(5:41:48 AM) Sunwise: As far as combat goes, the whole thing feels a touch off to me, really.
(5:41:58 AM) Wuzhles: Yeah
(5:42:09 AM) Wuzhles: Though I don't really have any ideas of my own how to improve it
(5:42:16 AM) Sunwise: Like, in the games, show, and probably comic, nobody ever gets injured by a single walker except in really rare, unfortunate, or unlucky circumstances.
(5:42:57 AM) Sunwise: And any single attack is very nearly guaranteed to down a zombie, because they're so slow and they become inexplicably squishy almost the instant they turn.
(5:43:12 AM) Wuzhles: That bothers me too
(5:43:23 AM) Wuzhles: Zombies should be one hit kills or easily incapacitated
(5:43:25 AM) Sunwise: The only time they're dangerous is when they numerically overwhelm you.  Which, of course, is a lot of the time, and that's why the zombie apocalypse is scary.
(5:43:35 AM) Sunwise: But the notion of anyone having difficulty one-on-one with a walker is just weird.
(5:43:36 AM) Wuzhles: just look at how easy even clem can kick a zombie and it falls over
(5:43:40 AM) Sunwise: Exactly.
(5:43:59 AM) Wuzhles: Zombies should only have like 3 hp
(5:44:09 AM) Wuzhles: so the only way to not kill it is to get a really bad roll
(5:44:12 AM) Sunwise: Sounds about right.  A head's worth.
(5:44:45 AM) Sunwise: And then you can still have those really shitty 0-Body Clem rolls where she has to whack Nick three times.
(5:44:55 AM) Wuzhles: uuuuugh
(5:44:59 AM) Wuzhles: That scene was just bad
(5:45:05 AM) Sunwise: It's always three with that sort of thing.
(5:45:06 AM) Wuzhles: Nick deserved better in my opinion
(5:45:42 AM) Sunwise: But yeah, walkers should have less HP, and they should be easier to hit.  Their threat should come from overwhelming numbers, not shitty dice rolls.
(5:46:08 AM) Wuzhles: You know that actually makes a lot of sense
(5:56:41 AM) Sunwise: Going further, to riff a bit off D&D's "sweet spot", the level 7-12ish range where people often say it's the most fun (and the most mechanically balanced, after the shitty you-miss-all-the-time-but-so-do-your-enemies of the lower levels, and before the auto-success and massive decimation at higher levels)... generally speaking, you'll have a bonus of +7-12 on your d20 roll in that range in D&D, on a 1d20 roll.  So your average modifier is about half of the maximum roll value.
(5:57:22 AM) Sunwise: If we were to look at the system here that way, you'd want a +5-7 modifier on average.
(5:57:48 AM) Wuzhles: I don't know if we'll ever level up strangely enough
(5:58:22 AM) Sunwise: Which allows room enough for some swing on the low end with unskilled characters with stats poorly suited to it (see: Clem's shitty hatchet work), and some big success for people who are hitting their Key and have the right stats (see: Lee, almost always, once he stops tripping over literally everything).
(5:58:34 AM) Sunwise: Yeah, I don't figure anyone's gonna level ever.  This just isn't that sort of game.
(6:00:49 AM) Sunwise: So like, let's say Lee's got +3 on all stats because he's a damn dirty cheater, and he's hitting his Key every single action because, again, he's the hero protagonist.  And he's got a weapon that's +2 against flesh, like a heavy fire axe or something.  That's still only a +6 total bonus, when he should be firing on all cylinders.
(6:01:54 AM) Sunwise: Of course, you'd also probably want to change the die result numbers a bit, for balancing around that.
(6:02:12 AM) Wuzhles: what do you mean?
(6:03:52 AM) Sunwise: Well, if you up the average bonus to a roll (either by fiddling with stats, adding skills, boosting Key effects, circumstance modifiers, or whatever else), then the current system of "6 or less fails, 7-9 is conditional success, 10-11 is total success, and 12 is a crit success" or whatever it is presently (I'm not entirely clear since I've yet to roll anything) does mean it's really hard to fail.
(6:04:35 AM) Sunwise: Most of what I'm getting at is that the random element's range is way too large (2-12) compared to the amount of bonuses people get to add to most rolls (+2 on a good day).
(6:04:49 AM) Wuzhles: oh so
(6:05:03 AM) Wuzhles: The results thing should dial up.. or wait, down?
(6:05:13 AM) Wuzhles: Like 2~4 is a failure?
(6:05:23 AM) Wuzhles: instead of 2~6
(6:05:41 AM) Sunwise: Well, the problem there is there's too much random swing.
(6:06:06 AM) Sunwise: The bonuses you can get count for only 1/6 as much as the randomness of the dice.
(6:06:16 AM) Sunwise: (on average)
(6:07:05 AM) Wuzhles: I feel really dumb here
(6:07:05 AM) Wuzhles: but
(6:07:39 AM) Wuzhles: The chance of failure should go down, the "intermediate success" increased and the "Success" thing stay, however 12 (max without modifiers) become critical hit?
(6:07:59 AM) Sunwise: Under the current system, that might be the best way to do it.
(6:08:07 AM) Wuzhles: I like it
(6:08:15 AM) Sunwise: Simply because everyone missing a zombie half the time is just dumb.
(6:09:16 AM) Sunwise: ESPECIALLY in the case of zombies.
(6:09:26 AM) Wuzhles: yeah
(6:09:37 AM) Sunwise: And especially because that sort of thing drags out combat needlessly, and combat is the worst thing when it comes to slowing down forum games.
(6:10:02 AM) Wuzhles: You could actually put this forward to Snicker and Bandito
(6:10:06 AM) Wuzhles: I think they'd like the idea
(6:10:11 AM) Wuzhles: also Galdis I guess
(6:10:16 AM) Wuzhles: but he sure comes here a lot.
(6:10:17 AM) Sunwise: Sure, it's dramatic, but in the source material, the drama is very rarely "will I hit or miss this one single zombie", but rather, "will I escape this whole zombie horde".
(6:11:11 AM) Sunwise: And then you've still got a substantial chance of failure for someone who, say, has a 0 modifier because they don't have the stats or any sort of experience with a gun.
(6:15:56 AM) Sunwise: I'd hafta ponder on it a bit more to really hash out something useful for a solution.
(6:16:13 AM) Sunwise: Because, of course, you also don't want to trivialize non-zombie-related tasks for inexperienced/unskilled people.
(6:16:51 AM) Wuzhles: I hated that roll I made for my character
(6:16:55 AM) Wuzhles: 6
(6:16:59 AM) Wuzhles: Which is close to 50% so
(6:17:02 AM) Wuzhles: What the hell, right?
(6:17:10 AM) Wuzhles: In fact it IS 50%
(6:17:49 AM) Wuzhles: I wonder how a combo of like
(6:17:58 AM) Wuzhles: Striking a 2d6 or something
(6:18:06 AM) Wuzhles: Then a dice with 100 faces
(6:18:17 AM) Wuzhles: .d 2d6
(6:18:17 AM) Internets: :: Total 4 / 12 [33%] :: Results [1, 3] ::
(6:18:28 AM) Wuzhles: and then
(6:18:34 AM) Wuzhles: .d 1d100
(6:18:34 AM) Internets: :: Total 75 / 100 [75%] :: Results [75] ::
(6:18:49 AM) Wuzhles: I am not smarts here
(6:18:50 AM) Wuzhles: Never mind
(6:19:46 AM) Sunwise: Well, in the end, the question is where you want success to happen.  If the breakpoint is 50%, then that should be retained on most actions.  It makes sense for someone who's not physically fit or a trained gymnast to fail pretty often trying to jump between rooftops.
(6:20:08 AM) Sunwise: But then attacking a zombie should have some sort of "this is very nearly a stationary target" bonus.
(6:20:25 AM) Sunwise: Because even an untrained, unsuited person is going to have a reasonably easy time hitting a single zombie.
(6:22:32 AM) Wuzhles: My character has +2 Mind
(6:22:44 AM) Wuzhles: And I gave him a Melee weapon
(6:22:46 AM) Wuzhles: I feel dumb
(6:23:00 AM) Sunwise: And even then, he should be able to hit a zombie.
(6:23:06 AM) Wuzhles: yeah
(6:23:15 AM) Wuzhles: He charged a zombie shambling towards him
(6:23:21 AM) Sunwise: It's not like they're trying very hard to get out of the way.
(6:23:22 AM) Wuzhles: Because for some dumb reason I got a Riot Shield
(6:23:26 AM) Sunwise: Humans, he should have trouble hitting.