Grim-n-Gritty: Revised and Simplified

[KenHood]

Just wondering, are these rules inspired by Ars Magica in some part? Some of the terminology and mechanics are just the same.

I'm not familiar with Ars Magica. The inspiration for the system came from the Fudge rules. I loved the way they handled combat.

A few years back, I played a computer game that used Soak as the term for a character's ability to absorb damage. Couldn't think of a better term that wasn't already in use by the d20 system, so I used it.

 

[Cergorach]

Ken, my comment wasn't about the lack of hitpoints, but rather the game balancing effects hit points had between the different fighter types: Ranger d8, Fighter/Paladin d10, Barbarian d12. From a balance perspective the Ranger got less hit points than the Fighter because the Ranger had more special abilities than the Fighter. The Barbarian gor more hit points than the Fighter because the Barbarian had less special abilities than the Fighter. So when you ditched the hit points you kind of removed a variable out of the balance equation. This would theoretically make the Ranger stronger than the Fighter and way stronger than the Barbarian. Maybe some guidelines for balancing the classes would be helpful?

 

[KenHood]

I don't think your theory will bear out in practice, so I don't perceive a need for rebalancing the classes. Test the rules in play before coming to the conclusion that a ranger will be more powerful than a barbarian or fighter.

The original GnG system did practically the same thing, as far as eliminating HP differences between classes.

You'll find that I'm touchy when it comes to issues of theory. I welcome anecdotes from play and make adjustments when someone finds something from actual use of the rules. I welcome requests for elaboration or explanation, but theory is theory. One can end up discussing it all day and night and arrive at nothing, save more theory. Experiment with the rules in play, share the results of your play, and we can discuss this issue further.

 

[RangerWickett]

What other sorts of things had you considered using? Your damage system actually looks a bit like the one for Mutants & Masterminds, where damage just causes penalties until you're knocked out. Of course, they go on the opposite side of the scale and have very cinematic combat, but it's remarkable how the same mechanic sorta works for both systems.

I'm surprised you didn't just tie 'hit points' somehow to Constitution. Well, time to read more.

 

[KenHood]

What other sorts of things had you considered using? I'm surprised you didn't just tie 'hit points' somehow to Constitution. Well, time to read more.

Heh-heh! That's a funny question. Remember, the original GnG system tied HP directly to Constitution?

This is a "flat" system, where you Constitution reduces the damage you take. So, in a sense, "hit points," as the revised system works, depends upon Constitution.

The goal is to make it very simple to use. For a while, I was considering eliminating the need for damage dice rolls to further streamline it, but keeping the rolls adds more unpredictability.

I've been thinking about this for about three years, so I've considered a lot of ways to handle it.

 

[KenHood]

Consider this: At the nitty gritty, every character in this system has 15 hit points before being disabled.

Two characters of equal ability fight. Both have a +2 Strength , Constitution, and Dexterity modifier, so the advantages of the respective abilities cancel out. Both wield daggers 1d4 damage. Neither wears armor. A single attack roll could result in a miss or from 1 to 23(!) points of damage. (Assume your attack bonus is equal to your defender's defense bonus. If you roll a 20 and your enemy rolls a 1, you hit and add +19 damage.) In other words, a single stab from a knife could leave a little cut or incapacitate you instantly.

Now imagine how unpredictable a fight becomes when you add in differences in size, armor, weapons, and -- most important -- attack and defense skill.

In these revised rules, two things determine your character's survivability: luck and skill. A bad die roll could result in your death. On the other hand, a highly skilled character could make mincemeat of a lesser skilled individual, even if the lesser is turtled up in the best armor.

Fights are unpredictable. They are not balanced. Even the best prepared character can end up slain from a peasant's stone, while the worst prepared just end up dead. That's the way I like it.

 

[KenHood]

The Barbarian gor more hit points than the Fighter because the Barbarian had less special abilities than the Fighter. So when you ditched the hit points you kind of removed a variable out of the balance equation. This would theoretically make the Ranger stronger than the Fighter and way stronger than the Barbarian. Maybe some guidelines for balancing the classes would be helpful?

Consider this: An enraged barbarian adds +4 Strength and +4 Constitution. These provide a +2 bonus to attack rolls and damage rolls, and +2 Soak. The barbarian suffers two less points of damage per attack. Since your degree of success influences the damage you inflict, the +2 attack bonus and +2 damage bonus combine to give the barbarian an average +4 extra damage against opponents. This is almost a whole wound column's difference in damage.

I did think about your remarks. They got me to reflecting on generic damage reduction. I added a line to the rules that allow you to convert generic damage reduction (e.g., 2/-) directly to Soak on a 1-for-1 basis. For example, if your character has 2/- damage reduction, he gets +2 Soak. (Soak applies to all forms of damage, not just weapons and natural attacks.)

 

[KenHood]

By the way, the comments of all posters have been very helpful. I've been able to "clean up" some small points in the rules in just a matter of hours. Thanks for the feedback.

 

[KenHood]

Attachment Vanished!

Hey, why did my attachment vanish?

 

[whydirt]

Hey, why did my attachment vanish?

I was about to ask where these new rules were, since I didn't see an attachment. Can you repost it or put it up as a link somewhere else?