Comments on: M&M Damage Roll

By: Rolando o Dano e Simplificando as Perícias no Mutantes e Malfeitores RPG! - PARAGONS

Wed, 03 Feb 2010 16:12:20 +0000

[...] http://arsludi.lamemage.com/index.php/40/mm-damage-roll/ [...]

By: Deep Play

Deep Play — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 01:26:18 +0000

Just wanted to thank you publicly for sharing this — our gaming group gave this a try last weekend and it turned out to be just the shot in the arm we needed.

As you note, the default ‘Damage Save’ rules feel WAY too passive from the player’s standpoint.

But the optional ‘Hit Point’ rules we replaced them with slowed down combat significantly, and were very, very kludgy — especially when it came to adjudicating the effects of powers like Drain, Boost, Transfer, Healing, Regen, etc.

As far as we’re concerned, this system of yours is the perfect compromise. Thanks again!

By: Daniel Ream

Daniel Ream — Mon, 04 May 2009 17:48:45 +0000

To #2 Mike: There’s no reason you can’t simply have the players make all the rolls for anything that affects their characters. When the bad guys beat up on them, have them make Toughness saves. When they beat up on the bad guys, have them make damage rolls. You might want to play with the numbers a bit so the players don’t have to remember two different breakpoint progressions.

By: Rolando o Dano e Simplificando as Perícias no Mutantes e Malfeitores RPG [Nitro Dungeon] « Nitro Dungeon - RPG Blog

Tue, 23 Dec 2008 23:28:58 +0000

[...] http://arsludi.lamemage.com/index.php/40/mm-damage-roll/ [...]

By: Gregg B

Gregg B — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 07:28:07 +0000

I just found the answer in the Atomic Think Tank forums. According to Steve Kenson:

“Yeah, it’s been brought up before that the probabilities for this option are off. It’s something I need to address in errata or an FAQ when I get a chance.”

By: Gregg B

Gregg B — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 07:05:00 +0000

Hello, I’m new to M&M. Although I’ve never played the game, I like your idea of a damage roll rather than a damage save. One benefit I see is that the attacker can roll two d20′s at the same time, one to see if you hit, the second to see if you do damage.

I’d like less of a “whiff factor” so I’m considering adjusting the ranges to Toughness +5 = bruised, T +10 = stunned, T +15 = staggered, and T + 20 = unconscious. Do you think this will be too lethal?

Also, do you have the Masterminds Manual? There’s a damage roll option on page 107, but it seems far too lethal: Toughness +16 = unconscious. Can you explain it?

By: Tim Keating

Tim Keating — Tue, 11 Dec 2007 16:34:03 +0000

Huh? Impervious who the what now?

I’m not sure you are using Impervious correctly, Steve-O. AFAICT it should work exactly the same using damage rolls as it does with Toughness saves — if the damage isn’t higher than your Impervious Toughness, it has *no* effect (one of those rare cases where it MIGHT be worth it to use Extra Effort for those +2 ranks of damage). If damage *does* exceed Impervious Toughness, resolve normally (i.e. Impervious is ineffective).

By: Steve-0

Steve-0 — Fri, 31 Aug 2007 00:18:12 +0000

Thanks for this house rule.
I felt it really helped speed up the game and it got the players more involved.
There was a wrinkle though, when it came to the Impervious extra. I had to make note of this extra. Any attack less than the Impervious amount was disregarded, while any damage beyond the Impervious was regarded as the attack bonus.
Otherwise, this worked awesome!
This blog rocks!

By: Mike

Mike — Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:58:17 +0000

I really like this system. I’ve noticed my players sitting there staring at me after hitting an opponent, waiting for the outcome from my Defense roll for the villian. So this does seem to put the ball in the player’s corner, so to speak.

But on the flip side, I know my players are big on games where they can actively “dodge” (i.e.- roll for defense of some sort rather than rely on a static number). So, I’m not sure which method my group will prefer. We shall see.

By: Joel A

Joel A — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 15:04:46 +0000

Kewl system. Thanks!