crit-based Hit Location System - in-process design thread

[GlassJaw]

i simply ask my players what exactly they're trying to accomplish with an attack roll. something more sprcific than "i swing my sword at the orc." like, "i attempt to cleave the orc's leg out from beneath him." if the PC crits, the leg is gone, the orc has to make a Fort save to keep from being stunned (as per the rules for taking wound damage), and the orc has to make a balance check. if he says, "i swing my sword at the orc's exposed neck," and crits, the orc will take bleeding damage each round. if the crit damage equalled or exceeded the orc's constitution score, i just say, "the head rolls from the orcs shoulders and lands at your feet." simple, cinematic, and no extra die-rolling.

This thread isn't about the validity of hit location systems.

In any event, what you describe is that absolute last thing I would want to do. Why would a player not say he is trying to behead everything he attacks and use the weapon with the largest crit range?

 

[Ltheb Silverfrond]

I converted a small Hackmaster crit table to D20. It is a D% table designed for use on every hit, but it could be converted back to a Critical hit chart easily. It deals its effects out in either simple d20 terms (ability damage, conditions like stunned, etc) or, for the more severe rolls, newer conditions (severed limbs, broken bones, profuse bleeding, etc).
There is no "insta-kill" or anything on the chart that would result in automatic death, but many will make death "very likely."
I also included new uses of the Heal skill to combat said effects. (Makes the skill useful) And I had to slightly modify death and dying rules to make certain things work.

I don't know if this is what you are looking for, but it worked in my games to make combat extremely gritty. Last session, the ranger was beat senseless into the fetal position, and the mage got his face torn off, literally, by darkenbeasts.

 

[AbeTheGnome]

This thread isn't about the validity of hit location systems.

In any event, what you describe is that absolute last thing I would want to do. Why would a player not say he is trying to behead everything he attacks and use the weapon with the largest crit range?

well, i wasn't really arguing against the validity of hit location systems. they're perfectly valid, it's just another level of complexity. from a fluff perspective, a combatant is usually aiming his attack. if he scores a critical hit, it seems safe to assume that he hit what he was aiming for. aiming for an enemy's neck isn't always the best option. in the system i use, you're no more likely to kill an opponent with a crit to the neck than to the leg. there's not a larger amount of variable damage that comes from aiming at different body parts. the damage is just different: bleeding from the neck, loss of limbs, etc. sometimes it's better to have a prone orc than a bleeding orc, or even an orc that's been effectively "dis-armed."

anyway, no offense meant. wasn't trying to hijack the thread. your proposed hit location system looks to be among the most viable i've seen, though i will echo the suggestions of other posters to make high rolls better, so as not to make the system contrary to the rest of d20.

 

[GlassJaw]

in the system i use, you're no more likely to kill an opponent with a crit to the neck than to the leg. there's not a larger amount of variable damage that comes from aiming at different body parts. the damage is just different: bleeding from the neck, loss of limbs, etc. sometimes it's better to have a prone orc than a bleeding orc, or even an orc that's been effectively "dis-armed."

Fair enough. But without any mechanics to illustrate the system, I'm immediately going to try to break the system. That's just the game designer in me.