Updated: Mortal Wounds

[Vyvyan Basterd]

Back in the day I was a big fan of using the ICE system crit charts in my AD&D campaign. Over time I nerfed criticals down to the point where they no longer even exist in my campaigns.

Recently I proposed a new use for them to my players. I want to use the charts to add some randomness to what occurs to a character at -10 hit points or less . To be clear, instead of the result always being death, I would roll on the crit charts to determine what horrible malady has befallen the character (which range from "nothing" to "death"). I have rules in mind for how a character can remove some of the more horrible effects through spells or long-term healing, although most grievous wounds will still retain some kind of impaired status even after healing (-1 to skill checks).

Two questions for everyone to ponder:
1) Generally what do you think of the idea?
2) ICE charts have progressively worse columns A through E. I have not come up with a good way to determine which column to use. I don't want it to be random, but I can't think of some in-game factor to tie it to. Any thoughts?

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

1. I think it's a bad idea, but maybe I don't understand it. For one thing, I don't understand how you can be at -10 hit points and yet have "nothing" happen. This idea seemingly makes dying a lot worse than it already is. If that's your intent, okay, but my opinion is that it would suck (and you asked for our opinion).

You are misunderstanding, but I figured I wasn't going to explain it well enough in the first go at it.

When reaching -10 hp you would roll. The weakest result of "Nothing" would mean just that. You don't die, you just continue to be unconscious at -10 hp. If the result was "Lose an eye" you wouldn't die, but without magical healing you would suffer a -2 to Spot checks, etc. It actually makes death less likely to occur at all.

2. I've always hated crit/fumble charts. Rolling on them to determine how you died is just nonsensical to me. It certainly wouldn't help the enjoyment in the game. If I ever thought it necessary for the story line to mutilate someone's corpse or whatever, I see no reason for chart as I would much rather choose the result based on what happened rather than take 30+ seconds to roll on 5 charts, only to have the result be incongruous. But, maybe I missed something from your description.

See above. It is not a "roll to see how you die" rule.

I understand peoples' hatred for crit/fumble charts. That's why I stopped using them the way most people use them. They were too punishing to player characters and not effective enough on non-player characters. But my old love for them applied in way that reduces character death is the intent of my idea.

 

[Sir Brennen]

Sounds interesting. I've heard some d20 game centered on pirates uses a similar concept - if you take enough damage to die, instead you end up with a scar, a peg leg, etc. Can't remember which game it was, though.

For the columns, you could have them correspond to light, medium and two-handed weapons, cross-referenced with wielder size. That would create a table (ICE was all about tables, wasn't it?) like so:

		Light	1-Hand	2-Hand
Fine		A-30	A-20	A-10
Diminutive	A-20	A-10	A
Tiny		A-10	A	B
Small		A	B	C
Medium		B	C	D
Large		C	D	E
Huge		D	E	E+10
Gargantuan	E	E+10	E+20
Colossal	E+10	E+20	E+30

The +/- is a percentage, 'cuz if I remember correctly, the table was percentage based, right?

You might have to adjust a bit for a creature's natural weapons. Claws would probably be Light; Bite would be Lite or 1-Hand; Horns, Tails, etc. also 1-hand, with special attacks like Powerful Charge or Trample being 2-Handed.

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

Sounds interesting. I've heard some d20 game centered on pirates uses a similar concept - if you take enough damage to die, instead you end up with a scar, a peg leg, etc. Can't remember which game it was, though.

For the columns, you could have them correspond to light, medium and two-handed weapons, cross-referenced with wielder size. That would create a table (ICE was all about tables, wasn't it?) like so:

		Light	1-Hand	2-Hand
Fine		A-30	A-20	A-10
Diminutive	A-20	A-10	A
Tiny		A-10	A	B
Small		A	B	C
Medium		B	C	D
Large		C	D	E
Huge		D	E	E+10
Gargantuan	E	E+10	E+20
Colossal	E+10	E+20	E+30

The +/- is a percentage, 'cuz if I remember correctly, the table was percentage based, right?

You might have to adjust a bit for a creature's natural weapons. Claws would probably be Light; Bite would be Lite or 1-Hand; Horns, Tails, etc. also 1-hand, with special attacks like Powerful Charge or Trample being 2-Handed.

Interesting idea. Could even use the Tiny creatures critical chart (which is also A-E) to do that, maybe adjust as:

		Light	1-Hand	2-Hand
Fine		At	Bt	Ct
Diminutive	Bt	Ct	Dt
Tiny		Ct	Dt	Et
Small		A	B	C
Medium		B	C	D
Large		C	D	E
Huge		D	E	E+10
Gargantuan	E	E+10	E+20
Colossal	E+10	E+20	E+30

Though this favors creatures already big enough to bring you down in the first place.

 

[solkan_uk]

Skull N Bones had a similar system, you had a number of lives and when 'killed' you were knocked out the scene for an amount of time and could come back later with an injury.

EDIT: As a note - IIRC the player didn't know how many lives they had, I think it was something like d3+1, so anyone could die once confidently, but after that it gets a little shaky.

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

Maybe it could be based on the skill of the attacker:

BAB
+1 to +5 = A
+6 to +10 = B
+11 to +15 = C
+16 or higher = D

And a one category bump if you have a "critical" feat such as Improved Critical or Power Critical (you can only get the one category bump once).

 

[Primitive Screwhead]

This is an interesting idea.. altho there are some problems with it..

Before I get to that, instead of the -10 = roll on chart how about:

When normal damage reduces you below 0 hps, roll on the Critical Damage chart.
You are returned to 0 hps before applying the results of the chart.

The table of the critical is determined by how far below 0 you had fallen. Each 5 points moves you up one table.
An opponent with the Improved Critical feat also moves you up one table.
The feat Toughness moves you down one table {or -10 on the result if already on table A}

You may spend an Action Point{AP} to move down one table {or -10 on the result if already on Table A}. You may spend multiple APs in this fashion.

*lost hps from either a critical or 'bleeding out' does not initiate a second Critical Damage roll.

Of course, the problem with this will be the tables in question. They would have to be redone in a more D20 favorable way.
Case in point, 2-handed Axe Fumble result 65-68: "Trip over an imaginary deceased turtle and spend two rounds burying it {stunned for two rounds}"
Yes, this was my favorite..and oft rolled..result

But this has always been a problem of detailed Crit charts.. matching the detail of the random crit with the actual injury event

We would need a small handfull of Crit tables, Weapon Type {Blud/Pierc/Slash}, Elemental type {Fire/Frost/etc..}, and Non-Physical {Finger of Death, etc..}

 

[Sir Brennen]

Ooo.. good call, relating the degree of negative hit points to the critical hit column. Per 5 points sounds good, though if one goes past -25, you'd then probably start adding +10% to the E column roll for each additional 5 points. Another alternative might be 5 + CON mod points as the increment.

And yes, it does sound like the tables would have to be modified heavily, since you're only interested in the results which indicate an actual, lasting injury (and every KO shouldn't neccessarily result in a injury at all.)

You might want to simply have one set of results, and how far one goes negative dictates the severity of the injury. For example, a roll of 28-34 on the chart might indicate Leg Injury, with -5 to -9 being a limp (lose one multiplier off of run speed), -10 to -14 lose 5 feet of base speed, -15 to -19 lose 10 feet of base speed, ect.

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

This is an interesting idea.. altho there are some problems with it..

Before I get to that, instead of the -10 = roll on chart how about:

Personally I would keep it as how far beyond -10, otherwise a very unlucky PC could die at -1 hp. That's not my intent.

Of course, the problem with this will be the tables in question. They would have to be redone in a more D20 favorable way.
Case in point, 2-handed Axe Fumble result 65-68: "Trip over an imaginary deceased turtle and spend two rounds burying it {stunned for two rounds}"
Yes, this was my favorite..and oft rolled..result:

Those humorous one's were only on the fumble chart, which I don't plan to use. But there will be some work to be done to modify the results into something more sensible for d20. There's alot of stun effects on there which don't fit being taken down.

We would need a small handfull of Crit tables, Weapon Type {Blud/Pierc/Slash}, Elemental type {Fire/Frost/etc..}, and Non-Physical {Finger of Death, etc..}

Got the weapon types (Arms Law) and elemental types (Spell Law). I think there is a force critical chart in Spell Law that could be used for non-elemental spell damage, but I would be inclined to rule that damage from spells like Finger of Death and Disintegrate that bring you to -10 would auto kill as that is the point of those spells.

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

*bump*