[BIRTHRIGHT] Vitality/Wound Points foBR.

[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.