PDA

View Full Version : Interesting alternatives to standard HP rules



SouthpawSoldier
2015-06-08, 04:44 PM
A common argument is the abstraction of HP. Is it energy/fatigue? Luck? Armor condition? Actual health? There's difficulty in translating an abstract concept into a good narrative for play, especially for new players/DMs. Toss in healing, and people can easily be confused about the actual condition of their character. A level 1 character drinks a healing potion; does that 8HP mean they just regenerated a missing limb? Or was it only the equivilent of chugging a good cup of coffee, giving them some pep and pick me up?

Some systems (FATE, for example) scrap HP entirely, and instead impose a progressive series of conditions, that affect characters' actual play; physical effects weaken/fatigue a character, mental effects exhaust them, etc. Great for narrative systems, but hard to cross into D&D/d20 games.

I've read a couple interesting alternatives to standard HP. One being the 16HP dragon from this blog post (http://www.latorra.org/2012/05/15/a-16-hp-dragon/). Even with less HP, the dragon is still scary, still a challenging fight. More relatable to Smaug, as per the "Tolkien in D&D" threads. Difficult to implement into D&D without an intense rewrite.

Another that I just came across in a Facebook group was a homebrew system that sounds interesting.


I run a system where most damage is applied directly to primary attributes. It works pretty well. Sometimes damage is spread out among all six and the character can absorb a ton of minor hits regardless of level, and other times a precision strike from an assassin's dagger or the overwhelming blow from a barbarian's axe will just kill someone outright, even if they're a hardened veteran.

Again, no idea how it would be implemented in a balanced manner into D&D, but I could see how it lends itself to verisimilitude better than standard HP; DEX damage hamstrings a character, limiting mobility; CON means severe bleeding. CHA would be facial damage, either scarring or something inhibing speech. WIS/INT would be getting one's bell rung, making you feel a little dizzy or concussed.

There's also the 5E DMG variant of scarring/serious injuries, the newly published 5e UA variant rules' "vitality points (not a fan, too much work). Lots of options.

How do you folks explain HP to new players? What houserules do you use to provide the right balance of number crunch and narration? How would you implement the options I mentioned?

Eisenheim
2015-06-08, 05:12 PM
I have not done this, because I switched completely to fate once I found it, but I think the best and most satisfying way to explain traditional hit points is, like fate's stress, as pacing. It doesn't have a good in-universe, physical or metaphysical analogue because it is a narrative quantity, measuring the amount of near-misses, glancing blows and on-screen moments of stress or danger the hero can absorb before he starts to lose.

LibraryOgre
2015-06-08, 05:41 PM
One of 4e's great contributions was the idea of "bloodied". HP is your overall stamina and health.. getting "hit" in combat doesn't mean you took a wound, but it does mean that you're weaker and more likely to take a wound.

At 50% HP, though, you're bloodied... you've been hit enough that you can say "You should see the other guy" when someone comments on it.

Draz74
2015-06-08, 06:23 PM
I like the SWSE system where Vitality Points explicitly represent stamina and maybe minor scrapes and bruises, with a condition track underlying it that represents actual significant physical harm. (Doesn't have to be a big track in my book: Normal, Wounded, Dying, Dead is fine.)

I guess technically this isn't that different from the FATE system, which uses "stress" instead of Vitality Points, except that everyone in FATE only has like 3-5 Stress boxes available to soak hits.

Cealocanth
2015-06-08, 06:49 PM
Savage Worlds uses an interesting system. Essentially, when a character tries to hit an enemy, they roll their to-hit and try to overcome their opponent's 'Parry' value. When they succeed, they roll damage. The result on the damage dice is compared to their opponent's 'Toughness'. If it is over that value, their opponent is 'Shaken' (They can only take free actions next round, which includes movement and a few 'Agility Trick' type powers). For every 4 points over the Toughness value, they get a 'raise', which means that the opponent accumulates one Wound. After three Wounds they are Incapacitated. After 4 Wounds they are dead. If you hit a target and make them Shaken while they are already Shaken, then they take a Wound instead.

I like this one because it's a simple system that takes into account everything from physical health and ability to luck to skill in combat. In SW, it's not so much about hacking pieces progressively off your opponents as it is about hitting them as hard as you can a couple of times in succession. Granted, it's not entirely realistic. Someone can still get shot with a bullet in the chest four times, shrug them off (using Soak rolls to resist taking wounds), and keep on fighting. It's more like an action movie than real life, but it beats the "With your current ability, you must hit me exactly four and a half times in the torso, and no more or less, in order to kill me" system that HPs give.

Maglubiyet
2015-06-08, 06:52 PM
I run a system where most damage is applied directly to primary attributes. It works pretty well. Sometimes damage is spread out among all six and the character can absorb a ton of minor hits regardless of level, and other times a precision strike from an assassin's dagger or the overwhelming blow from a barbarian's axe will just kill someone outright, even if they're a hardened veteran.

The original GDW Traveller had a system like this (I think -- it's been a few years). Hits were taken off of physical stats, STR, DEX, and Endurance.



How do you folks explain HP to new players? What houserules do you use to provide the right balance of number crunch and narration? How would you implement the options I mentioned?

Pretty much all new people I've played with in the past 10-15 years have been familiar with the idea of 'Hit Points' from video games.

In D&D I've tried a system similar to GURPS where a person takes a penalty to all rolls the round after they take damage. Instead of a 1-for-1 (up to a max of 4) like in GURPS, I had to drop it to a simple -1. Concentration rolls are a pain and they generally don't apply to anything other than casters (plus it's not a class skill for fighty types). It seems logical that you might have a more difficult time climbing a rope or firing a bow after you've been hit with an axe.

Seltsamuel
2015-06-09, 05:13 AM
You could take a look at the system of Dark Eye 4th Edition.

One fighter makes an attack roll a zone or with a random roll for targeting a body part, and the defender may parry this attack. If the attack connects the first one deals damage, where a portion of that damage is asborbed by armor, which will be subtracted from the hit points. But this is not the main reason of ending a fight because the damage value will be compared to a calculated score which includes constituition. If the damage is higher the defnder suffers one wound at a zone which has different effects. After getting three wounds at the same zone the zone is crippled and useless.

For Example Uberorc the mighty housecat attacks Bob the adventurer. It rolls a 19 and targets his left leg and the defender a 16, therefore it is a hit and a random dice roll. After that Uberorc rolls its damage of 2d6 +4 resulting in 15 damage. Bob has an armor value of 2 and suffers 14 points of damage. Additionally the 14 points of damage are compared to Bobs wound resist value, which is 8. He suffers one wound (If the damage was higher he could be wounded more often with the same attack) and therefore he takes penalties in movement and combat stats. Now the fight became easier for Uberorc and will be finished in one or two rounds.

Most combats end rather quickly because of that system and non caster have a chance to end a combat encounter as fast as a spell caster.

Sindeloke
2015-06-09, 05:56 AM
Back when my group used to homebrew 3.path into complete unrecognizability, we tried out a system where HP were basically locked at Con+Class die, and never increased ever during the game. Damage was likewise prevented from scaling; sneak attack never went past 2d6, for example. Armor provided DR rather than AC, and AC was increased with level as a fraction of BAB.

It didn't graft onto the system particularly well so we gave it up - there was just too much that needed to change. I still really like the concept, though, and if I ever built a system from the ground up I think I'd do it that way.

Maglubiyet
2015-06-09, 06:06 AM
You could take a look at the system of Dark Eye 4th Edition.

One fighter makes an attack roll a zone or with a random roll for targeting a body part, and the defender may parry this attack. If the attack connects the first one deals damage, where a portion of that damage is asborbed by armor, which will be subtracted from the hit points. But this is not the main reason of ending a fight because the damage value will be compared to a calculated score which includes constituition. If the damage is higher the defnder suffers one wound at a zone which has different effects. After getting three wounds at the same zone the zone is crippled and useless.

For Example Uberorc the mighty housecat attacks Bob the adventurer. It rolls a 19 and targets his left leg and the defender a 16, therefore it is a hit and a random dice roll. After that Uberorc rolls its damage of 2d6 +4 resulting in 15 damage. Bob has an armor value of 2 and suffers 14 points of damage. Additionally the 14 points of damage are compared to Bobs wound resist value, which is 8. He suffers one wound (If the damage was higher he could be wounded more often with the same attack) and therefore he takes penalties in movement and combat stats. Now the fight became easier for Uberorc and will be finished in one or two rounds.

Most combats end rather quickly because of that system and non caster have a chance to end a combat encounter as fast as a spell caster.

Oh yeah, hit locations are awesome! It doesn't matter how tough you are -- if your head or chest is incapacitated, you're out of the fight. Runequest had something like this as well, which made for much more entertaining combat.

Eldan
2015-06-09, 06:35 AM
I like Mutants and Mastermind's Toughness value. Basically, a character has toughness and an attack has a strenght value, the attacker rolls strength against toughness, if they beat toughness, the attack has an effect.

I actually liked it well enough that I considered using it in D&D, with fortitude saves as toughness.

SouthpawSoldier
2015-06-09, 07:10 AM
Back when my group used to homebrew 3.path into complete unrecognizability, we tried out a system where HP were basically locked at Con+Class die, and never increased ever during the game...It didn't graft onto the system particularly well so we gave it up

This reminds me of the aforementioned 16 HP Dragon bit. Sounds great, but So. Much. Math. to graft into D&D. Requires rewriting almost the entire system.



Pretty much all new people I've played with in the past 10-15 years have been familiar with the idea of 'Hit Points' from video games.


It makes sense to relate it that way, I just...dunno. Don't like the "feel" of it? *shrug* I think it's because I want injuries to matter, especially if we're talking severe wounds. I have a great deal of scars, and each tells a story; either a moment of carelessness, or bad judgment, or bad luck; they all remind me of specific experiences. The same should apply to PC's; getting whalloped in a fight at low levels should be somewhat nostalgic at later levels. (putting a pin in this; seems a great inspiration for homebrew).




In D&D I've tried a system similar to GURPS where a person takes a penalty to all rolls the round after they take damage.
Now this sounds not only interesting, but also easily applied. Could also be applied to AC, since you could argue temporary DEX damage, or fatigue affecting your ability to dodge. In fact.....as applied to 5e, maybe treat damage as temporary Ability damage, healed after rests? Makes the whole Short Rest "taking 5" concept fit better.


Savage Worlds uses an interesting system.

I've heard of this, and other systems that incorporate some form of "active defense". IIRC, there was an Unearthed Arcana option for this in 3.5. Do you find it slows the game?


You could take a look at the system of Dark Eye 4th Edition.

I honestly had to Google Dark Eye. Really impressed at the popularity. Going to try to look more into it, if I can find English data. I second the sentiment on targeting specific body parts. I remember reading an interesting article on why it wasn't implemented in 3.5. Essentially, the lower AC value of unarmored body parts (e.g., targeting the head of an opponent only wearing a breastplate) is balanced by the roll penalty of aiming for a smaller target, so it was deemed by developers as unnecessarily complicating the math (in 3.5?!).


One of 4e's great contributions was the idea of "bloodied".
I know of a few people who houserule that any individual hit that does more than a certain percentage of your max or remaining HP is treated as a crit, causing an additional effect (dazed/stunned, weakening, etc). My old table just described low HP enemies as being injured, but it caused no mechanical change.


I have not done this, because I switched completely to fate once I found it.

I love some aspects of FATE, but my heart belongs to D&D. Then again, I've yet to even play FATE, since my ol group was 3.5/PF exclusive.

harlokin
2015-06-09, 08:35 AM
I've heard of this, and other systems that incorporate some form of "active defense". IIRC, there was an Unearthed Arcana option for this in 3.5. Do you find it slows the game?

"Parry" in Savage Worlds isn't an active defence (it is not rolled), but functions similarly to AC, except that it only applies to melee attacks (ranged attacks have a TN modified by range/cover, not by the target's skill).

The fact that Savage World's characters will only ever have four Wounds, and that high damage rolls can potentially remove more than one Wound, keeps combat exciting even for experienced characters; a goblin with a shortbow can potentially 1-shot the equivalent of a 20th level character, but the system still maintains a pulpy heroic feel.

The only downside of the system for me is that you can get a bit of a 'death spiral' from wound penalties, which isn't really to my taste.

Komatik
2015-06-09, 09:49 AM
Riddle of Steel does well here, I think: Hit locations, and all attacks deal three different kinds of damage: Shock (immediate, one-time reduction of your combat pool, Riddle is a dice pool system), Pain (constant reduction to your combat pool until wound is healed - Pain and Shock don't kill you but will make it hard to fight), Blood Loss (~HP, this goes to zero, you die). Makes it easy to model different kinds of attacks and their effects. Something might be easy to grit your teeth to and just fight, but put you on borrowed time, while some blows are just naturally debilitating but not really lethal in the conventional sense.

Segev
2015-06-09, 10:07 AM
Risus is a game system where you have 10 dice to assign to between 4 and 10 "traits" that are your stats. You make these traits up. Things like "is a good cook" or "swordsman" or "IT Professional" or "freighter pilot" are all valid.

Combat is performed by applying your traits competitively (and narratively) against each other, and rolling. The attacker names a trait for attack (e.g. "I swing my sword at him, using Swordsman") and the defender picks one with which to defend (e.g. "I grab a meat cleaver and a cast iron pan to block and defend myself with Is A Good Cook!"). The dice are rolled and compared, and the loser loses a die to that trait, temporarily.

You're defeated when a trait reaches zero.




I've been toying with, for my own amusement, trying to update a system I consider clunky. It's a roll-under system, but I've been toying with making the higher you roll mean your roll was better...as long as it's under your "maximum success." (i.e. skill rating or stat) You even can choose the kind of dice to roll, with bigger dice having more chances of getting higher scores.

When you take damage, it's rolled fairly normally, but you have to roll a toughness-like check. Subtract that from the damage, if you succeed (if you didn't, take all the damage). From then on, the damage you took becomes a minimum success you must make, or you also fail checks.

(It's a bit more involved than that to cover a lot of detail, but that takes a lot of space to write and, frankly, I'm not completely happy with it just yet.)

Firest Kathon
2015-06-09, 10:33 AM
You could take a look at the system of Dark Eye 4th Edition.[...]

Oh yeah, hit locations are awesome! It doesn't matter how tough you are -- if your head or chest is incapacitated, you're out of the fight. Runequest had something like this as well, which made for much more entertaining combat.

If you feel this is too complex: The zone system is optional, you can also play without it. In that case a wound applies its penalty to all actions (not only those with the wounded limb) and you can take (one) more wound before you are incapacitated.


I honestly had to Google Dark Eye. Really impressed at the popularity. Going to try to look more into it, if I can find English data. I second the sentiment on targeting specific body parts. I remember reading an interesting article on why it wasn't implemented in 3.5. Essentially, the lower AC value of unarmored body parts (e.g., targeting the head of an opponent only wearing a breastplate) is balanced by the roll penalty of aiming for a smaller target, so it was deemed by developers as unnecessarily complicating the math (in 3.5?!).

You can have a look at the English section (http://www.wiki-aventurica.de/wiki/En:Main_Page) of the Wiki Aventurica, which focuses mostly on the game world but has some small sections about the rules. Unfortunately it is quite small...

NichG
2015-06-09, 10:35 AM
I have a system where individual attacks are usually very damaging - one or two will take out a character - but you have point pools that you can use after you see the enemy's roll to increase your defenses. Most attacks have a major and a minor effect, where the major effect (Primary Consequence) is the direct damage or even just instant death, and the minor effect (Secondary Consequence) is some kind of debuff; part of the system is that you can choose to spend more in order to avoid both, or spend less in order to only avoid the major effect.

So e.g. someone could use a special combat move try to cut your head off with an axe. If you let it go through entirely, its an instant kill (so obviously you at least must spend to avoid the major if you have the points), but the Secondary is maybe being unbalanced and taking a penalty to attacks for a round. So you have to decide whether its worth the extra cost to avoid the Secondary.

The nice thing is that you can do a lot of things that would normally be save-or-lose/save-or-die as the Primaries, and either the target still has enough points to resist, or they've been depleted and are vulnerable. It has some of the advantage of HP for pacing, but allows you to still have things in the system that have very immediate severe consequences. The downsides are that its hard to have waves of one-shottable enemies without making a separate system for that kind of enemy (like the minion rules in 4e). Also, players coming from other systems will often feel a bit cheated that a really cool (but expensive) power and a cheap or even free power can both be negated by the enemy spending the same number of points and both deplete the enemy pools at roughly the same rate. You have to get used to the system rewarding using expensive abilities on finishing blows that gain you something after the fight (e.g. finishing with a mind control power rather than a sword chop) rather than spending them on going nova at the opening of a fight to take out targets quickly as you would in other systems.

Seltsamuel
2015-06-09, 12:11 PM
[...]

I honestly had to Google Dark Eye. Really impressed at the popularity. Going to try to look more into it, if I can find English data. I second the sentiment on targeting specific body parts. I remember reading an interesting article on why it wasn't implemented in 3.5. Essentially, the lower AC value of unarmored body parts (e.g., targeting the head of an opponent only wearing a breastplate) is balanced by the roll penalty of aiming for a smaller target, so it was deemed by developers as unnecessarily complicating the math (in 3.5?!).


I know of a few people who houserule that any individual hit that does more than a certain percentage of your max or remaining HP is treated as a crit, causing an additional effect (dazed/stunned, weakening, etc). My old table just described low HP enemies as being injured, but it caused no mechanical change.

[...]



It is quiet hard to get your claws on dark eye books outside of Germany. Its like what is D&D for the rest of the world :smalltongue: Thats why I have a very hard time to get books for it *sigh*

I tried to use my google foo to find some english books or pdfs but failed. I have the books here. If you want I can write down the litte table with the hit zones.

The base is you still have to attack your foe like usual. If you donīt say anything you just roll an additional d20 to see what you hit randomly. If you want to hit something specific you take a penalty.