Not a Fan of the Resist Banes Mechanic

[Great_Moustache]

Calculations are pretty easy. That value you determined, 10 + 2*PL, that is the Average CR. It is the average, b/c that is the average amount, so it is still a 50% chance in most cases.

And actually, lower level banes are even easier now, since someone can argue using any attribute, they are going to most likely be using one of their higher stats.

And since there are several banes that never increase in difficulty, those will be way easy to just break out of.
dice = Avg w/ Explosions (rounded down for simplicity, few of these could be rounded up by 1 b/c of +0.5, click on “graph” to see the numbers more quickly: http://anydice.com/program/c643 , and yes, it isn’t as exact as what OL does, but close enough for these purposes)

d20 = 11
d4 = 3
d6 = 4
d8 = 5
d10 = 6
2d6 = 7
2d8 = 9
2d10 = 11
3d8 = 13
3d10 = 16

Attribute 0 = 11
Attribute 1 = 14
Attribute 2 = 15
Attribute 3 = 16
Attribute 4 = 17
Attribute 5 = 18
Attribute 6 = 20
Attribute 7 = 22
Attribute 8 = 24
Attribute 9 = 27

---

Part of the reason to group together the PL of the banes, not just for simplicity, is b/c there are banes out there for PL 1, which would be 12 to break out of, so 45% chance IF you use an Attribute Score of 0. At level 1, you are likely to have at least an Attribute Score of 4, which means on average you should be hitting around 15~17 with that attribute.

By making all PL 1-4 being a CR of 18 (by that forumla), you are at least making it a less than 50% chance to break out of it at Attribute 4.

[Great_Moustache]

@Daranar

But I gather you’re not a fan of that idea!

Yeah, after actually thinking about it some, the idea of having 2 different types of resists is just… blah.

This whole concept is already adding a bigger level of complexity, and then you are easily doubling that complexity b/c now there are 2 types of resists you can do, but they have different rules to determine which one you are doing.

---

Going back to the “too easy to break out of” concept, anything adding advantage to the resist roll does this 100%. Which is why I suggested ONLY feats should do this. Currently you can only get advantage on a resist roll via feats, and that’s with the current “too easy” system. By adding in focus actions and other things like bolster allowing it, you are making it even easier.

[Daranar]

Hmm… more food for thought. Would like to see percent success of Attr Dice vs. CR as each increases, but I get the gist you’re putting down…

[Great_Moustache]

some worth considering for CR difficulties:

[Great_Moustache]

And here is a google document you can comment on (if you want some thoughts organized or something?)

It shows every bane currently in Open Legend, with Black representing the max PL listed for the bane, and gradual colors to show the other Power Levels that exist, as well as how many banes there are of each Power Level.

Open Legend Bane Power Levels

PL 1 | 5 banes | 3 bane @ max level
PL 2 | 6 banes | 1 bane @ max level
PL 3 | 7 banes | 1 bane @ max level
PL 4 | 9 banes | 2 bane @ max level
PL 5 | 12 banes | 4 bane @ max level
PL 6 | 12 banes | 2 bane @ max level
PL 7 | 6 banes | 1 bane @ max level
PL 8 | 9 banes | 3 bane @ max level
PL 9 | 10 banes | 10 bane @ max level

[Daranar]

Yeah, I am reaching cognitive overload on this, need to led the CPU spin down a bit. The tiered CRs still feel off to me, feels like PL should mean something. The CR Difficulty chart you posted seems like suggestions, and not something where CR can only increase by 5 at a time? But I also hear your point on it getting complicated. Gonna sleep on it. It would be cool to compare actual probability numbers of Attr Dice vs. CR (rather than just average) to see how it compares to 55%.

I’ll dump the results of my dice rolling script since I have them handy, to compare -1, 0, 1 ADV up to attr level 9. This is 100,000 rolls per result.

{ average: 13.14329, median: 13, adv: -1, attrDice: '1d4' }
{ average: 13.73952, median: 13, adv: -1, attrDice: '1d6' }
{ average: 14.34667, median: 14, adv: -1, attrDice: '1d8' }
{ average: 14.9895, median: 14, adv: -1, attrDice: '1d10' }
{ average: 16.93748, median: 16, adv: -1, attrDice: '2d6' }
{ average: 18.30849, median: 18, adv: -1, attrDice: '2d8' }
{ average: 19.77088, median: 19, adv: -1, attrDice: '2d10' }
{ average: 22.60859, median: 22, adv: -1, attrDice: '3d8' }
{ average: 24.94883, median: 24, adv: -1, attrDice: '3d10' }
{ average: 27.08388, median: 26, adv: -1, attrDice: '4d8' }
{ average: 14.35602, median: 14, adv: 0, attrDice: '1d4' }
{ average: 15.26047, median: 15, adv: 0, attrDice: '1d6' }
{ average: 16.17792, median: 16, adv: 0, attrDice: '1d8' }
{ average: 17.1508, median: 16, adv: 0, attrDice: '1d10' }
{ average: 19.45542, median: 19, adv: 0, attrDice: '2d6' }
{ average: 21.3844, median: 21, adv: 0, attrDice: '2d8' }
{ average: 23.29099, median: 22, adv: 0, attrDice: '2d10' }
{ average: 26.49562, median: 26, adv: 0, attrDice: '3d8' }
{ average: 29.43369, median: 28, adv: 0, attrDice: '3d10' }
{ average: 31.62058, median: 31, adv: 0, attrDice: '4d8' }
{ average: 15.56507, median: 15, adv: 1, attrDice: '1d4' }
{ average: 16.7722, median: 16, adv: 1, attrDice: '1d6' }
{ average: 18.07473, median: 17, adv: 1, attrDice: '1d8' }
{ average: 19.36785, median: 19, adv: 1, attrDice: '1d10' }
{ average: 21.61708, median: 21, adv: 1, attrDice: '2d6' }
{ average: 23.89852, median: 23, adv: 1, attrDice: '2d8' }
{ average: 26.3385, median: 25, adv: 1, attrDice: '2d10' }
{ average: 29.44395, median: 28, adv: 1, attrDice: '3d8' }
{ average: 32.99079, median: 32, adv: 1, attrDice: '3d10' }
{ average: 34.90851, median: 34, adv: 1, attrDice: '4d8' }

[Great_Moustache]

@Daranar

The CR Difficulty chart you posted seems like suggestions, and not something where CR can only increase by 5 at a time?

Well yeah. It just a reference at a glance type thing. All that info is in Chapter 2 on the website.

Like I said, I was something to consider for this conversation as a whole. Providing some more reference.

[Great_Moustache]

@Daranar

feels like PL should mean something

but the thing is, the PL doesn’t mean something when it is inflicted. The only bearing on PL is whether you can inflict it or not, and in the case of weapons, you can inflict it at 1 PL higher than your Attribute Score.

However, for the Bane to stick to someone, the PL doesn’t even matter. It is the persons Defense scores that make that happen.

I can do a bane attack with Death, and get a 15 vs Toughness of 15 and it lands. That’s only a “PL” of 2 roll, but it does a PL 9 bane.

---

You could just tell players they have to mark down the attack roll that put the bane on you. Then when you roll, use a Resist Roll to replace your defense against that bane to throw it off (essentially a defend interrupt). That would be easier than trying to figure out all this other stuff, and it is already using mechanics in the game (as someone can do a defend interrupt to try and make the bane not land).

In the case of the exceptional success that puts the bane on, this means that would be hard to throw it off,b ut I would suggest taking the roll - 10 and that is the number you have to beat.

That would also make a really exceptional Bane Attack roll have way more meaning.

[Daranar]

@Great_Moustache

but the thing is, the PL doesn’t mean something when it is inflicted. The only bearing on PL is whether you can inflict it or not, and in the case of weapons, you can inflict it at 1 PL higher than your Attribute Score.

I think you could make an argument that a bane that is harder to inflict should be harder to “un-inflict.” I think there are flaws and/or technicalities with all the ideas so far. Trying to figure out which one I like best. Would like to put together a chart of Attr Level vs. CR probabilities just to see what it looks like. But first I have to do some billable work!

[Great_Moustache]

Well of course, there will always be flaws and technicalities, especially depending on what perspective you are coming from.

Part of my perspective was being part of discussions for changing core rules and adjusting the PL of some of the banes. Certain PL were decided to allow a wider range of use. For example, Immobile, Knockdown, and slowed all being PL 1. These weren’t all PL 1 from the start, but it made sense that anyone could have access to them from the very start. Not that they were necessarily weaker.

So I am a Powerful hulking brute with 9 Might. I grab ahold of you to immobilize you. You are a level 1, with 3 Might and 4 Protection. I roll a 30 to inflict immobile on you. You roll a 12 protection and have broken out of the immobile.

@Daranar

I think you could make an argument that a bane that is harder to inflict should be harder to “un-inflict.”

How are you determining “harder to inflict”, b/c again, the “hardness” of a bane to inflict is purely based on your targets Defense score. Harder to have “access” to is something different based on your level, but that certainly isn’t harder to inflict.

---

Thinking on this more, I really like the thought of using a contested roll idea. Especially if there is more complexity added, and something you are going to have to track anyways, why not track the original roll that inflicted the bane?

[Carl]

@Great_Moustache

In the case of the exceptional success that puts the bane on, this means that would be hard to throw it off,b ut I would suggest taking the roll - 10 and that is the number you have to beat.

That would also make a really exceptional Bane Attack roll have way more meaning.

I don’t really like this suggestion, because it can end up with some weird numbers. Consider a roll that needed to beat an 18 to have the bane attack succeed. If the roll is 27, the resist roll (under the system being discussed) needs to be at least 27. However, if the original bane attack is 28, then we have exceptional success. Some other effect is added, and the target for resisting the bane becomes… 18. Unless that other effect is really good, I think the person invoking the bane would rather just have the 28 target and no secondary effect.

[Great_Moustache]

You misunderstood.

Under current rulling, a Bane Attack has not exceptional success.

A Damaging Attack with exceptional success allows you to tack on a Bane for free. So instead of keeping that original number, taking it down by 10 for the target number to beat for resisting.

So I swing my axe and roll a 28. In addition to doing the 10 HP damage, I ALSO get to put on a Bane. Instead of keeping it at 28, I’m suggesting to drop it down to an 18.

[Carl]

Ah. I did misunderstand. That sounds reasonable.

[Great_Moustache]

Alright, SO, the whole reason to use the Target CR of 10 + 2*PL of the bane is b/c that is what is determined to do a Boon successfully, correct @Daranar ?

That determines the MAX PL you can invoke the boon as well. So even though you might be an attribute score of 9, you roll a 12, you can only invoke the boon at PL 1 (if it has a PL 1 affect). So the thing that determines the success of your boon is your Action Roll to invoke it, not the actual PL of boon that you can access.

So this is all to say, the actual 10 + 2PL doesn’t actually determine how strong the boon is. Your roll does this, the number you get on your Action Roll is what tells it in the end (and Succeed with a Twist, or Fail and the story continues). All the 10 + 2PL does is give you a reference for what you have access to.

In the case of banes, instead of 10 + 2*PL, you just have the PL and your Attribute Score to determine what you have access to. Currently what determines how “powerful” your bane is would just be how well they roll on the d20 resist.

Now if we made the Action Roll to invoke/inflict the bane on someone more important (which would also help with exceptional success on that Bane Attack), that would make the roll hold the power for the roller. This would make people put more value in getting advantage to Bane rolls (Bane Focus) as well.

So the following proposal is based on the following things:

• Complexity is already being added in tracking something for each bane a person has with all the proposed changes so far
• Adding meaning for the person doing the bane
• Making it harder to resist a bane on some level
• Making the least amount of changes, and attempting to keep complexity down as much as possible
• Due to the varied nature of how Banes can be inflicted, finding a way that feels “balanced” without assigning a hard number for a Bane
• Referenced Defend Interrupt Action for some wording, as well as current Resist Bane

---

#Alternative Resist Banes

When you are afflicted with a bane, record the Bane Attack Roll that caused it as the CR to resist the bane.

If a bane has been afflicted via Exceptional Success, take the Action Roll and subtract 10 to determine the CR to remove the bane. (Stephen rolls a 31 vs Ronald’s 20 Guard. Stephen inflicts Persistent Damage via Exceptional Success. Ronald’s CR to resist this bane is 21 (31 - 10).

You may choose to use your move action to recover from one or more banes afflicting you. This move action is a simplified way of representing any number of different ways you might go about shaking off the wide range of banes you might be afflicted by. For each bane afflicting you, describe how you are resisting a bane and then make a resist bane roll using an appropriate attribute (Fortitude, Will, Presence, and Protection are all typical examples of attributes used to resist bane). Note that some banes have different rules for how they can be resisted.

Many banes will persist for a longer duration after three failed resist attempts to shake them off. As such, you should keep a tally of any banes which you fail to resist.

[Daranar]

I think there is a lot of merit to this proposal. I don’t love the -10 math involved for exceptional success, though I understand why it’s there. I get your points about PL and that it does negate any value of exceptional success on a bane roll, etc.

I did make a spreadsheet to view probabilities vs. CR/PL but not sure it makes a strong case one way or the other

Attribute vs. PL

I also still like the idea of being able to put everything into a focused resist roll in a desperate attempt to shake it, too. But that could be house ruled, etc.

I’m slow, it can take me a little while to fully wrap my head around new ideas But I do see the validity in this one as well as some of the flaws in my last proposal…

[Great_Moustache]

Yeah, actually I meant to add a note after that saying perhaps use a -5 instead of -10

Waffling on that idea though. Could make sense either way.

[Great_Moustache]

@Daranar

I also still like the idea of being able to put everything into a focused resist roll in a desperate attempt to shake it, too. But that could be house ruled, etc.

I had a few thoughts on this as well. Potentially, you can do things to get advantage on this roll (makes sense b/c now the roll to inflict it has weight when it has advantage).

For the Feats that give advantage/disadvantage to resist, these would need to be modified to perhaps affect the d20 instead of the attribute dice. (Resiliant and Potent Bane).

OR

Keeping it how it is, so that it is harder to resist a bane. Only advantage/disadvantage can come from Feats for the resist roll, or certain factors determined by the GM for narrative, etc.

@Great_Moustache

This type of roll does not gain (dis)advantage except from feats that directly mention resisting banes. At the GMs discretion, other factors might allow (dis)advantage.

[Daranar]

I started to reply, realized I was going around in circles, so will hold off on commenting until I process some more! Thanks for all the thought you have put into this!

[Great_Moustache]

Yeah, I had that post typed and retype for awhile, just opened in reply mode for awhile. Walked away, made breakfast, came back.

It is a lot to think about. And I’m not sure that what I proposed is the best alternative or not, but I feel it is a good balance at the moment of all the various concerns.

Look forward to hearing your thoughts when you have time to let it roll around in your head.

[Daranar]

One thing my spreadsheet does show me is that with my proposal, low level banes are super-worthless against high-level characters, which is an issue. I like the other direction, where high-level banes are super hard to cast off, but the flip side kind of knocks a lot of banes out of play in those scenarios. So, that does make me lean toward your suggestion of making the bane roll matter.