Donjon Weapons & Armor question

[heldenhammer]

OK, a weapon's Weight Score is equal to it's Mundane Damage Rating, as per page 19 (screen version). A Sharp Weapon (listed on table 3-2 on the following page) adds +1 to the DR. I assume that this doesn't add to the Weight. Is that correct?

[Clinton R. Nixon]

You assume right and wrong.

There's certain key passages in Donjon that I purposefully left vague as all get-out in order to accomodate different playstyles and confuse readers (much like the description of the Fast demon ability in Sorcerer. This is a joke, if Ron is reading this.)

If you were part of a group where game balance was key, you'd play it as written - that is, Weight = DR no matter what.

If you were part of a group that wanted the game to make some sense - like mine - the +1 DR for sharpness wouldn't count for Weight, no.

[Ron Edwards]

Clinton is a funny, funny man!

Best,
Ron

[Mike Holmes]

Here's a way to balance the simmy fun rules for weight. Sharp weapons are lighter, but drop that "sharpness" die when they hit an armored foe. Call this the Magic Realm sharpness rule. Almost realistic.

Allow for weapons of "sharpness" with more sharpness dice to be found. Also, I'd certainly allow a player to increase his damage for his next hit by rolling over a Weapon Maintainence success to the next damage roll representing sharpening his weapon.

:-)

Mike

[heldenhammer]

Call this the Magic Realm sharpness rule. Almost realistic.

You had to mention Magic Realm....

I've owned that game since I was 11 years old and I've never been able to figure it out. I sure liked the hex-map pieces, though.

-Rob L.

[Mike Holmes]

You had to mention Magic Realm....

I've owned that game since I was 11 years old and I've never been able to figure it out. I sure liked the hex-map pieces, though.

Any chance you have the first edition rules? They were, actually, unplayable. AH admitted this and that's why they made the second edition. It is barely playable.

But I have to admit to loving it.

Anyhow, the idea is that weapons have "sharpness stars" and that this raises their damage level by one per star unless the weapon hits armor. Slightly kludgey, but actually elegant in a way. It really differentiates weapons. The lowly Woods Girl with a spear can kill the giant octopus which has Tremendous resistance. But she's got no chance against a dragon because they're considered armored (at least assuming you're playing with that optional rule).

Anyway to bring this back to Donjon, this is exactly the sort of mechanic that players ought to be inventing on the fly to add detail to the game, and to gain unwarranted advantage. ;-)

If the GM doesn't want to use the rule as I've got it, a player should be able to create an item with a mundane ability of "Damage from Sharpness" and add it to an item. Which being an ability can add to damage, and not add to weight. The GM if he's smart should quickly counter that sharpness does not work against armor. Then the rule has been established de facto.

Cool, Gamism used to create Sim detail.

Mike

[heldenhammer]

OK, maybe I'll try the second option; Sharpness adds to DR but not Weight (and would add to Worth, I would think...)

By the way, I'm running my first session of Donjon tonight. The Mushroom King is gonna kick my players' asses!

And yes, I'm sure it was 1st Edition Magic Realm.

-Rob L.

[Mike Holmes]

OK, maybe I'll try the second option; Sharpness adds to DR but not Weight (and would add to Worth, I would think...)

Oh, crap, why didn't I think of that. Another way to balance. Sharpness should add two to Worth. Sharp weapons are more expensive, and you're paying to have more DR in a lighter package.

Or think of it this way, sharpness does not add DR, it reduced weight by one for a given DR. This advantage makes the weapon have one more Worth.

Mike

[Shawn Conard]

It's for this exact reason that I've just fudged it and rate all weapons on a scale of 1 to 4.  A huge blunt object can still be 4, if it's massive and nasty looking enough.

This does have the weird side effect of unarmed attacks having a zero damage, rather than a negative damage.  I certainly don't object.  In fact, it makes a bit more sense to me that way.  I can, however, understand how certain balance issues might arise because of that.

And besides, it's not true and pure Donjon.  It's some some crazy variant.  Not unlike the twelve sided dice I use.

~Shawn Conard