Damage by HD in OSE/Od&d

[Mannahnin]

I like the idea and have been mulling it for a while, but it does have the downsides other folks already mentioned- access to magic edged weapons would be a significant buff to Clerics, especially, and there is that issue of smaller/cheaper weapons just always being better, unless you come up with specific narrative advantages for bigger weapons.

There's also the issue of the Thief being pathetic enough already, and giving them d4 damage really would consign them into the position of Worst Class Ever.

Honestly if I were experimenting with HD-based damage in OSE I'd seriously consider giving Thieves d8 HD while I was at it. I don't even think it would be unbalanced, with their restriction to leather armor and no shields; they're still not going to be tanks.

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

I dig the idea! I kinda like the original D&D "every weapon does d6 damage" rule, and this feels like a refinement of that.

 

[Mannahnin]

I dig the idea! I kinda like the original D&D "every weapon does d6 damage" rule, and this feels like a refinement of that.

Speaking of which, that reminds of a common OD&D house rule for folks who want to differentiate weapons while sticking with the d6, which could probably be combined with the damage by HD rule.

The OD&D house rule I'm thinking of for keeping weapons super simple is:

Regular weapons: d6
Two handed weapons: Roll twice, take the higher.
Light/small/concealable weapons: Roll twice, take the lower.
Fighting with two weapons at once instead of a weapon and shield: Either +1 to hit or +1 damage. Still just one attack.

 

[Cruentus]

Speaking of which, that reminds of a common OD&D house rule for folks who want to differentiate weapons while sticking with the d6, which could probably be combined with the damage by HD rule.

The OD&D house rule I'm thinking of for keeping weapons super simple is:

Regular weapons: d6
Two handed weapons: Roll twice, take the higher.
Light/small/concealable weapons: Roll twice, take the lower.
Fighting with two weapons at once instead of a weapon and shield: Either +1 to hit or +1 damage. Still just one attack.

I like those. Regarding the last, I've seen "advantage" given for two weapon fighting in some OSE circles. That seems like a lot (effectively a +5 to hit). I like the +1 (or maybe even 2?), and allowing the player to pick hit or damage. Still one attack (gotta keep things moving).

 

[Mannahnin]

I like those. Regarding the last, I've seen "advantage" given for two weapon fighting in some OSE circles. That seems like a lot (effectively a +5 to hit). I like the +1 (or maybe even 2?), and allowing the player to pick hit or damage. Still one attack (gotta keep things moving).

Yeah, I think I've seen the two weapon bonus usually implemented as just +1 to hit, which is pretty symmetrical with shields giving +1 AC, and rolling damage twice for two handers averaging about +1 damage.

That being said, IMO +1 hit bonuses on a d20 are usually a little finer-grained than I prefer, so +2 to hit is arguably more worthwhile and mathematically probably actually closer to even with the other combos.

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

Ah yes, no doubt a direct response to the "darts are the best OD&D weapon" concept.

What I love about these sorts of fixed damage dice is that people pick their weapons more along the lines of what they think looks cool than anything.

Speaking of which, that reminds of a common OD&D house rule for folks who want to differentiate weapons while sticking with the d6, which could probably be combined with the damage by HD rule.

The OD&D house rule I'm thinking of for keeping weapons super simple is:

Regular weapons: d6
Two handed weapons: Roll twice, take the higher.
Light/small/concealable weapons: Roll twice, take the lower.
Fighting with two weapons at once instead of a weapon and shield: Either +1 to hit or +1 damage. Still just one attack.

 

[Cruentus]

Yeah, I think I've seen the two weapon bonus usually implemented as just +1 to hit, which is pretty symmetrical with shields giving +1 AC, and rolling damage twice for two handers averaging about +1 damage.

That being said, IMO +1 hit bonuses on a d20 are usually a little finer-grained than I prefer, so +2 to hit is arguably more worthwhile and mathematically probably actually closer to even with the other combos.

I was also tinkering (i.e. using currently) in two games the idea of a shield being able to be "sundered", whereby it is destroyed, but ignores the damage done on that hit. So a shield bearer could use it for a big hit, or when they're down to a couple Hp, etc. The +2 would probably work since the shield provides a pretty big benefit (albeit one time, unless you bring multiple shields - but watch that weight!).

 

[GreyLord]

Some nice ideas I've seen here.

If doing BECMI or BX, I might pump up the damage die by one...so d10 for fighters and dwarves, d8 for clerics, mystics, elves, and halflings, and a d6 for Rogues and Wizards.

 

[Mannahnin]

Some nice ideas I've seen here.

If doing BECMI or BX, I might pump up the damage die by one...so d10 for fighters and dwarves, d8 for clerics, mystics, elves, and halflings, and a d6 for Rogues and Wizards.

If I were bumping dice, I might bump Fighters to d10 but leave Dwarves at d8. Dwarves have a bit of an issue of just being better Fighters; they don't cost a ton more XP than Fighters, the way Elves do compared to Magic Users, their level cap of 12 is almost never going to be relevant, and the weapon restrictions are also basically irrelevant.

I don't really think any of the others are necessary. Except Thieves, of course. Thieves getting stuck at d4s, or even d6s, is a clear flaw which is absolutely in need of correction if one were doing damage = HD.

 

[MockingBird]

Does the OSE advanced book expand on weapons and damage?