things for the next rule book

Rules questions, suggestions, and discussion

Moderators: Pwnerade, IVhorseman

Postby OneEye589 » Thu Nov 27, 2008 11:32 am

davee123 wrote:
OneEye589 wrote:Why do you sometimes type like an idiot piltogg and other times you use punctuation and actually follow the rules for the English language for the most part?


I think it's just a matter of rolling critical successes and failures. What's the UR of good grammar?

DaveE


I'm pretty sure its just a one.
User avatar
OneEye589
Pooplord
 
Posts: 4255
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2008 6:35 pm
Location: New York

Postby davee123 » Thu Nov 27, 2008 12:01 pm

OneEye589 wrote:I'm pretty sure its just a one.


You just failed on a UR of 1? (note: "it's" vs. "its")

DaveE
TROLOLO
davee123
Nice Dubs
 
Posts: 33
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Massachusetts, USA

Postby pesgores » Thu Nov 27, 2008 2:17 pm

OneEye failed.

What if the failer was Blitzen? Was it enough to make a party?
"You can get more of what you want with a kind word and a gun, that you can with just a kind word." - Al Capone
My official post number 1000 was "The whole battle?"
Image
User avatar
pesgores
The Dear Leader
 
Posts: 3262
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 5:47 am
Location: Looking for baseplates

Postby piltogg » Thu Nov 27, 2008 8:56 pm

The reason for this occurance is that sometimes I care about what I am typeing, however usualy I do not. So you know, just being lazy is all.
Image
User avatar
piltogg
Clown-Face Bologna
 
Posts: 2443
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 6:16 pm
Location: Fictional Deutschland

Postby OneEye589 » Fri Nov 28, 2008 2:38 pm

Yea I did, haha.
Oh well.
User avatar
OneEye589
Pooplord
 
Posts: 4255
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2008 6:35 pm
Location: New York

Postby Theblackdog » Sat Nov 29, 2008 6:03 pm

Minifig Skill/Attribute: Paratrooper (+1cp): If this minifig jumps or falls off of a tall structure or aircraft, he may use his Action to cancel any damage he takes from falling.
Just one random act of violence can brighten your day. Especially if it involves explosives.

Image
User avatar
Theblackdog
Clown-Face Bologna
 
Posts: 2473
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 3:30 pm

Postby davee123 » Mon Dec 01, 2008 6:16 pm

piltogg wrote:The reason for this occurance is that sometimes I care about what I am typeing, however usualy I do not. So you know, just being lazy is all.


There's a rule we need to add to BrikWars: Laziness. It's like an extra skill and/or movement penalty. Perhaps (say):

- Default Laziness is 0
- For each 2 Laziness points, decrease the cost of the unit by 1 CP.
- On each turn, the unit must "spend" their Laziness points on either movement, skill, or divided between both.
- For each Laziness point spent on movement, the unit subtracts 1" of its movement for that turn.
- For each Laziness point spent on skill, a -1 skill modifier is added to all the unit's skill rolls for that turn.
- A unit cannot spend more Laziness on movement than its maximum move rating.

It's a stupid system, but have a great vision in my head of some uber-skillful champion haphazardly waving his gun in the general direction of the enemy and saying "Meh". Sure, he's got enough skill such that if he TRIED, he could kill the oncoming troops, but he just doesn't care.

DaveE
TROLOLO
davee123
Nice Dubs
 
Posts: 33
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Massachusetts, USA

Postby warman45 » Mon Dec 01, 2008 7:20 pm

davee123 wrote:
piltogg wrote:oh, I got mixed up... I meant 5 times longer than 2001

There are a few things that don't quite line up-- like falling damage vs. collision damage for example. But mostly, it's pretty good.
DaveE

collision damage should be fall damage divided by two (colision damage has 2 objects moving towards each other causing twice the damage as one obgect moving at the ground or a wall
<img src="http://www.heresy-online.net/daemons/adoptables/24408.gif" alt="Broken Adoptable Image"><br><a href="http://www.heresy-online.net/daemons/levelup/24408-algurath.htm" title="Level up this Daemon!">Level up Adoptable!</a>
User avatar
warman45
Dimmy
 
Posts: 517
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2008 10:52 pm
Location: missisauga ontario (GTA!!)

Postby pesgores » Mon Dec 01, 2008 7:24 pm

Meh:

-For every 1 inch the minifig is falling, it gets 1 damage. For a normal minifig, 5 inches later, it dies.
"You can get more of what you want with a kind word and a gun, that you can with just a kind word." - Al Capone
My official post number 1000 was "The whole battle?"
Image
User avatar
pesgores
The Dear Leader
 
Posts: 3262
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 5:47 am
Location: Looking for baseplates

Postby davee123 » Mon Dec 01, 2008 8:15 pm

warman45 wrote:collision damage should be fall damage divided by two (colision damage has 2 objects moving towards each other causing twice the damage as one obgect moving at the ground or a wall


Actually, that's the complete opposite of my point. Collision damage is falling damage. You collide with the ground. They should be the same thing (or result in very similar damages), but they aren't (and they don't):

BW2001 - 4.3.5 wrote:... the object does as much damage as its Mass times the number of full stories that it dropped times 1d6. If the object has no appreciable weight, it does as much damage as if it had been thrown. The object itself takes as much damage as whatever it hits.


BW2001 - 4.3.6 wrote:Once you have determined the Collision Speed, divide it by five inches and round down. This number is the Damage Multiplier. (If the two objects collide at a speed of less than 5" per turn, any resulting damage is purely cosmetic.) Objects do their own Armor Value in damage, times the Damage Multiplier.


Note that an object's Mass number has little to do with it's AV. A diamond with a mass of 1 might have an AV of (say) 2d10+2. If you hurl a diamond at the ground at a height of 10" such that it reaches the ground at the end of the turn:

By 4.3.5, that's 1*1d6*(10/2.26) = 4.41*1d6 damage to whatever it lands on, and it takes that same amount of damage itself (between 4 and 26 damage)

By 4.3.6, it's (2d10+2)*2 = 2*(2d10)+4 damage to what it lands on (between 6 and 44), and the damage it takes will depend on the AV of whatever was landed on like Bonn-o-Tron.

You could similarly take a large ball of wadded-up tissue paper (AV 1d6 or less, also mass 1). It does the same exact damage as a diamond by 4.3.5, but by 4.3.6, you get 2*(1d6)+4 (between 6 and 16).

Basically, you could arbitrarily choose the damage type, and have the result differ greatly.

It doesn't really matter all that much, honestly. It's a discrepancy, and if you're an anorak enough to sneakily choose the damage type that's more beneficial to you, well, screw you. But for the sake of perfection, those rules ought to be in line with each other, and they're not. I think the rulebook is sort of littered with small issues like that, and most of them aren't worth the bother of fixing. But if (as Pitlogg was suggesting) you want a rulebook that's 5x larger, you could straighten out some of the idiosyncrasies and make a fully detailed and consistent system for brik physix.

DaveE
TROLOLO
davee123
Nice Dubs
 
Posts: 33
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Massachusetts, USA

Postby Niflheim » Tue Dec 02, 2008 7:01 am

Actually, falling should only be counted if the minifig falls off somewhere where its higher then him, then he should be wounded. For every 1 cm higher then him or her, they get wounded which could eventually kill him.


*~*Niflheim*~*
TROLOLO
Niflheim
Hero
 
Posts: 83
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2008 7:22 am

Postby davee123 » Tue Dec 02, 2008 3:14 pm

Niflheim wrote:Actually, falling should only be counted if the minifig falls off somewhere where its higher then him, then he should be wounded. For every 1 cm higher then him or her, they get wounded which could eventually kill him.


It's only applicable at heights greater than or equal to 1 story (6 brix), which is roughly 2.25". It happens regardless of whether the height is "higher then him", which apparently you wrote after failing your grammar roll. Then, it's a matter of how many stories of height the object fell (not really cm's).

As for a genuine addition to 2001 (in the oh-so-hurried state that the 2001 rules get updated), I propose an optional rule for struktural integrity:

--------

Any group of objects placed on top of another object will apply some degree of force to whatever's under them. Most of the time, this will be inconsequential, such as when a trooper steps onto the roof of a building. Other times, you may wish to see if enough force is being applied to damage the lower object-- perhaps if a battleship was gently placed on top of a house of cards.

To calculate the damage applied, you will need to know the mass of the object(s) applying the weight (M), and the longest measurement (in inches) of the amount of contact between the objects (C"). The damage done to the lower object is (M*1d6)/(C"*2).

Example:
Elmer, driving a tank, is chasing a rabbit across a rickety rope bridge. The tank has a mass of 28, with Elmer (mass 1) inside it. Their combined mass is 29. The length of contact between the bridge and the tank is approximately the length of the tank, 7". So the damage done to the rope bridge is (29*1d6)/(7*2).

---------------

DaveE
TROLOLO
davee123
Nice Dubs
 
Posts: 33
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Massachusetts, USA

Postby aybraus » Tue Dec 02, 2008 5:54 pm

I'm going to go ahead and address some of the suggested additions.
Cpt. Zipps wrote:Jetpack rules

Use flying propulsion, custom units chapter of rulebook
Rules for mediks and mechaniks

Easy to do, take them from the 2k1 rules, giving them a TekLevel of 3 (the "Universal TL" of the 2005 rules.

I don't think the next rulebook should be any longer than the current one.

I do have suggestions, though, and I will post them later.
TROLOLO
aybraus
Hero
 
Posts: 53
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 1:48 am

Postby Rayhawk » Wed Dec 03, 2008 12:24 am

The falling rules in 2001 are messed up because they were based on an earlier version of the Collision rules and never got updated. Whoops! A lot easier in the 2005 rules, and it'll get easier still once I delete all the parts of 2005 collisions that I don't like.

I'm still planning to work Mechanix into chapter seven, now that I've finally got the artwork for them. I've just been busy.
User avatar
Rayhawk
Overlord
 
Posts: 1016
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 8:02 pm
Location: BrikWars HQ, USA

Postby *CRAZYHORSE* » Wed Dec 03, 2008 5:07 pm

Rayhawk wrote:The falling rules in 2001 are messed up because they were based on an earlier version of the Collision rules and never got updated. Whoops! A lot easier in the 2005 rules, and it'll get easier still once I delete all the parts of 2005 collisions that I don't like.

I'm still planning to work Mechanix into chapter seven, now that I've finally got the artwork for them. I've just been busy.


yeah new art work. =]
I hope it's even better than then the artwork on the Horse stats card nothing beats that. awesome job can't wait.

PS: are you going to ask our opinion on it first or you just screw us and put it there anyway because you can?
User avatar
*CRAZYHORSE*
My Little Pony
 
Posts: 1758
Joined: Fri Feb 29, 2008 6:10 pm
Location: Procrasturbating.

PreviousNext

Return to The Rulebook

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest