Up until now, I have mainly relied on what I refer to as "a boiled-down version of the Storyteller System", in this case meaning that I reduced the diepools to one die, from 4-sided to 12-sided, depending on the amount of dice that were in the pool that's "boiled down".
Also with the addition that I added in the skill roll to it, before boiling it down.
This led to a character getting better at hitting if the weapon had high damage and vice versa, as i overall counted 1 as fumbles and 2 as misses.

The idea is to only have one roll, at least for basic attacks, and if the result is high enough, 1 damage is dealt, and if double that, 2 damage is dealt, and so on.
Armor and Stamina/Toughness is already included in the target number for "high enough".

In addition to it feeling a bit off that a weapon's damage adds to a character's skill to hit, i also recently ran across a few interesting comments here and there, essentially pointing towards that anyone may use a weapon, but if you aren't competent enough at it, it is more a matter of luck if you hit your intended target, and this holds even more true when it comes to firearms.
This do not make the weapons less lethal though, as someone with a sword or pistol still can cause massive damage or death when up close, even if they are incompetent at wielding said weapon.

I'm considering several solutions, like letting the skill equal a specific die, as i use 5 skill levels (actually 7, but the 2 top ones is far from easily obtainable), D4 to D12.
However, that disregards the massive damage even a novice can do with a lucky hit.
The latest idea is to let the weapon's damage decide the roll, then adding the skill level to that roll, but with the note that it cannot exceed the maximum rolled.
This messes instead with how to define what is fumbles and misses for the different skill levels.

I wonder if anyone has any suggestions or comments that may help or offer interesting viewpoints.

I'd rather have constant damage from weapons, than have weapons be more likely to hit based on how much damage they do.

How about if you just have a to-hit roll based on skill and the weapon's to-hit bonus, and most hits do a fixed amount (different for each weapon) of damage to what they hit. Very good rolls (more likely with higher skill) also can lead to a hit doing more damage than normal for the weapon, or other special effects, but that's not the usual result.

Quote from: Catelf;913450Up until now, I have mainly relied on what I refer to as "a boiled-down version of the Storyteller System", in this case meaning that I reduced the diepools to one die, from 4-sided to 12-sided, depending on the amount of dice that were in the pool that's "boiled down".
Also with the addition that I added in the skill roll to it, before boiling it down.
This led to a character getting better at hitting if the weapon had high damage and vice versa, as i overall counted 1 as fumbles and 2 as misses.

The idea is to only have one roll, at least for basic attacks, and if the result is high enough, 1 damage is dealt, and if double that, 2 damage is dealt, and so on.
Armor and Stamina/Toughness is already included in the target number for "high enough".

In addition to it feeling a bit off that a weapon's damage adds to a character's skill to hit, i also recently ran across a few interesting comments here and there, essentially pointing towards that anyone may use a weapon, but if you aren't competent enough at it, it is more a matter of luck if you hit your intended target, and this holds even more true when it comes to firearms.
This do not make the weapons less lethal though, as someone with a sword or pistol still can cause massive damage or death when up close, even if they are incompetent at wielding said weapon.

I'm considering several solutions, like letting the skill equal a specific die, as i use 5 skill levels (actually 7, but the 2 top ones is far from easily obtainable), D4 to D12.
However, that disregards the massive damage even a novice can do with a lucky hit.
The latest idea is to let the weapon's damage decide the roll, then adding the skill level to that roll, but with the note that it cannot exceed the maximum rolled.
This messes instead with how to define what is fumbles and misses for the different skill levels.

I wonder if anyone has any suggestions or comments that may help or offer interesting viewpoints.

I would suggest that a weapon has a standard damage.  Say a longsword would cause 10 damage (not knowing your system).  Even an unskilled person would cause 10 damage.  The bonus would come from skills in that weapon or fighting styles.  What you get is a character that can have a damage value ready on paper during combat, so there is no extra die rolling for damage.  I use something similar in my 1d8 system.

I would keep the "to hit" skill as a character's skill without a weapon modifier.  So you have a skill in the above mentioned longsword.  The character has a "to hit" skill (as I don't know your skill terms) of 3.  If you use a d12 for this, and they must roll under, they are not very skilled.  A d4 would make them highly skilled, but a d6 makes them average.  

I guess it depends on if you are using a single die system (d10, d20, d12) or a multi dice system (full set like OS d&d)