Aaaaaaaargh! My arm! MY ARM!

[TheGeometer]

Dungeons and Dragons may simulate many aspects of warfare, such as flanking, surprise, and performing a bull rush, but the mechanics of damage just don't make much sense. By level 20, it takes hundreds of direct arrow hits, even critical hits, or multiple shots from cannons, to take down a single unarmored warrior. Here's an experimental idea to add sense to it.

Every creature can be divided into 3 parts: Head, limbs, and body. Some may have more limbs or heads, and some may have none. All creatures using this system have triple their normal HP, but instead of a full HP, creatures using this system have a different HP value for each body part, in a ratio of 1:2:4, with all extra HP going to the body. Thus, a human that would ordinarily have 100 HP would have 23 HP in the head, 46 in each limb, and 93 in the body. A 12-headed Hydra with 140 HP would get 24 HP per head, 48 per leg, and 108 in the body (killing the heads would replace the sunder attempt when using this change).

Aside from separate HP values, these body parts each have different AC values. Since hitting the body of a creature is harder than hitting any of it randomly, the body gains +2 to AC. Each limb gets +4, and the head gets +8.

Now for aiming. You may specify which of the enemy's body parts you are aiming for whenever you are about to shoot an arrow or swing a sword. Make a roll against the modified AC value of that area, and if you succeed, you make a clean hit and deal damage to its HP. Optionally, if you miss by 2 or less, you may still land a hit on another body part. Roll randomly between the body parts that remain to determine which is hit, and deal half damage to it. For spells, touch and ranged touch attacks work the same way, but an area of effect spell deals damage to each part according to the same 1:2:4 ratio.

Finally, the effects. A creature that falls below 0 HP in all of its bodies or all of its heads falls unconcious. A limb that falls below 0 HP cannot pick up objects or supply the somatic components of spells. A creature with a dead ambulatory limb has its movement reduced by an amount inversely proportional to the number of ambulatory limbs the creature has, so a human with a dead leg moves at 1/2 speed, and a horse with a dead leg moves at 3/4 speed. Always round up to the nearest 5 ft.

In this system, there are no critical hits. x3 weapons add a damage die when they hit a head or limb, x4 weapons add 2, etc. This simulates their ability to deal more damage when hitting "critical" weak spots on the body. Similarly, weapons with a higher threat range hit the weak spots of the body more easily. Ignore 1 point of AC bonus on the head and 1/2 a point of AC bonus on the limbs (rounded up) for each point of threat range the weapon has over 1. A vorpal blade will only cut off a head if you aim for one and roll a natural 20. Lesser versions of the vorpal enhancement can be made that chop off only limbs.

Kind of a random idea, and probably done before, but I just wanted to throw it out there to see what people thought. From a flavor standpoint, it makes a lot more sense (and it's more fun, with the players roleplaying the loss of their limbs). Any comments or considerations?

[littha]

So your system both makes fights take longer to resolve and makes melee characters even worse than they currently are?

[TheGeometer]

So your system both makes fights take longer to resolve and makes melee characters even worse than they currently are?

On the contrary. If you can land a clean hit on someone's head, you'll probably kill him, and if you'd rather target his body, which is the most similar in mechanics to the system already in place, they'll usually have a bit less HP. So, this will make fights take less time, and give melee characters even more ways to beat up their enemies. The only aspect that this system complicates is keeping track of HP, but juggling different values on a character sheet should be nothing new to most D&D players.

[littha]

Except that some enemies were capable of taking you out in one-two hits anyway and now it is even more likley that your fighter gets his head taken off his shoulders by a bunch of kobolds.

[TheGeometer]

I highly doubt that. At +8 to AC, it's usually a terrible idea to try to decapitate someone at low levels. Besides, this system makes the Kobolds and the other things the Fighter faces that much easier to beat as well. It's not like the Fighter is getting the short end of the stick, and if the party wizard takes an arrow to the face it could (and this is truly shocking) hurt him really badly. If anything, the fragile casters would suffer the most from this change, as their HP is low enough already. An average level 10 wizard with 14 con (46 HP) would have 10 HP in the head. If anyone should worry about the Kobolds, it's him.

[Bauglir]

Tracking multiple hit point totals, particularly by dividing base HP into chunks that aren't based on multiples of 10, is a bit much in terms of bookkeeping. The problem is that hit points change at the table with relative frequency. How does healing get divided up? How do temporary hit points affect the whole thing? Does fast healing and  regeneration apply to each individual piece, or just one? Honestly, HP works just fine for what it is (an abstraction) as long as you're willing to accept a few consequences that violate common sense (which is acceptable, because no human with medieval technology could conceivably take down a dragon, but we expect our high level characters to do exactly that).

It's interesting, in principle, to make hit points more meaningful. I don't think body locations are a good approach, though. Also, I don't think you outlined what happens when a head is reduced to 0 (presumably, death, but you should include rules for undead or other creatures unaffected by headlessness if you're set on this).

EDIT: Also, if you like Called Shots, we already have rules for them. They're called Power Attack, though I no longer vouch for the balance of that thread, just that the ideas presented are useful.

[Tarkisflux]

Just to make sure I didn't miss something, you're proposing that when you attack someone with a weapon, you have to aim at a particular area, all of which are harder to hit than their normal AC. And if you miss by 1 or 2, instead of hitting the part you were targeting it gets randomly assigned at half damage. But if you hit, you target a reduced hit point pool and possibly inflict debilitating conditions on the target. That about right?

[littha]

Ok. We will go with level 3 because that +8 AC is going to matter even less at higher levels and lower than that can get you dead on a lucky hit anyway.

Wolf skeletons are a decent Cr 2 monster (so we could use a small group of them) they have +2 to hit with their bite.

Lets say our fighter is going all out defence, Full plate and tower shield with 12 DEX, he has 23 AC. The wolves hit him on 20s. They aim for the head and still hit him on 20s. Might as well go for the head.

Now we look at the wizard, he has no armor and 12 dex for an AC of 11, the wolves hit him on 9s or aim for the head and hit his 19 AC on 17s. They are much better off just going for the body.

At level 10 or so you start to get monsters that will laugh at your AC anyway.

Lets say a Cauchemar nightmare (because it was the first CR 10/11 monster I came across. It has +23 to hit and a level 10 character isnt likley to have more than 25 AC unless you are throwing your entire WBL into AC. That +8 AC means it will hit you in the head 55% of the time anyway and even if it misses the head its likley to strike your body and is liable to decapitate your fighter rather rapidly.

Level 10 wizard shouldn't be getting hit anyway.

[TheGeometer]

Tracking multiple hit point totals, particularly by dividing base HP into chunks that aren't based on multiples of 10, is a bit much in terms of bookkeeping. The problem is that hit points change at the table with relative frequency. How does healing get divided up? How do temporary hit points affect the whole thing? Does fast healing and  regeneration apply to each individual piece, or just one? Honestly, HP works just fine for what it is (an abstraction) as long as you're willing to accept a few consequences that violate common sense (which is acceptable, because no human with medieval technology could conceivably take down a dragon, but we expect our high level characters to do exactly that).

It's interesting, in principle, to make hit points more meaningful. I don't think body locations are a good approach, though. Also, I don't think you outlined what happens when a head is reduced to 0 (presumably, death, but you should include rules for undead or other creatures unaffected by headlessness if you're set on this).

These are actually some good points. For anything that affects HP, it's safe to multiply it by 3 and split it into that 1:2:4 ratio unless otherwise specified; it keeps everything nice and balanced. As for the loss of a head or a body, you fall unconscious (your head doesn't get removed; it's more of a serious blow or injury), and the HP of the body part reduced to 0 drains until death at -10. For undead and other monsters that wouldn't mind the loss of a head, a head attack could cause blindness, but only the loss of body HP will kill them.

As for the meaning of the system, it's really just a thought experiment. Though the regular HP system works well, this provides more realism, more methods of combat, more ways to win and lose, and the satisfying ability to actually slay something when you run it through with a greatsword.

But if you hit, you target a reduced hit point pool and possibly inflict debilitating conditions on the target. That about right?

Yes, that's what generally happens when you stab someone.

Ok. We will go with level 3 because that +8 AC is going to matter even less at higher levels and lower than that can get you dead on a lucky hit anyway.

Wolf skeletons are a decent Cr 2 monster (so we could use a small group of them) they have +2 to hit with their bite.

Lets say our fighter is going all out defence, Full plate and tower shield with 12 DEX, he has 23 AC. The wolves hit him on 20s. They aim for the head and still hit him on 20s. Might as well go for the head.

This is another good point. Do you think needing another roll to confirm a head or limb shot, like a critical, could fix the problem? Perhaps failing this second roll could shift the hit back to the body, rather than a miss on the original attack...

[littha]

More rolls bogs down combat even more.

[Tarkisflux]

But if you hit, you target a reduced hit point pool and possibly inflict debilitating conditions on the target. That about right?

Yes, that's what generally happens when you stab someone.

You know, ignoring most of an attempt at clarification and only responding to the last bit with an attempt at being pithy is pretty lame. It's also not pithy in this case, since stabbing someone could have nothing to do with a subset pile of hit points or a debilitating condition other than death (see normal combat rules and critical existence failure). Since you didn't bother to respond to the rest of it I will assume that I wasn't missing some redeeming factor and move on.

This is bad for the edge case success rule abuse littha has pointed out, because of the increased difficulty in hitting a target (and thus generally reduced damage overall), the increased difficulty in hitting the same pool of hp as your allies (and thus generally lengthening combat), and because it doesn't compare well with regular power attacking with the same effective penalty to hit. It might make attack roll decisions more meaningful, though I strongly doubt it would function that way in a group setting where you were trying to stack damage, but it's not worth the increased complexity or combat time.

[TheGeometer]

You know, ignoring most of an attempt at clarification and only responding to the last bit with an attempt at being pithy is pretty lame. It's also not pithy in this case, since stabbing someone could have nothing to do with a subset pile of hit points or a debilitating condition other than death (see normal combat rules and critical existence failure). Since you didn't bother to respond to the rest of it I will assume that I wasn't missing some redeeming factor and move on.

This is bad for the edge case success rule abuse littha has pointed out, because of the increased difficulty in hitting a target (and thus generally reduced damage overall), the increased difficulty in hitting the same pool of hp as your allies (and thus generally lengthening combat), and because it doesn't compare well with regular power attacking with the same effective penalty to hit. It might make attack roll decisions more meaningful, though I strongly doubt it would function that way in a group setting where you were trying to stack damage, but it's not worth the increased complexity or combat time.

To be honest, I actually didn't mean any offense. Your post seemed to just reiterate what I had posted, so I assumed that it was some sort of subtle satire on the complexity of the system. I have a tendency to read too much into things. I also thought that the last statement embodied the rest of what you said, so I in no way intended to ignore the rest of it. Sorry for the misunderstanding. As for the disadvantages in a group combat situation, could you give an example? I don't really follow your logic.

[Tarkisflux]

Sorry for the misunderstanding. As for the disadvantages in a group combat situation, could you give an example? I don't really follow your logic.

Fair enough. The hit point system basically works when people all target the same pool. You hit a guy a few times, and he falls down. And it doesn't matter who gets those hits in. Stack enough damage on someone, and they go down.

But with this, you have more options to take down the same target, and they don't stack. Attacks against someone's legs or arms might reduce their offensive ability, but they are less likely to succeed and, aside from the status condition they inflict, don't actually remove people from a fight. You'd have to break both arms or both legs or whatever to stop someone, and that's doing about as much damage as you'd need to do to the body (an easier target). And the head is a tempting target to actually remove someone from a fight, but you're substantially less likely to hit it except in edge cases. If you would hit their base AC on a 3, you could hit their body on a 5 or their head on a 11, which is actually a good deal because hitting 55% of the time against a pool 1/4 the size of the pool you could be hitting 80% of the time is a good trade. There is actually a real breakpoint for that on the bottom end (that I don't feel like solving for at present) as well as the top end if you don't drop the autosuccess rule (AC 16 - body on a 18 or head on 20, you are likely to kill them more quickly from the headshots), and outside of those ranges is makes sense to target the head all the time by yourself. But when you add in multiple party members, they have to all meet the same breakpoints or you're better off aiming for the body or their contributions are very unlikely to stack with yours.

It's basic lowest common denominator stuff, where you aim for what the party is best at even if you might be better doing something else on your own. Because if you don't do that, the whole aspect of focus fire goes away. Which would make everything take longer and reduces the benefit of you striking a different body part. It's kind of moot if you can one-shot a head I guess, but when that's done and you pick a new target you aim for whatever pool of theirs that your party has been working on, or you elect to not stack with them and attack something else. The former reduces your own attack choices based on your party's preferences and effectiveness, and the latter potentially invalidates their work entirely (head shot) or yours.

I think I've got a suggestion that should let you target body parts like you want while still hitting against the standard pool of hp, but it'll have to wait until I get back since I'm out of time.

[TheGeometer]

Sigh... yeah, I guess this is conceptually less playable than the system already in place. Why did I think adding realism to a fantasy game was a good idea, anyway? Well, at any rate, I would be interested in hearing more about your idea, Tarkisflux. Something along that line would really help this concept.

[Tarkisflux]

If you want to keep the ability to attack different body parts to disable people, you should work it into attacking the base hp pool somehow. Splitting it just doesn't work with a differentiated party, because people don't take advantage of it or their attacks don't stack with each other. So instead of that, keep normal hp and normal ACs, and rework your special attacks.

Strike A Limb: Attacking a limb requires an attack roll with a -4 penalty against the target's normal AC. Unlike most attacks, this attack does not automatically hit on a roll of natural 20. On a successful hit, the target suffers normal damage from the weapon. Note that this damage can not bring a target to less than 0 hit points. If the full damage rolled, less DR or other resistances, is greater than 50% of their current hit point total, the selected limb becomes non-functional until <insert healing condition here>. <Insert bad things about losing legs, arms, tentacles, etc. here. Consider adding a sommatic spellcasting failure chance for loss of a single arm>.

If you miss by 2 or less, the target suffers half damage instead. This damage does not impair the intended limb and is simply deducted from their current hit point total. If a natural 20 would miss the target, the target can instead take full damage from the attack, at the attacker's discression.

Sever A Head: Severring a head requires an attack roll with a -8 penalty against the target's normal AC. Unlike most attacks, this attack does not automatically hit on a roll of natural 20. On a successful hit, the target suffers normal damage from the weapon. If the full damage rolled, less DR or other resistances, is greater than 25% of their current hit point total, the creature loses its head. A creature that cannot survive without the loss of its head is immediately reduced to -10 hit points and killed. Otherwise, the creature takes damage normally and loses access to all senses that resided in the head. For most creatures, this makes them blinded and deafened. <Maybe add in a regeneration override for creatures that lose their head>.

If you miss by 4 or less, the target suffers half damage instead. This damage does remove a head and is simply deducted from their current hit point total. If a natural 20 would miss the target, the target can instead take full damage from the attack, at the attacker's discression.


The percents probably need some adjusting, and it doesn't make a lot of sense for creatures with lots of limbs or heads yet, but that's the basic idea. You still deal damage against their basic pool of hp, you just take a penalty in exchange for an attempted bonus effect. And if you miss by a bit, you're still contributing to the same pool as everyone else is, rather than a random one. Plus, since it gets easier to drop or disable someone as they take damage, you can have a fighter / barbarian come in and start taking heads off after a sneak attack or a fireball (assuming those tactics matter in your game in the first place). Or you can beat someone down, and then take off their legs and an arm or whatever without actually killing them (because it's easier to keep them as prisoners, and you could heal it eventually anyway if you needed to).

[Edit] I have been informed that this is very similar to the GURPS called shot system. In case that matters for some reason. [/Edit]

[TheGeometer]

That sounds great! That seems to me like the perfect compromise between my original idea and traditional D&D functionality. To turn this into a full-blown variant, we would need to completely rewrite the vorpal enhancement, though. And maybe some feats to make arm-chopping more optimal.

[Amechra]

The gambits here are essentially a called shot rule; the thread has a feat that gives you all the Minor ones.

Maybe generalize them out?

[Tarkisflux]

That sounds great! That seems to me like the perfect compromise between my original idea and traditional D&D functionality. To turn this into a full-blown variant, we would need to completely rewrite the vorpal enhancement, though. And maybe some feats to make arm-chopping more optimal.

I guess you could set the Vorpal enhancement such that it provided a bonus to hit and reduced the damage required when you made such a strike. And you could re-create the Sharpness enhancement to do similar things with the striking of limbs, though that's more of a removal than simply making them non-functional. I'd probably skip the sharpness thing though, and make breaking limbs a bludgeoning upgrade for impact and make vorpal an upgrade for keen. Piercing weapons can get the shaft here. Or not.

Oh, I also forgot to add in the above suggestion that this means you can keep crits as-is. Taking a penalty to lop off a head or an arm and critting works perfectly fine with the above, hence my desire to work these sorts of upgrades into crit range enhancements. Though now that I've written it all out, they're probably not necessary as requirements.

That said, I'm not sure why such a rewrite would even be necessary. Unless you wanted to directly hook into these new rules, the Vorpal enhancement can just ignore the normal damage requirement and lop off a head. I already rewrote the Vorpal enhancement over here to work better along those lines if you just wanted that. Feel free to work it out whichever way you like.

As for feats, I can't think of any feats that wouldn't just be number changers for these abilities (bonuses on maneuvers, damage percentage changes) or extremely niche (chop off extra heads with a strike). And I don't think any of those are particularly good ideas, the former because I don't like number shuffling feats at all. If I were going to do feats for these, I'd make feats to use the strikes in the first place and reduce the penalties on them to compensate for their new opportunity cost. I don't think that's what you're going for though.

[veekie]

Hmm, I wonder if turning it into an extension of Sunder rules would work...