People seem to like the idea of actual descriptive damage in their RPG's. Even though in D&D the notion of hit points is expressly an abstraction of a character's fortitude - especially since third edition - people like the notion of slicing a sword across the torso or bashing the skull of their enemies. The problem is that any system complicates the rules and slows down play, as well as increasing the hazard to the player character. Here's an option that I was working on back in third edition but it proved kind of complicated and cumbersome. Fourth edition, though, let me kind of riff on the idea and come up with a decent little system.

Every time a character is hit, roll d20 against the following table to determine location:

1 - 3 R. Leg
4 - 7 L. Leg
8 - 10 R. Arm
11 - 13 L. Arm
14 - 19 Torso
20 Head

Location does not affect damage. A hit point is still an abstract thing. It either represents an actual wound or a close call or luck or a bruise or any other thing that brings the character closer to his death. But we don't want to play with the numbers and redefine the game. But damage to a body part will have a negative impact in other terms. But first, make a saving throw. On a success, go no further. The wound is superficial, or a near miss or whatever. On a failure, the attacker assigns the target one of the following penalties based on location.

leg - -2 on initiative (possibly moving you down in the order), - 1 square movement, -1 acrobatics, -1 stealth, -1 Reflex

arm - -1 melee attack, -1 damage, -1 athletics

torso - -1 fortitude, -1 athletics,-1 endurance

head - -1 attack and damage, -4 initiative, -2 reflex, -2 will, -1 on all INT based skills, -1 on all WIS based skills

These effects are cumulative, so that 2 hits to the legs can cause -2 squares of movement; except that the penalties applied in this way cannot be more than half the original bonus. So movement for a normal character could not be reduced to below 3. Critical hits guarantee that there is a wound and double the penalty.

Each time a healing surge is spent by or on the character, one of these penalties is reduced by one.

An example of this in action:

Aust swings his sword at Corvac and scores a hit. Rolling for location, he gets a 17 and hits in the torso. Corvac rolls a 12 for his saving throw - it was a glancing blow. Corvac swings and rolls a 20 - critical hit (no need for Aust to try his save). For location Corvac rolls a 3 - right leg. He chooses for the wound to affect Aust's movement. Aust now has 4 squares of movement. Next round, Aust spends a healing surge for his second wind. He receives back hit points equal to his surge value, as well as decreasing a penalty of his choice. He chooses his only one - movement - and his movement is now 5.

As hit location systems go, this is a fairly easy one to manage. You can remember the location table and the penalties fairly easily and it doesn't add a lot of time to the game. It doesn't mitigate the value of hit points or healing surges, but it does apply pretty logical set of repercussions based on hit location.

Note: I haven't playtested this yet. The locations table is based on a modification we used for Cyberpunk 2o2o - it was just too easy to get hit in the head. I'll give this a go sometime in the near future. It's a prototype house rule, but I think it's fundamentally sound.

chris.m.durham

One thing that has bothered me for a long time is the use, or I should say the misuse, of the profit motive in fantasy roleplaying. Here's the scenario: The villiage is raided by monsters, the player-characters come to the rescue, the monsters are chased off, but they took hostages. The villagers turn to their new-found saviors for aid, and what's the first question? "What's in it for us?"

Everyone has their own reason for playing D&D. I understand this; but the basic conceit of the game is that you take on the mantle of a hero. It's disconcerting enough to me that even newcomers to the game are prone to this sort of behavior. My girlfriend, in her second D&D game ever was the first to ask this question given this scenario - immediately backed up by the rest of the players. New and veteran players alike suffered from the same condition: Reward-Based Roleplay. This is something that has no doubt been bolstered by years of computer and console games that simulate the RPG experience but lack that personal touch.

I noticed this and, playing an adventure-seeker, I tried to steer the group in what I thought was a better direction: There are townsfolk to rescue, adventure awaits, let's go! and then I noticed something. We were in a skill challenge to negotiate a bargain for our services. What? It seems horribly sad to me that the writer of this particular adventure assumed that the "heroes" would expect compensation. How heroic.

Don't get me wrong, I understand well that monetary reward is part and parcel to the game. I get that game balance depends not only on the increase of your stats and traits, but also on your ability to outfit a character to a level befitting their ability. But that's why this kind of reward has always been referred to as "treasure." This is not a world of modern contract negotiations where mercenary consultants work out a compensation plan. This, the world of Dungeons and Dragons, is a world built for heroes. Willing heroes, accidental heroes, reluctant heroes, antiheroes - they all have something in common.

Perhaps it is a matter of laziness on the part of the players that has now become acceptable. But where's the fun in that? If you negotiate a reward for your services, where is the challenge of figuring out what makes your character a hero? Reward is convenient, but why not think of a better reason to justify your storming the castle? Hell, I've got a great one.

Go rescue the townsfolk because it's the right thing to do. D&D provides an escapist reality for us. We live in a world that's so jaded and impersonal that doing the right thing is almost never a forgone conclusion. We could chat all day about why that is, and disagree on as many points as we concur, but the fact of the matter is that our perception of the consequences of "right action" often make us at least reluctant. In this fantasy world though, why not check that baggage at the door, check in to the game, drink the Kool-Aid, and go be a hero for once.

Of course you should role play. Maybe you don't know why you're doing the right thing. Maybe your character doesn't know. Part of the fun may be finding out. Maybe your character does know why he or she does the right thing. Part of the fun may be testing their convictions. Maybe they do the right thing for the wrong reasons. There are any number of possibilities. Roleplaying is telling a story and there are a number of people contributing to that story. As a player character, you only have a fraction of that story in your hands, so make it a personal story - a character-driven story. This is the sort of thing that sets tabletop RPG's apart from computer-based games. That personal touch.

And that doesn't mean the profit motive can't be there. Of course we dungeon delve because we're after lost treasure. But when you come to the T section in your 10' x 10' corridor with a treasure horde at one end and the kidnapped princess in imminent danger at the other, which way will you go? That's what makes the game interesting.

chris.m.durham