Damage Dice - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

Damage Dice

Post/Author/DateTime Post
#1
remoray
Dec 13, 2008 3:42:16 The DnD method for attacks is two steps,
first determine if your attack succeeds
then determine how much damage

Armour sits in the first step. Heavy armour makes it less likely for an opponent to do damage, but does not modify the damage total itself.

Other rpg systems also have two steps, but move armour to the second step where it reduces damage, possibly negating it entirely.

Personally I prefer the DnD method, as success at the first step ensures that you are doing some damage, you just don't yet know how much.

On the other hand, it makes sense for armour to modify damage, which is why other systems often put it in the second step.

I wondered if there was a method of moving armour to the second step, whilst retaining the surety of doing a positive amount of damage, and also taking advantage of the range of polyhedral dice we have available.

My idea is to have the weapon and the armour interact in a matrix to determine the size of the damage dice.

armour
none light medium heavy
w
e fist d6 d4 d2 d2
a light d8 d6 d4 d2
p martial d10 d8 d6 d4
o exotic d12 d10 d8 d6
n

Magical weapons and/or armour extends the matrix.

Under this method, the first step literally decides between a hit and a miss. Dex is important, but armour is not yet relevant.

Assuming a hit, consult the matrix to determine how big the damage dice are. Better weapons mean bigger dice, and potentially more damage. Better armour means smaller dice and potentially less damage. But damage is always a positive number, meaning that a successful hit always does something.

Some monsters may also have specific weaknesses to certain attacks. Use the right kind of attack and everyone might be rolling d12's for damage!
#2
Qube
Dec 13, 2008 8:10:20 nice idea, but I fear you'll land into a mathematical hell ...

for one, you'll put seconairy frontliners, like the ranger and the tactical warlord, at a disadvangage (any class that relies on "good dex/int + light armor = heavy armor" )
#3
jrhorn424
Dec 13, 2008 8:41:28 A slightly simpler system that my DM is uses (and I prefer) is:

Combine "Armor as Damage Reduction" and "Armor as Damage Conversion" in /Unearthed Arcana/ as follows:

Your armor bonus, halved and rounded down, is your damage reduction.

The rest of your armor bones is damage conversion. Conversion changes lethal damage to nonlethal and eliminates nonlethal damage.

Finally, your armor class is your touch AC.

I really like this system because a big guy in plate shouldn't be harder to hit than the wizard--he should be easier to hit, but it should be *way* more difficult to deal damage. So far, the system has been really elegant and easy to implement. Shields, deflection bonuses, and protection bonuses improve your touch AC, so you can still make yourself harder to hit. Magical armor is split between DR and DC as above.

Oh yes, and one more neat side effect: most important baddies drop unconcsious (not dying) since the DC deals some subdual along the way. This makes it easier to capture and gain information from them. Another plus: PCs go unconscious before they die. A lot fewer raise dead spells.
#4
Neutronium_Dragon
Dec 13, 2008 8:42:46 Seconded. Some systems do this sort of thing, but they're designed around it from the ground up, while D&D isn't. As such, you really can't work it into D&D without causing serious breakdowns in the combat math.
#5
bastard_dm
Dec 13, 2008 10:35:35 Damage reduction worked really well in 3.x as a way to modify the way armor works. In 4e, however, your more durable character types (fighters, paladins, barbarians), work through the gaining of temporary hit points- they absorb damage from attacks, thus reducing the actual damage dealt to the target.

In addition, more durable characters, regardless of armor, have more hit points. This results in them having a larger healing surge value, so healing items and powers are more effective on them. Thus, a hit for 10 damage isn't as effective on the party fighter than against the wizard.

I had tried a system of half AC / half DR in my last 3.5 game. It worked fairly well- I would recommend something like that rather than the mathematical nightmare of varying dice. If you're running 4e, I don't think it's necessary.
#6
Fedosu
Dec 13, 2008 12:16:30 The way I think about it isn't that armour makes you harder to hit, just that it makes it harder to do damage. So a miss on your attack rolls isn't necessarily a physical miss, it just indicates that you didn't do any damage; you could have missed outright, but you might have just hit them lightly or at an angle that allowed the armour to deflect your attack.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 remoray Dec 13, 2008 3:42:16	The DnD method for attacks is two steps, first determine if your attack succeeds then determine how much damage Armour sits in the first step. Heavy armour makes it less likely for an opponent to do damage, but does not modify the damage total itself. Other rpg systems also have two steps, but move armour to the second step where it reduces damage, possibly negating it entirely. Personally I prefer the DnD method, as success at the first step ensures that you are doing some damage, you just don't yet know how much. On the other hand, it makes sense for armour to modify damage, which is why other systems often put it in the second step. I wondered if there was a method of moving armour to the second step, whilst retaining the surety of doing a positive amount of damage, and also taking advantage of the range of polyhedral dice we have available. My idea is to have the weapon and the armour interact in a matrix to determine the size of the damage dice. armour none light medium heavy w e fist d6 d4 d2 d2 a light d8 d6 d4 d2 p martial d10 d8 d6 d4 o exotic d12 d10 d8 d6 n Magical weapons and/or armour extends the matrix. Under this method, the first step literally decides between a hit and a miss. Dex is important, but armour is not yet relevant. Assuming a hit, consult the matrix to determine how big the damage dice are. Better weapons mean bigger dice, and potentially more damage. Better armour means smaller dice and potentially less damage. But damage is always a positive number, meaning that a successful hit always does something. Some monsters may also have specific weaknesses to certain attacks. Use the right kind of attack and everyone might be rolling d12's for damage!
#2 Qube Dec 13, 2008 8:10:20	nice idea, but I fear you'll land into a mathematical hell ... for one, you'll put seconairy frontliners, like the ranger and the tactical warlord, at a disadvangage (any class that relies on "good dex/int + light armor = heavy armor" )
#3 jrhorn424 Dec 13, 2008 8:41:28	A slightly simpler system that my DM is uses (and I prefer) is: Combine "Armor as Damage Reduction" and "Armor as Damage Conversion" in /Unearthed Arcana/ as follows: Your armor bonus, halved and rounded down, is your damage reduction. The rest of your armor bones is damage conversion. Conversion changes lethal damage to nonlethal and eliminates nonlethal damage. Finally, your armor class is your touch AC. I really like this system because a big guy in plate shouldn't be harder to hit than the wizard--he should be easier to hit, but it should be way more difficult to deal damage. So far, the system has been really elegant and easy to implement. Shields, deflection bonuses, and protection bonuses improve your touch AC, so you can still make yourself harder to hit. Magical armor is split between DR and DC as above. Oh yes, and one more neat side effect: most important baddies drop unconcsious (not dying) since the DC deals some subdual along the way. This makes it easier to capture and gain information from them. Another plus: PCs go unconscious before they die. A lot fewer raise dead spells.
#4 Neutronium_Dragon Dec 13, 2008 8:42:46	Seconded. Some systems do this sort of thing, but they're designed around it from the ground up, while D&D isn't. As such, you really can't work it into D&D without causing serious breakdowns in the combat math.
#5 bastard_dm Dec 13, 2008 10:35:35	Damage reduction worked really well in 3.x as a way to modify the way armor works. In 4e, however, your more durable character types (fighters, paladins, barbarians), work through the gaining of temporary hit points- they absorb damage from attacks, thus reducing the actual damage dealt to the target. In addition, more durable characters, regardless of armor, have more hit points. This results in them having a larger healing surge value, so healing items and powers are more effective on them. Thus, a hit for 10 damage isn't as effective on the party fighter than against the wizard. I had tried a system of half AC / half DR in my last 3.5 game. It worked fairly well- I would recommend something like that rather than the mathematical nightmare of varying dice. If you're running 4e, I don't think it's necessary.
#6 Fedosu Dec 13, 2008 12:16:30	The way I think about it isn't that armour makes you harder to hit, just that it makes it harder to do damage. So a miss on your attack rolls isn't necessarily a physical miss, it just indicates that you didn't do any damage; you could have missed outright, but you might have just hit them lightly or at an angle that allowed the armour to deflect your attack.