Enhancing p.42's damage table - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

Enhancing p.42's damage table

Post/Author/DateTime Post
#1
chaosfang
Oct 10, 2011 21:51:45 One of the reasons why p.42 isn't popularly used in combat is because the effects, while cinematic, can be a bit less spectacular when it comes to dishing out the pain -- by epic tier in particular, a low-optimized character can easily pull off 4d6+23 damage at-will (no charging shticks or anything), which compared to 3d8+10 (moderate DC damage) makes the whole thing rather lackluster.

To make this whole thing more interesting (and dangerous), might I suggest the following instead: 4E DC Damage Table (proposed).

Additionally, when an effect is supposed to deal damage, it isn't a pass/fail argument, but rather a more gradient flow: if the player succeeded in the Hard DC, he gets to do the Hard DC damage, but if he fails that, his damage is downgraded to Moderate DC damage. The only time he'd fail to do any damage is if he fails the Easy DC.

Alternatively, any damage-dealing terrain power could use the Easy DC for at-will powers, Moderate DC for encounter and recharge terrain powers (recharging at the end of a round at maybe 5, 6 or after a couple of rounds), and Hard DC for encounter powers mostly.

For added deadliness, you might want to add 2 damage dice for limited use powers (3 at paragon, 4 at epic).
#2
pluisjen
Oct 11, 2011 4:30:10 I fear that the Hard DC is a bit of an overkill. That's doubling the damage and it's often not that hard to be able to hit it semi-reliably (as in, as accurate as an attack roll) while it currently seems to be far better, especially if this is designed to be at will.

On the other hand, inspiring people to do more improvisations is a good thing, so it might not be that bad.
#3
Neutronium_Dragon
Oct 11, 2011 7:27:41 Well... P42's damage tables probably ought to be updated to the same standards as are used in modern monster design (P42 was the same as the original monster damage table, IIRC). The new monster damage table would have 'medium' damage of 4d8+20 at level 30, which is pretty close to 4d6+23.
#4
chaosfang
Oct 12, 2011 6:09:30
I fear that the Hard DC is a bit of an overkill. That's doubling the damage and it's often not that hard to be able to hit it semi-reliably (as in, as accurate as an attack roll) while it currently seems to be far better, especially if this is designed to be at will.

On the other hand, inspiring people to do more improvisations is a good thing, so it might not be that bad.

As I suggested, the proper allocation would be

Easy DC -> at-will, or something that can easily be repeated by anyone in the party
Moderate DC -> encounter/recharge (with recharge typically anywhere from "at the beginning of the second round after it was used" to "when the last user is reduced to 0 hit points")
Hard DC -> encounter

Now while the Terrain Powers tutorial recommends that you put in either a condition or damage but not both, I see little reason for not combining a minor effect with low damage at Moderate DC, a minor effect with moderate damage at Hard DC, a moderate effect with low damage at Hard DC, a moderate effect with moderate damage at Hard DC +5, and so on.

Minor effects could be anywhere from -2 to attack rolls, to grants combat advantage.
Moderate effects would likely be forced movement, prone, immobilize, ongoing damage (maybe 2 at heroic, 5 at paragon, 10 at epic), and maybe movement as well (non-forced, for allies).
Good effects would be things like daze, blind, and other conditions that heavily impede, but not negate outright.
Excellent effects would be those that negate: stun, dominate, petrify, etc.

2 Minor = Moderate, 1 minor + 1 moderate = good, 1 good + 1 moderate = excellent. I wouldn't recommend putting too many effects (like damage) in one skill check though...

Basically the scale is that the creature should be able to do excellent damage or inflict an excellent condition, but not both. As the damage or the power of the condition wanes, the DC required to accomplish the task becomes easier. So I guess the formula would be something like...

Easy - minor effect / low damage
Moderate - minor effect + low damage / moderate effect / moderate damage
Hard - minor effect + moderate damage / moderate effect + low damage / good effect / high damage
Hard + 5 - moderate effect + moderate damage / good effect + low damage / minor effect + high damage / excellent effect / excellent damage
Hard + 10 - moderate effect + high damage / good effect + moderate daage / excellent effect + low damage / minor effect + excellent damage

Anything beyond this would be just about impossible to achieve for the most part, and even if it was attainable, I'd likely say no.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 chaosfang Oct 10, 2011 21:51:45	One of the reasons why p.42 isn't popularly used in combat is because the effects, while cinematic, can be a bit less spectacular when it comes to dishing out the pain -- by epic tier in particular, a low-optimized character can easily pull off 4d6+23 damage at-will (no charging shticks or anything), which compared to 3d8+10 (moderate DC damage) makes the whole thing rather lackluster. To make this whole thing more interesting (and dangerous), might I suggest the following instead: 4E DC Damage Table (proposed). Additionally, when an effect is supposed to deal damage, it isn't a pass/fail argument, but rather a more gradient flow: if the player succeeded in the Hard DC, he gets to do the Hard DC damage, but if he fails that, his damage is downgraded to Moderate DC damage. The only time he'd fail to do any damage is if he fails the Easy DC. Alternatively, any damage-dealing terrain power could use the Easy DC for at-will powers, Moderate DC for encounter and recharge terrain powers (recharging at the end of a round at maybe 5, 6 or after a couple of rounds), and Hard DC for encounter powers mostly. For added deadliness, you might want to add 2 damage dice for limited use powers (3 at paragon, 4 at epic).
#2 pluisjen Oct 11, 2011 4:30:10	I fear that the Hard DC is a bit of an overkill. That's doubling the damage and it's often not that hard to be able to hit it semi-reliably (as in, as accurate as an attack roll) while it currently seems to be far better, especially if this is designed to be at will. On the other hand, inspiring people to do more improvisations is a good thing, so it might not be that bad.
#3 Neutronium_Dragon Oct 11, 2011 7:27:41	Well... P42's damage tables probably ought to be updated to the same standards as are used in modern monster design (P42 was the same as the original monster damage table, IIRC). The new monster damage table would have 'medium' damage of 4d8+20 at level 30, which is pretty close to 4d6+23.
#4 chaosfang Oct 12, 2011 6:09:30	I fear that the Hard DC is a bit of an overkill. That's doubling the damage and it's often not that hard to be able to hit it semi-reliably (as in, as accurate as an attack roll) while it currently seems to be far better, especially if this is designed to be at will. On the other hand, inspiring people to do more improvisations is a good thing, so it might not be that bad. As I suggested, the proper allocation would be Easy DC -> at-will, or something that can easily be repeated by anyone in the party Moderate DC -> encounter/recharge (with recharge typically anywhere from "at the beginning of the second round after it was used" to "when the last user is reduced to 0 hit points") Hard DC -> encounter Now while the Terrain Powers tutorial recommends that you put in either a condition or damage but not both, I see little reason for not combining a minor effect with low damage at Moderate DC, a minor effect with moderate damage at Hard DC, a moderate effect with low damage at Hard DC, a moderate effect with moderate damage at Hard DC +5, and so on. Minor effects could be anywhere from -2 to attack rolls, to grants combat advantage. Moderate effects would likely be forced movement, prone, immobilize, ongoing damage (maybe 2 at heroic, 5 at paragon, 10 at epic), and maybe movement as well (non-forced, for allies). Good effects would be things like daze, blind, and other conditions that heavily impede, but not negate outright. Excellent effects would be those that negate: stun, dominate, petrify, etc. 2 Minor = Moderate, 1 minor + 1 moderate = good, 1 good + 1 moderate = excellent. I wouldn't recommend putting too many effects (like damage) in one skill check though... Basically the scale is that the creature should be able to do excellent damage or inflict an excellent condition, but not both. As the damage or the power of the condition wanes, the DC required to accomplish the task becomes easier. So I guess the formula would be something like... Easy - minor effect / low damage Moderate - minor effect + low damage / moderate effect / moderate damage Hard - minor effect + moderate damage / moderate effect + low damage / good effect / high damage Hard + 5 - moderate effect + moderate damage / good effect + low damage / minor effect + high damage / excellent effect / excellent damage Hard + 10 - moderate effect + high damage / good effect + moderate daage / excellent effect + low damage / minor effect + excellent damage Anything beyond this would be just about impossible to achieve for the most part, and even if it was attainable, I'd likely say no.