[Announcement] Canning the Cannon Canon

[Naelwyn]

If you want to do rolls and have them feel fair instead of random, you need a stats system.

If you have a stats system you need a leveling and/or point buy system that functions objectively without DM/Staff oversight and functions in such a manner that nobody can complain.

As I mentioned before a few times including back when I was staff, this isn't impossible to implement, but logistics becomes nigh-insurpassable if you want to try and slot existing characters in, as how do you determine the skill/experiance/level of existing characters? It's a nightmare no matter how you slice it.

If you want a stat system, properly implemented, and want to use d20 or otherwise to actually feel like an RPG it's ultimately my opinion that it necessitates a full reset and everybody rolls new characters. And if one does that I'd say probably a good oppertunity to redraft a lot of things.

I don't necessarily see that as something worth doing, but I think that's what it'd take if that was what was collectively wanted. It's a full out paradigm shift.

HW is prooobably better off staying freeform.

 

[Jazzper]

If you want to do rolls and have them feel fair instead of random, you need a stats system.

If you have a stats system you need a leveling and/or point buy system that functions objectively without DM/Staff oversight and functions in such a manner that nobody can complain.

As I mentioned before a few times including back when I was staff, this isn't impossible to implement, but logistics becomes nigh-insurpassable if you want to try and slot existing characters in, as how do you determine the skill/experiance/level of existing characters? It's a nightmare no matter how you slice it.

If you want a stat system, properly implemented, and want to use d20 or otherwise to actually feel like an RPG it's ultimately my opinion that it necessitates a full reset and everybody rolls new characters. And if one does that I'd say probably a good oppertunity to redraft a lot of things.

I don't necessarily see that as something worth doing, but I think that's what it'd take if that was what was collectively wanted. It's a full out paradigm shift.

HW is prooobably better off staying freeform.

Very true for skills and combat rp, but we wouldn't need all of that for cannons and breaking siege equipment because those things have nothing to do with the skill of the user, they're random. Therefore the randomness of rolls are not too out of place. Maybe adjust it to the skill of the maker if needed?
MrPolo had a really good distribution for it

 

[Naelwyn]

Very true for skills and combat rp, but we wouldn't need all of that for cannons and breaking siege equipment because those things have nothing to do with the skill of the user, they're random. Therefore the randomness of rolls are not too out of place. Maybe adjust it to the skill of the maker if needed?
MrPolo had a really good distribution for it

Correcto. I agree completely.

When you want a roll to mean more of a random chance and you're using a d20 system you can simply map it to a 'd100' which converts things into a percentage chance.

It lets you map things to a finer degree and add things at say a 1% chance that don't feel as worthy to do at a 5% chance.


An example, not one I fully purport, can be something like
/roll 1d100

1: Catastrophic Failure - Unexpected fragility of barrel and unexpectedly potent gunpowder. Barrel cracks and splinters and may produce metal shrapnel in a nearby area.
4-5: Catastrophic Failure - Barrel failure - bore is ruined beyond usability and must be remade.
6-10: Early Triggering - Errant spark triggers gunpower early/mid loading process.
11-30: Dud Firing - Gunpowder fizzles or is mis-timed. Ball does not leave barrel. Barrel must be cleared and cleaned, then refilled with gunpowder, wadding and shot anew to fire again.

Etc etc.

 

[MRPolo13]

Bit about d100

Yeah I'd much prefer a broader range too, but it seems that DMs much prefer sticking to the classical d20, which I suppose is fine in a sense. It might not allow for the range of events that might happen realistically, but it's okay nevertheless.

 

[Rygan]

don't forget that after you manage to not kill yourself in this system you still have to pass the DC for hitting your target

 

[Ced]

Hrmn. Alright, read most of this with a 'fair enough' expression, let's see what we can do. It's probably my fault naming the thread like I did, but the rules include all other gunpowder based weaponry, not just cannons. Hence the use of the word launcher, Polo. I didn't mean to put you in such a tizz, but I was referring to anything used to launch projectiles, such as the hand of a person. The rules are not exclusive to cannons, but were designed to encompass them.

I'm up for editing these rules to suit the community, so what would be helpful is if people continue saying what they like/don't like in this thread. I'm getting a general vibe of "having a roll system is acceptable but the brackets are bonkers" from the folk that have commented so far. If you're a part of the silent majority and don't fly with this, please speak up so that we don't just end up with a new set of rules and a new set of people unhappy with them.

On rolling: while I'm against rolling for combat RP in general, for black powder weapons (including cannons) the roll is there to 1. represent the danger of black powder and to (perhaps clumsily) factor in the operator's chance of fumbling the process of operating the engine and 2. to nerf their effectiveness in-game. In this case I find a roll reasonable because personal attributes don't play as big a part as they do in skill-based acts. If a DM is present, it's up to them to add modifiers to the roll as they see fit.

On the brackets: hokay, 20% chance to blow up is a little hardcore. The "proportional to the amount of powder used" bit was supposed to limit the failure's effect with cannons and mostly screw over people trying to throw hand-grenades or use fire rockets. For example, 4lb of powder blowing up in your hand = no more hand. 4lb (assuming you're using ~16lb cannon shot, which is on the heavy side afaik, someone correct me if I'm wrong) of powder going wrong in a cannon just means lots of smoke and a broken cannon, depending on its construction, not necessarily death (unless you're unlucky). It means you're better off using less powder with lighter shot.

Anyway, down to what matters. How about this:
1: 5%. An explosion centered around the device proportional to the amount of powder used and also subject to the effects of rolling 2-4. Specifically, this means the powder ignites before launch.
2-4: 15%. Device breaks in a way that requires extensive, long-term repairs or reconstruction (unusable for the rest of the OOC day).
5-10: 30%. A dud-shot, requires re-ignition (DM's discretion on negative effects if applicable).
11-13: 15%. Device works at 50% effect.
14-20: 35%. Device works as intended.

This means that the chance of a catastrophic failure is reduced from 40% to 20%, while the chance of a perfect shot is reduced from 40% to 35%, with the addition of Polo's half-strength detonation making an at least semi-successful operation a 50% chance. What do we think?

 

[Cap]

my personal suggestion because i hate complicated rolls is

above 10 it fires, under 10 it doesn't

 

[Blorbis83]

my personal suggestion because i hate complicated rolls is

above 10 it fires, under 10 it doesn't

Too complicated, use smaller numbers please.

 

[Cap]

Too complicated, use smaller numbers please.

roll d2

1 it doesnt work, 2 it does work

 

[BoredBrit]

Too complicated, use smaller numbers please.

roll d1 if its a 1 it doesnt work for filthy heretics but if its a 1 it works for all godfearing pious guys

 

[MRPolo13]

Revised bit

With the barrel thing, I was just being a bit anal, as I am wont to do. I've never seen anyone use anything other than cannons. Hell, I always felt that grenades, even though fairly obvious in creation, were a tad outside the tech lock. In Europe first grenades appeared around 1460s according to Wikipedia. According to those articles grenades would've been around the size of a cricket ball so not exactly 14 pounds in weight. Still, an early explosion in the hand would probably hurt you very badly, if not outright kill you.

This is an infinitely better system. As long as no one dies by catastrophic failure because "roll to see if you're dead" is probably the worst anyone can come up with. That is, again, talking strictly about cannons. A hand grenade or explosive cannonballs blowing up suddenly and tearing your arm off? I can definitely see that. However, if the chance of death is that much higher with high explosive weapons, they should be counter-balanced by being very, very effective. It should be a gamble of sorts. You manage to take the shot and you can do a lot of damage. You don't and you risk a lot. Also high explosives are great as a way of hurting people or guns. A cannon barrel can be cracked extremely easily if the explosion occurs at the exit, which might be surprising to some. The end of the cannon was never intended to take that sort of stress, only the bottom was, so an early explosion could be very bad news.

 

[Ced]

I'm bumping this to give others a chance to chip in, otherwise the (now edited) original post is officially in effect.

 

[Warwolf]

Comparing the revised system with the new one I can be happy to say I like it.
The original was on the verge of 'why even bother using them anymore'. This seems much more balanced and realistic.

 

[DraconDarknight]

People will hate me, but anyway:

Ced
Requesting another addition:

Cannons actually need ammunition to be used and if I remember that right cannon balls where added as a craftable item in the form of normal and heavy (heads) a while ago. - Would be a shame to let that go to waste.
Is there a chance we can get that somehow in-cooperated into the new cannon rules?

The ultimately nice thing would be if they actually had to use gunpowder too but that might be a bit much for most people here.

 

[Ced]

People will hate me, but anyway:

Ced
Requesting another addition:

Cannons actually need ammunition to be used and if I remember that right cannon balls where added as a craftable item in the form of normal and heavy (heads) a while ago. - Would be a shame to let that go to waste.
Is there a chance we can get that somehow in-cooperated into the new cannon rules?

The ultimately nice thing would be if they actually had to use gunpowder too but that might be a bit much for most people here.

Do you mean that the cannonball heads and gunpowder items would be consumed in-game when they get fired?

 

[Cap]

the only way to get gunpowder OOC is to kill creepers

making RP require OOC items goes so far into the territory of 'really freaking obnoxious' that i dont know why you'd ever consider it

 

[mokwar]

I believe creepers actually are an IC thing-
Or so I think I heard once, I might be wrong, so they might be killable ICly
(I might be wrong though)

 

[Cap]

I believe creepers actually are an IC thing-
Or so I think I heard once, I might be wrong, so they might be killable ICly
(I might be wrong though)

the point is that gun powder can be created out of mined ingredients in the real world but the only way to acquire it ingame is going to the sorrows (which if you want to do ICly is a trip of months at least) and kill suicide bombers

it's stupid to make anything in RP require an OOC item

 

[Immerael]

I'm gonna actual agree with Cap here. Combine what he said with the rules already in place that make all that gathering IC almost useless since you're still at only 50% chance for it to work.

If we went that hard the only way I could see balancing it is if you go that route. Is to do away with rolling so long as you consume those resources on each shot.

 

[mokwar]

the point is that gun powder can be created out of mined ingredients in the real world but the only way to acquire it ingame is going to the sorrows (which if you want to do ICly is a trip of months at least) and kill suicide bombers

it's stupid to make anything in RP require an OOC item

Yeah, you got a point there