Mighty Deeds of Arms Question

[Zak S]

HEY: I'VE GOTTEN TWO RESPONSES HERE AND NEITHER ANSWER MY QUESTIONS, PLEASE READ THE WHOLE POST BEFORE RESPONDNG:

I haven't tested the game yet, but am about to. However, reading it I have a question about Mighty Deeds:

If I understand correctly, a PC must:

-successfully hit the target's AC,

AND

-roll above a 3 on a d20 (usually a d20)

to perform a mighty deed. The results for mighty deeds are broken into "3" results (the weakest), and gaining power through "4","5", and "6", and then "7+" results being the most powerful/successful.

My question is: since the attack roll has to not only be above 3 but also beat the defenders armor class, won't the vast majority of Mighty Deed rolls be 7+?

I assume this is intended and part of how the game is designed but doesn't it:

A-make combat extremely brutal (which is ok, but it's really easy to blind someone for 24 hours or forever in this system so you'd think after a few years, whole armies would be blind)
and (more of a big deal to me)
B-kind of neglect results 3-6, which will hardly ever come up? On paper, they seem to be carefully graduated options that add situational complexity, but looking at the numbers it seems like they would only come up in marginal cases.

Also, the set-up seems to guarantee that these marginal, less-effective results 3-6, are more likely against weaker foes (with worse ACs). Which seems kinda backwards.

Anyway, I know the real test of any rule is in the playing and I will not throw this out or hack it before trying it, but I'd like to hear what the original intent of setting up deeds this way was.

[mshensley]

I haven't tested the game yet, but am about to. However, reading it I have a question about Mighty Deeds:

If I understand correctly, a PC must:

-successfully hit the target's AC,

AND

-roll above a 3 on a d20 (usually a d20)

to perform a mighty deed. The results for mighty deeds are broken into "3" results (the weakest), and gaining power through "4","5", and "6", and then "7+" results being the most powerful/successful.

My question is: since the attack roll has to not only be above 3 but also beat the defenders armor class, won't the vast majority of Mighty Deed rolls be 7+?

I assume this is intended and part of how the game is designed but doesn't it:

A-make combat extremely brutal (which is ok, but it's really easy to blind someone for 24 hours or forever in this system so you'd think after a few years, whole armies would be blind)
and (more of a big deal to me)
B-kind of neglect results 3-6, which will hardly ever come up? On paper, they seem to be carefully graduated options that add situational complexity, but looking at the numbers it seems like they would only come up in marginal cases.

Also, the set-up seems to guarantee that these marginal, less-effective results 3-6, are more likely against weaker foes (with worse ACs). Which seems kinda backwards.

Anyway, I know the real test of any rule is in the playing and I will not throw this out or hack it before trying it, but I'd like to hear what the original intent of setting up deeds this way was.

To attack, you roll a d20 plus your attack bonus die (d3 at first level) plus your strength mod. (if any). If you roll >= their AC, you hit. If you hit and your attack bonus die roll is 3 or above, you do a MDoA.

[Zak S]

To attack, you roll a d20 plus your attack bonus die (d3 at first level) plus your strength mod. (if any). If you roll >= their AC, you hit. If you hit and your attack bonus die roll is 3 or above, you do a MDoA.

Your answer does not have very much to do with my question. My question was not about how you do an MDoA.

[Zak S]

To attack, you roll a d20 plus your attack bonus die (d3 at first level) plus your strength mod. (if any). If you roll >= their AC, you hit. If you hit and your attack bonus die roll is 3 or above, you do a MDoA.

I'm sorry, that is not in any way an answer to the question that I asked.

[Leopold]

what happens when it's a D4/D6/D7? Does that mean they NOW have to get a 4/6/7 to be able to succeed in their attack roll to do the Mighty Deed? If 3 is the baseline and everything after 3 is the sweet spot we are going to have far too many bullrushing, tripping, shield bashing fighters at my table as that is vastly overpowered.

If the way it is supposed to be is the MAXIMUM attack bonus die (3/4/6/7/etc) then that does seem kind of broken as it does not scale well with other abilities as we go from 33% chance of success at 1st level to 18% at 5th level. No fun.

[reverenddak]

yep, what mshensey said. Only Warriors and Dwarves get MDoAs and the die that has to show 3+ is the attack die they get, relative to level. i.e. Warriors get a bonus +1d3 attack die at level 1. If THAT die is 3+ they get a mighty deed. it's not clear if they HAVE to declare it before the roll or not. That bonus Attack Die gets added to the standard d20 they roll for attack.

[Zak S]

yep, what mshensey said. Only Warriors and Dwarves get MDoAs and the die that has to show 3+ is the attack die they get, relative to level. i.e. Warriors get a bonus +1d3 attack die at level 1. If THAT die is 3+ they get a mighty deed. it's not clear if they HAVE to declare it before the roll or not. That bonus Attack Die gets added to the standard d20 they roll for attack.

That isn't at all an answer to my question either.

Please re-read the post.

[Harley Stroh]

I haven't tested the game yet, but am about to. However, reading it I have a question about Mighty Deeds:

If I understand correctly, a PC must:

-successfully hit the target's AC,

AND

-roll above a 3 on a d20 (usually a d20)

to perform a mighty deed. The results for mighty deeds are broken into "3" results (the weakest), and gaining power through "4","5", and "6", and then "7+" results being the most powerful/successful.

My question is: since the attack roll has to not only be above 3 but also beat the defenders armor class, won't the vast majority of Mighty Deed rolls be 7+?

I assume this is intended and part of how the game is designed but doesn't it:

A-make combat extremely brutal (which is ok, but it's really easy to blind someone for 24 hours or forever in this system so you'd think after a few years, whole armies would be blind)
and (more of a big deal to me)
B-kind of neglect results 3-6, which will hardly ever come up? On paper, they seem to be carefully graduated options that add situational complexity, but looking at the numbers it seems like they would only come up in marginal cases.

Also, the set-up seems to guarantee that these marginal, less-effective results 3-6, are more likely against weaker foes (with worse ACs). Which seems kinda backwards.

Anyway, I know the real test of any rule is in the playing and I will not throw this out or hack it before trying it, but I'd like to hear what the original intent of setting up deeds this way was.

Zak,

Thank you for the post. You are correct in your understanding of how the mechanic is currently designed. And your assessment of how it will play out is, I believe, accurate.

I would, though, add a nuance that may or may not change your perception of the the rule in play:

The level scale of DCC RPG is very condensed. Originally we planned on having 5th level be the max level obtainable, but after feedback from the forums, realized that players overwhelmingly wanted at least ten levels. Even so, 5th level means you are the freakin' man. (Hereafter, "the Man.")

The Man gets to roll +1d7. Lesser mortals roll 1d3 or maybe better if they've been around the block. While he is stabbing you through the face, I'm merely tossing some sand around.

For the Man, yes, he blinds half his opponents for life, the other half are never able to reproduce, and the third half are dead. That's cause he's the Man. If you get lucky with the Man, maybe you only walk away blinded for a week or two, with a nasty scar. It's certainly less common to get lucky.

So, in the final release, it very well could be that a 10th level fighter, walking Death Incarnate, deals an +d7. And, hopefully, it makes sense, given the less granular power scale.

//H

[Ze Groupe]

The combined result of the d20 + d3 + Strength Bonus must beat the targets AC (In other words you must still hit the target as per normal), the MDoA tables only refer the d3 (or higher dice as the warrior gains levels). Thus a low level warrior will never get into the 4, 5, 6, 7+ range until he gets a higher bonus die type. Thats how i understand it anyway.

Hope that helps.

[reverenddak]

There is a detail that Zak is getting wrong:

roll above a 3 on a d20 (usually a d20)

It's NOT usually on the d20 where you have to get 3+, it's on the bonus "attack die" that a fighter or dwarf gets appropriate to level.

You roll both a d20 AND the bonus attack die (a d3 for a Warrior 1) and add whatever bonuses. The "total" has to beat the AC to hit, as usual. AND if the bonus attack die (the d3 for Warrior 1) is a 3+, it gets the benefit of a MDoA. Which you have to declare at the beginning of the attack.

[Harley Stroh]

There is a detail that Zak is getting wrong:

roll above a 3 on a d20 (usually a d20)

It's NOT usually on the d20 where you have to get 3+, it's on the bonus "attack die" that a fighter or dwarf gets appropriate to level.

You roll both a d20 AND the bonus attack die (a d3 for a Warrior 1) and add whatever bonuses. The "total" has to beat the AC to hit, as usual. AND if the bonus attack die (the d3 for Warrior 1) is a 3+, it gets the benefit of a MDoA. Which you have to declare at the beginning of the attack.

Thank you, I didn't catch that.

Yes, a warrior's attack roll is 1d20+(attack die). If this total beats the AC, the attack hits. And, if the attack die is 3 or better, the MDoA takes effect.

//H

[jmucchiello]

HEY: I'VE GOTTEN TWO RESPONSES HERE AND NEITHER ANSWER MY QUESTIONS, PLEASE READ THE WHOLE POST BEFORE RESPONDNG:

I'm answering each point where you have made mistakes inline. Hope that helps.

I haven't tested the game yet, but am about to. However, reading it I have a question about Mighty Deeds:

If I understand correctly, a PC must:

-successfully hit the target's AC,

By adding his action dice (d20 usually) and his attack die (d3-d7) and his strength bonus (and any stray bonuses)

AND

-roll above a 3 on a d20 (usually a d20)

No a 3 or above on the attack die (the d3/d4/d5/d6/or d7)

to perform a mighty deed. The results for mighty deeds are broken into "3" results (the weakest), and gaining power through "4","5", and "6", and then "7+" results being the most powerful/successful.

My question is: since the attack roll has to not only be above 3 but also beat the defenders armor class, won't the vast majority of Mighty Deed rolls be 7+?

No, most of the die rolls on the ACTION DIE which is d20 in most cases will be above 3. The action die is d20 at first through fourth level for all classes. At 5th level, fighter wizards dwarves and elves get a second action die of d16 or d14. The attack die will only be above 3 some of the time because the die size is not as big as you think it is.

{snip}

The rest of you comments follow from a faulty assumption so I presume you will re-evaluate them yourself.

[kataskicana]

I think the confusion is that when looking at the results chart 3,4,5,6,7 the OP was comparing the attack roll + mods + action die. THat is incorrect. You are just looking at the result of the action die... so a d3 at level 1.

[Devil Swine]

As everyone is trying to tell you...

-roll above a 3 on a d20 (usually a d20)

is wrong!!


You roll a 1D3 for that level NOT 1D20. So you would only be able to do your special move 1/3 of the time (that you hit) and if there were no other mods.

[Zak S]

I think the confusion is that when looking at the results chart 3,4,5,6,7 the OP was comparing the attack roll + mods + action die. THat is incorrect. You are just looking at the result of the action die... so a d3 at level 1.

You are right.

[Zak S]

As everyone is trying to tell you...

-roll above a 3 on a d20 (usually a d20)

is wrong!!


You roll a 1D3 for that level NOT 1D20. So you would only be able to do your special move 1/3 of the time (that you hit) and if there were no other mods.

Yeah I was not actually making THAT mistake exactly, the confusion I was making was this one:

http://www.goodman-games.com/forums/vie ... 66&t=14497

[Harley Stroh]

All of which has proven, to me, we need to create a better distinction between action and attack dice.

//H

[Devil Swine]

Well,here is another question.


What do you do when the Thief ect want to Charge,disarm,shield bash,ect? What is the rule for others to do those things?

[reverenddak]

Well,here is another question.


What do you do when the Thief ect want to Charge,disarm,shield bash,ect? What is the rule for others to do those things?

The same for when Clerics want to pick locks, or Warrior wants to cast Sleep, technically they can't. Don't let them. try make it really, really, really, REALLY hard, if not practically impossible.

[kataskicana]

Well,here is another question.


What do you do when the Thief ect want to Charge,disarm,shield bash,ect? What is the rule for others to do those things?

The same for when Clerics want to pick locks, or Warrior wants to cast Sleep, technically they can't. Don't let them. try make it really, really, really, REALLY hard, if not practically impossible.

I disagree with that statement. Picking locks and casting spells are class abilities. Doing cool things is not limited to fighters and dwarves. Doing cool things WITH an attack is what defines and MDoA. They can accomplish a lot and have the best roll to do so and get to do it while making a damaging strike with their weapon.

Anyone is able to attempt to tackle a fleeing orc as their action. They would have less chance and not deal any weapon damage, but they can do it. Being able to do neat and interesting things is the heart of any old school role-playing.

[meinvt]

I was also confused by this when I read the rules thinking an attack die was probably a die rolled when taking the attack action. I think calling it simply an attack bonus die or combat die even warrior die would be enough of a distinction.

[Tortog]

I disagree with that statement. Picking locks and casting spells are class abilities. Doing cool things is not limited to fighters and dwarves. Doing cool things WITH an attack is what defines and MDoA. They can accomplish a lot and have the best roll to do so and get to do it while making a damaging strike with their weapon.

Anyone is able to attempt to tackle a fleeing orc as their action. They would have less chance and not deal any weapon damage, but they can do it. Being able to do neat and interesting things is the heart of any old school role-playing.

I totally agree with this. I'd even go to the point of allowing everyone to cause damage with their MDoA's. Fighters and Dwarfs are just better at it and so can accomplish them more often. Since other classes (and races) don't get the "attack die," have their MDoA be a function of their normal d20 attack roll. If they've declared a MDoA and beat the defenders AC by 3+ consult the appropriate table. this same system could be adapted to skill checks as well... beat the DC by 3+... and you're being mighty.

[reverenddak]

Anyone is able to attempt to tackle a fleeing orc as their action. They would have less chance and not deal any weapon damage, but they can do it. Being able to do neat and interesting things is the heart of any old school role-playing.

Tackling a fleeing orc? That would be grappling, something anyone can do (both logically and rule-wise.) Things like that are not what I'm talking about.

In no way was I saying they shouldn't do cool things. In fact, what I'm saying is that non-Warriors already can do cool things. Turn undead, pick locks, disable traps, cast spells, etc. etc. Restricting MDoA to just Warriors (therefore Dwarves) is their cool thing. That's what makes it neat, i.e. interesting.