PDA

View Full Version : Easy to Kill Players



8BitNinja
2017-08-06, 03:00 PM
So I've been helping my friends make a TRPG taking place in the near future (2040s) inspired by ArmA, Tom Clancy books, and real life political events. Since they wanted to make the game a bit more realistic than the average RPG, we decided that characters gain HP on level up only by their CON modifier, armor not being universally protective (EX: Kevlar vests with no plating will protect against handgun rounds, but have no effect on rifle rounds) with the exception of the super heavy Eisenhower and Zhukov armors, and most weapons being able to one or two shot most unarmored characters. Also, medics are not miracle workers and permanent injuries exist.

Do you think that a game could still work and be fun if everyone isn't a superhero? Or do you think that the players need to be able to take more hits than the average grunt?

If you need any more information, I will be happy to provide it.

Vitruviansquid
2017-08-06, 03:15 PM
In systems where you want to emphasize lethality, reduce the number it hits it takes to kill someone, but also reduce the likelihood of hits landing.

If your goal is to make a system where combat is so lethal, the setup of the fight is more important than how the fight itself is played out, then write rules that allow players to do cool things (and NPCs to do scary things) during the setup. You might devote your time and attention to the main loop of the game, then once that's satisfactory, think about what you want to do for systems on the periphery of that.

As an aside, I would seriously consider getting rid of HP as a whole and rethink what exactly you want level ups to do. Don't have the level 10 Tom Clancy guy go around soaking bullets that would kill a level 1 Tom Clancy guy outright.

Thrudd
2017-08-06, 03:19 PM
If characters can die easily, then they should also be quick and easy to create - so not too many rules or different options they need to choose from -character templates (classes) with most everything standardized and not more than a few things that they can switch out to customize would be a good idea. Having multiple characters per player or backup characters ready to go is also good idea. Episodic missions is probably a good format for that sort of thing. For example: Players find out what the mission is, then they choose their team from the pool of characters they've created. Go on the mission - if they fail and/or everyone dies, the next team gets a briefing about what happened and they're still hunting for those bad guys that got away, or whatever it was about.

Each session or every couple sessions it should be a new mission that starts with the briefing and choosing the right members for the team.

Grod_The_Giant
2017-08-06, 03:22 PM
It sounds like you're working from a very D&D-y sort of framework? I strongly suggest checking out some existing games with relatively modern settings to see what sorts of ideas you like.

In general, I'd say that if you want combat to be any significant part of the game, it should be survivable. Not necessarily D&D style, but it should be possible to escape a skirmish relatively unscathed, and to emerge from a serious battle with at least most of the party still alive. The more lethal you make fighting, the more it becomes a worst-case, "avoid whenever possible" scenario.

My usual preference would be something like Fate's Stress/Consequence tracks (https://fate-srd.com/fate-core/conflicts#stress). In a nutshell, you have a small pool of "stress" that basically represents plot armor-- attacks that deplete stress are close misses, attacks that connect but fail to penetrate your armor, or are barely blocked but leave your hands ringing, that sort of thing. When it runs out, you either die or suffer a serious, long-term Consequence. If you survive the fight, stress recovers in a minute or two, while Consequences linger for sessions or longer. That gives you a setup kind of like I described above, where it's possible to take a hit or two and keep going without turning into a solid wall of meat. (The D&D version of this all would be Vitality and Wound Points (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/adventuring/vitalityAndWoundPoints.htm), I guess).

Given some of the sources you mention, it's probably worth putting a strong emphasis on surprise. If you're caught off-guard, it should be really easy to put you down, possibly bypassing the "plot armor" type virtual health altogether.

Guizonde
2017-08-06, 03:25 PM
i'd say if you want lethal, go the dark heresy or only war route: most weapons can do more damage than characters have hp, fate points can allow you to avoid the worst injuries, and some armors can deny certain levels of weapons. your basic flak armor (the imperial guard body armor in wh40k) is actually proof against pretty much all common handguns, and up to shotgun slugs. lasguns and up, however, and you'll be deader and deader.

the crit tables of that game are as spectacular as they are practical. for a body blow, it goes from a hit to the family jewels rendering the character prone up to perforating a lung straight to bisecting the poor sap in a shower of gore, forcing everyone to do a willpower check not to run away.

*reading*

everything thrudd said makes me vouch for only war, just reskin it into a tom clancy novel (easy to do), and do that. good luck.

Anonymouswizard
2017-08-06, 03:30 PM
So I've been helping my friends make a TRPG taking place in the near future (2040s) inspired by ArmA, Tom Clancy books, and real life political events. Since they wanted to make the game a bit more realistic than the average RPG,

What's the average RPG? Because the realism quota is different if we assume our baseline is Fate than if we assume it's GURPS.


we decided that characters gain HP on level up only by their CON modifier,

Okay, in my experience most games don't have levels, and the average hit points vary significantly. Off the top of my head:
-4 in Savage Worlds (with penalties for each one)
-4+8 in Victoriana (the second set give penalties)
-40 in Keltia
-18 in Rocket Age (hits reduce stats)
-30 at 1st level in Fantasy AGE, increasing by about 4.5 a level
-21 in Traveller (hits reduce stats)
-10 in GURPS
-2 in Fate
-50 in Unknown Armies

Oh, but damage also varies a lot, you can't tell how deadly each of these systems are from that (although bar Fate and Fantasy AGE PCs are squishy). All bar Fantasy AGE don't have levels either. Really, levels go hand in foot with realism, I certainly haven't levelled up at all in my life.


armor not being universally protective (EX: Kevlar vests with no plating will protect against handgun rounds, but have no effect on rifle rounds) with the exception of the super heavy Eisenhower and Zhukov armors, and most weapons being able to one or two shot most unarmored characters. Also, medics are not miracle workers and permanent injuries exist.

Oh boy, having to work out what my armour protects against (I see the end result, 'I wear several sets of armour to be protected against anything). This is a bunch of elements that while great alone might not be fun together.


Do you think that a game could still work and be fun if everyone isn't a superhero? Or do you think that the players need to be able to take more hits than the average grunt?

Why are these the only two options? Most of my games have been pretty far from Superhero, in fact I once nearly experienced a TPK in session 2 (it was an Unknown Armies game, the book recommends avoiding combat). But they weren't particularly deadly, either from the GURPS-style '0hp is out of the fight and recovering for days, but unless you fail a roll you won't die' or from being much more combat as war. Sure, we couldn't take more hits than the average grunt, and in fact were poorly armed most of the time, but still mopped the floor with our enemies and never had a casualty.

I've been in games with everything from 'chump' to 'professional' to 'superhero' as the PC's squishiness, and honestly it makes little difference as long as the system doesn't go out of the way to kill PCs (which this one does, must wear armour or else you'll die in a single lucky hit, or even a normal hit, but you can't reasonably prepare because the enemy might have weapons that pierce your armour). At least GURPS has the decency to make armour universally protective and just make most guns do more damage that it prevents (and even then going to 0hp likely won't kill you).


If you need any more information, I will be happy to provide it.

Yes, could you please explain why you're using levels in a realistic system when point buy has existed for over forty years.

Koo Rehtorb
2017-08-06, 03:57 PM
I will again take the opportunity to pontificate about my favourite RPG, Burning Wheel, with a damage system that might work well for you.

Each PC has a physical tolerance scale derived from their fort and power stats, the scale goes from B1 to B16 with higher being more damaging. Each PC marks spots along that scale for things that correspond to their superficial, light, midi, severe, traumatic, and mortal wounds. So if someone has a B4 superficial wound, if they get hit with an attack that does B4 damage then they take a superficial wound.

Each level of wound has a different penalty associated with it. A midi wound subtracts 2 dice from nearly everything you roll. A traumatic subtracts 4 dice. A mortal wound instantly incapacitates you and has you bleeding out on the floor if there isn't an expert doctor immediately present to treat you. Taking a number of penalty dice equal to your lower stat also incapacitates you, so four light wounds is equivalent to a traumatic wound. But each wound is tracked separately so while four light wounds is equivalent to a traumatic wound in terms of how effective you are, the light wounds are much less serious in the long term because they're easier to treat and recover from. If you take a bunch of flesh wounds you'll be back on your feet in under a day, but if you take a traumatic wound you need immediate medical attention and months of recovery time.

Notable for the system, some people certainly are much tougher than others, but not to as great a degree. A person that's as tough as a human can possibly be would have a physical tolerance scale of:
Superficial: B5
Light: B9
Midi: B11
Severe: B12
Traumatic: B13
Mortal: B14

Where a person who's an average human would be more along the lines of:
Superficial: B2
Light: B4
Midi: B6
Severe: B7
Traumatic: B8
Mortal: B9

If you shoot someone with a rifle you'd roll a d6 (not counting bonuses for exceptional aim which would shift probabilities). On a 1-2 you'd do a B5, on a 3-4 you'd do a B9, on a 5-6 you'd do a B13. So, you see, even on the toughest man on the planet, getting shot in a vital place with a rifle is still going to do nearly lethal amounts of damage. But he's much better at shrugging off those shots that aren't aimed as well.

For armour, armour either blocks all the damage from an attack, or does nothing. Armour has an amount of dice equal to how good the armour is. So a bulletproof vest might be 3 dice of protection where serious infantry body armour might be 6 dice. You roll all those dice, 4+ is a success. If any of them are a 1 the armour is damaged and loses one die until it's repaired. You need a number of successes equal to the weapon's Versus Armour stat +1. So if a handgun with VA 1 is shooting at a bulletproof vest you'd roll 3 dice and need 2 successes to absorb the hit, which sounds reasonable to me.

sengmeng
2017-08-06, 04:02 PM
Dark Heresy is very lethal. One of my characters on there was considered extremely durable with 10 "hitpoints" (they used another name), and swung a two-handed sword that dealt 2d10+4 damage, meaning the toughest normal human around was only one swing from death from his own weapon on a decent roll. And although I was playing an ex-primitive who still liked his sword, the system is mostly based on guns. Cover and aiming matter a lot under that system, and a good dodge roll can be the difference between life or death. You don't need to convert to it, but a lot of concepts in it might help. And if you drew your gun and fired without aiming, you had on average a 30% chance of hitting, which could also be negated by their dodge roll.

Blymurkla
2017-08-06, 04:09 PM
Please don't kill your players.

Mr Beer
2017-08-06, 05:20 PM
Please don't kill your players.

I was going to say this as well. Kill one and you might get away with it but make it a habit and it's all 'serial killer' and 'maniac dissolves corpses in acid' and 'basement of horrors'. Really not worth it.

goto124
2017-08-06, 08:07 PM
Play FATAL, it's the fastest way to kill both the characters and their players.

Arbane
2017-08-07, 12:19 AM
As people have said, check out some games that aren't D&D/d20 based. Savage Worlds, GURPS, and (especially) Cyberpunk 2020 might all be a good start, as all of them can be modern/futuristic, and handle gunfights reasonably well.

Mr Beer
2017-08-07, 12:54 AM
Gunfights in GURPS are highly deadly. A rifle round hits for 5d or 6d damage (enough to trigger a death check for a normie) and military rifles fire multiple rounds. If you want characters to survive regular gunfights in GURPS, they need to be cinematic and/or superpowered, have excellent body armour or face inept opposition. Which is realistic.

Having body armour and facing goons who bring pistols to a rifle fight will help. If said goons refuse to Aim and lack firearms training, that will help a lot. It means that the characters can deal with most encounters fairly easily if they use decent tactics combined with lethal force, while at the same time very much needing to fear being ambushed by a cold-eyed killer with a shotgun or sniped by a guy with a rifle hidden on a rooftop.

Eldan
2017-08-07, 03:59 AM
In systems where you want to emphasize lethality, reduce the number it hits it takes to kill someone, but also reduce the likelihood of hits landing.


As people have said, check out some games that aren't D&D/d20 based. Savage Worlds, GURPS, and (especially) Cyberpunk 2020 might all be a good start, as all of them can be modern/futuristic, and handle gunfights reasonably well.

I actually remember reading an edition of Cyberpunk 2020 that talked about the designer interviewing police consultants and urban warfare specialists about how gang warfare and shootouts between mercenaries might look like. It comes down to some of what Vitruviansquid said: most combat is short and at very close range and most shots will miss.

So, find a system that makes guns lethal, but allows for a lot of usage of cover and group tactics. If a few shots are lethal, being the first one to fire becomes invaluable. If your players are ambushed, they are probably dead, so let them do the Shadowrun thing where they can carefully plan out what they are doing.

Lvl 2 Expert
2017-08-07, 04:25 AM
This sounds pretty cool. I think it is important to know which attributes will become important in place of HP. Initiative, dex to armor class, evasion (for grenades and such), spot, listen, hide, anything that will let the players outmaneuver the opposition and land the first hit. Try to see if all the classes you're converting offer that sort of stuff, and if necessary rebalance a bit. (For instance: if you're trying to include a d&d cleric in a no magic low healing low HP world, stop doing that, although I figure you're probably working of D20 modern or similar to begin with.) If at any point you feel the game does not have enough character progression, get them an increase to any of that stuff on level up. If players find their way to these options on their own, good for them.

Anonymouswizard
2017-08-07, 05:29 AM
As people have said, check out some games that aren't D&D/d20 based. Savage Worlds, GURPS, and (especially) Cyberpunk 2020 might all be a good start, as all of them can be modern/futuristic, and handle gunfights reasonably well.

I mean, everyone should do this. I've personally always wanted to try Cyberpunk 2020, but I've never been able to justify buying it.

OP, systems that make damage reduce Attributes are also worth looking into. It's in some ways more realistic than weapons being one hit kills, a wounded character is more likely to surrender or play dead than under a hp system as they'll have their effectiveness reduced. Depending on the system you still might get one hit kills as well, but they'll be less common than injuries.


Gunfights in GURPS are highly deadly. A rifle round hits for 5d or 6d damage (enough to trigger a death check for a normie) and military rifles fire multiple rounds. If you want characters to survive regular gunfights in GURPS, they need to be cinematic and/or superpowered, have excellent body armour or face inept opposition. Which is realistic.

Having body armour and facing goons who bring pistols to a rifle fight will help. If said goons refuse to Aim and lack firearms training, that will help a lot. It means that the characters can deal with most encounters fairly easily if they use decent tactics combined with lethal force, while at the same time very much needing to fear being ambushed by a cold-eyed killer with a shotgun or sniped by a guy with a rifle hidden on a rooftop.

Well it does help that those goons also go down with a single shot (in fact, once you get up to rifles almost everyone generally goes down in a single shot before ultratech armour). There's also the fact that preparation goes a long way, when a pistol drops an enemy in one or two shots then whoever surprises the other side likely wins with minimal effort. I once had a character survive because the enemy was trying to poison us instead of shooting us in the brain.

GURPS seems to swing towards Combat As War once firearms come along. Scout, prepare, and hit like lightning, it's the only way to consistently win with realistic firearms.

dps
2017-08-07, 03:54 PM
I was going to say this as well. Kill one and you might get away with it but make it a habit and it's all 'serial killer' and 'maniac dissolves corpses in acid' and 'basement of horrors'. Really not worth it.

You'd want to kill 'em all in during the same game session anyway, which would make you a mass murderer rather than a serial killer. Most of us don't expect to be murdered while gaming, but if someone bits it every session, eventually the rest of the players would catch on.

Of course, if you're killing multiple groups of players, then we're back to serial killer territory.

daniel_ream
2017-08-07, 05:59 PM
If you want more realistic combat, you're going to end up with realistic body counts. Given the average gamer's grasp of tactics and instinct for character preservation, I suspect this isn't going to end satisfyingly for anyone involved.

I would suggest you drop the "realism" mindset and instead think carefully about what you want gunfights to look like in your homebrew, and create rules that reward the behaviour you want to see from your PCs.

For instance, if you want a lot of cover-hugging, leapfrogging under covering fire, and encouraging PCs to keep their heads down, then make cover impervious to gunfire, have a rule that suppression fire always hits a target out of cover, and have body armor turn a lethal hit into an incapacitating one rather than reducing damage. Also have armor provide severely escalating penalties the thicker it is. If you want sniping to be a winning tactic, then make sure camouflage gives a huge defense boost and aiming a huge hit/damage bonus. If you want blitzkrieg to work, then give huge bonuses for first round surprise. Etc., etc.

Arbane
2017-08-07, 06:09 PM
And if you want it to look more like a John Woo movie, skip 'realism' and play Feng Shui. :smallbiggrin:

8BitNinja
2017-08-07, 06:23 PM
I will attempt to reply to everyone here, but for now I'll just do the first three.


In systems where you want to emphasize lethality, reduce the number it hits it takes to kill someone, but also reduce the likelihood of hits landing.

If your goal is to make a system where combat is so lethal, the setup of the fight is more important than how the fight itself is played out, then write rules that allow players to do cool things (and NPCs to do scary things) during the setup. You might devote your time and attention to the main loop of the game, then once that's satisfactory, think about what you want to do for systems on the periphery of that.

As an aside, I would seriously consider getting rid of HP as a whole and rethink what exactly you want level ups to do. Don't have the level 10 Tom Clancy guy go around soaking bullets that would kill a level 1 Tom Clancy guy outright.

This is a good idea. It also would add incentive to getting to be an accurate shot with sniper rifles or expending most of your ammo with LMGs. It also adds reason to maybe go with a bipod or foregrip for an attachment rather than a grenade launcher.


If characters can die easily, then they should also be quick and easy to create - so not too many rules or different options they need to choose from -character templates (classes) with most everything standardized and not more than a few things that they can switch out to customize would be a good idea. Having multiple characters per player or backup characters ready to go is also good idea. Episodic missions is probably a good format for that sort of thing. For example: Players find out what the mission is, then they choose their team from the pool of characters they've created. Go on the mission - if they fail and/or everyone dies, the next team gets a briefing about what happened and they're still hunting for those bad guys that got away, or whatever it was about.

Each session or every couple sessions it should be a new mission that starts with the briefing and choosing the right members for the team.

This is actually reminiscent of the proto-game that inspired this idea. Characters were made so that they could be easily replaced if the players lost a few characters from the last mission.


It sounds like you're working from a very D&D-y sort of framework? I strongly suggest checking out some existing games with relatively modern settings to see what sorts of ideas you like.

In general, I'd say that if you want combat to be any significant part of the game, it should be survivable. Not necessarily D&D style, but it should be possible to escape a skirmish relatively unscathed, and to emerge from a serious battle with at least most of the party still alive. The more lethal you make fighting, the more it becomes a worst-case, "avoid whenever possible" scenario.

My usual preference would be something like Fate's Stress/Consequence tracks (https://fate-srd.com/fate-core/conflicts#stress). In a nutshell, you have a small pool of "stress" that basically represents plot armor-- attacks that deplete stress are close misses, attacks that connect but fail to penetrate your armor, or are barely blocked but leave your hands ringing, that sort of thing. When it runs out, you either die or suffer a serious, long-term Consequence. If you survive the fight, stress recovers in a minute or two, while Consequences linger for sessions or longer. That gives you a setup kind of like I described above, where it's possible to take a hit or two and keep going without turning into a solid wall of meat. (The D&D version of this all would be Vitality and Wound Points (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/adventuring/vitalityAndWoundPoints.htm), I guess).

Given some of the sources you mention, it's probably worth putting a strong emphasis on surprise. If you're caught off-guard, it should be really easy to put you down, possibly bypassing the "plot armor" type virtual health altogether.

I'll find a way to implement this mechanic, this sounds like a good idea to keep players from dying from being attacked by incredibly weak assailants from a head on attack.

daniel_ream
2017-08-07, 07:31 PM
And if you want it to look more like a John Woo movie, skip 'realism' and play Feng Shui. :smallbiggrin:

To be honest, I found Feng Shui doesn't really model John Woo films very well. It suffers from what Daniel Bayn referred to as "punishing you less".

8BitNinja
2017-08-08, 07:19 PM
i'd say if you want lethal, go the dark heresy or only war route: most weapons can do more damage than characters have hp, fate points can allow you to avoid the worst injuries, and some armors can deny certain levels of weapons. your basic flak armor (the imperial guard body armor in wh40k) is actually proof against pretty much all common handguns, and up to shotgun slugs. lasguns and up, however, and you'll be deader and deader.

the crit tables of that game are as spectacular as they are practical. for a body blow, it goes from a hit to the family jewels rendering the character prone up to perforating a lung straight to bisecting the poor sap in a shower of gore, forcing everyone to do a willpower check not to run away.

*reading*

everything thrudd said makes me vouch for only war, just reskin it into a tom clancy novel (easy to do), and do that. good luck.

Sounds like a good idea. Points taken.


(1) What's the average RPG? Because the realism quota is different if we assume our baseline is Fate than if we assume it's GURPS.



(2) Okay, in my experience most games don't have levels, and the average hit points vary significantly. Off the top of my head:
-4 in Savage Worlds (with penalties for each one)
-4+8 in Victoriana (the second set give penalties)
-40 in Keltia
-18 in Rocket Age (hits reduce stats)
-30 at 1st level in Fantasy AGE, increasing by about 4.5 a level
-21 in Traveller (hits reduce stats)
-10 in GURPS
-2 in Fate
-50 in Unknown Armies

(3) Oh, but damage also varies a lot, you can't tell how deadly each of these systems are from that (although bar Fate and Fantasy AGE PCs are squishy). All bar Fantasy AGE don't have levels either. Really, levels go hand in foot with realism, I certainly haven't levelled up at all in my life.



Oh boy, having to work out what my armour protects against (I see the end result, 'I wear several sets of armour to be protected against anything). This is a bunch of elements that while great alone might not be fun together.



(4) Why are these the only two options? Most of my games have been pretty far from Superhero, in fact I once nearly experienced a TPK in session 2 (it was an Unknown Armies game, the book recommends avoiding combat). But they weren't particularly deadly, either from the GURPS-style '0hp is out of the fight and recovering for days, but unless you fail a roll you won't die' or from being much more combat as war. Sure, we couldn't take more hits than the average grunt, and in fact were poorly armed most of the time, but still mopped the floor with our enemies and never had a casualty.

I've been in games with everything from 'chump' to 'professional' to 'superhero' as the PC's squishiness, and honestly it makes little difference as long as the system doesn't go out of the way to kill PCs (which this one does, must wear armour or else you'll die in a single lucky hit, or even a normal hit, but you can't reasonably prepare because the enemy might have weapons that pierce your armour). At least GURPS has the decency to make armour universally protective and just make most guns do more damage that it prevents (and even then going to 0hp likely won't kill you).



Yes, could you please explain why you're using levels in a realistic system when point buy has existed for over forty years.

1. For my baseline I'm using D&D 3e and 3.5e. So not that realistic.

2. The starting characters could have as little as 1hp to as much as 12hp. Either way, the M4A1 (one of the common rifles in the game) will be doing somewhere around 2d8 damage, not including crits

3. Cool, but levels are the best way I know to advance stats and skills. Either that, or have a Skyrim-esque system where every skill and stat has it's own XP.

4. I guess superhero is a hyperbole, but the point is that the people I want most characters to be are ones that have the physical and mental abilities that would land them at about the median of competence in the infantry. Characters that would be strong and smart enough to land them in special ops would be rare.

Grod_The_Giant
2017-08-08, 08:35 PM
1. For my baseline I'm using D&D 3e and 3.5e. So not that realistic.
I really suggest looking at how some other RPGs work before trying to write your own, especially if you're looking to substantially diverge from the 3e D&D model. I mean, d20 Modern at the very least seems like a good starting point. It's worth at least skimming

A point-buy system like GURPS or M&M (to see a non-level-based way of doing things)
A rules-light system like Risus (to see how far you can cut rules and still have a game)
A narrative-focused system like Fate or Apocalpyse World (to a different perspective on how to model things)
An intensely non-generic system like Paranoia or Dread (to see how rules can reinforce setting)

If nothing else, it's a good source of inspiration, and you're likely to stumble across some mechanics you like.


4. I guess superhero is a hyperbole, but the point is that the people I want most characters to be are ones that have the physical and mental abilities that would land them at about the median of competence in the infantry. Characters that would be strong and smart enough to land them in special ops would be rare.
In terms of what you're familiar with...? I suggest using Vitality and Wound Points (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/adventuring/vitalityAndWoundPoints.htm) and E6 type rules, so you halt vertical advancement at a lower point than 3.5 does. Allow surprise attacks to count as auto-crits and you'll get very modern-feeling lethal ambushes.

Blackhawk748
2017-08-08, 08:40 PM
If noone has recommended it i would say at least take a glance at Savage Worlds, its a generic rules system thats petty much on the lower, gritty end.

Slipperychicken
2017-08-08, 10:17 PM
You could try using Wild Talents (ironically, a superhero system) for such a game, since it looks like you want characters in a sort-of-modern setting with supernatural powers and super-science, but who are still more or less human in terms of the amount of hurt they can take.

It has a brilliantly elegant core mechanic (the One Roll Engine), a locational damage system, permanent injuries, and even lets you build your own powers. Just be sure to learn the system and develop a very clear idea about separate point restrictions for powers, stats, and skills. Also don't let players pack wiggle dice onto everything, or get armor points on themselves to be immune to damage. You kind of have to balance it yourself based on a clear vision of the game you want to play, but then at the same time you're already making your own RPG.

Anonymouswizard
2017-08-09, 01:49 AM
1. For my baseline I'm using D&D 3e and 3.5e. So not that realistic.

Ah, one of the less realistic RPGs is our baseline, as I suspected. I mean, I've seen less realistic (Exalted, Godbound, Anima: Beyond Fantasy) but they were all intentional, I'm not sure if 3.X was.

I really suggest playing some professionally published games. My short list:
-GURPS, just to see how roles heavy can end up. Characters will go down to a rifle shot, but it won't be a definite kill.
-Savage Worlds, to see the differences between generics and the difference between a system that strives for realism (GURPS) and one that doesn't.
-Fate (or Apocalypse World), to get an idea of narrative gaming.
-Something really specialised, as in only doesn't one thing but does it really well.


2. The starting characters could have as little as 1hp to as much as 12hp. Either way, the M4A1 (one of the common rifles in the game) will be doing somewhere around 2d8 damage, not including crits

And I've already left the table. I mean sure, in GURPS I have 10hp and a rifle does IIRC 5d6 damage (average 17.5), but even if cover doesn't exist I can mitigate that by increasing my Dodge (there's various ways). Basic Speed 6 and Combat Reflexes gives me a Dodge of 10 to dodge 50% of attacks, and is reasonable for a normal person. Plus if I am hit I'm still likely alive, especially if I'm wearing some form of armour.


3. Cool, but levels are the best way I know to advance stats and skills. Either that, or have a Skyrim-esque system where every skill and stat has it's own XP.

How about how the majority of games do it? You have XP, spend that XP on stats and skills directly. Maybe skills cost 3XP a rank and stats cost 14XP a rank. Have you actually played a professionally named game that isn't about fighting giant winged lizards in subterranean complexes?


4. I guess superhero is a hyperbole, but the point is that the people I want most characters to be are ones that have the physical and mental abilities that would land them at about the median of competence in the infantry. Characters that would be strong and smart enough to land them in special ops would be rare.

Yeah, I tend to play at slightly higher levels (competent professional instead of average professional). But my point was that you're implying an either or and saying 'is squishy bad', when it's a wide range of legitimate options.

Knaight
2017-08-09, 02:31 AM
You could try using Wild Talents (ironically, a superhero system) for such a game, since it looks like you want characters in a sort-of-modern setting with supernatural powers and super-science, but who are still more or less human in terms of the amount of hurt they can take.

It has a brilliantly elegant core mechanic (the One Roll Engine), a locational damage system, permanent injuries, and even lets you build your own powers. Just be sure to learn the system and develop a very clear idea about separate point restrictions for powers, stats, and skills. Also don't let players pack wiggle dice onto everything, or get armor points on themselves to be immune to damage. You kind of have to balance it yourself based on a clear vision of the game you want to play, but then at the same time you're already making your own RPG.

If you're going to use an ORE base, you'd want to start with Nemesis - where the starting point is action horror, and where it has a lot of the little details that fit. It's also free and less than 60 pages long (although it manages to be pretty crunchy despite the length), and is thus a pretty easy way to get some non-d20 experience with RPG systems.

Anonymouswizard
2017-08-09, 03:30 AM
If you're going to use an ORE base, you'd want to start with Nemesis - where the starting point is action horror, and where it has a lot of the little details that fit. It's also free and less than 60 pages long (although it manages to be pretty crunchy despite the length), and is thus a pretty easy way to get some non-d20 experience with RPG systems.

It's pretty crunchy because there's only rules in those <60 pages.

Great game though.

RazorChain
2017-08-09, 03:42 AM
So I've been helping my friends make a TRPG taking place in the near future (2040s) inspired by ArmA, Tom Clancy books, and real life political events. Since they wanted to make the game a bit more realistic than the average RPG, we decided that characters gain HP on level up only by their CON modifier, armor not being universally protective (EX: Kevlar vests with no plating will protect against handgun rounds, but have no effect on rifle rounds) with the exception of the super heavy Eisenhower and Zhukov armors, and most weapons being able to one or two shot most unarmored characters. Also, medics are not miracle workers and permanent injuries exist.

Do you think that a game could still work and be fun if everyone isn't a superhero? Or do you think that the players need to be able to take more hits than the average grunt?

If you need any more information, I will be happy to provide it.


I'm just going to iterate what others have said here. There is no need to reinvent the wheel unless you REALLY want to do so. There are plenty of good system out there that are good at down to earth gritty heroes and firefights. In fact most systems aren't about four color fantasy superheroes but D&D isn't one of them. So why try to force a square into a round hole? Why not find a appropriate system and focus on world building? But then again using D&D as a baseline for what you are trying to achieve is like building your castle in a swamp, it's doable but......


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w82CqjaDKmA

Knaight
2017-08-09, 04:10 AM
It's pretty crunchy because there's only rules in those <60 pages.

Great game though.

That and because tables are high crunch density and it doesn't shy away from them.

FreddyNoNose
2017-08-10, 02:52 PM
Play FATAL, it's the fastest way to kill both the characters and their players.

What about classic traveller? Die during character creation!

Grod_The_Giant
2017-08-10, 03:05 PM
What about classic traveller? Die during character creation!
That only gets the characters, though. The players' will to live is intact.

(DeadEarth gets an honorable mention, though. Not only can you die in character creation, you're only ever allowed to roll up three)

Anonymouswizard
2017-08-10, 03:40 PM
That and because tables are high crunch density and it doesn't shy away from them.

True, I also like and try to use tables in my homebrew, they can condense rules to a third of the space. Although my current homebrew doesn't use any yet because it's more focused on 'add these rules to the game'.


What about classic traveller? Die during character creation!

I mean sometimes you pretty much have to suicide characters, RAW you have to play that character with all 4s you rolled up (or possibly all 2s, although that's astonishingly unlikely).

FreddyNoNose
2017-08-10, 03:42 PM
That only gets the characters, though. The players' will to live is intact.

(DeadEarth gets an honorable mention, though. Not only can you die in character creation, you're only ever allowed to roll up three)
Easy to kill players. That should be simple. Did anyone not see the red wedding?

8BitNinja
2017-08-13, 01:09 PM
I will again take the opportunity to pontificate about my favourite RPG, Burning Wheel, with a damage system that might work well for you.

Each PC has a physical tolerance scale derived from their fort and power stats, the scale goes from B1 to B16 with higher being more damaging. Each PC marks spots along that scale for things that correspond to their superficial, light, midi, severe, traumatic, and mortal wounds. So if someone has a B4 superficial wound, if they get hit with an attack that does B4 damage then they take a superficial wound.

Each level of wound has a different penalty associated with it. A midi wound subtracts 2 dice from nearly everything you roll. A traumatic subtracts 4 dice. A mortal wound instantly incapacitates you and has you bleeding out on the floor if there isn't an expert doctor immediately present to treat you. Taking a number of penalty dice equal to your lower stat also incapacitates you, so four light wounds is equivalent to a traumatic wound. But each wound is tracked separately so while four light wounds is equivalent to a traumatic wound in terms of how effective you are, the light wounds are much less serious in the long term because they're easier to treat and recover from. If you take a bunch of flesh wounds you'll be back on your feet in under a day, but if you take a traumatic wound you need immediate medical attention and months of recovery time.

Notable for the system, some people certainly are much tougher than others, but not to as great a degree. A person that's as tough as a human can possibly be would have a physical tolerance scale of:
Superficial: B5
Light: B9
Midi: B11
Severe: B12
Traumatic: B13
Mortal: B14

Where a person who's an average human would be more along the lines of:
Superficial: B2
Light: B4
Midi: B6
Severe: B7
Traumatic: B8
Mortal: B9

If you shoot someone with a rifle you'd roll a d6 (not counting bonuses for exceptional aim which would shift probabilities). On a 1-2 you'd do a B5, on a 3-4 you'd do a B9, on a 5-6 you'd do a B13. So, you see, even on the toughest man on the planet, getting shot in a vital place with a rifle is still going to do nearly lethal amounts of damage. But he's much better at shrugging off those shots that aren't aimed as well.

For armour, armour either blocks all the damage from an attack, or does nothing. Armour has an amount of dice equal to how good the armour is. So a bulletproof vest might be 3 dice of protection where serious infantry body armour might be 6 dice. You roll all those dice, 4+ is a success. If any of them are a 1 the armour is damaged and loses one die until it's repaired. You need a number of successes equal to the weapon's Versus Armour stat +1. So if a handgun with VA 1 is shooting at a bulletproof vest you'd roll 3 dice and need 2 successes to absorb the hit, which sounds reasonable to me.

This sounds like a better system that I had. Thanks for suggesting this.


Dark Heresy is very lethal. One of my characters on there was considered extremely durable with 10 "hitpoints" (they used another name), and swung a two-handed sword that dealt 2d10+4 damage, meaning the toughest normal human around was only one swing from death from his own weapon on a decent roll. And although I was playing an ex-primitive who still liked his sword, the system is mostly based on guns. Cover and aiming matter a lot under that system, and a good dodge roll can be the difference between life or death. You don't need to convert to it, but a lot of concepts in it might help. And if you drew your gun and fired without aiming, you had on average a 30% chance of hitting, which could also be negated by their dodge roll.

I'll study up on Dark Heresy, it probably has a lot of things I'm going to want to use.

@Every comment concerning leveling up: I completely forgot about point buy. Sorry about that, I've just been reading up on a lot of D&D stuff recently