/hbg/-Homebrew General

File: nine weapon charts.png (59KB, 782x541px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 782x541px

This is technically for a vidya, but it could in theory be played on tabletop and this particular slice of the mechanics looks very like a wargame/miniature game so I figured /tg/ would know best what to say about it
>center arrow indicates where the character is (large dot) and what direction they're facing (arrowhead); for convenience, the position/facing is always the same, but a different facing yields the "same" threat distribution rotated appropriately
>medium-sized dark (but not black) dots indicate where in the field a particular weapon type can center its attack; a line connected to a tiny dot indicates that the attack targets both endpoints simultaneously
>lighter-grey dots/lines indicate what cells are targeted by melee-range special attacks using this weapon- as a general rule, the special attack footprint is three times the footprint of a regular attack
>small red and cyan dots indicate, for the one-handed weapons, what square may be protected by a shield in the off-hand; the red dot indicates where a right-handed shield-user (that is, whose off-hand is the left hand) places their shield, the cyan dot indicates where a left-handed shield-user places their shield
>any hex threatened by an enemy weapon is harder to hit from
>a line of attack that intersects a hex affected by an enemy shield is more likely to miss
>attacks from behind are more likely to hit in general, with the line opposite the facing being the best direction from which to attack

I'm pondering over how to weight the damage output of these weapon types (these nine are not exhaustive, fyi); probably the blue and red extended-reach weapon types are the most flexible, and should therefore do the least damage, but I'm not sure how to calculate that kind of advantage? And some weapon types may be restricted by class, which would also limit their broken-ness without necessarily impacting damage output.

>>50451621
I just came up with one in the caster thread:

You only gain experience or new abilities by electing to take risks to prototype them in combat.

Thus you can take the safe guarantee, or go wild with creativity.

>>50451648
Hmm, that sounds like it'd work best if new abilities were pretty loosely arbitrated? like if the GM was expected to vet new abilities on a case-by-case basis. else you'd have a really hard time outlining how new abilities are to be weighted/vetted without severely restricting the creativity of the player... or making taking new options in combat super slow to resolve. but for a more relaxed/easy-going gamestyle that'd be pretty cool!

>>50451621
>any hex threatened by an enemy weapon is harder to hit from
by default (not counting special abilities extending the range) this effect only pays attention to the dark dots, not the hexes threatened by the special attacks with their extended range.

>>50451626
>>50451760
fuck

>>50451731
It could be anything from 'you risk perils of the warp on X roll' to 'you attempt to expand the flame size, but if you roll X you take some damage'.

For priests/monks it could be 'risk upsetting the karmic wheel to get some misfortune later', or 'you might annoy X angel/spirit resulting in lower standing/retribution'.