Re: [OT} Hero system - Killing Attacks was Re: D&D hit points

On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 00:51:21 -0000, No 33 Secretary
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> carved upon a tablet of ether:

> I'm confused. Without a bonus to the stun multiplier, a killing attack does 
> less stun, on average, for the same damage class, as a normal attack. 
> Average stun multiple is (1+1+2+3+4+5)/6, or 2.667. A 1d6 killing attack 
> will, on average, do 3.5 body, and 8 stun. 3d6 normal will do, on average. 
> 10.5 stun.
> 
> The potential to do a *lot* more stun is there, certainly. But on average, 
> you do significantly less.
> 
> Or did I miss some special condition in the subject change?

No, you didn't. The issue is that the chances of a 1d6K attack doing a
_lot_ of Stun is rather greater than that of the 3d6 Normal attack.
There's a 1 in 6 chance of the killing attack doing 18+ Stun, vs a 1
in 216 chance of doing 18 Stun (and never more than that). As Killing
Attacks also penetrate better (even their Stun is only stopped by PD
if it's got some rPD with it) they actually have a better chance of
getting stun or KO results than normal attacks do. Therefore unless
your foe has very little Body compared to their Stun and Con, _and_
it's imperative they not go into negative Body, there's no point
taking a normal attack vs a Killing one.

For example, the average guy has Body 10, Con 10, Stun 20, PD2.
Therefore a 1d6K attack has a 5 in 36 chance of getting a KO, and a 12
in 36 chance of stunning the guy. A 3d6 normal attack has a 56 in 216,
or about a 9 in 36 chance of getting that stun, and no chance of
getting a KO. Basically it's crap, especially as it'll take about 10
hits to put him down from Body loss, as opposed to three, as well.

-- 
Rupert Boleyn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Just because the truth will set you free doesn't mean the truth itself
should be free."