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

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

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.

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. ;)

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.

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.

pilot602 wrote: ....say Joe Pilot earns "super skill 1" he would then use (2)d6 (or a d12 if it exists) ...

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?

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?

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).

Ravien wrote:

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.

Which is more important in combat?

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)?

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

Cool pic, but why does it have a, ummm, codpiece?

Also, I think the legs look too stubby.

But I like the idea with the missile/gun thingys that it can grab. Pretty cool

-Ben

I think the pic is pretty cool too, but I'm going to pick some serious nits with it - because us gamer nerds do. Better I than someone who's holding the final product.

1. The width of the pelvis and the stubbyness of the legs means this is a SLOW and not very maneuverable robot. However, it's stable (broad base, low center of gravity). Thus able to support a ton of weapons/weight - which I don't really see. Maybe make the weapons a bit bulkier?

2. The feet cannot rotate in a horizontal plane independently. Try walking like that on an uneven surface like that yourself for a while (keeping them rigidly forward like the knee).

3. While the grabbable weapons are cool - their supports look really spindly. So you'll loose the weapon quickly. Also, the weapons are loose so that the robot can use it's hands, obviously. But what is it going to use? Not for climbing or breaking it's fall - the weapons are in the way. For grappling/punching - the weapons are also in the way. For using a 'sword' or anything else - well, these things won't be lying around, so it should be carrying one. Many of these objections could be solved with a second drawing, with the weapons in 'retracted' mode.

4. What do those shoulder-stegosaurus thingies do?

5. Unless there's lots of camera's and screens, that head won't be doing a lot of looking - but it is sheltered a bit more. The picture suggests a flexible neck, though, to me.

Not intended as a flame. God knows I couldn't draw my way out of a paper bag.

Thanks,

But it is just a concept piece. ;)

I like the torso and the arms but the legs/hips are going to get a reworking.

However, I do want a kind of "stodgy" look to the "retrofit" armor. Retrofit armor is exactly that, a bodged-on armor kind of forced to fit on the machine's skeleton. The Black Thyron armor is the stuff the machine was designed to wear and as such will be much more sleek, mean, organic and mobile looking.

Also note - the weapons frame is also a retro fit. At this point in the storyline "ancient" ranged weapons have not been discovered. The only weapons from the original factories are swords, spears, knives, etc. To "extend" the capabilities of the machines Humans developed the "Weapons Frame." It's an exoskeletal "back-pack" that is loaded up with various ranged weapons. It's meant to be expendable. It is meant to be folded up behind the machine or jettisoned when the machine enters hand-to-hand combat.

pilot602 wrote: Thanks,

But it is just a concept piece. ;)

pilot602 wrote: At this point in the storyline "ancient" ranged weapons have not been discovered. The only weapons from the original factories are swords, spears, knives, etc.....

Maybe swords and stuff could be like huge lightsaber thingies!!! That would certainly make them comparable to modern projectile weaponry, cos they can burn a hole through anything!

Ok, I'll be quite now. :P

-Ben

Hmm, if I may...

I'll agree with Syd that you need to explain melee weapons, but it shouldn't be to hard with your story. Your story is where you'll explain your technology so this is where you can have fun.

First off...why robots? Weapon platforms are so much more effective when they serve a singular purpose. Tanks are powerful, well armored units that have taken the place of seige weapons when pounding fortifications, other armored units, and securing potitions. Planes are the weapon of choice for air superiority with their high speed and heavy payloads.

I'd suggest that the design of the robots makes it easier to train soldiers for combat, than having crews of them man airplanes or tanks. The first robot armor was exosuits that allowed soldiers to perform at peak condition and evolved into armor that allowed combat in harsh environments. Keep building on that and you eventually have armor that is capable of replacing tanks, battleships, and fighters with the proper outfitting.

However, the design of these things means that they're freaking huge and therefore easy targets. Stoping traditional projectile systems would be the main focus of anyone making one. Eventually, firepower would be a secondary weapon as the most effective way of stopping one of these things is by simply cutting it in two. With shields, polycarbonate armor and electrical field dampeners, there's not much you could shoot at one of these things that would stop it outright. With redundant systems and advanced repair technology, one-shot/one-kill would be a distant memory.

Humans are vulnerable to ranged weapons because you only have to destroy one percent of the human body (given it's the right one percent) to kill the whole machine. Robots wouldn't have that drawback, reducing the effectiveness of projectiles. Add heavy armor and shielding and guns suddenly become a lot less effective. It's your story, so just develop these robots faster than traditional weapons.

Rushing the shooter and getting into a position where ranged weapons cause damage to both the target and the shooter would become almost a primal tactic. Therefore, the only weapon that makes sense is an old fashioned sword or polearm. These robots have missiles and such I'm certain, but when it's pilot vs. pilot, the only way to get that kill should be to hack the other guy's robot apart.

That's what you're going for right?

Sydney Freedberg wrote:

pilot602 wrote: At this point in the storyline "ancient" ranged weapons have not been discovered. The only weapons from the original factories are swords, spears, knives, etc.....

Dude, at some point you are going to have to justify this "melee weapons only" thing. Hand to hand combat is a central (if implausible) part of the "giant fighting robot" genre, but since in modern militaries, swords are obsolete and knives are mostly used for opening ration packs, you really have to come up with some explanation why they're effective again.

WyldKarde wrote: Hmm, if I may...

I'll agree with Syd that you need to explain melee weapons, but it shouldn't be to hard with your story. Your story is where you'll explain your technology so this is where you can have fun.

First off...why robots? Weapon platforms are so much more effective when they serve a singular purpose. Tanks are powerful, well armored units that have taken the place of seige weapons when pounding fortifications, other armored units, and securing potitions. Planes are the weapon of choice for air superiority with their high speed and heavy payloads.

I'm glad you're happy with your reasoning. One other things you could throw in the mix, if ever desired, would be the psychological aspect of giant robots on the populace.

wrote: uote>pilot602 wrote:

quot;Sydney Freedberg]Dude, at some point you are going to have to justify this "melee weapons only" thing.....

Duly noted.

Everything looks great to me so far!