Results 41 to 50 of 101
-
02-22-2004, 11:27 AM #41
- Join Date
- Nov 2001
- Location
- Gothenburg, Sweden
- Posts
- 949
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
> I don`t know which holes Mark meant there, but IMO the holes in the V/W
> system have to do making wound points equal to con score since it gives
> them too broad a range to be an effective value. Also, the use of size in
> that system turns things into a fraction or multiplier, which are very hard
> to balance in the CR system in a way that actually relates to the threat of
> the creature. The use of vitality points really works well in support of a
> "magic power" system (in the Star Wars version one can spend vitality to
> operate various Force powers) but in the absence of such a system they`re
> of questionable value in comparison to hit points.
> Personally, I use a pretty heavily modified V/W system for BR, mostly
> because I think it fits better with the BR theme of bloodtheft.
The hole I was referring to is this: Once a character is disabled at 0 Wound points (only able to take a move or standard action) there's nothing an enemy can do to hurt him further. The character can basically just stand there and soak up damage forever at that point.Jan E. Juvstad.
-
02-22-2004, 01:03 PM #42
- Join Date
- Nov 2001
- Location
- Virginia Beach, Virginia
- Posts
- 3,945
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
"Evidently you have not played Star Wars d20 or Alternity. I have and both have a much deadly system than does D&D. "
I play Star Wars every other week. Sorry but D&D with VP/WP system and not using the a DR system is much more deadly.
"The DR rules for the VP/WP system are pretty shaky. A critical bypasses all damage reduction regardless of whether or not the attacks would normally do so. While this still requires a confirmed critical, it does weaken the DR system. "
What DR rules for the VP/WP system? You miss the fact that each seperate rules variant isn't meant to be used with another rules variant? That each variant in UA is built to work with the Core Rulebooks, not with the variant next to it in the book?
This is not the section on armor and DR this is the section on VP/WP and how to incorporate it into the existing set of rules, with sections on fast healing, natural healing, etc. This is all part of the same variant. Whereas the variant for armor as damage reduction starts on pg 111 and also includes descriptions of how to handle natural healing, fast healing, etc. for that variant.Duane Eggert
-
02-22-2004, 03:30 PM #43
- Join Date
- Apr 2002
- Location
- BR mailing list
- Posts
- 1,538
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
Damage Reduction? "Damage reduction functions normally, reducing
damage dealt by attacks. However, any critical hit automatically
overcomes a creature`s damage reduction, regardless of whether the
attack could normally do so."
No one else likes this idea? I think it adds to criticals in a very
nice way.
--Lord RahvinNOTE: Messages posted by Birthright-L are automatically inserted posts originating from the mailing list linked to the forum.
-
02-22-2004, 07:30 PM #44
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark_Aurel" <brnetboard@BIRTHRIGHT.NET>
Sent: Sunday, February 22, 2004 5:27 AM
> The hole I was referring to is this: Once a character is disabled
> at 0 Wound points (only able to take a move or standard action)
> there`s nothing an enemy can do to hurt him further. The character
> can basically just stand there and soak up damage forever at that
> point.
The system I use (fom Star Wars) is that 0 Wounds represents dying. As a
homebrew addition, I figure that vitality is the product of a constitution,
in the way that Con modifies vitality, so I impose a -1/level vitality
penalty for every two wounds lost. Its like re-calculating the Con bonus to
VP based on the new Con (wounds remaining).
Let`s say a Rogue 5 with a 12 Con and 23 hp is attacked by an archer who
scores a confirmed critical against him. If the attacking weapon were a
shortbow, so he takes 1d6 wound damage. If he takes 4 wounds, he loses 10
vitality because of the wounds. Now he has 8 Wounds and 13 Vitality.
Because a Wound 0 Character is suffering an effective -5/level vitality
penalty, very few character have any vitality left when they hit 0 Wounds.
I have seen cases where a fighter type character has made above average
rolls in Vitality and so at 1 Wound remaining still has a handful of
Vitality to allow him to act. Those that do so strike me to be like
soldiers and firemen who have taken fatal wounds and continue to save lives
by their actions for a few minutes.
No additional penalty is imposed if because of the withdrawal of VP, the VP
total goes negative.
I don`t actually re-calculate Con bonus, for book-keeping ease, when wounds
are done, I just impose a wound penalty which acts like a VP modifier. I do
this also because after healing, I want to make sure wounded character have
a lower VP ceiling. If the rogue in my example takes no further VP damage,
he can`t get above 13 VP without either a healing spell to cure a wound
point(s) or time to recover through natural healing.
Wounds are a serious business.
Kenneth Gauck
kgauck@mchsi.com
-
02-22-2004, 07:43 PM #45
- Join Date
- Dec 2002
- Location
- Northern Virginia
- Posts
- 18
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
(It's been a LONG while since I've last posted - like what you've done with the site! You can't tell from the email list, hehe)
Ecliptic, you refer to Second Edition as if it was a bad thing!
Now, to each his own, but there's a number of things - mechanic-wise - that keep any campaign I run (BR, FR, *anything*) grounded in 2E/S&P rules. I'm also a Reverse Engineer - I'll drag back 3/3.5 features I like, beat it over the head with the 2E rulebook until it submits, and then pronounce my house-ruled item good.
Why's it taken so long? Well, to quote the immortal Lone Star: WELCOME TO REAL LIFE. :lol: Notwithstanding the 3E conversion being done here, I started a campaign handbook for my players (and lay out what I wanted accomplished, etc) a year ago. Guess what? It's 1/3 to 1/2 done. Why? Real Life intruded, and I put it aside for a FR project I'm working on with another DM. Work situations, work demands, change. And now, on the FR project, there's two of us (not a whole committee) that have to coordinate. At least, the BRCS project is working with "one" (if you count 3E, 3.5E and d20 as one) set of rules - not crossing between 3E and heavily house-ruled 2E to make sure a character in one isn't too grossly distorted in the other.
So, cut 'em some slack. Or, do a write-up yourself, and submit it for a vote, or at least discussion, rather than trying to flay they guys working on the BRCS for not meeting your timetable. Writing is easy, writing GOOD takes time.
(Oh, personal aside: strarth/Chris, if you're around still, contact me. h34r: )
Lysander
-
02-22-2004, 11:41 PM #46
- Join Date
- Jul 2002
- Posts
- 79
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
Yes the UA VP/WP system is much more deadly than Star Wars. But still not as deadly as Alternity. But your original comment didn't state that you were referring to D&D using the UA VP/WP system just that the generic (implied by omission) D&D system was more deadly.
How about on pg 118 where it refers to Damage Reduction? "Damage reduction functions normally, reducing damage dealt by attacks. However, any critical hit automatically overcomes a creature's damage reduction, regardless of whether the attack could normally do so."
Ecliptic, you refer to Second Edition as if it was a bad thing!
Or, do a write-up yourself, and submit it for a vote, or at least discussion, rather than trying to flay they guys working on the BRCS for not meeting your timetable. Writing is easy, writing GOOD takes time.
-
02-23-2004, 12:50 AM #47
----- Original Message -----
From: "ecliptic" <brnetboard@BIRTHRIGHT.NET>
Sent: Sunday, February 22, 2004 5:41 PM
> Developers only use what they think is best, voting doesn`t help.
Do what for whom? There were plenty of conversions downloadable here before
BRCS got into the act of making an official document. Part of what
motivated them was not to just make another conversion, but create a 3e
standard which the whole community could refer to as a standard (whether or
not they actually used it). Another part of this was to create a nice
document that might serve to attract new players, but its really only going
to do that if existing players regard it as somewhat authoritative.
When introducing new players to BR played in 3e, I can either hand these
players the old 2e rulebook and then explain my own conversion to them, or I
could hand them the BRCS and explain my own homebrew differences. The
choice I make in this regard has to do with which creates less work for me.
Hence the BRCS team has a strong incentive to figure out what I and everyone
else wants, because otherwise its not going to be recognized as a standard
or used to introduce new players. So using polls is an essential part of
their mission.
Kenneth Gauck
kgauck@mchsi.com
-
02-23-2004, 02:35 AM #48
- Join Date
- Jul 2002
- Posts
- 79
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
For anything to ever been considered the standard, official or not. The entire system needs balanced, it needs a large overhaul. It needs to be as simple as possible. That means everything, including the Domain rules. All the 2nd edition information but the background information needs to be taken and thrown out the window. The developers and everyone else needs to quit holding onto the past so much as it hampers progression. Instead of creating something that allows new players to get started in Birthright, they want to create something for themselves.
-
02-23-2004, 03:30 AM #49
ecliptic, your program is so broad, what you are really suggesting is that
the team should be inventing a setting from the ground up. Until you just
did so, no one to my knowledge has suggested that the BRCS team make that
its project.
Kenneth Gauck
kgauck@mchsi.com
-
02-23-2004, 03:30 AM #50
- Join Date
- Apr 2002
- Location
- BR mailing list
- Posts
- 1,538
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
> For anything to ever been considered the standard, official or not.
> The entire system needs balanced, it needs a large overhaul. That means
> everything, including the Domain rules.
I thought the domain rules had some great changes and balances in
there. I`m still marvelling over the ingenious of court actions.
Have you read the BRCS document?
Instead of creating something that allows new players to get started in
Birthright, they want to create something for themselves.
I disagree. But... Even if that were true, what`s wrong witht that?
That`s certainly my goal for my own BR adaption that I`ve been working
on... To create something for myself and whoever might find it useful.
Granted, there`s nothing even remotely "official" about mine... ;)
--Lord RahvinNOTE: Messages posted by Birthright-L are automatically inserted posts originating from the mailing list linked to the forum.
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks