D&D 5E Called Shots: Aiming at specific body parts rule and discussion.

[Rya.Reisender]

I personally don't let monsters do "called shots" at all. No PC will ever lose his eyes or an arm or something, unless the player of that PC tells me he wants his character to have such a fate.

 

[Eltab]

There is a lot of potential for embarrassing tang-tounglers here. (not a typo)

In my HotDQ group, one player with a female Cleric was getting the stuffing pounded out of her by a Cult enforcer.
DM: -rolls dice- He hits you ... in the chest ... with a mighty blow.
Me: Shouldn't he take a penalty for hitting a small target?

I was thinking about 3e rules for hitting a smaller-than-human-size target, such as a Halfling or Gnome. The rest of the group did NOT take it that way.

Her: Hey, I'm a C cup!
Everybody else:

Not exactly my best moment. I mentioned it in the 'Harrassment in Gaming' thread as an example of 'stupid stuff you do / say once and never repeat'.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

I don't like called shots in an abstracted system like this. In a D&D variant with armor as DR and all that I'd like it better, and as other have said it will end up being called shots every single time IME.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I've seen players wanting make things like this since I begin to play AD&D 16 years ago. People always want to hit specific body parts to cause different effects, a thing that directly confronts with the HP system of D&D by introducing located injuries instead of reducing abstract vitality. AD&D 2e has its own rules, which are the base of what I've done here.

After mana/spell-point systems and critical hits, called shots & hit locations were probably the most-done variants back in the day. Maybe a distant third, but they were certainly out there. Mostly, like mana systems, they were terrible. D&D hps were (and are) an admirably abstract system encompassing all the otherwise impractical-to-model vagaries of combat, and called-shot systems tended to undermine that.

One simple alternative for fight-ending called shots (like decapitations or the like), is to just rule that the character reducing the target to 0 hps gets to call how it happens, including consequences other than death or unconsciousness.

I think that Conditions are the perfect resource for this...
If you don’t already have disadvantage from any source, you can attempt a called shot. A called shot is a readied action triggered after the foe has taken its turn "opening" its defense, and the attack is made at disadvantage. ... The main effects of affecting body parts are applying a condition if the shot is successful. The condition is decided by the player but it must have sense for the attack (such as stunning a foe with the pummel of a sword to the head) and the DM has to approve it, and the foe must succeed in a Constitution saving throw to avoid the effect.

Thougths? comments?

Better than most called shot systems I've seen. You're pulling in extant sub-systems - disadvantage, reactions, saves, & conditions - rather than making up a lot out of whole cloth. And, you haven't quite made it an end-run around the hp/damage sub-system (which is a huge part of how 5e scales, so bypassing it would be disastrous).

You might put added requirements on very potent conditions, like stunned - maybe that the target have only so many hps left, or that the attack deal damage of at least some fraction of original or remaining hps, or only a lesser condition is imposed.

With called shot attempts reducing your overall expected DPR (because of the disadvantage & possibly cover), and requiring three d20 rolls in your favor to work (a hit with disadvantage and a failed save), I suspect the 'danger' would be with them going un-used, or succeeding so seldom as to make little impact, rather than being terribly OP. (Not that you need to beef them up or anything, as a basic combat option open to all, they just can't be that powerful, anyway).

If you want to make them a little more impactful (more likely to actually do something other than make you miss), you could find some other way to limit how often they can be attempted. Maybe they could require Inspiration (or CS or SA dice), for instance?

 

[Greenstone.Walker]

In my experience, players are always keen for called shorts, right up to the point where the GM uses them on characters.

Called shots are great when fighting animals and undead and other mindless foe, but the first time an intelligent foe makes a called shot at the barbarian's arm, making the barbarian unable to wield the two-handed great sword of munting, the player will probably change their mind.

If you want to use them in a game then go for it, but make sure the players understand that that everyone at the table will be using the rules.

My opinion is that called shot rules are unnecessary. If you want to make the foe unable to use their arm so they drop their sword then use disarm. If you want to blind them so they can't attack you as you run away then use disengage.

 

[Eltab]

If you want to blind the foe so they can't attack you as you run away then use disengage.

PC: "HeroDude grabs a handful of dust and dirt from the ground and throws it in that nasty bruiser's eyes. He runs off this way." -moves mini on map- "Rules-wise, that's a Disengage."