Post by oakesspalding on Oct 23, 2018 20:53:31 GMT -6
Here is an alternate weapons attacks and damage system for Seven Voyages of Zylarthen (and OD&D). It's simpler and (I think) cleaner, and arguably tracks the dynamic of how different weapons interact with different types of armor more accurately and interestingly. I suppose it's my version of some of the changes made to OD&D in Greyhawk, at least on the players' side. But hopefully it avoids some of the problems with that attempt, as well as making use of the other Zylarthen mechanics.
And here is some analysis I just did:
Mathematically, there are two main differences between the systems.
The first is that the alternate scheme is MUCH better for the player characters. If you assume that the armor classes of monsters are evenly distributed and big monsters make up 1/3 of all monsters, then a 4th level Fighter will inflict an expected 1.72 hits per swing under the original system and an expected 3.99 hits per swing (!) under the alternate system (not counting unarmed attacks and lances). I actually don't really have a problem with that. Zylarthen (and OD&D), without fudging, is quite lethal anyway. So I'm not against helping the player characters without feeling the need for compensatory monster damage inflation.
The second is that the spread of damage between different weapons is greater in the alternate system. Taking the battle axe as the standard (100%), in the original system the range goes from 70% for dagger to 109% for a long sword wielded with two hands. In the alternate system the range goes from 45% for dagger and staff to 103% for great sword. A common sword does 87% of the damage of a battle axe in the original system vs. 64% in the alternate system. A mace does 80%/59%, etc.
(It's now clear to me that spears are overpowered in the first system.)
The math for both probably overrates the axes and blunt weapons, as the majority of monsters in Zylarthen only fall into the AC9 to AC6 category.
And here is some analysis I just did:
Mathematically, there are two main differences between the systems.
The first is that the alternate scheme is MUCH better for the player characters. If you assume that the armor classes of monsters are evenly distributed and big monsters make up 1/3 of all monsters, then a 4th level Fighter will inflict an expected 1.72 hits per swing under the original system and an expected 3.99 hits per swing (!) under the alternate system (not counting unarmed attacks and lances). I actually don't really have a problem with that. Zylarthen (and OD&D), without fudging, is quite lethal anyway. So I'm not against helping the player characters without feeling the need for compensatory monster damage inflation.
The second is that the spread of damage between different weapons is greater in the alternate system. Taking the battle axe as the standard (100%), in the original system the range goes from 70% for dagger to 109% for a long sword wielded with two hands. In the alternate system the range goes from 45% for dagger and staff to 103% for great sword. A common sword does 87% of the damage of a battle axe in the original system vs. 64% in the alternate system. A mace does 80%/59%, etc.
(It's now clear to me that spears are overpowered in the first system.)
The math for both probably overrates the axes and blunt weapons, as the majority of monsters in Zylarthen only fall into the AC9 to AC6 category.