Quote from: Razor 007;1082352A weapon could possess a To Hit Bonus, and/or an Initiative Bonus.  Those would still be powerful options.  And as always, I'd still like to have a Damage Bonus on a weapon in any RPG.

Sure. And personally I am not entirely opposed to the idea of weapon damage not differing too much between various weapons. A knife in my game surely isn't much less lethal than a broadsword (an arming sword). Similarly to Hârnmaster, it's the placement that counts (critical success and all that). But I don't know if I wouldn't want in a game like D&D rather more niche building for various weapons, a bit like what ASOIAF does (though it's terribly unrealistic, which would have to be fixed).

Ultimately, if that's an idea that is intriguing you, go for it and try how it feels. One other caveat is that differences between levels become to stark now that they will threaten to overshadow gameplay entirely. How many levels do you envision to exist in that configuration? Regardless, it will become a game of characters getting one-shotted repeatedly, as long as they dont fight lower level characters. Also, I presume there won't be multiple attacks per round?

Quote from: Razor 007;1082316Remember that even with 3 or 4 dice rolled, you may still only do 6 or 8 damage; which isn't world shaking.  But when the roll goes high; you could ace a foe with a single hit.

In that case you could also consider rolling extra dice, pick highest (or lowest which may be preferred in some situations). Maybe an extra die (based on weapon type) at certain levels. I don't think you would want to do this for every level, but maybe every other, or doubling of levels etc, otherwise fistfulls of dice by 5th+.

If you gave +1 damage at odd levels (adds to max damage), and +1 die the other (pick one), a 4th level would get to roll three damage dice (pick best) and add 2 to overall damage beyond weapon damage.

Improving the to-hit roll as they go up levels in ability but keeping the damage the same, and keeping the to-hit roll the same but having the damage go up - fiddle with the numbers enough, and statistically it's the same result, the same average damage per combat round. But the former leads to miss, hit, miss, hit and eventually falling over, the latter leads to miss, miss, miss, WHOMP DEAD. These give different feels.

It also matters whether hit points (or "wound levels" or whatever) go up by level, too. Remember that's not a given in game systems. Doing 5d6 damage against people when everyone has 1d6 hit points is one thing; doing 5d6 when they have 1d6 to 10d6 hit points is another.

Consider the simplest combat system using dice: we each roll 1d6, whoever rolls highest wins, the other guy dies. Simple but this tends to be unsatisfying. Now we add two rolls: 1d6 for each of our hit points, and 1d6 for damage if we hit. Statistically this is the same, leading to a 50-50 chance of one of us winning and the other dying. But it doesn't feel the same, and introduces the chance for one of us to drop to lower hit points and say, "I surrender / run away." That is, going from a single d6 roll vs roll to resolve things, to adding hit points, changed nothing statistically, but added the chance for roleplaying, and indeed encourages it. It also encourages some sense of history in the game. "Hasn't this guy survived 5 duels? He must be tough / have high HP."

Too often game designers focus on fiddly dice mechanics and charts, and think only of the statistics. But the results can be statistically the same and still give very different results at the game table, in that they encourage or discourage certain approaches to play.

In HERO system, you had Combat Skill Levels for hitting. if you wanted, you could use some of them to add to damage, instead. I had a pit fighter character with a lot of Combat Levels and he did that often. That's in the same vein, and more flexible, as a really competent combatant can go for accuracy or damage. At least in the edition I played.

Damage dealt, increasing with experience; through training, knowledge of anatomy, and proficiency with your character's chosen weapons, etc.  But, instead of complex rules and mechanics; just add your character's hit dice to their damage rolls.

Quote from: The Black Ferret;1082420In HERO system, you had Combat Skill Levels for hitting. if you wanted, you could use some of them to add to damage, instead. I had a pit fighter character with a lot of Combat Levels and he did that often. That's in the same vein, and more flexible, as a really competent combatant can go for accuracy or damage. At least in the edition I played.

Combat skill levels added a lot of variety, offense, defense, damage, just one of the many things I like about HERO (and yes I think this was in most versions). Not only the different ways the skill levels could be applied but also varying between fairly cheap (2-3 pt) very weapon specific skill levels to mid range (5pt) multi-weapon group skills to the even more expensive (8pt) all combat levels that allowed the skill to be used for defense against ranged attacks without a shield.

Quote from: Alexander Kalinowski;1082391Sure. And personally I am not entirely opposed to the idea of weapon damage not differing too much between various weapons. A knife in my game surely isn't much less lethal than a broadsword (an arming sword). Similarly to Hârnmaster, it's the placement that counts (critical success and all that). But I don't know if I wouldn't want in a game like D&D rather more niche building for various weapons, a bit like what ASOIAF does (though it's terribly unrealistic, which would have to be fixed).

Ultimately, if that's an idea that is intriguing you, go for it and try how it feels. One other caveat is that differences between levels become to stark now that they will threaten to overshadow gameplay entirely. How many levels do you envision to exist in that configuration? Regardless, it will become a game of characters getting one-shotted repeatedly, as long as they dont fight lower level characters. Also, I presume there won't be multiple attacks per round?

I'm not opposed to multiple attacks per round for Fighters.  Perhaps the progression in D&D 5E is about right, for multiple attacks?

Regarding my suggestion of adding a Fighter's hit dice, to their weapon damage:

Consider a neophyte, as opposed to a true master.  They each use the same weapon, but the danger of catastrophic damage to their enemies, is vastly different.  Adding hit dice would represent this difference pretty well, would it not?

IIRC, some version of Star Wars d20 increased the lightsaber damage you dealt by +Xd8s, depending on how many Jedi guardian levels you had.

Quote from: Toadmaster;1082438Combat skill levels added a lot of variety, offense, defense, damage, just one of the many things I like about HERO (and yes I think this was in most versions). Not only the different ways the skill levels could be applied but also varying between fairly cheap (2-3 pt) very weapon specific skill levels to mid range (5pt) multi-weapon group skills to the even more expensive (8pt) all combat levels that allowed the skill to be used for defense against ranged attacks without a shield.

Yeah, I liked that about HERO, as well. My pit fighter, for example, and if I recall correctly,, had 2 Overall Combat Levels, 3 with Melee, and 1 with Sword, and I think 2 Defensive. Now that I think more, I believe that they had to be Overall Combat Levels to add to damage. You couldn't get, say, a couple cheap level in Sword and use them for damage.

13th Age does something like this, but for all characters. There are only 10 levels from memory, you do 1d8 at 1st, 2d8 at second, and so on. Something like that.

Quote from: Razor 007;1082307Level 0 Novice; weapon damage only.

Level 1 Beginner; weapon damage plus 1 hit die.

Level 2 Promising Beginner; weapon damage plus 2 hit dice.

Level 3 Intermediate; weapon damage plus 3 hit dice.  1d8 + 3d10, etc.

Crazy simple Damage rolls, and a Level 1 Fighter has no business challenging a Level 3 Fighter. A high level fighter would do a lot of damage.

I've never seen this, but it's interesting. The thing is, as you say, it would be something where there'd be little point in fighting a higher level opponent.

Quote from: RPGPundit;1083939I've never seen this, but it's interesting. The thing is, as you say, it would be something where there'd be little point in fighting a higher level opponent.

Well, by yourself you'd have a chance of defeating a higher level opponent; just not a good chance.

It would encourage teamwork, to help overcome challenges.

One thing you could do with damage like that is allow for it to be split it up between multiple attacks.

So a level 10 fighter surrounded by level 1 characters might make 5 attacks at two dice each.

Quote from: TJS;1083956One thing you could do with damage like that is allow for it to be split it up between multiple attacks.

So a level 10 fighter surrounded by level 1 characters might make 5 attacks at two dice each.

That is a good idea.  I'd either want to embrace the OD&D model for Fighter attacks vs all enemies with 1 hit die or less; or else the 5E model for 2 at level 5, and 3 at level 11, etc.

Quote from: Razor 007;1083972That is a good idea.  I'd either want to embrace the OD&D model for Fighter attacks vs all enemies with 1 hit die or less; or else the 5E model for 2 at level 5, and 3 at level 11, etc.

I am surprised that different Class Hit Dice hasn't been mentioned?  I would adopt the Pathfinder / 5E Hit Die for each class.

Fighter, level 3, weapon hit die plus 3d10 damage.

Wizard, level 3, weapon hit die (if used) plus 3d6 damage.

I imagine someone might suggest that isn't right; but at level 5, the Wizard can Fly or Spider Climb or Levitate.  The Wizard becomes supper versatile.  He can Levitate his opponent off of a cliff, and end the spell effect.  That's a one shot kill.  Or, Levitate someone who can't swim out over a river.  He'd get any information he wanted.