UA: Converting to Injury Rules

[LoneWolf23]

I run an online chatroom D&D game, and I've realized something: Combat takes a hell of a long time in D&D, which kinda eats up my group's 3-4 hour game sessions (the biggest window of gaming time my group can manage). Likewise, traps can eat up some time when PCs get struck by them and end up losing HPs.

Which is why I'm now interested in the Injury rules from Unearthed Arcana. I know the system was probably taken from Mutants and Mastermind's own Damage Save rules, so I'm familiar enough with it, but I'm unsure how to convert D&D PCs/Creatures to the Injury system..

Anyone here tried it yet? If so, care to share your opinions?

 

[Khaalis]

Unearthed Arcana Injury Rules

The basics of the rules are thus:

The Injury variant eliminates Hit Points, and simply determines whether characters are hut or killed every time they're hit in combat.

Injuries accumulate until the PC becomes disabled or dying (staggered or unconscious for nonlethal damage).

Mechanic:
DV (Damage Value) = Whenever PC takes damage, divide the damage by 5 (round up).
Injury = Fortitude save (DC 15 + DV)

Success = no ill effect
Fail by less than 10 = Take a hit (Each Hit is a -1 cumulative modifier on future Fortitude saves to resist injury)
Fail by more than 10 = Disabled (or staggered)

Natural 20 = Auto success
Natural 1 = Auto fail by more than 10

Dying = If any hit is taken after being disabled
When dying, each round make a Fortitude save (DC 10 +1 per round after first) to become stable. Penalties from accumulated hits count for this save.
Failure = Dead
Success by less than 5 = doesnt die but does not improve and must continue making the saves every round
Success by more than 5 but less than 10 = becomes stable but still unconscious
Success by more than 10 = becomes conscious and disabled

When dying, any hit is killed.
When dying, another PC can improve the dying PC's condition by making a DC 15 Heal check as a standard action (provokes AoO).

Natural Healing: a full night heals 1 hit per 2 character levels (min 1 hit per night). Complete bed rest (24hr) heals 1 hit per level. Nonlethal is faster to heal at 1 hit per hour per 2 levels.

Magic Healing: 1 hit (both lethal and non-lethal) per 5 points of healing (min 1).

Fast Healing: 1 hit (both lethal and non-lethal) per 5 points of fast healing (min 1/round). May also add their fast healing value to Fortitude saves to become stable when dying.

Regeneration: All damage is treated as non-lethal, except for the specific type of damage that effects them normally (ie trolls = fire).

Bonus Hit Points: Anything that grants bonus HP (ie toughness feat) gives the bonus to Fortitude saves vs injury at +1 save per 5 HP (min +1). High CON does not stack as a bonus HP since the CON mod already gies bonus Fort save.

DR/ER: Adds to Fort saves to resist injury at +1 per 5 DR or ER (min +1). The exception deals injury normally. ie DR 10/magic gives a +2 fort save vs injury against non-magic weapons, ER (fire) 15 grants a +3 fort save versus fire attacks.

Coup de Grace: As normal but the result of the hit is made one worse (also note DC will be higher due to higher damage).

Thats about it. Hope that helps.

 

[LoneWolf23]

Oh, I have all of those rules in my UA book, thank you. I was wondering if people here had had much luck converting their campaigns to those rules..

...Though it's a moot point now, since one of my players refuses to convert because she thinks Injury rules makes it too easy for the PCs to suffer in battle (She's unlucky with dice)...

...Although I could always add the possibility of using Action Points to recover quickly or lower your damaged status.

It's either that or dropping the idea and going for Reserve Points instead.

 

[Khaalis]

From looking at the system, I can agree with the player. The Injury system is NOT a system that favors the players. This is a system for a game with little combat and when combat does happen it is meant to be fast, dirty, and deadly. This is for a much more "realistic" feel to combat. It actually equates a successful attack roll to a physical "hit" rather than the amorphous HP "wearing the opponent down" system. If you run a lot of combat in you game and dont want players dropping like flies - Dont use the Injury system.

Action points really arent much help either if you run a lot of combat. If you only run occasional combat it "might" work but no one will ever use their action points knowing they have to save them for the occasional combat if they want to stay alive.

As for the reserve points, it makes some sense. It is again a part of the amorphous HP system, but it lends some realism in that it basically is stating that some of the HP damage is real, and some is just exhaustion. At some point... you energy reserves wear out and you just cant get any more refreshed than you currently are (0 reserve) until you sleep. This actually makes good sense.

Personally however, I prefer the Wound Vitality system for its mix of HP "exhaustion” system as well as for the reality that one good strike can cut you down regardless of how “experienced” you are. A 20th level Paladin may be powerful, but that well shot and unexpected assassin’s sniper shot to the face could just as easily kill him. My issue has always been that the 20th level fighter’s attitude is – “BAH! Its only 200 Orcs. I can finish them off and be in time for lunch!” - knowing full well that they are night invulnerable. Shouldn’t be that way. Everyone should fear battle to some extent.

JMHO

 

[Janx]

On a related note, maybe you're not running combat efficiently.

I wrote a series of mIRC scripts that automated damage tracking for the players pretty well.

All the GM had to type was "/dam Janx 16" and my client would deduct 16 damage from my HP.

We handled AC, attacks, damage, HP tracking pretty well. If I still have the scripts, I can post them.

Refer to Monte's own Dragon article (DungeonCraft) where he mentions that an encounter takes an hour, on average. This holds true for most groups, and being online wouldn't change that much.

Khaalis's posted rules don't seem to make things any simpler (now you really need some scripts to track and calculate the rolls). They only make combat more deadly.

You might want to consider what is making combat take so long? How many players are there? Are there complex actions being taken, or simple attacks (I roll to-hit, I roll damage)? Are you and the players being extremely verbose in description? Is there delay time between player responses (like they're in 3 other chat rooms at the same time)?

Janx

 

[LoneWolf23]

The campaign is held in one of my personal rooms in a MUCK, and we have six-eight players (though rarely more then 7 are there at a given time). Due to conflicting scheduals, I can only get all of them together and ready to play by 9:00pm my time, and by the time 12:00pm hits, I'm usually too tired to continue (last time, I was completly worn out by 11:30), which leaves us 3 hours of valid playtime.

So yeah, 1 hour should be the maximum time we spend on a fight encounter, allowing for in-combat rp, and some of the more exotic tactics my players use (our ranger's got into his head to try and play Tarzan by swinging around the branches). The format in which we play doesn't allow for easy use of maps, so I've already taken to running combat without it, which is possibly why things take longer then they should. And before someone recommends programs like OpenRPG or WebRPG, I -do- have them, only I can't figure out how to use them...

Any advice?

 

[Janx]

Well we're actually moving off topic, but to the real topic (ie. your problem isn't which rules to use, its how to speed things up).

I can't help you with WebRPG or one of those apps , I haven't used them either. Obviously, there are products out there like those, GRIP, my chat scripts, special chat rooms, etc that can automate damage tracking and die rolling. On the other hand, how long does it take for me to say, "I swing with my sword. 16, for 12 damage if I hit" and then you respond with the actual result (checking the AC, etc). Not very long, so those tools only shave seconds off response time.

Playing mini-less is the way people had been playing D&D for years, so that's not a problem either (www.montecook.com for a great DM article on playing without mini's).

Having a ranger wanting to swing on a vine while attacking's pretty hard to model without a human GM, so that's an area where only you can arbitrate. Thus the fancy openrpg programs will not entirely help in that regard. Even the cool NeverWinter Nights thing might need your help (or the Ranger simply wouldn't be able to do it).

I suspect, your biggest problem is simply having 6+ players. More players equals more delay between each player getting a turn. Hence the WoTC 4-player standard (which is really 4 PCs + 1 DM = 5 players). It's a actually a good rule of thumb for any game design. Most games bog down, when I have to wait for more than 4 other "actions" to be resolved before my turn.

Here's some ideas along those lines:
Run less combat, more RP: chat rooms are great for chatting, so run more encounters where there is more yap, and less hack.
Run fewer Players: take the 4 most reliable, best players and keep them, let the others go (best trick is to "split" the group into 2 games, whether you run both is up to you).
Read monte's mini-less article: after so much mini use, we forget how to run without them. Mini's define things for us quickly, but also constrain our game play in we only think to do what the movement rules let us. Here's a link: http://www.montecook.com/arch_dmonly21.html
Check to make sure you've got the most optimal game tools available and learn to use them. You can speed up aspects of the combat, which will get you some gain. There are forums, and the like for using those tools, go hunt them down. Let me know if you want my mIRC scripts (in your MUCK, that might not be possible, but then a MUCK might have its own scripts). You'll have to hunt around and test with a friend.

Anybody else got some tips on speeding up combat?

Janx