Alternative HP systems and other altered d20 mechanics

[Upper_Krust]

Hi Lily!

I'm only going to address one point here right now.

Okay.

because I think it comes straight to the point of arguing for HP.

The only pro hit point argument that you can have is that they are already in use. Changing them will require at best; heavy modification to the Core Rules (if not an entire new edition itself).

There are several ways in realistic treatment of damage and injury can detract heavily from, or even collapse, a game when the factors are not fully taken into account.

I don't think there is, so I am going to be interested in your arguments!

1) Healing times. This might not sound like a big deal, but often players are not willing to "waste time" waiting for their fellow players to "heal up." Yes, magical healing can counteract this to some extent, but if the healer runs out of juice the party made up of players of this type will effectively commit suicide. I have seen it happen before.

Utter metagaming! Bad roleplaying!

Just imagine in Star Wars:tESB when Luke was injured by the Hoth Wampa. I can just see Han Solo played by your gaming group "F**k him - I'm not going out there its bloody freezing!"

2) Paranoia can creep into the game.

Making for interesting roleplaying perhaps...?

If you weren't planning on this effect, the most successful character becomes the one who can trick his own friends into soaking up more of the hits than he has to take himself.

The most successful character is the best roleplayer.

If that player/character happens to be a 'bad seed' then thats their problem.

Firstly their PCs actions will have repurcussions within the campaign world. Secondly prolonged selfish play may alienate them from your roleplaying group.

I don't see how either point is relative to the mechanics of the system, hit points or otherwise!?

This might seem like a perfectly legitimate way to play, but in the long run it leads to hard feelings and the possible collapse of a group.

I remember we had a character in our group like this, his machinations made everyone into better roleplayers though.

3) One stupid mistake on the part of one person can end an entire campaign as it brings utter disaster down on the entire party. If the party is surrounded by fifty armed and ready crossbowmen, and one member of the group decides to reach for his weapons instead of the sky, the party is dead. End of discussion.

You are so clutching at straws here!

Firstly you presuppose the party has let itself be surrounded in a life or death situation, secondly you are painting a very bad picture of the DM.

Since we are using Star Wars analogies...

Remember in Star Wars:RotJ when the heroes are surrounded by the Ewoks and Han Solo goes for his blaster only to be dissuaded by Luke Skywalker.

Again a player in your group is Han Solo: "BLAST EM!".

Good DMs response: "Are you sure thats what you want to do?" *explains situation*
Bad DMs response: "Roll-em!"

Hit point systems don't elimiinate this threat, but they do make it possible that SOME characters will survive if they play it smart.

How are they 'playing it smart' by attacking when hopelessly outnumbered!? LOL!

Hit points has absolutely no bearing on 'playing it smart' thats roleplaying!

What you are suggesting is that being able to easily squash 50 enemies is somehow smarter!? Thats power gaming, not smart roleplaying!

These are just the points coming to the top of my head right now, as I sit here getting ready for a nap.

Sweet dreams mate!

I'm sure there are plenty of others, but I think I've made my point.

You have made a number of points; all of which I have proved ineffectual.

Realism is very much a double-edged sword, not something to be thrown in lightly as I've seen it called for so many times.

Surely realism (in and of itself) is a 'one-edged sword!?'

It's just not something to throw in on a whim,

Here we are in agreement! It could be something of a rude awakening for jaded players - but a rewarding one in the long run I believe!

it really takes a lot of careful thought to get the balance right.

As with any system.

 

[Lily Inverse]

I'm going to say something right now UK: My arguments aren't any longer directed at YOU, just the general population of idiot DMs which seems to exist. ;D They're the ones who need to hear about these things, because they're the ones who manage to chop off their own heads with "realism"

Just imagine in Star Wars:tESB when Luke was injured by the Hoth Wampa. I can just see Han Solo played by your gaming group "F**k him - I'm not going out there its bloody freezing!"

Seen it. However, something like this would invariably be followed up by "Why don't you do it, Chewie? You've got thick fur." Metagaming? Yes. If your group metagames, you should strongly consider sticking with the HP system.

The most successful character is the best roleplayer.

If that player/character happens to be a 'bad seed' then thats their problem.

No, it's the entire group's problem, and one not easily solved if the players are all friends. To say anything else is to ignore the way many players become attached to their characters.

I don't see how either point is relative to the mechanics of the system, hit points or otherwise!?

Both are relevant because they can change the way a group normally handles things. People who normally get along well and work together suddenly become desperate, belligerent, and uncooperative with each other, when the situation has changed to make it more logical to work together better.

I remember we had a character in our group like this, his machinations made everyone into better roleplayers though.

Pressure does strange things to people. Your mileage may vary, but I have seen this very issue cause major headaches and even tear apart a rather close-knit gaming crew of mine.

I'd like to repeat. Your mileage may vary.

You are so clutching at straws here!

Firstly you presuppose the party has let itself be surrounded in a life or death situation, secondly you are painting a very bad picture of the DM.

Remember in Star Wars:RotJ when the heroes are surrounded by the Ewoks and Han Solo goes for his blaster only to be dissuaded by Luke Skywalker.

Again a player in your group is Han Solo: "BLAST EM!".

Good DMs response: "Are you sure thats what you want to do?" *explains situation*
Bad DMs response: "Roll-em!"

Actually, I was intending to put one PLAYER in a very bad light. This happened a few weeks ago in a one-shot game (and nobody was actually playing seriously, so survival wasn't a big point.)

The damn ranger decided that he wasn't going to put down his corrosive bow and instead fired a shot into the crowd. EVERYBODY tried to reason him out of it, in and out of game, but the player had come to that decision and wasn't going to change it.

One, Mr. Corrosive Bow went down in the first round, as well he should have, drawing the most fire. Everybody else lost a fair number of hit points, but we were still kicking because of the system in use. It took a lot of tactics involving taking advantage of everything we could, including the long reload time on crossbows, but we managed to get out of the situation without another loss, although there was only one party member actually STANDING at the end of it. Sounds heroic to me, and something that isn't possible when you're playing for utter realism.

Essentially it was like this
Good DMs response: "Are you sure thats what you want to do?" *explains situation*
Bad player'sresponse: "Roll-em!"
Everybody else: *Explains situation again*
Bad player's response: "ROLL-EM!"

I don't think the entire party deserves to die because one person insists on being an utter idiot. But *realistically* that's what would happen.

It could be something of a rude awakening for jaded players - but a rewarding one in the long run I believe!

Risky to take on complete faith. If your players don't agree with you, you don't have any players for long.

I guess it's something that you should probably discuss more with your players than with us here. I prefer to use the VP and WP Star Wars D20 system because I don't run games like they're reality, I run them like a movie (or an anime series). For that, a more realistic way of tracking damage simply detracts from the atmosphere.

Also note one thing about the Star Wars system that wasn't mentioned before: A critical hit doesn't do extra damage, it deals damage directly to Wound Points (So criticalling with a Lightsaber is a pretty much one-hit kill, what with the lightsaber doing 3d8 + Xd8 damage, where X is equal to a class feature for Jedi.)

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi Lily mate!

I'm going to say something right now UK: My arguments aren't any longer directed at YOU, just the general population of idiot DMs which seems to exist. ;D They're the ones who need to hear about these things, because they're the ones who manage to chop off their own heads with "realism"

Thats okay Lily we are all friends here!

I will challenge your arguments, but I would never make any personal attacks.

Seen it. However, something like this would invariably be followed up by "Why don't you do it, Chewie? You've got thick fur."

As opposed to Hans futuristic material cold weather gear.

Metagaming? Yes.

No. Metagaming would be if players knew Chewies fur gave him Cold Resistance 8 while Hans Clothing only gave him Cold Resistance 6.

If your group metagames, you should strongly consider sticking with the HP system.

Metagaming (players thinking with regards game mechanics) is never a good thing and its generally inherant in the system. A logical system would not have any metagaming since all aspects would be 'realistic' anyway.

No, it's the entire group's problem, and one not easily solved if the players are all friends. To say anything else is to ignore the way many players become attached to their characters.

Selfish characters or players should not be advocated within a group if it will lead to problems. Groups should stop these problems before they advance.

Once again I reiterate this has absolutely nothing to do with game mechanics!

Both are relevant because they can change the way a group normally handles things. People who normally get along well and work together suddenly become desperate, belligerent, and uncooperative with each other, when the situation has changed to make it more logical to work together better.

I don't see what you are basing these grand statements on!?

Problems within the group are nothing whatsoever to do with the RPG you are playing!

Pressure does strange things to people. Your mileage may vary, but I have seen this very issue cause major headaches and even tear apart a rather close-knit gaming crew of mine.

I'd like to repeat. Your mileage may vary.

I agree it can. But its nothing to do with gaming mechanics. To suggest such is churlish.

Actually, I was intending to put one PLAYER in a very bad light. This happened a few weeks ago in a one-shot game (and nobody was actually playing seriously, so survival wasn't a big point.)

The damn ranger decided that he wasn't going to put down his corrosive bow and instead fired a shot into the crowd. EVERYBODY tried to reason him out of it, in and out of game, but the player had come to that decision and wasn't going to change it.

Turn him in to the authorities. Obviously the character (player?) only had his own interests at heart and should be punished. No reason the rest of the group should suffer because of one stupid player. Hopefully they will learn next time.

One, Mr. Corrosive Bow went down in the first round, as well he should have, drawing the most fire. Everybody else lost a fair number of hit points, but we were still kicking because of the system in use. It took a lot of tactics involving taking advantage of everything we could, including the long reload time on crossbows, but we managed to get out of the situation without another loss, although there was only one party member actually STANDING at the end of it. Sounds heroic to me, and something that isn't possible when you're playing for utter realism.

Essentially it was like this
Good DMs response: "Are you sure thats what you want to do?" *explains situation*
Bad player'sresponse: "Roll-em!"
Everybody else: *Explains situation again*
Bad player's response: "ROLL-EM!"

I don't think the entire party deserves to die because one person insists on being an utter idiot. But *realistically* that's what would happen.

Again this has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the mechanics!

Either the group of antagonists surrounding the PCs represents a superior force or it doesn't! Individual mechanics are irrelevant!!!

Risky to take on complete faith. If your players don't agree with you, you don't have any players for long.

You are imagining giants when there are only windmills.

I fail to see how introducing logical game mechanics will lead to player revolt - as you suggest.

I guess it's something that you should probably discuss more with your players than with us here. I prefer to use the VP and WP Star Wars D20 system because I don't run games like they're reality, I run them like a movie (or an anime series). For that, a more realistic way of tracking damage simply detracts from the atmosphere.

Actually it would enhance the experience. Read Toj' previous post about movies/novels etc.

Also note one thing about the Star Wars system that wasn't mentioned before: A critical hit doesn't do extra damage, it deals damage directly to Wound Points (So criticalling with a Lightsaber is a pretty much one-hit kill, what with the lightsaber doing 3d8 + Xd8 damage, where X is equal to a class feature for Jedi.)

Its an interesting variant system but I don't see that solving the perceived problems.

 

[Lily Inverse]

Again this has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the mechanics!

Either the group of antagonists surrounding the PCs represents a superior force or it doesn't! Individual mechanics are irrelevant!!!

This is where we differ. Different types of mechanics can make different forces superior, and can change the odds of surviving an encounter with superior forces.

In a realistic fight, five surprised people vs fifty with prepared actions do not survive. Ever. Not that I've heard of, anyway. But that doesn't make for a very good story, now does it?

I fail to see how introducing logical game mechanics will lead to player revolt - as you suggest.

It's not introducing logical mechanics, it's intoducing disliked mechanics. If your group agrees that you like the realistic mechanics, no problems. If they don't, it IS a problem, logical or not.

Also, if you're running it like an anime, realism has nothing to do with the atmosphere. Trust me on this one.


Okay, joking aside, the rather serious alternative of VP and WP vs HP. I'll list off the advantages of both:

HP:

1)Simple
2)Quick

VP/WP

1)Simple
2)Quick
3)Forces tactical thinking. Any hit really COULD be your last.
4)Introduces possibilities for a point-based magic system based on the Force mechanics from SW D20.

BTW, these aren't variant rules for Star Wars.

 

[LostSoul]

In a "realistic" gaming environment, once the guns came out Han and Luke wouldn't have lasted five seconds in that detention block. But they did. That is a reflection of the reason behind using HP over something more complicated. HP make it easier to be a hero.

I think the argument is that Hit Points aren't logical. They don't make sense and, because of that, you can't extrapolate for events that don't exist in the rulebooks.

In d6 Star Wars, Han and Luke Dodged (with their high Dodge skills) the Stormtrooper's blaster shots. That's just as heroic and just as simple as Hit Points.

 

[LostSoul]

I'm going to throw my hat in the ring.

1) Healing times.

Unless other characters force you to fight when you're wounded, this isn't a big deal. That's the only consideration you've got to make; and it's independant of system.
(And shouldn't it be worse with Hit Point systems, where you take hit after hit instead of using your skill to avoid blows? When you use your skill successfully, you don't take damage; unlike Hit Points lost due to near misses, rolling with the blow, parrying attacks, etc.)

2) Paranoia can creep into the game.

Paranoia is already there. This depends on how you run your game (running hard-ass combats no matter what state the PCs are in, or dropping save-or-die situations on them all the time), not the system.

3) One stupid mistake on the part of one person can end an entire campaign as it brings utter disaster down on the entire party. If the party is surrounded by fifty armed and ready crossbowmen, and one member of the group decides to reach for his weapons instead of the sky, the party is dead. End of discussion. Hit point systems don't elimiinate this threat, but they do make it possible that SOME characters will survive if they play it smart.

In this specific example, you might have some kind of "Dodge" mechanic that allows players to do heroic tasks. Something like that would be simple to add in a logical system, where a hit is a hit. With Hit Points, those x-bowmen aren't even a threat.

With regards to the 3rd point, though, utter disaster resulting from one mistake or die roll is a style of gaming, not a mechanics issue.

 

[Toj]

Sorry I haven't been adding to this, but I just got back from fishing! (For those interested we caught a lot of large mouth bass and had a blast. My wife even went the extra step of taking everyone's fish of the hook so she could get experience!)

Lily Inverse wrote:
The damn ranger decided that he wasn't going to put down his corrosive bow and instead fired a shot into the crowd. EVERYBODY tried to reason him out of it, in and out of game, but the player had come to that decision and wasn't going to change it.

This scenario, where 5 people are surrounded by 50 people with bows is kind of ridiculous. Now I could actually see some people surviving with realistic mechanics, but only with lots of ingenuity and of course if the characters themselves have high skill. Otherwise 5 characters WOULD be wasted in this scenario. But there are so many other ways of handling it. For one the DM could rule that the crowd just shot at the stupid ranger (As long as the other part members didn't act). If the whole party did react with hostility, then it's their own fault and they must suffer the consequences.

Lily Inverse wrote:
In a realistic fight, five surprised people vs fifty with prepared actions do not survive. Ever. Not that I've heard of, anyway. But that doesn't make for a very good story, now does it?

You know, I actually agree with this. Of course there could be a lot of luck involved and they might survive. Unless the 5 people were epically skilled (is epically a word?) they'd be screwed. But obviously if the party let 50 people surround them, and let those 50 people prepare actions, then the party might be missing a few marbles. Why should their stupidity be rewarded?

Lily Inverse wrote:
Also, if you're running it like an anime, realism has nothing to do with the atmosphere. Trust me on this one.

I would have to disagree. We game with realistic mechanics and also play anime. I believe the games are even better because of it. Most anime consists of characters who are super insanely skilled and quick, and hardly ever get hit. This translates better in an RPG when they actually DON'T get hit, instead of giving them lots of HP and somehow saying that those hits really aren't hits.

I've already spent a lot of time modifying the rules. I have the dodge and parry rules figured out, as well as how the different styles of fighting work (such as fighting with one weapon, one weapon and a shield, two weapons, unarmed, etc.)

My main problem areas are HP and strength. With HP I am not sure how I want to figure them. UK's method of HP based on weight is interesting, but I am not too sure it really works. I really think strength should be a part of HP. With Strength I am unsure how to work damage. I really hate plus's to hit, but I can't really figure out a method of making damage be a dice roll. An example would be having a 12 strength add 1d4 damage instead of the normal +1 damage.

Any ideas would be greatly appreciated!

 

[hong]

Hit points has absolutely no bearing on 'playing it smart' thats roleplaying!

If hit points really have absolutely no bearing on "playing it smart", then the lack of hit points will also have no bearing on it.

All your arguments basically amount to "a good DM can fix anything". This is true, but irrelevant.

 

[Lily Inverse]

You know, I actually agree with this. Of course there could be a lot of luck involved and they might survive. Unless the 5 people were epically skilled (is epically a word?) they'd be screwed. But obviously if the party let 50 people surround them, and let those 50 people prepare actions, then the party might be missing a few marbles. Why should their stupidity be rewarded?

This was in a pre-made adventure. The scenario was an ambush, and we were *supposed* to go quietly. Being allowed to read the adventure afterwards, the notes on "If the PCs resist" pretty much amounted to "kill them." And as I said, it nearly happened that way. It took both luck and some pretty damn good tactics to get out alive, but we did make it. It wasn't through any fault of the PCs that they were surrounded (The encounter occurs if the PCs go into a certain crypt, and they must go into that crypt to complete the adventure) Poor planning on the author's part was the problem here.

All your arguments basically amount to "a good DM can fix anything". This is true, but irrelevant.

Thank you. I guess what I've been saying is "Don't assume everyone's a good DM." The system works for the majority because it seems to help compensate somewhat for morons like the last guy who tried to insert injuries I played under. The scenario with the nightmare players I described. I lived it several times. I guess that really turned me off the whole "Let's do everything as close to reality as we can possibly go" crowd, because the majority of the ones I've run into are idiots like that.

...

Not to say that anyone here is like that.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi Lily!

This is where we differ. Different types of mechanics can make different forces superior, and can change the odds of surviving an encounter with superior forces.

This is true - but you are acting as though skill/ability will have no bearing at all upon a situation. Which is crazy!

In fact I think you have some wild ideas about what employing 'realistic' mechanics would mean!

Skill makes a difference.
Equipment makes a difference.
Tactics make a difference.
Magic will also make a difference.

These things won't disappear in a logical system! But I get the impression you believe they will!?

In a realistic fight, five surprised people vs fifty with prepared actions do not survive. Ever. Not that I've heard of, anyway. But that doesn't make for a very good story, now does it?

History is replete with against the odds encounters. Thats how heroes are born.

(Thermopylae) Spartans vs. Persians (40+?/1)
(Bravo-Two-Zero) SAS vs. Iraqis (125/1)
(Rourkes Drift) British Army vs. Zulus (50/1)

I don't consider any of the above heroic forces to be comprised of epic characters. Obviously they were far more skilled than their counterparts; had better equipment and used superior tactics.

Throw superior magic into the mix and you allow for an even greater disparity of numbers!

It's not introducing logical mechanics, it's intoducing disliked mechanics. If your group agrees that you like the realistic mechanics, no problems. If they don't, it IS a problem, logical or not.

How would they know whether they like an RPG (or not) if they haven't played it before!?

If people are blinkered and shortsighted enough to never try anything new (fair enough I suppose) then thats their problem!

Also, if you're running it like an anime, realism has nothing to do with the atmosphere. Trust me on this one.

Not true. If anime had nothing to do with realism then you wouldn't need any game mechanics.

Mechanics are used to explain (or try to explain) events/occurances - be they mundane or fantastical.

Okay, joking aside, the rather serious alternative of VP and WP vs HP. I'll list off the advantages of both:

HP:

1)Simple
2)Quick

VP/WP

1)Simple
2)Quick
3)Forces tactical thinking. Any hit really COULD be your last.
4)Introduces possibilities for a point-based magic system based on the Force mechanics from SW D20.

BTW, these aren't variant rules for Star Wars.

Thats your alternative though, not mine.