Star Wars SECR's New Damage System.

[Ranger REG]

'Course, the second Saga preview will be up today (Monday), and so all of the above might be clearer very soon...

Unfortunately, the second "preview" is about skills.

 

[Donovan Morningfire]

With the third probably refering to feats, so hopefully the fourth or fifth preview will be about combat. I'm definitely intrigued by the damage track/threshold as well as the static saving throw scores, but I'd like to see more about how the whole things works as a whole before I make a final judgment call on the system, especially as I'm a big proponent for VP/WP system, which I found helped discourage 'kick in the door' style of play, even though I think I only had two NPC mooks (both stormtroopers oddly enough) score successful critical hits in roughly 6+ years of running SWd20.

Also, it seems we're getting these previews once a week, so we should have bits and pieces about each chapter (as outlined in JC100) by the time of release.

 

[Ranger REG]

With the third probably refering to feats, so hopefully the fourth or fifth preview will be about combat. I'm definitely intrigued by the damage track/threshold as well as the static saving throw scores, but I'd like to see more about how the whole things works as a whole before I make a final judgment call on the system, especially as I'm a big proponent for VP/WP system, which I found helped discourage 'kick in the door' style of play, even though I think I only had two NPC mooks (both stormtroopers oddly enough) score successful critical hits in roughly 6+ years of running SWd20.

Well, you simply can't make such a buying decision when your research consists of bits and pieces of previews.

Personally, if this HP+Conditional Track system is more successful, I might just be importing into my d20 Modern games. I'm more of a fan of wound-level model than drop-on-the-spot model.

 

[Donovan Morningfire]

Well, you simply can't make such a buying decision when your research consists of bits and pieces of previews.

Personally, if this HP+Conditional Track system is more successful, I might just be importing into my d20 Modern games. I'm more of a fan of wound-level model than drop-on-the-spot model.

I'm thinking the damage track is an evolution of the Massive Damage save mechanic used in d20 Modern oddly enough. Just instead of making a save or dropping dead if the damage hits or exceeds the threshold, you instead suffer a penalty to your d20-based checks. In theory, it would circumvent the "gas tank" mindset of D&D hit points (go until you drop).

I probably will end up buying the book when it comes out, as overall I'm liking what I'm seeing from the previews. But you're right, more information doesn't hurt

 

[JohnSnow]

I'm thinking the damage track is an evolution of the Massive Damage save mechanic used in d20 Modern oddly enough. Just instead of making a save or dropping dead if the damage hits or exceeds the threshold, you instead suffer a penalty to your d20-based checks. In theory, it would circumvent the "gas tank" mindset of D&D hit points (go until you drop).

You know, that occurred to me too. An evolution of the massive damage threshhold mechanic, combined with some kind of "wound status" mechanic.

I've been trying to remember games that had wound status mechanics. One of them was WEG's d6 Star Wars. I can't for the life of me remember entirely how that worked, but I do remember this much:

Weapons had a damage code (xd6) which you compared with some opposed roll or static DC (strength IIRC) to determine whether you took a wound. If you didn't, you were fine. If you did, you received some wound. What I remember was stunned, wounded, severely wounded, and mortally wounded.

I think Alternity (aka d20 beta test) had a similar system. Oh yeah, the lead developer on both those systems was WotC's current head of RPG Development - Bill Slaviscek. So I'm not surprised if he let Gary and Rodney implement something similar.

I like that you can "nickel and dime" someone to death (as in the hit point system). But I also like the notion that you may not always have to.

It's keeping with the genre conventions of action adventure that the mooks have fewer wound status levels than the heroes. Most non-hero characters (bad guys and allies) are usually "fine" or "out." The exceptions are the big bad villains - in which case they'll be statted up like heroes.

 

[Plane Sailing]

I've been trying to remember games that had wound status mechanics.

True20/M&M/Blue Rose are probably the biggest current ones

 

[iwatt]

True20/M&M/Blue Rose are probably the biggest current ones

OWoD had wounded status (i.e the spiral of death)

 

[Ranger REG]

You know, that occurred to me too. An evolution of the massive damage threshhold mechanic, combined with some kind of "wound status" mechanic.

I've been trying to remember games that had wound status mechanics.

FASA's MechWarrior: BattleTech RPG.
White Wolf's Vampire/Werewolf/Mage RPGs.
Last Unicorn Games's Star Trek RPGs.

 

[Baby Samurai]

This is my take on Defences:

The key is that all of those numbers for Ref, Fort and Will are static (no "+" symbol in front) like AC. And notice that Ref has flat-footed in parenthesis. So I think when you want to attack someone with a melee or ranged attack you roll your attack as normal and must equal or succeed your opponents Ref score to smack them.


By looking at those scores and his ability scores we can glean that each score starts at 10 plus whatever ability modifier you have (in his case +0 Dex for Ref, +2 Con for Fort, and +1 Wis for Will). And I guess each class receives a bonus to each of theses scores that goes up in level. As he is a Scout he starts with Ref +3, Fort +2 and Will +1.

So the dude’s defences break down as:

Ref 13 (+3 from 1st level Scout, +0 from Dex)

Fort 14 (+2 from 1st level Scout, +2 from Con)

Will 12 (+1 from 1st level Scout, +1 from Wis)

So maybe now, instead of saving throws for spells and what not, if you want to cast hideous laughter etc on someone, you would roll d20 + caster level (+ key ability score modifier?) and must equal or exceed their Will score to be successful?

And the same with trying to polymorph someone etc (roll vs. their Fort score).

The system would obviously blend AC and Saves and give the players more rolling. Instead of you just manifesting mind thrust and the DM rolling a Will save for the critter, you would roll a manifester level check against the creatures Will score, and if successful – GUH! - 10d6 or whatever – neat.

 

[Donovan Morningfire]

So the dude’s defences break down as:

Ref 13 (+3 from 1st level Scout, +0 from Dex)

Fort 14 (+2 from 1st level Scout, +2 from Con)

Will 12 (+1 from 1st level Scout, +1 from Wis)

While I agree with the sentiment of what you posted, I think the assumption you made using base 10 is inaccurate. I was re-reading my copy of Unearthed Arcana a couple nights ago, and under the option of "players roll everything," it made mention of how to calculate the static saving throw DCs by taking the bonus and adding 11.

So Chalzakka's defense breakdown would instead be:

Fort 14 (11 base, +1 from 1st level Scout, +2 from Con)

Ref 13 (11 base, +2 from 1st level Scout, +0 from Dex)

Will 12 (11 base, +0 from 1st level Scout, +1 from Wis)

So it would seem that instead of average save bonuses from RCR and OCR, Scouts now get an average Fort save, a good Ref save, and a poor Will save.