RE: (TFT) Garage Band: Inna Gadda Ty Bearda

["Ty Beard" <tbeard@tyler.net>]

Well, it is different. A little heavy on the math for my tastes, but it does
distinguish between penetration and damage. I'll have to play around with
it, but it may be too fiddly for mosy players' tastes.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: tft-owner@brainiac.com [mailto:tft-owner@brainiac.com]On Behalf Of
> Prophesor

> It seems to me that if you want a weapon that ignores armor,
> then you need a system, and once you have a system, you can have
> as many weapons/spells/critterpowers as you want.
>
> I propose a method whereby an attack may be given a
> 'penetration' factor, in addition to the damage factor that
> attacks already have.
>
> When an attack hits, multiply the damage by the PEN (mightier
> than the sword...), subtract for armor, then take the remainder
> and divide by the PEN.  OK, so far, all we've said is that armor
> effect is divided by the PEN, so a PEN of 3 means armor is 1/3
> effect.  But I'm not done.  Now divide the damage by PEN, again.
>  This models the idea that going through better (PEN) means
> doing less work (damage) as you pass, and applies as well to the
> tender inside as it does to the crunchy outside.

I wonder if you couldn't instead use a system simply divides the *armor* by
the penetration? I.e., a penetration of 4 divides will reduce 5 points of
armor to 1.25 points of armor.

> So far so good.  To recap so far: DAM times PEN, subtract Armor.
>  Now divide the remaining DAM by PEN, and then divide by PEN
> again.
>
> One more wrinkle, if you want it:  The blow-through check.  If
> the damage divides without remainder, multiply it again.  This
> reflects that sometimes a slug finds a bone, or tumbles, or
> otherwise gets lucky, and stops inside the target, obviously
> therefore doing no less damage due to PEN.  Against multi-hex
> figures, if another hex of the figure lies behind the hex which
> was targeted, the slug stops in the target on a remainder of one
> or zero.  If two hexes, remainders of 2 or 1 or 0, etc.  (ETC?!
> What are you shooting?  Elephants?  Indri?  Goo?!)  You might
> also let a high-talent character increase the remainders that
> mean full damage, on the theory that careful targeting helps.

Neat idea, but I think this may be adequately handled with the existing
doube/triple damage rule. OTOH, if you like this rule, I'd go with very low
damages for weapons.

> Heck, if it blows through, TFT practically requires that you
> follow the bouncing ball, so to speak, rolling to miss figures
> on a line that should probably be random, but weighted toward
> the original path of the slug.
>
> With such a mechanic (or set of mechanics - it's a garage!),
> weapons do not need to be given overwhelming damage to represent
> their power, and the relative damage/penetration 'feel' of a
> shotgun (PEN 1), say, versus a pistol (PEN 2) versus a rifle
> (PEN 3) may be modeled.  A firey spell might have reduced
> penetration, while a lighting bolt might have great penetration,
> but relatively less damage.

Philosophically, we're on the same track.

> I'm guessing an early pistol might have PEN 2, DAM 2d.  Plate (6
> points usually?  My books are upstairs...) will take off three
> effective.  Here, I'll chart it:
>
> DAM  *PEN -armor  Effect  Blowthrough?
> 2     4      0
> 3     6      0
> 4     8      2    .5(1)      Yes
> 5     10     4      1        No, DAM 2
> 6     12     6    1.5(2)     Yes
> 7     14     8      2        No, DAM 4
> 8     16    10    2.5(3)     Yes
> 9     18    12      3        No, DAM 6
> 10    20    14    3.5(4)     Yes
> 11    22    16      4        No, DAM 8
> 12    24    18    4.5(5)     Yes
>
> OK, maybe it's not perfect, but it's 1:30, cut me some slack.

It's very interesting...

--Ty
=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"