
GM Drachenfels |

As you guys will see in my latest combat post, I'm wanting to provide everyone with as much information as they need to totally resolve combats. I encourage everyone to challenge themselves and be fair to the nature of the event.
Are you trapped in the tunnel and being trampled? Toughness. Do you think your character would run in horror when facing the undead? Will power.
I've set up the scenario. I leave the fun to you! Extra XP as always for inventive roleplay.

GM Drachenfels |

I'm going to simplify the saving throw rules. On your character sheets you'll want to add a new stat for your saving throw and it's what you will use anytime you lose a combat.
TOUGHNESS + WOUND TOTAL
Here is Gretta for example:
WS 25 | BS 28 | S 28 | T 28 | AG 38 | INT 36 | WP 35 | FEL 45 | A 1 | W 10 | SB 2 | TB 2 | M 4 | Save: 38%
So if your toughness is 40 and you have 12 wounds, then your permanent Saving Throw is 52%.
PASS: Near death experience, but alive to see another day.
FAIL: Possible death. Depends on the nature of the event and the story. Definitely some kind of critical hit.

pinvendor |

Drachenfels, questions before I post Lutke's actions.
In this tight spaced one person wide tunnel...are you saying that even the people who stated they went inside are also fighting undead or is it just those outside?
I ask because I would love to try and assist Caspar with my "Corrupted" Heal, but if I am technically in combat with another undead, I would be then making myself a free-to-hit target for two undead monsters. I am pretty sure Lutke won't survive that.
That being stated, since you're putting Caspar in a "critically wounded but alive" status and we're not keeping track of rounds, will there be time to assist Caspar if I "try" to remove the undead threat before rushing to his aid?

GM Drachenfels |

That is correct. There are NO undead in the tunnel at this time. I should have clarified. But it's near impossible to run into the tunnel for shelter because Donkey is there kicking up a storm and everything is in chaos and panic.
And go ahead and resolve your combat action as you see fit. Instead of a combat, then perhaps do a series of rolls like I did for Gretta, where you try to reach Caspar.

GM Drachenfels |

ALBRECHT: I don't often struggle to understand rules, but I still boggle at your magic system. While I enjoy the fact that we're now using d100's, how do you get 9 casting dice? That seems excessive. I think we may just want to use a simple system: Casting Dice = 1st number of WP. You roll vs WP as your attack. Count successes. Ignore the doubles rule, and we'll use any fumbles or exceptional roles in your spam to augment your attack.

GM Drachenfels |

NOTE: May not be able to update much today. Our cat looks like she got hit by a car so we're taking her to the vet. Then I'll need to get back home and get ready for work. Still, everyone that hasn't resolved your combats/actions go ahead and do so. Lutke, as I said you can use your action to try to get to Caspar using whatever rolls you see fit.

OneDrunkViking |

The abundance of dice is because of casting higher than the target number. I think its wonky too but it shouldn't happen often, and as spells get more and more difficult its less likely to occur. But ok.
I however REFUSE to ignore the doubles rule. Magic can be crazy rad, but it NEEDS to have the opportunity for miscasting otherwise where's the danger?
If instead you want me to roll casting dice/attacking dice as the first digit of WP, ok, but then the Magic characteristic has no purpose.
I'd say roll once for casting using my magic stat, then the attack based on WP? I guess?

GM Drachenfels |

I'm not offended per say, but I don't see how anything can defend against 9 attack dice. That'll obliterate anything I throw at Albrecht. Most of the stuff I'm putting against you guys has 3 defense dice at most.
My suggestion:
* Roll d100.
* # of attack dice is equal to your first number in Will Power.
* To Succeed you must roll lower than your Will Power.
* Each Magic Characteristic point is +1 Dice.
* Casting Numbers:
1-4: No minus
5-8: -1 Attack Dice
9-14: -2 Attack Dice
15-20: -3 Attack Dice
^^ We can adjust those numbers if you want. Just a quick chart.
* For Doubles: Any double in your spam attack role will count. So if you did 5d100 and one of the rolls came up a double, then that would be a minor manifestation? Or we could have it if two sets of rolls were doubles? What do you think?
I think this fixes a lot of the issues and keeps it simple.

pinvendor |

Wait what? The magic numbers that represent even more powerful spells will practically never succeed if you remove Attack Dice. That's not a fair representation of the magic. The enemies defense shouldn't be increased because the spell is more awesome. That's very befuddling.

GM Drachenfels |

Really? The system I'm proposing is exactly the same as what we're doing now, heh. Roll under a stat. First # of your stat is the dice you roll. Count amount of successes. And like in the current rules, you get + dice for things like 2 handed weapons, so then would Albrecht get a + for his Magic Characteristic score. The - attack dice as spells get higher in level is to signify the difficulty of casting such advanced spells. But we can augment those numbers and make them less extreme.

OneDrunkViking |

I disagree that it keeps it simple. I think keeping a actual casting roll will eliminate any further chances of confusion later.
If the harder the spell is to cast, why would I want to get decreased attack dice? Then the odds of ever getting the spell to work will be ridiculous. Especially since its just success that is dealing wounds not spells any more. Ya dig?
Why would I ever want to cast Fire Ball or Fiery Blast aside from they might hit more guys than normal, with the risk that, say for Fiery Blast (a 22 casting cost) will decrease---
Now, wait a second. This means that I COULD cast these crazy spells RIGHT NOW, just with a negative?
Meaning. Albrecht, as of THIS MOMENT, can cast Fiery Blast with a -3 dice meaning,
3d100 ⇒ (46, 40, 12) = 98 vs 50 = 3 Successes.
Instead, I can always cast flames of Uzuul and guarantee more successes.
I think that'd be fine, I guess, but with the LITE rules not having anything to do with wounds etc, makes it no point in trying to cast higher level spells? I just want to roll as many dice as I can essentially.

GM Drachenfels |

Just try to keep yourself on par with the party. I want your magic to be epic (and before with how we were doing things it wasn't), but we must strike a balance. I don't really care what the rules are as long as they fit in the context of the game and feel fair to everyone: GM, players and the poor NPCs you're going to roast :)

OneDrunkViking |

That is what would happen, and that is ridiculous. I agree. But for the WH magic system miscasting HAS to happen. So I need to use Mag Stat, for rolls. That's that. It's easy, not hard to read, the only person who has to deal with it is me. I'm going to do that for casting.
Then using my WP to determine success rolls is fine. Especially since we want to get all victories etc done in one post, I would say that STRONGER spells would give MORE attack dice.
So for fiery blast, still need to attempt to roll over a 22 on however many dice, but because its 1d10 blasts instead of just one like fires of uzhul, maybe add 1d10 Attack rolls? So a higher spell is then harder to cast, and has the chance to be more powerful.

OneDrunkViking |

So, for instance. I'm fighting an undead. SCARY I know. Let's say my Mag Stat is 3. I wanna attempt to cast Fire Ball. Needs a casting number of 12, and I can hurl 3 fireballs. So I roll to cast...
3d10 ⇒ (2, 9, 5) = 16 Ok it succeeds!
Since I get to do 3 balls of flame, it gives me 3 additional attack rolls. WP being 50 that's 8.
8d100 ⇒ (39, 63, 93, 44, 61, 58, 13, 9) = 380 vs 50.
Now, that seems like alot, but I won't be at 3 Mag forever, if at all. None of my previously Albrecht's ever got there I believe.
As for saving. I think -5% per success makes more sense. Kind of reflects just how brutal an attack was?

GM Drachenfels |

ODV: How about this? Instead of the extra fireballs adding extra attack dice, how about they just hit extra targets? Roll 1d3 to determine and we apply the success damage to any targets in that radius?
I just want to get away from huge strings or attack dice. I think if instead we flip it to targets effected that'll fix things.
you score 3 successes and there are a group of undead. Roll 1d3 and you get a 2. You'll hit 2 skeletons and they both need to roll defense against 3 successes.
Sound fair?

OneDrunkViking |

Well, that spell has the option to hit one or more targets. So if I elect to hit more than one target I'd imagine I'd just make a normal success roll against multiple targets. Like:
I choose to hit 3 instead of just one, so, against each guy I get 5 dice from WP and 1 From the spell, 6 success rolls vs each one of them?
That's fine, and I hesitate to believe Albrecht has a chance to truly get to massive AoE spells haha. But like I said. I have...

OneDrunkViking |

So what yer offering is I roll one string of successes
5d100 ⇒ (7, 89, 96, 37, 19) = 248 3 successes
And then three undead roll their defense to match it?
3d100 ⇒ (6, 40, 93) = 139 Let's say they have 30 def. so 1 success
3d100 ⇒ (87, 66, 53) = 206 0
3d100 ⇒ (13, 52, 34) = 99 1 Success
So two are beat by 2, and 1 is beat by 3.

GM Drachenfels |

Haha @ the spoiler! But I trust you. I know you're not a power gamer. Just keep in mind enemies have defense pools between 3-5 (at this time). If you're throwing 200 attack dice pretty much expect to be destroying everything short of a Chaos Dragon from the northern wastes. And what fun is that? ;)