Combat Changes

[Cargus10]

I'm toying with these as house rules, and wanted to get people's opinions on how well they might (or might not) work in practice. For reference, the campaign is going to have roughly "Dark Ages" technology, so any armor over DEF 6 will be pretty much unheard of, other than helmets which may get DEF 7. I will be using hit locations, impairment, and disabling, as well as some form of bleeding rules (though maybe something requiring a bit less bookkeeping than the stock rules - still thinking about that).

 

1. Armor gets double its DEF vs. STUN. This has 2 effects I like. First, it lessens the problem with lots of unconscious opponents that have to be given the coup de grace. Second, it makes armor a bit better vis-a-vis Combat Luck.

 

2. I like the idea that fighting ability is more a result of training than just natural talent. So instead of CV = DEX/3, I'm thinking of making the base CV = DEX/5. The same would apply for ECV, in the very rare instances that ego combat would occur.

 

3. I'm going to completely ignore regular END, as it rarely makes sense to worry about in a Heroic campaign (at least in my experience). I *will* worry about LTE, for cumulative effects of spellcasting, fighting, overland travel, etc.

 

What do y'all think? All comments and opinions are welcome!

[Manic Typist]

Re: Combat Changes

 

Hm, well for a "Dark Ages" esque game I think normal END would be especially appropriate. I've done some mock fighting myself (Dagorhir, anyone?) and a significant part of winning a fight is managing your energy. Still, if you don't want to do it, more power to you.

 

I also like Combat Luck, a lot. Regardless- you could just rule that anyone who gets knocked out is out the fight- either dead or unconscious long enough that the group has plenty of time to decide what to do with them.

[Cargus10]

Re: Combat Changes

 

I agree that in real life, not getting exhausted is important. It just seems that in every heroic game I've run, this never happens. I've toyed with not allowing a post-12 recovery phase and forcing a players to take a recovery as needed, but...hmmm....not sure it's worth the extra bookkeeping.

 

I don't dislike Combat Luck at all, but it sure is popular . I mostly wanted to avoid the whole "slaying of the fallen" thing that is so NOT a trope of fantasy, even the more gritty fantasy.

[sbarron]

Re: Combat Changes

 

I like all three ideas! #2 and #3 seem to better simulate what you're looking for, and I think its great that you willing to tweak the game to suit your tastes.

 

#1 does this as well, but I wonder if its going far enough? My experience with HERO combat has been that characters tend to get knocked out by one big shot to the Head, Stomach, or Vitals. STUN just never seemed to get nickled-and-dimed down to zero, because a big shot would always works it way at some point. Given this, I'm not sure doubling the STUN def. of armor will really make a big difference in the number of knockouts. It will help, certainly. But HERO hit locations being what they are, x4 and x5 STUN multipliers make knockouts a real possibility in every combat. Maybe switching to a straight x3 STUN multiplier, or maybe even x2, would work better for you.

 

Personally, I might try something like x2 STUN multiplier for every hit location except the head, which I'd make x4 (since getting hit in the head is really the most likely way for someone to get knocked out, isn't it?). I'd keep the BODY hit locations multipliers as is.

 

Upping the STUN defence might do exactly what you're looking for...honestly, I've never tried it. But, keep some other options in mind in case that doesn't have the effect you want. And please come back and let us know how these house rules work out for you! You're group is like guinea pigs. They can get these rules tested upon them for the greater good.

[Cargus10]

Re: Combat Changes

 

Y'know, I think you are on to something - why didn't I think of simply reducing the STUN multiples for body hits? I know what they are trying to simulate - the shock of the blow, the "getting the wind knocked out of you", etc. But isn't that already sort of simulated with the rule for being CON stunned? Yeah, me like....1/2x STUN for hands and feet, 1x STUN for arms and legs, 2x STUN for body, 3x STUN for vitals, and 4x STUN for head. I think I'll try that instead and see how it goes.

[Edsel]

Re: Combat Changes

 

I remember watching several shows (on the History Channel and such) that claimed that the problem you describe was actually very common. People in heavy armor were fairly hard to kill. Often they would be beaten sensless and then an enemy would use a dagger or stillito to deliver a killing attack between the joints of the armor. This was also how knights would often be captured and ransomed rather than killed.

[Cargus10]

Re: Combat Changes

 

Indeed, this is true. But in this campaign there is no plate or field plate, and while there are knights, the whole ransom concept isn't very well established as yet save for the recognized lords. Heck, below the nobles and a few of the more wealthy merchants, there isn't even a real "money" economy in my game - a lot of folks still use barter as no one trustworthy is really in the coin minting business yet. Old empire coins are known to be good, sure, but there aren't a whole lot of those around as most were lost in the cataclysm that destroyed the Empire.

 

But, maybe the "as is" rules will do fine for people in lighter armor. I plan to run some simulated combats when I get a chance this week and see how things change when I tweak various parameters.

[sbarron]

Re: Combat Changes

 

Of course, just because a situation is common in real life doesn't mean you want to have it in your game. I mean, how many Orks did Legolas knock out in the Lord of the Rings trilogy, and how many did he kill outright during combat?

 

This always comes down to the type of game you want to play and the genre you want to simulate. If you don't want your PCs to have to "clean up" the battlefield by dispatching all the knocked out bad guys, then reducing the effect of stun can help do that. If you want to simulate real life combat in 11th century Europe, then you probably need to develop rules for infections and disease killing far more soldiers after the battle than actually died on the field...by a large margin.

 

Both totally valid "rule settings," dialed in to simulate what you want. But providing a very different game for the GM and the players.

[Cargus10]

Re: Combat Changes

 

Agreed. Total realism is something that you really can't simulate with any system that is remotely playable (I cite the old game "Aftermath" as an example. We used to say, "after the math you get to play...a little). Even if you could, most folks wouldn't want to play it.

 

I want a "gritty" feel to my game, but I don't want the PC's to have to go around killing the wounded. I also don't want to have to make every puncture to the abdomen a death sentence, as it was in real life (can you say peritonitis? Sure you can...). So, there will be at least some magical healing available, for example.

 

I want to have a somewhat grim setting, but I also want the ability for the PC's to be *heroes* by gawd, and that means putting themselves in harm's way, as well as not routinely killing downed enemies because they can't be burdened with prisoners.

[Markdoc]

Re: Combat Changes

 

I want to have a somewhat grim setting' date=' but I also want the ability for the PC's to be *heroes* by gawd, and that means putting themselves in harm's way, as well as not routinely killing downed enemies because they can't be burdened with prisoners.[/quote']

 

My approach is that given the very real risk of infection and the fact that magical healing is only available to the select few, most NPCs who have been in a fight, and end up knocked out and down 4-5 BOD will crawl off somewhere and heal up - for several weeks. They are certainly not going to spring up and attack anyone - still less the guys who just butchered their way through 4 times their number of soldiers.

 

As a result, my players don't bother with finishing off the wounded: except in very special circumstances - and the very fact that rarely they have to, simply highlights the fact that these are unusually desperate measures.

 

cheers, Mark

[sbarron]

Re: Combat Changes

 

I woke up this morning realizing that reducing the STUN effects and leaving everything else the same will have some unintended side effects. The big one I think is that it will take several hits to kill even the most pedestrian characters. Given armor in the 4-6 DEF range is available, and 2d6 killing attacks are the norm, it could easily take 5-7 hits to bring somone down to negative BODY, and thats assuming that you mix in a couple of shots to the head/vitals. Combat could get very...long.

 

The high STUN multipliers tended to shorten combat, because you could usually get a knockout with 2-3 hits, even if it took many more to actually kill something. But with knockouts being less likely, you're left with having to do 20 BODY to take your average villian down, while on average only doing 1-3 BODY per attack. That might really reduce the fun.

 

Well, just something else to think about while doing your mock battles.

[sbarron]

Re: Combat Changes

 

My approach is that given the very real risk of infection and the fact that magical healing is only available to the select few, most NPCs who have been in a fight, and end up knocked out and down 4-5 BOD will crawl off somewhere and heal up - for several weeks. They are certainly not going to spring up and attack anyone - still less the guys who just butchered their way through 4 times their number of soldiers.

 

As a result, my players don't bother with finishing off the wounded: except in very special circumstances - and the very fact that rarely they have to, simply highlights the fact that these are unusually desperate measures.

 

cheers, Mark

Everytime a thread like this gets started, Markdoc comes in and says he runs his games this way, and then I chip in and say that I do the same thing. So...well, I do the same thing.

 

I don't do it because of infections or the scarcity of magical healing, though. I just think that most villians don't want to hurt the PCs bad enough to die over it. So, a decent shot to head/vitals/stomach and the badguy is done. A couple hits to the chest or legs and the badguy is done. He's had his fill and just wants to get home alive. And if that means playing dead or begging for his life, so be it.

 

The trick with making this system work is to not have badguys get back up and threaten the PCs after they have been out/down. Can they come back another day? Sure. But the first time you have a baddie get back into the fight after being knocked out, the PCs are going to start slitting throats left-and-right. And I guess you can't really blame them. They probably cut their teeth in D&D, killing kobold babies for the experience. That's a hard habit to break!

 

I know. My name is sbarron, and I'm a recovering D&D addict. Not inlcuding a brief relapse after 3.0 came out, I've been sober since 1990. I've still got my 4th edition Hero System Rulebook on the shelf.

[Markdoc]

Re: Combat Changes

 

One way to deal with that is to do as I do

 

That is, I have no hard caps in my game: the result is that after a couple of years play, I have players who can either dish out 3d6 HKA if they max out their damage or hit OCVs in the 12-13 range if they max out OCV. The result is that very often fights tend to end with someone getting something pointy in an unarmoured bit. That can be fatal or severely wounding depending on target and hit location. It also puts a high premium on block/dodge and tactics.

 

More typically, damage is around 2d6 and OCV 8-10, but even with an average of 7 BOD, a hit to unarmoured regions is still going to inflict serious harm.

 

In this setting armour is still very, very important - but skill is more important.

 

Tactics play a role too. In a recent fight, a PC was crossing blades with an NPC. Since there was fair deal of blocking going on, the PC had all their levels in OCV - a serious mistake when the NPC feinted, the PC blocked an attack that wasn't actually intended to hit - and the suddenly DCV5 PC got a haymaker'ed kick in his unarmoured 13's the next phase (Block at -2 not good enough!)

 

cheers, Mark

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Combat Changes

 

I woke up this morning realizing that reducing the STUN effects and leaving everything else the same will have some unintended side effects. The big one I think is that it will take several hits to kill even the most pedestrian characters. Given armor in the 4-6 DEF range is available, and 2d6 killing attacks are the norm, it could easily take 5-7 hits to bring somone down to negative BODY, and thats assuming that you mix in a couple of shots to the head/vitals. Combat could get very...long.

 

The high STUN multipliers tended to shorten combat, because you could usually get a knockout with 2-3 hits, even if it took many more to actually kill something. But with knockouts being less likely, you're left with having to do 20 BODY to take your average villian down, while on average only doing 1-3 BODY per attack. That might really reduce the fun.

 

Well, just something else to think about while doing your mock battles.

 

One thing I always like to consider in bumping up the lethality is the impact on PC mortality. It's hard to run a long-term epic campaign when you have to replace a PC every session or two due to combat lethality. If you exempt the PC's from the lethality (whether by different rules for NPC's or making healing/resurrection more readily available to PC's), the setting loses its grittiness pretty quickly.

[Cargus10]

Re: Combat Changes

 

All food for thought. Some things a bit unique about my campaign-to-be:

 

1. Armor above DEF 3-4 is expensive and hard to come by.

2. Mostly no one except PC's and main baddies will have any Combat Luck - I figure that it's a pretty rare thing in general.

3. Disabling & impairment rules are in effect.

 

So that might make a difference. Anyhow, I still need to run my mock combats. I'll post the results here for the general amusement of the natives

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Combat Changes

 

You may find this document useful:

 

Lethality Options