Weapons with adds and enhancements

[dungeondevil]

If I were to have a regular dagger (2D6+2), but one that has up to +5 points of enhancements (if I understand the enhancements rules properly), that should permit me to list it as 2D6+7. Now, my question is, would I then be able to fold the +7 into the dice, assuming each die is three pips (a la WEG's Star Wars)? Thus, would it become 4D6+1.

If it remains 2D6+7, my average should be 14, whereas, if the latter case of 4D6+1, the average would be 15. That one point discrepancy may not make a world of difference in most combat dice-pool counts, unless it's a close shave. WWKSAD?*

___________________

* What Would Ken St. Andre Do?

[mosker]

For flavor and character class reasons, I'd keep the enchantment in the adds. You have a special dagger, not a dagger that thinks and behaves like a sword--and may become inaccessible to certain characters. An adds enchantment makes it less swingy, which can be fun, but unless the dagger really does think it's a sword complete with the attitude coming with a longer blade (wow, I really should rethink this sentence), it's also stronger from a narrative standpoint.

[houndle]

I agree with mosker for the reasons stated. Also, that extra 2d6 gives you more chances of scoring Spite (if you use that) so may be slightly more powerful than the raw numbers suggest.

But hey, if you want a 4d6 dagger then go for it. The distinction between a big knife and a small sword gets pretty blurred anyway.

[ProfGremlin]

Allow me to offer a different perspective - a 2d6+7 vs 4d6+1 provides for a minimum damage of 9 vs 5. Sometimes knowing that you'll be doing a minimum amount of damage with a particular attack can sway the players choice. Also, the narrative aspect as to why that dagger wounds so deeply cannot be underestimated. I'm thinking here of the dagger from Shaddar Logoth which both Mat Cauthon and Padan Fain carried in the Wheel of Time series.

[dungeondevil]

May 6, 2024 7:29:00 GMT -5 mosker said:

For flavor and character class reasons, I'd keep the enchantment in the adds. You have a special dagger, not a dagger that thinks and behaves like a sword--and may become inaccessible to certain characters. An adds enchantment makes it less swingy, which can be fun, but unless the dagger really does think it's a sword complete with the attitude coming with a longer blade (wow, I really should rethink this sentence), it's also stronger from a narrative standpoint.

I wasn't referring to enchantment, but Enhancements (vide dT&T, Section 4.3, p. 49ff.).

[nialldubh]

I had a problem with the daggers and enhancement from the beginning; as I presumed the max for any weapon would be +5, but the dagger (Sax, Arkansas toothpick, haladie) 2d6+4 was the only weapon that could rise to 2d6+9 (I will not include the Troll weapons at this moment, they big and Ilkin, but in honesty increasing a weapon size to next stage; therefore a Troll dagger could have been treated as a shortsword or broadsword, depending on how big the Troll is, but for the record it would be max: 2d6+10).

No other weapon can do it, not the swords, poleaxes, bows, etc., why?  (Err: Brass knuckles, Light-duty wizard’s staff) I do not include gunnes, and I would rarely use them.

An error in rule creation? Probably...

Perhaps the basic dagger should have just been 2d6. And the modifier make the dagger one of the greater types, leaving it as like 5E; and once a dagger becomes 2d6+5, it reverts to a Sax. But Deluxe T&T had to give the daggers something unique?

It did not really help... I do not think...

I really enjoy the enhancement bonuses, but using them on dagger becomes ridiculous.

A basic shortsword, enhanced to max is 3d6+5 (average 15 damage); STR 8, DEX 7. The Sax is 2d6+9 (average 14 damage); STR 7, DEX 8 (I not bothered about throwing DEX at present). Is this just? The min damage is 8 for shortsword and 11 for the Sax.

Shortswords have become a useless tool.

Bonuses are additive (when reasonable) but will

not exceed +5, and negatives will not go below -5.

Page 49; deluxe.

I was uncertain of the rule here, did this mean a sax 2d6+4 could not rise above 2d6+5?

I had to judge and it did not work, so I just added max bonus to Sax for 2d6+9 and left it that way; as I could not logically give it a rule.


My logic; if I had to make a rule: would be to give no description of individual daggers (they had not done that for every other weapon) and state that every dagger was 2d6. Then add the enhancement from p49 to make any unique daggers.

[houndle]

I've always preferred to use weapons which are thematically correct rather than just going for maximum damage. This would apply to enhancements as well as the basic weapon.

I remember a campaign from many years ago where everybody was running around with Terbutjes just because they were cheap and easy to use and highly effective (they did a massive 1d6+5 damage in those days). I think we ended up banning them in the end. These days I would probably say "okay, but first you've got to find a shark and persuade it to donate its teeth..."

[dungeondevil]

Bonuses are additive (when reasonable) but will not exceed +5, and negatives will not go below -5.

Okay, I guess I misread that passage: I thought it meant the enhancement bonuses could not exceed +5, but it looks like any bonus to the dice cannot exceed that. My bad. I guess I'll have to spend time in remedial Troll School.

So I would revise my example dagger to be either 2D6+5 [12 average, min 7], or 3D6+2 [12.5 average, min 5].

[alkazar]

Wow! This is fascinating. Someone should write up a TrollsZine article about weapon averages with adds. I never really thought about it before.

It's like a couple of summers ago when I played T&T using 3D6 to make saving rolls instead of 2D6. What I found was that 3d6 wasn't as good as 2D6 and didn't really offer an easier save ability beyond a 1 level saving roll, because TARO just doesn't happen, or at least does not occur enough to make it viable. While DARO when rolling 2D6 happens way more frequently, allowing a player to shoot for higher level saves more often.

Now I didn't try 3D6 with "Sixes add and roll over" (SARO?) rule. Where every time you roll a six you get to add and roll again and keep rolling as long as you keep getting a six. That might actually work to level it out and I may give it a go this summer and see.

I guess that just because it has more dice doesn't make it better or deadlier.

[mosker]

May 7, 2024 23:09:58 GMT -5 alkazar said:

Now I didn't try 3D6 with "Sixes add and roll over" (SARO?) rule. Where every time you roll a six you get to add and roll again and keep rolling as long as you keep getting a six.

apn 's Days of High Adventure PBM game here has exploding and imploding dice for combat, where sixes act as SARO as you describe, and ones are re-rolled with the number subtracted for the total. My low add mage fighting with two knives came very close once to a negative HPT in a poor roll.

[dungeondevil]

May 7, 2024 23:09:58 GMT -5 alkazar said:

Now I didn't try 3D6 with "Sixes add and roll over" (SARO?) rule. Where every time you roll a six you get to add and roll again and keep rolling as long as you keep getting a six. That might actually work to level it out and I may give it a go this summer and see.

Exploding sixes?! That's one way to make spite hurt the combat-winner all the more! Way to stab back at the monster with your dying breath! Your odds of getting that second six is just less than three percent -- IOW, pretty minuscule.

[houndle]

At the risk of going further off topic, the M!M! convention of using a roll of 1 for spite really appeals to me. If you roll enough sixes you've probably won the combat anyway, using 1 for spite gives the underdog a chance. If you interpret the rules as allowing the Chaos Factor to manufacture spite, the underdog has some interesting choices to make... especially if Spite also triggers special effects.

Whether by luck or good judgement, there is much more subtlety in these rules than meets the eye.

[dungeondevil]

May 7, 2024 23:09:58 GMT -5 alkazar said:

Wow! This is fascinating. Someone should write up a TrollsZine article about weapon averages with adds. I never really thought about it before.

It's like a couple of summers ago when I played T&T using 3D6 to make saving rolls instead of 2D6. What I found was that 3d6 wasn't as good as 2D6 and didn't really offer an easier save ability beyond a 1 level saving roll, because TARO just doesn't happen, or at least does not occur enough to make it viable. While DARO when rolling 2D6 happens way more frequently, allowing a player to shoot for higher level saves more often.

Now I didn't try 3D6 with "Sixes add and roll over" (SARO?) rule. Where every time you roll a six you get to add and roll again and keep rolling as long as you keep getting a six. That might actually work to level it out and I may give it a go this summer and see.

I guess that just because it has more dice doesn't make it better or deadlier.

Does TrollsZine pay for articles?

[nialldubh]

May 8, 2024 8:48:40 GMT -5 houndle said:

At the risk of going further off topic, the M!M! convention of using a roll of 1 for spite really appeals to me. If you roll enough sixes you've probably won the combat anyway, using 1 for spite gives the underdog a chance. If you interpret the rules as allowing the Chaos Factor to manufacture spite, the underdog has some interesting choices to make... especially if Spite also triggers special effects.

Whether by luck or good judgement, there is much more subtlety in these rules than meets the eye.

Honestly, 1s are low, and are regarded as low, hence why grant it a boon. A 6 is a power hit, means damage. so, 1 spite. The 6s does not mean winning a round as the foe could roll 6s also, or as what I do by cancelling it by any 1s rolled, much like apn imploding/exploding dice.

but theory is 6s high, creates a stronger hit, why should a weak strike benefit?

[ProfGremlin]

May 9, 2024 11:26:38 GMT -5 dungeondevil said:

Does TrollsZine pay for articles?

Trolls!Zine has always been a volunteer, community driven project. No money is changing pockets anywhere along the process. It exists simply because of the love of the fans for T&T and M!M!