HDCAM by Julien Boulanger (Bereflex). Unfortunately, the website that provided it no longer has a functioning messaging system that I can use to thank him and advise of the use of this image.

While merging all the tactical and attack mechanics into a single die roll, as described in part one, can greatly speed combat, there’s no reason to stop there. The next part of the combat sequence involves doing damage and may also require recording any losses of characteristics used in the attack if the system tracks endurance consumption.

There are many more variations in damage mechanic than there are attack mechanic.

• The D&D / Pathfinder mechanic is relatively straightforward: you roll damage according to your weapon type and stats – per successful attack – and taking into account any successful critical hits.
• Some Systems track an endurance cost for each successful attack.
• Some Systems subtract an amount from the damage that represents the protection afforded by armor.
• Some Systems track more than one kind of damage. Most commonly, one type represents Stun or Shock damage, and another represents physical harm.
• The Hero system tracks all of these, and adds a couple of further wrinkles: damage gets recovered after every turn, which represents a number of actions determined by the characters speed stat; there is a power that reduces the damage taken to a percentage of that inflicted; the two types of damage are not rolled separately, but are based on different ways of counting the same die rolls; there are two different defense scores, one for physical attacks and one for energy attacks. On top of all that, there are attack forms such as Mind Control that bypass all of this, and do no direct damage at all, instead comparing the ratio of damage done to a stat of the target.

That makes it far harder to create a single process that is one-size-fits-all. Not impossible – just harder.

1. Effect

In fact, to make it work, there’s a concept that you need to wrap your head around, which I’ve labeled “Effect”. It doesn’t matter what the significance or nature of the damage roll is, or if it’s multiple dice or just one, or any of the other complications; either I’ll deal with them specifically as part of the process described below, or they get wrapped up in this nice little bundle called “Effect”.

“Effect”, then, could be 2d6+12 (a D&D/Pathfinder damage reference) or 5d6 Ranged Killing attack with Armor Piercing costing 15 Endurance (Hero System) or 12d6 Mind Control costing 24 Endurance (another Hero System reference) or a 16d6 Fireball (another D&D/Pathfinder Reference) or whatever. Effect is the fundamental definition of the “damage” roll, as it exists within the normal game mechanics.

I’m going to use a relatively straightforward Pathfinder example to highlight the process. The base effect is d8+6, representing a Medium-sized target, a +2 Longsword, and a character with 18 Strength (+4 modifier).

I’m further going to assume that we’re talking about a 12th level fighter, who therefore gets three attacks in a combat round.

The Effect is therefore d8+6.

2. The N Factor

The second stage of the process is to assess and analyze “the N factor”. Part of the abbreviation process for attack rolls was combining multiple attacks into one – whether that’s an entire turn’s worth (Hero System) or because the system inherently gives multiple attempts to hit to characters (D&D/Pathfinder, for example). This is where we take that into account by simply multiplying the base Effect by the N factor – but it isn’t the only time that we have to use this value, so jot it down.

Our example character gets three attacks in a round, so the N factor is three. We care not one bit that they have different chances of success – that’s something that would have been taken into account in the Attack Roll stage.

The total effect is therefore 3 x (d8+6) or 3d8+18.

3. Effect Barrier

The Effect Barrier is any defense that has to be deducted from Effect “rolled”, multiplied by the N factor (because the Barrier has to be overcome with each attack, and the net Effect represents multiple attacks when the N factor is anything but 1.

Pathfinder doesn’t subtract defense from damage, it reduces the chances of an attack being effective – and that’s built into the attack stage. So the Effect Barrier in this case is zero.

For the sake of argument, I could suggest that the character possesses a magical shield or something of some sort that absorbs the first four points of damage from an attack, in which case the Effect Barrier would be 4. Just to have a name to hang this benefit from, let’s call it an Absorbency. Taking the N factor of 3 into account, Absorbency would yield an Effect Barrier of 12.

4. Effect Minimum

So: calculate the minimum “effect” that can be achieved after the N factor is taken into account, less the Effect Barrier. This is the minimum effective effect that can actually make a difference.

The lowest that you can roll on a d8 is a 1, so the lowest result on 3d8 is obviously 3. Adding 18 and subtracting the Effect Barrier of zero yields an Effect Minimum for our example of 21.

With the fictional “Absorbency” to take into account, the Effect Minimum would be 3+18-12, or 9.

5. Probable Effect Maximum

The damage-handling compression process that I have devised handles effect levels in two tiers, the upper tier being reserved for critical hit effect levels. This is the lower tier, i.e. the normal-hit effect. So, disregard any potential critical hit and simply calculate the normal maximum effect that the character can achieve, If there is a hit location system built into the game mechanics, identify the highest relevant effect multiplier and apply one-half plus HALF that amount. Then multiply by the N factor, and subtract the Effect Barrier, which should also be adjusted by the same hit location factor if hit location is relevant.

Okay, there’s a lot to demonstrate in this part of the process.

• The straight Pathfinder “Core Example”: Without any critical hits being involved, the maximum you can get from 3d8+18-0 is 24+18 or 42.
• With “Absorbency”: Without any critical hits being involved, the maximum from 3d8+18-12 is 24+6=30.
• If the Pathfinder GM were using a House Rule based on the Hero System hit location chart, the highest modifier would either be 2x damage (if based on the Body Damage results) or 5x damage (if based on the Stun Damage results). That yields a hit-location factor of x(0.5+1)=x1.5 or x(0.5+2.5)=x3. Folding this into the previous results gives:
  • No “Absorbency”, based on “Body”: 42×1.5=63, -0x1.5 = 63;
  • No “Absorbency”, based on “Stun”: 42×3=126, -0x3 = 126;
  • With “Absorbency”, based on “Body”: 42×1.5=63, -12×1.5 = 63-18 = 45;
  • With “Absorbency”, based on “Stun”: 42×3=126, -12×3 = 126-36 = 90.

Note that I don’t recommend either version of this House Rule, this is being used for illustrative purposes only! But if you did like the idea, I strongly recommend that this replace the normal critical hit system.

6. Absolute Effect Maximum

The absolute effect maximum is what happens when you do roll a (confirmed) critical, AND get the maximum benefit from any hit location, AND roll the absolute maximum damage that you can get.

Sticking with the same six examples:

• Straight Pathfinder: The base damage multiplier for a critical is x2. So that’s 2x(3d8+18)-0, or a maximum of 2x(24+18) or 84.
• With “Absorbency”: 2x(3d8+18)-12 gives 2×24 + 2×18 – 12 = 48 + 26 – 12 = 74 – 12 = 62.
• With Hit location:
  • No “Absorbency”, based on “Body”: 2x 42 x2 = 2x 84 = 168, -0x2 = 168;
  • No “Absorbency”, based on “Stun”: 2x 42 x5 = 5x 84 = 416, -0x3 = 416;
  • With “Absorbency”, based on “Body”: 2x 42 x2 = 2x 84 = 168, -12×2 = 168-24 = 144;
  • With “Absorbency”, based on “Stun”: 2x 42 x5 = 2x 210 = 420, -12×5 = 420-60 = 360.

One look at the numbers above should show why I don’t recommend this as a House Rule unless it’s replacing the existing critical hit system!

7. Probable & Absolute Effect Ranges

Damage is therefore defined as falling into one of two ranges: The Probable Effect Range, from Minimum Effect to Probable Effect Maximum, and the Absolute Effect Range, from Probable Effect Maximum to Absolute Effect.

I’m going back to ignoring the Hit Location options in the example, having demonstrated them in previous sections.

• Straight Pathfinder:
  • Probable Effect Range: 21-42.
  • Absolute Effect Range: 42-84.
• With “Absorbency”:
  • Probable Effect Range: 9-30.
  • Absolute Effect Range: 30-62.

But these are far more usefully written as a minimum plus a range:

• Straight Pathfinder:
  • Probable Effect Range: 21 + 0-21.
  • Absolute Effect Range: 42 + 0-42.
• With “Absorbency”:
  • Probable Effect Range: 9 + 0-21.
  • Absolute Effect Range: 30 + 0-32.

8. Non-Linear Curve Correction

To be practical, we want to map the range of results against a flat probability curve, so that we can apply the results at the greatest possible speed. This means that our simulation of the normal combat mechanics will be inaccurate if a single attack requires multiple dice to be rolled.

The easiest way to adjust for that – and it can be quite significant if there are more than three or four dice of damage per attack that is being simulated – is to adjust the variation of results inward. That means raising the minimum and lowering the range. The question is, by how much?

If you want to be technical, the range should be defined by the most probable 80% or 90%. You could use probability to calculate it, but that sounds too much like work and isn’t the ultra-fast and responsive result that we want. So here’s a rough rule of thumb: for two or three dice, alter the range by 5%. For every dice after the third, and up to the seventh, alter the range by 5%. For the eighth up to the 11th, alter the range by 2%. From the 12th to the 18th, alter the range by 1%. If there are more than 18 dice in each attack – and it happens in the Hero System, especially with high-power characters – alter the range by 1% more.

Here’s a key step: You have to DOUBLE the range adjustment. Otherwise, the increase in the minimum will make up for the reduction in range (except for rounding errors).

In other words:

1 dice = no change.
2 dice = +5% minimum, 90% range.
3 dice = +5% minimum, 90% range.
4 dice = +5% minimum, 90% range.
5 dice = +10% minimum, 80% range.
6 dice = +15% minimum, 70% range.
7 dice = +20% minimum, 60% range.
8 dice = +22% minimum, 56% range.
9 dice = +24% minimum, 52% range.
10 dice = +26% minimum, 48% range.
11 dice = +28% minimum, 44% range.
12 dice = +29% minimum, 42% range.
13 dice = +30% minimum, 40% range.
14 dice = +31% minimum, 38% range.
15 dice = +32% minimum, 36% range.
16 dice = +33% minimum, 34% range.
17 dice = +34% minimum, 32% range.
18+ dice = +35% minimum, 30% range.

Round minimums down and ranges up, UNLESS that gives an odd number for the range, in which case do it the other way around.

In our example, we have three attacks each doing 1d8 plus something, and that has given us ranges of 21 + 0-21 and 42 + 0-42 (ignoring the “Absorbency” option. Let’s double that to three attacks doing 2d8 each, and then assume that all six d8s are from one attack – that still gives us a range of twice that shown, i.e. 42 + 0-42 and 84 + 0-84. Maybe it’s a spell and not a longsword.

6 dice = +15% minimum, 70% range – so the 42 + 0-42 becomes 49 + 0-28, and the 84 + 0-84 becomes 96 + 0-60.

Doing this accurately requires a calculator most of the time. Or you could simply guesstimate it based on the above percentages and keep going – which is what I would do.

9. Absolute Effect Midrange

For reasons that will shortly become clear, it’s required that we define the midpoint of the Absolute Effect Range. This isn’t necessarily the straightforward average; if there are more than one or two factors to take into account, if the ducks all have to line up in a row in order to achieve the absolute maximum, if there is additional damage that only happens on a critical hit, if – in D&D/Pathfinder terms – each critical has to be separately confirmed, the point that is roughly halfway through results by probability is going to be less than the simple average.

I don’t count simply rolling maximum on the damage dice; that’s what the damage abbreviation system is there to calculate.

The Bias Ratio Sum

As a general rule, the more things that have to go right, the smaller the fraction of the distance between the low point of the range and the high point of the range will be “middle probability”.

The “Bias Ratio Sum” is simply a fancy (but accurate) way of describing how far through the Absolute Effect Range the midpoint of probability will be located, and it’s actually really simple to calculate.

Denominator

The important part is what’s on the underneath of the fraction. That is The Bias Ratio Sum, because it’s a total that gives the Bias Ratio.

If just one thing has to go right eg confirming a critical, the Bias Ratio Sum is 2.
If two things have to go right, the Bias Ratio Sum is 3.
If three things have to go right, the Bias Ratio Sum is 4.

The pattern should be clear: the number of things that have to go right, plus one.

To get the maximum, all three attacks have to be possible criticals, and each of those has to be confirmed. That’s actually 5 things that have to go right – the original critical roll (that’s assumed so it doesn’t count), the confirmation of that critical, and the two additional critical chances and confirmations, so in both examples, the Bias Ratio Sum is 6.

Numerator & Ratio

And the top part of the fraction is always a 1, unless there’s some re-roll or second-chance mechanism involved – in which case it’s 1 plus each additional chance. This can get a little more complicated than it seems, if the player has only one re-roll available for multiple rolls; if you have to handle this situation, the only way to get a usable value is to do one of two things:

1. Work out the complete set of possible situations and assess their relative probability, in exactly the same way you would work out the results of 3d6 or 4d6; or,
2. Fake it. Pick a number that seems about right.

The ratio is, obviously, numerator divided by denominator.

So, in our examples, the ratio is 1/6, since the denominator is 6 and the numerator is 1.

Calculating The Absolute Effect Midpoint

If there’s a range of 0 to whatever in the Absolute Range, then the absolute effect midpoint will be “Bias Ratio of the way through” that range. Which sounds a lot more complicated than it is. Just multiply the range by the fraction you’ve calculated and that’s the midpoint of probability, or close enough to it.

Quite often, you will have to decide how to round the result. I generally decide based on my reasons for choosing cinematic combat in the first place: if it’s to facilitate roleplay or skill activity against a combat background, I’ll round down; if it’s to enhance the drama of the encounter, I’ll round up; otherwise, I’ll round off.

• Straight Pathfinder, Absolute Effect is 42 + 0-42, so the range is 0-42. 1/6th of the way through that range is 42/6 which equals 7. So the Range Midpoint is 42 + 7 = 49.
• With “Absorbency”, the Absolute Effect is 30 + 0-32, so the range is 0-32. 1/6th of the way through that range is 32/6, or 5 1/3. For the sake of argument, I’ll assume that the combat is to be secondary to a player trying to solve a puzzle (a skill activity), and round down to 5. The Range Midpoint is 30 + 5 = 35.

10. Secondary Effect Types

While I’ve gone to a lot of trouble to explain what’s going on here, in practice – once you know what you’re doing – you can generally rattle off each number about as fast as you can write them down. Only once or twice is a calculator called for, and I’d guesstimate those numbers. Speed is more important than accuracy, as I’ll explain in a bit. I want to get the practical stuff out of the way, first.

It literally is just a matter of seconds. That means that it’s fast enough – when necessary – to repeat the process thus far for each type of effect that you need to track – whether that’s separate Stun and Body damage, or an Endurance cost, or whatever.

d10 or d12?

Ultimately, this replaces all the damage calculation with a single d10 or d12 roll. I’ll explain how in a moment.

Use a d10 if your game system doesn’t have critical hits. Use a d12 if it does.

Both D&D and Pathfinder definitely have critical hits, so in this case the choice would be a d12.

The d10 Range

Doing damage based on the d10 roll is really simple: roll a d10, multiply the result by one tenth of the adjusted Probable Effect Range (roughly), and add the Probable Effect Minimum.

The d12 Results

For results of 1 to 10, on the d12, simply multiply the result by one tenth of the adjusted Probable Effect Range (roughly), and add the Probable Effect Minimum, exactly as if you were rolling a d10. The result is not a critical hit.

13a. The 11 Result: Absolute Effect Midpoint

If the result on the d12 is an 11, the result is a critical hit doing the damage calculated as the Absolute Effect Midpoint. If you want a bit of variability, subtract 5 and add a d10, or use -10 and a d20, but I don’t usually bother.

13b. The 12 Result: Adjusted Absolute Maximum

If the result on the d12 is a 12, the result is a critical hit doing the damage calculated as the Absolute Maximum – as adjusted for multiple dice, if necessary. If you want a bit of variability, subtract 5 and add a d10, or use -10 and a d20, but I don’t usually bother.

The Underlying Philosophy

While this system for accelerating damage handling is grounded in the realities of the existing game mechanics, it is not a perfect simulation and doesn’t pretend to be. It is predicated on the principle that so long as both sides are utilizing the same mechanics, it doesn’t matter if there’s an approximation here or there, or the occasional inaccuracy; the system is still fair to both. Just thought I’d clear that up.

Going one step further

Of course, it’s possible to go even further. You could combine both the Cinematic Attack Roll and the determination of damage without too much difficulty. All you have to do is regard the margin of success as your d-whatever. If the damage process states a d12 is the right choice, i.e. you have critical hits to worry about, then the top two results – natural 19 and natural 20 – are treated as the 11 and 12 on the d12, otherwise the 20 is the same as rolling a 10 on the d10.

Of course, it would be absolutely astonishing if the range of success just happened to be 10 or 12, whatever is called for. It’s more likely to be 7 or 9 or 14 or something. So you may sacrifice some granularity – or you may gain some, but the odds are more the other way.

If your range of successful “hit” results is, say, 14, and you don’t need to allow for criticals, then it’s range times margin of success / number of possible “hit” results, i.e. 14. And a calculator is almost certainly needed.

And that’s the ultimate reason why I only rarely go to this extent. Why sacrifice everything you’ve gained by needing to pull out a calculator and use it?

The Advantage Gained

Ultimately, what this process does is define the minimum and maximum damage that can be achieved by a non-critical attack, make allowances for game mechanics, and then spread the range of damage between these extremes over a convenient linear scale after adjusting for what I described in the article on Attack Mechanics as the “non-linear probability hump”.

The scale of the advantage to be gained is dependent on the game mechanics being replaced; the more complex they are, the more the GM stands to gain. The Hero System, for example, is both the most complex game system to be simulated by this process, and the Game System that gives the greatest benefit from being streamlined.

Pathfinder, on the other hand, is far more typical. So, let’s tally up the gains and their cost using our example as a standard.

Three critical confirmations, three rolls of the damage dice, and six additions per combat round have been replaced with about six simple calculations that only have to be done once per combat. Let’s assume an average of 1 second to complete each of these tasks.

One combat round: 12 seconds vs 8 seconds.
Two combat rounds: 24 seconds vs 10 seconds.
Three combat rounds: 36 seconds vs 12 seconds.
Four combat rounds: 48 seconds vs 14 seconds.

Even at this freakishly fast pace, the trend is clear. But the reality is even more distinct: five-to-ten seconds for each action per combat round is probably closer to the mark even in a quick combat, while 1-2 seconds for each calculation remains fairly reasonable. And that’s per character. You ALWAYS roll a d20 to attack and a d10 for damage, so you may as well roll them both at the same time and simply ignore the damage if you miss. Yes, there is slightly more set-up time; but that is a one-time thing, or once per combat at most.

The Abstraction Of Damage

It’s far more challenging to abstract the damage part of the combat mechanic, but no less rewarding. The combination yields an enormous time saving, and enables combat to flow far more naturally, succinctly, and dynamically. The process may be more abstract, but the result is often a smaller gulf between action and consequence; battle feels more real because there is less of a wall dividing the visualization of action. Game mechanics may simulate reality, but they do so at arm’s length; cinematic combat is an action-movie roller-coaster in comparison.

Of course, part of that benefit exists purely through the contrast of pace between the abstracted mechanisms and the normal game system. You should always have a clear and compelling reason for choosing cinematic combat; overuse it and it will lose its mojo. But use these techniques in appropriate circumstances and you will be astonished at their effectiveness.

If abstracted mechanics bring combat closer to the players, would not no mechanics at all be the ultimate delivery vehicle for excitement? That’s the minefield that the final part of this series is going to walk right into…