Alternative HP systems and other altered d20 mechanics

[Toj]

Upper Krust wrote:
What would happen if a Human parried a Hill Giant?

What we have done in the past is if you are fighting something that has a certain amount of strength higher than yours, you cannot parry but have to dodge.

Thus you would always have to dodge a dragons attacks and giants attacks.

 

[Broken Fang]

Sonofapreacherman - V&V...what a great old super hero game!

Upper Krust -
1. What did you think of GURPS lite...assuming you have had time to read it.

2. In both Runequest (pretty realistic, like GURPS but with % system instead of 3d6) and GURPS parrying or blocking a Hill Giant would induce injury. The damage they could do would well exceed yout armor value/damage reduction and you would still take the rest. Your best bet here was to dodge (assuming you were of humanoid origin).

3. I like what you are doing as well but I don't want to spend the time doing something about it. If I want to play logical/realistic grim low magic fantasy thats what GURPS and Runequest are for...I understand this.

 

[Sonofapreacherman]

Okay, I've had all day to think about this.

Hit Points: Weight / 25 (rounded up) = Base Weight Modifier.

I.E. 180 lbs. / 25 = 8.

Base Weight Modifier x Constitution bonus = Hit Points.

I.E. If your Constitution is 16 then... 8 x 3 = 24.

Strength bonus equals damage reduction.

I.E. If your Strength is 18 then... Damage reduction of 4.

Weight x 1/10 of Strength = Carrying Capacity.

I.E. 180 x 1.8 = 324. (Divided by three and round down for individual loads).

Carrying Capacity determines additional damage as a rollable die. See my posted chart (above)

+1 Hit Point per level for wizard types.
+2 Hit Points per level for cleric/rogue types.
+3 Hit Points per level for fighter types.

-----

Armor ratings no longer add to Armor Class.

Armor ratings become damage reduction.

-----

Parrying.

You can parry the same number of times per round that your character can attack.

An opposed attack roll against your opponent determines if you successfully parry their attack.

You CANNOT parry ranged attacks.

You CANNOT exchange a parry roll for an attack roll (or vice versa) without a special feat that permits as much.

You CANNOT parry a creature that is 2 or more sizes larger or 2 or more sizes smaller than your character. When you parry a creature that is 1 size larger, you do so with a -4 modifier. When you parry a creature that is 1 size smaller, you do so with a +4 modifier.

-----

Dodging.

You can dodge the same number of times per round that your character can attack, but your give up one attack for each dodge.

An opposed attack roll against your opponent determines if you successfully dodge their attack. The character may also add any Dodge bonuses they have (obvious point, but needs stating).

You can dodge melee and ranged attacks.

You can make a regular move as a part of a dodge action.

You can dodge creatures of any size. You get a +4 modifier to the dodge roll for every size category that your character is smaller than your attacker. You get a -4 modifier to the dodge roll for every size category that your character is larger than your attacker.

You gain a +4 bonus to dodge for every range increment that a weapon exceeds their shortest distance. For example, you gain no dodge bonus against a longbow being shot at a distance of up to 100 feet, but for every additional 100 feet after that, you gain a +4 dodge bonus.

-----

I still think that mass is the simplest factor to use.

It would be easy to rig a random weight table for characters by race.

It would be easy. Heck the Player's Handbook already has random Weight charts. But forcing players to randomly roll weight doesn't allow characters to "choose" what they look like, creating their own self-image. Minimizing the importance of Weight as I have done (Weight / 25) and incorporating other multiplying factors (Constitution bonus) allows characters to create their own self-image again, without randomness.

I'm not sure about this. A halfling would gain much more benefit than a Hill Giant.

No worries mate! A Hill Giant has the prerequisites to take the feat Giant's Toughness! +9 to Hit Points. They would never waste their time with the regular Toughness feat.

I would have just used Strength x10lb = Heavy Load.

Not enough carrying capacity for characters. They hail a lot of stuff. You still have to create 3 loads of weight.

Weight x 1/10 of Strength is actually fairly accurate according to my exhaustive calculations (thus far).

 

[jonrog1]

Not wanting to quote the long previous discussions, but a quick comment on the "different damage types vs. armor" style, which leads to a larger comment.

Alternity used that system. Actually, they let the weapons stats be single values, then gave multiple values for the armor vs. weapon type. Being one of the few humans who tried the Alternity system, it was a royal pain in the butt. Sure, if you were a total fanboy tracking that stuff was no problem, but the casual players would hink up on us.

And that leads us to a third -- and in my mind most desirable style of system -- besides logical and realistic: ELEGANT. Designing a game system, we have to remember that an elegant system, although not entirely logical, makes it easier for a broader base of players to play, something that has to be taken into account when a game is as complex as an RPG.

Having HP dependent on CON instead of STR is elegant in that it allows some variation without being confusing. You're not that big, but you're hard to kill -- fantasy and adventure tales are filled with such characters. The separate CON allows us to adjust for fantasy racial tendencies without making hardy races all godlike uber-warriors. And what about my friend who weighs 60 lbs. less than me but can bench press me and my couch? Or my skinny friend, who isn't that strong, but because he ran 5 miles every day (high CON) managed to survive a car wreck the doctors said would have killed anyone else?

I think the question here is: if you're really after simplicity, why the heck make the characters track an extra stat like weight, which in no other way holds any significance in gameplay, in order to get their most basic character info? And is a system where you have to toss PC's a +1 ability score per level in order to make a mechanic work really logical or elegant?

Trust me, I understand the craving for a system so integrated we no longer have to rule zero anything or consult the sage -- although I tend to find those questions are about magic or poorly worded rules than than badly thought out rules.

And I'm with UK on parrying. Enjoy the combat grinding to a halt with the rolls and counter-rolls during every individual combat.

It's just my two cents, but in my mind, over-complication for the sake of false logic is what nearly killed the hobby in the 2E days, or as I call them, "The Buzzkill Editions."

I suppose what I'm getting at here, and I swear I"m not finding it in the previous five pages -- WHY are you finding this HP sytem tweak necessary in your own game?

 

[Sonofapreacherman]

Originally posted by jonrog1
And that leads us to a third -- and in my mind most desirable style of system -- besides logical and realistic: ELEGANT.

There's the rub. What I am personally aiming for is logic and elegance. The two can shake hands seamlessly. It just requires more work. If you have any ideas on how to make the submitted ideas more elegant, without throwing them out altogether, please offer those ideas up. Because just telling me that they are not elegant right now only tells me that I perhaps need to do more work.

Originally posted by jonrog1
Having HP dependent on CON instead of STR is elegant in that it allows some variation without being confusing.

I couldn't agree more. All of your examples are sterling.

Originally posted by jonrog1
I think the question here is: if you're really after simplicity, why the heck make the characters track an extra stat like weight, which in no other way holds any significance in game play, in order to get their most basic character info?

Not to be insulting friend, but this is a weak argument. Players already have to generate a value for their Weight during character generation. It's no great additional burden to divide that figure by 25 and multiply the result (rounded up) by your Constitution modifier.

I promise that the number of times you will have to make this calculation are staggeringly small.

Originally posted by jonrog1
And is a system where you have to toss PC's a +1 ability score per level in order to make a mechanic work really logical or elegant?

I'm not crazy about it either. One attribute bonus every 4 levels is fine by me.

Originally posted by jonrog1
And I'm with UK on parrying. Enjoy the combat grinding to a halt with the rolls and counter-rolls during every individual combat.

A grinding halt is an exaggeration. With dodging and parrying rolls, your character now plays a very active roll in saving their own skin. That only ramps up the excitement of combat. Keep in mind, with parrying, armor no longer augments you Armor Class. It becomes damage reduction. Plus, your Hit Points will change very little throughout your adventuring career.

Originally posted by jonrog1
WHY are you finding this HP system tweak necessary in your own game?

Because elegance is not enough. Elegance and logic are worth fighting for.

 

[Thorvald Kviksverd]

SOAPM--

I might have missed something, but a couple of observations...

1: If your base HPs are generated by multiplying some base by your STR Mod, this will give characters with STR<12 either Zero or Negative HPs.

2: WRT Parrying, did you mean to instead say, "...may not parry attacks of creatures two or more sizes greater..."?

3: There may be a means for generating weight for PCs, but what about all the monsters. Wouldn't it be better to limit these formulas to the already existing stats?

4: Following point 3 above, and if the primary stat for determining HPs was to be STR, I would probably penalize certain races--such as Halflings--to a greater extent (say -4 STR), since this would then be offset somewhat by the heightened dodge chance versus larger creatures.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hello mate!

Upper Krust -
1. What did you think of GURPS lite...assuming you have had time to read it.

I read through it all, however, my short term memory is pretty bad.

I recall thinking I liked some ideas (skills etc.), but not necessarily the combat.

I thought I had saved the file, but for some reason it hasn't saved properly.

2. In both Runequest (pretty realistic, like GURPS but with % system instead of 3d6) and GURPS parrying or blocking a Hill Giant would induce injury. The damage they could do would well exceed yout armor value/damage reduction and you would still take the rest. Your best bet here was to dodge (assuming you were of humanoid origin).

I have contemplated that any parrying deals an amount of damage (10% opponents strength rounded down perhaps?).

But again I don't see parrying as anything more than an optional rule. So I don't really want to have to worry about it too much.

3. I like what you are doing as well but I don't want to spend the time doing something about it. If I want to play logical/realistic grim low magic fantasy thats what GURPS and Runequest are for...I understand this.

I am only tackling these issues for fun. However, I think I could design a system better than GURPS that was both logical and elegant.

 

[Sonofapreacherman]

1: If your base HPs are generated by multiplying some base by your STR Mod, this will give characters with STR<12 either Zero or Negative HPs.

First of all, it would be multiplied by Constitution (not Strength), but I see your point and have been thinking about it as well.

You could never have Hit Points less than your Constitution score. Meaning, everybody with a 13 or lower Constitution has a Hit Point total equal to their Constitution score.

2: WRT Parrying, did you mean to instead say, "...may not parry attacks of creatures two or more sizes greater..."?

Yes I did. Thank you. Consider it changed.

3: There may be a means for generating weight for PCs, but what about all the monsters. Wouldn't it be better to limit these formulas to the already existing stats?

It would, but it has long since bothered me that many creatures in the various monster manuals do not have weight values. They should. It surprisingly comes up a lot in my games. That said, many creatures in the monsters manual do have their weight listed. I just noticed the other day that displacer beats weigh 500 lbs.

4: Following point 3 above, and if the primary stat for determining HPs was to be STR, I would probably penalize certain races--such as Halflings--to a greater extent (say -4 STR), since this would then be offset somewhat by the heightened dodge chance versus larger creatures.

Once again, I am basing Hit Points on weight and Constitution. Not Strength.

 

[Thorvald Kviksverd]

First of all, it would be multiplied by Constitution (not Strength)...

(I was thinking CON--really I was!)

Once again, I am basing Hit Points on weight and Constitution. Not Strength.

***Miscommunication Alert!***

Re-reading my post, I see I wasn't being very clear.

I meant that in the hypothetical system that limited itself to the present stats for generating HPs, I would nominate STR to be most determinative, as it represents in some measure both size and fitness (of course you could further modify this by CON)--and would therefore adjust many of the smaller races' STR scores downward accordingly (as I think they are far too high even under the present system).

Hope that clears things up

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hello again mate!

Okay, I've had all day to think about this.

Hit Points: Weight / 25 (rounded up) = Base Weight Modifier.

I.E. 180 lbs. / 25 = 8.

I still say 1hp/10lbs is simple enough. Though I like your next idea which works in conjunction with this one.

Base Weight Modifier x Constitution bonus = Hit Points.

I.E. If your Constitution is 16 then... 8 x 3 = 24.

Not sure if a multiplier will work with current CON scores.

However, I have never been happy with my treatment of Constitution.

When you think about it, why should a Hill Giant have a Constitution of 19 - can it run a marathon?

Shouldn't base Constitution be the same for all creatures.
ie. 11 = reasonably healthy; 5 = weak; 20 = superfit. Perhaps then your Constitution multiplier idea would work well!?

Strength bonus equals damage reduction.

I.E. If your Strength is 18 then... Damage reduction of 4.

Similar to my treatment of Strength. I originally planned to have STR bonus be Damage Reduction anyway.

However, the spanner in the works I ran into is that if we make strength proportional (which it should be) and use it as Damage Reduction (instead of hit points) then it becomes next to impossible to injure strong creatures.

Weight x 1/10 of Strength = Carrying Capacity.

I.E. 180 x 1.8 = 324. (Divided by three and round down for individual loads).

Carrying Capacity determines additional damage as a rollable die. See my posted chart (above)

I don't know if all that is necessary. In the PHB the max load for STR 9 is 90lbs.

So therefore you have 30 light/60 mid/90 heavy

For strength 18 you have double that.

Simple.

+1 Hit Point per level for wizard types.
+2 Hit Points per level for cleric/rogue types.
+3 Hit Points per level for fighter types.

I don't agree that hit points should be mucked about with too much. I don't think a 120lb 20th-level Wizard should be more resistant to damage than a 250lb 1st-level Barbarian.

You may as well stick to the current rules.

Armor ratings no longer add to Armor Class.

Armor ratings become damage reduction.

Absolutely.

Parrying.

You can parry the same number of times per round that your character can attack.

An opposed attack roll against your opponent determines if you successfully parry their attack.

You CANNOT parry ranged attacks.

You CANNOT exchange a parry roll for an attack roll (or vice versa) without a special feat that permits as much.

You CANNOT parry a creature that is more than 2 sizes larger or 2 sizes smaller than your character. When you parry a creature that is 1 size larger you do so with a -4 modifier. When you parry a creature that is 1 size smaller you do so with a +4 modifier.

The whole parrying thing is just going to get in the way. As an option its fine, but I wouldn't personally have it as a core rule.

Dodging.

You can dodge the same number of times per round that your character can attack, but your give up one attack for each dodge.

An opposed attack roll against your opponent determines if you successfully dodge their attack. The character may also add any Dodge bonuses they have (obvious point, but needs stating).

You can dodge melee and ranged attacks.

You can make a regular move as a part of a dodge action.

You can dodge creatures of any size. You get a +4 modifier to the dodge roll for every size category that your character is smaller than your attacker. You get a -4 modifier to the dodge roll for every size category that your character is larger than your attacker.

You gain a +4 bonus to dodge for every range increment that a weapon exceeds their shortest distance. For example, you gain no dodge bonus against a longbow being shot at a distance of up to 100 feet, but for every additional 100 feet after that, you gain a +4 dodge bonus.

Again I don't see this as anything more than perhaps an optional rule. Armour class can handle all this much more simply.

It would be easy. Heck the Player's Handbook already has random Weight charts. But forcing players to randomly roll weight doesn't allow characters to "choose" what they look like, creating their own self-image. Minimizing the importance of Weight as I have done (Weight / 25) and incorporating other multiplying factors (Constitution bonus) allows characters to create their own self-image again, without randomness.

I still don't understand why we have to play down the importance of mass?

I told you they could pick their own weight then choose (or roll) STR which would have a see-saw effect on DEX.

Admittedly I haven't sorted the details out fully yet!

No worries mate! A Hill Giant has the prerequisites to take the feat Giant's Toughness! +9 to Hit Points. They would never waste their time with the regular Toughness feat.

I don't see that really solving a lot!

Great Wyrms could have upwards of 25,000+hp!

HA! A bit too late for that my friend. You already jumped off the cliff of complicated things before I arrived, except I've decided to dive off that cliff too. Its all about breaking through the water safely now and making it look easy for the role-players.

What ideas of mine were too complicated for you mate? I thought they have all been straightforward up to now!? I am confused at your confusion!?

Not enough carrying capacity for characters. They hail a lot of stuff. You still have to create 3 loads of weight.

Weight x 1/10 of Strength is actually fairly accurate according to my exhaustive calculations (thus far).

Under my system a character with:
STR 9 30lbs/60lbs/90lbs
STR 12 40/80/120
STR 15 50/100/150
STR 18 60/120/180
STR 27 90/180/270