Here are some results of all that number-crunching that went into last post, a hit table that simulates using “variable” weapon damage by altering the hit chances for AC 9 to 2 but rolling 1d6 for damage on all successful hits.
Chart 9a: Simulating Variable Damage by Hit Chance
Simulated
Die
|
Armor Class
|
|||||||
9[10]
|
8[11]
|
7[12]
|
6[13]
|
5[14]
|
4[15]
|
3[16]
|
2[17]
|
|
1d4
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
1d6
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
1d8
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
11
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
1d10
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
8
|
9
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
Note: the 1d6 isn’t simulated but is included on the chart
for reference.
Chart 9b: Comparing true damage dice to simulated damage dice
Damage
Die
|
Average Likely Damage with True Roll
|
Average Likely Damage with Simulated Roll
|
d4
|
0.9375
|
0.9625
|
d6
|
1.3125
|
1.3125
|
d8
|
1.6875
|
1.6843
|
d10
|
2.0625
|
2.056
|
Example of use: using
a “d4” weapon to attack roll a d20 to hit on the row for d20 and when you hit
roll 1d6 for damage (do the same with the other types of notational damage but
only rolling 1d6 for actual damage). Over the course of multiple combat rounds the
different hit chances will come very close to producing the same average likely
damage (as per Chart 9b).
Charts 9a and 9b show how significant higher damage weapons
are in the common variable weapon damage used these days. We also see what
variable weapon damage means, when a weapon does 1d4 points of damage or 1d8
points of damage (when playing with such notation) due to the inherent abstract
nature of classic RPG combat we aren’t just saying “Weapon A does this much
damage when it strikes a target” what we are actually say is “Weapon A will provide the opportunity to inflict
this much damage on a target during combat”. So a d8 weapon isn’t necessarily inflicting more
damage because it is inherently more awful in the types of wounds it inflicts
but it offers the user more opportunity to inflict wounds.
Here’s a cleaner version of attack matrix for damage by hit
chances that just replaces the dice notation for damage with relative verbiage should
anyone want to make use of such a mechanic but doesn’t want it cluttered up
with dice notation for dice not being used.
Damage Class Attack Table
Damage
Class
|
Armor Class
|
|||||||
9[10]
|
8[11]
|
7[12]
|
6[13]
|
5[14]
|
4[15]
|
3[16]
|
2[17]
|
|
Light
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
Medium
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
Heavy
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
11
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
X-Heavy
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
8
|
9
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
Considering this, it would be simple convert the final result as below:
ReplyDelete-Light: -2 to hit
-Medium: no modfier
-Heavy: +2 to hit
-X-Heavy: +4
On a few cases (Heavy hitting AC 5; X-Heavy hitting AC 6 or 5) the I idea I propose will be off by 1 point, but I think it's negligible.
It would definetly do the trick inside the 9 to 2 Ac range. I went with the chart above as because of weapoon vs Ac modifiers which do get pickywiith one point here and there (if anyone bothers with them).
DeleteWhat about different ACs? Would those modifiers be too off?
DeleteA flat -2 to +4 outside the range would be too off beyond the 9-2 ac range.
Delete