DEFENSE... again!

[Morrus]

I've just been playtesting the following DEFENSE value, and it seems to be working so far for both monsters and characters.

[h=4]Basic Value[/h]

1) Determine your DEFENSE dice pool (attribute, skill, equipment) and MENTAL DEFENSE (attribute, skill, equipment) which is capped in the same way as any other dice pool. The equipment dice will come from shields (see below).

- For DEFENSE against melee, use the highest of STR and AGI
- For DEFENSE against ranged, use AGI
- For MENTAL DEFENSE use the highest of your three mental attributes.

Skill with your current MELEE WEAPON (or unarmed fighting) applies to DEFENSE against melee attacks, as can the quality of that weapon.

2) Consult the following table:

[TABLE="class: grid, width: 90%"] [TR] [TD]POOL
[/TD] [TD="align: center"]1d6[/TD] [TD="align: center"]2d6[/TD] [TD="align: center"]3d6[/TD] [TD="align: center"]4d6[/TD] [TD="align: center"]5d6[/TD] [TD="align: center"]6d6[/TD] [TD="align: center"]7d6[/TD] [TD="align: center"]8d6[/TD] [TD="align: center"]9d6[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]DEFENSE
[/TD] [TD="align: center"]4[/TD] [TD="align: center"]7[/TD] [TD="align: center"]11[/TD] [TD="align: center"]14[/TD] [TD="align: center"]18[/TD] [TD="align: center"]21[/TD] [TD="align: center"]25[/TD] [TD="align: center"]28[/TD] [TD="align: center"]32[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE]

3) Apply a size modifier to DEFENSE (not MENTAL DEFENSE):

[TABLE="class: grid, width: 500"] [TR] [TD="align: center"]SIZE
[/TD] [TD="align: center"]MODIFIER
[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD="align: center"]Tiny[/TD] [TD="align: center"]+8[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD="align: center"]Small[/TD] [TD="align: center"]+4[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD="align: center"]Medium[/TD] [TD="align: center"]+0[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD="align: center"]Large[/TD] [TD="align: center"]-4[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD="align: center"]Enormous[/TD] [TD="align: center"]-8[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD="align: center"]Gigantic[/TD] [TD="align: center"]-16[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD="align: center"]Colossal[/TD] [TD="align: center"]-32[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE]

4) Apply any unique modifiers (some monsters, for example, or careers/traditions).

5) Adjust for armor and shields (see below).

[h=4]Adjustments to Existing Rules[/h]
The following are changes to existing rules.

• The starknight's +5 defense ability has changed. A starknight with that ability wielding a laser sword can use that weapon (and their skill with it) against ranged attacks also. Starknights may also use INT as their DEFENSE attribute.
• Shields add a basic value to DEFENSE according to size: small (+2), medium (+4), large (+6). Plus higher quality shields add equipment dice to the dice pool just like weapons do.
• Armor applies a penalty to DEFENSE based on its type: medium armor -2, heavy -4. Light armor inflicts no penalty.
• Cover and range are currently unchanged.
• The minimum value is 0. This represents a target so easy to hit that no roll is required unless mitigating factors change that value. Many colossal creatures, buildings, and so on fall into this category: you can't miss them.

[h=4]Optional Rule[/h]
A character may choose to actually roll DEFENSE instead of using the precalculated value. This is simply a roll of the dice pool. Note that this can slow down play.

[h=4]Exploits[/h]
Following are a few defensive-themed exploits which can be purchased.

Hunker Down (END 6+) -- cover grants you one extra die of cover.

Dodge (AGI 6+, reactive) -- you gain the effect of cover from ranged attacks when in the open as long as you have moved at least 10 feet this turn.

Brush Off (STR 8+, reactive) -- you contemptuously brush aside a melee attack, gaining the effect of cover from one melee attack.

 

[Primitive Screwhead]

Sentience modifier for Mental Defense similar to the Size modifier?

And to clarify, your verbiage seems mixed with regards to equipment. is it:

a> "The equipment dice will come from shields (see below)", which means that a Small Shield adds 2 dice to your defence pool {and therefore about +4 to your end DEF score} but is capped by the number of traditions you have

or

b> "Shields add a basic value to DEFENSE according to size...", which means you calculate your basic defence pool, reference the chart to get your basic defence... and then add the +2 for holding a small shield, thereby increasing your DEF above what your tradition caps the dice pool to.

optional rule idea:
Active Defence: You may spend your last action in a round to become as defensive as possible. Roll your Def pool to set your DEF score until the start of your next action. If you have not attacked this round you may add 1D6 to this roll for every 2D6 in your attack pool.

 

[Morrus]

The sentience adjustment may not be needed now that INT can be a viable source of mental defense. But give it a try and let me know!

For the shields, a shield adds a basic bonus (2/4/6) on top of the calculated score. Quality shields add to the dice pool when it's being formed.

So a high quality medium shield gets +1d6 to its dice pool (up to the cap limit), and then when the total is calculated, then adds +4 to that.

(Your optional rule doesn't work: rolling your DEF pool to set your DEFENSE for the next round is exactly what the system effectively does anyway; it just streamlines it with an average, but allows you to roll it).

 

[Morrus]

After further testing, the armor penalties are too high.

We've set them at 0/-2/-4 for light/medium/heavy, and they seem to be working out. I've edited the above post.

 

[LucasC]

After further testing, the armor penalties are too high.

We've set them at 0/-2/-4 for light/medium/heavy, and they seem to be working out. I've edited the above post.

I was just about to post about that. Those penalties look much better.

Something to think about perhaps... eliminate the armor penalty altogether and instead give armor a base Defense pool (maybe 2 dice, or 3 dice) and have that replace the characters stat pool. To get SOAK, you then rely entirely on armor. At lower character levels, it will likely benefit you (depending on where you set the armor pool) but as a character's level increases, they are likely to lose DEFENSE in place of SOAK.

Second thought...

Consider basing armor on either STRENGTH or AGILITY but not allowing ENDURANCE for this purpose. Characters already use END to derive HEALTH and using it for DEFENSE doubles up on its value. It also doubles up skills that add to END like Hardy. This skill now does double-duty adding to both HEALTH and DEFENSE.

 

[Morrus]

I was just about to post about that. Those penalties look much better.

Something to think about perhaps... eliminate the armor penalty altogether and instead give armor a base Defense pool (maybe 2 dice, or 3 dice) and have that replace the characters stat pool. To get SOAK, you then rely entirely on armor. At lower character levels, it will likely benefit you (depending on where you set the armor pool) but as a character's level increases, they are likely to lose DEFENSE in place of SOAK.

Second thought...

Consider basing armor on either STRENGTH or AGILITY but not allowing ENDURANCE for this purpose. Characters already use END to derive HEALTH and using it for DEFENSE doubles up on its value. It also doubles up skills that add to END like Hardy. This skill now does double-duty adding to both HEALTH and DEFENSE.

I added in the STR/AGI thing above; it's a little more complex, actually, but basically what you said.

I've considered using armor as an AGI cap, but I'll test this a bit more for now.

The big effect is the use of melee weapons or unarmed combat skills (and equipment quality) as part of melee defense. That makes a skilled knight with a sword hard to hit because he knows how to use his sword.

Also, that opens the door for a really easy and - I think - cool starknight change. You can simply now say that a starknight can use a laser sword against ranged attacks.

 

[Morrus]

One thing this does do - you have got to actively build DEFENSE. You need skills and equipment to get it as good as an attack pool. Acrobatics etc. become a necessity.

Plus ranged attacks are harder to avoid. I kinda like that.

 

[Morrus]

Okey dokey. More playtesting done!

So, at the moment we're getting a lot of people with incredibly low defenses. However, this is not an issue with the calculation above - it's an issue with career/tradition design and character builds, neither of which were designed with the above in mind. Partly, also, racial/species starting scores are a bit low. They were 3 once, went down to 2, but then the dice pool system changed; they can probably safely go back up to 3 again.

Secondly, defensive skills now need to be more commonly found in careers/traditions. Melee defenses work OK because you can use weapon skills, but things like acrobatics and concentration and the like barely feature. I will go through all the careers and ensure that defensive skills are sprinkled much more liberally.

I'm inclined to allow all characters one free defensive skill. They get one free exploit, and a defensive skill will add 1d6 to some defensive dice pools which will make all the difference.

Finally, equipment. Shields add to DEFENSE, as you already know. Melee weapons add to melee defense. I'm inclined to say armor quality can add to defense, too.

 

[LucasC]

We noticed the very low defenses as well.

My group has the following numbers: 0, 7, 10, 11, 16, 17, 30

Most do not have any defensive skill trained and everyone except the jedi (30) is wearing heavy armor.

Adding defensive skill options to careers will help. It will likely water everything down somewhat. If a player has to actively train (1) attacks, (2) defenses, and (3) some other area like social skills, piloting, etc. then you'll get lower dice pools all around.

It feels like your starting to close in on the right calculation.

 

[Morrus]

Yeah, it's starting to "feel" right to me, too. Holy crap, playtesting is so important, but so arduous at time! I'm glad we did it though; it's a much better game for it.

Then again, there are whole swathes of barely tested areas - stronghold building, starship combat, travel rules, the whole of N.O.W.... yikes! Still, the core rule is the vital thing.

I'm also very much enjoying the even newer new descriptor used in the starter set I'm currently putting together. Shorter, snappier, and has more effect in play. I'm very happy with it.