One of the biggest problems I've always have with D&D style games is hit points. They just don't make sense in any sort of realistic way. Like when reading a combat encounter in a D&D novel the characters don't just take sword blow after sword blow and carry on like it's nothing. Mostly it's about avoiding getting hit not just soaking up the damage until they pass out.
Anyways while looking at the healing spells I had a simple idea of making it at least a little more realistic. Characters would have their hit points grouped into quarters. It would got as follows...
Lightly wounded: 75%-100% of total hp. No wound penalty.
Moderately wounded: 50%-75% of total hp. -1 penalty to actions.
Seriously wounded: 25%-50% of total hp. -2 penalty to actions.
Critically wounded: 0%-25% of total hp. -4 penalty to actions.
I dunno. What do you guys think?
One of the biggest problems I've always have with D&D style games is hit points. They just don't make sense in any sort of realistic way. Like when reading a combat encounter in a D&D novel the characters don't just take sword blow after sword blow and carry on like it's nothing. Mostly it's about avoiding getting hit not just soaking up the damage until they pass out.
Anyways while looking at the healing spells I had a simple idea of making it at least a little more realistic. Characters would have their hit points grouped into quarters. It would got as follows...
Lightly wounded: 75%-100% of total hp. No wound penalty.
Moderately wounded: 50%-75% of total hp. -1 penalty to actions.
Seriously wounded: 25%-50% of total hp. -2 penalty to actions.
Critically wounded: 0%-25% of total hp. -4 penalty to actions.I dunno. What do you guys think?
The idea of wounds v. hit points is something I've kicked around for quite some time. Sagas (the RPG) has something like this, I understand, and I think Star Wars Sagas (which, if I recall, is a d20 based system) does as well. Yours is a nifty concept.
For myself, what I do, is take hit points, wound points, and defenses and saves, and apply them similarly but separately. I think your idea could definitely work, however one difficulty many players would have is recalculating their various levels of "woundedness"* every time they get a level. It's actually a nice system, but that's a complication many players don't want to deal with (much like my wound points v. hit points... it's one more thing to keep track of).
So keep that in mind with any changes you tack on. A local group might respond better than a global one... almost certainly will, in fact... if said group is up to it.
* This is so, totally not a word.
One thing I like about this idea is it gives a good way of describing how badly a player or npc is hurt. I don't allow plays to say exactly what their current hit points are at. So rather then saying "I'm down to 15 hp" a player can tell the party healer that they're seriously wounded. Or when asking how badly a monster is hurt rather then saying something like "It's less then half dead" I could say "It's only moderately wounded". :)
The idea of wounds v. hit points is something I've kicked around for quite some time. Sagas (the RPG) has something like this, I understand, and I think Star Wars Sagas (which, if I recall, is a d20 based system) does as well. Yours is a nifty concept.
For myself, what I do, is take hit points, wound points, and defenses and saves, and apply them similarly but separately. I think your idea could definitely work, however one difficulty many players would have is recalculating their various levels of "woundedness"* every time they get a level. It's actually a nice system, but that's a complication many players don't want to deal with (much like my wound points v. hit points... it's one more thing to keep track of).
So keep that in mind with any changes you tack on. A local group might respond better than a global one... almost certainly will, in fact... if said group is up to it.
* This is so, totally not a word.
It could work but having hit points, wound points and defense saves seems unwieldy to me. I don't think recalculating would be too much of an issue as even quarters is pretty easy math and I'd only be running games in person anyways.
I had a different idea for how to rework hit points which I sort of liked more but it got pretty complicated having to recalculate Everything! I want to keep it simple and the wound level concept is the most straight forward idea my limited mind can come up with. :)
I just use either Vitality and Wound or the Wound system from unearthed Arcana.
So have you guys, like, heard about Ultimate Combat for your PF RPG needs? :P
So have you guys, like, heard about Ultimate Combat for your PF RPG needs? :P
You meant the book where my Vitality and Wound rules come from? Yeah i got it.
So have you guys, like, heard about Ultimate Combat for your PF RPG needs? :PYou meant the book where my Vitality and Wound rules come from? Yeah i got it.
Except you specified Unearthed Arcana, not Ultimate Combat in your earlier post. And it's Wound/Vigor points in Ultimate Combat.
Except you specified Unearthed Arcana, not Ultimate Combat in your earlier post. And it's Wound/Vigor points in Ultimate Combat.So have you guys, like, heard about Ultimate Combat for your PF RPG needs? :PYou meant the book where my Vitality and Wound rules come from? Yeah i got it.
Same thing only better and i was only talking wound rules from UE. I also use UE's defense bonus and UC armor as DR rules.
|
I agree with your assessment of the problem. However, I don't believe that this is a proper solution.
The main problem I have with penalties to actions after suffering damage is that it causes combat to snowball in one side's favor. This is especially a concern at lower levels when a solid hit in the first round could cause a player to suffer (at least) a -2 to all actions for the remainder of the fight. At lower levels a -2 or, gods forbid, -4 is going to neuter a character's damage, to hit, saves, etc.
It's the to hit and saves that I have the largest problem with. If the party is losing a fight they shouldn't have the odds stacked against them in such a manner. This model prevents a momentum swing in combat.
Here's my nightmare scenario:
The party is ambushed by a group of archers.
- The party takes damage in the suprise round
- The archers will most likely have a high enough initiative take their turn before the party
- The archers are most likely more than one round's distance away from the party (at least the melee)
In the above scenario a low level party would all be suffering a -2 (or more) penalty before the melee even had a chance to attack.
Thats the Advantage to vigor/wounds your keep the realism of getting hurt (wound damage) but keep things mostly the same with Vigor.
I agree with your assessment of the problem. However, I don't believe that this is a proper solution.
The main problem I have with penalties to actions after suffering damage is that it causes combat to snowball in one side's favor. This is especially a concern at lower levels when a solid hit in the first round could cause a player to suffer (at least) a -2 to all actions for the remainder of the fight. At lower levels a -2 or, gods forbid, -4 is going to neuter a character's damage, to hit, saves, etc.
It's the to hit and saves that I have the largest problem with. If the party is losing a fight they shouldn't have the odds stacked against them in such a manner. This model prevents a momentum swing in combat.
Here's my nightmare scenario:
The party is ambushed by a group of archers.
- The party takes damage in the suprise round
- The archers will most likely have a high enough initiative take their turn before the party
- The archers are most likely more than one round's distance away from the party (at least the melee)In the above scenario a low level party would all be suffering a -2 (or more) penalty before the melee even had a chance to attack.
I see where this could be a problem. I'm not sure that it's a bad thing though. I don't like running Hack & Slash style Dungeon Crawl games anyways. My games aren't just full of random mobs that exist only to glorify the heros. There should be consequences. Combat is a b@@*% and should not be entered lightly. Grand Warlord Kills Alot should be just as susceptible to a sword in the gut as Farmer McAverage. I guess it's the CP2020 in me. In that system even the most experienced combat veteran can be one shotted if you're smart about it.
|
|
I see where this could be a problem. I'm not sure that it's a bad thing though. I don't like running Hack & Slash style Dungeon Crawl games anyways. My games aren't just full of random mobs that exist only to glorify the heros. There should be consequences. Combat is a b*#%& and should not be entered lightly. Grand Warlord Kills Alot should be just as susceptible to a sword in the gut as Farmer McAverage. I guess it's the CP2020 in me. In that system even the most experienced combat veteran can be one shotted if you're smart about it.
I agree with you:
- I don't like hack 'n slash either
- The world should be populated with a (reasonable) number of battles that threaten TPK
- The heroes should suffer consequences of actions (here, not checking for traps, being too loud/disruptive, alerting agents, etc.)
- A lucky stab should injure a character like a hanging breaking ball does a pitcher
That said, I believe that combat should be dynamic. When you start handing out penalties for not going first or casting buffs early you remove that possibility from the fight.
Again, this system may work much better at higher level -- where the penalties won't kick in until a few rounds into combat. However, at lower levels these rules would require a GM to tailor scenarios to eliminate surprise rounds and minimize the threat of numerous encounters. Indeed, at lower levels it would require the entire party to have a higher initiative than the melee; lest the tank (or beefy melee, as it were) become ineffective as they enter the chamber. This ineffectiveness would force a reasonable BBEG to focus those doing damage and whittle down the party to nothing.
I would love to see a series of rules that force characters to show the damage they have suffered as in-world details. I simply cannot imagine a structure that is neither too weak to matter, nor too strong to not work to that fatal detriment of a party (again, and I know that I belabor this point, especially to lower-level parties).
I like the injury system from UE, personally. Never got to play it, though.
I would try to stay close to the system optional rules. Therefore, use the Wounds/Vigor optional rules from UC.
If you need it more gritty than that, I think you should tone it down a bit and change the penalties. Something that makes you want healing, but not loss the ability to hit. Maybe something like this:
Lightly wounded: 75%-100% of total hp. No wound penalty.
Moderately wounded: 50%-75% of total hp. -1 penalty to actions.
Seriously wounded: 25%-50% of total hp. -1 penalty to actions, -1 AC/Reflex.
Critically wounded: 0%-25% of total hp. -2 penalty to actions, -2 AC/Reflex.
You might have to change the 'wounded conditions' naming so that people understand it is based on Vigor Points, not Wounds Points. Maybe injured?
EDIT: In hindsight, just use the existing conditions. Make people 'Fatigued' at 50% hp (or Bloodied) and 'Exhausted' at 25% hp (Critically Injured)
I really like the idea but haven't had a chance to subject my players to it yet.
It does bring up one classic question though "How much realism do you want in your fantasy game"?
I would try to stay close to the system optional rules. Therefore, use the Wounds/Vigor optional rules from UC.
If you need it more gritty than that, I think you should tone it down a bit and change the penalties. Something that makes you want healing, but not loss the ability to hit. Maybe something like this:
Lightly wounded: 75%-100% of total hp. No wound penalty.
Moderately wounded: 50%-75% of total hp. -1 penalty to actions.
Seriously wounded: 25%-50% of total hp. -1 penalty to actions, -1 AC/Reflex.
Critically wounded: 0%-25% of total hp. -2 penalty to actions, -2 AC/Reflex.You might have to change the 'wounded conditions' naming so that people understand it is based on Vigor Points, not Wounds Points. Maybe injured?
EDIT: In hindsight, just use the existing conditions. Make people 'Fatigued' at 50% hp (or Bloodied) and 'Exhausted' at 25% hp (Critically Injured)
The penalties are certainly open to modification. I just like the idea of having health broken down into four categories to match up with the named healing spells. :p
Sounds like your looking for a system closer to Friday night firefight.
Woot! I love that bit in the CP2020 FNFF where they talk about Newtonian Physics. It's pretty funny. :)
HereMuch debate and a lot of good stuff thrown around but kirth had a pretty good system that holds and has been used in actual play
Lightly wounded (<50% total hp left): fatigued*
Heavily wounded (<25% total hp left): exhausted*** In game, fatigue just applies a -1 to everything -- including concentration checks and spell DCs!
** Exhaustion applies a -3 penalty to everything (and you can't run).Effects in play: PCs actually start using things like tactical retreats when they're overmatched and unprepared. The party likes to set things up, if possible, so they don't take a lot of damage. They use buffing spells a lot more (vs. relying solely on battlefield control and save-or-lose), and they use scouting, divination, and ambushes more often. Undead are scarier, because they don't take wound penalties.
Yes! Tactical retreats, using buffing spells, scouting, ambushes, scary undead, etc. This all sounds like good stuff. The players should actually have to think to be effective. A little bit of caution/paranoia is a good thing. If I just want easy mode, with a bunch of mobs that exist solely to be slaughtered and glorify the PCs, then I could be playing 4th edition..... I just hate their minion system so much! >.<