[BIRTHRIGHT] Vitality/Wound Points foBR.

[Birthright-L]

A lot of views in a single post!

As for vitality point, my objections are totally different from yours (they
have to do with instant-kill criticals from strong enemies), and I`ve
already pointed them out twice, so I see no need to do so again. In sort,
the damage range of a fantasy game is too great for vitality points to work,
IMHO.

As forthe rant against NPC classes, I started out with your opinion.
However, I have since USED the system - and it actualy works fine. In a
military campaign that I`m running, we have stock NPC soldiers with various
levels of Warrior. These guys are great for filling out the squad - they are
no pushovers, but unlike the full PC classes, they have only basic skills
and abilities. They lack the special qualities that makes the PCs heroes.
This means they rarely take over the adventure. When someone has to do a
heroic effort for the squad, it is almost always a PC - but when they form a
line, the NPCs are vital.

As for them being less attractive - well, they are NPC classes. They are
SUPPOSED to be less attractive. If what you wanted was a cool NPC villain,
don`t use an NPC class. But his goons work very well as stock NPCs.

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Birthright-L]

A lot of views in a single post!

As for vitality point, my objections are totally different from yours (they
have to do with instant-kill criticals from strong enemies), and I`ve
already pointed them out twice, so I see no need to do so again. In sort,
the damage range of a fantasy game is too great for vitality points to work,
IMHO.

As forthe rant against NPC classes, I started out with your opinion.
However, I have since USED the system - and it actualy works fine. In a
military campaign that I`m running, we have stock NPC soldiers with various
levels of Warrior. These guys are great for filling out the squad - they are
no pushovers, but unlike the full PC classes, they have only basic skills
and abilities. They lack the special qualities that makes the PCs heroes.
This means they rarely take over the adventure. When someone has to do a
heroic effort for the squad, it is almost always a PC - but when they form a
line, the NPCs are vital.

As for them being less attractive - well, they are NPC classes. They are
SUPPOSED to be less attractive. If what you wanted was a cool NPC villain,
don`t use an NPC class. But his goons work very well as stock NPCs.

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Eosin the Red]

Here is the wound/vitality system that I use....It has not been updated with
some newer ideas but it covers some of the more tricky aspects (Sneak
Attacks, Spells, and Falling). It also addresses Starfoxes concern about
fantasy overpowering the Wound factor.

http://www.mabinogin.com/Woundpoints.htm

Eosin~

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Birthright-L]

From: "Eosin the Red" <Eosin_the_Red@COX.NET>

> Here is the wound/vitality system that I use....It has not been updated
with
> some newer ideas but it covers some of the more tricky aspects (Sneak
> Attacks, Spells, and Falling). It also addresses Starfoxes concern about
> fantasy overpowering the Wound factor.
>
> http://www.mabinogin.com/Woundpoints.htm
>

The wound point part here looks reasonable - though it is very toned down.
Many of my friends use a similar variant, where the number of negative hit
points you can survive is equal to Con (possibly with a level modifier at
very high levels). I see very little difference between such a system and
your proposal here.

An Armor absorption system can work, but not without some form of Defense
Value. Otherwise, Power Attack become obligatory, and Base Attack becomes
largely meaningless except as it applies to Power Attack. And if everyone
uses Power Attack, we are basically back to the present system!

Also, you table makes all armor a little worse - since the sum of the DR and
Def Penalty is always lower than the present AC bonus. Full Plate offers
only a +2 net bonus, for example! I think that the Def Penalty should only
apply to characters improficient in the use of such armor - that is what
armor proficiency is all about.

On the other hand, you seem to have ditched the Dex bonus - not a good thing
in my book.

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[geeman]

Stephen Starfox writes:

> A lot of views in a single post!

I try to pack in as much bang for the bandwidth that I can.... ;)

> As for vitality point, my objections are totally different from yours (they
> have to do with instant-kill criticals from strong enemies), and I`ve
> already pointed them out twice, so I see no need to do so again. In sort,
> the damage range of a fantasy game is too great for vitality points to work,
> IMHO.

Yeah, I can see that objection. It does, however, go to what I see as the
merit of wound/vitality over hit points. Using hit points I`m sure we`ve
all experienced those situations in which players have recognized the simple
math of combat. "I can go at least X rounds with monster Z," and/or "It
will take me X rounds to KILL monster Z given the rate of damage done and
received." Using wound points that kind of metathinking is a bit less
likely because ANY combat can wind up being deadly--or at least harmful--to
ANY character. That`s what someone who uses a vitality/wound point system
is going for.

In BR, I think that`s more appropriate than in many other D&D campaigns
because BR is often touted as a "low level" setting--whatever that means.
(Whatever it does mean appears to mean even less in 3e since levelling up is
generally faster.) Using vitality/wound points the unexpected can happen,
which is generally the kind of feeling that occurs in D&D at low levels more
frequently than at high levels. While I like to reward players for good
play using a levelling up system, I personally don`t ever want them to lose
that sense that their PCs could get killed. In fact, losing a PC or two
from time to time might not really be a bad thing.

> As forthe rant against NPC classes, I started out with your opinion.
> However, I have since USED the system - and it actualy works fine. In a
> military campaign that I`m running, we have stock NPC soldiers with various
> levels of Warrior. These guys are great for filling out the squad - they are
> no pushovers, but unlike the full PC classes, they have only basic skills
> and abilities. They lack the special qualities that makes the PCs heroes.
> This means they rarely take over the adventure. When someone has to do a
> heroic effort for the squad, it is almost always a PC - but when they form a
> line, the NPCs are vital.

That again would appear to be a difference in DM style. I personally don`t
want the NPCs to be vital. Significant, yes. Vital, no. The NPC classes
in 3e strike me as being a strange mix of weakness (when it comes to class
features) and survivability (because of the hit point system.) In my
experience this leads to another buffer between the PCs and their opponents.

Gary

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Mark_Aurel]

In BR, I think that`s more appropriate than in many other D&D campaigns
because BR is often touted as a "low level" setting--whatever that means.
(Whatever it does mean appears to mean even less in 3e since levelling up is
generally faster.) Using vitality/wound points the unexpected can happen,
which is generally the kind of feeling that occurs in D&D at low levels more
frequently than at high levels. While I like to reward players for good
play using a levelling up system, I personally don`t ever want them to lose
that sense that their PCs could get killed. In fact, losing a PC or two
from time to time might not really be a bad thing.

Having the "unexpected" happen isn't really a specifically low-level phenomenon. In fact, I'd argue the opposite, and say that unexpected things happen far more often in high-level games, courtesy of scaling monsters and monster abilities - particularly insta-kill abilities and spells, like disintegrate, dominate person or the good old finger of death, monsters, fighters, and rogues being able to dish out hundreds of points of damage in a single round under just the right circumstances, and so on.

I think the Birthright-specific problem may rather be in the lack of foes with these capabilities than in a system flaw; most Birthright campaigns I've been in have hardly been monster bashes - monsters are a "big event," unlike most other worlds. If the majority of combat encounters in Birthright tends to be with masses of thug-level characters, like goblin tribes or orog warbands, or dealing with ambushes or assassination attempts, then it is perfectly logical that combat boils down to a fairly boring routine. For a certain level of heroic flavor, I find that perfectly acceptable - King Arthur doesn't get maimed by scrub #659, he faces down Mordred in lethal combat.

Either way you swing it, high-level D&D combats aren't inherently aren't inherently any less predictable than low-level ones; it's just that you must deal with a generally wider range of capabilities on the side of both hero and villain. In D&D proper, the most predictable levels in terms of combat outcomes may be the levels from 3-6 or so - the levels where neither side generally has any insta-kill capability, and neither are so fragile as to be killed in a single blow (as 1st-level characters can easily be). Of course, predictability may not be the proper term here, but I think the flaw is with the type of encounters that Birthright encourages, and the style of play that some prefer, and how that interacts with the D&D ruleset, rather than either the ruleset or style of play itself.

Another way to discourage fighting and encourage roleplaying-oriented solutions is to simply up the ante and have major encounters be of an EL or four above the party level - so that the odds do not easily favor the characters. That's not necessarily an easy thing to do within Birthright, of course - so going the way of making PCs a bit more vulnerable can do the trick, too - but this, too, is perfectly well supported within the hit point system, with variants like 20-20-confirm-kill (only one out of perhaps 800 cases, of course).

I agree perfectly in general that games get boring without a sense of menace to the characters - if no one ever dies, or if raising the dead is too easy, there's never a real sense that some day someone will fight their last combat. I just think that this is already pretty well supported by the existing D&D system or variants, if played as written, without modifying the core system itself. I've found that vitality/wounds points systems can sometimes produce far worse results than a standard hit point system - that of anticlimactic fights. "Yeah, I rolled really well and killed the Gorgon in one blow."

[Green Knight]

I have been using a wound point/vitality system since 2E. Called it buffer points (vitality) and hit points (wounds) back then, and call it wounds and hit points now, but that`s not important.

Using the AC system as a base, I calculate wound points as follows:

10+size mod+str mod+con mod

It gives a nice does of hp to big dragons and keep most PC at about the same level. Creatuers w/o Con have a +0 mod, but take no penalties from wounds. Chreatures w/o Str use their charisma instead.

...but what I was really going to say is:

SW critical hits goes directly to wound points. A blaster pistol does 3d6/10.5 points of damage. Enough to send a character unconcious and dying with one hit. Other weapons are worse; lightsabers do a minimum of 3d8+Str bonus and have a good threath range. Saves against falling and other hazards determine wheter you take vitality or wound damage. Failing those saves can be lethal. In short, if you go for a "directly to wounds" critical system, be prepared for character death, unless there is magical healing to be had.

It gets even more dangerous in a fantasy setting. The ogre and his greatclub can now send an unlucky PC to hell with one blow. Perhaps the fireball does wound damange if you fail the ref save? If you ask me, it is not necessarily a bad thing (and gives a nice gritty feeling to combat), but be prepared for some nasty things to happen with you PC (and the DM`s NPCs).

A less drastic approach is to always require damage to wear down hit points before wounds are taken. This approach probably requires some steep penalties for taking wound points, like stunning and then staggering + ability damage (for example).

I have used both systems, and like both approaches. It depends on the setting; I go for the latter in a heroic campaing and the former in a low-level down to earth one.

B

Cheers
Bjørn

-------------------------------------------------
WebMail fra Tele2 http://www.tele2.no
-------------------------------------------------

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Eosin the Red]

Whoops, that is a Wheel of Time Page; Defense is assumed. I would do it a
little bit differently for BR.

The DR table has been messed up and I have been to lazy to fix it. I did
mention that I use more upto date rules in my Table Top :)


Eosin
----- Original Message -----
From: "Stephen Starfox" <stephen_starfox@YAHOO.SE>
To: <BIRTHRIGHT-L@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM>
Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2003 4:15 AM
Subject: Re: Vitality/Wound Points for BR.


> From: "Eosin the Red" <Eosin_the_Red@COX.NET>
>
> > Here is the wound/vitality system that I use....It has not been updated
> with
> > some newer ideas but it covers some of the more tricky aspects (Sneak
> > Attacks, Spells, and Falling). It also addresses Starfoxes concern about
> > fantasy overpowering the Wound factor.
> >
> > http://www.mabinogin.com/Woundpoints.htm
> >
>
> The wound point part here looks reasonable - though it is very toned down.
> Many of my friends use a similar variant, where the number of negative hit
> points you can survive is equal to Con (possibly with a level modifier at
> very high levels). I see very little difference between such a system and
> your proposal here.
>
> An Armor absorption system can work, but not without some form of Defense
> Value. Otherwise, Power Attack become obligatory, and Base Attack becomes
> largely meaningless except as it applies to Power Attack. And if everyone
> uses Power Attack, we are basically back to the present system!
>
> Also, you table makes all armor a little worse - since the sum of the DR
and
> Def Penalty is always lower than the present AC bonus. Full Plate offers
> only a +2 net bonus, for example! I think that the Def Penalty should only
> apply to characters improficient in the use of such armor - that is what
> armor proficiency is all about.
>
> On the other hand, you seem to have ditched the Dex bonus - not a good
thing
> in my book.
>
>
************************************************** **************************
> The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
> Birthright-l Archives:
http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
> To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
> with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Tempest]

I have used old 2nd AD&D PO: Combat and Tactics criticals to get more "realistic" combat to 3E. Everytime critical hit is scored, it deals normal critical damage and target is required to make fort save DC equal to damage dealt. If unsuccesful critical hit is scored and effect is determined from table. Addition to that, every time character/monster rolls to original threat range of weapon (excluding bonusses from keen and similars and improved critical) when determining if critical or not, critical hit gains an additional multiplier and new roll is made to see if additional multiplier is gained. Every additional multiplier adds +1 to effect roll of critical hit.

This has worked pretty well in our games.

[Peter Lubke]

On Tue, 2003-06-03 at 14:41, Gary wrote:
A while back we were discussing using vitality and wound points for
BR. There are several merits to such a system; not the least of which is
the "less cinematic" approach that that system of assigning damage seems to
propagate. It has other merits, particularly for BR fans. The
vitality/wound point system that I`ve seen come out of WotC, however,
always had a couple of little faults to it that I didn`t really much like.

1. Con = Wound points. Now, aside from the fact that this is the only
occasion I can think of when the system uses an ability score itself as the
basis of another stat rather than the ability score modifier, it isn`t a
particularly elegant way of handling the situation. (I guess bloodline as
an ability score is another example... but I have even more objections to
that than to con=wound.) The range of con scores makes for a sometimes
bizarre distribution of wound points. The low end of the standard range of
3-18 is probably not that realistic a set of numbers since players rarely
take on PCs with con scores under 8, but for the sake of the mechanic it
makes for characters with a range of 600% in their wound points at 1st
level. That`s pretty significant given that their vitality points can`t
reach that high starting out.

I use 10 + CON bonus|penalty for wound points. No CON bonus for hit
points. Brings CON into line with other ability stats as a one time
bonus. Keeps the range of Wound|Life|Damage (ability for human to
weather real physical damage) reasonably small. Monsters get 9 + HD, for
monsters with d8 HD, modified values for those with other. Non-classed
humans rate as 1-1HD, and thus score as 8 points. Elves and dwarves rate
as 1HD and thus score as 10 points.

2. No New Wound Points. Wound points are, after all, just another way of
assessing damage. What does 1 wound point mean? Nobody really
knows. It`s an abstraction. When Luke Skywalker got his hand cut off by
Darth Vader that could have been 1 wound point of damage. Who`s to
say? Given that it doesn`t really make sense that the stat is as static as
it is. Even if the point is to make things less cinematic that doesn`t
mean that in a level based system one should ignore the effects of
levelling up. So I figured in a change when it came to that sort of thing
for the purpose of these rules.

Totally agree. (Magic exceptions and special situations may increase
wound points but +1 or +2 would be the absolute limit in any case)

3. No vitality points for "common" NPCs. One of the things that`s always
annoyed me about the NPC class idea is that I can`t figure out why anyone
would really want to take one of those classes. OK, there is the rare
circumstance in which one might want to start off with the skill points of
the ???, and since there is no Noble PC class in standard D&D one is left
with the aristocrat, but for the most part the NPC class system is a waste
of time IMO. Especially since I can`t see any reason why a NPC would
_continue_ to level up in those classes after gaining the XP to gain 3, 5,
8+ levels. Plus, the classes lack utility, so NPCs wind up being
unsatisfactory when one wants to develop encounters. Thus, the NPC class
system gets used fairly rarely and has little real bearing on the
game. This vitality/wound point system addresses not only the utility of
NPC characters who take various classes, but also deals with why someone
might have to take those classes.

Well, I don`t totally agree, but do see where you are going. Anyone (any
character - be they PC or NPC) will have "some" combat ability even if
it is almost non-existent. Human NPCs are generally 1d6 hit points for
active professions, 1d4 for sedentary, and 1d8 for those with some
martial ability. e.g. sailor 1d6, scribe 1d4, bouncer 1d8.

For the purpose of this system I`m differentiating between "heroic" and
"common" characters, where heroic characters are more like what we`re all
used to and common characters are NPCs who less access to
vitality/wound. Aside from their access to vitality and wound points,
however, there`s no difference between heroic and common characters. A
common "minstrel" (the NPC bard) is just as musically talented,
knowledgeable, etc. as a heroic "bard" but is less likely to get involved
in heroic activities (rather, he`s less likely to survive such things)
because he can get killed more easily.

4. I haven`t written this aspect of the system up yet, but I`ve never been
satisfied with how bloodtheft works--even in the original BR
materials. Using vitality/wound I have a few ideas on how to make that work.

IMHO, bloodtheft does no physical damage beyond that of being mortally
wounded by a strike through the heart (as if that isn`t enough). A
critically wounded, magically held or unconscious character (for
example) is unable to prevent such a killing blow. Critically wounded is
defined as having less than one-third of their life|wound points
remaining.

As a side issue, the level-drain of vampires, wights, life-stealing
swords etc, does not drain levels but PERMANENTLY reduces a characters
wound points (in addition to any actual damage or loss of hit points). A
Vampire would reduce a characters maximum wound points by two on a
successful life-draining attack. Any character drained to 0 in such
manner becomes undead ... yada yada yada...(you know the drill).

When I get the stuff on bloodtheft written up and perhaps more information
on NPC classes that directly relates to BR material I`ll post that (or ask
Arjan to put it up on BR.net since it will be more directly BR related
then) but in the meantime I`d be interested in comments on the system as
presented. Here`s the link:

http://www22.brinkster.com/geeman/

I`ll leave that up for a while--until I find something else I`d rather have
up there....

Gary


Regular Combat:

During combat any character under attack will be taking damage to
their Hit Points. If a character has his Hit Points brought to 0,
they begin to take Wound damage. If a characters Hit Points is
reduced to 0, the character is in serious danger of being maimed or
killed. A character that remains in combat with 0 Hit Points and is
later attacked will deduct all damage from their Wounds until those
also reach 0 - at that point the character is dying. If their Wounds
are greater than their constitution modifier then they are dead.


Two 7th level warriors slugging it out are more likely to inflict
serious damage, and inflict it more quickly, than two first level mages
- yet both are approximately evenly matched to their opponents. While
total hit points are an absolute measure of luck, skill, experience in
combat when two opponents square off the values are relative. Thus a
character will take strike damage to their hit points only if they have
a relatively higher current hit point total, otherwise they take an
actual wound.

This has very real consequences in terms of fantasy melee tactics:
(i) You can`t "wear down" strong single opponents without taking
casualties in real terms - people will get hurt.
(ii) A single high level character will not exhaust their hit points in
a drawn-out battle of attrition with an opponent of similar combat
measure.

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[geeman]

A few points regarding the vitality/wound point system that I`m not sure
were clear from the post introducing the changes or from later discussion:

1. There is no saving throw required when one takes wound damage. The
effects are automatic and can only be changed by healing the
damage. Rolling the saving throw for the damage always struck me as a bit
of an odd game mechanic and it seems like something that would slow down play.

2. There`s a fairly minor, but significant change to the proposed system in
that being reduced to 0 wound points is NOT fatal. There is no -10 rule,
but if you take a look at the table on the effects of damage you`ll see
that both vitality points and wound points must be reduced to 0 in order to
kill a character. Now that might not seem a big difference from the
standard V/W system since characters are generally killed by wound damage
after their vitality points have been reduced to 0 first, but it does
address the issue with the "lucky critical" hit from a creature. Unless
the victim`s vitality points have been reduced, most heroic characters can
only be knocked unconscious by such an attack. Any foe capable of
delivering a critical blow that would kill a character (by reducing both WP
and VP to 0) would be capable of delivering the same blow as standard
damage and killing the character.

3. I was thinking I`d combine this system with a 2d10 roll rather than d20
for attacks, which would make those critical hits less likely.

Laters,
Gary

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[kgauck]

Gary writes
> 2. There`s a fairly minor, but significant change to the proposed system in
> that being reduced to 0 wound points is NOT fatal.

Actually, its my experience that such systems have a system shock/stabilization
roll when wounds reach zero. Characters might stabilize, die, or remain in
shock.

Kenneth Gauck
kgauck@mchsi.com

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[geeman]

At 09:55 PM 6/6/2003 +0000, Kenneth Gauck wrote:

> > 2. There`s a fairly minor, but significant change to the proposed system in
> > that being reduced to 0 wound points is NOT fatal.
>
>Actually, its my experience that such systems have a system
>shock/stabilization
>roll when wounds reach zero. Characters might stabilize, die, or remain in
>shock.

In the system I`m proposing, 0 wound points = unconscious. One of the
things I`ve never really care for in D&D is the almost binary nature of
life and death. People should get knocked out a lot more often than the
system would portray--particularly heroic types.

Another reason I did it that was is because the -10 rule always struck as
being a sort of half-assed way of representing a dying state that only
works if one thinks of dying as being like a rocket launch count down, so I
wanted to do away with that too. Wound points pretty well replace the 10
hit points of the -10 rule, and instead of counting round by round I`d
rather something like the optional system of being "comatose" if one is
reduced to both 0 wound and 0 vitality and not killed outright.

One could still use the -10 rules for that system pretty easily if one wanted.

Gary

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Peter Lubke]

On Sat, 2003-06-07 at 08:42, Gary wrote:
At 09:55 PM 6/6/2003 +0000, Kenneth Gauck wrote:

> > 2. There`s a fairly minor, but significant change to the proposed system in
> > that being reduced to 0 wound points is NOT fatal.
>
>Actually, its my experience that such systems have a system
>shock/stabilization
>roll when wounds reach zero. Characters might stabilize, die, or remain in
>shock.

In the system I`m proposing, 0 wound points = unconscious. One of the
things I`ve never really care for in D&D is the almost binary nature of
life and death. People should get knocked out a lot more often than the
system would portray--particularly heroic types.

Gygax did NOT intend that, in fact if you read the original material
(and the 1st Ed AD&D DMG - see page 82) you will find it explicitly
stated so. Zero hit points represents the inability of the character to
continue combat. For Monsters/NPCs at such a point they will simply be
unconscious, surrender or flee, unless noted differently (e.g. bears).
Beings at zero hit points may be immediately slain (e.g. stabbed through
the heart), captured etc. It even recommends what to do if PC parties
always kill their opponents at such a point - i.e. opponents begin to
fight with greater ferocity, increased morale (fanatic) knowing that
it`s a win or die situation.

It has been PLAYERS not the system that failed to distinguish the
non-binary nature. (and the editor/author of 2e AD&D) The -10 "rule" in
2e was an extraordinary mangle by a bunch of editors that understood
nothing at all about the original intent or mechanism. Until the evil
publishing empire put its foot down there were some quite unflattering
(but IMO very valid) criticisms of their "lightweight" experience.

Another reason I did it that was is because the -10 rule always struck as
being a sort of half-assed way of representing a dying state that only
works if one thinks of dying as being like a rocket launch count down, so I
wanted to do away with that too. Wound points pretty well replace the 10
hit points of the -10 rule, and instead of counting round by round I`d
rather something like the optional system of being "comatose" if one is
reduced to both 0 wound and 0 vitality and not killed outright.

One could still use the -10 rules for that system pretty easily if one wanted.

Gary

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[geeman]

At 10:32 AM 6/8/2003 +1000, Peter Lubke wrote:

>>In the system I`m proposing, 0 wound points = unconscious. One of the
>>things I`ve never really care for in D&D is the almost binary nature of
>>life and death. People should get knocked out a lot more often than the
>>system would portray--particularly heroic types.
>
>Gygax did NOT intend that, in fact if you read the original material
>(and the 1st Ed AD&D DMG - see page 82) you will find it explicitly
>stated so. Zero hit points represents the inability of the character to
>continue combat. For Monsters/NPCs at such a point they will simply be
>unconscious, surrender or flee, unless noted differently (e.g. bears).
>Beings at zero hit points may be immediately slain (e.g. stabbed through
>the heart), captured etc. It even recommends what to do if PC parties
>always kill their opponents at such a point - i.e. opponents begin to
>fight with greater ferocity, increased morale (fanatic) knowing that
>it`s a win or die situation.

Reflecting Gygax`s original intention may or may not be a valuable thing to
do--but it`s not really my goal. It`s certainly not what I`m trying to do
with a vitality/wound point system. I just don`t find the same subtleties
that you see in Gygax`s 1e rules. The mangling of later writers were IMO
improvements upon the vague 1e system--particularly where things like the
-10 rule were concerned. If I go play in EGG`s game I`ll do things his way
(if he DMs.) Otherwise, I`ll take his stuff under advisement. If I were
to rank game designers whose opinions I value his name would appear on the
list--but it`d be somewhere in the middle double digits range.

Gary

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[kgauck]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Gary" <geeman@SOFTHOME.NET>
Sent: Friday, June 06, 2003 5:42 PM


> In the system I`m proposing, 0 wound points = unconscious. One of the
> things I`ve never really care for in D&D is the almost binary nature of
> life and death. People should get knocked out a lot more often than the
> system would portray--particularly heroic types.

Well, I`m going by Star Wars here, because its the only d20 I have which
spells out the wound system, and it seems to do that, It says, "If your
wound points drop to 0, your character is unconcious and dying. You must
immediatly make a Fortitude saving throw against a DC 10. If the save
fails, the character dies." You make this check every hour until you fail
(DC 10 + 1 per hour of unconciousness), succeed by 10 or more (then you`re
stable), or someone uses the Heal skill (DC 15) or healing magic.

So, I am I right to read that instead of "unconcious and dying" you`d rather
go with just unconcious?

Kenneth Gauck
kgauck@mchsi.com

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[geeman]

At 10:00 AM 6/9/2003 -0500, you wrote:

>So, I am I right to read that instead of "unconcious and dying" you`d rather
>go with just unconcious?

Yeah, that`s right. I did that for two reasons. First, to do away with
the "whammy" of the one-kill critical hit, which is most people`s objection
to the vitality/wound system--myself included. Second, in order to have a
more articulated system of effects for damage. There`s a tweaked list of
categories for damage in that vitality/wound document that covers most of
the conditions caused by various types and amounts of damage. 0 vitality =
fatigued, 0 wound = unconscious. I also added a condition, injured, and
made the effects of fatigue and exhaustion a cumulative process rather than
a pair of more dire conditions per the 3e/D20 rules. That means the
"fatigued-injured-exhausted" conditions have a total effect of -6 to
strength and dexterity (-2 from each condition) plus various effects based
on the condition; cannot run or charge (fatigue) moves at half normal speed
(exhaustion) and makes only partial actions (injured.) Each of these
conditions can occur independent of one another in combat. Well, one has
to be fatigued in order to be exhausted, but that`s kind of the point....

So let`s say the lucky critical that everyone always worries about sneaks
in and 12 points of damage to a character with 10 wound points and 8
vitality points. That character would be unconscious because his wound
points were reduced to 0. The remaining 2 points of damage would reduce
his 8 vitality points to 6. That character is injured (wound points
reduced) so he suffers -2 to str and dex and can only make partial actions,
but since he`s out that doesn`t much matter until he wakes, a DC 25
Fortitude save per round. Since the DC of that Fortitude is so high most
characters will remain out for a while, many may not be able to wake on
their own. I think I`ll change that check to DC 20, though, just to give
low level characters a shot at it.

Let`s say that same character was struck by a lucky critical hit that did 6
wound points of damage rather than 12. According to that document he is
not fatigued (0 vitality) nor exhausted (0 vitality + wound damage) but
injured. In the SW vitality/wound system this character would be fatigued
(-2 to str & dex) and has to make a fortitude save to avoid
unconsciousness, but in this system there is no roll to avoid
unconsciousness. Injured (having suffered wound damage) does mean that he
can make only partial actions. The character is "shot in the leg or
shoulder" and must choose to run or fight. He can no longer do both. (He
could make a partial charge action, though.) He still has vitality points
left, however, so he can survive on the battlefield, albeit in a weakened
state.

If that character was hit by an attack that does 8 points of standard
damage his vitality would be reduced to 0. His wound points have not be
effected yet, so he is fatigued, -2 to strength and dex, can no longer run
or make charge attacks and, of course, all subsequent damage is attributed
to wound points.

An attack on that same character that did 10 points of standard damage
would reduce his 8 vitality points to 0 and his 10 wound points to 8. That
character is now fatigued (0 vitality) injured (wound points reduced) and
exhausted (0 vitality, wound points reduced) so his overall condition is -6
to str and dex, he cannot run or charge, moves at half his normal speed and
he can make only partial actions. Given the way combat works this is the
most likely scenario.

It`s a more articulated and progressive thing than the standard Star Wars
(or other) wound system. In effect, I think it`s somewhere between hit
points and the vitality/wound points of WotC.

A couple of notes about this system that I think should be mentioned or
reiterated in order to get the proper context.

1. I`m thinking of combining this with a 2d10 roll rather than 1d20 for
attacks to get a simple curve of results, which will wind up making
critical hits much more rare.

2. The system is also combined with a set of rules regarding access to
vitality and wound points based on the "heroic" or "common" condition of
the character. That heroic/common system makes vitality and wound points a
bit more flexible and ties them in with levelling up.

3. I`m doing away with the -10 rule and replacing it with a system of
"comatose" rules (also noted in that document) but one could still use the
-10 rule if one preferred. Wound points AND -10 seems awful generous, but
that kind of thing is up to the DM.

4. One other tweak that I`m considering that I think most people will
object to at first is that I`m going to do away with the constitution bonus
to vitality points. I fully expect players to howl about this at first,
but since I`m making it a universal change (nobody`s con effects vitality
points, so their opponents will have the same stats) it really isn`t
unbalancing. Because people like to have big numbers for their stats,
however, I expect this to be one of those things that people have trouble
getting used to.

"I had 48 hit points, now I have 40 vitality points... this sucks."

"Yeah, but you also have 11 wound points. Besides, the creatures that you
encounter will have their vitality points reduced as well, so you`re not
really less powerful in relation to the actual templates and ability scores
of other creatures.... Your constitution just no longer has a greater than
normal effect on your character`s overall stats."

A few months ago I wrote up a description of the effects of ability scores
on character class features, and coined the phrases "multipler" vs "flat"
bonuses for the ability score modifiers. Constitution has a "multiplier"
bonus on hit points in 3e/D20 in that the modifier is multiplied by
experience level to get a cumulative increase in hit points. Dexterity, on
the other hand, has a flat bonus to AC in that it is added only
once. There`s no real reason that that needs to be the case. One could
have to opposite. Hit points might never change, but AC could increase to
the point where characters became effectively out of the EL of one
another. It would be weird, but it would be a different shade of the same
issue. However, the mix of multiplier and flat bonuses is something that
I`m finding increasingly difficult to justify, so I`m doing away with the
multipliers. In the long run I don`t think it will really be that big a
problem. In this case, using a vitality/wound point system constitution
still gives a flat bonus (to wound points) but the multiplier function of
constitution will no longer be in effect.

I still haven`t quite figured out how I want to do away with the
intelligence modifier to skill points--or if I should at all since it has
less of an effect overall on combat than con/hit points. We`ll see. I`ll
have to playtest this a bit.

Gary

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[kgauck]

I rather like the real possibility of the one hit kill threat. Its
probabaly my central reason for abandoning hit points.

Kenneth Gauck
kgauck@mchsi.com

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[geeman]

At 06:09 PM 6/9/2003 -0500, you wrote:

>I rather like the real possibility of the one hit kill threat. Its
>probabaly my central reason for abandoning hit points.

You could still use the system and replace "unconscious" with "dead" pretty
easily. There`s still the other tweaks regarding fatigued, exhausted and
injured.

Gary

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.