Combat House Rules

[Galadrin]

Hi all, here are some house rules inspired by Green Ronin's new Ice and Fire RPG. Tell me what you think,
Rule 1) No more negative hit points. When you go to 0 HP, you are "defeated" (unconscious, bleeding, whatever fits the narrative). Helpless targets can still fall victim of a coup de grce maneuver.
Consequences: Character death is left more up to narrative and player tactics than unlucky dice and conspicuous GM dice-fudging. Then again, a TPK is still a TPK!
Rule 2) When a PC or important NPC takes a hit, he or she can reduce the damage to half (rounded up) and take a "wound" on a given location. You can take a wound for every 3 full points of Constitution ability score (after that, you are slain). Each wound stacks a -1 Penalty to all d20 rolls, and is an excuse for your GM to introduce complications in the narrative later on. When you are defeated (0 HP), you automatically gain 1 wound.
Consequences: Another way to make characters tougher, and introduce more decision making in combat. Does the Rogue accept the arrow hit and go unconscious, or does he spend his last wound and try to escape, knowing that any further damage will slay him?
Rule 3) Wounds take a week and a successful Constitution check to recover, else a new wound is gained. Classes with (eventual) access to divine spells (Ranger, Cleric, Druid, Paladin) can substitute a successful Wisdom check for a friend's failed Constitution check.
Rule 4) If your attack roll does not beat AC, but does beat touch AC, you hit the target's armour. Roll damage and reduce it by the target's armour bonus (to a minimum of 1).
Consequences: This balances out the now tougher PC's. If a PC has AC 16 (chainmail plus a shield) and touch AC 11 (shield), then any hit of 11 to 15 will do regular damage -5.
Rule 5) Power attack. Any character can opt to Power Attack, trading his entire BtH bonus for an equal damage bonus.
Consequences: This is like the old D&D 3e Power Attack, but without the fiddling and min-maxing of to-hit and damage bonuses. If you are a level 5 fighter, either you hit at +5 or you do damage +5.

Reactions?

[moriarty777]

Hmm... Interesting -- particularly 'Rule 2'. I'm not entirely sure how it would play out in terms of impact on gameplay. Would it make combat longer as players try and decide what to opt for? Is there a random table for the locations?

If you try this, let us know how it runs.

At any rate, thanks for sharing!

M
_________________
"You face Death itself in the form of... 1d4 Tarrasques!"

Partner to Brave Halfling Publishing
http://www.arcanacreations.com

[serleran]

I already, and always have, use #1. Only, in my games, 0 HP = dead.

Rule 2 -- Complicates the game; makes no distinctions between types of wounds -- a wound to head is more likely cause much more significant damage / loss than one to the thigh, for example; requires having some sort of hit location system, even if it is the player (not recommended) that gets to pick where the wound "goes."

Rule 3 -- Assuming #2 and no healing magic (I'd wager this would be the best way to make a better distinction between cure light wounds and cure critical, rather than simply healing more sustained damage), it is flat-out wrong as it also assumes rangers and paladins gain spells; they do not, by the rules of C&C so it is yet another houserule, and one that is not needed, though some might find it enjoyable (personally, rangers are already way badass without spells, and paladins... well, the less I say about them the better.) But, beyond that, allowing a Wisdom check from a class that has it as Prime by default just removes the need for healing magic for long-term applications; it reinforces the "healing tank" archetype that many find unappealing.

Rule 4 -- More bookkeeping and does not balance out the tougher PCs: it makes them tougher! High AC-granting armors (ie, plate mail, chain mail, etc.) require two-handed weapons or multiple dice of damage to do little, unless the roll to hit is very good, but would be required anyway with those ACs. For example: fighter with AC of 17 (touch AC of 10 -- he's wearing plate, say): on an 11-16 he takes damage rolled - 7 -- no d4 weapon can hurt him unless the weapon is magical or the opponent has a +4 damage bonus, and then, its only 1 measly point, making the prospect of a "wound" very unlikely

Rule 5 -- Would not allow it, but this is the only "balancing" factor of these proposed rules. Since it only allows BtH to be taken, decent-level fighters (4-7) will likely always take the bonus to damage, especially against weaker foes and simply obliterate whatever the encounter; rangers already get level to damage against many foes, and this just double "stacks" them -- I can see entire populations of low HD monsters no longer existing. Better use monsters with at least a 17 AC against 1st level parties now.

So, umm, I guess for C&C I just don't like the feel these changes have -- they might work, and they might be fun, but I see them as needlessly complicated and not what I would want in my game.. but that is my game. Enjoy them if you like them.

[Rigon]

Interesting ideas, however, I think that rules 1-4 just add a level of bookkeeping that I wouldn't want in my game, but they add enjoyment to yours, then add them. The 5th rule is a very simple way to incorporate "feats."

R-
_________________
Rigon o' the Lakelands, Baron of The Castles & Crusades Society
The Book of the Mind

[Turanil]

I don't like rules 4 and 5, but I see interesting potential in rules 1, 2, 3. I have always been bothered with the 9th level fighter who with but only 1hp left, can still fight, run, and climb ropes without any hindrance. Yet this should be playtested first I think.
_________________
Homebrews Wiki a list of campaign settings on the web.

[Galadrin]

Thanks for the comments everyone,

moriarty777 wrote:
Hmm... Interesting -- particularly 'Rule 2'. I'm not entirely sure how it would play out in terms of impact on gameplay. Would it make combat longer as players try and decide what to opt for? Is there a random table for the locations?

I never run any hard, fast rules in my C&C games (which is why I love the versatility of the SIEGE engine). The wounded location would probably be bargained by the GM (i.e., "I will allow you to reduce that 20 damage hit to a wound, but only if your leg is all torn up!") or decided between the GM and the player.

serleran wrote:
Rule 2 -- Complicates the game; makes no distinctions between types of wounds -- a wound to head is more likely cause much more significant damage / loss than one to the thigh, for example; requires having some sort of hit location system, even if it is the player (not recommended) that gets to pick where the wound "goes."

Essentially, each wound carries a drawback that is up to the GM. Aside from the basic -1 to rolls for each wound, the GM chooses the complication the wound introduces, which can be huge. If you get chopped in your thigh, you may have trouble escaping your foes, but if you get chopped in your head, you could fall unconscious moments later from a concussion! The latter is certainly more serious. All in all, the wound drawback should add to the narrative - not just screw characters mechanically. They aren't huge, gaping holes in the PC, but more like injuries (ranging from minor to major depending on what is convenient for the GM). I realise this is loosey-goosey, but that's definitely how I roll ; )

As for the "healing" roll Rangers et ali can make, I was imagining this more as secret medicines, healing techniques etc. The Ranger can make a splint or pultice while the Druid likely knows alchemy that can aid in recovery. Clerics and Paladins can pray for healing. I was actually thinking of allowing the Barbarian the same ability (as he seems much like a Ranger), but I'm still on the fence about that. In any case, think of it as a Secondary Skill from AD&D 2e.

And lastly, as for "armour hits" (rule 4), I don't think this will make anyone tougher, as it is a net gain in potential hits and damage, not a loss. It's true, armour hits vs things like AC 22 Dragons will be more or less discounted, and this is intentional (it is dragon scale after all). It shouldn't be more bookkeeping either, as the player knows any attack roll above 10 is an armour hit (if it's not already a full hit).

[Matthew]

I use Rule #1. As a general guide, every hit point inflicted beyond 0 equates to a 'wound level', so a character reduced to -7 has a '-7' wound, but still 0 Hit Points. Each wound level takes 5-10 days to recover from or can be cured by a healing spell of the same or greater level [You couldn't use cure light wounds to remove a level 2 wound, though when it naturally heals to level 1 you could]. Wounds left untreated are often fatal and severe wounds may have long lasting effects. Every level of wounding causes a culmative negative penalty on any character actions, and the total number of wound levels a character can endure may be dictated by constitution.

The other rules seem okay to me, though rule #4 and #5 sound as though they are set up to work together.

BTH: 5 versus AC 16

(16-25) 50% Normal Damage

(11-15) 25% Normal Damage -5

(06-10) 25% No Damage

Use Power Attack and...

16-20 25% Normal Damage +5

11-15 25% Normal Damage

06-10 50% No Damage

That's definitely a number crunching game.
_________________
It is a joyful thing indeed to hold intimate converse with a man after ones own heart, chatting without reserve about things of interest or the fleeting topics of the world; but such, alas, are few and far between.

Yoshida Kenko (1283-1350)

[Galadrin]

Matthew wrote:
That's definitely a number crunching game.

Eww, you're right. Consider that rule dropped from my future games. I hate it when players seek mechanical advantages that have little to do with advancing the narrative.

Speaking of which, does anyone know what good Head AC is? Helms confer AC to the head, which I imagine would help against falling rocks, but what else? Are there rules for called shots that I'm missing?

In any case, I like my called shots like they are in AD&D 2e, where it doesn't bestow a mechanical advantage, just a plot enhancer.

[Matthew]

Aye, you have to watch out for the way new rules interact. That was always the problem with AD&D 2e. Individual Optional Rules worked fine by themselves, the trouble only came when they were combined together. To some extent, that was the legacy of 2e that was passed onto D20 and the feat system.

When I want to use called shots, I generally use a modified 2e system. Striking a limb or head has a penalty to hit of -4, but only a roll of 16-20 indicates success, a lower roll that is also a hit is just treated as a normal hit. The armour class of the head I usually treat as equal to the normal armour class of the character, but there are exceptions. A character wearing a Great Helm in addition to Mail (AC 15), I would treat as equivalent to Plate Mail (AC 17). Basically, though, the easiest thing to do is start with the Armour Class and describe that number with a piece of head gear:

AC 11, Light Padded Coif or Light Leather Helmet

AC 12, Heavy Padded Coif or Heavy Leather Helmet

AC 13, Reinforced Padded Coif or Reinforced Leather Helmet

AC 14, Light Mail Coif or Light Helmet

AC 15, Heavy Mail Coif or Heavy Helmet

AC 16, Reinforced Mail Coif or Reinforced Helmet

etc...
_________________
It is a joyful thing indeed to hold intimate converse with a man after ones own heart, chatting without reserve about things of interest or the fleeting topics of the world; but such, alas, are few and far between.

Yoshida Kenko (1283-1350)

[imneuromancer]

The below are how I would implement these new rules. Note that you are really disadvantaging characters (versus monsters) with most of them, so they may need something to make their lives easier.

1) I agree with this one. I have always liked the idea of doing a CON check to see if you die. Depending on how deadly you want the campaign, you could make it one of the following if you get reduced to less than 0 HP:

a) a simple CON check (CL0 or even "negative" CL if you want it to be easy)

b) a CON check with a CL of the monster that last hit you.

c) a CON check with the CL of how much damage you took in your last hit.

Successive hits AFTER you go past 0 requires another check or die.

2) Make a wound any hit that does the characters CON score or higher in hit point damage. The CON score is now your "wound threshold". This makes calculation easier and faster.

3) sounds good

4) that can get REALLY complicated, esp. with monsters, I wouldn't play with that, personally,.

5) I would make it +x to damage, -x to AC and To Hit. Basically, you are just trying to do a haymaker without any regard to your defense or hitting. This way, damage won't escalate out of control like it D&D 3.x.

[Joe]

IMHO...Complicates things and slows down combat without actually improving play.

I like it quick, and deadly.