Changing the way Damage Abilities work.

Discuss rule quandaries, supplements, or anything else OVA related here.

Moderators: Clay, Jade

Clay
Dangerously Sane
Posts: 1282
Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2004 4:32 pm
Location: Nowhere-land
Contact:

Changing the way Damage Abilities work.

Post by Clay »

I've considered this off and on through OVA's life, and even during its initial creation, but I've decided to throw something together for this forum's perusal, since we have a startling number of active posters. (what is it...4 now? ;D )

In any case, throw Weapon, Power Move, Martial Arts, and their ilk out the window and replace it with a single Ability, now called "Attack."

You can simply assign a value to Attack. If a character has Attack +3, he/she gets a +3 bonus to their DT for all attacks. That simple. No Endurance costs or anything. It makes creating NPCs, baddies, and monsters scarily simple.

Too simple for you? Well, under Attack, you can create an unlimited number of "moves", similar to how the Power Move Ability works. Each move can be defined by the Power Perks and Flaws, with the addition of an Endurance cost.

For example, if you have Attack +2, and you want to have a DT bonus of 4, you need to buy Extra Damage x 2, which now makes the attack move cost 10 Endurance.

Through this, you may realize Weapons no longer get "free" perks and flaws. However, attacks can now be described with things like "Requirement." Instead of Weapon (sword) +2 with Armor Piercing, you now have Attack +2 (Armor Piercing (+5), Requirement: Sword (-5). This eliminates the kinda screwy fact that Weapon has the Focus/Requirement Weakness/Flaw built in.

Another change is Power Move DTs are no longer so darn confusing. Instead of the silly "Power Move replaces your DT instead of adding to it" and other nonsense, it simply acts as a bonus.

There is some nerfing involved. Although Power Moves +1 and +2 are equivalent to before. (Attack +2 with Extra Damage x2 + Default DT of 1 = 5, just like Power Move +2), higher levels now do less damage for the same Endurance cost. I think it's a decent compromise for simplicity's sake.

Making characters who require weapons to get their Attack bonus are slightly more complicated now. You could always have Attack +2 with the Focus (Sword) weakness, but what if you have a diverse suite of attack moves, some requiring the weapon and others not?

Then you could move on to the Requirement: Weapon Power Flaw instead, but this results in rather inane situations where you have Attack +1 and have to build it up through Extra Damage perks.

I've redone some of Raine's Abilities to demonstrate. Flip open OVA to compare to his current representation.

Raine

Attack +4
Sword Strike (Armor Piercing, Decreased Damage) DT +3, End 0
Electrical Storm (Extra Damage, Area Effect x 2, Stun, Charge, Requirement: Must be Outside) DT 6, End 20
Raging Thunder Slash (Extra Damage x3) DT 7, End 20
Mist Touch (Armor Piercing x 2, Continued Damage, Will Attack, Decreased Damage) DT 3, End 20

Focus - 2 (Attack requires Kaze Satsujinsha)

So, what do you think? Is this a nice streamlining of the rules? Or is it an oversimplification that makes character creation more difficult?
Beli
Worthy Tortoise
Posts: 37
Joined: Tue Jun 20, 2006 2:05 pm

Post by Beli »

I may propose this in my fantasy game to see how it works.

Now, I have a small question. Does this also remove Combat Skill from the list, making attack both a hit and damage attribute? That would make things pretty easy, as I've had a bit of player confusion around Combat Skill is for hit while Weapon, Martial Arts, etc is for damage.

I'm concerned with the unlimited number of moves though. With this arrangement, it seems the player is getting a lot of power for free. I'd be a little less concerned if the player had to purchase attack at a specific level and then added perks and flaws for each special attack they wanted.

Of course, I guess it is not much different than the current format. Maybe I'm over-thinking at the moment.

:wink:

I'll see what my players think and we'll give it a try.
Roleplay does not begin with everyone else.
Roleplay begins with you.
Father of Dragons
Worthy Tortoise
Posts: 60
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 10:08 pm
Location: Phoenix, Arizona

Post by Father of Dragons »

It does seem a bit simpler than the current approach, although I haven't found the current approach too complex. Really, what makes things complicated in attacks and power attacks is the perks and flaws, not the other stuff, and we'd be keeping those. It does make a good alternate rule, though, particularly (as you noted) for spec'ing opposition.
"If that's pure logic I'll take vanilla."
Clay
Dangerously Sane
Posts: 1282
Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2004 4:32 pm
Location: Nowhere-land
Contact:

Post by Clay »

Attack would not add to your ability "to hit." This has always been a point of confusion with a lot of players. Let me state it simply...no Ability will both add to your DT and your attack roll.

As for unlimited moves, it's not really a big deal considering Power Move already grants this. Another reason I'm thinking about this change is the "rule-hypocrisy" where a person can field countless power moves but has to buy each weapon separately.

I have never wanted to punish players for being versatile. It's why Combat Skill applies to ALL combat skills. If you have a cool idea for a hero who wields a pistol in one hand and a sword in the other, you shouldn't be punished into spending points on two combat skills and two weapons, when you really don't get an advantage for doing so. (This is how the Power Move Suite came about. It makes far more sense in most games to build one super powerful move instead of splitting up those points into a series of separate, but similar moves. The latter is how anime is always represented, and I wanted to encourage that.)

Thanks for your thoughts. I'd love to see how it works "in play" as I'm considering it as an official replacement, not just an optional rule. This doesn't mean I'm dead set on it, of course. I'm very uncertain of its implications and just wanted to see how it "flew" with you guys. :)
Father of Dragons
Worthy Tortoise
Posts: 60
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 10:08 pm
Location: Phoenix, Arizona

Post by Father of Dragons »

Clay wrote:As for unlimited moves, it's not really a big deal considering Power Move already grants this. Another reason I'm thinking about this change is the "rule-hypocrisy" where a person can field countless power moves but has to buy each weapon separately.

I have never wanted to punish players for being versatile. It's why Combat Skill applies to ALL combat skills. If you have a cool idea for a hero who wields a pistol in one hand and a sword in the other, you shouldn't be punished into spending points on two combat skills and two weapons, when you really don't get an advantage for doing so. (This is how the Power Move Suite came about. It makes far more sense in most games to build one super powerful move instead of splitting up those points into a series of separate, but similar moves. The latter is how anime is always represented, and I wanted to encourage that.)
This does make a fair bit of sense -- the current system where weapons have to be bought individually is kind of inconsistent. The term "attack", however, is kind of confusing with combat skill -- maybe "damage" instead, since that's what it does?

An interesting consequence of this change is that you could run Attack/Damage the same way Magic (Arcane) is run, with some prepared attacks (like prefigured spells), and the ability to improvise attacks on the fly.

I think, on reflection, I like this approach.
"If that's pure logic I'll take vanilla."
Beli
Worthy Tortoise
Posts: 37
Joined: Tue Jun 20, 2006 2:05 pm

Post by Beli »

You have good points there, Clay. Of course, as I said, it's your baby so you know it better than any of us. :D

I've got an XCrawl game starting out, and the players are sitting in the Green Room right now waiting their introductions. I may get them to adjust their characters a little to see how things work out.

I also agree with FoD in that the term "Attack" needs to be thought out. As I said, I've dealt with player confusion over which ability to the 'to hit' ability and which is the 'damage' ability before, and while the system is simple and a little more streamlined, calling the ability "Attack" may cause some confusion. If I come up with any suggestions, I'll share 'em ^_^
Roleplay does not begin with everyone else.
Roleplay begins with you.
Clay
Dangerously Sane
Posts: 1282
Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2004 4:32 pm
Location: Nowhere-land
Contact:

Post by Clay »

I agree..."Attack" leaves something to be desired. The problem is, a word like Damage is a complete clunker. You might say in a casual conversation that Vash has a cool gun ATTACK...but who's going to say "Boy, Vash's damage is totally awesome!"

I really try to keep the attributes list reading like a character description, and I want to avoid "game-y" words like Damage for that purpose.

Any other suggestions? Attack Move seems bland and specific, but nothing else comes to mind that moves away from "skill" and towards "damage."

You could always go for Combat Attack or Combat Damage to be a companion with Combat Skill, but that seems to conjure up even more confusion and again sounds rather like game jargon.

Also, FoD: Yes, that's very much the point. This allows players to throw foes into tables, kick people in the gut, bash a bottle over someone's head, and fire their signature gun without having to figure up numbers or sacrifice their damaging ability.
Father of Dragons
Worthy Tortoise
Posts: 60
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 10:08 pm
Location: Phoenix, Arizona

Post by Father of Dragons »

Clay wrote:I agree..."Attack" leaves something to be desired. The problem is, a word like Damage is a complete clunker. You might say in a casual conversation that Vash has a cool gun ATTACK...but who's going to say "Boy, Vash's damage is totally awesome!"

I really try to keep the attributes list reading like a character description, and I want to avoid "game-y" words like Damage for that purpose.

Any other suggestions? Attack Move seems bland and specific, but nothing else comes to mind that moves away from "skill" and towards "damage."

You could always go for Combat Attack or Combat Damage to be a companion with Combat Skill, but that seems to conjure up even more confusion and again sounds rather like game jargon.
Hm. Well, there's "Combat Power" or simply "Power" -- has a certain superhero-ish ring to it. I thought about "Might", but that sort of confuses with Strong. There's "Warfare" (found in the Amber Diceless RPG), but that sounds too much like Combat Skill. Or we could go mystical and call if "Ki" or "Qi". We could choose a word based on the effect: "Impact", "Harm", "Hit", "Pound", "Strike", etc.

Getting just the right word is hard.
"If that's pure logic I'll take vanilla."
Beli
Worthy Tortoise
Posts: 37
Joined: Tue Jun 20, 2006 2:05 pm

Post by Beli »

You know, I kind of like Power. Nice one, FoD!
Roleplay does not begin with everyone else.
Roleplay begins with you.
Clay
Dangerously Sane
Posts: 1282
Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2004 4:32 pm
Location: Nowhere-land
Contact:

Post by Clay »

At first, I looked at "Power" and could not resist grimacing. It conjured up images of "super powers" and the like, and that's not really appropriate.

But if I thought further, and tossed away my inner 14 year-old Spiderman reader, Power is actually very appropriate. It's like Strength...but not quite. It's more of a unique and personal strength, like Martial Arts or Saiya-jin power-levels.

At the same time, I have trouble using the word "power" to represent guns, swords, and boomerangs.

Not a bad start though, thanks!
Father of Dragons
Worthy Tortoise
Posts: 60
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 10:08 pm
Location: Phoenix, Arizona

Post by Father of Dragons »

Clay wrote:At the same time, I have trouble using the word "power" to represent guns, swords, and boomerangs.
No matter how you look at it, an attribute that makes you do more damage with a gun when you hit, but doesn't actually increase your chance of hitting, is pretty abstract.
"If that's pure logic I'll take vanilla."
Clay
Dangerously Sane
Posts: 1282
Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2004 4:32 pm
Location: Nowhere-land
Contact:

Post by Clay »

I don't see how the two are related, really. Just because you carry a bazooka (tons of damage) doesn't make you any better at aiming it.
Father of Dragons
Worthy Tortoise
Posts: 60
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 10:08 pm
Location: Phoenix, Arizona

Post by Father of Dragons »

Clay wrote:I don't see how the two are related, really. Just because you carry a bazooka (tons of damage) doesn't make you any better at aiming it.
But currently in OVA, if you have Weapon (Pistol) +5 you do lots more damage with .45 automatic than someone without a Weapon advantage at all, but your chance of hitting (if you both have the same amount of Agility and Combat Skill) is the same. Or is higher levels of Weapon supposed to represent more potent weapons? That's not the impression I got from the rules ...
"If that's pure logic I'll take vanilla."
Clay
Dangerously Sane
Posts: 1282
Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2004 4:32 pm
Location: Nowhere-land
Contact:

Post by Clay »

The latter. The higher your level in Weapon, the more "deadly" the weapon is.

Braun's handgun is only a Weapon +2. I imagine a bazooka would be a +4.

In essence, you are buying the item itself. It does not improve your damage with "weapons" in general.
Father of Dragons
Worthy Tortoise
Posts: 60
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 10:08 pm
Location: Phoenix, Arizona

Post by Father of Dragons »

Clay wrote:The latter. The higher your level in Weapon, the more "deadly" the weapon is.

Braun's handgun is only a Weapon +2. I imagine a bazooka would be a +4.

In essence, you are buying the item itself. It does not improve your damage with "weapons" in general.
OK, but you do realize that there's nothing in the current OVA text to relate the the level of your weapon ability and the type of weapon, don't you? I had interpreted increases in the weapon ability as increasing skill in using that particular weapon, thus allowing you to cause more damage with it; not it representing buying better weapons.
"If that's pure logic I'll take vanilla."
Post Reply