How does /tg/ like his damages ? fixed or defined by dice rolls ?

Dice rolls. It feels nice to roll max damage.

fixed, i like it more for strategy

>>54109137
Mixed, Defined by dice roll for some weapons, fixed for others.

>>54109137

Hybrid. A tight roll range with a primarily fixed component. Variable, but without the ability to get pure dicefucked.

>>54109137

Fixed, with damage reduction from armor and a chance to crit if your attack roll was super accurate.

>>54109137
Generally fixed, if only for speed's sake. Although can be modified by factors controlled by the attacker and defender.

Exploding Dice Rolls.

It depends on the importance of the individual for me.

games like 40k where there's 50 dudes on the table, I don't want to roll a specialized die for each damage. In an RPG or skirmish game where the individuals matter more, I like it when there's variance to the dice.

I also find damage dice important in static vs save based systems.

On a static armor or defense value, some level of variance is needed so variable damage is good. If it's a save system, there's no need to waste further time by adding yet another variance to it.

Rolls for players, average for creatures.

>>54109137
I prefer fixed damage because I'd rather have my hits actually deal consistent damage every time rather than having it all be determined through RNG.

Like it's so stupid, you already hit the dude, but now you gotta hope you don't roll a "1" on top of that? The fuck is that shit about?

Fixed with a very small range for randomness.

>>54109137
Actual damage = expected damage unless the recipient of the damage may or may not die from the hit, in which case it is rolled.

The only serious disadvantage to this system is that it reveals that the monster is near-dead; in most cases characters would see that even without any metagaming just from descriptions, so it's not big deal. Otherwise, it speeds up combats, removes the variance-means-incompetence issue, and all without getting rid of fun associated with chance. I've talked to GMs who consider hit/miss to provide enough variance, but binary results dampen the enjoyment - that's why most systems have crits, to add at least a little spice.

>>54109137
I like the FFG Star Wars / WoD method, weapons deal flat damage augmented by successes.

>>54110720

Same.

File: d20 Mace.jpg (151KB, 570x1013px) Image search: [Google]

151KB, 570x1013px

>>54109137
Decided by the same roll that determines whether it missed or not

>>54111705
Oh, and I forgot: while I think my roll-when-critical system is pretty good, the only other damage system I've came up with is an abomination from hell that is pretty much a cautionary tale about bad game design.

How it works (streching the difinition of the word): first, attacker rolls to determine whether the attack has hit. Then, he rolls damage. Subject of the attack makes a resistance save; fail means a wound, and success decreases his resistance save. Enemy debuffs to resistance are removed whenever you get a wound, but wounds inherently resistance by the amount that depends on another characteristic (the higher the Guts, the lower the decreases). The length and strength of no-damage-hits' resistance debuffs depends on, again, Guts, but also enemy features. Of course, not every character dies after the same number of wounds - that is decided by yet another thing.

This monstrosity somehow turned out to be both too random and too predictable, and fights looked like a very bashful GURPS satire made by somebody who had never played GURPS.

>>54110590
The true patrician's way.

>>54109751
this
my sword can do 1 damage, but let my lightning bolt do d3

>>54109137
Rolls plus static mod.