PDA

View Full Version : Low Health Penalties (Any Edition)



The Dark Fiddler
2009-06-01, 06:12 AM
One of the main things that I've seen about certain things, like Evokers, is that they're not that great because a low health enemy fights the same as a high health enemy. Solution? Make penalties for having low health, such as, off the top of my head and really crappy:

If a character has less than 50% of its health left, it takes a -1 on all rolls, including damage rolls. If it has less than 25%, it takes another -1 on all rolls, and a -1 on all ability scores except Constitution. If it has less than 10%, it takes another -2 on all rolls, and another -1 on all ability scores except Constitution.

Like I said crappy, but it gets my point across. If you have any ideas, I'd like to hear them.

Eldan
2009-06-01, 06:33 AM
While the basic idea is good, at least those you suggested above don't really hurt casters. Instead, fighters suffer.

DracoDei
2009-06-01, 06:37 AM
Penalize everything EXCEPT Constitution, or the math will slow the game down way too much.

The Dark Fiddler
2009-06-01, 06:37 AM
Any suggestions on fixing that?

Satyr
2009-06-01, 06:55 AM
While the basic idea is good, at least those you suggested above don't really hurt casters. Instead, fighters suffer.

Not really, if you apply penalties for injuries, physical attacks become a very effective form of debuffing. I use this for years with Serpents and Sewers, and I found it to be large step into the right direction - not to make combats more balanced, but to make them more suspenseful and interesting.

Jergmo
2009-06-27, 12:17 AM
This is a system I came up with for this.

50% health:(Deeply bruised, pierced, or sliced open)
Arm: -2 to all attacks and all skill checks involved in using that arm.
Abdomen: -2 to attack rolls involving the tail and Balance, Jump and Tumble skill checks.
Leg: -2 to all Dexterity bonuses for AC (if any) and Balance, Climb, Jump, Move Silently and Tumble skill checks involving that leg.
Torso: -1 penalty to attacks and Balance, Climb, Escape Artist, Jump, Move Silently, Ride, Swim or Tumble checks.
Wing: Flying speed reduced by one-half and maneuverability by one category.
Head: -2 penalty to Initiative, Listen and Balance.

Note: Body part must be hit again when below 25% health for the penalties to rise.

25% health:(Bone has been snapped, area severely pierced or split open.) Victim begins suffering from continual bleeding damage until injuries are healed.
Arm: Penalties rise to -8.
Abdomen: Penalties rise to -8.
Leg: Penalties rise to -8, movement rate reduced by one-half.
Torso: Penalties rise to -5 and movement speed is reduced by one-half.
Wing: Wings can only be used to glide clumsily and can only take off from an elevated position. When attempting to land, victim must roll a Dexterity check (DC 17) or crash, taking 2d6 damage.
Head: Constitution check (DC 17) or go into shock and suffer additional damage equal to base damage of the weapon used to cause the injury.
Bludgeoning: Cannot speak command words properly or cast spells with verbal components.
Piercing: Severe eye damage. -4 penalty to ranged attacks and Spot.
Slashing: -4 penalty to Initiative, Listen and Balance.

AvatarZero
2009-06-28, 02:35 PM
If you're already applying a penalty to die rolls, you probably don't need to apply a penalty to attributes as well. The die roll penalty will have most of the same effect, and you save a lot of recalculation of attack bonuses, hit points, encumbrance, etc.

If you want an injured character to be less able to move/lift, why not just count them as more heavily encumbered by one step? That includes a reduction to movement speed and ability to dodge. Obviously characters that rely on those will suffer (yay, it's a Monk nerf!) unless you specify that it isn't actual encumbrance. Not sure what should happen to an already heavily armoured character (yay, it's a Fighter nerf!).

That said, I'm not sure the game gets more fun for players if the PCs lose effectiveness with HP. Also, this sort of rule will shift combat more in the direction of all-or-nothing fights. Either you steamroll your opponents, or the fact that you're losing makes you lose faster. Just a thought. Season to personal taste.

Yora
2009-06-28, 02:54 PM
In 3.5e, I like the idea of being fatigued under 50% and exhausted under 25%.
Of course, this lowers your "effecive hp total" quite substantially.
If you're healed back over 25%, you still need a full hour of rest, before the exhaustion becomes fatigue and once back above 50%, you still need 8 hours of rest before being back to full strength. A heal or restoration spell removes the penalties, if the hp are back at the right levels after the spell is cast.
That's still not a problem for wizards, so I think the fatigued and exhausted conditions should also require a Concentration check with a base of 10 and 15 for casting spells at all times.

At 50% you're noticably weakened and at 25%, you're more or less out of the fight. Increasing hit dice size would be required, unless you want a campaign in which characters spend quite some time being severely beaten up.

Mando Knight
2009-06-28, 03:57 PM
Star Wars SAGA Edition had something like this: a "condition track," where if a character took more damage than his Fortitude Defense (plus a few modifiers if applicable), they would get increasingly large penalties.

One or two such hits (-1 and -2 penalties to all d20 rolls and defenses),weren't terrible, but after the third (-5 penalty), the character becomes pretty much crippled. You could also recover one step up the condition track by spending three swift actions (consecutively?) (SAGA's swift actions are like 4E's minor actions: you get 1/turn, but you can trade a Move or a Standard action in for an extra Swift action each).