Re: Mods (open discussion)

[John Hogg <johnhogg@expert.cc.purdue.edu>]

On Wed, 7 Oct 1998, Wright Frazier wrote:

> > Yes, going toe to toe with creatures/actors/characters with obscene DV is
> > dumb.
> 
> Not really.  It depends on how the creature is being played.  I've seen
> a creature with a 30ish CDV, 20 CM, d20 damage, and 400DP buzzed down
> by _1_ warrior with no backup beyond the rest of the party dorking
> around with the other baddy(not nearly as heinous) or plinking at the
> ubermonster ineffectually.
> 
> This warrior had a CM in the mid to high teens, CDV of 26ish, 60 or
> so DP, and a weapon skill of 16ish.  It took him awhile, but he killed it
> with no help.
>

Sheeeeeeeeit!

Lemmie run through this ...

Big baddie doing about 10 points/round (1d20 attack)
Hits warrior about 3/4 the time ...
should take about 8 rounds

Swordsman, cranking 5 attacks/round (makes multi better than 50%)
CM, for math, let's say 20
doing 7 pts/hit (average for d12 weapon)
hits 50% of the time
10 rounds should = 25 hits * 7 dp = 175 dp = baddie at about 40% begining
DP

@6 attacks/round
10 rounds = 30 hits * 7dp = 210 dp

Dude, the baddie should have pulped him.  Even at 7-8 attacks a round.

Also noted the DV on the swordsman has GOT to be magically boosted
(ballpark equivalent to +5-9 plate)
I'd assume he had some sort of magic weapon as well to make up the
difference in damage, or the baddie didn't single him out after the first
attack.

Therefore, he's not so "straight up" a warrior.  Of course, in the above
scenerio, I'd whip out the big guns myself.
 
> 
> 40dp = rtg8.2
> long sword 15 = 14.4
> CM 15 = 9.6
> 

Thought Kris gave an example of costing ballpark of 20 rtg for cm 20 and
ballpark 20 more for greatsword at 16+ ... deleted the post inadvertantly
... my own fault for not doing the math.

Leads to a chicken-and-the-egg arguement, though.  Was the monster's dv
that high because a 19-21 wouldn't do because high mods were expected, or
did the warrior's mods just happen to be high enough to go after the
baddie?

> rtg32.2 and he is a complete and utter killer.  I also consider that
> midrate as you can reasonably expect to get to that rating in less
> than 6 months, esspecially now with GM'ing xp for planned adventures.
> Granted its a cookie cutter warrior with no dimensions, but if you
> are looking for a pure killer, then you hit it at rtg32 and then
> expand your concept from there.  If you are a dwarf you get that nifty
> +4CM against armored folks, for even more deadliness against humanoids.
> 

My point as well.


> Not at all.  Sometimes it WILL be a loose/loose senario.  Hell this
> past weekend I ran a complete fuck adventure.  The party walked into
> a shitstorm, knew they were walking into a shitstorm, and I completely
> and utterly reamed 1 of'em.  There was nothing kind or truely fair
> about it.  I was a dick.  He however knew it was a possiblity of happening
> and he still walked into the situation knowing I was going to play the
> actors in that way.  He still had a great time from what I can see, as
> did others.

OK, so you didn't MAKE HIM try to kill the baddies, he attempted because
he wanted to ...

> 
> While they may not seem terribly pleasent at the time, hopeless situations
> are one of the most enjoyable to escape from if you feel you've earned it.
> So yes, sometimes the big megabaddie has to be hauled out and the party
> reminded that they are indeed mortal(in some cases).  I don't see this
> as a being a 'bad' or 'poor' GM so long as it is well played, and if
> the party DOES triumph, they are suitably rewarded.  May be not instantly,
> and may be not in obvious ways.  But again, if its played well, it is
> one of the most rewarding of roleplaying senarios.
> 

Agreed (except the whold remind the party they're mortal ... mind you, I
don't DISAGREE with that entirely, though, either.)

> > 
> > To extend the argument that MODS are there to make it possible for a
> > warrior to go toe-to-toe with such a creature is also poor reasoning.
> 
> No, thats exactly one of the reasons, because it makes for a GREAT story
> and rememberance.  Epic, in my opinion, is Good.

unfortunate line spacing here ... the arguement of "Warrior has to have
megamods because he has to hit the baddie" is poor reasoning because the
warrior should never HAVE TO hit the baddie.  Inadvertently put some space
and text between the premise and conclusion.  My fault.

Again, I'm wanting to look at AQ without mods, but also without entities
with 30 + DV (putting forth arguement that without MODS, creatures
SHOULDN't be designed with super DV)

> To get through the armor, shield, and defenses of a god, you gotta be
> a freakin monster with the Mod.  This is why warriors have such things,
> so they CAN go into the epic battle with some hope of if not killing,
> then at least wounding it so others can get at it as well.
>
Mortals should NOT regularly be able to go toe-to-toe with gods, armies,
or freaking forces of nature.  (though, style points to those who REALIZE
they're walking into the face of doom, and do it anyway)

> I say having Mods there make it so folks _CAN_ go toe to toe with the
> bigggest and the baddest since AQ's skill/combat system does not
> allow for any other combat paradigm.  
>

I agree

> > IF, we want to make the warrior's skills more attractive,
> 
> They are already VERY attractive.
>

Poor wording on my part (Assassination is MIGHTY nice, and who DOESN'T
have a weapon skill).

I meant more in the vein of:

If we want the warrior skills to be what defines the warrior class rather
than their wonderfully inexpensive combat mod.

Example, picture Errol Flynn ... better yet, Mandy Potenkin (Indego
Montoya is a bit more contemporary) battling it out on the top of the
cliff.  Obviously skilled fantasy swordsman.  Lots of misses because his
enemy was similarly skilled (not because he wore neat magic armor, or had
spells, or items of like ability)

Now picture the plain Vanilla AQ warrior.
Skilled in only one weapon, dependent on mods, and not much good at
anything else.

Wesley advances ...
Indego smacks him 6 times with his long ... er, greatsword (warriors don't
USE anything smaller) killing him outright.
 
> > IF, we want a warrior skill to be the only non-magical means of elevating
> > our character's DV's above armor,
> > (yes, I know Dodging is Marine)
> 
> I don't get how this at all relates to Mods.
> 
As stated in an earlier post, an opponent with a missle mod of 4-5 pretty
well negates any benefit from dodging.  (Though the roll to hit IS just
the base die roll now)

> > Should we not reconsider the effect of MODS?
> 
> No, I disagree.  It would require a complete reworking of MANY things.
> Not the least of which are how monsters work.  I personally don't
> want multi-attacking monsters with a d20 attack since you'd have to
> give monsters some ability to hit.
>

Oooh, hadn't thought of that ... heh, cool.

Actors (merely humanoid monsters) can have skills, though (goes back to
being nasty enough to use player tactics against other players, though)
 
> Granted personally I'd like to see the disolution of mods and just
> run things PURELY off of weapon skill but we'd have to change a WHOLE
> lot of things and make a lot of people get rid of some items and its
> just not worth it.
> 
> Wright
> 

Don't know if it would be worth it or not, but it would be a pain in the
ass to do the work.  :(