RE: [WW] Sherman Tank vs. Purple Worm

[Matt Smith <mdsiii@nts-online.net>]

Bobby Farris wrote:

>I think you misunderstand what I am saying. How you adjust rules is going to
>determine if the tank or monster is better. This is why I say you have to
>decide which way you want to go first.
>Let me give you some examples.

This is clearer to me, thanks.
>
>Basically there are three ways to go....
>
>1) Make no changes in any rules and fight it as is. This means the Sherman
>will kill the Purple Worm easily because the Worm will never be able to hurt
>the Sherman due to its PV.

Agreed.

>
>2) We "Monsterize" the Sherman. In this case the Sherman will loose its PV
>ability and it will be a somewhat closer fight. The Sherman has a lower AC,
>but its attack is a killer. Meanwhile the Purple worm has a better AC, but
>its attack isn't as good. The Purple Worms big advantage is its HP's. I feel
>"Monsterizing" the Sherman gives a slight advantage to the Worm.

Note that when the Sherman loses its PV, logically it should gain a
significant "STR bonus" to hit, since that is how the basic D20 system
handles penetration. Also, the Sherman's Armor value would turn into
an armor bonus to AC. It's the ratio of these conversions that will
determine the relative strength of tank vs. monster.
>
>3) We can "Vehiclize" the Worm. This I think would give the moste equal
>fight, of course a lot of that depends upon what rules we agree to use. That
>said, I don't like the ide of having to change monsters from the monster
>manual. I personally would drather see the changing or addition of rules for
>WW than changing what is D20. (Even though D20 is, as is all systems, a
>flawed system.)
>
Ideally, a conversion system would be symmetrical: run it one way to
"Monsterize" a tank, and in reverse to "Vehiclerize" a monster. If
done right, it wouldn't matter to the outcome of the fight which
combatant is converted, so you could do whatever is most convenient.

Matt Smith