Hi all,
I've never used this precise system before, and haven't played a d100 type system in quite awhile, but was going over Eclipse Phase with a friend. We both agree that the setting is freaking awesome, but we both found the critical system to be head scratching in its execution. I think if anyone told me that 1 out of 10 times that someone hits me with a weapon, that it would bypass the armor they were trying to sell me, I'd think they were selling me complete crap. Same thing if a weapons dealer said, "Everything I have is a great deal, but 1 out of every 10 times you miss, something crazy's gonna happen.. and it won't be good."
I can sort of see the point, I mean if the players run up against something in armor that they'd have no hope of penetrating with their weapons, it at least gives them a chance, but the system seems so divorced from reality that I doubt I could use it in a game. Plus, if characters see something so heavily armored that it's just shrugging off their attacks, I would hope they would run... critical hits actually would encourage them to stick around.
So one option I came up with for critical successes was to just allow double damage, or even maximum damage, for the weapon.
Critical failures, I would probably just ignore.
Comments or suggestions welcomed...
Welcome! These forums will be deactivated by the end of this year. The conversation continues in a new morph over on Discord! Please join us there for a more active conversation and the occasional opportunity to ask developers questions directly! Go to the PS+ Discord Server.
Criticals in combat: unbalancing to remove them?
Tue, 2010-06-22 13:57
#1
gambler1650
Criticals in combat: unbalancing to remove them?
Tue, 2010-06-22 14:45
#2
puke
Re: Criticals in combat: unbalancing to remove them?
most games are like that, though. if you want less criticals, you can thin them out in a number of ways:
- reduce frequency they come up on the dice, putting them at only 00 and 99, or 01 or whatever.
- require a certian MoS to qualify for a critical
- require criticals to be confirmed by a second roll
- introduce "tables of effects" that give varying results for criticals, either randomly, at GM discretion, or based on MoS.
it's true that 1 out of 10 times you hit or miss, something will happen. but assuming you have a 50/50 chance of hitting or missing, you only have a 1 out of 20 chance of either a critical success or failure. its basically a D20 system, multiplied by 5. it's neat that the probability of what KIND of crit you have moves with your probability of success, but you could easily turn it into a 1/20 crit success & 1/20 crit failure.
you could even turn it into a native D20 system by dividing everything by 5, and only criting on 1 and 20.
Tue, 2010-06-22 23:24
#3
Totalgit
Re: Criticals in combat: unbalancing to remove them?
I dont have a problem with the crits bypassing armour, what i might have a problem with if i ever get round to playing is called shots to bypass armour. Taking a -10 & needing a MoS of 30+ to bypass armour when you can aim for +10 and still hit if you fail to get the MoS but still succeed is pretty sick.
The gm can say "nope its armoured all over so no called shots to bypass" but still seems like why would you not just always take a aim action and try calling your shots?
Tue, 2010-06-22 23:31
#4
Thampsan
Re: Criticals in combat: unbalancing to remove them?
I have no problems with criticals, in fact I find that in many cases against particularly well armoured PCs they are the only thing that makes the fight interesting. Further more as ST you can rule against the critical if the armour has no particular weakness to bypass.
So, for example, an armoured eva-suit isn't going to have holes, chinks or other cracks that can be exploited - but light body armour does, plenty of places to get shot that aren't protected, the face, neck, etc.
Remember that MoS also cause more damage, so MoS 30+ gets you +5 DV, MoS 60+ gets you +10 DV. Combat should be short, sharp and terribly dangerous otherwise you aren't doing it right.