Page 55 of 103

Re: BW 2010 feedback

Posted: Tue Feb 12, 2013 12:22 pm
by IVhorseman
2" always seemed a little short and silly, but it also works. 4" would stop armored minifigs from being able to make charge attacks, which is probably for the best. Horses would still be able to charge to their full extent, too.

At first I was going to bitch about this, but so far it's just sounding awesome. The only thing that I'm hesitating about is whether or not doubling that length makes the gameplay all that much different, but my gut feeling says that it'll be for the better. It'll make extended charges more useful on big-ass tanks, too.

Re: BW 2010 feedback

Posted: Tue Feb 12, 2013 1:22 pm
by Falk
Just making sure I understand this right: if I charge, I can combine with a sprint, and the distance gets counted from all the turns I spent in the charge, and then for each 4" I traveled in the whole charge, I get +1d6 damage that adds to the weapon's damage. Or did I completely misunderstand this? Also, can a vehicle charge even if it doesn't have any spikes?

Re: BW 2010 feedback

Posted: Tue Feb 12, 2013 1:33 pm
by Rev. Sylvanus
stubby wrote:As I'm doing another simplification round on the momentum rules, I'm thinking of changing the requirement to 4" per +1d6 Mom rather than 2". Comments welcome, even though I know nobody uses Momentum anyway.
I think I would welcome this change.

I use momentum all the time and love its application. 4" to fully "charge" up a lance always seemed incredibly good and never seemed to mean horsemen had to maneuver very much to stay devastating. I think I would also like it because it would allow infantry, etc, to maneuver a little more in relation to foot spearmen. That is, a minifig with a spear charging two inches is a beast, almost to the point where the folks I play with see very little reason not to use spears over any other kind of heavy weapon, or even hand weapons for that matter. Knowing that (at least for medieval games) you can crowd in and potentially nullify the spear's power with well-planned movements adds tactical variety and also makes non-pointy hand-and-heavy weapons less obsolete.

My two cents, anyway.

Re: BW 2010 feedback

Posted: Tue Feb 12, 2013 2:32 pm
by Quantumsurfer
I agree with everything Rev just said.

Re: BW 2010 feedback

Posted: Tue Feb 12, 2013 7:53 pm
by Zupponn
Image

Re: BW 2010 feedback

Posted: Wed Feb 13, 2013 7:27 am
by *CRAZYHORSE*
Falk wrote:Just making sure I understand this right: if I charge, I can combine with a sprint, and the distance gets counted from all the turns I spent in the charge, and then for each 4" I traveled in the whole charge, I get +1d6 damage that adds to the weapon's damage. Or did I completely misunderstand this? Also, can a vehicle charge even if it doesn't have any spikes?
Yes, but! the amount of bonus 1d6's is limited to the creature's size if I remember correctely. So a minifig would never get more than 1d6 charge damage bonus dice. And a horse never more then 2d6.

Re: BW 2010 feedback

Posted: Wed Feb 13, 2013 11:18 am
by stubby
IVhorseman wrote:2" always seemed a little short and silly, but it also works. 4" would stop armored minifigs from being able to make charge attacks, which is probably for the best. Horses would still be able to charge to their full extent, too.
I'm not sure why I orginally thought 2" was a good idea, to be honest. Maybe I was thinking in terms of exaggerating Damage output rather than exaggerating grand maneuvers? The idea of using SL:1 Armored minifigs as automatic-hitting 1d6 battering rams made me take a second look. (They can still be used as 1d6 battering rams, but 4" would mean they'd have to spend a couple turns building up speed first.)
Falk wrote:Just making sure I understand this right: if I charge, I can combine with a sprint, and the distance gets counted from all the turns I spent in the charge, and then for each 4" I traveled in the whole charge, I get +1d6 damage that adds to the weapon's damage. Or did I completely misunderstand this? Also, can a vehicle charge even if it doesn't have any spikes?
Your Size puts a limit on how many Momentum Dice you can have stored up at any one time. So yeah, minifigs top out at 1d6, Horses at 2d6.

The number of Mom dice you can spend at once depends on what you're spending them on - up to the Weapon Size for extra Charging Weapon Damage, for instance, or up to your Structure Level for Collision Damage.

So for the vehicle with spikes example: let's say you've got a 4" IceCreamTruck with 2d10 Armor and 1" Spikes on the front. The pilot hits the afterburners for a vehicle Sprint, so it's zooming along at a ridiculous 20". 20" would be enough for a potential 5d6 Momentum, but it's Size 4" so it maxes out at 4d6. It crashes into a billboard. The spikes are 1", so it can spend one of the Mom dice for +1d6 Damage with the spikes. If the billboard survives, then the truck has 2d10 Armor, so it can spend two Mom dice for +2d6 Collision Damage. Now it has one Mom left. Assuming it's successfully crashed through the billboard, then it can keep going and start building up Mom again.

(Also I think it'll be funny to just rename them to "Moms" rather than "Mom Dice.")

I'm getting rid of having to keep track of the Mom Pile for KnockBack; KnockBack is just determined by the Collision Damage roll now. This means that your shoving ability will be based on how heavy you are, rather than your size: a tiny tank is better at pushing things around than a giant zeppelin. Physical Opposition is still purely Size-based though, so the giant zeppelin is better at resisting being pushed around than the tiny tank.

Re: BW 2010 feedback

Posted: Wed Feb 13, 2013 1:14 pm
by aoffan23
That last bit about Pop is completely wrong. Inertia affects both pushing power and stopping power, and an object's inertia is determined by its mass. It's easier to push a beach ball (assuming it's filled with air) than a bowling ball.

Re: BW 2010 feedback

Posted: Wed Feb 13, 2013 1:30 pm
by stubby
But a beanbag is harder to push than a bowling ball. I'm thinking about rigidity and leverage also. (As well as what makes for the simplest dice rolls.)

Re: BW 2010 feedback

Posted: Wed Feb 13, 2013 1:53 pm
by aoffan23
Well in the conext of BrikWars it makes sense, since machines and creatures tend to get heavier as they get bigger. That makes me think there might be the possibility of Super Light and Super Heavy rules to account for objects that are large but light or small but heavy. On the other hand, that might be best left for the Bonus Material forum, since I can't really see them being used often.

Re: BW 2010 feedback

Posted: Wed Feb 13, 2013 2:08 pm
by stubby
We already have those rules. They're called Structure Level.

Re: BW 2010 feedback

Posted: Wed Feb 13, 2013 2:11 pm
by aoffan23
It's funny, I thought about that right after I posted, and just logged back in to correct myself. Boy, do I ever look silly.

Re: BW 2010 feedback

Posted: Wed Feb 13, 2013 2:13 pm
by Zupponn
stubby wrote:Mom dice

(Also I think it'll be funny to just rename them to "Moms" rather than "Mom Dice.")
Shhh, don't tell Warhead.

Re: BW 2010 feedback

Posted: Wed Feb 13, 2013 2:29 pm
by stubby
aoffan23 wrote:It's funny, I thought about that right after I posted, and just logged back in to correct myself. Boy, do I ever look silly.
Image

Re: BW 2010 feedback

Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2013 11:30 pm
by samuelzz10
I saw you post this in a 2010 topic:
stubby wrote: The 2010 rules are almost done, I'm not going to go back and re-edit them all over again. Just curiosity more than anything else.