Penetration [Weapon Trait][Crossroads]

[Admiral Squish]

Penetration:
Created for Crossroads: the New World

Weapons with the penetration trait more easily ignores the protections of its target. These weapons either punch through armor or hide, or deal damage by transferring force through it.
All penetration weapons have a penetration value. When attacking a target with an armor bonus or natural armor bonus to armor class with a penetration weapon, the attacker gains the penetration value as an untyped bonus to the attack roll. This bonus cannot exceed the equal the total value of the target's armor and natural armor bonuses to armor class. If a target's armor bonus and/or natural armor bonus does not apply again the attack roll, such as when making a touch attack, or attacking with a brilliant energy weapon, it does not apply when determining the maximum value of the penetration bonus. A ranged weapon with the penetration trait only applies the trait against targets within one range increment.
When a penetration weapon is used to attack an object, it ignores a number of hardness points equal to its penetration value.

Weapons:
Many weapons of the crossroads setting gain the penetration trait.

Spoiler: Simple Weapons

Show

Weapon Name	Penetration
Light
Dagger	Penetration 1
Mace, Light	Penetration 2
Stiletto	Penetration 3
One-handed
Mace, heavy	Penetration 3
Morningstar	Penetration 4
Ranged, One Handed
Javelein	Penetration 2
Sling	Penetration 3
Ranged, Two-Handed
Crossbow, Heavy	Penetration 6
Crossbow, Light	Penetration 4
Ammunition
Bolt, Crossbow	Penetration +0
Bolt, Bodkin	Penetration +1

Spoiler: Martial Weapons

Show

Weapon Name	Penetration
Light
Hammer, Light	Penetration 2
Pick, Light	Penetration 3
Starknife	Penetration 2
One-handed
Flail	Penetration 3
Pick, Heavy	Penetration 5
Warhammer	Penetration 4
Two-Handed
Earth Breaker	Penetration 6
Flail, Heavy	Penetration 5
Pickaxe	Penetration 7
Ranged, One Handed
Atlatl	Penetration 4
Buckler Gun	Penetration 4
Pepperbox	Penetration 6
Pistol	Penetration 6
Pistol, Coat	Penetration 4
Pistol, Dagger	Penetration 4/1**
Pistol, Double-barreled	Penetration 6
Pistol, Dragon	Penetration 4
Pistol, sword cane	Penetration 4/0**
Ranged, Two-Handed
Blunderbuss	Penetration 6
Culverin	Penetration 10
Double Hackbut	Penetration 12
Fire Lance	Penetration 4
Longbow	Penetration 4
Longbow, Composite	Penetration 4*
Musket	Penetration 10
Musket, Axe	Penetration 8/0**
Musket, Double-barreled	Penetration 10
Musket, Warhammer	Penetration 10/4**
Shortbow	Penetration 3
Shortbow, Composite	Penetration 3*
Ammunition
Arrow	Penetration +0
Arrow, Blunt	Penetration -2
Arrow, Bodkin	Penetration +1
Bullet	Penetration +0
Pellets	Penetration -2

*Composite bows add their strength modifier to penetration value.
**Double weapon. The first value refers to the firearm, the second to the melee weapon.

Materials:
The hardness of various materials, specifically, the material of the weapon's head, point, or projectile, modifies a weapon's penetration value. The tables above assume a hardness of 10. Some specific materials have special rules about how they affect penetration.

Hardness	Modifier
5 or lower	Penetration -2
6-8	Penetration -1
9-11	Penetration +0
12-14	Penetration +1
15 or higher	Penetration +2

[Admiral Squish]

I just recently remembered this thing, and I figured i should work on it a bit before it slipped away, buried deep in the thread, never to be seen again.
Anyways, this is just a possibility at the moment, I'm not entirely certain i will be adding it in, but after a bit of consulting with the real-world weapons and armor thread, I'm reasonably confident in my numbers and how they relate to one-another.

This is intended to be a weapon trait, just like trip, brace, or disarm, though perhaps it is a bit more complicated than most. Anyways, this doesn't increase weapon prices, you can't add it to any weapon, it just changes the way the listed weapons interact with armor, in a fashion I hope is a bit more realistic.

So, let me know what you think, I'd love to hear if my numbers are off somewhere, and if you see any problems with the system itself. It's a bit of a challenge to explain clearly and concisely, so if anyone has a better way to say it, I'm all ears. Thanks!

[Amechra]

"A penetration weapon applies its value as an untyped bonus to attack rolls, to a maximum of the total of the target's armor and natural armor bonuses to AC."

That does the exact same thing, with about a 30th of the words.

[Admiral Squish]

"A penetration weapon applies its value as an untyped bonus to attack rolls, to a maximum of the total of the target's armor and natural armor bonuses to AC."

That does the exact same thing, with about a 30th of the words.

*blinks*
*double checks*
*Headdesks*

I feel exceptionally silly.

[Amechra]

*blinks*
*double checks*
*Headdesks*

I feel exceptionally silly.

It happens to the best of us.

[Admiral Squish]

It happens to the best of us.

It does indeed. It's been a while, though. And then this happens...
Anyway, it's been edited appropriately.

Apart from that excessive over-complication, what do you think of the idea? How do the number look?

[Spiryt]

So, from that table, what happens with the rest of the weapons, like most ubiquitous sword, for example?

Similarly, what about armors?

In general, since some elements of Weapons and Armors get significant numerical boost, the rest is effectively kinda gimped.

[Admiral Squish]

So, from that table, what happens with the rest of the weapons, like most ubiquitous sword, for example?

Similarly, what about armors?

In general, since some elements of Weapons and Armors get significant numerical boost, the rest is effectively kinda gimped.

If they're not on the table, they don't have a penetration value, or at least not significant penetration to be counted here.
Swords, axes, any slashing weapons, really, they just don't seem to have the penetration power needed to be included in the list.
I mean, if you want to get technical, some of the larger blades might have penetration one or two, being able to slice through leather or padded armor, but they don't seem to really offer any kind of advantage against anything sturdier.

I haven't gotten to adding penetration-proof armor just yet, but I am indeed working on it.

Yes, some weapons do have a distinct advantage now. However, if you look at things from a mechanical standpoint, there have always been a few weapons that are simply mechanically superior to others, namely martial blades being the best option in light, one-handed and two-handed melee categories. Highest damage, most reliable damage, larger crit ranges, and no special training necessary. Bows have always been the better option compared to crossbows. Penetration may change the balance of power, but the fact that some weapons are better choices than others remains the same.


Oooh, here's something that just occurred to me: Would penetration interact with hardness when using a penetration weapon to attack an object? I think it would, in all likelihood, but how is the more pressing question. Perhaps a penetration weapon ignores hardness equal to its penetration? But then, you could have situations such as a stone hammer-head breaking through a steel door...

[Spiryt]

Yeah, some weapons always were unbalanced, but I personally didn't like that fact.

And I was simply thinking of different qualities in exchange for no penetration - no doubt that giving all weapons AP at all cost is kinda pointless.

Different qualities are obviously not the part of this particular HB though.

, you could have situations such as a stone hammer-head breaking through a steel door...

Stone absolutely can break steel door, all depends on impact etc.

D&D already has simple, but decent mechanics for this with 'Hardness' depending on thickness of said surface etc.

And of course one have to remember that 'hardness' isn't most fortunate choice of word - glass tends to be very hard, but often can be very easily smashed by bare hand, let alone stone.

[Admiral Squish]

Yeah, some weapons always were unbalanced, but I personally didn't like that fact.

And I was simply thinking of different qualities in exchange for no penetration - no doubt that giving all weapons AP at all cost is kinda pointless.

Different qualities are obviously not the part of this particular HB though.



Stone absolutely can break steel door, all depends on impact etc.

D&D already has simple, but decent mechanics for this with 'Hardness' depending on thickness of said surface etc.

And of course one have to remember that 'hardness' isn't most fortunate choice of word - glass tends to be very hard, but often can be very easily smashed by bare hand, let alone stone.

Yeah... I mean, there's two opposing drives at work. Part of me wants to make the weapons as accurately depict their historical abilities and uses as possible. But another part wants the weapons to be balanced against one another so that no single one is ever an 'obvious' choice in the game.
If I were to indulge the latter side of me, I would probably end up making something that assigns point values to various traits, such as special traits (including penetration), damage die sizes, wielding methods, range, and such, and then balance the point values of each weapon. But they would have little to nothing to do with the real traits of the weapons.


Well, hardness relates to the material, the item's HP is the part modified by thickness. So, an inch-thick plate of steel has the same hardness as a 1/10th inch thick sheet (10), but the former has 10 hp, the latter having only 1. Typically crystalline or glass materials have higher hardness and lower HP.

I think it would be easy enough to just say that a penetration weapon just ignores hardness points equal to penetration value.

[SuperDave]

I like what you've done here, but I have to admit, I'm reluctant to use the Penetration system in my Crossroads campaign that I'm running right now, for the simple reason that it makes combat that much more complex. My players are still fairly new to Pathfinder combat (most of them started with 4e), and I feel like throwing a totally new, untested mechanic into the mix, which fundamentally changes how weapons damage and armor defends would complicate things greatly, even if it IS a little more realistic.

[redwizard007]

What about dropping the penetration modifier and instead listing an additional AC condition (like surprised and flat footed) in monster entries? And obviously npc, pc notes as well.

As a military history buff I am all about realism, but it's a clunky mechanic to add to combat.

[gr8artist]

My advice is with Redwizard. The attack bonuses you give are too good, in my opinion.
I would suggest DR/piercing, or giving armors a regular AC and a "vs piercing" AC. Or just a flat 2 points of AC ignorance for all piercing weapons.
Perhaps have piercing weapons ignore 1/2 the AC of armors of the comparable weight category. Light weapons ignore half the AC of light armors, 1-handed weapons ignore 1/2 the AC of light and medium armors, and 2-handed piercing weapons ignore half the AC of all armors. I'm not sure how much is different for your campaign setting, but this is what I'd go with.

[Amechra]

The funny thing is that Piercing looks like it gives a big bonus to attack rolls... but it only does so if the other guy has a cumulative Armor + Natural Armor bonus equal to or greater than that attack bonus.

So your Shortbow with Bodkin Arrows would have Penetration 4... but would only get a +1 bonus on attack rolls against a Human wearing Padded Armor.

Now, one flaw I just noticed is that there technically isn't language that specifies that the other creature has to be benefiting from their Armor and Natural Armor bonuses to AC - I think it should specify that you don't get Penetration bonuses on Touch Attacks (and Brilliant Weapons should be revised to just giving your weapon infinite Penetration, in exchange for dealing no damage to objects.)

[Mehangel]

The funny thing is that Piercing looks like it gives a big bonus to attack rolls... but it only does so if the other guy has a cumulative Armor + Natural Armor bonus equal to or greater than that attack bonus.

So your Shortbow with Bodkin Arrows would have Penetration 4... but would only get a +1 bonus on attack rolls against a Human wearing Padded Armor.

Now, one flaw I just noticed is that there technically isn't language that specifies that the other creature has to be benefiting from their Armor and Natural Armor bonuses to AC - I think it should specify that you don't get Penetration bonuses on Touch Attacks (and Brilliant Weapons should be revised to just giving your weapon infinite Penetration, in exchange for dealing no damage to objects.)

I agree, dont allow the penetration to be used against touch attacks.

Also personally in my games I would make a feat that would add the penetrating traits to the weapons you have listed. It would mean that only 1 person has to keep track of the penetration bonus, not everyone..

[Admiral Squish]

I don't think it's all that complex, honestly. If you have a penetration weapon and the opponent has armor/natural armor, you get the penetration value as a bonus to attack, but the bonus can't exceed their armor bonus + natural armor bonus.

A 'penetration' or 'v. peircing' AC value... maybe? There are a lot of concerns. If it's just a flat value without armor/NA, then it would be no different than a touch attack. If it was reducing the armor by half, it would interact strangely with effects that increase or grant an armor bonus. Applying it on the fly would require significantly more math. And if it was based on the weapon size, then how would that work with weapons wielded in unusual ways, such as a large longsword being used as a greatsword by a medium creature? Or ranged weapons?

Maybe... Maybe if I broke it down to categories of penetration, and kept the cap of armor+NA?
Like, there's four values, +2, +4, +6, and +8, which would have to have names. You don't have to track your exact number, just the category. If you attack an opponent with armor/na, the bonus applies, but it can't exceed their armor+na. Modifiers would only move you up and down by categories, not by the actual value.

I'll add something to prevent it from applying to touch attacks, at the very least.