Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
AndyDay303

Armor, fatigue and wounds

Recommended Posts

Good point... That really doesn't make sense from a narative point of view.

In fact armor should cause fatigue... Perhaps the renaming of wounds wasn't such a good idea afterwards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's kind of the problem with having mechanics that try to cover too many aspects into one thing. Yeah it's greatly simplified, but it ends up where a lot of things don't make sense or don't work consistently in the way they are meant to, but it all takes a bit of trial and error to find a system that is both simplified and covers all the bases you want it to effectively.

The way the wounds(or fatigue)/armor works in this game reminds me a bit of how poise works in Dark Souls. The armor basically allows you to take more hits without being incapacitated. In dark souls if the hits break through your poise, then you are staggered and will most of the time be killed by the following attacks from the enemy because you cannot effectively act to prevent it, whereas if your poise can take the hit then it doesn't interrupt your current attacks and you can still block/dodge effectively despite some health being removed. Heavier armors give you more poise while clothing type armors give you hardly any.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, AndyDay303 said:

Hi,

I like the 1.0 change to using fatigue. This feels cinematic. However why would armor reduce the fatigue you take? Seems like it should reduce the severity of wounds. 

Just a thought. 

 

Andy

Having been an SCA fencer and Heavy... heavier armor, while it slows me down, doesn't tire me as fast as 2-3 square feet of bruise does... Even the little dings and 2" diameter fencing bruises can be felt for days... and make one tire more easily. The better the armor, the smaller the bruises I wound up with in heavy; this also meant far less trouble the following day.

It is somewhat physically reasonable. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly I think the problem is calling attacks "damage".  Damage in the beta at present doesn't represent decent hits at all (that's what Critical Strikes are) but rather how exhausted you are from having to fend off attacks.  At most, fatigue is really minor cuts or bruises.  Being able to rely on your armour to more or less ignore attacks and only be threatened with genuine harm by attacks of a certain ferocity makes sense.  But thinking of every attack check that meets the TN as an actual blow is clearly not correct.  This is an important concept and I'm not convinced the game is doing as good a job as it could communicating the difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, GaGrin said:

Honestly I think the problem is calling attacks "damage".  Damage in the beta at present doesn't represent decent hits at all (that's what Critical Strikes are) but rather how exhausted you are from having to fend off attacks.  At most, fatigue is really minor cuts or bruises.  Being able to rely on your armour to more or less ignore attacks and only be threatened with genuine harm by attacks of a certain ferocity makes sense.  But thinking of every attack check that meets the TN as an actual blow is clearly not correct.  This is an important concept and I'm not convinced the game is doing as good a job as it could communicating the difference.

This is the same problem that DND has with hit points. They don’t actually represent guys, generally. 

 

5R5 fatigue is conceptually the same as hit points in DnD. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, GaGrin said:

Honestly I think the problem is calling attacks "damage".  Damage in the beta at present doesn't represent decent hits at all (that's what Critical Strikes are) but rather how exhausted you are from having to fend off attacks.  At most, fatigue is really minor cuts or bruises.  Being able to rely on your armour to more or less ignore attacks and only be threatened with genuine harm by attacks of a certain ferocity makes sense.  But thinking of every attack check that meets the TN as an actual blow is clearly not correct.  This is an important concept and I'm not convinced the game is doing as good a job as it could communicating the difference.

That's one thing more specifically said in Force & Destiny, which this system shares a bit of heritage with - a single round of combat's Lightsaber checks could represent several seconds to a minute's exchange of blows, with a narrative description of Luke & Vader's duel on Bespin only taking about 8 rounds or so..

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/31/2017 at 1:31 PM, AndyDay303 said:

This is the same problem that DND has with hit points.

It's funny, I remember getting really angry with DnD for years precisely because of this and then one day it just *clicked*.  You look at the old editions and you basically only use hps for attacks or other threats you can see coming and everything else is save-or-die*. I think where this abstraction breaks down is out of combat, stuff like being stabbed while you're asleep or why healing spells suddenly really suck.  It's not really the hit point mechanism that's the problem, it's not being able to follow what's happening in the fiction from one moment to the next because different parts of the mechanism imply different things.

*or other nastiness

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, GaGrin said:

It's funny, I remember getting really angry with DnD for years precisely because of this and then one day it just *clicked*.  You look at the old editions and you basically only use hps for attacks or other threats you can see coming and everything else is save-or-die*. I think where this abstraction breaks down is out of combat, stuff like being stabbed while you're asleep or why healing spells suddenly really suck.  It's not really the hit point mechanism that's the problem, it's not being able to follow what's happening in the fiction from one moment to the next because different parts of the mechanism imply different things.

*or other nastiness

Actually its not a problem with DND. You read the wounds description, at least before they changed in this beta, and you would see physical harm, bruises and such.

You dont read this description in DND. At least on 5E that is the most recent on my mind it literally says something like "its the mixture of physical and mental durability, your will to live" and stuff like that. You are not being cleaved in half by attacks and sustaining them because you are Level 8 and not 1. You are being battered around until you are cleaved and die. (Your HP reaches a negative or at least 0).

Biggest problem of Hitpoints in DND is that  people dont bother to read because they think they already understand it. Not long ago actually had this discussion with the GM and when he got the book to check out he was literally impressed.

Like i said before Wound was fine, People were projecting what they TOUGHT wounds should be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure, but some of 5E acts like it's you dodging blows like a champ (i.e. HP progression and damage values on weapons) and some of it acts like it's actual physical harm (Hit Dice recovery, Healing Spells).  This makes it difficult to concretely imagine the scene and it's not helped by the terms the game uses.  Saying "hit" implies a hit.  Saying "damage" implies you've actually hurt someone.  In my experience people don't read things very carefully so expecting people to grok this difference is probably asking too much if it's not consistantly hammered home throughout the text.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ok fatigue and damage First your trying to avoid being hit dose not necessarily cause you to tire out unless you have no physical stamina(not a real samurai if you have that little physical stamina) 
second what fatigue  basically is the scraps bruises and superficial damage you take form getting blows to you that do not relay hurt  you severely.

with that out of the way couple problems  

Question 17  right now as the update says anyone can take a 7 or lower item  why would anyone not take plate armor

Plate armor removes 5 damage form a strike this will break most peoples razor edged weapons in 2 blows with out a great deal of luck starting out (3 rings 2 skill or worse)

and not everyone can start with a blunt weapon that deals a lot of damage like a tetsubo  

earth stance needs looked at it's to power full  being in earth stance removes a core ability of the system from affecting you  no if ands or butts .

salutation 1: you can not use opportunities on opponents.   2: it removes just 1 opportunity from the keeped dice  if the opportunity is targeting you  from opponents (maybe scale with ranks)

cause it's impossible to crit someone in earth stance but they can crit you  this seems unfair  also there is no down side to being in earth stance at all and it removes a critical aspect of the game one the game is built on opportunities

Hit   implies you hit the person in some manner not necessarily in a major way (that's a crit) you could have ran your blade down the side of their arm and did relay little to no damage.

if you make armor reduce crits then you will destroy the crab defenders school ability.

now another factor  3 crits in same area = death   this to me seems a bit over the top  it  means that 4-5 bad guys with 2r2s with ranged martial doing strikes  have about a 50% chance to kill a single target in 1 round

now I know it says if gm allows this but if players can do it  NPCs should be able to as well so I can see a lot of death happening do to  good strategist  numbers of targets   and just bad luck.

now in 4e it was  possible to get a relay good roll lots of explosions  on dice and get a 1 hit kill but the odds where low at starting characters but this looks like it's going to be even more deadly.

Criting with out damage seems off  but killing with out any damage seems insane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Mobiusllls said:

Actually its not a problem with DND. You read the wounds description, at least before they changed in this beta, and you would see physical harm, bruises and such.

[snip]

Biggest problem of Hitpoints in DND is that  people dont bother to read because they think they already understand it. Not long ago actually had this discussion with the GM and when he got the book to check out he was literally impressed.

Like i said before Wound was fine, People were projecting what they TOUGHT wounds should be.

Given that RPGs are played with words, it matters that important game terms are well named. Games can explain around them, but a bad name is going to lead people astray. We saw that with "outbursts" in the beta. 

Taking the D&D example, "hit points" soundlike they should be for when you get hit, or something analogous to it (hurt, in some form or another). 

Similarly, "wounds" sounded serious (at least to me, a native English speaker), but they weren't--not in 4e*, and not in the beta. The connotation of "wound" is so severe that when I hear "The soldier was wounded in battle", my next question is "Did they survive?", not "So are we talking bumps and bruises, or serious bleeding?". 

Personally, I'd prefer that mechanics called "hit" and "damage" were actually related to blows and harm.

*Yes, yes, they became serious over time, but only after you hit a zillion. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, sidescroller said:

when I hear "The soldier was wounded in battle", my next question is "Did they survive?"

"Tis but a scratch."

Back on topic, I had been pondering the idea that armour with certain traits could grant assisting dice or advantage on resisitance tests against crits.  Given how strong armour is and the already delicate damage/crit balance I'm not convinced this would be a good idea.

Say what you like about the beta, the designers have put some thought into those numbers, they aren't completely random.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Grodark said:

Question 17  right now as the update says anyone can take a 7 or lower item  why would anyone not take plate armor

Plate armor removes 5 damage form a strike this will break most peoples razor edged weapons in 2 blows with out a great deal of luck starting out (3 rings 2 skill or worse)

and not everyone can start with a blunt weapon that deals a lot of damage like a tetsubo   

Having plate armour is one thing. Getting to wear it is another. Just about any situation that allows your opponent to use wargear should allow you to do the same and providing you with proper gear is your lord’s responsibility. Question 16 (not 17, I think) is more about letting you own an item with some personal significance than about letting you own something useful. If it’s appropriate for your character to be given or at least leant an item, you should almost always have access to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, GaGrin said:

"Tis but a scratch."

Back on topic, I had been pondering the idea that armour with certain traits could grant assisting dice or advantage on resisitance tests against crits.  Given how strong armour is and the already delicate damage/crit balance I'm not convinced this would be a good idea.

Say what you like about the beta, the designers have put some thought into those numbers, they aren't completely random.

Can you elaborate? I haven’t been able to play test this but from the looks of it, Samurai  with armor will only take 1-2 damage per hit, and so the game could easily become a slog. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, AndyDay303 said:

Can you elaborate?

Not in a simple way sadly, but there's an ongoing discussion about related issues in the Blades vs Blunts thread.  The short version is that there are two methods to fight ending and the weapon/armour interactions plus the particular techniques you have combine in such a way that all the implications aren't immediately obvious since strife, fatigue, crits and armour have different permenance as well as effects.

I could ramble about it for hours to be honest, but it's the sort of thing you need graphs and tables for which typically puts people to sleep.

Don't tell anyone, but I have a suspicion that the designers might like crunchy games.  Call it a hunch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, AndyDay303 said:

Can you elaborate? I haven’t been able to play test this but from the looks of it, Samurai  with armor will only take 1-2 damage per hit, and so the game could easily become a slog. 

The average on 3+2k3 is pretty much 2.5 or so.

So, on the battlefield, yes, bushi in maxed out armor will take 0-2 per strike. But that's not the key element. When you get 2 Su + 2 Op on a roll you do a crit. Crits add up. Repeats go one category more severe, unless you've changed stance..

Most non-bushi don't have armor. Most bushi don't wear it in town. So those are 5-7 less the 1 for a kimono... so it's only 2-4 hits to doing major damage. With Starting characters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Grodark said:

nameless ronin   look at the update 1.0 pdf is says question 17 they can pick any item rarity 7 or less that was given to you by a group or that you won in battle 

 

First, question 16, not 17. Second, I didn’t say that isn’t true. Third, it doesn’t matter.

It doesn’t matter because characters, all characters who want to, actually can start with a wargear weapon like a tetsubō or ōtsuchi. They can try to requisition it (and their lord shouldn’t have a problem with this if their duties make it necessary to have such an item) or they can get one via that same question 16 (only the Unicorn scimitar and repeating crossbow have a rarity higher than 7) and requisition plated armour themselves if they want to. Again, question 16 is not about your character having the kind of gear they need. It’s about having an item, any kind of item, with a special connection as a gift or war trophy.

Maybe plated armour reduces damage a bit too much. Maybe some weapons don’t do enough damage. That’s a debate we can have. But question 16 is irrelevant for that debate. If your GM feels it’s best that you have a certain item during a scene in a campaign, he can easily (and by the rules) make sure you have it even if it’s not part of your starting outfit and you didn’t otherwise acquire one already. Conversely, if he wants to put you in a scene where you can’t use that item despite it being in your possession, he can just as easily do that too. You can’t just bring wargear weapons with you in court. You won’t be wearing armour while bathing in a hot spring. There are numerous plausible reasons that can make it impossible to use a certain item or even just have it with you.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

but that not the point  and the question is 17 not 16. 16 is for a personal item not of weapon or armor

the question is simple give a reason that a bushi would take anything other than the plate armor and give a good reason for it

reasons for plate armor it has the best chance to defend against katanas   , it can look real cool , it's more expensive than just about any other item ,  and most  players do not get anything better than

traveling cloths as a bushi.

Edited by Grodark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Grodark said:

the question is simple give a reason that a bushi would take anything other than the plate armor and give a good reason for it

Because you could take an Otsuchi and get a damage 9 weapon instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Grodark said:

the question is simple give a reason that a bushi would take anything other than the plate armor and give a good reason for it

reasons for plate armor it has the best chance to defend against katanas   , it can look real cool , it's more expensive than just about any other item ,  and most  players do not get anything better than

traveling cloths as a bushi.

  • Because, as @GaGrin says, you could get an otsuchi.
  • Because you could get a crossbow and get a damage 7 weapon that can kill from a refreshingly long way away.
  • Because you can get Lacquered armour - yes it's not as good as plate, but it has the ceremonial trait, which gives advantages in social situations and makes it more likely to be acceptable in some more formal situations
  • Because you want Sanctified Robes which actually help against magical attacks.
  • Because you want a Finger of Jade as a starting item in case of Maho and Shadowlands unpleasantness.
  • Because we haven't see the costs and rarity for pretty much any non weapon/armour items (a warhorse, for example) that might be in the final version.

 

Yes, Plate is best for stopping Katanas. But as noted, if you're in a situation where wearing plate is not unusual, your opponents are probably not attacking you with katanas. 

Edited by Magnus Grendel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Magnus Grendel said:

Yes, Plate is best for stopping ... your opponents ... attacking you with katanas. 

*snip* In a nutshell, my thoughts exactly.

Although there will always be exceptions.  That Katika duelist school severity bonus at even rank 1 means a katana can crit for the same severity as you can with a Tetsubo against an incapacitated opponent with your very first hit irrespective of armour.  Sure, you need to wreck the sword to do it, but right off the bat that's potentially a huge advantage if you get that in early.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Grodark said:

but that not the point  and the question is 17 not 16. 16 is for a personal item not of weapon or armor

the question is simple give a reason that a bushi would take anything other than the plate armor and give a good reason for it

reasons for plate armor it has the best chance to defend against katanas   , it can look real cool , it's more expensive than just about any other item ,  and most  players do not get anything better than

traveling cloths as a bushi.

Question 17 is about your parents’ opinion of you. After the update, you get a skill rank out of it. It has nothing to do with weapons, armour or other possessions. That’s question 16.

The reason to take something else is that whatever you take is not intended to give you better gear. It’s intended to give you something with a personal connection. As a samurai, exceptions like ronin notwithstanding (and I’m sure they will get additional restrictions on character generation), you can have all the gear you want anyway. Your lord provides it. 

Your starting outfit is really just the possessions a samurai of low status and glory would typically have and travel with.  It’s representative of the duties that samurai will have been given, so it depends on their training - their school. But if you are assigned a duty that is a bit different, that your equipment isn’t properly suited for, it’s the responsibility of whoever assigned you that duty to provide you with what you need. If you are sent to battle and don’t have war gear, you will be given the use of weapons and armour. If you are to be a messenger, you will likely be given a mount so you can travel faster. If you are an envoy, you will be given impressive attire and suitable gifts to present to whoever you will be meeting.

Samurai PCs don’t (have to) worry about utilitarian possessions. If they need something, all they normally have to do is ask for it. So if you get to pick an item during character generation, there is no reason to pick the most expensive thing you can think of or the rarest or something you feel is missing from your starting outfit. The wealth of your lord pays for expensive items you need. Your lord’s connections give access to goods more rare than you can seek out yourself. It’s your lord’s duty to see to it anything you miss is made available to you.

Question 16 explicitly says to choose an item symbolic of an event in your past and/or your ties to a certain group. That’s what you are supposed to do, so do just that. Anything else about this item is largely irrelevant in this setting.

 

Edit: let me put it like this. Question 16 gives you an opportunity to make your character stand out more. It’s about giving them a bit more backstory and an item that serves as a reminder of that event or period in their life. So don’t choose the most obvious thing, whatever that may be. Choose something unique and distinguishing. An early copy of Akodo’s Leadership given to you for being an exceptional scholar on that subject. A lucky cricket bestowed upon you by monks for sweeping their temple daily when you were younger. A fan you took from your favourite geisha house. A go set hand-made for you by a younger relative you were attentive to when they needed it. Be creative. Don’t choose an item because it’s the “best” in some mechanical sense, that shouldn’t matter at all. Think of a memorable story about your character and choose an item that fits that story.

Edited by nameless ronin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...