RPGDot's SPECIAL article numero 3

Saint_Proverbius · Post by **Saint_Proverbius** » Wed Aug 28, 2002 7:50 am

[ -> Preview]

Cabal just told me <A href="http://rpgdot.com/">RPGDot</a> has posted the <A href="http://www.rpgdot.com/index.php?hsactio ... 401">third installment</a> of their series of articles about the SPECIAL system in <A href="http://lionheart.blackisle.com">Lionheart</a>. This time, they're covering Perks. Here's a clip:<blockquote>Damage ResistanceWhen you are tough you take less damage, and you're tough. Each level of this Perk will add +10% to your Crushing, Piercing and Slashing Damage resistance.Number of Ranks: 3Requirements: 6 Endurance, 6 Luck, Level 3</blockquote>Hmmm.. Toughness.

Post by **DarkUnderlord** » Wed Aug 28, 2002 3:15 pm

Damage Resistance wrote:When you are tough you take less damage, and you're tough.

I keep reading that over and over again. When you are tough you take less damage, and you're tough.

So when you're tough, you take less damage and your tough? Well, no shit Sherlock. Do we really need that "and your tough" at the end there or am I just being picky over petty grammatical errors hereÃƒâ€šÃ‚Â¹?

Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â¹Rhetorical question.

Crow of Ill Omen · Post by **Crow of Ill Omen** » Wed Aug 28, 2002 3:36 pm

I think it might be falling afoul of the inherent potential for ambiguity in English grammar. They could have mitigated it with emphasis, like:

"When you are tough you take less damage, and you're tough."

Even better, perhaps, would have been:

"When you are tough you take less damage, and you are tough."

Lessening the ambiguity wouldn't have made the Damage Resistance perk any less lame, though. I hope they're not using it in articles because it is the best they came up with or because it typifies their perks.

Killzig0nologinforme · Wed Aug 28, 2002 4:47 pm

it sounds like Yogi Berra in that AFLAC commercial so when you're hurt it doesn't hurt to be hurt.

Deathy · Post by **Deathy** » Wed Aug 28, 2002 5:00 pm

That is actually a perk from Fallout with a different name.
In fact, most of those perks are taken from the Fallout series.

Crow of Ill Omen · Post by **Crow of Ill Omen** » Wed Aug 28, 2002 5:16 pm

It's the name that's lame. Can we also expect "See More Gore" instead of "Bloody Mess", I wonder.

See More Gore
-----------------------
People who see more gore, see more gore, and you see more gore. Violence level is set to maximum for all deaths.

Rosh · Post by **Rosh** » Wed Aug 28, 2002 5:48 pm

I'm with you there, Crow. It seem that they are going for a more clinical and redundent naming scheme than what Fallout used.

VasikkA · Post by **VasikkA** » Wed Aug 28, 2002 5:53 pm

I'm glad to see some old Fallout perks in Lionheart as well.
/me wants Slayer! :twisted:

Spazmo · Post by **Spazmo** » Wed Aug 28, 2002 10:21 pm

Dark Majesty
A shadowy being has approached you with an offer that sounds too good to be true. For simply signing a blank piece of paper, he has offered you +3 skill points in all of your melee skills, +10% to poison resistance, +1 skill point per level, and a house in a very warm climate in your old age. What a deal! Sylvants cannot pick this Perk.
Number of Ranks: 1
Requirements: Perception <7, Intelligence <7, Level 12

Now there's a perk. I like the low intelligence/perception requirement.

Ibbz · Post by **Ibbz** » Thu Aug 29, 2002 4:30 pm

*Crushing, Piercing and Slashing Damage resistance

Anyone else notice that sounds remarkably similar to a feature in another game system

?

Saint_Proverbius · Post by **Saint_Proverbius** » Fri Aug 30, 2002 5:29 am

Ibbz wrote:*Crushing, Piercing and Slashing Damage resistance

Anyone else notice that sounds remarkably similar to a feature in another game system ?

Yup, that's a direct rip from 2nd Edition AD&D.

Spazmo · Post by **Spazmo** » Fri Aug 30, 2002 5:33 am

No, no it's not. There aren't any percentage resistances in AD&D 2nd Ed. aside from magic resistance. They may exist in Baldur's Gate and other Infinity Engine games, but any D&D player will tell you that BG is not proper AD&D. The resistance thing isn't really a ripoff at all. Fallout had resistances to normal, fire, laser, etc., so Lionheart has slashing, crushing and piercing. It's just a part of the SPECIAL system.

Ibbz · Post by **Ibbz** » Fri Aug 30, 2002 10:25 am

3E DND has Slashing, Piercing and Bludgeoning resistances. Only difference between that and Lionheart is that Lionheart is using a different word for getting hit by a war hammer, mace etc
I also dont think BG had any other resistances besides magic.

Spazmo · Post by **Spazmo** » Fri Aug 30, 2002 10:33 am

Yeah, BG did. Or maybe it was just Planescape: Torment (mmm... Planescape: Torment...) and Icewind Dale.

Regardless, there are no percentile resistances aside from magic in real D&D 2nd Ed. And D&D 3E's resistances aren't by percentage, so there.

Crow of Ill Omen · Post by **Crow of Ill Omen** » Fri Aug 30, 2002 4:23 pm

I don't know about BG, but in AD&D second edition, weapon damage type vs. armour was represented as an adjustment to the attacker's THAC0. It was an optional rule, and not many people used it.

Adding variables to frequently used calculations is best left to computer games or computer-aided moderation. Otherwise, it can become very intrusive. Although, AD&D didn't help the situation by having such an unnecessarily cumbersome combat system.

Ibbz · Post by **Ibbz** » Fri Aug 30, 2002 7:09 pm

True "Resistances" in 3E arent done by percentages, but Immunities ARE.{Which do exactly the same thing in 3E as it does in Lionheart with the only difference, again being the name}

Saint_Proverbius · Post by **Saint_Proverbius** » Sat Aug 31, 2002 2:13 am

spazmo wrote:No, no it's not. There aren't any percentage resistances in AD&D 2nd Ed. aside from magic resistance. They may exist in Baldur's Gate and other Infinity Engine games, but any D&D player will tell you that BG is not proper AD&D. The resistance thing isn't really a ripoff at all. Fallout had resistances to normal, fire, laser, etc., so Lionheart has slashing, crushing and piercing. It's just a part of the SPECIAL system.

The categories are a direct rip, not how they handle them. Fallout didn't need "crushing, piercing, blah blah blah" because you you could tweak the ammo/weapon modifiers for physical damage for those weapons to model how the ammo/weapon worked.

For example, hollow point ammo had more physical resistance for the armor because it fans out on impact, but also tears through you which gave it a double damage mod. Full metal jacket lowered the damage resistance so it was more penatrating to armor, but did less damage.

Think of hollow points as a mace and full metal jacket as a rapier.

Basically, for all those people who don't get why SPECIAL has all those lovely DRs and DTs based on category for Armors and Ammos, that's why they did it.

Spazmo · Post by **Spazmo** » Sat Aug 31, 2002 2:59 am

That's just what I was saying: it's an adaptation of SPECIAL for a fantasy setting.

Dan · Post by **Dan** » Sat Aug 31, 2002 3:52 pm

Spazmo wrote:That's just what I was saying: it's an adaptation of SPECIAL for a fantasy setting.

Yeah it's an adaptation, but they could have made it more original and not just apply those rules wev'e seen in a dozen other games.

Spazmo · Post by **Spazmo** » Sat Aug 31, 2002 11:03 pm

If it ain't broke, don't fix it. I'm all for originality, but if it's worked in countless other RPG games, why make up some new system that might just screw the whole thing up?

Duck and Cover

RPGDot's SPECIAL article numero 3

RPGDot's SPECIAL article numero 3

Re: RPGDot's SPECIAL article numero 3

it sounds like...