Realism, Heroism, and Abstract Hit Points

[TerraDave]

Regarding realism: one thing I have been thinking about is adrenaline. It is what can keep your blood-pressure up, and keep you fighting when you should really probably die. Its sort of like anti-shock, where pressure drops and things go very badly. Interestingly, it opens the door to the "Warlord" approach, someone who can motivate you so well you actually stay alive longer. (of course, as noted above, death should probably come after battle when the adrenaline goes away.)

Regarding Gameplay: Why hit points? Jonathan Tweet has interesting discussion of them here. To summarize the standard arguments (with which I basically agree) they avoid the things that people who like realism want: swingy results (killed in one shot, not killed in many) and death spirals (debilitation makes your more vulnrable to more debilitation). Instead, as a player you have a pretty good idea where you stand and can make calculated risks, knowing if one more blow will kill you or not.

Then again, I wouldn't want to completely get rid of single hits sometimes causing massive damage, or some kinds of debilitation. At least not where my players are concerned.

 

[Generico]

There is a system already in existence which more accurately simulates the reality of intense combat. It's called the Vitality points system and is used by the older version of Star Wars RPG. For those unfamiliar with it, you basically had HP, which represented physical wellbeing, and you had Vitality Points, which represented your ability to negate otherwise harmful attacks. Your HP was the same as your con score, and your VP was based on hit dice + con mod.

Normal attacks targeted vitality points first, and did not affect hit points until all vitality points were gone. When your hp was gone, you were dead. Critical hits on the other hand, targeted your hp directly and bypassed your vitality points entirely.

Using that system, you could achieve a point where even low level characters could suffer multiple hits without dying, yet still a 20th level character could be killed with one solid critical hit.

While the result of the system was perhaps more realistic, it was not more fun. Nobody wants their 20th level character to be killed by one shot from a lucky stormtrooper. In fact, hardly anyone ever actually made it to high levels because it was so easy to die. This is the reason SWSE doesn't use that system anymore. The goal of a game is to be fun, not to be realistic. Most people only want realism until they actually play something realistic.

 

[Warbringer]

Re Posture... Use Intimidate as Initiative .. (or maybe a feat to allow this)

 

[mmadsen]

Why hit points? Jonathan Tweet has interesting discussion of them here. To summarize the standard arguments (with which I basically agree) they avoid the things that people who like realism want: swingy results (killed in one shot, not killed in many) and death spirals (debilitation makes your more vulnrable to more debilitation). Instead, as a player you have a pretty good idea where you stand and can make calculated risks, knowing if one more blow will kill you or not.

Then again, I wouldn't want to completely get rid of single hits sometimes causing massive damage, or some kinds of debilitation. At least not where my players are concerned.

As I said earlier, if we simply switch from ablative hit points to roll-to-live, I agree that we're left with an awkward tradeoff -- fun versus realism -- but we don't have to make that tradeoff.

If we give PCs and other "name" characters fate points, action points, drama points -- whatever you want to call them -- then we can provide plot protection to everyone who's supposed to have it, even if they're simple hobbits and not great warriors, without giving it to, say, Gondorian knights, who might be great warriors, but who aren't the heroes of our story. This way we avoid mistaking plot protection for toughness and combat skill.

 

[mmadsen]

There is a system already in existence which more accurately simulates the reality of intense combat. It's called the Vitality points system and is used by the older version of Star Wars RPG.

I wouldn't call the Vitality system particularly realistic or fun. As you point out, it's a system where you have plenty of plot protection -- only sometimes, for no particular reason, you don't.

I'd rather see a system where skilled characters survive largely by being skillful -- e.g. avoiding getting hit -- and they only fall back on their limited plot-protection points when the dice don't go their way.

 

[mmadsen]

Or, on the flip side, to NOT attack an ally who runs up to cure light wounds when you are focused on the people trying to kill you.

Excellent point. Friendly fire is a huge problem with dispersed skirmishers who aren't all clearly identifiable. Of course, in D&D this isn't usually such a problem, since the party knows each other well, and the enemy is a bunch of monsters, but aid from an invisible ally would not be the least bit obviously friendly.

 

[Fallen Seraph]

I don't really have much to add... But, well here goes.

This is one idea after reading this stuff I thought of/tempted to toy with. It sorta mixes old and new.

A fighter gets attacked from the side, his hit-ratio math is (1-20): -1 for being caught off-guard, but +2 for wearing full-plate for say a total of 6 (5 is a base-number). The DM rolls gets a 8. He manages to slip past the armour to attack.

Now that he has managed to attack, how much will this affect him? The dagger gives a +10% to serious harm. The DM rolls a 40% + 10% equals: 50%. So at 50% he has trouble moving (less movement squares/amount of actions he can take).

If the DM had scored a 80-90& he would have done serious enough harm to have the Fighter roll to see if falls unconscious. 90%-100% would mean death.

Certain effects on the weapon could be used like this as well, say the dagger was serrated it then opens the ability to on-top of the ordinary effect a additional effect. Say it gives a 40% of having a bleed wound (over-time this will cause a person to fall unconscious (however close it is to the 80%-90% needed to fall unconscious is that many rounds it takes to reach it). This however, will also be effected by a fighters rolls, with his own bonuses, such as say a silk-shirt, etc.

This system could mean that, the means of attack as well as the method of delivery can be effected and delivered in a more realistic fashion. So for another example, the Fighter is inside a trench, a cannon goes off. The trench gives him a +4, and the loud sound another +1, for a total of: 10. The cannon however because of concussive force and shrapnel has a +5. It beats his hit-ratio.

Being a cannon this has a +40% chance of doing serious harm. The DM rolls a 0%. Given the 40% the fighter is knocked off his feet and loses a turn.

However he must also deal with the cannons' side-effects, which has high 30% for being stunned. He manages to not get stunned because of a feat that gave him a sturdy frame.

This percentile system could be used for falling to. The farther you fall, a larger damage-bracket is opened. With the maximum bracket being death.

 

[Generico]

I wouldn't call the Vitality system particularly realistic or fun. As you point out, it's a system where you have plenty of plot protection -- only sometimes, for no particular reason, you don't.

It is quite realistic in the sense that while any character can potentially survive many attacks without dying (and that possibility increases with training), any character can also be killed quite easily if luck does not go their way. The "particular reason" for that is that sometimes an attack does not hit a vital spot (represented by a normal attack roll), and sometimes it does (represented by a critical hit roll). This is very much in-line with real combat.

I'd rather see a system where skilled characters survive largely by being skillful -- e.g. avoiding getting hit -- and they only fall back on their limited plot-protection points when the dice don't go their way.

That is exactly what the VP system is. A character who is higher level, and thus better trained (e.g. "skilled) in combat arts, has more VPs. VPs represent one's ability to avoid taking life-threatening damage. When you take VP damage, that is saying that you expended effort to dodge or otherwise negate the lethality of the attack. It does not mean that you took a hit and just toughed it out. When you run out of VP it means that you no longer have the energy to negate the lethality of an attack. Therefore, the subsequent attacks actually hit you, and cause lethal wounds. A critical hit essentially represents a lucky shot, which you failed to negate, and it hit a vital area dealing actual physical damage.

The system is quite realistic if you understand the abstraction that a reduction in VP does not constitute an actual hit by an enemy's attack, and that successful hits are represented by HP only. VP is more a representation of your physical energy and will to fight.

Like I said, despite the system accurately representing events which regularly occur in reality, it's not fun to have your highly skilled 20th level character get shot down by some 1st level bum who gets lucky.

 

[Kaisoku]

I like this thread, it brings up some very good concepts with regards to how combat works in reality, and how it could be incorporated (or has been) in gaming.


One thing I think is worth going into more depth on is the whole morale or "mindset" issue.

A highly skilled combatant won't just be better at avoiding hits, but also won't let hits that do land demoralize him as much. Yes, there's the physical aspect to it, such that a person who has conditioned his muscles and such can withstand a blow better... but it's the same problem with Concentration being solely Constitution based.

A skilled Fighter will get slashed across the hand, and might even drop his weapon for it, but without batting an eye, he'll strike out with that hand and punch, grab or fend and otherwise continue fighting.

A lack of combat experience can mean the unfortunate person might start clutching the wound, scream in pain, or otherwise lose combative capability.
For a very non-combative person (normal person who hasn't had any combat experience at all), even a near miss could make them nervous enough to start making mistakes.


This kind of thinking also allows for more story concepts to enter the game. One movie/story that I find great for the "morale" contribution to this thread is The 13th Warrior. The fighters in that story had the mindset that their Fate had already been set, nothing could change it, they will die when it's their time. "Fear profits a man nothing".

This would mean a person who has a great bonus against Fear in the game, would likely have a fairly good bonus at surviving combat, since they don't fear death in the same sense. I always thought of Paladins being very powerful in combat for the fact that they were immune to fear... conviction of faith, knowing your God had your back, no fear of dying for the cause, etc... all that would make a scary opponent in combat I'd think.



As for systems that adequately represent this kind of thinking...

d20 Mutants and Masterminds had the Toughness roll to replace hitpoints. While it goes all the way to make it a purely physical thing... the mechanic is quite sound, and could be modified to be more of a Combat Resolve type system.

Simply change the effects from "Stunned/Staggered/Unconscious" to things like.. Shaken, Frightened, and Panicked.

I also prefer to not remove control of the character from the player, so forcing someone to flee because of the status effect wouldn't be good for a standard combat thing.

However, simply changing it to reducing combat options and adding penalties would be sufficient to making someone seriously consider escaping. Especially if you allowed a mechanic for shaking off those effects when not being directly threatened... it becomes a tactical choice.


So basically something like the following status effects:

Shaken: Penalties to attack/defense. Through damage or other forms of demoralization, you are becoming less capable at attacking and defending.

Frightened: Larger penalties, plus can't use per encounter/day abilities. It's not that you forget how, but rather that you don't think to do it... or you are so nervous that starting the maneuvers fail and turn into normal attacks as you revert to basic training.

Panicked: As long as you are trying to remain in combat, you can only perform one standard or move action (like being slowed, essentially). If trying to flee combat (even if it's to get an item, cast a spell, etc) then you can have a full round of actions to do it.


Then, add the ability to spend something like a Full Round action to calm yourself and reduce the demoralization by a step, or something.. as long as you aren't being threatened of course (being damaged or struck while attempting means auto failure, etc).


Toss in some Combat Action points to allow people to shed demoralization when needed, and you've got your Heroic aspect back again.

 

[loseth]

For those really interested in realism in combat, I'll just chime in with one important point that I find is often ignored in such debates:

Military weapons and civilian sidearms are not the same. Not by a long shot. This is true of the modern age (military assault rifle or .50 cal sniper rifle vs civilian pistol), of the early modern period (military broadsword vs civilian rapier or smallsword) and of the medieval period (military pike or lance vs civilian dagger). Civilian sidearms usually insert a small quantity of metal into the target with a relatively low total force. As such, they don't usually kill on a single hit, and they tend to be all or nothing--either they hit a vital spot and deliver a fatal wound, or they hit a non-vital spot but can't cause enough tissue damage to actually impair the target.

Military weapons, on the other hand, insert larger amounts of metal into the target with much greater total force. If they hit a vital spot, then you get the same effect as a civilian sidearm--a fatal wound. The big difference comes when the weapon fails to hit a vital spot: unlike a civilian sidearm, a military weapon has sufficient damaging surface area and sufficient force to cause significant trauma to muscle tissue, tendons/cartilege/etc. and to bone. It may not kill you, but it very likely will either put you out of the fight or significantly impede your combat performance for the rest of the fight.

Surviving a few hits from a civilian sidearm is not especially unusual. However, most combat-oriented RPGs deal mainly with military weapons, and surviving even one hit from such a weapon while still maintaining full combat effectiveness is--although by no means impossible--certainly quite unlikely.