Damage Progression

I’ve been examining damage charts, especially the damage for increasing monster size and weapon sizes.

This is post is largely analysis and comparison. I’m not done with this topic. I think I’ve got something (several somethings, in fact) that are better than the RSRD version, but I’m not satisfied yet that it’s done.

RSRD Damage for Increasing Size

According to the RSRD, when increasing damage through increasing size, the following table is used, once for each size increase.

I don’t want to have to apply the changes iteratively, once per size change. Following the guidelines above makes for some weird results. What happens when you go from 2d6 to 3d6, then from 3d6 to… what? As far as I can see you’d have to split the 3d6 into 2d6+1d6 and apply the changes separately, for 3d6+1d8… I’d be more inclined to make it 4d6 instead, which could then lead to 6d6 (2d6+2d6 -> 3d6+3d6), which should scale about right. Similar can be done with 2d8 -> 3d8 -> 4d8 -> 6d8.

Hmm. I’ll look at this as an option later. I hadn’t considered it when I started my analysis.

Monsters in the RSRD don’t always follow these progressions, though they usually come close. Specifically, dragons don’t fit.

Dragon Natural Damage, from RSRD

The progression used in all cases is 1d4 -> 1d6 -> 1d8 -> 2d6 -> 2d8 -> 4d6 -> 4d8, which is not what was presented above. It wouldn’t be terribly difficult to overrule the standard progression with this one, but it’s a little awkward.

The deltas of the means do not increase consistently. This itches.

Solutions

I’ve got a couple possible solutions in mind.

Solution 1: Revise RSRD Damage for Increasing Size

I didn’t initially consider this option because I don’t like having to apply changes iteratively. I think it might come close to what I was thinking in the first place, though, and it’s closer to the core rules.

I’ve split the 1d10 progression out because it’s uncommon and doesn’t really interact with the progression above.

This is getting weird again, though. And I still don’t like having to apply the changes iteratively.

Solution 2: Unified Damage Progression

Instead of having rules that get applied iteratively, what if there is a damage progression that grows in a consistent manner and increases in damage just move down the chart?

The simplest version of this is 1d6 per rank, scaled into the smaller dice when below 1d6.

This is pretty simple. If a medium creature (human, say) did 1d6 points of damage, a giant (huge human) would do 3d6 (rank 5, moved down 2 for the size change). It’s kind of boring, but it would work.

A more complex advancement that is perhaps a little more interesting might look like

Without getting into Epic tier I think we don’t need this many ranks… but it was an interesting problem filling them out. I appreciate the simplicity of just using an increasing number of d6s, but this makes a curve that better fits lower-tier damage.

There are some alternative values that are close but will throw off the monotonic increases (1d10 -> 1d12 instead of 2d6, etc.) if desired. I like the above table, though.

Application of Damage Progression

The progression described above can be applied to weapons and to natural attacks. In fact, it lets me define a natural attacks matrix.

Natural Attack Matrix 

	Basic	Expert	Heroic	Master	Champion	Legendary
Fine	1	1	d2	d3	d4	d6
Diminutive	1	d2	d3	d4	d6	d8
Tiny	d2	d3	d4	d6	d8	d10
Small	d3	d4	d6	d8	d10	2d6
Medium	d4	d6	d8	d10	2d6	2d8
Large	d6	d8	d10	2d6	2d8	2d10
Huge	d8	d10	2d6	2d8	2d10	3d8
Gargantuan	d10	2d6	2d8	2d10	3d8	3d10
Colossal	2d6	2d8	2d10	3d8	3d10	3d12
Colossal+	2d8	2d10	3d8	3d10	3d12	5d8

Weapons often run a few steps above this, which might seem unfair… except that I’d rather view it as “the Champion martial artist can hit as hard as someone wielding a greatsword”, which is pretty impressive.

How does this match up to some of the existing natural attack progressions?

Natural Attack Matrix vs. Monk Damage

The damage below is for a medium creature. Tiers are approximate (Monk goes up at the top of each tier rather than at the next tier; close enough).

Tier	Monk Damage	Natural Attack Matrix
Basic	1d4 (not in RSRD)	1d4
Expert	1d6	1d6
Heroic	1d8	1d8
Master	1d10	1d10
Champion	2d6	2d6
Legendary	2d8	2d8
Epic	2d10	2d10

Okay, this looks pretty close. The natural attack matrix lags by one level.

Natural Attack Matrix vs. Dragon Damage

This table is copied from above.

Size	Bite	Claws	Wings	Tail Slap	Crush	Tail Sweep
Tiny	1d4	1d3
Small	1d6	1d4
Medium	1d8	1d6	1d4
Large	2d6	1d8	1d6	1d8
Huge	2d8	2d6	1d8	2d6	2d8
Gargantuan	4d6	2d8	2d6	2d8	4d6	2d6
Colossal	4d8	4d6	2d8	4d6	4d8	2d8

I’m going to make the following tier slot assignments, based on damage done by size.

• Bite is Heroic
• Claws are Expert
• Wings are Basic
• Tail Slap is Expert
• Crush is Expert
• Tail Sweep is Expert

Without increasing the tier of the attack, the damage is a little lighter than the RSRD version.

However, I have to say that I like this. The damage is reasonable in that it is consistent with what other creatures can do (remember, dragons are already a little more powerful than their CR really indicates), but there is room for improvement (up to or perhaps exceeding the RSRD damage). I can also imagine a dragon that lacks some of these attacks (a wingless dragon shouldn’t have wing attacks) or a dragon that takes them in a different order (claws without a bite attack, or a dragon with a long sinuous tail learning the tail slap or tail sweep earlier).

Something I really like is that the additional attack forms are added as the dragon has lower-tier slots available. It starts with a bite attack (perhaps with claw attacks) because it has only limited slots, but can fill with more slots as it gets older (and bigger) and has more slots available.

This brings up multiple attacks per round. I’ll have to consider that later.

Alternate Natural Attack Matrix 

	Basic	Expert	Heroic	Master	Champion	Legendary
Fine	1	1	d2	d3	d4	d6
Diminutive	1	d2	d3	d4	d6	2d6
Tiny	d2	d3	d4	d6	2d6	3d6
Small	d3	d4	d6	2d6	3d6	4d6
Medium	d4	d6	2d6	3d6	4d6	5d6
Large	d6	2d6	3d6	4d6	5d6	6d6
Huge	2d6	3d6	4d6	5d6	6d6	7d6
Gargantuan	3d6	4d6	5d6	6d6	7d6	8d6
Colossal	4d6	5d6	6d6	7d6	8d6	9d6
Colossal+	5d6	6d6	7d6	8d6	9d6	10d6

This works out somewhat higher than the first matrix provided, and leads to the following Monk chart.

Tier	Monk Damage	Natural Attack Matrix
Basic	1d4 (not in RSRD)	1d4
Expert	1d6	1d6
Heroic	1d8	2d6
Master	1d10	3d8
Champion	2d6	4d6
Legendary	2d8	5d6
Epic	2d10	6d6

I can’t say I don’t like it. It gives a bit of a tune-up to the Monk, which harms nothing.

Given the tier slots chosen for the dragon above, we get the following Dragon chart.

• Bite is Heroic

• Claws are Expert
• Wings are Basic
• Tail Slap is Expert
• Crush is Expert
• Tail Sweep is Expert

Again, a slight tune-up, which given how I’ve been trimming dragons back might not be unreasonable. While the multiple-d6s approach is a little ‘boring’, it was also dead easy. Again, I can’t say I don’t like it.

Conclusion

I don’t have a conclusion, in the sense of having a decision which way to go. I like what the unified progression does for designing monsters (natural attacks) and weapons. I’m more comfortable with things growing slower at the lower end and will probably go this way. The multiple-d6s approach is viable as well, and something I may consider if I feel the need to increase damage output.

This needs refinement yet.