[Nomad Zophiel]

I'd suggest 3:1, roll the remainder. If someone spends Edge, they roll it rather than divide by 3 and get Rule of Six bonus dice equal to 1/2 the automatic hits.

[Doc Chaos]

Mathematically its more like 3:1 and the optinal rules for buying successes even is 4:1.

[voydangel]

Yea, on that note I had been contemplating House ruling the buying hits rule to 3:1. That basically fixes the issue of making doing this with armor only far less complicated. That way instead of having special rules for armor, its just a flat house rule that applies to everything evenly. Which is much simpler comparatively speaking.

My reasoning is that by making it 4:1 your punishing the players for buying hits. Fairly severely actually. Obviously we all know that rolling nets you an average of 1 hit per 3 dice, whereas buying is only at 1 hit per 4 dice. Thus is penalty #1.

However what most people don't take into account is that when you buy hits, you reduce the number of dice you roll - which in turn increases the chances of getting a glitch. i.e.: rolling all 20 (for example) dice, the odds of getting a glitch are 1 in 60,466,176*; whereas if you were to buy 4 successes (using RAW), then your dice pool becomes only 4 (with 4 automatic successes). Now the odds of glitching the roll are only 1 in 36*. Granted - still a slim chance, but statistically speaking that's a change in odds of biblical proportions...if you take my meaning. Thus is penalty #2.

Furthermore, if you'll note the wording for glitches and critical glitches:

If half or more of the dice pool rolled come up as 1s, then a glitch results.

If a character rolls a glitch and scores zero hits, then she has made a critical glitch.

then you can see that hits that are bought do not save you from critical glitches as the criteria are based on dice rolled. So a dramatically increased chance of rolling a critical glitch is inherent in buying hits as well. Penalty #3.

So, with all these fairly severe negatives (statistically speaking), why do we all use this rule so much? Cause it speeds up play and makes us need to roll less dice. Well, then why don't we quit punishing our players and NPCs and make the buying hits rule be at a 3:1 ratio? We may not be able to fix the increasing odds of glitching and crit glitching as successes are bought, but at least we can give them a wee bit more bang for their buck when they decide to take their chances.

Well, that's my take on it anyway...


*Note: My math may be off, but I'm pretty sure I erred on the side of caution. For example: I think the odds of glitching with 4 dice is actually higher (more likely) than 1:36, but I forget how to do some of the deeper stats math these days.

[Chaemera]

voyd, the thing to take in mind when talking about glitches / critical glitches is that, under the RAW, you can either buy hits or roll the dice.

The system you're currently considering is essentially turning it into the same thought process as a weapon, you have Base Soak of TRUNC(Armor.Modified/3) (whereas a weapon has a Base DV) and then you have the Soak Roll of Body + REMAINDER(Armor.Modified/3) (analogous to the attack roll for the weapon, if a little unusual).

So I would treat the Total DP for glitching as just being the remaining dice that are rolled, not rolled dice + auto-hits. Hell, if you really wanted to make it simple, you could lump Reaction into the Soak Roll (along with any ranged combat modifiers / full defense) and have it be a simple opposed roll:

Attack Skill + Agility vs Reaction + Body + REMAINDER(Armor.Modified/3). Compare Base DV to TRUNC(Armor.Modified/3) to determine stun vs physical.

Now you've sped up combat.

[voydangel]

voyd, the thing to take in mind when talking about glitches / critical glitches is that, under the RAW, you can either buy hits or roll the dice.

The system you're currently considering is essentially turning it into the same thought process as a weapon, you have Base Soak of TRUNC(Armor.Modified/3) (whereas a weapon has a Base DV) and then you have the Soak Roll of Body + REMAINDER(Armor.Modified/3) (analogous to the attack roll for the weapon, if a little unusual).

So I would treat the Total DP for glitching as just being the remaining dice that are rolled, not rolled dice + auto-hits. Hell, if you really wanted to make it simple, you could lump Reaction into the Soak Roll (along with any ranged combat modifiers / full defense) and have it be a simple opposed roll:

Attack Skill + Agility vs Reaction + Body + REMAINDER(Armor.Modified/3). Compare Base DV to TRUNC(Armor.Modified/3) to determine stun vs physical.

Now you've sped up combat.

Good things to think about.

I had apparently forgotten that you can buy hits or roll. I was thinking of buying as a means of reducing dice pools, rather than an option to use instead of rolling.

I like your math, and suggestions, and if my whole group were math nerds I would probably use it. Alas, only 2 of my players are math geeks and I consider myself a 1/2 math geek. My other players would probably start to bleed from the ears were I to try to explain this system to them..lol

Oh well, it's still an informative, educational, and interesting look into the specifics of combat math.

However, wouldn't that "simple" opposed roll be: (ROLL[Attack Skill + Agility] + HITS[Weapons Base DV])  vs  (ROLL[Reaction + Body + REMAINDER(Armor.Modified/3)] + HITS[TRUNC(Armor.Modified/3)])  ?

[Nomad Zophiel]

Or you could assume that both sides buy hits in equal proportion until you get to the leftovers

Simple test (Attribute+Ability)-(Rea+Armor+body). If the number is positive, the attacker rolls and Damage=DV+hits. If the number is negative, the defender rolls and damage=DV-hits.

Add all appropriate modifiers to both sides before calculating. Basically you're lumping everything together in one roll, letting both sides buy hits until one comes out ahead, then rolling or buying the difference. You can still compare the final DV to armor to determine stun vs physical, final DV+1/3 BOD if you're a real stickler.

[voydangel]

I guess at this point we need to start looking into how we define streamlining....   cause this is all definitely faster, but is it easier? 

[Chaemera]

yeah, it gets math intensive fast .

Worth noting that Nomad's version is easier to recalculate on the fly, though generally, I'm opposed to mixing buying and rolling. I'd be more comfortable completely reconfiguring the system, if I were to go this far.


1. Divide all armor by 2, this is the Base Armor Value, it isn't rolled. (You'll see why 2 in a bit)
2. Take the remainder, name it whatever you want (I'd call it the Armor's Absorption) and add it and body to your opposed reaction roll.
3. Armor Penetration applies directly to Base Armor Value. (this is why I'm friendly and give 1 point base per 2 in this system).
4. Physical if base weapon DV exceeds armor, Stun otherwise.

This offers minimal math, no dice trade-in system that stretches the meaning of "buying hits" past the breaking point. It also helps re-align armor to be more similar to weapons by providing a "base", automatic protection against the weapon's "base", automatic damage.

Yes, it'll push game balance somewhere, but the combat system will never be truly "balanced" while being playable. Besides, what do you expect out of five minutes of carefully thought out turning the rules system on its head?

[voydangel]

At first glance your system seems to make Armor 50% stronger, but also makes AP on weapons twice as effective. Lets see if I can come up with some examples to show how the systems would differ. I'm going to assume every 3 dice = 1 hit, 1 die left over = no luck, 2 dice leftover = lucky roll. e.g.: 6 dice = 2 hits, 7 dice = 2 hits, 8 dice = 3 hits, 9 dice = 3 hits, 10 dice = 3 hits, 11 dice = 4 hits, etc.

***************************

RAW: 11 dice to attack, 5P -1AP vs 3 body, 3 reaction, 8 armor (average humans, average guns, average armor)
Prelim:
8 armor - 1AP = 7 modified armor

Process:
4 hits on attack roll - 1 hit to avoid bullet = 3 net hits + 5P base DV = 8P modified DV
7 armor + 3 body = 10 dice to soak = 3 hits
Final damage = 5P


5 minute mayhem rules: 11 dice to attack, 5P -1AP vs 3 body, 3 reaction, 8 armor (average humans, average guns, average armor)
Prelim:
1. Armor rating / 2 = 4 Base Armor Value (0 remainder)
2. Body + Reaction + armor remainder= 6 soak roll
3. Modified Base Armor Value = 4 + -1AP = 3
4. Weapons Base DV = 5 > Modified Base Armor Value = 3

Process:
4 hits on attack roll + 5P base DV = 9P modified DV
6 dice to soak = 2 hits + 3 Modified Armor Value = 5 Soak hits
Final damage = 4P

***************************

RAW: 16 dice to attack, 6P -2AP vs 6 body, 6 reaction, 15 armor (Bigger guys, guns & armor - more similar to Shadowrunners stats)
Prelim:
15 armor -2AP = 13 modified armor

Process:
5 hits on attack roll - 2 hit to avoid bullet = 3 net hits + 6P base DV = 9P modified DV
13 armor + 6 body = 19 dice to soak = 6 hits
Final damage = 3S


5 minute mayhem rules: 16 dice to attack, 6P -2AP vs 6 body, 6 reaction, 15 armor (Bigger guys, guns & armor - more similar to Shadowrunners stats)
Prelim:
1. Armor rating / 2 = 7 Base Armor Value (1 remainder)
2. Body + Reaction + armor remainder = 13
3. Modified Base Armor Value = 7 + -2AP = 5
4. Weapons Base DV = 6 > Modified Base Armor Value = 5

Process:
5 hits on attack roll + 6P base DV = 11P modified DV
13 dice to soak = 4 hits + 5 Modified Armor Value = 9 Soak hits
Final damage = 2P

***************************

RAW: 16 dice to attack, 8P -4AP vs 6 body, 6 reaction, 15 armor (Bigger guys & armor, weapon = monowhip - more similar to Shadowrunners stats)
Prelim:
15 armor -4AP = 11 modified armor

Process:
5 hits on attack roll - 2 hit to avoid whip = 3 net hits + 8P base DV = 11P modified DV
11 armor + 6 body = 17 dice to soak = 6 hits
Final damage = 5S


5 minute mayhem rules: 16 dice to attack, 8P -4AP vs 6 body, 6 reaction, 15 armor (Bigger guys & armor, weapon = monowhip - more similar to Shadowrunners stats)
Prelim:
1. Armor rating / 2 = 7 Base Armor Value (1 remainder)
2. Body + Reaction + armor remainder = 13
3. Modified Base Armor Value = 7 + -4AP = 3
4. Weapons Base DV = 8 > Modified Base Armor Value = 3

Process:
5 hits on attack roll + 8P base DV = 13P modified DV
13 dice to soak = 4 hits + 3 Modified Armor Value = 7 Soak hits
Final damage = 6P

***************************

hmmm. So, with this limited sample space, it seems that the average damage dealt with guns will be just a touch lower (1 damage lower to be precise), therefore making gun combat less deadly overall.
However, we can see that with a high AP weapon (the monowhip) combat becomes significantly more deadly. I would assume the same outcome would occur if we set up a test with APDS ammo.
We also see that with the 5 minute system we are more likely for our damage to remain physical rather than getting converted to stun in pretty much all cases.

I think the only thing I would do would be to perhaps add a 5th item to the prelim of the "5mm" rules:
5. Weapons Base DV - Modified Armor Value = bonus (or penalty) to attackers roll.
that way the process part of the 5mm rules becomes simply an opposed roll of (Agi + weapon skill) vs defenders pool (calculated in step 2)

Since the derived values from steps 1 (Base Armor Value) and 2 (Defense Pool) can both be pre-calculated & noted on the character sheet, an attack of any sort becomes simply:
1. Modify Base Armor Value with AP of attack.
2. Weapons Base DV - Modified Armor Value = bonus (or penalty) to attackers roll. (If this is a bonus, then damage is Physical, if it's a penalty or a wash, then damage is Stun).
3. Roll Modified Attack Roll vs. Defense Pool. Net hits by attacker = boxes of damage sustained.

Does this sound like I'm getting your system correctly? Or am I missing something?

[Chaemera]

Yup, you basically hit the nail on the head. I'm assuming since each attack hit you just went straight to adding hits from attack and "soak" to the Base DV and Modified Base Armor (if hits on the "soak" roll exceeded hits on the attack roll, hit would be completely negated, of course).

I was expecting a higher frequency of Physical hits from the proposal, just didn't want to spout it off without doing the math, and I didn't feel like doing the math.

I think the only thing I would do would be to perhaps add a 5th item to the prelim of the "5mm" rules:
5. Weapons Base DV - Modified Armor Value = bonus (or penalty) to attackers roll.
that way the process part of the 5mm rules becomes simply an opposed roll of (Agi + weapon skill) vs defenders pool (calculated in step 2)

I take this to mean that there would be no more automatic damage? Though, as your examples have shown, in almost all cases, this has resulted in physical damage, which suggests that the system doesn't work as intended, since ideally we would see a similar distribution of Physical and Stun. Oh well, if you like quicker, more painful gun fights, this certainly seems to do the trick. I'd probably consider using it for "dangerous" Shadowrun games.

Since the derived values from steps 1 (Base Armor Value) and 2 (Defense Pool) can both be pre-calculated & noted on the character sheet, an attack of any sort becomes simply:
1. Modify Base Armor Value with AP of attack.
2. Weapons Base DV - Modified Armor Value = bonus (or penalty) to attackers roll. (If this is a bonus, then damage is Physical, if it's a penalty or a wash, then damage is Stun).
3. Roll Modified Attack Roll vs. Defense Pool. Net hits by attacker = boxes of damage sustained.

Does this sound like I'm getting your system correctly? Or am I missing something?

If you incorporate your item 5 into my original 4 steps, yep, that's the 5 Minute Mayhem combat rules, by Chaemera and voydangel. Chosen Nondescript Deity(ies) of the moment, preserve us.

[voydangel]

I think I may incorporate the 5mm rules into the game that I am planning to start next week. I actually like the fact that it will generally being doing Physical instead of stun damage, especially since it seems to do less actual boxes of damage, barring high amounts of AP anyway. But since I am generally fairly stingy with APDS and the like in my games, I don't think it will be too big of an issue. We'll see.
I have a few friends who want to play, and even though i have 3 other games that I'm GMing atm, I am rather excited to have a test bed for this, so here we go!  
I hope I can survive doing 4 games at once, plus college, plus looking for a job.