Feedback Requested

[linux]

First, thumbs up to Drifter Bob on an excellent article. Your knowledge is always helpful and welcomed. (This article assumes you have read the realism paper by Drifter Bob and possibly the forum postings. Though it may not be required.)

On the same topic of realism, or inner consistency really, I have designed something that I want the community here to comment and criticize (when applicable.) Many of you are familiar with the 'morning star conundrum'. How does one allow a weapon to exist effectively that is a mace (blunt force damage) and also has multiple spikes on its head (puncture/penetrate). In looking for a combat system that allowed me to go to sleep at night, I came up with the following:

I tore down the complex (blunt, slashing, cutting, puncturing) and made it simple. All weapons transmit kinetic energy when they strike, from dagger to warhammer. All weapons also penetrate to some extent. We know a dagger can cut through soft leather into flesh with moderate strength. The dagger penetrates the leather, wounding the flesh. Flanged weapons and hammers also penetrate even though they are considered blunt. They just penetrate considerably less because they lack an effective edge or point. This allows me to make a morning star as deadly and dangerous as it should be in games. It has high penetration while maintaining a high level of blunt force transmission, combining the best of two worlds. All weapons can be broken down and modeled after this method. It allows me to use existing weapons and make more up on a whim.

This is where the most feedback would be appreciated. Instead of reflecting the Offensive potential and defensive potential of weapons as flat bonuses, I have done something unique (I believe). I have given each weapon an Offensive Potential (OP) value and a Defensive Potential (DP) value for the common maneuvers made by respective weapon in combat. For example:

A Dagger may have an OP of 12 when thrusting, an OP of 5 when swinging (x or y axis), and a DP of 6 when parrying.

The Offensive Potential value is equal to the max value of bonus applied in the related skill, to the attack. A character with a 10 in shortblade weapons could apply all of his bonus one-to-one to receive a +10 on a thrusting attack. A character with a 16 in shortblade weapons could apply 12 points at one-to-one (+12) then apply the remaining 4 at a two-to-one (+2) for a total bonus of +14 on a thrusting attack. This reflects the ability of the dagger to be superb at thrusting...to a point, till it is more difficult to utilize the structure of the dagger contrast to skill, thus making the attack not as effective as your skill with the weapon. But, it is good to have some left over skill to apply to any potential defensive maneuvers, as well.

Thoughts, observable pitfalls?

[Andrew Martin]

The Offensive Potential value is equal to the max value of bonus applied in the related skill, to the attack. A character with a 10 in shortblade weapons could apply all of his bonus one-to-one to receive a +10 on a thrusting attack. A character with a 16 in shortblade weapons could apply 12 points at one-to-one (+12) then apply the remaining 4 at a two-to-one (+2) for a total bonus of +14 on a thrusting attack. This reflects the ability of the dagger to be superb at thrusting...to a point, till it is more difficult to utilize the structure of the dagger contrast to skill, thus making the attack not as effective as your skill with the weapon. But, it is good to have some left over skill to apply to any potential defensive maneuvers, as well.

Thoughts, observable pitfalls?

Consider this situation:
A large, strong character picks up a PC and throws the PC against an opponent who is only holding a braced spear, so that the spear goes through the character.

Consider a pit trap, with sword or dagger blades embedded in the stone at the bottom, and a falling PC hitting these blades.

Consider a scythe trap, something like in the movie Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, which mooks get their heads cut off by and Indie gets past by understanding the clue.

In this first case, the skill is separate from the weapon. In the second case, there is no skill involved. In the third case, the skill involved is something quite esoteric. :) Would your combat damage system cope with this?

[linux]

I am unsure if the end of the spear is in the ground or not, I will proceed with both. In ground, The spear has a set kinetic force / penetration value either way. The attack would depend on an untrained Thrown Weapons check with a penalty for an improvised weapon, performed by the throwing character. If a miss, falling damage. If a hit, my Thrown weapon mechanic incorporates applied strength as part of the attack roll (to hit effectively.) For example, spear has a Penetration of 10, Force of 4 (for damage) and the strong character hits difficulty 12 with a 14, adding a +2 for his accuracy. Doing a base damage of +12 Pen. +6 For. Regular rolls from there. If the spear is in the hands of another, I guess it wouldn't really be braced then, the damage would also depend on the stability (balance check) of that character, which my system does handle.

The Pit Trap. 15 feet deep, with dagger like spikes. Take the Penetration and Force of a Dagger. Add the force of a fall (+1/5feet?) It is an automatic hit if completely suprised, in most cases. Would have Pen. and Force like above add to the force the depth of the pit and you have yourself what appears to be a standard attack, yes.

If I remember correctly, the Scythe trap has a blade that takes off your feet first(for shorter characters) followed by one aimed at the head. If one knew like Indy did, it would be an Agility based maneuver, if he failed, he would be hit as if struck by a normal scythe equivalent/Falchion attack with skill equal to the level of the one who built the trap. Damage same as a scythe. Now, for those who knew nothing of the trap, they would suffer not only the above damage, but the attack would be considered a surprise attack making them much easier targets.

My system incorporates relative success. Meaning the better attack roll, the higher the damage. Though, I am still working on a Damage system. Either one like TROS (which is excellent by the way.) or one that uses Hit Points where wounds are based on the percentage of damage incurred, the amount the Hit Points were reduced by. This allows a hit that can be fatal, even though you still have 7 hit points left. I've tryed that system before and it almost pleased me. The damage system definitely needs some finality. Should damage be based on the blow or the person receiving the blow. Which of those is the more important of the two?