Alternative HP systems and other altered d20 mechanics

[Broken Fang]

Well I have to say this has been intresting to read (even though I did skip a page or two). I don't think I've seen anyone mention GURPS yet. Play that if your not happy. Between 1st ed and 3rd ed thats all I played...about 10 years worth (33 yrs old now).

GURPS has the following:
1. skills that reflect your ability to hit
2. skills that reflect your ability to defend (parry/dodge/block)
3. low HP that don't increase (no levels in the game)
4. armor reduces damage
5. strength and weapon type determine damage die and bonus
6. called shots with penalties so low strength high skill characters can hit and do damage (it really sucks if you hit and inflict NO damage) - though this can happen with a bad roll

Some problems with GURPS:
1. low magic system
2. the above hitting but inflicting no damage
3. only four attributes (min/max potential)

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi Isawa mate!

Upper_Krust:

I fear that we, too, are going to have to agree to disagree.

As long as we part amicably thats okay mate.

We're going around in circles, since every time I point out a flaw in your system, you turn around and claim it to be a point in your favor. "That's not a bug, that's a feature!"

Well I already proved that my system easily handled your baseball activities, even though twice you changed the information yet kept the same end result to make it look as though it didn't.

As far as 19 points of damage killing a 9 HP person, I meant:

9 - 19 == -10 == death

That's why I said "if we were removing damage from hit points".

But you already knew I didn't advocate hit points like that so your initial statement (in this regard) was simply misleading.

We also seem to have a very different take on the armor issue; you see multiple DRs for armor/damage type pairs as simple, I see it as more bookkeeping than necessary. I don't think either of us is going to budge here.

Thats okay. Like I mentioned a few posts ago when my DM suggested using armour to reduce damage I was skeptical too. But after a few games I found it worked much better and became just as simple to use as before.

(And as far as fire using leather's normal DR, how do you arrive at that? I'm not questioning the decision, just wondering what logic is behind it.)

Simple. Fire is energy.

As far as BESM's damage, you're right - someone with 19 or 20 levels worth of Special Attack does 300 points of damage, which is the same damage that they list for planet-killing weapons. It's an unsually high level - most people won't have attacks that go above 45 or so - but for certain genres of anime, it makes perfect sense for characters to have planet-destroying powers. I'm looking forward to seeing GOO's Silver Age Sentinels, their supers game using the same system (except using d10s instead of d6s).

Sounds interesting! I have a penchant for high powered gaming (which is one of the reasons why I would like to see D&D scale better).

On what Hit Points represent, we're totally in disagreement here.

The term 'hit points' is simply the name given to an arbitrary game mechanic.

Whether I use the term in my system is immaterial.

I find the idea of one's ability to withstand damage being directly related to mass to be, well, ridiculous.

Yet you follow a system where they can't even explain what in actuality hit points are.

I refer you back to Ryan Danceys comments.

I shouldn't be forced to come up with a character's weight,

Yet you are okay with rolling hit points! This seems hypocritical.

Frankly I can't think of a D&D player character I have created where weight wasn't determined!

especially since body weight can mean many different things - fat vs. muscle, for example,

Exactly. Which is why its Mass + Strength. Incidently the more mass someone carries the stronger they are.

or unusual construction (such as a golem made from a very dense but fragile substance).

Material hardness would be relative to strength.

I also find that hit points that don't really count as hit points (i.e., you don't actually subtract damage from them) to be very counter-intuitive,

In 1st/2nd Ed. Armour Class was negative and so was thac0. In 3rd Ed. they reversed that.

What I propose is that instead of subtracting damage from hit points you add it up. Again hardly a major revelation.

since the idea of HP is deeply ingrained into the entire gaming industry. It's an easy system to manage, if not the most realistic, but you know what - when I game, I'm not gaming to simulate the real world. The concept of someone having a lot of hit points doesn't bother me in the least. Unless I'm playing in a supers game, if you jump into lava or off of an extremely high cliff, dead no save. Your mileage may vary.

Gaming is about having fun, participating in a story, realism will help immerse you in that story.

Finally, on the rules set that you keep bringing up... wanting to design 4th Edition is a noble goal, to be sure.

Little more than wishful thinking at this stage. Thats not to say I couldn't do it though.

However, it does nothing to fix the problem now.

So you admit you have a problem with hit points.

If you detest HP so much, then fix it now.

I never said I detested hit points. In fact I said I was happy with them (I have used them for over 15 years after all!) - just not contented; and I think someone (whether its me or not) could create a better system.

Don't make an excuse of "HP are too core a component to change at this point."

...but they are probably the most ingrained mechanic in the entire system!

If you're going to make a fix to the system, then do it already.

Why should I have to tidy up someone elses mess?

If I was designing 4th Edition I would start from scratch. That doesn't mean it wouldn't have familiar components but I wouldn't carry dead weight just for the sake of nostalgia.

I see far too many people who complain and say that they could do it much better, but who never offer anything truly concrete as a fix. Well then, let's see what you would do, and not just in bits and pieces. Put something solid together and let the community review it.

I am too busy working on other roleplaying material at the moment - replying to this whole hit point thing was just a way for me to unwind! Even so I am happy with some of the ideas that have arisen out of it.

Like I mentioned before this thread was initially in the General Discussion Forum - not House Rules; added to that I didn't start the thread to begin with!

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi Broken Fang!

Well I have to say this has been intresting to read (even though I did skip a page or two). I don't think I've seen anyone mention GURPS yet. Play that if your not happy. Between 1st ed and 3rd ed thats all I played...about 10 years worth (33 yrs old now).

GURPS has the following:
1. skills that reflect your ability to hit
2. skills that reflect your ability to defend (parry/dodge/block)
3. low HP that don't increase (no levels in the game)
4. armor reduces damage
5. strength and weapon type determine damage die and bonus
6. called shots with penalties so low strength high skill characters can hit and do damage (it really sucks if you hit and inflict NO damage) - though this can happen with a bad roll

Some problems with GURPS:
1. low magic system
2. the above hitting but inflicting no damage
3. only four attributes (min/max potential)

GURPS sounds really interesting! I must admit I am totally unfamiliar with that particular RPG.

However I just downloaded Gurps-lite so I'll have a read of that.

 

[Lily Inverse]

Uhm. . . . .

I was just going to ask one more thing, although it's probably silly. What's the problem with using hit points to simulate a "reality" where people tend to take massive hits and aren't affected by them? To use Ranma 1/2 as the example again, the characters are regularly hit with blows that put small to mid-sized craters in the landscape, launched into Low-Earth Orbit (LEO) by giant hammers and spatulas, and at one point Ranma himself is even run over by an elephant. And yet the worst injury that lasted longer than a few manga frams for effect was a sprained wrist.

It seems like HP was MADE for just this kind of game.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Re: Uhm. . . . .

Hi Lily!

I was just going to ask one more thing, although it's probably silly. What's the problem with using hit points to simulate a "reality" where people tend to take massive hits and aren't affected by them? To use Ranma 1/2 as the example again, the characters are regularly hit with blows that put small to mid-sized craters in the landscape, launched into Low-Earth Orbit (LEO) by giant hammers and spatulas, and at one point Ranma himself is even run over by an elephant. And yet the worst injury that lasted longer than a few manga frams for effect was a sprained wrist.

It seems like HP was MADE for just this kind of game.

I'm not familiar with Ranma 1/2 but it sounds something like DragonballZ (?).

As I mentioned a number of posts ago, even with realistic systems you have a variety of pertinent factors to play around with:

Physics (eg. Superman)
Skill (eg. Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon)
Equipment/Technology (eg. Dr. Doom)
Tactics/Knowledge (eg. Odin)
Magic (eg. Gandalf)

Each can be taken to any extremis, or mixed. Therefore meaning anything is possible even within the guise of reality.

 

[Lily Inverse]

I'm not familiar with Ranma 1/2 but it sounds something like DragonballZ (?).

No. DBZ, for one thing, has less actual fighting. And a lot more episodes spent simply screaming at one another.

As I mentioned a number of posts ago, even with realistic systems you have a variety of pertinent factors to play around with:

Physics (eg. Superman)
Skill (eg. Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon)
Equipment/Technology (eg. Dr. Doom)
Tactics/Knowledge (eg. Odin)
Magic (eg. Gandalf)

Each can be taken to any extremis, or mixed. Therefore meaning anything is possible even within the guise of reality.

Let me see if I'm getting this right. You're saying that, to simulate fights where people don't really suffer injury without being knocked out or killed completely, that a system that accounts for individual injuries is necessary? I would say it's downright ocntradictory.

By the way, this is the very definition of realism that I've been going by. If you disagree, say now.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi Lily mate!

No. DBZ, for one thing, has less actual fighting. And a lot more episodes spent simply screaming at one another.

Okay, well like I said I am not familiar with Ranma 1/2.

I am familiar with DragonballZ and Fist of the North Star.

Let me see if I'm getting this right. You're saying that, to simulate fights where people don't really suffer injury without being knocked out or killed completely, that a system that accounts for individual injuries is necessary? I would say it's downright contradictory.

By the way, this is the very definition of realism that I've been going by. If you disagree, say now.

I never infered that a realistic system for injury was necessary - after all I have been playing D&D for almost 20 years!

I do believe a realistic system would be superior though!

What I would say, is that a realistic system could still work with something like DragonballZ or Fist of the North Star (and I would imagine Ranma 1/2 too). Simply because you can extend (the previously mentioned) factors to account for any eventualities.

 

[Lily Inverse]

I never infered that a realistic system for injury was necessary - after all I have been playing D&D for almost 20 years!

Then you don't want what most people in this hobby refer to as a "realistic" damage system at all! (See Rolemaster, et al.) This is what I've been TRYING to get out of you. The very definition of realism is "exactly how detailed is each bloody cut, slash, impact, and incineration?" Not "how close to simulating reality can we get this?" Most "realistic" systems start from more logical bases, but in the end they break down into needless and pointless die-rolling and chart consultation, simply by necessity. Note the ICE collapsed without the Middle Earth RPG license. That's why I typically say that people who want "Realism" are deluding themselves. What they really want is BLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOD!

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi Lily!

Then you don't want what most people in this hobby refer to as a "realistic" damage system at all! (See Rolemaster, et al.)

I think you can have a logical damage system and still maintain simplicity.

I do want a realistic damage system. However since I have played D&D for almost 20 years without a realistic damage system obviously it isn't a necessity!

This is what I've been TRYING to get out of you.

Now you're confusing me?

The very definition of realism is "exactly how detailed is each bloody cut, slash, impact, and incineration?" Not "how close to simulating reality can we get this?"

This all seems like somantics?

Obviously an RPG is a simulation of sorts, so I favour the latter.

Most "realistic" systems start from more logical bases, but in the end they break down into needless and pointless die-rolling and chart consultation, simply by necessity.

Note the ICE collapsed without the Middle Earth RPG license. That's why I typically say that people who want "Realism" are deluding themselves. What they really want is BLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOD!

I can only conclude Rolemaster was'nt well enough designed then? Though I freely admit I am not familiar with Rolemaster - though from what I have recently read it is too pedantic.

 

[Broken Fang]

UK - GURPS lite will give you a good but brief overview of the system. Really from it though you can extrapolate anything else you might want in GURPS. Many of the source books are excellent though.

Lily - Rolemaster came down to what you rolled on the critical charts. I don't think I ever saw anyone die from loss of HP's. It was the broken back or severed arm that always did you in.

And comparing anything to Ranma 1/2 or DBZ you might as well just play Toon. Get wacked sit out for a few minutes...then your right back in!