Questions from Ken

Private forum for DragonMech Battles development.

Moderators: walrusjester, mythfish

Post Reply
mythfish
Chaos-Summoning Sorcerer
Posts: 791
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2004 1:47 pm
Location: Louisville, KY
Contact:

Questions from Ken

Post by mythfish »

These questions came from Ken in an email, but I'm reposting them here and answering so everyone knows.
Some questions/thoughts:

I love the concept of the variable phases. Although the advantage to determining the sequence doesn't seem as important once you realize that damage from attacks doesn't take effect until the end of the round, you can force other players into taking actions that they really would rather not take. For instance, if you move your mech toward a weakened foe, then that opponent has to decide: a) move away, or b) guess whether Character Actions or Melee Combat is coming next and act appropriately. Some good strategy choices.
Thanks. This is the thing I'm most proud of so far in this game (at this point I don't even remember if that was my idea or Matt's idea...all that matters is that it's a cool idea :) ). The idea is to have a unique mechanic that can actually change the course of the battle, and to put choices into the players' hands that most games don't give them. That's kind of the philosophy behind the accuracy table, too, but that one does a less effective job I think.

Question: Character Actions phase or simply Character phase?
Character Phase, I believe. Were we inconsistent with the wording somewhere?

Nice, simple results for dice rolls.
Again, part of the design philosophy. Simple enough so it's not confusing, but detailed enough that there are multiple outcomes.
In the Mishaps table for Accuracy, there's a reference to "your mech's Might." Should this say "your mech's Damage Bonus"?
Yes, you are correct. Noted. I'm thinking the mishap table will get a complete overhaul at some point relatively soon. The one we have now is kind of a placeholder, I think.

Charging: Do you have to declare a charge during the Movement phase, or can you simply wait to declare a charge during Melee Combat as long as your mech has moved?
Matt & I actually had this conversation just the other day. We decided that as long as your mech has moved, you get the damage bonus. No declarations are really necessary in any phase, much less the movement phase. Since there's no downside to charging and no risk involved, there's really no reason to "declare" it. More or less the same thing holds true for aiming.
Tripping: Only certain melee weapons can cause trips, correct? That is, you can't trip a mech with a ballista.
Good call. We'll clarify that in the next update. You cannot trip with a ranged attack unless the weapon's description specifically states that you can. (Yeah, I know we don't have weapon descriptions yet :? ).
Crew and units: I like this a lot. I know that a typical unit has 5 soldiers, but what is the maximum number of specialists or extra soldiers you can add to the unit? It sounds like you can have a maximum of 6 (5 soldiers plus one specialist/extra soldier), but I didn't see this spelled out.
That's a question that hadn't even occurred to me yet. I was assuming that you can attach as many extras as you want, but it doesn't really change the effectiveness of the unit in any way except to give it some special abilities.
Soldiers and tripping: The last two sentences confused me. For each unit of soldiers adjacent to an enemy mech, they get a +1 bonus to damage "at range," which can be useful in tripping mechs. I get how the +1 is handy when rolling a d20 for tripping success, but the "at range" comments puzzles me. What does that mean? If they're adjacent to the mech, how do they get a ranged damage bonus?
Now that you mention it, I'm a bit puzzled by that as well. My guess would be that we want to remove the (at range), but I'll let Matt try to explain it.
Characters' special abilities: I dig the way you've incorporated the various PC feats and abilities here, even giving the warrior a bit of Anklebiter flavor. It adds a cool way for me to pimp my mech!
The idea was to cover as many of the classes from the RPG with as few character types as possible. The Warrior in DMB could be a fighter, anklebiter, steamborg, or something else in terms of the RPG. The DMB Sorcerer mostly represents arcane casting types from the RPG, but it can be used to represent divine casters as well (note the Heal ability). We just decided "Sorcerer" was a cooler word than "Spellcaster".
Mech Design: After the example of point cost, you write, "A mech's Base Cost is equal to its Hold." That's not true for the Steam and Arcane mechs, whose Base Cost is double the Hold.
Good catch. I think that's leftover from a previous version that missed getting updated.
In the Weapons table, the term "level" looks unusual here, but I don't know any alternative. For the Hook, how can an enemy mech break the hold? (I know the descriptions are coming, but from a playtesting perspective, I'm curious.)

I agree about "level", but I'm also unsure of a good alternative. I'm reworking the weapon table and adding some more options (and descriptions) for the next draft, so maybe I'll think of something before then.
Dieter Zimmerman
[[Faceless Minion of the Dark Master]]
walrusjester
Hard-Bitten Adventurer
Posts: 150
Joined: Tue Jun 22, 2004 9:02 am
Location: Surrounded by corn

Re: Questions from Ken

Post by walrusjester »

mythfish wrote:
Soldiers and tripping: The last two sentences confused me. For each unit of soldiers adjacent to an enemy mech, they get a +1 bonus to damage "at range," which can be useful in tripping mechs. I get how the +1 is handy when rolling a d20 for tripping success, but the "at range" comments puzzles me. What does that mean? If they're adjacent to the mech, how do they get a ranged damage bonus?
Now that you mention it, I'm a bit puzzled by that as well. My guess would be that we want to remove the (at range), but I'll let Matt try to explain it.
The "at range" is also stray wordage left over from an earlier draft. The +1/adjacent unit bonus applies to tripping. We're undecided on whether that should also apply to damage when soldiers are adjacent to mechs. It gives soldiers a little more of a chance, and therefore makes them more useful. But I'm far from satisfied with the way soldiers work right now, so that may all change in the next couple of versions. And I have nobody to blame but myself, since I wrote the soldier rules.

But I'll take credit for the Tactics Phase idea. I've been wanting to put that in a game for years. And I think Dieter undersells his Accuracy idea - it may need balancing, but I think it's a rock-solid concept.
DragonMech line developer, freelance writer, tall guy named Matt.
Ken Hart
Deft-Handed Cutpurse
Posts: 195
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2003 7:23 pm
Location: Goodman Games East
Contact:

Crew question

Post by Ken Hart »

Hey, a question about the Brute crew member option: Should his +3 bonus for damage also count toward his unit's Boarding Combat roll if they board a mech? I'd make a case that it should. If you put it in D&D terms, an orc barbarian in a boarding party would be more than a match for several typical Stenian or Legion mech crew members.

--Ken
DCC, DragonMech, Etherscope editor
Writer: "Madness at the Mutilated Oak," DCC #48: The Adventure Continues;
DCC #52: Chronicle of the Fiend

"It really is the height of pessimism to have a hat lined with chain mail." --Mrs. Peel
walrusjester
Hard-Bitten Adventurer
Posts: 150
Joined: Tue Jun 22, 2004 9:02 am
Location: Surrounded by corn

Re: Crew question

Post by walrusjester »

Ken Hart wrote:Hey, a question about the Brute crew member option: Should his +3 bonus for damage also count toward his unit's Boarding Combat roll if they board a mech? I'd make a case that it should. If you put it in D&D terms, an orc barbarian in a boarding party would be more than a match for several typical Stenian or Legion mech crew members.

--Ken
Yep, it should. At least until we finish revising character abilities...
DragonMech line developer, freelance writer, tall guy named Matt.
Post Reply

Return to “DragonMech Battles Development”