Rebuild 1E...

[mmadsen]

I don't at all mind the idea of a 1-10 or 1-15 game design; and while I like the idea of a 10th being much more powerful than a 1st I also want to see a system where a lucky 1st *can* seriously threaten a 10th. My example here is and always has been Merry, Eohyl, and the Ringwraith: you've got a somewhat-experienced Fighter and a nobody bringing down one of the most feared and powerful foes in the world. Any game of mine absolutely has to allow for this to happen, somehow.

I agree completely. I want a game where Eowyn and Merry can slay the Witch King of Angmar with a couple of fateful blows, where Legolas can slay a fell beast with a single arrow, where Bard can slay Smaug with a single arrow, where a samurai can slay just about anyone with a single stroke, etc., but where none of those things are guaranteed.

Hit point are (unintentionally) designed to prevent this. With hit points, characters either have few, so one attack can kill them, and two attacks will kill them, or they can have many, so one attack cannot kill them, but multiple attacks can. So we add on special rules for sneak attacks, magic weapons, etc. that keep damage escalating with hit points.

 

[BryonD]

Black Company:
Crits deal CON damage.

 

[Raven Crowking]

I agree completely. I want a game where Eowyn and Merry can slay the Witch King of Angmar with a couple of fateful blows, where Legolas can slay a fell beast with a single arrow, where Bard can slay Smaug with a single arrow, where a samurai can slay just about anyone with a single stroke, etc., but where none of those things are guaranteed.

Hit point are (unintentionally) designed to prevent this. With hit points, characters either have few, so one attack can kill them, and two attacks will kill them, or they can have many, so one attack cannot kill them, but multiple attacks can. So we add on special rules for sneak attacks, magic weapons, etc. that keep damage escalating with hit points.

RCFG has a "Get the Drop" mechanic that allows this to happen, even though it uses hit points. Basically, by getting the drop on an opponent, you can gain extra damage (gambled as extra damage reducing your chance to hit; outside of RCFG, consider using each +1 or +2 of BAB not used adds +1d6 damage).


RC

 

[mmadsen]

Black Company: Crits deal CON damage.

Even if critical hits do Con damage, that means a knife can't kill anyone. In fact, a sword can't either -- or is damage doubled before it's applied to Con?

RCFG has a "Get the Drop" mechanic that allows this to happen, even though it uses hit points. Basically, by getting the drop on an opponent, you can gain extra damage (gambled as extra damage reducing your chance to hit; outside of RCFG, consider using each +1 or +2 of BAB not used adds +1d6 damage).

You might want to borrow a mechanic from Buffy, used for staking vampires: multiply damage by some big factor (e.g. five), but only apply that bonus damage if it's enough to kill the victim.

 

[Celebrim]

Hit point are (unintentionally) designed to prevent this.

No, I think they are very intentionally designed to prevent this.

The reason that hit points are so popular and have become so pervasive of a game mechanic is that they prevent this. It's good for the game that things which are cool in literature do not happen, because they aren't so cool in a game.

Deathbringer Saurfang killed in a single blow? Not really cool.
Lord Jaraxxus killed in a single blow? Not really cool.
Gothix the Harvester killed in a single blow? Not so cool.

The problem is what is climatic in a book, isn't necessarily climatic in a game. Tolkien in particular is very deliberately creating anticlimaxes, and they really work only in context. Defeating the enemy in a single blow is cool only if it doesn't really depend on luck to do it. What you really want in a story is for the protagonist to overcome obstacles by perserverance and struggle. This is the straight forward way to have a satisfying story and the best way to have a climatic encounter in a game.

 

[Remathilis]

No, I think they are very intentionally designed to prevent this.

The reason that hit points are so popular and have become so pervasive of a game mechanic is that they prevent this. It's good for the game that things which are cool in literature do not happen, because they aren't so cool in a game.

Deathbringer Saurfang killed in a single blow? Not really cool.
Lord Jaraxxus killed in a single blow? Not really cool.
Gothix the Harvester killed in a single blow? Not so cool.

The problem is what is climatic in a book, isn't necessarily climatic in a game. Tolkien in particular is very deliberately creating anticlimaxes, and they really work only in context. Defeating the enemy in a single blow is cool only if it doesn't really depend on luck to do it. What you really want in a story is for the protagonist to overcome obstacles by perserverance and struggle. This is the straight forward way to have a satisfying story and the best way to have a climatic encounter in a game.

That's why Wound/Vitality was such a poor choice for Star Wars; a franchise which prides itself on 10+ minute fight sequences (many times in melee using lazer-swords) and you include a "one-hit kills" mechanic? Epic Fail.

 

[Treebore]

That's why Wound/Vitality was such a poor choice for Star Wars; a franchise which prides itself on 10+ minute fight sequences (many times in melee using lazer-swords) and you include a "one-hit kills" mechanic? Epic Fail.

Have you looked at SAGA? Now its 5 big hits and your down, or a bunch of smaller hits.

 

[Mythmere1]

No, I think they are very intentionally designed to prevent this.

The reason that hit points are so popular and have become so pervasive of a game mechanic is that they prevent this. It's good for the game that things which are cool in literature do not happen, because they aren't so cool in a game.

Deathbringer Saurfang killed in a single blow? Not really cool.
Lord Jaraxxus killed in a single blow? Not really cool.
Gothix the Harvester killed in a single blow? Not so cool.

The problem is what is climatic in a book, isn't necessarily climatic in a game. Tolkien in particular is very deliberately creating anticlimaxes, and they really work only in context. Defeating the enemy in a single blow is cool only if it doesn't really depend on luck to do it. What you really want in a story is for the protagonist to overcome obstacles by perserverance and struggle. This is the straight forward way to have a satisfying story and the best way to have a climatic encounter in a game.

This is brilliantly stated.

How do you give someone those compliment-thingies?

[EDIT - Never mind, figured it out. Little scales at the bottom left grant xp.]

 

[mmadsen]

No, I think they are very intentionally designed to prevent this.

The reason that hit points are so popular and have become so pervasive of a game mechanic is that they prevent this.

I stand by my point that hit points do prevent one-shot kills of competent characters, but that this was discovered over time to be a good thing for most games; it was not the original intent of the mechanic, which was really just a way for a "hero" to be as powerful as four 0-level guys, and a "super-hero" to be as powerful as eight.

 

[Remathilis]

Have you looked at SAGA? Now its 5 big hits and your down, or a bunch of smaller hits.

Yup. The problem with Saga is that the Damage Threshold is far too low, but that's fixable. W/VP was systematic and required removing the whole thing to replace with hp (followed by a complete re-write of the Force system).

Anyway, I digress. Back to 1e!