PDA

View Full Version : All Flesh Must Be Eaten -> Melee weapon rules



SpikeFightwicky
2009-11-04, 01:28 PM
Allow me to 'Axe' a few questions (for those versed in AFMBE rules):

Question the first: On the 'main' zombie damage sidebar (generic AFMBE zombie), it states that weapon multipliers do not apply unless the attack was a head shot. By multipliers, do they also include strength? For example, I recall (though my memory's suspect...) that the axe does something like d6*Strenth (an axe was specifically used in a game I was running), but it's slashing so it does x2 damage against regular human targets. By weapon damage multipliers, do they mean the x2 from a 'slashing' weapon, or both the *2 and *Str (for straight d6 damage). A zombie took a fire axe to the torso and I ruled that the strength multiplier still applied. A zomboid got hit in the torse for 18 damage and dropped. It seemed too easy, but then again, it was just one zombie.

Q2: Do zombies get a defensive action, or can they take multiple actions in melee? For example, I ruled that the zombie from the above example would not try to avoid the incoming axe at all (being a zombie and all). However, when the zombie tried to get the grabby-grab on the PC, I whiffed once and that was it (I wasn't sure if regular combat multiple action rules applied to them, since they're not very spry). It just bugged me that there weren't any stipulations for zombies with regards to these rules.

I had a 3rd question, but I'll need my book to ask it correctly.

Salz
2009-11-04, 03:32 PM
Hey there,

It has been awhile since I played so bear with me.

Q1: I would say you ruled correctly. The strength still applies. The bonuses for slashing do not.

Q2a: The defensive action depends on how smart the zombie is. Regular Zeds? Nope. One with animal intelligence? Quite possibly. It all depends on the intelligence and how you run them. That's part of the beauty of AFMBE. Really customizable and loose. Surprise those players with zombies they would never think of. Claws are particularly nasty I have found.

Q2b: I always ran it and had it run that they could. Subject to the usual penalties of coures.


I'll keep checking back for that third question.

SpikeFightwicky
2009-11-05, 07:43 AM
Hey there,

It has been awhile since I played so bear with me.

Q1: I would say you ruled correctly. The strength still applies. The bonuses for slashing do not.

Q2a: The defensive action depends on how smart the zombie is. Regular Zeds? Nope. One with animal intelligence? Quite possibly. It all depends on the intelligence and how you run them. That's part of the beauty of AFMBE. Really customizable and loose. Surprise those players with zombies they would never think of. Claws are particularly nasty I have found.

Q2b: I always ran it and had it run that they could. Subject to the usual penalties of coures.


I'll keep checking back for that third question.

Thanks for the info! As for the third question, it was about skill success levels as they pertain to attack VS dodge. From what I read, the dodger has to dodge with at least as many success levels as the attacker. But if the dodge doesn't succeed, but comes close, does it lower the number of successes the attacker gets? For example, if the attacker gets 4 success levels and the dodger get 3, is the attacker's damage modified for 4 successes (enemy didn't dodge, so they take full damage), or the difference between the dodge and the attack (the enemey almost dodged/got almost out of the way, so they take less damage)? So in the above example, do they deal damage as if they had 4 success, or just 1? (The difference between attack and dodge rolls being 1)

Salz
2009-11-05, 04:10 PM
Thanks for the info! As for the third question, it was about skill success levels as they pertain to attack VS dodge. From what I read, the dodger has to dodge with at least as many success levels as the attacker. But if the dodge doesn't succeed, but comes close, does it lower the number of successes the attacker gets? For example, if the attacker gets 4 success levels and the dodger get 3, is the attacker's damage modified for 4 successes (enemy didn't dodge, so they take full damage), or the difference between the dodge and the attack (the enemey almost dodged/got almost out of the way, so they take less damage)? So in the above example, do they deal damage as if they had 4 success, or just 1? (The difference between attack and dodge rolls being 1)

That is an interesting question. As far as I can tell (I've flipped through the book for ten minutes or so) there are no rules for that. The one thing that sticks out is on page 94, "The Outcome Table is meant as a playing aid, not a restrictive law."

It would seem to me that the Outcome Table is a bit tacked on (in the combat sense). That isn't to say we didn't use it, because we did. It adds spice to the game.

I would say it depends what kind of a game you are playing, and the tone you want to set with it. Badass Zombie Killer Extraordinaries? Have it reduce for the PC's but not the Zombies.

Personally my group (for the most part, and definitely when I was running) played Norms. We were much more into the survival aspect of the zombie games. As such if I was running today I would say you do subtract success levels. I feel to do otherwise is a bit punishing to someone who rolled well on their dodge. Imagine managing to get a 24 dodge only to have it beat by a 25 attack. Even though you rolled AMAZINGLY well your taking 4 extra damage before multipliers. That makes that at least 8 extra damage, more likely around 16 or so.

I hope that helps.

Feel free to ask if you have any more questions!

SpikeFightwicky
2009-11-06, 08:37 AM
That is an interesting question. As far as I can tell (I've flipped through the book for ten minutes or so) there are no rules for that. The one thing that sticks out is on page 94, "The Outcome Table is meant as a playing aid, not a restrictive law."

It would seem to me that the Outcome Table is a bit tacked on (in the combat sense). That isn't to say we didn't use it, because we did. It adds spice to the game.

I would say it depends what kind of a game you are playing, and the tone you want to set with it. Badass Zombie Killer Extraordinaries? Have it reduce for the PC's but not the Zombies.

Personally my group (for the most part, and definitely when I was running) played Norms. We were much more into the survival aspect of the zombie games. As such if I was running today I would say you do subtract success levels. I feel to do otherwise is a bit punishing to someone who rolled well on their dodge. Imagine managing to get a 24 dodge only to have it beat by a 25 attack. Even though you rolled AMAZINGLY well your taking 4 extra damage before multipliers. That makes that at least 8 extra damage, more likely around 16 or so.

I hope that helps.

Feel free to ask if you have any more questions!

The subtract successes method is what I was doing (it seemed to make the most sense). Though the PCs were full fledged Survivors, it was by no means a zombie slaughter game -> more of a 'try to survive', grittier game. So far the system works great! The game was 100% improvised whilst the players made their characters (unknown to them :smallwink:) but they said it was the funnnest RPing they've done in a long time.

I think there were maybe a few other questions I had that came up (I ruled on the fly to keep things flowing), but none are coming to mind. I'll be sure to ask away!

Salz
2009-11-06, 03:50 PM
AFMBE is very well set up to a quick and dirty game to play. The rules are not complex, character creation isn't too long, and it is fun.

It is good to hear it went well. I'll keep an eye on this thread for any more questions.

If you ever really want to make them cry, even as suvivors, make a fast zombie with claws (Similar to HL2 fast zombies). Claws are a players worst nightmare.

For Example; quoted from Calinero, a friend of mine IRL, I was running;



I actually haven't had too many character deaths, but I had one in All Flesh Must Be Eaten. I played a bartender with the drawback Honorable, and we were in my apartment. The other party members were a thirty four year old woman with a six year old son, and an elderly janitor. A zombie climbed up the apartment building and broke in through the window. The janitor had Cowardice, so he ran away immediately. The zombie had the woman and her son pinned in my bedroom. I could have run out the door, but I chose not to. Instead, I attacked it with my cricket bat to try and buy them time to climb out the window, down the fire escape. It killed me with its claws...a noble sacrifice, and one that would have been better if it hadn't ripped the boy from his mother's arms and torn him in half before he could get out, then chased the mother into the parking lot and thrown her in front of the janitor's van.


Salz's note: Actually, the van driver screwed up, ran the mother over, and the zombie dodged out of the way.

SpikeFightwicky
2009-11-09, 09:17 AM
AFMBE is very well set up to a quick and dirty game to play. The rules are not complex, character creation isn't too long, and it is fun.

It is good to hear it went well. I'll keep an eye on this thread for any more questions.

If you ever really want to make them cry, even as suvivors, make a fast zombie with claws (Similar to HL2 fast zombies). Claws are a players worst nightmare.

For Example; quoted from Calinero, a friend of mine IRL, I was running;



Heh, that sounded like a fun game! I had some plans for fast zombies, then zombies with claws (the 'zombie plague' was part virus, part micro-organism, and after enough feeding, the micro-organism would grow and mutate the body), though we didn't get to play too much AFMBE. I later turned it into a scenario for for a Conspiracy X game that I'll be running soon.

As for your play experience, how were the games usually designed? As in, was it like Dawn of the Dead where the world's 'taken over' and the survivors are just trying not to die (hold the fort besieged by zombies?), or more 'isolated incidents', where the survivors have to last long enough for help to arrive? The game I ran was planned quite literally while the players were making their characters, but flowed very well because I'm familiar with some 'Emergency Procedures' that might be taken in such an emergency. They got out of the building in which they were holed up, but that was the end of the session (and it was a one shot, though they definately would like to play again, though as part of a Conspiracy X type game).

Salz
2009-11-09, 03:30 PM
I normally ran (and played) where the Zombies had taken over, or were in the processes. I do run very sandbox games though.

I tried it being a single city where they had to get to the entrance to the quarantine zone. From there they would be taken and tested, etc. It just seemed so forced to me. (It was on the fly and I was not on the top of my game that day.)

We did play one game that was in the future, years after the outbreak and zombies were regulated to animals in the wilderness basically. I didn't have much interest in it. I (and a few others) just felt no real connection to the world.

So whatever you choose, make it believable. If that's your guys thing.