fast,) have enough TO to TAKE a hit, or have the good sense to retire after the few bouts they survive. The Gambler's Ruin will catch up with you eventually, and YOU WILL DIE, no matter how smart or good you are, especially when Longswords can't nick, scratch, gut, gouge-- or anything else seemingly minor-- you :)

[contracycle]

The Gambler's Ruin will catch up with you eventually, and YOU WILL DIE, no matter how smart or good you are, especially when Longswords can't nick, scratch, gut, gouge-- or anything else seemingly minor-- you :)

CHEAT, damnit.  You are still thinking about "fighting people" instead of "killing people".

[Bob Richter]

A chain vest with leather sleeves and a set of bracers will do wonders in reducing the effectiveness of a "clip".

In our model, Natural toughness can be better than the best metallic armor.

But it is, for the most part, canceled out by the attacker's strength. Armor is vital because it is ON TOP OF your natural toughness.

Also, think of what exactly you're talking about.. the difference in ST of 2 is a fairly sizeable difference in TRoS mechanics. That would mean that the guy is considerably stronger than you are tough, and is wielding a fairly nasty weapon with the intent of killing you... Chances are, if you fail to get out of the way or keep that weapon from meeting your one and only body, a messy death is pretty much ensured... So die with it, or learn to not get hit.

Okay, so what have we learned? Nothing new. We were aware that TRoS was an imperfect model to begin with... Hell, Jake knew it. But it's better than any other at emulating real combat... which can safely be taken as a given in this forum. Can it be improved? I don't doubt it. Will it be? Probably, as Jake's already stated he's going to be trying. For now, I'll play the system as is, and continue to take part in discussions which dissect the system.. But simply knocking it for it's (acknowledged) imperfections isn't constructive.

If you'll look, I wasn't actually just "knocking" tRoS for its imperfections. I was just pointing them out. This is the first step to rectifying them, IMHO. Unacknowledged flaws go uncorrected, and thus there are monstrosities like DnD.

I was actually tossing a potential mechanic out there to see if it flew. And I get "I think you watch too many movies."

Um. Thanks.

Sure, an ST 6 guy is stronger than an ST 4 guy is tough, but weapons still strike at odd angles and catch nothing but skin no matter how much strength is behind them, especially when an able target is trying his darndest to get the frak out of the way.

[Bob Richter]

As to why it's important. Hm. I guess I'm just not too keen on my Body 4 guy being ENSURED a messy death if Strength 6 Guy ever CLIPS him with a two-handed longsword. (+2 for the sword, +1 for the success.)

Don't get into fights, then.  More seriously, what the system is telling you is that if it scored even the minimum success he WASN'T nicked.  Nicking is too fine for the system to resolve - it does not address that scale.  The minimum success it records is sufficient to do the above damage - which I think is a perfectly plausible interpretation of "successful use of a sword".

I say, if a Strength 6 guy SUCCESFULLY USES A TWO-HANDED LONGSWORD on someone, they are fuckin' dead and no bones about it.

And you're wrong. If the same blow had struck Ulrich the Stahl, it would be a Level 1 wound. Even struck against his neck, this would yield:

BL 1
Shock 4
Pain 5-WP (1, in Ulrich's case.)
"Flesh Wound"

Does that sound like a mortal blow to you?
:)

This isn't DnD. There's a lot beyond SIMPLE SUCCESS. There's QUALITY OF SUCCESS. A single success means a blow has been struck, but to suggest that such a blow would be instantly fatal to someone just because they're not as well-built as Ulrich is, quite frankly, silly.