Mongose: Quintessential Fighter

[Wulf Ratbane]

I don't have TQF, but now that it's been put in the context of OA, I don't have a problem with it. (In fact, that's one of my favorite parts of OA.)

The rationale in OA is fine with me: It's a way to reward players who continue to spend feats down a certain path with a "synergy" bonus.

In my mind, anything that keeps fighters from having to branch out into the other Feat "paths" (Cleave, TWF, Whirlwind, etc.) is a good thing.

Of course I still disagree with tying it to Wisdom.... =)

Wulf

 

[Crothian]

It also depends on the feat chart. How many feats and how useful are they on their own. I like the idea in general. It gives characters something to work for and it rewards players for sticking with a path. Making it availible through training and costing money is nice as the GM can keep a firm control on it. I've yet to play in a monty Haul campaign, so I know how hard it is to gather money. THe limited it through wisdom is an interesting choice. I can understand why they chose that attribute and why they did it.

All this talk. I really want to see this book.

 

[bardolph]

Why is magic so FUBAR in the Open Mass Combat System???

The Open Mass Combat system is mostly pretty neato. I would have liked better rules on movement, but hey, that's just me.

Its treatment of MAGIC, however, is MESSED UP.

According to the OMCS, a MAGIC MISSILE will kill TWO TO FIVE PEOPLE PER MISSILE!!!! That's right, two to five people, MULTIPLIED by the number of missiles! Why? The glib explanation is because the people are "packed so close together."

WTF????

I don't know what the writers were smoking when they wrote this, but can I have some??

 

[Crothian]

Re: Why is magic so FUBAR in the Open Mass Combat System???

The Open Mass Combat system is mostly pretty neato. I would have liked better rules on movement, but hey, that's just me.

Its treatment of MAGIC, however, is MESSED UP.

According to the OMCS, a MAGIC MISSILE will kill TWO TO FIVE PEOPLE PER MISSILE!!!! That's right, two to five people, MULTIPLIED by the number of missiles! Why? The glib explanation is because the people are "packed so close together."

WTF????

I don't know what the writers were smoking when they wrote this, but can I have some??

I'll take that as an editting error. They must have meant another spell. Either that, or they have some House Rules for their Magic Missile that I've got to try!

 

[jasamcarl]

No house rules.....

No, it is not infered that Magic Missle would KILL that many individuals, just that the UNIT will take that much damage it unit hitpoints; like d20 proper, the system is very abstract. Unit hitpoints are a function of unit sides, but specific quantities do not correspond with the number of units. This is made clear with the rules on recovering casualties, where low level clerics can 'regenerate' lost unit points. Unit hit points are suppossed to represent the 'general' ability of a unit to stay in combat, and thus corresponds with not just the number of units, but individual morale, cohesion, etc.

Look, just as regular hitpoints are not simply a reflection of con, so the same applies to the OMCS equivilant; a pretty deft, subtle handling of the rules if you ask me.

 

[bardolph]

Unit points are supposed to represent Hit Dice. For example, a company of 20 1st-level warriors will most likely have 20 unit points. jasamcarl is correct in that unit damage is not necessarily people KILLED, but rather an abstraction of a unit's ability to go on fighting.

However, here's the exact quote:

originally from The Quintessential Fighter

Any offensive spell will cause normal damage to a Unit's Hit Points, even if it normally affects only one subject, due to the close density of fighting men.

So, let's say a 3rd-level wizard casts magic missile at the aforementioned company of 20 1st-level warriors. Two missiles are produced, each doing 1d4+1 points of damage. Let's say a 2 and a 3 are rolled. Total damage is 7 unit points of damage. The unit now has 13 unit points left.

Hmm... so two missiles striking single targets for 3 and 4 damage each, somehow manage to wipe out 1/3 of the potential survivability of TWENTY fresh men-at-arms!

Still seems a bit FUBAR to me...

 

[bardolph]

Actually, let me take this example out to its ultimate absurdity

Side A: Twenty men-at-arms (1st-level warriors). 20 unit points.
Side B: One 3rd-level wizard.

Just for fun, let's say that the wizard is far enough away so that the warriors can't reach him for three rounds.

Round 1: Wizard casts magic missile. Does 7 unit points of damage. Side A now has 13 left.

Round 2: Wizard casts magic missile. Does 7 unit points of damage. Side A now has 6 left. Must make a Morale check at DC 10.

Round 3: Wizard casts magic missile. Does 7 unit points of damage. Side A is now defeated.

Okay. So a third-level wizard has "defeated" twenty men-at-arms with three castings of magic missile, which produced a total of SIX missiles, each doing 1d4+1 points of damage.

I wonder how many of these men-at-arms survived?

Originally from The Quintessential Fighter

Ranged Combat: At the end of any combat involving purely ranged weapons, 50% rounding down, of lost Unit Hit Points may be recovered.

So apparently, out of the twenty men originally present, only ten of them survived. Not bad, considering only six missiles were fired, with the likelihood that any individual missile was fatal being about 25%.

Hmm...

 

[Mongoose_Matt]

bardolph: One question - what is Side A (the soldiers) doing during this time? Sitting there being blasted? Or hacking the Wizard apart?

Remember, this is an abstract system designed to keep Player Characters in the forefront of the action and, as another gentleman pointed out, Unit Hit Points do not always reflect actual casualties, but rather a unit's ability to carry on fighting.

If you are looking for something more detailed, there are plenty of top-notch wargames already on the market. The OMCS was designed to handle large numbers of troops on each side with just a few dice rolls, so that the action can return to the player characters (where it belongs) as quickly as possible.

 

[Crothian]

I was finally able to get a hold of this. So far I'm fairly happy with it. I really like the peasent hero prestige class. The fighting styles seem okay. Many of the prerequistes are hard to come by. I look forward to the others in the series.

 

[bardolph]

bardolph: One question - what is Side A (the soldiers) doing during this time? Sitting there being blasted? Or hacking the Wizard apart?

I was assuming that they were charging towards the wizard, but couldn't reach him in time. Probably not a fair assumption. However, I could tweak the example to use three 1st-level wizards instead of one 3rd-level wizard. These fellows have a 110 ft. range on their magic missiles, so they should be able to pull it off.

Remember, this is an abstract system designed to keep Player Characters in the forefront of the action and, as another gentleman pointed out, Unit Hit Points do not always reflect actual casualties, but rather a unit's ability to carry on fighting.

If you are looking for something more detailed, there are plenty of top-notch wargames already on the market. The OMCS was designed to handle large numbers of troops on each side with just a few dice rolls, so that the action can return to the player characters (where it belongs) as quickly as possible.

I can accept that. I noticed that rules for movement were conspicuously absent. Still seems a bit off, and can be subject to extraordinary abuse if the OMCS was used extensively in a campaign, especially since the advantages for spellcasting are increased dramatically in the OMCS, which further highlights the weaknesses of fighters in a book which is supposed to enhance fighters.