Party HP

[Crusadius]

If you've split into 2 different parties then their would be 2 different party hp's.

So now you are tracking individual hp for characters, just deciding what pool they contribute to.

 

[FrogReaver]

So now you are tracking individual hp for characters, just deciding what pool they contribute to.

Not sure what u mean

 

[FrogReaver]

Downing a PC at 1/4 sounds too soon. Consider a 4-person party. If all that damage is narratively done to one character, then you can down them at that point. But if the narrative has spread the damage around even a little... probably nobody should be down yet.

yea I think adjusting that value to higher would be good.

This also plays weirdly when individual characters resist damage or are especially hard to hit, or who narratively should be easy targets. In D&D terms, it might make the Barbarian easier to down than he should be, and the party Wizard harder to kill than you'd expect.

Sounds like it’s achieving the goal. The whole idea is to tie the parties fortunes together. Imagine for a moment the fighter is in melee taking a beating and an enemy archer looses his arrow at your wizard. As it stands now the wizard has no worries. In the proposed system, because the party is getting the crap kicked out of it to a sufficient level then the mechanics direct the fiction to produce an injured party member at that time. Any party member will do (in this case it was the wizard) but it’s not particularly important Which. It’s a bit less simulation than many may prefer. But it should produce more dynamic combat fiction while also making combat feel a little less safe for all involved.

 

[Crusadius]

Not sure what u mean

Your original premise was "a Party HP system where instead of tracking individual hp for characters instead hp moves up to the party level".

But now to have two different party HP pools you have to determine how to split the party HP pool into two. So is the plan to just straight out halve the main pool? Or should the composition of each party need to be accounted for? That is, if one party is made up of the barbarian and knight and the other the rogue and wizard with the bad cough, should each pool reflect the composition of the party?

 

[FrogReaver]

Your original premise was "a Party HP system where instead of tracking individual hp for characters instead hp moves up to the party level".

But now to have two different party HP pools you have to determine how to split the party HP pool into two. So is the plan to just straight out halve the main pool? Or should the composition of each party need to be accounted for? That is, if one party is made up of the barbarian and knight and the other the rogue and wizard with the bad cough, should each pool reflect the composition of the party?

Intent was always for party composition to matter.

 

[FrogReaver]

Anyone who has played games like Star Wars where the party gets into battles while all on the same ship or other vehicle, would have some experience with this.

Yes! ship combat in games would probably get close.

 

[aramis erak]

Mouse Guard and Torchbearer do team HP. The "HP" equivalent (disposition) is generated as a best in team + help from rest of team plus base by ability used for the disposition roll. (So, if based upon Nature, and Nature is a 5, that's 5 plus the number of successes on 5+(helpers) d6 shooting for 4+ on each. Thing is, they don't take out members before running out. The nastiness of the defeat depends upon the remaining fraction of the group that took them out.

 

[Umbran]

Sounds like it’s achieving the goal.

I understand that. It is just that the goal may run contrary to the image the players had in mind for their characters. The way you depict it is in line with expectations - the fighter is hearty, but the wizard isn't. However, the system is just as likely to run the other way. The wizard can take an enormous beating that they shouldn't be able to, and then the fighter dies from what would otherwise have been a scratch, which is weird.

This kind of system should work well for games/settings in which there's not expected to be a whole lot of difference in how much punishment different characters can take. Modern gritty stuff, or Call of Cthulhu, for example. But in games in which players can make build choices that should substantially increase or decrease hardiness, you are apt to run into situations like the above - whether you frame it like "Hey, I chose to have all those hit points, why do I still fall over so easily?" or that the results don't fit the narrative setup "How the heck does Wizbang the Flagrant take that many hits and still stand?"

I expect you'll find that overall, it makes combat less safe for the tanks, but more safe for those who are traditionally glass cannons.

 

[FrogReaver]

I understand that. It is just that the goal may run contrary to the image the players had in mind for their characters. The way you depict it is in line with expectations - the fighter is hearty, but the wizard isn't. However, the system is just as likely to run the other way. The wizard can take an enormous beating that they shouldn't be able to, and then the fighter dies from what would otherwise have been a scratch, which is weird.

This kind of system should work well for games/settings in which there's not expected to be a whole lot of difference in how much punishment different characters can take. Modern gritty stuff, or Call of Cthulhu, for example. But in games in which players can make build choices that should substantially increase or decrease hardiness, you are apt to run into situations like the above - whether you frame it like "Hey, I chose to have all those hit points, why do I still fall over so easily?" or that the results don't fit the narrative setup "How the heck does Wizbang the Flagrant take that many hits and still stand?"

I expect you'll find that overall, it makes combat less safe for the tanks, but more safe for those who are traditionally glass cannons.

I can see that. I think theres some interesting mechanics that can be incorporated to provide that tanky feel. Maybe Abilities that provide a chance for a character to avoid being downed when that happens.

 

[Willie the Duck]

Tunnels and Trolls seems to be the initial RPG to use this type of system. Each character and monster rolls a set of dice based on their combat prowess (and spells cast, stuff used, etc.) and adds it to their side's total. The side with the higher total inflicts the difference as damage to the losing group. Spells and missile weapons inflict damage even if the the casting side loses. Damage is split out (in a method that I think has differed a bit by edition) to individuals, where their armor then acts as DR. It's not exactly what the OP was seeking, but similar in concept.