PDA

View Full Version : Looking for ideas for alternate (more realistic) damage mechanics



Yitzi
2012-02-29, 07:15 PM
As we all know, the hit point abstraction, as written, is horribly broken from a simulationist POV. So because I'm working on a system remake, I'm looking for something that can replace it, and be viable from both a gamist and simulationist perspective.

Some things to keep in mind are:
-What do hit points actually represent
-How healing scales with level
-How damage scales with level

After seeing some suggestions (so as not to put anyone's mind on a particular track) I'll post the best I've come up with.

SamBurke
2012-02-29, 07:26 PM
The way I look at it is as follows: you get hit solidly, you DIE. Instantly.

When you start your life as a soldier (level one), you get hit most of the time, and most of the time, that's a pretty good hit. You're green.

As you improve, you gain reflexes and instincts to help you. Now the hits from the same person (a person who's still green) are mattering a little less: the graze quite a bit.

By the time you reach heroic level, you have seen battle dozens, hundreds of times. You know where fools swing, and you can avoid, parry, or take most hits with strength. Of course, another hero could kill you, if he's got a good weapon and can hit you straight-on.

In game terms:

Level one vs level one. Damage given is pretty high, damage taken is high, Compared to level. Two noobs; the damage is coming from the inherent deadliness of the weapon (IE, it's hard not to kill someone when you swing a great sword or shot a crossbow).

Level five vs. level one, you're facing someone of lower level, you don't get much pain. This is because you are a superior soldier, and are dodging their weapons and attacks.

Lvl5 vs lvl5. Good fighters against each other, solid damage to each, but more variance miss vs hit.

So on and so forth... it's not perfect (LOTS of issues with DnD), but it kinda works for me.

Seerow
2012-02-29, 07:31 PM
I personally favor a variant on wounds/vitality, where wound points are much lower (around 4-6 for an average person, as opposed to con score). Wounds get damaged by 1 for every 10 points you pass the target's damage threshold, with an increase of 1 point (plus one extra per crit multiplier) on a crit.

As for healing scaling, have something like healing surge value that depends on the higher HP value, that is the base value for almost all healing.


HP is very fast to regenerate, and represents skill/luck/endurance. Wounds are slower to regenerate, and typically only comes back faster with mid level magic or special abilities like regeneration, they represent actual physical damage taken.

Running out of wounds means death. Running out of HP can either dramatically lower DT (so after running out you're much more likely to get knocked out/killed), or can just mean that you're knocked unconscious instantly, depending on how you want to run it.

bobthe6th
2012-02-29, 07:35 PM
also, a nice point that was made by some one
HP damage isn't just getting stabed, thats around 20%-10% hp. higher then that, go indiana jones style. your the protagenist, foot souldures should only be a problem if you are forced into a protracted battle. pot shots from the bush miss a lot, and you swords miss you. but after long enough, a hole is worn in your plot armor and you can be hit. then you will drop quickly, as your stmina is near it's end and you move slugishly.

ngilop
2012-02-29, 07:38 PM
For me the greatest and most 'realistic' i guess for I do have a limit on my won suspension of disbelief.

are teh health/life/what have you rules form teh late TSR futuristic game ALTERNITY whihc is basically a more detail wound/vitality system really, but then again i think the whole ALternity system was the greatets ever created. too bad that It came so late in TSR's life.

Grinner
2012-02-29, 08:02 PM
Don't forget to add pain and trauma mechanics.

In a pain system, becoming too injured too quickly would result in penalties or just becoming stunned for a number of rounds.

For trauma, if a character takes massive damage and survives, then he suffers ability drain to a random ability score.

These ideas could probably work in conjunction with the vitality/wound system.

gkathellar
2012-02-29, 09:28 PM
Way back when, on a community project that never finished, Eldan and I hashed out and I think basically solved the problems of the Vitality/Wound Point system.




I know the rules for it. I have Unearthed Arcana. I like the rules for it. What I'm not fond of is the insta-death by critical possibility for heroic characters.

If Vitality points are luck, last-moment effort and heroic grit, then it seems better to have them wear down over the course of a game session - and since there's not going to be any (or very little) instantaneous magical healing in this system, that's actually a thing that will happen.

By dropping the "critical hit on wound points", we make the danger less "some guy getting off a lucky shot," and more "pushing your luck."

I see.

Perhaps one could weaken the effects of criticals? Instead of dealing the weapons base damage to wounds, a crit deals 1 wound, or 2, in the case of a x3 weapon.

That sounds excellent, and should of course be in addition to any vitality damage for a hit. Maybe even more? Say, (Critical Multiplier) x (Damage Dice Rolled For Weapon)? That be 2 or 3 for most weapons, as high as 4 or 6 for guns and such. Or just give each weapon a Wound Value for critical hits.

Yitzi
2012-02-29, 10:25 PM
The way I look at it is as follows: you get hit solidly, you DIE. Instantly.

When you start your life as a soldier (level one), you get hit most of the time, and most of the time, that's a pretty good hit. You're green.

As you improve, you gain reflexes and instincts to help you. Now the hits from the same person (a person who's still green) are mattering a little less: the graze quite a bit.

By the time you reach heroic level, you have seen battle dozens, hundreds of times. You know where fools swing, and you can avoid, parry, or take most hits with strength. Of course, another hero could kill you, if he's got a good weapon and can hit you straight-on.

In game terms:

Level one vs level one. Damage given is pretty high, damage taken is high, Compared to level. Two noobs; the damage is coming from the inherent deadliness of the weapon (IE, it's hard not to kill someone when you swing a great sword or shot a crossbow).

Level five vs. level one, you're facing someone of lower level, you don't get much pain. This is because you are a superior soldier, and are dodging their weapons and attacks.

Lvl5 vs lvl5. Good fighters against each other, solid damage to each, but more variance miss vs hit.

So on and so forth... it's not perfect (LOTS of issues with DnD), but it kinda works for me.

So in that case, what should healing be? (As I said, I'm looking for a new mechanic, not necessarily an explanation of the existing one.) If the amount of actual damage you can take stays the same, then the amount of healing needed to bring you from zero to full should also be the same, in which case does that mean that a level 1 healing class can effectively heal a level 20 character?


I personally favor a variant on wounds/vitality, where wound points are much lower (around 4-6 for an average person, as opposed to con score). Wounds get damaged by 1 for every 10 points you pass the target's damage threshold, with an increase of 1 point (plus one extra per crit multiplier) on a crit.

Wounds/vitality is certainly an approach, but see the issues below.


As for healing scaling, have something like healing surge value that depends on the higher HP value, that is the base value for almost all healing.

That works well for healing surges (which are of limited availability that does not rise with levels, and are self-only), but applying that to magical healing would mean that a level 1 cleric can heal a level 20 character as well as a level 20 cleric can, and that could mess things up.


HP is very fast to regenerate, and represents skill/luck/endurance.

Skill and luck are not expendable resources, so that won't work, but endurance could work. I'll have to think about using either that or some other endurance-based concept (perhaps taking damage makes you lose endurance faster.)


also, a nice point that was made by some one
HP damage isn't just getting stabed, thats around 20%-10% hp. higher then that, go indiana jones style. your the protagenist, foot souldures should only be a problem if you are forced into a protracted battle. pot shots from the bush miss a lot, and you swords miss you. but after long enough, a hole is worn in your plot armor and you can be hit. then you will drop quickly, as your stmina is near it's end and you move slugishly.

I do not want to invoke plot armor in any mechanical manner. Stamina might work, though.


For me the greatest and most 'realistic' i guess for I do have a limit on my won suspension of disbelief.

are teh health/life/what have you rules form teh late TSR futuristic game ALTERNITY whihc is basically a more detail wound/vitality system really, but then again i think the whole ALternity system was the greatets ever created. too bad that It came so late in TSR's life.

If you can describe the system, I might be interested.


Don't forget to add pain and trauma mechanics.

In a pain system, becoming too injured too quickly would result in penalties or just becoming stunned for a number of rounds.

For trauma, if a character takes massive damage and survives, then he suffers ability drain to a random ability score.

These ideas could probably work in conjunction with the vitality/wound system.

Some sort of pre-death penalties for damage definitely seem advisable.


Way back when, on a community project that never finished, Eldan and I hashed out and I think basically solved the problems of the Vitality/Wound Point system.

The problems associated with criticals, I can handle. (In fact, I've been toying with, and will probably use, a completely overhauled critical system where criticals are determined not by the natural roll but by the amount by which you beat the enemy's AC: An 18-20 threat range is equivalent to having to beat the AC by 7, a 19-20 range means you have to beat it by 10, and a 20 range means you have to beat it by 20. Every crit does not multiply damage, but requires a Fort save* to avoid death: For a 2X multiplier the DC is equal to twice your damage (base weapon damage and STR bonus only), for a 3X multiplier the DC is 10 plus 3Xdamage, and for a 4X multiplier the DC is 20 plus 4Xdamage.) My problem is how the healing works and how it corresponds to fluff.

*All saves are also being increased, so a weak save is 1/2 character level plus CON bonus, and a strong save is equal to character level plus CON bonus.

Seerow
2012-02-29, 11:53 PM
That works well for healing surges (which are of limited availability that does not rise with levels, and are self-only), but applying that to magical healing would mean that a level 1 cleric can heal a level 20 character as well as a level 20 cleric can, and that could mess things up.


Worth noting: I mentioned something along the lines of healing surge value as a base value for healing. Surges themselves aren't necessarily needed for such a mechanic. (That said I do like surges, but would probably go with a more flexible method of distributing them, or make them much more plentiful but also fuel other things, and be an overall method of tracking exhaustion)

That a level 1 cleric can heal almost as well as a level 20 cleric is intended. The difference in the two would be the level 20 cleric would get more bonus healing, be able to use his healing more times per fight, be able to take better advantage of action economy (off turn immediate action healing is much more potent than standard or even swift action healing), or even things like "Heal double surge value". There's any number of ways you can scaling healing through levels without needing to have a set value of hit points recovered by the spell. In fact, it bothers me more that a level 20 warrior requires far more healing to recover from what is a minor injury to him than a level 1 warrior requires to recover from near death.



Skill and luck are not expendable resources, so that won't work, but endurance could work. I'll have to think about using either that or some other endurance-based concept (perhaps taking damage makes you lose endurance faster.)


Skill is not expendable, but having more skill can let you stretch your endurance further. Luck is not something you can choose to expend, but let's face it in heroic fantasy heroes are unnaturally lucky. They frequently go through a large part of a fight without a scratch just to get a serious injury right after. To me that indicates the hero's HP running out.

Yitzi
2012-03-01, 12:01 AM
That a level 1 cleric can heal almost as well as a level 20 cleric is intended. The difference in the two would be the level 20 cleric would get more bonus healing, be able to use his healing more times per fight, be able to take better advantage of action economy (off turn immediate action healing is much more potent than standard or even swift action healing), or even things like "Heal double surge value". There's any number of ways you can scaling healing through levels without needing to have a set value of hit points recovered by the spell. In fact, it bothers me more that a level 20 warrior requires far more healing to recover from what is a minor injury to him than a level 1 warrior requires to recover from near death.

Yes, I suppose there are other ways to make it work. It would, however, mean that the primary healing method I'd been planning on using (Pathfinder-style energy channeling) wouldn't work. It also means that an army of low-level healers as support would be an extremely effective tactic (if you can keep the enemy from attacking your healers.)


Skill is not expendable, but having more skill can let you stretch your endurance further.

Yes, but that's the endurance being represented by actual HP, with skill being relevant only to maximum HP.


Luck is not something you can choose to expend, but let's face it in heroic fantasy heroes are unnaturally lucky. They frequently go through a large part of a fight without a scratch just to get a serious injury right after. To me that indicates the hero's HP running out.

That's not the sort of story I'm interested in making a game for, though. That's more a narrative-based approach, and there exist good games for the narrativist approach.

Seerow
2012-03-01, 12:11 AM
Yes, I suppose there are other ways to make it work. It would, however, mean that the primary healing method I'd been planning on using (Pathfinder-style energy channeling) wouldn't work. It also means that an army of low-level healers as support would be an extremely effective tactic (if you can keep the enemy from attacking your healers.)


So what mid-high level characters are going to drag armies of low level characters behind them and somehow keep them 100% safe? Yeah, I get the feeling they'd either have to expend so many resources doing so that it isn't worth it, or they'd have a pretty high mortality rate and have trouble recruiting more healers pretty quickly.


Yes, but that's the endurance being represented by actual HP, with skill being relevant only to maximum HP.


But if skill is impacting maximum HP, then it must also have an impact on your current hp, otherwise without that skill you'd have fewer hp currently... I'm not sure why this point is even worth arguing about o.0


That's not the sort of story I'm interested in making a game for, though. That's more a narrative-based approach, and there exist good games for the narrativist approach.


If you're looking for purely simulationist then you should skip the vitality/hp altogether and just use straight up wounds, with a high lethality combat system.

If you want to step beyond that at all you have to accept some degree of narrativism. After all if you make HP purely endurance, then you should also have making attacks and doing anything else cost HP to do... and I think we both know that won't work well in the end.

gkathellar
2012-03-01, 06:47 AM
If you're looking for purely simulationist then you should skip the vitality/hp altogether and just use straight up wounds, with a high lethality combat system.

And honestly, if you're looking for realism, the d20-system is not the best way to do it.

Eldan
2012-03-01, 07:03 AM
Way back when, on a community project that never finished, Eldan and I hashed out and I think basically solved the problems of the Vitality/Wound Point system.

We really should take that up again at some point.

gkathellar
2012-03-01, 07:26 AM
We really should take that up again at some point.

Yes we should. It seems like it kind of stalled out around the time it was getting more formal and organized, so if that transition actually got pushed through, I think restarting it would be doable.

Too bad about the new Worldbuilding Forum, though - that's pretty slow in general.

Yitzi
2012-03-01, 10:13 AM
If you're looking for purely simulationist then you should skip the vitality/hp altogether and just use straight up wounds, with a high lethality combat system.

I'm not looking for simulationist, I'm aiming for a primarily simulationist system with substantial gamist aspects.


After all if you make HP purely endurance, then you should also have making attacks and doing anything else cost HP to do... and I think we both know that won't work well in the end.

Actually, in what I've come up with (thanks in large part to your first post), fighting or similarly strenuous activity does drain endurance the same way being wounded does. I'll post it at the end of this post.


And honestly, if you're looking for realism, the d20-system is not the best way to do it.

The current d20 system isn't. But that's a large part of why I'm writing a system remake.


What I came up with (based on Seerow's mention of endurance) is as follows:

-Every hit does damage unless it's reduced by armor or DR; this isn't compared to any fixed number of hit points, but is simply damage.
-In addition, a hit that does enough (the amount depends on the weapon) precision damage (in this system, if your attack roll beats the target's AC-equivalent and does damage, the amount by which the attack roll beats the AC-equivalent is added as precision damage to a maximum of 20; sneak attacks simply multiply this precision damage) is a critical hit, forcing a Fort save (DC depends on the weapon and non-precision damage done); a character that fails the Fort save is killed.
-A character also has a number of stamina points, with the maximum depending on constitution modifier, class, and level. Effectively, this replaces HP.
-For each minute of strenuous activity (running, fighting, using STR-based skills), a character loses 1 point of stamina. If a character is damaged (with or without strenuous activity), each minute he also loses 1 point of stamina per point of damage for each minute, in addition to any due to strenuous activity. This loss is prorated, so a character that is engaging in strenuous activity and has 19 points of damage loses 2 stamina per round. Lethal damage counts just as nonlethal damage.
-Massive damage: Damage from a single hit that exceeds a character's CON score requires a Fort save (DC equal to the damage done); on a failure the character immediately loses stamina equal to the damage done. Precision damage does not count for this purpose.
-A character that is at half or less stamina is fatigued (-2 to STR, DEX, and all saves, cannot charge or run.) A character at one-fourth or less is exhausted (-6 to STR and DEX, -4 to all saves, half speed, cannot charge or run.) A character with no stamina is unconscious (as well as having -4 to all saves), and if damaged continues losing stamina. A character at a negative stamina equal to his constitution score and at least one point of lethal damage is dying, and in addition to the above effects must make a Fort save (DC equal to 1/10 the lethal damage) each hour or take 1 CON damage. A character reduced to 0 CON in this manner dies. If the character's lethal damage exceeds his maximum stamina, he must make the save each round instead.
-Characters regain stamina over time: each hour, a character regains stamina equal to his constitution score. If sleeping (or trancing for an elf), the character regains an stamina equal to one-eighth his maximum each hour. Also, channeling positive energy restores surrounding characters' stamina, and channeling negative energy drains it. This gain is also prorated.
-A character can also treat another character's (or even his own, although this takes a -5 penalty) wounds with a Heal check. The check takes a minute and provokes AoO, the DC is 5 and the damage treated is equal to the check result minus 5. A treated wound no longer causes stamina drain or counts toward a dying character's chance of CON damage, but is not truly healed: Each round the character engages in strenuous activity, there is a 50% chance that one point of treated damage becomes normal damage.
-Characters lose damage over time: Each day, a character loses treated damage equal to one-half his constitution score, or half that much in non-treated damage if no treated damage remains. (This is also prorated.) Transmutation-school spells (usually divine spells) and similar effects can hasten this healing or even directly heal. (Direct-healing spells heal non-treated damage first, and do not heal treated damage any more effectively.)

Deepbluediver
2012-03-01, 11:43 AM
I'm normally all about getting game mechanics to make sense, but "realistic" health systems are one point where I think we should draw a line.

The first and biggest issue, I think, is what do you consider to be "realistic"? If you or I got stabbed in the leg, we probably collapse on the ground and howl in pain until we passed out. If a marine or navy seal got stabbed in the leg they could probably shrug it off enough to tie up the wound and keep going, abiet with a limp, and even then they would still eventually need medical attention.

But in D&D terms, special forces operatives or olympic athletes (arguable the most physical capable people on the planet) are likely no more powerful than a 5th or 6th level D&D characters. How exactly do you realisticly envision a 20th level fighter?

Every system for making realistic wounds that I've seen really just give crippling penalties to getting stabbed in the arm or leg (which admittedly, is kind of realistic) but turns every fight into rocket tag.

If you are dead set on altering the way the life-system functions, I would pick an end point first, and work backwards from there.
Decided what you want the epitome of physical health and endurance to be, and then start building the system around achieveing or limiting that.

Eldan
2012-03-01, 01:47 PM
Yes we should. It seems like it kind of stalled out around the time it was getting more formal and organized, so if that transition actually got pushed through, I think restarting it would be doable.

Too bad about the new Worldbuilding Forum, though - that's pretty slow in general.

Eh. I have some time this week and perhaps next too. I think I'll go set up a new thread for it, so we can start over from 0. Start with a compilation thread of ideas we already had, and a second one for things that were proposed, but never really finished.

Prime32
2012-03-01, 04:03 PM
The problem is, the HP system already simulates normal humans realistically. Normal human are lv1 commoners with 2hp. An lv6 character is someone like Michael Phelps (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Phelps) or Simo Häyhä (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simo_H%C3%A4yh%C3%A4). If you choose to play a higher-level character, you're choosing to play a superhuman.
i.e. This isn't "people surviving bullets is unrealistic", it's "Kryptonians surviving bullets is unrealistic".

A man fighting gods while being as fragile and easy-to-hit as a normal human, now that's unrealistic.

boomwolf
2012-03-01, 08:01 PM
You can use the regulat ruling just fine with it making sense, as long you fluff that normal hit are "shallow cuts", "minor stabs" and "small bruises" instead of "deep cuts", "puncturing stabs" and "crushing impacts", so while they ARE very effective against someone who's body is not use to taking punishment an needing to sustain some damage (read-low levels and squishy classes), a great fighter would not mind them much...
Until he get struck by some massive blow (50+ damage, with the instant-death rules) that just might take him down regardless of how durable he is, or if the enemy lands too many such minor injuries or even a few well-placed blows (critical)...

Yitzi
2012-03-01, 09:03 PM
I'm normally all about getting game mechanics to make sense, but "realistic" health systems are one point where I think we should draw a line.

It will, of course, require more abstraction than most systems, but I think we can do better than the normal D&D system.


The first and biggest issue, I think, is what do you consider to be "realistic"? If you or I got stabbed in the leg, we probably collapse on the ground and howl in pain until we passed out. If a marine or navy seal got stabbed in the leg they could probably shrug it off enough to tie up the wound and keep going, abiet with a limp, and even then they would still eventually need medical attention.

But in D&D terms, special forces operatives or olympic athletes (arguable the most physical capable people on the planet) are likely no more powerful than a 5th or 6th level D&D characters. How exactly do you realisticly envision a 20th level fighter?

As quite impressive. But one thing that is clear is that if he does reduce the damage taken, healing done to him is not going to be reduced similarly, so having hit-points-as-reducing-damage and not scaling healing to hit points (also known as D&D 1-3.5) makes no sense.

The other thing that seems clear is that while a more hardened character is more resistant to eventually passing out from his wounds, resistance to dying immediately from a dagger in the throat will grow far slower. I think my system captures that nicely, with immediate death being affected by Fort saves (which are less level-dependent than hit points), but eventually passing out being dependent on a hit point equivalent. (It also makes for a nice balance between "rocket tag" and "only casters get save-or-die".)


Every system for making realistic wounds that I've seen really just give crippling penalties to getting stabbed in the arm or leg (which admittedly, is kind of realistic) but turns every fight into rocket tag.

That's not what I want; the system I mentioned means you have to be halfway to "knocked out" to get any penalties, and crippling penalties don't apply for some while after that. Relatively easy healing of the penalties should also prevent rocket tag.


The problem is, the HP system already simulates normal humans realistically. Normal human are lv1 commoners with 2hp. An lv6 character is someone like Michael Phelps (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Phelps) or Simo Häyhä (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simo_H%C3%A4yh%C3%A4).

And would Michael Phelps be able to take so much damage that it would require 6 times as much healing as that required by a normal human who's almost dead? (Almost dead means just that, not just "took a wound that left him screaming in pain until he passed out.")


You can use the regulat ruling just fine with it making sense, as long you fluff that normal hit are "shallow cuts", "minor stabs" and "small bruises" instead of "deep cuts", "puncturing stabs" and "crushing impacts", so while they ARE very effective against someone who's body is not use to taking punishment an needing to sustain some damage (read-low levels and squishy classes), a great fighter would not mind them much...
Until he get struck by some massive blow (50+ damage, with the instant-death rules) that just might take him down regardless of how durable he is, or if the enemy lands too many such minor injuries or even a few well-placed blows (critical)...

The problem is that even someone not used to taking punishment isn't going to be killed (or even brought to within a minute of dying) by minor stabs. Passed out after a short while, yes, about to die (the effect of negative HP in D&D) right after being stabbed, no.

Saidoro
2012-03-02, 01:12 AM
But in D&D terms, special forces operatives or olympic athletes (arguable the most physical capable people on the planet) are likely no more powerful than a 5th or 6th level D&D characters. How exactly do you realisticly envision a 20th level fighter?

The problem is, the HP system already simulates normal humans realistically. Normal human are lv1 commoners with 2hp. An lv6 character is someone like Michael Phelps (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Phelps) or Simo Häyhä (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simo_H%C3%A4yh%C3%A4). If you choose to play a higher-level character, you're choosing to play a superhuman.
Your levels are a bit off, 1st level is ordinary person, 2nd is extraordinary, third is one in a million, 4th is once in a lifetime, 5th is once ever. Or at least that was the original design intent as I understand it, I could be wrong.

As quite impressive. But one thing that is clear is that if he does reduce the damage taken, healing done to him is not going to be reduced similarly, so having hit-points-as-reducing-damage and not scaling healing to hit points (also known as D&D 1-3.5) makes no sense.
Why doesn't it make sense? More physically advanced people take more magic to heal because there's more to rebuild. Remember that mundane healing all heals some multiple of your hit dice every time interval, that healing doesn't get slowed down as you level, it works the same way as in the real world.(well, not really, but it does in the sense you're refering to.

I think my system captures that nicely, with immediate death being affected by Fort saves (which are less level-dependent than hit points), but eventually passing out being dependent on a hit point equivalent. (It also makes for a nice balance between "rocket tag" and "only casters get save-or-die".)
I don't see how you're balancing between those, they aren't even really opposed to each other or anything. Anyway, this is completely rocket tag at high levels.

And would Michael Phelps be able to take so much damage that it would require 6 times as much healing as that required by a normal human who's almost dead? (Almost dead means just that, not just "took a wound that left him screaming in pain until he passed out.")
Again, magical healing. We can make the rules say anything we want and as long as they're internally consistent they're fine.

The problem is that even someone not used to taking punishment isn't going to be killed (or even brought to within a minute of dying) by minor stabs. Passed out after a short while, yes, about to die (the effect of negative HP in D&D) right after being stabbed, no.
Admittedly the dieing subsystem in d&d is wonky, that probably could stand being fixed.

Yitzi
2012-03-02, 09:41 AM
Why doesn't it make sense? More physically advanced people take more magic to heal because there's more to rebuild.

Yes, but if HP largely represents the ability to avoid damage, that should multiply the amount of HP healed (since more HP represents the same amount of damage)


I don't see how you're balancing between those, they aren't even really opposed to each other or anything.

Because save-or-die effects are a huge contributor to rocket tag.


Anyway, this is completely rocket tag at high levels.

How so? Your ability to get a crit does not increase with level (unless the opponent is neglecting defense), and the effects of damage are reduced because you have more stamina.


Again, magical healing. We can make the rules say anything we want and as long as they're internally consistent they're fine.

But when that internal consistency implies "someone who is able to turn a blow into a less significant blow reduces healing in the same manner", then you've still got problems.


Admittedly the dieing subsystem in d&d is wonky, that probably could stand being fixed.

Yeah, if damage led to unconsciousness rather than immediate death, then you could just let HP be ability to take damage (not to reduce it) and everything would make sense; that's a major goal of my system.

Xechon
2012-03-02, 12:38 PM
I know everyone will hate me for this, but...called shots. I believe that the best way is the right way, and oftentimes the easiest (occam's razor). So, if arms and legs get lopped off in the real world, why not in our games? Now, you can add a bit of randomness to this, because in the middle of melee combat it is hard to hit exactly where you want, but leave dodging the blows to AC and armour, and make sure you have a cleric in the party.

That's how I see it at least, but that idea isn't for everyone. Don't hate too much.

erikun
2012-03-02, 01:37 PM
I feel that there are three rough levels of damage you'd probably want to abstract in a game. The first is a near-miss/scratch, which is technically a hit (such as for delivering poisons and such) but does not cause any meaningful damage itself. The next would be something bad enough to cause penalities, either through pain or through limiting mobility. The highest would be outright destruction of a body part. Yes, you can granulate it further, but those are the overall three categories. I don't see how you can get scratched up enough to seriously impair you, or get enough bumps and bruises for a limb to fall off.

Being "high level" would likely mean resistance to wound penalities and an improved ability to avoid being hit in the first place. There isn't anything that would stop something crushing your arm to crush it any less, but ignoring and working through injuries does seem reasonable.

If you want to keep the HP mechanic, then it could be re-worked into an Endurance or Parrying mechanic. That is, rather than being a character's health, it is how long they can keep fighting and defending themselves before they start taking injuries. Note that the system would behave very strangely with poisoned weapons involved. (Also, HP = parrying would mean that shields could give a "HP" boost rather than a Constitution score. Would +5 or +10 HP/level make sword-and-board more attractive?)


However, one big awkward part of using HP and wounds is that one makes the other irrelevant. When you have a character with 100 HP, does it matter much what kind of wounds a sword strike deals when it connects? It will rarely do so, and you're basically just doubling the combat rules to handle what is a borderline case - and won't apply that often either, as a few attacks meaningful against a 100 HP character will quickly apply enough wounds to drop most opponents anyways. I might recommend a simple "When helpless, damage is applied to Constitution score" variant if you want to apply penalities and possibly death when the HP-equilivant is empty.



What I came up with (based on Seerow's mention of endurance) is as follows:
So if I understand this system correctly, characters have both Hit Points and Stamina Points. Stamina Points are equilivant to Hit Points, except they aren't recovered by healing magic, can't maneuver well at half SP, can't do much of anything at 1/4 SP, and recover it all by sleeping. Also, you take double-SP damage if you fail a Fort save. And die in the process.

I am not seeing this a reasonable, realistic, or even that practical. Even if we assume you are removing HP and allowing healing magic to apply to Stamina, the primary difference I see is that all creatures are effective for about 3/4 of their current HP, before falling into a "can only cast spells for meaningful effect" mode. I'm not sure if that's what you wanted, but that seems to be what you are suggesting.

Yitzi
2012-03-02, 02:23 PM
I know everyone will hate me for this, but...called shots. I believe that the best way is the right way, and oftentimes the easiest (occam's razor). So, if arms and legs get lopped off in the real world, why not in our games? Now, you can add a bit of randomness to this, because in the middle of melee combat it is hard to hit exactly where you want, but leave dodging the blows to AC and armour, and make sure you have a cleric in the party.

That's how I see it at least, but that idea isn't for everyone. Don't hate too much.

That could definitely work from a pure simulationist perspective, but would likely end up being unworkable from a gamist perspective. Also, it still doesn't explain what to do with body damage.


I feel that there are three rough levels of damage you'd probably want to abstract in a game. The first is a near-miss/scratch, which is technically a hit (such as for delivering poisons and such) but does not cause any meaningful damage itself. The next would be something bad enough to cause penalities, either through pain or through limiting mobility. The highest would be outright destruction of a body part. Yes, you can granulate it further, but those are the overall three categories. I don't see how you can get scratched up enough to seriously impair you, or get enough bumps and bruises for a limb to fall off.

Makes sense. I think special rules for rolling less than 1 damage would work well for the scratch case (say, it does no base damage and any precision damage is divided by the amount it's short of 1, but it can still deliver poisons), and body-part destruction probably is something it's better just to leave out entirely for gamist reasons.


If you want to keep the HP mechanic, then it could be re-worked into an Endurance or Parrying mechanic. That is, rather than being a character's health, it is how long they can keep fighting and defending themselves before they start taking injuries. Note that the system would behave very strangely with poisoned weapons involved. (Also, HP = parrying would mean that shields could give a "HP" boost rather than a Constitution score. Would +5 or +10 HP/level make sword-and-board more attractive?)

Interesting idea. But I do want to keep Constitution, and I think a parrying mechanic should not be an ablative effect.


However, one big awkward part of using HP and wounds is that one makes the other irrelevant.

The point of my system is that they build off each other: Wounds drain endurance, and draining endurance is why non-critical wounds are significant.


I might recommend a simple "When helpless, damage is applied to Constitution score" variant if you want to apply penalities and possibly death when the HP-equilivant is empty.

Never mind applied to CON score; damage to a helpless opponent will usually be a save-or-die effect, and a CDG makes it a particularly nasty one, so death is very easy to cause against a helpless opponent.


So if I understand this system correctly, characters have both Hit Points and Stamina Points.

You don't understand it correctly. There are no hit points (well, except for creatures with no CON score, which would use the hit point mechanic instead). If a blow doesn't kill you outright, you can have a million damage and all it will do is drain 100,000 Stamina per round (which will pretty quickly make you unconscious and then dying. Now that I think of it, though, there does need to be faster damage for being dying with really high damage; adding that now.)


Stamina Points are equilivant to Hit Points, except they aren't recovered by healing magic

Stamina isn't recovered by healing spells, but is recovered by channeling positive energy, which is quite easy for clerics. It also recovers relatively quickly over time.


Also, you take double-SP damage if you fail a Fort save. And die in the process.

What? You die for failing a Fort save against a critical (caused by high precision damage), you lose extra stamina for failing a fort save against massive damage (caused by high damage; I forgot to add this before, but that does not include precision damage).


Even if we assume you are removing HP and allowing healing magic to apply to Stamina, the primary difference I see is that all creatures are effective for about 3/4 of their current HP, before falling into a "can only cast spells for meaningful effect" mode.

Firstly, -6 to STR and DEX is a huge penalty but not one making you useless. Secondly, yes this does mean that a character near unconsciousness is far less effective; I see no reason this should not be the case. Thirdly, the primary difference is in that damage does not directly detract from a pool, but rather creates a gradual loss; as a result, time becomes a serious consideration when badly injured.

Reltzik
2012-03-02, 03:52 PM
I've been playing around with a damage system that might fit the bill. I consider it overly-involved for tabletop play (unless you've got a really hardcore group), but could work well as the underlying mechanic for a computer system. I've yet to nail it down precisely, so a lot of the following rules are vague.

Hit locations, HP, wounds, and bleeds

This system uses a hit-location chart that I've yet to peg down precisely. For now, assume that it divides into trunk, head, left/right leg, left/right arm. We might subdivide further into locations on that chart. Anything that hits you hits you at a particular location. Each location has a number of HP, which is usually pretty high. Again, I haven't pegged it down entirely, but figure that it's 10 HP for the head, 10 for either arm, 20 for either leg, and 20 for the trunk. Modify this by adding 1, 1, 2, or 2 times your con modifier to each location, respectively. Characters have two additional HP pools: Fatigue points and System HP. Damage to the first represents things which tire you, daze you, or distract you in the moment, and additionally many actions which you might take can inflict fatigue damage. Damage to the second represent things that affect your entire body, like shock, poison, some diseases, etc.

When you are hit, you gain a wound at a certain location, which represents a certain amount of damage AND a bleed effect with the same numeric value (ie, if you take 3 damage, you've got a 3HP wound and a 3HP/rd bleed effect). (It should be noted that attacks would do a lot LESS initial damage than in typical DnD; the aforementioned giant's axe could do 12 damage on a crit.) This reduces your hit points at that location, system hit points, and fatigue points.

Every round, the bleed effect applies its damage to the wound, to system HP, to fatigue points, but NOT to location HP.

Damage effects:

For every (say) 5 points of damage associated with the wound, you receive a penalty to some types of actions using that body part. For example, a 5-point wound to the right arm might give a -1 penalty for dexterity-based actions using that arm, or strength-based actions. Alternately, a hit to the leg might give a -1 penalty for move actions (if you're using a system where move actions represent something that you roll for), or reduce your speed. These penalties might be assigned by DM fiat, or there might be percentile dice involved. Furthermore, if you botch an action, do 1 point of damage to the location, fatigue, and system HP, for every wound that penalized the action, increase those wounds by +1, and increase their associated bleed affect by 1 (the wound reopens.)

If you are reduced to 0 fatigue points, you are stunned, dazed, exhausted, or otherwise incapacitated. Fatigue damage in excess of your max fatigue points becomes damage to system HP.

If some hit location is dealt initial damage from a single attack equal to its max HP, it is destroyed. For most physiologies, if this is the head, the character dies outright, and if this is the trunk, extraordinary and immediate life support will be required to keep the character alive. Limbs can be severed outright or reduced to useless pulp. If a particular wound ever amounts to more HP than the hit location, the character loses conscious control of this location; for the head or torso, this means falling unconscious.

If you are reduced below half system HP, you fall unconscious. Every full minute you spend at or below 0 system HP, you must make some sort of fort save or receive -1 to constitution, which affects (among other things) your max HP, potentially causing a deadly cycle. If you are reduced to 0 constitution in this or any other manner, you die.

Healing:

You naturally recover fatigue points every round at a rate dependent on your constitution, usually somewhere around 10/rd. System HP is recovered at a rate of about 10/hour. All bleed effects associated with wounds are reduced in effect by 1hp/rd every round, AFTER they cause damage. Wounds (and their associated locations) heal at a rate of roughly 10 HP per week; their associated penalties vanish as the numeric value of the wound reduces, and the wound finally goes away when it's reduced to 0 HP.

It is a single-round action to bandage a wound. Bandaging a wound will negate (though not end) some part of the wound's associated bleed effect, depending on how good your check was to bandage it. For example, if you pass your medicine check by 3 and the wound was going to bleed for 5 HP next round, it instead bleeds for 2 HP. Further attempts to bandage the wound stack. (This same system also applies to tourniquets.) Bleed effects will still heal, but good bandaging will prevent damage from being applied to system HP, the wound, or fatigue points as this happens.

Other rules:

Critical hits should be extremely rare, and will typically do x2 initial damage, with subsequent consequences for bleed effects, wound penalties, and hit locations.

I keep feeling that most weapons should have special properties under this system. For example, bludgeoning weapons could have increased initial damage but reduced bleed effects, and perhaps arrows must be pulled out (restoring their bleed effect to their initial value) before their associated bleed effects can be reduced below 2 HP/rd.

If you are scaling your character with a level system, increases in constitution affect your survivability. I could also see multiplying your HP by a fixed multiplier (say, 1.2) with every level-up. And obviously, you should be getting better at remembering to duck.


Example:

Kyle the Bandit has a natural -1 modifier to constitution, meaning his arm has total 9 HP, and he has a total of 63 system HP and 63 fatigue HP. Kyle takes an arrow to his right arm, a critical hit. This is a particularly grievous wound, sticking in the bone and causing 6 HP of initial damage. Kyle gets a single wound worth 6HP, with a 6HP/rd bleed effect, and the HP for his system, fatigue, and right arm all take 6 damage. The DM rules that the wound affects the strength of his right arm; all rolls using the right arm and affected by strength in any way are at a -1 penalty, and if he botches such a roll the wound's bleed effect increases by 1. Kyle is an archer, and would normally return fire with his bow. However, drawing the bow requires a minimum strength score, so that would be affected by his -1 penalty. Instead, Kyle runs and hides, an action that causes 30 fatigue damage in its own right.

At the end of Kyle's turn, the wound bleeds, causing 6 more damage to fatigue points and system HP, and is then the bleed effect is reduced by 1. He also recovers 9 fatigue points. Kyle's now has 51/63 system HP and 3/9 arm HP, and 30/63 fatigue points. The wound in his arm is now 12 HP in size, earning another penalty, this one a -1 to dexterity-based actions, on top of the existing -1 to strength-based actions, which use this arm. Furthermore, the wound size now exceeds his arm's HP, and he's lost use of his arm. The wound has a 5 point bleed effect associated with it. The combination of running and blood loss is leaving him light-headed, his life-blood's draining away and his arm's gone completely numb.

Next turn, Kyle pulls the arrow out of the wound with his other hand (causing 5 fatigue points). This restores the bleed effect to 6 HP/rd. He also wants to retrieve bandages from his kit, but can't because he's got only one working hand. At the end of round, he bleeds for another 6HP to the wound, system HP, and fatigue points, but recovers 9 fatigue points. He's now at 45/63 system HP, and has 28 fatigue points. His wound's now at 18 HP and bleeding at 5 HP/rd. The pain's debilitating and sapping his ability to act, and if he drops below 32 HP (which he will in 4 rounds, at this rate) he'll fall unconscious.

Next round, Kyle gets out his bandages, an action costing 5 fatigue points. He then bleeds for 5 HP, making his wound size 23 HP with 4hp bleed, his system HP 40/63, and his fatigue points 27/63 (he recovered 9 at round's end).

Next round, Kyle attempts to bandage the wound. This costs him 10 fatigue points. Despite high penalties for attempting the task 1-handed, Kyle manages to negate 1-hp of bleed per round. This round, Kyle's bleed effect only causes 3 hp of damage to fatigue and system, and the wound only grows by 3 points. Kyle's now at 23/63 fatigue, 37/63 system HP, with a 26 HP wound that has a 3HP/rd bleed effect and bandages negating 1 HP/rd of bleed.

Kyle continues his first-aid attempts next round and negates 2 more points of bleed. He's now at 22/63 fatigue, 37/63 system HP, and has a 26 HP wound that has a 2HP/rd bleed effect and bandages negating 3 HP/rd of bleed. Kyle's stopped bleeding, thanks to the bandages.

Kyle's within 5 system HP of unconsciousness, and too exhausted to run. It's been 6 rounds (30 seconds) since he was shot. He waits a few rounds to catch his breath, then scampers out to brave his pursuers as he searches for a better hiding place. Once there, he hopes to wait out the night, recovering 9 system HP/hour. Kyle can expect to heal 18 HP of his wound in two weeks, restoring his arm to minimal functionality; if he finds a doctor, he might be able to reduce this time with appropriate medical care that I don't have rules for yet.

BarroomBard
2012-03-03, 04:05 PM
Personally, I think the simplest solution is just to change your perspective.

HP, as said throughout this thread (and by Gygax himself), represents your ability to shrug off wounds, roll with the punches, or just successfully keep from dying. When you receive a blow that knocks you below 0 HP, this represents pushing your luck too far, or having gotten so weary that you make a mistake.

Healing, then, should be rethought of as magic which removes the weariness from you. It knits together the bruises and cuts you've received, it leeches the fatigue from your bones.

Grinner
2012-03-03, 05:36 PM
Personally, I think the simplest solution is just to change your perspective.

HP, as said throughout this thread (and by Gygax himself), represents your ability to shrug off wounds, roll with the punches, or just successfully keep from dying. When you receive a blow that knocks you below 0 HP, this represents pushing your luck too far, or having gotten so weary that you make a mistake.

Healing, then, should be rethought of as magic which removes the weariness from you. It knits together the bruises and cuts you've received, it leeches the fatigue from your bones.

Yes, but that conflicts with the whole idea of AC.

Plus, it becomes problematic at higher levels of plays.

Yitzi
2012-03-03, 08:08 PM
I've been playing around with a damage system that might fit the bill. I consider it overly-involved for tabletop play (unless you've got a really hardcore group), but could work well as the underlying mechanic for a computer system. I've yet to nail it down precisely, so a lot of the following rules are vague.

Might have some good ideas...


Hit locations, HP, wounds, and bleeds

This system uses a hit-location chart that I've yet to peg down precisely. For now, assume that it divides into trunk, head, left/right leg, left/right arm. We might subdivide further into locations on that chart. Anything that hits you hits you at a particular location. Each location has a number of HP, which is usually pretty high. Again, I haven't pegged it down entirely, but figure that it's 10 HP for the head, 10 for either arm, 20 for either leg, and 20 for the trunk. Modify this by adding 1, 1, 2, or 2 times your con modifier to each location, respectively. Characters have two additional HP pools: Fatigue points and System HP. Damage to the first represents things which tire you, daze you, or distract you in the moment, and additionally many actions which you might take can inflict fatigue damage. Damage to the second represent things that affect your entire body, like shock, poison, some diseases, etc.

When you are hit, you gain a wound at a certain location, which represents a certain amount of damage AND a bleed effect with the same numeric value (ie, if you take 3 damage, you've got a 3HP wound and a 3HP/rd bleed effect). (It should be noted that attacks would do a lot LESS initial damage than in typical DnD; the aforementioned giant's axe could do 12 damage on a crit.) This reduces your hit points at that location, system hit points, and fatigue points.

Every round, the bleed effect applies its damage to the wound, to system HP, to fatigue points, but NOT to location HP.

I'd rather avoid location HP as a general rule, as that will make things too complicated, as well as being too likely to be un-fun. It might be available through a feat-equivalent (do X damage and apply X penalty), but nothing universal. Having separate fatigue points and system HP runs into the same problem for the latter as a straightforward HP system: Something that kills a target immediately shouldn't affect a high-level target particularly less than a low-level target, unless it's due to taking less actual damage per HP (in which healing should scale, and that combined with improving healers makes it too easy to heal away any damage indefinitely unless damage increases to rocket tag levels.)

Healing:

You naturally recover fatigue points every round at a rate dependent on your constitution, usually somewhere around 10/rd. System HP is recovered at a rate of about 10/hour. All bleed effects associated with wounds are reduced in effect by 1hp/rd every round, AFTER they cause damage. Wounds (and their associated locations) heal at a rate of roughly 10 HP per week; their associated penalties vanish as the numeric value of the wound reduces, and the wound finally goes away when it's reduced to 0 HP.

It is a single-round action to bandage a wound. Bandaging a wound will negate (though not end) some part of the wound's associated bleed effect, depending on how good your check was to bandage it. For example, if you pass your medicine check by 3 and the wound was going to bleed for 5 HP next round, it instead bleeds for 2 HP. Further attempts to bandage the wound stack. (This same system also applies to tourniquets.) Bleed effects will still heal, but good bandaging will prevent damage from being applied to system HP, the wound, or fatigue points as this happens.

And magical healing? That's where the problem really lies.

The general system does have some stuff that I like, though, and is already in my idea.


Personally, I think the simplest solution is just to change your perspective.

HP, as said throughout this thread (and by Gygax himself), represents your ability to shrug off wounds, roll with the punches, or just successfully keep from dying. When you receive a blow that knocks you below 0 HP, this represents pushing your luck too far, or having gotten so weary that you make a mistake.

Luck won't work, as "pushing your luck too far" is simply not how luck works. The ability to roll with the punches, limited by exhaustion because it's tiring work, is somewhat better, especially with your idea for what healing does...it still doesn't explain, though, why avoiding damage from a powerful blow will tire you out much more than avoiding damage from a somewhat less powerful (but still devastating if you don't roll with it) blow.

ngilop
2012-03-03, 11:30 PM
If you can describe the system, I might be interested.


The best I cna do is give you the link to the wikipedia article. ist very similar to what somebody mentio with many diffent layers of 'hit points' so you have stun wound and lastly mortal.

anywyas it would take me a LONG time to actually describe it to you :( a fault on my part. anyways here is the link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternity)


also here (http://alternityrpg.net/) is a link to a website dedicated to teh game, just go to the forums and peruse them to get a good feel on what the game is all about with people who still actually play it.

erikun
2012-03-04, 12:40 AM
So it looks like you're replacing HP with SP, which ends up being the same thing except you get penalities at low SP values. And you're changing healing magic to "energizing" magic, and having it recover SP rather than the tossed HP value.

And the damage is delayed and spread out over 10 rounds. (Good luck keeping track of that.) I can't help but think there's a more elegant solution than that - something like "If you are below half SP for four rounds, you become fatigued."


You also seem to be requiring a lot of fortitude saves. A LOT of fortitude saves. I'd imagine a lot of attacks above level 6 or so would provoke one, at least when aimed at the PC party. A dragon with 60 CON may not have much to worry about, but most PCs will fall into the 12-18 CON range, and even a basic fireball at that level will be over that amount.

Yitzi
2012-03-04, 01:23 AM
So it looks like you're replacing HP with SP, which ends up being the same thing except you get penalities at low SP values. And you're changing healing magic to "energizing" magic, and having it recover SP rather than the tossed HP value.

No...the big difference is that whereas an HP system has a pool directly reduced by damage, this has a pool which loses points gradually depending on how much damage you have...the damage itself stays until it heals naturally or magically (but you can bind the wounds to at least keep it from draining SP.)


And the damage is delayed and spread out over 10 rounds.

No, you've got it COMPLETELY WRONG. The damage is not spread out at all. You have two values: A damage value, which is caused by being hurt and drains SP (without itself being reduced) until it is healed or bound, and an SP value which works more like HP, but is reduced over time by damage rather than being reduced as soon as you take damage.

10 rounds is significant only in that's how long it takes to lose SP equal to your damage. If the damage lasts 2 minutes before being bound, you'll lose twice that much SP. If your cleric heals it after 5 rounds, you only lose half as much SP as the damage you took.


You also seem to be requiring a lot of fortitude saves. A LOT of fortitude saves.

Depends who you're fighting, but yes if you're fighting a giant you'll probably be making a save against massive damage every time it hits (well, unless you use armor or feat-equivalents to reduce the damage you take; against a giant you're probably better off trying to not get hit in the first place, though). Fortunately, even a failure on such a save isn't too bad, so combined with the resources available to an appropriate-level party, it'll make it a significant fight but not an unreasonable one.

Saves against criticals are quite a bit more serious, but unless you're facing a sneak attack or a crit-easy weapon (which produces relatively low DCs on that Fort save) or are a caster or some other combat-poor class who's getting directly attacked for some reason, that's going to be quite rare.


and even a basic fireball at that level will be over that amount.

Yeah, a fireball is probably going to lose you some SP directly unless you manage to jump out of the way in time. So what?

zlefin
2012-03-04, 01:53 AM
how about converting the system used in gurps?
I only have very old gurps books; so i'm not sure how it's changed since first ed; but it was always a game fairly high on realism; and it should be feasible to convert the gurps system to d20.
But really what's needed for solutions is for you to clarify exactly which gamist and simulationist features you deem necessary and which are more negotiable; and how you want to handle all the various rocket tag issues.
Then its' easier to craft solutions. Also; high level situations are probably inevitably gonna be mass rocket tag in ANY more realistic system; due to the power of the abilities being tossed around.

Yitzi
2012-03-04, 08:35 AM
how about converting the system used in gurps?
I only have very old gurps books; so i'm not sure how it's changed since first ed; but it was always a game fairly high on realism; and it should be feasible to convert the gurps system to d20.

If you can roughly describe the system, it might be an option.


But really what's needed for solutions is for you to clarify exactly which gamist and simulationist features you deem necessary and which are more negotiable

For simulationist, I want to get as much as I can get, and in particular want to avoid the "high-level characters can shrug off attacks that instantly kill low-level characters" syndrome unless it can be justified as taking less actual damage. For gamist, I want something playable, meaning (among other things) that it's not too confusing, doesn't make things un-fun, that monsters can keep getting stronger without one-shotting the party, and that healing is balanced at all levels.


and how you want to handle all the various rocket tag issues.

Any equal-level attack should be either very difficult (i.e. generally not worth it) to pull off against the character, or the character should be capable of surviving an attack or two at that level, or (if the character is a defensive build) both.


Also; high level situations are probably inevitably gonna be mass rocket tag in ANY more realistic system; due to the power of the abilities being tossed around.

Not if defenses increase accordingly.

Reltzik
2012-03-05, 10:09 AM
As mentioned, my system is probably too involved for tabletop play.

Healing: Any change to the damage system would probably negate healing systems. As far as magic goes, here are some ideas for some basic spells:

Clot: Reduce bleed effects by some number. May scale with level or have a mass- variant.

Reinvigorate: Restores system HP, reducing the effects of shock. Either have multiple levels of the spell, or have it scale with level, or both. Mass- variant also good.

Cure wound: Reduces a particular wound's HP value by a certain amount. Again, multiple levels of spell and/or scale with level. Mass- variant also good.

Heal: Reduces ALL wound's HP values by a certain amount, AND restores system HP. May scale with level.

Regeneration: Eliminate all wounds, restore all system HP, and restore destroyed body parts.

Reltzik
2012-03-05, 04:37 PM
For simulationist, I want to get as much as I can get, and in particular want to avoid the "high-level characters can shrug off attacks that instantly kill low-level characters" syndrome unless it can be justified as taking less actual damage. For gamist, I want something playable, meaning (among other things) that it's not too confusing, doesn't make things un-fun, that monsters can keep getting stronger without one-shotting the party, and that healing is balanced at all levels.

Any equal-level attack should be either very difficult (i.e. generally not worth it) to pull off against the character, or the character should be capable of surviving an attack or two at that level, or (if the character is a defensive build) both.

.... in that case, let me suggest something along the lines of (old) WoD's attack/damage system. In it, a single roll is made to attack. Damage is determined somewhat by the degree to which you exceed what you needed to hit. This makes sense. Attacks that JUST BARELY HIT shouldn't kill a person outright, unless we're talking grenade launchers. You'd expect mild cuts from the greatsword that you ALMOST dodged or a graze from a bullet that nearly missed. Hell, even Luke only lost a hand when Vader's lightsaber hit. A just-barely-hit shouldn't take its target straight through the heart and kill him instantly.

(I'm oversimplifying the system a bit. The actual system, IIRC, was based on dice-pools. Each die gave a chance for a success. Normally you only needed one success to hit, but a character could roll their pool for a defensive skill such as Dodge to negate your successes with their successes. THEN you'd roll damage, with a number of dice equal to your successes to hit, possibly modified by the weapon used. (Big heavy weapons might double your pool, explosive weapons might add a fixed number of dice, etc.) Things like armor and stamina could be rolled to negate your successes for damage, and some types of damage couldn't be negated by some types of rolls, ie, stamina could help soak damage from a punch, but not a sword unless you had some sort of magical resistance to slashing damage.)

HP was fixed. The system was point-buy (kinda), so we didn't see the sort of imposed balancing where people improved their defenses at the same rate that their opponents improved the corresponding offenses. (That's one of the few things I think 4e got right.) Healing DID tend to scale, but somehow it worked out anyway. Healing also didn't play the same role in WoD as it did in DnD.

I'd say for realism coupled with survivability and power-balance, go with damage being connected to how much you exceed to-hit rolls by, and scale defenses similarly with level. These defenses don't reflect your ability to absorb damage, but your ability to avoid taking damage, be it by way of dodging or by way of armor. If you want some classes to have specialties that give them advantages in making or defending against certain types of attacks, give them a fixed bonus to those attacks that stacks with all others but does not scale.

The net result would be a system with fixed HP. Furthermore, given two character builds of equal level, the expected value of damage dealt by one to another should be fixed regardless of level. This could be explained by the target of the attack getting better at taking cover as the other gets better at attacking. However, against lower level characters, the expected damage goes up; I'd suggest linearly with level. Furthermore -- and this is something most systems miss -- the standard deviation of damage should remain fixed for same-level opponents. And finally, while new powers might be more effective than the old powers scaled, they should be matched by new defensive abilities in the target. Fiddle with the maths until you get that.

In this system, healing probably shouldn't scale unless it comes at a greater cost, such as the higher-slot penalties of metamagic feats.

Yitzi
2012-03-05, 05:12 PM
.... in that case, let me suggest something along the lines of (old) WoD's attack/damage system. In it, a single roll is made to attack. Damage is determined somewhat by the degree to which you exceed what you needed to hit. This makes sense. Attacks that JUST BARELY HIT shouldn't kill a person outright, unless we're talking grenade launchers. You'd expect mild cuts from the greatsword that you ALMOST dodged or a graze from a bullet that nearly missed. Hell, even Luke only lost a hand when Vader's lightsaber hit. A just-barely-hit shouldn't take its target straight through the heart and kill him instantly.

I was already planning to add the amount you're over as precision damage, and you only get a chance of insta-kills if your precision damage exceeds a certain amount.

Making almost-dodged strikes be low-damage even with powerful weapons makes sense as well, but I'm not sure how to implement that. Any ideas (seeing as I don't want to use dice pools)?


the sort of imposed balancing where people improved their defenses at the same rate that their opponents improved the corresponding offenses.


I'd say for realism coupled with survivability and power-balance, go with damage being connected to how much you exceed to-hit rolls by, and scale defenses similarly with level. These defenses don't reflect your ability to absorb damage, but your ability to avoid taking damage, be it by way of dodging or by way of armor.

Already planning something of that sort, in that your combat skill (replaces BAB) can be used to boost defense against a single target or boost attacks (or certain other bonuses as well), or some points toward each. Armor becomes a sort of DR instead. Still looking for ideas on how to smoothly connect damage to attack at the low end as well.


If you want some classes to have specialties that give them advantages in making or defending against certain types of attacks, give them a fixed bonus to those attacks that stacks with all others but does not scale.

I'd say there will be some scaling and some not, and some scale in unusual ways. For instance, Feint scales with the difference between your bluff check (or combat skill check with the right ability) and your opponent's sense motive check or combat skill check (whichever is higher). Sneak attacks double precision damage, but are nearly impossible to pull off against an opponent with any dodge or dexterity bonuses to defense.


The net result would be a system with fixed HP.

Now that I don't want, as it makes it too dangerous at high levels. Even a glancing blow from a demon lord is going to be more than a first-level character could take without being knocked out. Perhaps more importantly, while it might work for a low-healing game, a game that has healing on par with D&D (or even more; I feel healers in 3.5 aren't getting enough benefit) is going to mean that if the healers increase in power things will be pretty much impossible to balance, as you said, and having them not increase means they don't get to feel they're improving.


Furthermore, given two character builds of equal level, the expected value of damage dealt by one to another should be fixed regardless of level.

Firstly, I don't even want expected value of damage to be fixed for a given level; some builds are more defensive than others, and some find their strengths in noncombat or nondamaging abilities. Also, having increasing HP means of course it will increase with level.


This could be explained by the target of the attack getting better at taking cover as the other gets better at attacking. However, against lower level characters, the expected damage goes up; I'd suggest linearly with level. Furthermore -- and this is something most systems miss -- the standard deviation of damage should remain fixed for same-level opponents.

I'll be aiming for SD/expected to be what stays fixed, but still a very good idea.


In this system, healing probably shouldn't scale unless it comes at a greater cost, such as the higher-slot penalties of metamagic feats.

Unless the greater cost is one that they are more easily able to pay as they level (which runs into the same problems as if it improves outright), that's going to make level advancement not very much fun for the healers.


So overall, there are some ideas in what you said that I don't feel fit what I'm aiming for, some that I already had in mind, one (scaling SD linearly with expected value) that I definitely do want to try to implement, and one (an attack roll barely beating the defense making for low damage) that I'd like suggestions on how to implement (although I'll also try to think of ideas on my own.)

EDIT: I've thought of a way to make a low attack roll do low damage: Raise base defense by 2 and have a "graze" mechanic where if you miss the defense by less than 5 you do damage but a lot less of it (-20% for each point by which you miss it, applied before armor.) The scaling SD with EV idea, however, is getting very hard to work out, as both of the usual ways to increase damage (fixed bonuses and more dice) increase EV slower or not at all, and I really don't want to have a lot of d20s being rolled for damage or having too many "multiply the actual damage" multipliers. So ideas there would be greatly appreciated.

RedWarlock
2012-03-05, 11:03 PM
Not sure how useful this will be to you, but here's the system I use in my own psuedo-d20-modern system:

You have your Endurance score in Vital, Lethal, and Blunt health points, which represent general bruising, minor cuts and fleshwounds, and more critical hits, primarily with respect to the pain these injuries cause you. Most attacks deal Blunt or Lethal damage, depending on the weapon type. (this is somewhat similar to WoD.) Running out of Blunt HP means attacks dealing Blunt are rolled over into Lethal, and you risk going unconscious. Likewise, running out of Lethal means all damage taken is dealth to your Vital HP, and you are in critical condition.

Two aspects are aided by class progression. Your Tough score (similar to a Fortitude save, getting bonuses from Endurance) is used as inherent damage reduction vs all non-energy attacks (everything but Cold, Fire, and Electricity damage, which deal blunt, lethal, and vital damage respectively), reducing the damage by one type, vital reduced to lethal, lethal reduced to blunt, and blunt ignored.

You also get extra health dice from class levels. Your base health points don't change, unless your Endurance score improves, but health dice act akin to 4e healing surges, allowing you to work through the pain and injury and recover some of your health points. There's a 'second wind' basic action which lets you catch your breath at any time, rolling a HD+end and healing your least type of damage. The actual injury isn't gone, but you've worked through the pain enough that it doesn't matter any more. (Sorta Die Hard.)

The one exception to this are Injuries, which are status concepts. A Concept is a mechanic which allows another character (or the GM) to inflict a penalty on you and your actions by expending some plot points (the system's XP), which you can work to avert by expending your own plot points. Injuries are things like 'Twisted Ankle' or 'Broken Arm', and can be invoked to cause a character to take a penalty to what they're doing (in my system, that uses 3d6, you lose a d6 on an affected roll attempt). Injuries can be inflicted with certain maneuvers, spells, or as the result of major success or failure on dice rolls. The offside benefit is, though, that when you have an injury inflicted on you, you get extra plot points for it, since you had to struggle through the challenge.

It's more of a narrative-driven system, but I like to think it's got enough simulationist complexity to satisfy most.

Reltzik
2012-03-06, 01:20 AM
I was already planning to add the amount you're over as precision damage, and you only get a chance of insta-kills if your precision damage exceeds a certain amount.

Making almost-dodged strikes be low-damage even with powerful weapons makes sense as well, but I'm not sure how to implement that. Any ideas (seeing as I don't want to use dice pools)?



Perhaps have damage dice be determined by amount you beat their defense by. For example, meet it exactly and it's 1 damage, beat it by 1 and it's 1d2, etc. You can "upgrade" or "downgrade" that for certain types of weapons by using the weapon-size tables.




I'd say there will be some scaling and some not, and some scale in unusual ways. For instance, Feint scales with the difference between your bluff check (or combat skill check with the right ability) and your opponent's sense motive check or combat skill check (whichever is higher). Sneak attacks double precision damage, but are nearly impossible to pull off against an opponent with any dodge or dexterity bonuses to defense.

The problem isn't scaling, the problem is scaling at uneven rates. Imagine you've got a dumb fighter type who isn't sinking ranks into sense motive versus a bard that's ALL about bluff. At level 1, the bard has... um, let's go with +6 to bluff, which is probably on the low side... and the fighter has +0 sense motive. If I'm doing my math right, the bard has an 81.5% chance of success, and will succeed, on average, by 6 points.

Fastforward to level 20. The fighter STILL hasn't sunk any ranks into sense motive. The bard, due to ability increases, magic items, and more ranks, now has a +25 to bluff (again on the low side). The Bard's success rate is now 100%, and will succeed, on average, by 25. Because the fighter's (already weak) defense hasn't scaled at the same rate as the bard's offense, the Bard now has a sure-fire win tool. And if you say, "oh, it's just feinting, that doesn't guarantee a win", you don't know what a bard can do with good RP. (For example, the bard can convince the fighter that his party members and the bard's party have actually switched forms due to illusions, and the fighter's attacking the wrong people.) It's fine if the lvl 20 fighter has +19 to sense motive rolls vs the lvl 20 bard's +25 bluff. The Bard still has the same degree of advantage as at 1st level and can expect the same high rate of success. The problem is when the expected value between two different builds change as both level. Keep that sucker at +6 forever, unless one or the other pulls ahead in level.

Similar problems exist in 3.x for BAB vs AC, bad vs good saves, damage vs HP, et cetera. Up to about 5th level, everything's fairly neatly balanced and it takes a few good wallops to kill something. But by 20th level, if you're the first to apply your opponent's kryptonite, you pretty much win. Fighters get will-or-suck-until-they-die, wizards get ambushed-and-die, etc.




Now that I don't want, as it makes it too dangerous at high levels. Even a glancing blow from a demon lord is going to be more than a first-level character could take without being knocked out. Perhaps more importantly, while it might work for a low-healing game, a game that has healing on par with D&D (or even more; I feel healers in 3.5 aren't getting enough benefit) is going to mean that if the healers increase in power things will be pretty much impossible to balance, as you said, and having them not increase means they don't get to feel they're improving.

Firstly, I don't even want expected value of damage to be fixed for a given level; some builds are more defensive than others, and some find their strengths in noncombat or nondamaging abilities. Also, having increasing HP means of course it will increase with level.



Fixed HP does, indeed, only work if the expected damage taken vs a level's corresponding CR is also fixed. That demon could expect to smack a 1st level char around for, say, 50 HP every round. (Meaning 50 HP exactly once.) By the time the character's level is the same as the demon's CR, though, their defenses should reduce that to, say, 2 HP/round or whatever you settle on. Otherwise, yeah, fixed HP doesn't make much sense.

However, I should emphasize that I meant that it's only fixed for certain builds vs other builds. I agree that a not-good-at-attack build versus a heavy-defense build should have a much lower expected damage rate than massive-offense vs wimpy-defense. What I'm saying is that FOR ANY PARTICULAR MATCH-UP, it should be the same rate at level 20 as at level 1.

You could probably try for proportionate scaling, ie, all parties expect their HP to increase by roughly the same proportion as expected damage scales. But there are all sorts of curlicues that tie into that, and my sense is that the maths are easier just to keep HP and expected damage fixed.

Your call, of course.




I'll be aiming for SD/expected to be what stays fixed, but still a very good idea.



Yeah, that's what you want if expected is variable.




Unless the greater cost is one that they are more easily able to pay as they level (which runs into the same problems as if it improves outright), that's going to make level advancement not very much fun for the healers.



... since when has being the walking medkit been fun? The fun part is laying down buffs or debuffs or going Godzilla. And I did mean greater cost, easier to pay as they level. But if (if!) you have fixed HP and fixed expected damage, then scaling healing represents a HUGE relative increase in the healer's power. Think about it.

Level 1: Fighter gets smacked by 4 foes for 5/9HP. Healer heals 2 HP.
Level 20: Fighter gets smacked by 4 foes for 5/9 HP. Healer heals 21 HP.

HUGE change in the healer's power level!

If you do scale HP and expected damage, scale healing at a similar rate... and then scratch your head over why, exactly, the fighter regains LESS health (proportionately) from a 1st level healer as the fighter levels. (In other words, why does getting more awesome make you harder to heal?) This is one of the curlicues that I mentioned, and about the only good solution is 4e's healing surge mechanic, in which case the healing ability is "target gets a healing surge", and it's scaling with the target's level, not the healer's. I'd say let the healing abilities scale by adding extras, like being able to cast it as a ranged or quickened spell, being able to couple it with buffs or debuff-removers, etc.

Yitzi
2012-03-06, 10:59 AM
You have your Endurance score in Vital, Lethal, and Blunt health points, which represent general bruising, minor cuts and fleshwounds, and more critical hits, primarily with respect to the pain these injuries cause you. Most attacks deal Blunt or Lethal damage, depending on the weapon type. (this is somewhat similar to WoD.) Running out of Blunt HP means attacks dealing Blunt are rolled over into Lethal, and you risk going unconscious. Likewise, running out of Lethal means all damage taken is dealth to your Vital HP, and you are in critical condition.

Two aspects are aided by class progression. Your Tough score (similar to a Fortitude save, getting bonuses from Endurance) is used as inherent damage reduction vs all non-energy attacks (everything but Cold, Fire, and Electricity damage, which deal blunt, lethal, and vital damage respectively), reducing the damage by one type, vital reduced to lethal, lethal reduced to blunt, and blunt ignored.

You also get extra health dice from class levels. Your base health points don't change, unless your Endurance score improves, but health dice act akin to 4e healing surges, allowing you to work through the pain and injury and recover some of your health points. There's a 'second wind' basic action which lets you catch your breath at any time, rolling a HD+end and healing your least type of damage. The actual injury isn't gone, but you've worked through the pain enough that it doesn't matter any more. (Sorta Die Hard.)

The one exception to this are Injuries, which are status concepts. A Concept is a mechanic which allows another character (or the GM) to inflict a penalty on you and your actions by expending some plot points (the system's XP), which you can work to avert by expending your own plot points. Injuries are things like 'Twisted Ankle' or 'Broken Arm', and can be invoked to cause a character to take a penalty to what they're doing (in my system, that uses 3d6, you lose a d6 on an affected roll attempt). Injuries can be inflicted with certain maneuvers, spells, or as the result of major success or failure on dice rolls. The offside benefit is, though, that when you have an injury inflicted on you, you get extra plot points for it, since you had to struggle through the challenge.

It's more of a narrative-driven system, but I like to think it's got enough simulationist complexity to satisfy most.

It's also got a lot of complexity, and I don't see any advantage over what I've got so far.


Perhaps have damage dice be determined by amount you beat their defense by. For example, meet it exactly and it's 1 damage, beat it by 1 and it's 1d2, etc. You can "upgrade" or "downgrade" that for certain types of weapons by using the weapon-size tables.

The problem with that is that then the strength bonus is unaffected. Although perhaps making the weapon damage decrease (-1 size for each point you're under, down to -5 being a miss, seems good), and a flat -50% to strength damage for a glancing blow.


The problem isn't scaling, the problem is scaling at uneven rates. Imagine you've got a dumb fighter type who isn't sinking ranks into sense motive versus a bard that's ALL about bluff.

That's why you get to use your BAB instead of Sense.
(Also, I'm planning to ditch bard; the ideal feinter would be a particular type of fighter, although a more general bluffer would be better as a rogue.)


If I'm doing my math right, the bard has an 81.5% chance of success

Easy formula: The chance of the underdog by x points winning an opposed d20 roll is (20-x)(19-x)/800.

I'll probably be using a 3d6 system, though.


and will succeed, on average, by 6 points.

A bit more, as negative values don't count (well, unless you lose by 10 or more, then your target gets a boost to defense.)


Because the fighter's (already weak) defense hasn't scaled at the same rate as the bard's offense, the Bard now has a sure-fire win tool.

Hence the ability to use BAB instead.


And if you say, "oh, it's just feinting, that doesn't guarantee a win"

Actually, a sneak-attack-feint by that much at that level probably would nearly guarantee a win with a light pick and a good STR score.


you don't know what a bard can do with good RP.

Actually I do, which is why Glibness will have no equivalent. Of course, a well-built bluffer rogue can still do crazy things by 20th level, which is why using Aid Another for Sense Motive allows you to add a bonus equal to the "difficult to believe" penalty (up to a maximum of your own modifier) instead of just +2; so long as the party rogue (or monk, or nobleman) can talk the fighter out of things, there'll be no problem.


The problem is when the expected value between two different builds change as both level. Keep that sucker at +6 forever, unless one or the other pulls ahead in level.

I'd say that it'll stay similar if both are supposed to be good at that area (bluffing or combat or whatever); otherwise one will pull ahead, but party members good at an aspect can protect the less adept party members. The exception would be saves, where defenses tend to pull ahead faster for good saves and lag very slowly for poor saves (which saves are good, and what gets what saves, are getting major overhaul; suffice it to say that dominating the fighter is not a good plan.)


Similar problems exist in 3.x for BAB vs AC, bad vs good saves, damage vs HP, et cetera. Up to about 5th level, everything's fairly neatly balanced and it takes a few good wallops to kill something. But by 20th level, if you're the first to apply your opponent's kryptonite, you pretty much win. Fighters get will-or-suck-until-they-die, wizards get ambushed-and-die, etc.

The way I'm planning it, it's more a question of determining the terms of the engagement; a fighter's "kryptonite" isn't something as simple as "will saves" but more like "noncombat methods", and their rogue or monk buddy can help defend against that. A rogue can be beaten pretty easily in combat...but at high levels, getting to that point is the challenge (and let's not even discuss trying to catch a ranger...) Wizards or druids will die to a few good wallops if you're a fighter and can penetrate their shields, but if they team up with a fighter or monk that's not necessarily so simple. (Monks don't really have any weaknesses, but are offensively fairly weak in every area other than some aspects of diplomacy and will tend to lose to another class in that class's area of expertise.)


However, I should emphasize that I meant that it's only fixed for certain builds vs other builds.

Ah, for fixed build varying over level. Yeah, that should mostly scale. I do think having slightly longer fights as you level (perhaps going roughly as the fourth root of level) would be a good idea.


You could probably try for proportionate scaling, ie, all parties expect their HP to increase by roughly the same proportion as expected damage scales. But there are all sorts of curlicues that tie into that, and my sense is that the maths are easier just to keep HP and expected damage fixed.

I suspect it'll be harder for fixed HP and expected damage once you add in considerations such as vastly varying builds (high-hit vs. high-damage for instance.) Plus, it's makes levelling feel more like an achievement.


... since when has being the walking medkit been fun?

Perhaps it's time that changed. It's not going to be a full-time job except for dedicated healers (and that will be fun for people who enjoy casually negating anything the enemy tries to do), but should be a serious option.


And I did mean greater cost, easier to pay as they level. But if (if!) you have fixed HP and fixed expected damage, then scaling healing represents a HUGE relative increase in the healer's power. Think about it.

Of course it does. And that's the problem, because non-scaling healing fails from a gamist perspective. I have thought about all this, and that's motivating the restrictions.


If you do scale HP and expected damage, scale healing at a similar rate... and then scratch your head over why, exactly, the fighter regains LESS health (proportionately) from a 1st level healer as the fighter levels.

This was exactly the dilemma at the root of this thread: How to fluff HP so that it does make sense and still fits the simulationist approach.


and about the only good solution is 4e's healing surge mechanic, in which case the healing ability is "target gets a healing surge", and it's scaling with the target's level, not the healer's.

My answer was to sort-of-replace HP with stamina, which does make sense that the fighter simply has more of it, and stamina replacement does scale. Actual damage healing also scales (although it's not available except as "speed natural healing" for the first few levels), and while damage does scale, it only affects stamina which scales with it.


I'd say let the healing abilities scale by adding extras, like being able to cast it as a ranged or quickened spell, being able to couple it with buffs or debuff-removers, etc.

Interesting idea, but one of the standard "extras" will be coupling spells together, and two copies of the same spell can be coupled together, so you still end up with more healing.

I'd still appreciate ideas on how to make damage standard deviation scale with expected damage, though.

Reltzik
2012-03-07, 10:21 AM
.... hrrrm. If one views healing as a "defense against damage" thing the way one views having a monk in the party as "defense against attack", that might work. In particular, if you have damage have delayed application (justified by, say, adrenaline, or time it takes to bleed out, etc), a healer's power can scale by reducing more-and-more severe wounds down to expected-damage. (Not that this is the actual healing power, just that this is what maths work out to in a typical case.) In particular, if you assume a balanced party includes a healer the way you assume it contains a defend-against-bluffs character... yeah. Then healing becomes a sort of retroactive DR from armor, and you can add the two together and have the sum scale at the same rate (or slightly higher, if you want longer-lasting battles) as expected damage. The problem with this is that spells that temporarily or permanently eliminate the healer (hold person, for example) open a huge hole in the party's defenses, and you need to make this hole scale with level as well.

Probably the easiest way (from a maths perspective) to set up rolls that fix std deviation relative to mean is to forget straight roles and go with a z-table. (Actually, you probably want a curve that's weighted towards 0 damage to account for your misses and barely-hits, so go with an exponential distribution, the math's easier for that anyway.) Using percentile dice (or 3d6, or any roll really), create a table of results for each roll based on the std deviation of the die roll and identifying that with the standard deviation of your desired probability distribution for damage. The difficult part is figuring out how to account for different odds of hitting (which affect the std deviation as well as expected damage) and mechanics like your precision damage.

I'd also suggest, from a gamist perspective, either nixing the fort save based on precision damage rule, or getting rid of the nat-1-autofails rule for saves.

Yitzi
2012-03-07, 11:04 AM
.... hrrrm. If one views healing as a "defense against damage" thing the way one views having a monk in the party as "defense against attack", that might work. In particular, if you have damage have delayed application (justified by, say, adrenaline, or time it takes to bleed out, etc)

Yes, that is what I planned for largely this reason.


a healer's power can scale by reducing more-and-more severe wounds down to expected-damage.

It'll be a mix of reducing more and more serious wounds, and undoing the damage done until then. But I'm not planning to have the difference be fixed, as that would still not work with increasing HP-equivalent.


In particular, if you assume a balanced party includes a healer the way you assume it contains a defend-against-bluffs character... yeah.

Yeah, it pretty much will have to have a healer; the best healer by far is cleric, with paladins and druids also having substantially weaker healing ability, and high-level monks will probably get a bit of healing ability too. Clerics will also be a very versatile class in a sense (essentially tier-2 levels of versatility; no particular cleric can do everything, but pretty much any role can be filled to some extent by the right sort of cleric, usually a cleric of a deity related to that role.)


The problem with this is that spells that temporarily or permanently eliminate the healer (hold person, for example) open a huge hole in the party's defenses, and you need to make this hole scale with level as well.

Actually, it'll get harder and harder to take out the healer as levels progress; even the druid and cleric (the two healer classes with the least defense against something like hold person) will be having their relevant saves grow faster than spell DC. Well, unless you can use charms or illusions against a druid or paladin, but they're tough to use in combat.


Probably the easiest way (from a maths perspective) to set up rolls that fix std deviation relative to mean is to forget straight roles and go with a z-table. (Actually, you probably want a curve that's weighted towards 0 damage to account for your misses and barely-hits, so go with an exponential distribution, the math's easier for that anyway.) Using percentile dice (or 3d6, or any roll really), create a table of results for each roll based on the std deviation of the die roll and identifying that with the standard deviation of your desired probability distribution for damage. The difficult part is figuring out how to account for different odds of hitting (which affect the std deviation as well as expected damage) and mechanics like your precision damage.

Yeah, but table lookups make for annoying play, I don't want to go that approach.


I'd also suggest, from a gamist perspective, either nixing the fort save based on precision damage rule, or getting rid of the nat-1-autofails rule for saves.

Firstly, it's not as big a problem as you'd think, as in order to get a crit even with something like a falchion you need to beat the opponent's AC by at least 7 (or 4 with a sneak attack, but most of the time that's not any easier), and that's moderately difficult if he's defending himself and nearly impossible if he's quite a bit higher in level than you, so it shouldn't cause the sort of problem I think you're thinking of.

That said, I am planning to replace the nat-1-autofails rule; instead, because I'm using a 3d6 system, 2 1's mean you roll an exploding 6 and subtract it, and 3 1s mean you roll again and subtract 18. So there is the possibility of getting arbitrarily low, but it's extremely unlikely that you'll end up with a result lower than your modifier (and the lower it has to be, the more unlikely it is.)

Straybow
2012-03-07, 06:52 PM
I'll probably be using a 3d6 system, though.
That may be a poor choice. Each +1 has a hugely variable effect. At the middle of the curve a +1 is worth 12.5%, at the extremes it is worth as little as +1.5% (ignoring 3 and 18 as automatics). That means a +2 is equivalent to a D&D +5 in the middle range. A +5 is equivalent to D&D +5 at the top/bottom and a huge +11.5 in the middle, far too powerful. Unless you envision a system where modifiers are kept very low the effects will be "swingy."

If you want realistic you have to think outside the D&D box. You can't change the way hit points work and expect it to fit in the rest of the D&D combat mechanics. D20 can't even dream about being slightly realistic. That includes about 99% of combat feats. No apologies for using the word "realistic" instead of the politically correct gamer word "simulationist."

Damage should have two classifications: Abstract (d20-like) hit points are bumps, scrapes, and singes. Physical damage points are lacerations, crushing bruises or fractures, etc.

***** Weapons normally do physical damage unless something (armor or other defense) modifies it into abstract hit point damage.

***** There are no vitality points or fixed reserve of physical damage. Physical damage accrues without limit (with increasing effects, see below).

***** Armor has no direct effect on attack roll. Armor has a base damage reduction of 1 to 4 (soft armor, flexible armor, semirigid armor, rigid armor), and has a base damage modification (turning physical damage into abstract hit points) double that value. Note that armor is normally worn over an arming coat or gambeson, compounding soft and hard protection.

***** Critical hits allow a number of points of damage to bypass damage modification to become physical damage, but not damage reduction. No other damage multiplication or bonus for crits.

***** Attacks include hit location. Armor coverage is tracked to the detail of hit location table used. A d20 table should be the minimum. There would be a very big difference between two armor types rated at the same AC in d20.

***** Encumbrance (including any defensive penalty) and movement rate for armor is based on weight, with a small bonus for good distribution (as opposed to mail where almost all the weight falls on the shoulders).

***** Shields are not armor, they are mobile cover. This system would require an Active Defense model for attack resolution. There are many possibilities.

***** Physical damage is subtracted from associated ability score when using the body part in question. Physical damage is tracked by broad location: head, torso, right arm, left arm, right leg, left leg.

For attacking, the arm wielding the weapon uses the modified Str.
For encumbrance, overbearing, and so on, damage to legs is deducted from Str.
For lifting, damage to arms, legs and torso might apply depending on lifting method.
For defense (which is not AC as used in d20) deduct damage to legs from Dex.
Torso damage applies to Con, but can also cause spellcasting failure chance as pain or shortness of breath interrupts casting. (Starting Con bonus is counted as +0, diminishing bonus becomes penalty.)
Blunt trauma to head mitigated by suitable protection (blows to helmet or mage armor that don't physically penetrate) is spread among all three mental stats, evenly with leftovers (which would include the first 1-2 pts) randomly assigned.
Damage to head without protection is applied to all three stats equally!!!
Reducing an effective ability score to zero has no incapacitation effect other than perhaps making an attempted use futile due to high penalty. It is damage that has to be healed. At ability score of 0 the modifier is –5. Reducing below zero adds the negative number to –5 (essentially doubling the rate of penalization to the associated action).

***** Abstract (d20) hit point damage is not tracked by hit location. Physical damage counts against hit points, too. When hit points go below 1 creature must make Fort save against incapacitation, and each time damage is taken thereafter. Negative hit points have no other inherent meaning.

Incapacitation is based on types and locations of damage: immobilization and unconsciousness would be common. In cases where only abstract damage has been suffered, immobilization of a body part can result from stunned nerves, and unconsciousness from a knock to the head that isn't severe enough to result in ability score damage.

***** Death occurs when a coup de grace is administered to an incapacitated creature. Critical hits to unprotected parts of the head and center of mass may be assigned to mortal wounds.

***** Bonuses to damage from ability score, magical enhancement, etc are added to the die size. Any method of resolving nonstandard die sizes that do not alter the average nor significantly alter the distribution are acceptable.

For example, if your d8 sword has +5 by Str and magical enhancement, it would be acceptable to roll a d12 and add +0/+1 depending on a high/low die, or roll a d8 and add +0/+5 depending on high/low die. You could also roll a d16 and subtract 3 for any result over 8.

Note: do not use the attack roll for high/low, since it is biased by the "to hit" value needed and critical hit criteria.

Straybow
2012-03-07, 06:54 PM
Sorry, double post.

Note that such a system will encourage spellcasters to wear armor and put up with failure chance. Failure chance should be lessened somewhat to compensate, and applied (perhaps diminished a bit more) to non-arcane casters.

I would combine this with an alternate magic system that uses spellcasting skill roll and many other mods anyway.