This is a site for discussing roleplaying games. Have fun doing so, but there is one major rule: do not discuss political issues that aren't directly and uniquely related to the subject of the thread and about gaming. While this site is dedicated to free speech, the following will not be tolerated: devolving a thread into unrelated political discussion, sockpuppeting (using multiple and/or bogus accounts), disrupting topics without contributing to them, and posting images that could get someone fired in the workplace (an external link is OK, but clearly mark it as Not Safe For Work, or NSFW). If you receive a warning, please take it seriously and either move on to another topic or steer the discussion back to its original RPG-related theme.

Author Topic: Design Alternatives Analysis Archive  (Read 105092 times)

Bloody Stupid Johnson

  • Senior Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3366
Implementation - Safety valves
« Reply #30 on: December 21, 2011, 09:07:22 PM »
"Stupid effing die. I haven't made a skill check yet tonight. Can I use my luck to retest?"
"No Tim, Tanya has "very lucky"; you have "strange luck". There is a difference. She gets the two free retests. You are about to get hosed."
-Midian Dark Fantasy
 
 
'Luck points' of whatever sort give a player control over the outcomes for their PC. Depending on the game these might be fluffed as 'luck points', 'willpower points' or 'action points' (the PC tries extra hard), represent an application of experience (Over the Edge) or be left as some sort of abstact 'story point'. The fluff mainly affects whether points are vaguely conceivable as being spent in character (i.e. are an 'associated' mechanic, to use Justin Alexander's term) or not; what they can be spent to do affects how believable this is. In terms of fiction, spending a luck point (defined as just 'good fortune') might be described as a near-miss than is recovered at the last minute, or the mechanics can be ignored to treat it like any other roll that was successful the first time.
Purpose-wise, as well as aiding character survival against the odds, a willpower-type interpretation of safety valve points (if not pure luck) can also give a way to factor a character's personality onto rolls, if a system doesn't have more detailed mechanisms that do that (Cortex+, Heart & Souls), since a player can opt to spend points on rolls important to the character (Whether that's desirable is another question, your answer to which depends on your desire for realism and/or difficulty).
Balance-wise, some characters may be given more 'luck points' as a way to compensate them for lower stats/less directly useful characters - e.g. Zander-type 'White Hats' in Buffy [Unisystem] get more Drama Points than 'slayers' and the like.

Depending on the game, points spend may be gone for good, or refresh can be based on certain conditions, or luck points can recover on a per-day, per-game-session, or per-adventure schedule. Points might also be bought with XP even if XP isn't directly used as the luck points (Unisystem, Mutazoids 2nd ed.), or recovered through some other factor. If points are spent permanently then the total is usually not directly connected to any attribute (except perhaps initially). They might be equal to leftover points from character design (SenZar, DC Heroes), rolled randomly (Warhammer 1E/2E), or be a set starting number.

A luck point might add an extra 'success' (common in dice pool systems where, otherwise, difficult tasks are impossible for weaker characters); an extra dice (in dice pool systems); a bonus to a roll (sometimes rolled); an automatically maximized dice roll; or a reroll which can be either mandatory ("the player must take the result regardless, as luck can be either good or bad"- 3E Luck domain) or 'choose the highest'; a reroll could also be against a different target number or with a different bonus. Luck can be measureable as just a number of rerolls, and can also have a bonus value itself in some games (+2 vs. +3, +d8 vs. +d6) or refer to another number as a bonus value (reroll with +Cha modifier).
Some sorts of luck point offer automatic success, while others give a reroll, or reroll with a bonus. Feel-wise, the balance here is between wanting use of a luck point to not be wasted (i.e. a reroll that's worse is anticlimactic), and having it be possible to avoid any risk/danger if a luck point is used (for instance, the argument the designers of Savage Worlds put forward re. 'soaking').
Full rerolls are probably more common in games where rolls are of single dice with very variable results (i.e. 1d20) to counteract the inherent chanciness of the core mechanic. A re-roll is a less powerful boost when more dice are used by default e.g. if rolls are normally 2d10 or a dice pool.
From a player point of view rerolls are particularly strategically valuable for minimizing critical failures and the like - since a critical failure is an uncommon event, a re-roll will almost certainly negate one easily (even if the new roll still isn't sufficient to get a success). Some systems take this into account and either ban rerolls of critical failures (an optional rule in Savage Worlds), or add extra cost to re-rolling particularly poor results (Dying Earth, as part of its core mechanic).
Rerolls (as opposed to a flat bonus) may feel more like a do-over (luck) as opposed to extra effort (willpower), and so be more metagame.
The full impact of spending 'luck points' can vary depending on effect-determination (if a high hit roll also increases damage) or other flow-throughs from rolls (if a higher attack roll also wins initiative, if a higher initiative roll gives more attacks).
Rerolls tend to be either/or, whereas a bonus can be variable - a character might spend several points boosting their roll. The latter has more opportunity for special abilities to modify (e.g. Jack Diamond in the Arkham Horror boardgame has a 'gain an extra bonus die when you spend clue tokens' ability). Rarely a reroll might also get a bonus as well (e.g. Savage Worlds' "elan" edge IIRC).

Luck may be an intrinsic attribute, or a special advantage possessed by only a few characters - more or less depending on whether the tone of a game setting is cinematic or realistic.
Dangerous games which do not use a luck point system are more likely to allow PC raise dead/resurrection (e.g. D&D). Or just encourage GM fudging outside the system :(
In systems that are more tightly integrated/highly evolved, the luck point metagame currency may be the same power points used in the spellcasting system as power/mana (Legends of Anglerre, I think). Conversely, supers games can have Luck as a super power, in which case its less common but using it may cost points off whatever point pool powers normally draw from. A couple of the weirder systems for calculating luck points would be Alternity (where 'last resort points' are based on the Charisma attribute, "Personality", for game balance reasons) or Fuzion (where Luck is a derived stat based on Int+Reflexes.
 
Luck may operate to reduce incoming damage and so increase character survival, allow rerolls of whatever checks the player may choose (whether life-threatening or not), or both. Sometimes there may be basic uses of luck points available to all characters but with specific abilities required to allow points to be spent to boost certain things (e.g. damage rolls or saves as well as skills, etc).
 
For some systems, luck points may be a necessary 'kludge' to getting the right results: Savage Worlds' bennies help mitigate what could otherwise be a quite deadly system due to frequent open-ended damage rolls, while in DC Heroes 1E Batman would automatically kill/knock out the Joker with one punch, unless the latter spent points to boost his defense. FATE or Marvel Heroic rely on application of aspects/assets (by point burning) to give mechanical weight to bits of the scene or character the players/GM deem relevant.  Some games deliberately mitigate lethality by removing 'save-or-die' effects [4E], instead having multiple rolls required before a death effect applies (such as beholder petrification in 4E requiring multiple saving throws over a couple of rounds) but giving characters spendable rerolls also works. IIRC, FATE Core often does both.
 
There are pros and cons to having luck points work both for absorbing damage (Savage Worlds, Mutants and Masterminds) and rerolling checks. If these are the same, then there may be an incentive for players to hoard points, not spending them outside of combat. On the other hand, if soaking and other rolling use the same resource, there is more synergy between attacks that cause damage, and attacks that force a saving throw - avoiding issues such as fighters and wizards not cooperating in combat (i.e. if the wizard repeatedly save-or-dies a monster for several rounds while the fighter does damage, they're both effectively attacking separate hit point tracks).

 Some systems also take 'luck points' further, allowing PCs to co-opt GMing or provide control over some aspect of game reality e.g. with GM approval a character can spend hero points to definitely find a beaker of acid nearby, while fighting in the mad scientists' laboratory). These include some Fate variants and DC Heroes.
Some interesting discussion here by Lunamancer on 'story' effects of luck points and how points tend to be spent to avoid some plot complications rather than survive them. (points tend to be spent early to block complications, so a merciful GM giving some way out of a tough situation may give different results than luck points. Also, perhaps powerful but gone-for-good points have a different incentive structure than just 'rerolls' which tend to be used early on).

Note also some RPGs have Luck attributes that are not spent and so aren't 'safety valves': in this group we could include Luck in Tunnels and Trolls (which is instead analogous to a 'saving throw') or Bad Stuff in Amber (which isn't rolled but helps influence GM narration). T&T Deluxe does however have a 'Better Lucky Than Good' spell that lets a character (for 4 Wiz) use LK instead of any other attribute for a saving throw.
 
General Notes
The thread here has some more discussion about 'hero points' that may be of interest: http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=13530
Likewise this one brings up an idea that GM control of luck point flow is an issue, and that a resource giving a bonus reflects willpower (extra effort) better, while a reroll more resembles luck (metagame). http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=26416
Non-Point-Based Resources: TORG/MasterBook's 'Drama Deck' gives cards that give some metagame effect on game results.

More or less every safety valve system (I know of) ignores the 'stakes' of a roll (how important that roll was) in determining its cost to reroll, apart from very basic limits on types of checks that a reroll can be applied to in some cases (e.g. rerolls not being useable for saves & only skill checks, or not on damage)

A situation in a game with safety valves sometimes calls for multiple rolls to resolve an event, which makes it harder to accomplish and - also - requires additional resources to pull off artificially, with resources burned to augment each roll. (as noted in roll-under) Island of the Lizard King for Fighting Fantasy has a difficult task that requires two Tests for Luck, and hence costs 2 Luck, while persuading Galactus in one TSR adventure needs three separate Red successes, and so forcing a success on the roll costs a significant chunk of Karma.

Generally a luck point is probably assumed to be spent at the moment in play it occurs, which would often limit their usage to checks which happen 'now'. For instance, if you're rolling a Wisdom check to see if you packed a whatsit in your bag earlier that would help in this situation, whether you should be able to spend a luck point is debateable since it relates to an action that occurred earlier. It might be OK if luck points are metagame anyway, or the GM might take a dim view of this as a sort of time travel.

Examples of Safety Valve Systems


Damage-mitigation-only systems
*Warhammer - has "Fate points" which let characters survive a lethal circumstance. Once used they're gone for good.
*Apocalypse World lets a character soak some incoming damage by taking a broken condition to one of their stats, reducing it by -1 permanently. (This also reminded me of Rage in Werewolf, where a Garou could not die by spending a Rage point and rolling on the 'battlescars' table).
*Fighting Fantasy gives PCs a Luck score with a successful roll giving 1/2 damage and a failed roll double damage (it is slightly more useful to characters with even Stamina scores. Each time it is used the score takes a point of temporary damage. It does have one function beyond just damage-mitigation: it can be used deliberately in combat to deal 2x damage with a successful check (but half damage on a failure) i.e. it adds variation to the normally-fixed damage result (usually 2 points).
*Mutants & Masterminds/True20 has 'conviction' points allowing reroll of any d20 roll. These do more than just altering damage, but that is a very common use, since Toughness saves are made with d20 (it uses these in place of hit points).

General Task Bonuses & Rerolls
*TORG (possibilities): while this give PCs ability to manipulate reality, they are interesting in that they are used in-character by PCs ("Storm Knights"), who have a limited ability to manipulate reality and understand that they have a limited supply of "possibility energy". (the Drama Deck card system is still quite metagame, however)
*HOL (Human Occupied Landfill) gives the players as a group a reserve of "Grace of God" points - how many is determined by rolling d6. A player who attempts to use a GOG point when the pool is exhausted gets the "Wrath of God" point instead.
*Weapons of the Gods lets characters store up a limited number of die rolls for later ("the river"). This is complicated slightly by it using a One-Roll-Engine-esque match-counting system; higher rolls are slightly better but various rolls in storage let a character bolster more rolls (improving a roll of 2-2 requires another 2, while 7-7-7 needs another 7). (This sort of mechanic works well for it since its not entirely 'all or nothing' as it would be in a system where only 1 die is rolled; die 'storage' also obviously would be a problem in a 'step die' system since replacing a d6 with a stored d10 would be fairly unfair, needing complex mapping or requiring a roll be a minimum height - giving synergy with other powers temporarily increasing step)
*The "2d20 system" (i.e. Mutant Chronicles, the Conan game in kickstarter) has a system of "Momentum" which lets characters store 'successes' for later, rather than specific die rolls.
*Dragonlance: the 5th Age (the SAGA system) uses cards instead of dice, with players choosing which number to play from their hand. Hence players are always using the 'roll' they think is useful and/or dramatically appropriate.
*Shadowrun 4E lets characters spend "Edge" either before or after a roll to get bonus dice (equal to their Edge score), and 6s give an extra roll. If a character declares their use of Edge before the first roll is made, the secondary benefit (6s give an extra die) applies to the entire dice pool, while if declared afterward it applies only to the bonus Edge dice.
Shadowrun 1e-3e (maybe 4e, not sure) is also notable for having an 'action pool' of dice in combat which can be spent in various ways (attack, dodge, soak; not initiative) and which refresh each round.
*Earthdawn 1E gives characters different "Karma action dice" based on race; a Obsidiman who spends a Karma gets only +d4 to their total; a human or ork gets +d8 while a tiny windling would get +d10; an additional game balancing mechanism (and a way to differentiate levels of luckiness that doesn't exist if luck only grants rerolls -at least if the new roll is by default at the original odds). Note that spending Karma here is unreliable due to the bonus being rolled. In 1E at least, Karma points seem to be limited to use on only a few possible actions; one of the major benefits of levelling up is the ability to spend Karma on particular class-related die rolls. Some magical rituals may also cost Karma. Each class has a described "karma ritual" for recharge, though the fluff is largely irrelevant (effectively its a daily recharging).
*Risus similarly has no "luck point" score, but the function of a safety valve is achieved by "pumping". Each character score can add a number of bonus dice for a turn, after which the score is reduced by that much. In Risus' quite abstract system, a character may then be able to carry on without a huge disadvantage by switching to another, vaguely related skill - The viking [4]/swashbuckler [3] who "berserks" for an extra 3 dice in combat drops to Viking [1], but can keep fighting on without much penalty using their Swashbuckler rating.
*Underground (a disturbing cousin of DC Heroes) is unusual for awarding luck points for high die rolls (any natural rolls of 24+ on 2d10/doubles roll up) as well as good play.
*HackMaster gives characters 'Honor points', initially based off stats and later awarded for defending their reputation or class-based behaviour; these can be burned for a reroll. Honor affects NPC reactions to the character and based on the characters level they can have 'too much honor' or 'dishonor'.
*4th edition D&D has "Action Points" which are somewhat different to the other varieties listed, granting an additional action when spent. This is perhaps about as good as a reroll in many cases - although if a character has used up a particular 'power' it isn't available for the second attempt, or on the plus side potentially having 2 successful actions in a round. A character can also use an action point to recover from (rather than prevent) damage by using a 'second wind' & spending a healing surge, and a number of effects can add a bonus to these actions (i.e. paragon abilities or the human 'Action Surge' feat). Action points are gained each second encounter and reset to 1 after resting, buffering characters against the '5 minute workday'. An early 2014/late 2013 dragon magazine reportedly adds other uses for action points, e.g. re-using encounter powers.
(An effect giving extra actions can also be gotten with rerolls in games where high initiative grants bonus attacks such as Midian Dark Fantasy, quoted)
*AIF, a freerpg allows characters to bring forward dice from the next round (sometimes giving similar results to how other games, e.g. HERO let characters perform a Dodge by 'aborting' next rounds' action). It also lets characters lower their pool this round to add dice to next round. Its perhaps also sort-of similar to the resource dice pools of games like Dogs In The Vineyard.
*Al-Qadim for AD&D 2E (the 'land of fate') let characters 'call upon fate' making a % roll to see if the situation improved. A bad roll instead worsened the situation.
*Casefile: Zodiac (freerpg I think) uses a 'blackjack' roll-under system where higher is better until you roll over the target number and 'go bust'. Bonus dice can increase score but pushing it over the target number causes bursting as usual.
*Old School Hack reportedly has a pool of bonus dice in the centre of the table which can be awarded by players to other players, rather than having awards be GM-controlled.
*Savage Worlds - has 'bennies' which can be spent to either reroll checks or 'soak' damage. Best use of 'bennies' can require some metagame calculation, in particular a large damage roll may be better off handled with Incapacitation Roll rerolls that direct 'soak' as novice players are likely to do. SW sometimes uses odd die mechanisms that prevent characters from rerolling such as a fixed 50% chance to rise as a vampire if killed by one, the card-based initiative, or slightly different damage rules (the 'No Mercy' edge is needed to reroll damage rolls; probably not terribly optimal). (this sort of way of siloing subsystems isn't really that uncommon - see bonus and penalty accumulation post later)
*FantasyCraft has action dice which add bonuses to rolls (e.g. +d6). Its interesting in having abilities that interact with this to define specific character capabilities, e.g. a human character can have a 'Talent' that lets them double-boost rolls related to their area of competency e.g. spend two bonus dice to boost Strength rolls, or a wizard can have a 'practiced spellcasting' which gives them a refund on a spend action die if the roll still fails (against all targets). Rune knights have a 'battle mage' ability which after an action die is spent on attack/spellcasting, applies again the next round to the other type, encouraging a mix of both (3E has a similar feat which applies a save DC/attack benefit without a resource cost).
In addition to action points it also has distinct 'fortune' and 'edge' subsystems (allowing building up & then using points in connection with more specific families of feats).
Spycraft (its predecessor) has untrained maximums on skill checks (>15 requires training) which can be bypassed by spending 3 action dice. (the rule would potentially be a bad idea without a bypass like this).
*Sovereign Stone (the precursor of the Cortex system) let characters "exert", taking Stun damage, to roll an extra dice along with the normal 2 dice, prior to the roll being made. Characters could also use "last ditch exertion" after the dice were rolling, with 1 point of damage adding +1 to the roll (more expensive, given that 1 pt would have bought a d4).
This method could potentially lead to alot of metagame tactical evaluation as to whether PCs will suffer more damage from failing the roll or exerting themselves, as well as making healing magic a free source of 'luck points'. As it ties together an abstraction (dice rolls) with something concrete (damage) it can also lead to bizarre results and justifications - e.g. characters taking damage from upping their dice rolls to find information at the library.
Cortex: Assets (advantages) in Cortex taken at D6 level or more often are specified to add a bonus (+2 step to the dice) to rolls, if plot points are spent before the roll, in addition to the assets' normal bonus i.e. the asset die code.
The 3.x fatespinner has a mechanism for representing luck which doesn't modify rolls directly: they can subtract points from a spell save DC, making it easier to save, which is saved as 'spin' in order to boost the save DCs of other spells later.
Legends of the Wulin has 'Joss' which is interesting in that the PC starts with 3 points of it, opting to divide it between Chivalrous (positive for them, an extra die for a round) and Malicious (reduces enemy dice pool by a die).
Barbarians of Lemuria gives characters 5 'hero points' initially which can be spent to either avoid death, increase damage, or raise a die roll. These are per-adventure, however, rather than automatic full replentishment the GM may award 'a point or two less' 'if the Saga went badly'.
*DC Adventures [M&M 3E] has an 'extra effort' rule where a character can become fatigued/exhausted to add a bonus to a dice roll, or other bonus (stat increase or special effect). A Hero Point can be spent to negate the fatigue. This is mainly used for the power stunts (its interesting to compare this with MSH where the stunting uses a roll, and points are spent to increase the stunt roll instead of directly spending points for an automatic special effect).
*An interesting "Doom" houserule for any system is described here: http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?p=831281#post831281
*FUDGE has 'FUDGE points' (allowing rerolls IIRC?). Not terribly useful in combat? While it has a damage system, the damage spiral is steep enough that a system was proposed (here) to have extra 'hit points' as well which operate much like a safety valve -  suggesting these be used alongside and separate to Fudge points because 'most GMs keep tight rein on Fudge points' and to prevent abuse of points outside combat.
*fairly obscure freerpg World of Terath is d% roll-under, with each 'ki point' spent adding 100% to chance of success; a 'critical' is 1/10th of normal skill so ki is often spent in multiples to increase chance of a crit.
*an interesting non-RPG system example, the recent Warhammer Quest card game lets characters use aid actions on each other to get bonus auto-success tokens, with tokens however being assigned to specific actions only (each player having four: Aid, Attack, Rest, Explore).
*Low Fantasy Gaming has skills that only add +1 to the character's (3-18) stat for rolling under. However, if a character has a Skill they can spend a 'reroll' from a reroll pool equal to their level. This approach is slightly a problem due to its race system (where a given race gets 'advantage' on stat checks instead of a stat mod) - race gives much more of an improvement in ability than does skill.

Advancement Currencies
*DC Heroes ("hero points"); these are integrated with the advancement currency of the game i.e. they also work as 'xp'. The system here was intended to make sure heroes did not advance with experience (as genre emulation); the perhaps unfortunate effect of this is that a character in an 'unbalanced' party struggling to survive burns hero points, while the unbalanced party members can save resources to advance faster. Points here have various uses including: pumping attribute values (max. of double), building gadgets, resisting successful social attacks and powering certain metagame abilities such as Omni-Connection, as well as (with GM veto) minor reality editing. Points are spent frequently and there are opposed bidding rules. Characters usually can't spend points on rolls to avoid 'disadvantages', such as stopping a psychological complication from manifesting, presumably since a character could use points from taking the disadvantage to negate it even though that wouldn't be point-efficient in the long run.
While "hero points" act as a general use safety valve, 3E is interesting in having a "Lucky" advantage that lets a character get an OV/RV shift once per adventure (cost 15 to buy initially so expensive, but multiple use and more importantly, can be used in various situations where hero points can't be spent, like resisting disadvantages or on Danger Sense rolls. Compare to say Savage Worlds where there's a "lucky" advantage but it just gives an extra 'bennie'.
*Marvel Super Heroes (Karma) has a similar setup (see below); GURPS also has an optional rule whereby character points can be spent to boost rolls.
*Over The Edge represents experience as a pool of re-roll dice which can be spent each session; they can also be traded in for permanent increases. Unlike the two systems above the character never has to choose between using a resource temporarily or getting a permanent bonus, however.
*Savage Worlds - Older versions of this let a character make a roll for each unspent bennie at the end of a session to convert it to XP; this was dropped to encourage players to use all their bennies (it also has problems with Luck, which gave an extra bennie, giving extra points over the long-term).
*SenZar lets a character spend a character point permanently to act as if they rolled a perfect "20" on a d20 roll. (Character points are used to buy merits or raise stats, but were awarded separately to the XP used to gain levels). It also has a 'luckster' class which can burn a large number of magic points temporarily to achieve the same effect.

Unintended Interaction of Safety Valves with advancement: some games have randomized advancement, such as random-roll hit points or checks for attribute increases. It may be possible to spend luck to assist on these rolls and so get permanent enhancements from rerolls - this is usually an undesirable result however unless the safety valve points are spent permanently, in which case it may be OK. As well as rewarding system mastery around purely metagame factors, this sort of interaction can be undesirable since per-session or per-day luck recovery can give ambiguous or excessive numbers of rerolls in downtime or between sessions. Safety valves can likewise interfere with mechanics where character gains incur a risk (e.g. where PCs can gain a stat boost by drinking from a magic fountain or whatnot but then have to roll for death/side effects)

Roleplay-based Bonuses
*Storyteller (Willpower): willpower here is an attribute, recovered through acting in accordance with a characters' Nature. It provides a single automatic success, added to the dice pool - in original Vampire this made it particularly useful on high-difficulty rolls (e.g. difficulty 10, which was as likely to succeed as botch regardless of dice pool). Since 'willpower' is an attribute all characters (PC or NPC) have it, though most GMs neglects to spend Willpower for NPCs/enemy combatants all that often.
While its classified here as 'roleplay based' its actually just the recovery of Willpower governed by the characters' roleplaying - point expenditure isn't directly affected by personality.
(A dice pool system could also have luck give (less reliable) extra dice, of course [Arkham Horror - though technically a boardgame] lets characters spend 'clue tokens' to roll extra dice.)
One oWoD storyteller game, Mage, has a 'Destiny' background which plugs into the willpower by letting a character roll dice = background (diff. 8) to recover Willpower when appropriate to their destiny, in most cases including to avoid dying. There is also a separate 'Luck' merit, which just grants a total reroll (and a 'Charmed Existence' merit that just reduces chance of botching by taking away a single roll of '1').
In my experience large Willpower ratings seem to be not-especially useful, just because refreshing Willpower is so difficult - though this is subject to GM whim, and with guidelines fuzzy enough that the GM could fix if they noticed. Basically, if you can only get back a couple of Willpower, you can only spend a couple of Willpower - so there isn't much difference between 6 and a 10 here, apart from the odd roll of the rating itself
*Exalted has a series of 'virtues'; as well as spending Willpower similarly to Storyteller, a character can spend a Willpower to roll their virtue rating as bonus dice. However, virtues can also limit conflicting behaviour.
*Deathwatch, a Warhammer 40K rpg about space warriors, has Fate points, as well as 'demeanors' like 'scornful' or 'calculating' which give the character an equivalent bonus 1/session on a task related to the demeanor (Interesting in that its a more direct link between playing personality and dice bonus than in Storyteller, though it needs to be in addition to Fate points, as there's no guarantee a 'demeanor' is relevant enough to save a character's bacon).
*FATE (Fate points) gives characters points for having a negative complication of a character's Aspect come into play (Aspects working as both advantages and disadvantages). Scaling up from this, 'Capes, Cowls and Villains Foul' has one Complication per character including things like Kryptonite susceptibility, klutziness, or a loved one that gets in the way frequenntly) that the player can invoke to disable the PC for 3 rounds but grant a point of 'editorial control' (good for a reroll).
*Marvel Super Heroes lets the PC/NPC completely 'call' the result of a die roll in advance by spending Karma. They declare the final result before rolling, which might be only a success ("Green Result") or might be a higher Yellow or Red result. The dice are then rolled and the difference between the roll and the minimum necessary is the Karma cost, with a minimum cost of 10 if the character would've made it without the attempt (e.g. with an Incredible score, a character would need 91+ on d100 to get a Red result; if they actually rolled only a 67, the cost is [91-67], or 24 Karma points.
Specific rules on how Karma can be used sometimes reflect genre conventions, but as with Vampire, I've largely grouped this in the 'narrative' category because they way points are saved up is RP driven.
*Icons (essentially a FATE rebuild of MSH) has similar rules around use of 'Determination' points. It adds the extra complication that it can only be spent if a roll is one-try only, or has been tried and failed previously, preventing characters from 'alpha striking' (as noted by Soylent Green). Both MSH and Icons allow parties to form group pools of Karma or determination which all members of a hero team can draw off; Icons also suggests using or burning team determination to generate physical resources (team vehicles, HQs, needed devices).
*HarnMaster has 'piety points' which are randomly rolled (at a penalty if a character chooses a deity at odds with their own morality). These are earned for pious acts and, apparently, expended for divine intervention (I never got whichever supplement fully explained this). Atheist characters get nada.
*The Dying Earth (and relatedly, Gumshoe) systems have no single "luck point" score, but all of a characters skills individually function as pools of rerolls or bonuses, with some odd effects. Recharge conditions are assigned for each score.
*5E D&D: characters may gain 'inspiration' (allowing advantage on a roll after it is made i.e. a reroll) as a result of playing bonds, ideals, personality traits or flaws at GM discretion. A character with inspiration may also transfer it to another character (if they play well). As well as a numerical bonus, advantage can trigger extra abilities e.g. sneak attack can apply to damage when a character has advantage in combat (weirdly, some bonuses hence allow sneak attack while others, such as fighter precision manuever, boost the to-hit by as much but just don't).
*Invulnerable lets characters earn Determination based on things related to their characters' Motivation. The interesting thing here though IMHO is that uses of Determination include letting characters with 'hyper-attributes' (powers boosting an attribute directly) automatically win contests against characters who aren't hyper; in spite of hyper-attributes normally being rated as extra dice so that normals always have a chance.
*characters may get a GM-assigned 'role playing bonus' to a check - for instance, in My Life With Master the GM may give out a bonus "sincerity" or "desperation" die at his option [cf. use of player skill, non-resource-based mechanics section].
 
Narrative Control systems
Narrative control usage: sometimes games allow reality adjustments for using 'safety valve' points. Note that's at odds with the reserve having an in-world representation (e.g. a character shouldn't be able to "Willpower"  a contact into existence), but can be a fairly common ad-on to a basic system. FantasyCraft can allow it, as does Thrilling Tales supplement for Savage Worlds. Other examples around this feature:
*Superbabes lets PCs take "Bimbo Points" to succeed on rolls or break the rules. At the start of the adventure, a roll less than a PCs current Bimbo Point total entitles the GM to a roll on the "Bimbo Events" table, which includes such entries as "cult wishes to sacrifice the character", "character gains 10 pounds" and "costume destroyed in battle". The roll of a bimbo event resets their points back to zero.
*FATE -many versions may enter into this with negotiation over some sorts of compels and the like.

GM-side resource systems:
 On the other side of the screen, luck points for NPCs may be controlled by a parallel system to what PCs have, or a different system (e.g. the GM may have a single reserve of points for all NPCs, or no points). Both PCs and NPCs are going to be tied into using the same system if "luck points" are based off a basic character attribute.
Where GMs have large supplies of 'luck points', GM fudging of dice rolls is effectively built into the system legally; it also may be problematic that PCs use the same reserve for the whole adventure, while fresh NPCs may appear in each encounter.
*DC Heroes (see above for basics) gives the GM a potentially unlimited supply of hero points; NPCs follow the same rules as the heroes and can have whatever number of points the GM deems appropriate (sample NPCs can have up to 200). Bidding wars are possible between PCs and bad guys. As noted in the old Dragon #165 review: "there's always a heavy Hero Point flow during play. Sometimes so many get blown in a single phase, maybe on a single punch, that it's like the Weimar Republic, where townspeople hauled hyper-inflated Deutschmarks in wheelbarrows to buy a loaf of bread."
*Savage Worlds gives the GM a limited supply of 'bennies'; 2 plus 2 for each 'wild card' NPC (archvillains and the like).
*SenZar lets the GM give exceptional NPCs only 'Fate Points'; if the players win, they get the bad guy's Fate Points.
*MSH gives bad guys a fixed karma supply equal to the sum of a character's mental attributes when they enter play; however bad guys have different spending rules (and refresh rules) to good guys, limiting their use except in dramatic escapes or story-furthering events.
*Cortex+ Marvel Heroic (MHR) gives the GM a 'doom pool' starting at 2d6, more for important scenes, which resets each scene and can increase e.g. if PCs perform certain actions or roll 1s on their dice. Another twist to this is that the Doom Pool is used as an opposing roll when no opponent with scores is available.
*Fighting Fantasy gives PCs a Luck score. NPCs were not usually given a Luck, making it unclear how they interact with effects that require a test on it (AFF 2E eventually clarifies they use Skill, for involuntary checks only).

Non-Resource-Based "Safety Valves"
Systems can also allow for characters to reduce their chances of failure by metagame means not involving point spending, or in-game means. For example:
*some games (or GMs) may allow a bonus to a roll if a player can describe well how their character is performing the action. For instance, jumping a chasm might be easier if a character throws their heavy items across first, or climbing may be easier if a character throws up a rope using a grappling hook and takes off their armour.
*Take-10 in 3E D&D lets a character pass a mundane skill or ability check by forsaking any chance of rolling higher.
*Call of Cthulhu 7E lets a character re-roll a skill check, but with the stakes increasing (such as a failed attempt to open a door alerting monsters on the other side).
*Gumshoe eliminates failed investigation rolls entirely - characters always find clues.
*Level-based (D20/D&D derived) games rarely have point spending on dice rolls. This may be partly just tradition, but its also possible to consider Levels as a sort of 'safety valve' mechanism, in and of themselves. An experienced character becomes a protagonist and gets higher numbers across the board giving them more success/survivability. Some D&D editions claim that 'luck' is a factor accounting for a portion of the character's HP total. In a sense having Han Solo be a high-level Smuggler in D20 Star Wars gives some results similar to giving him CPs to spend in WEG D6 Star Wars.

Edit history: Extra notes on Willpower (*); FF (*), rerolls and special abilities (*), invulnerable (*), story twists being avoided by luck points (*).
« Last Edit: July 21, 2017, 11:15:56 AM by Bloody Stupid Johnson »

Bloody Stupid Johnson

  • Senior Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3366
Combat – Round Structure and Initiative
« Reply #31 on: December 23, 2011, 06:31:08 PM »
Moving along into combat...which probably means I've skipped a few things, but its an easy few topics and I'm lazy...
 
Normally a round is only a few seconds, from 3 seconds (Cyberpunk) to 6 seconds (3.x D&D) to 15 seconds (Palladium). AD&D uses minute-long rounds but with most sword swings abstracted away as being blocked, except during surprise rounds where a character can instead perform a full round worth of attacks each segment. Tunnels and Trolls has 2-minute-long combat rounds, which are quite abstract. I think – but not quite sure – that Amber runs combat largely through GM fiat or has subjectively defined rounds which could potentially be much longer. EABA v2 reportedly includes the idea of 'Turn Mod', where the real-world length of a round increases each round, allowing more shots etc. (to fast-forward through stalemate situations ?). Full Light, Full Steam uses a single opposed roll to resolve a whole combat - much like how most games handle e.g. routine skill checks - and so doesn't have 'rounds' per se.
Length of rounds does affect design choices as regards fatigue (which becomes more of a concern where rounds are longer) and movement (longer rounds tend to allow more movement and so requires less rules controlling this). Longer rounds usually permit more actions in each.
 
Usually an initiative system tells a character what they can do during a round. A couple of games (Fighting Fantasy, Tunnels and Trolls) have rounds where everything is simultaneous – both sides roll an attack total and the loser takes damage (though in T&T spells and then missile attacks are resolved before all melee; timing for other events in the round is not normally defined, and need only be calculated in special cases - the solo adventures using various procedures).
In One-Roll-Engine games such as Godlike, initiative is determined as part of the combat roll so while all players roll individually at the same time, combat rolls do take effect in a sequence. Pendragon is similar - highest successful skill roll goes first. (These sort of games generally need additional rules to determine where 'automatic' actions, those not requiring a roll, go in the action sequence - I could however imagine a system where everyone gets an automatic action + a dice action and automatic actions resolving first was a feature not a bug, or last such that volunteering to roll the skill check makes it go faster but risks botching it).

Most other games have characters acting in sequence, which may be determined every round (most older games, Savage Worlds), or just once per combat (3E D&D and many recent games); Palladium compromises with one initiative roll per combat but with a round being several turns of 'attacks'. Cortex keeps the same initiative for the whole combat, but a character can spend a 'plot point' to reroll (taking higher only) in a later round. Hazard Studios' Supers! normally keeps initiative to later rounds, except loss of the initiative stat [Reaction] can force a re-roll. Round-by-round initiative can have tactical effects e.g. a penalty that lasts for one round (e.g. from Taunt in Savage Worlds) may be irrelevant if the target wins initiative the next round and recovers.

Determining order can be handled in various ways, handled by either counting up or counting down:

 
*Round Robin – more a boardgame feature, but it is possible for players to resolve actions clockwise or counter-clockwise around the table, based on where the players are sitting. Doesn’t work for virtual environments,and may be unfair. Treating the GM as a player here means all the monsters go at once. Might be combined with Dex Countdown if the players are willing to be seated in order of Dexterity. Doesn't work in online environments like Roll20.
 
*Dexterity Countdown (Highest goes first): Holmes D&D, Dragon Warriors, Arduin and SenZar use a Dexterity Countdown system where characters go from highest to lowest Dex (SenZar's system is also complicated by using 'phases' however- see below). This method requires all monsters have a defined Dexterity score (they don't get one in Holmes, or for Dragon Warriors either...presumably this is meant to be rolled on 3d6). While fast, it is predictable and IMHO somewhat unsatisfying.
Unlike randomized initiative systems, a countdown system usually can't have penalties for going later (e.g. 'flatfootedness' in 3E, or being unable to perform interrupt actions as in JAGS) since the determinacy of the fixed order makes this somewhat unfair.
0D&D has a Dex-based initiative system in Eldritch Wizardry, I believe predating Holmes; this actually does include some randomness via an effective Dex adjustment for being surprised or completely surprised (-4), as well as armour and action adjustments; there is also a table for 'phase' derived from the adjusted Dex which might be necessary if Dex scores are similar or for very high scores (which could allow 2 actions). As noted under multiple actions, Arduin also gives higher DEX to give multiple actions (if double the opponent).
Fate Core uses countdown based off Notice skill rating. Trail of Cthulhu reportedly uses countdown based on the (current?) skill pool for the characters' actions (more complicated in that the initiative resulting can be a factor when choosing actions).
Highest-goes-first is fairly often used as a secondary, tie-breaking system in a conventional die-roll-based initiative system.


*a simple die roll (Initiative Roll) –usually an additive roll, more or less regardless of what the games’ core mechanic is. Initiative rolls need to handle opposed rolls (ordering several opponents usually - unless wholly side-based), and it also needs to be reasonably fast to resolve (e.g. no tables).
Interesting elaborations here:

-Rolemaster lets characters get a bonus to initiative by getting a penalty to their action.
-3E/4E D&D uses the same initiative roll every round, meaning that durations measured in rounds can be tracked as expiring on the character’s next turn.
-Savage Worlds uses standard playing cards to determine initiative, with some draws (Jokers) granting a character additional bonuses. Doing this denies "wild card" PCs their normal bonuses against NPCs - they don't receive the extra Wild Die - as well as making initiative non-stat-based (certain Edges only give a character extra draws or redraws, making them more likely to go first and increasing their chance of getting a Joker).
Usually only the card number is really important, though 'suit' breaks ties - there is a 'Monologuer' hindrance that makes a character stop and rant if their card is a 'club' however.

-Warhammer 3E encourages teamwork by allowing PCs to exchange initiative rolls.
-A couple of games including Marvel Super Heroes, AD&D-2 (unless using optional rules), and TORG have side-based initiative rather than individual initiative, with players generally free to determine their precise order amongst themselves; similar to the ‘exchanging rolls’ option except that monsters can’t spoil their plans. The Torg roleplaying game (and successors, Shatterzone and Masterbook) used a "per side" initiative, splitting the combat into Heroes and Villains. Which side had initiative was determined by a card drawn from the Drama Deck. The Initiative line listed which side would go first, and sometimes detailed a special effect that applied to one side or the other. The game distinguished between Standard scenes, in which there was a 50/50 split between Heroes and Villains, and Dramatic scenes, in which Villains won initiative about 2/3rds of the time.
-the 'Advantage system' (actually just a houserule by Raven McCracken for whatever system), rolls one initiative die for each attack a character has, with each attack acting on the appropriate initiative. Not too dissimilarly, LegendQuest lets two-weapon fighting characters roll Initiative for each weapon separately. 'Dark Fantasy' also does this; however, it also notes a TWF character can only attack with the primary weapon unless at least one initiative roll beats the opponents'.
-Shadowrun 4E a character can fumble initiative, which results in them going last against someone with the same total initiative (on a 'glitch')(might actually be relevant since total initiative is Initiative score + the successes on the initiative roll), and take a penalty at GM discretion. They also lose an extra action on a 'critical glitch' (only if they have multiple actions).  
-in Hackmaster (revised 5th ed?) a character hit by a weapon can act 2 seconds/initiative points later, probably increasing their initial initiative roll.
-Hackmaster also has a 'mitigating surprise' rule, whereby a character can assist another character in noticing ambush, in which case their initiative rolls are averaged e.g. a PC with '5' helping a PC with '11' would reset both to initiative 8.

Rolled initiative can interact weirdly with surprise unless the GM is careful. Often someone initiating trouble will get a 'free go' first; if they also then roll initiative normally, the GM might be inclined to have a 'low' roll stand as-is, while a 'high' roll might be interpreted as being the next turn, i.e. actually later. A fix would be to have a surprise attack be set to a good initiative, instead of an extra turn (Hackmaster also does this; e.g. lower is better and an ambush goes off on "1").

*Phases – a more elaborate version of Countdown allowing for multiple actions, seen in e.g. HERO. Here the round has 12 (1 second long) segments; a character with SPD 1 acts in segment 7, a character with SPD 2 in segments 6 and 12, a character with SPD 3 in 4, 8 and 12, and so on. In HERO, Initiative rolls still order actions within a phase; phases likely require some additional method for handling exact timing.
Another example would be SenZar; this has phases 1-10, with characters acting in Speed order ("Dex Countdown" method) within each Phase. Unlike HERO a character with multiple actions in SenZar has actions in the first phases of the round; e.g. a character with 3 attacks goes in Phase1, Phase2 and Phase3. This can also be seen to be quite similar to Palladium's system (where all 1st attacks go, then all 2nd attacks, and so on) except without an initiative roll). While it uses the DEX to countdown within each phase, characters never gain extra actions for high DEX (SPD) in SenZar as they do in some other systems like Arduin, or OD&D w/ eldritch wizardry; this is solely determined by combat skill level.
 
*Strike ranks – older Runequest typically determined who went first based on reach, with weapons able to act again after a certain number of “strike ranks”. Rounds may still be kept, however; see next pattern.
 
*Continuous Initiative- a few systems (e.g. Exalted) do not divide combat into rounds. Instead actions continuously count up. In this system any action will take a certain number of 'ticks' or 'segments' - similar to strike ranks. This lets faster weapons/actions go more often; also there are no weird "metagame" effects from round structure - compare to how in a round system with initiative rolled each round, how a spell or effect with duration that lasts "until the end of the round" or "until your next turn" goes away sooner (or sooner on average) if triggered toward the end of the round. Time between actions might be fixed or might be rolled (e.g. in the Omnifray system when a character rolls d12+reaction time to see how many 0.1 second increments before they next act).
 
*If-Action systems- once seen in a friends homebrew system, every character rolls and only the one character with the best roll receives an action. Losers get a bonus each round they lose, until they finally get a turn. Painful, as this generates initiative rolls equal to the number of combatants per action, instead of one initiative roll per action (most systems), one per combatant (the 3E system) or no rolls at all (Dex countdown or round robin systems).
 
*Tagging- Marvel Heroic Roleplaying (MHR) selects one participant as having the initiative; they then select the next person (either ally or enemy) and so on until all participants have been activated. This is a strange mechanism unlike anything seen in nature; like much of MHR it generates complex metagame tactics whereby characters may try to breakup opponent tactics based on specific strike orders, or may activate the enemies before allies to prevent an enemy going last and seizing the advantage for next round.
 
*Bidding-potentially characters could bid some resource to decide who goes first (not sure if any RPG systems do this; happens in some boardgames, I think.).(edit: proposed for David Johansen's "World of Disney" system, with characters choosing a difficulty penalty ('risk') to see who goes first.
 
*player declaration (BASH ??) - the character declaring an aggressive action automatically goes first. Cortex also does this (e.g. Supernatural); the initiator can do one brief surprise action, then initiative is rolled.
 
*GM-determined initiative - e.g. Dungeon World uses GM arbitration to determine who goes when; combats are not strictly speaking in rounds, just turns for each character, so one character may get multiple turns (though more alternation is generally encouraged) making this an ad hoc version of 'if-action'. Monster results may occur 'within' a PCs turn as a result of bad rolling, making more actions not necessarily good.
Amber is also GM-arbitrated, although its core mechanic being an opposed comparison (and without a detailed 'move' structure forcing character-by-character resolution) it might be closer to an initiativeless system.

*Level-based initiative: 'Sharp Swords and Sinister Spells determines initiative based on the Level/Hit dice of opponents. If a player character ties in HD with an opponent they (the PC) make an Agility check to go first; if two PCs tie (probably very likely!) they go in order of Agility or test if they have the same score.

Rounds can be split up more elaborately, such as by having separate Move phases before or after regular combat rounds (Battletech ? ). AD&D 2nd Ed’s Combat and Tactics breaks combat into Very Fast, Fast, Average, Slow and Very Slow phases, with the phase a character goes on determined mostly by their Size; this is very granular and as implemented quite messily , but does let actions like movement delay characters without too much hassle. Rolemaster Standard System has Snap, Normal and Deliberate action phases, each resolved in initiative order.
Some games (Riddle of Steel, 2nd ed. D&D with some optional rules) may have different initiative/combat procedures for duelling as opposed to general melee.
 
Simultaneous Actions
Games vary in whether they permit simultaneous actions, or whether these are forbidden (with ties broken by reroll, reroll of another statistic, or stat comparison). Games may also have a tacit understanding of initiative as a convenient 'fiction' for player-resolution rather than having in-game parallels, so that there may be an initiative order for dice rolling but with (e.g.) all actions being completed before results such as damage are applied. Another example of this may be in 2E initiative - feysquare.com (now down?) at one point had an interesting quote from Steve Winter on how one PC casting a fireball could be thwarted by another PC charging, due to assumption that the spell would take time to cast in 'game reality' despite group-based initiatives making a whole groups actions theoretically simultaneous.
 
Action Type and Initiative
Some initiative systems may consider what a character is doing to be the primary factor determining order of actions (e.g. games with more phases/more complex round arrangements as noted above). e.g. T&T handles spells/then missile fire/then melee resolution system; the cubicle-7 Dr Who RPG has phases of Talking, Moving, Doing (e.g. fixing things or other skills) and then Fighting, giving social characters the opportunity to talk people out of being attacked first (as the Doctor often does); changing actions incurs a -2 (on 2d6) penalty and can cause things to happen out of the usual order.
Conversely in other systems characters may be able to do virtually any action, with no modifier for action type - D20 system for instance does this with the equalization meaning that the separate declaration of actions before rolling in 2E could be phased out (see Rich Baker's comments in the 3.5 Rules Compendium, pg 71). This is usually more likely to be the case with simple action systems; e.g. Dragon Warriors- in this a handful of actions take multiple rounds, and the Dexterity comparison determining who goes when is not usually modified (although there is a variety of mummy that goes last automatically when spellcasting, due to having to cast spells with a ritual dance). Many systems may be somewhere in the middle, with action modifying the initiative result in some way. Individual weapon choice can even modify initiative - 2nd edition D&D using individual initiative adds weapon 'speed factor' to initiative results making larger weapons slower, which is interestingly the exact opposite of what Runequest did i.e. giving a bonus to who goes first based on weapon reach.
Some games may have actions which count as multiple actions (e.g. "power punch, counts as two attacks"[Palladium]); these can potentially be delayed to a later initiative if multiple actions are staggered rather than being all at once, or may just resolve in normal order.
 
Advance Action Declaration
Some systems have action declaration rules which affect how combat plays out; a character might declare actions before initiative is rolled (meaning the wrong initiative can ruin their plan)(e.g. Unisystem, 2E AD&D, oWoD), rather than declaring on their turn. Where actions are declared before initiative is rolled, an order of declaration is sometimes also enforced – as in oWoD Storyteller where characters declare in reverse initiative order. This last method is a fairly exacting system perhaps suited to high PvP games.  A system might have action declaration for some actions but not others, such as a wizard needing to declare spells for next round before initiative while fighters are free to declare actions in response to the situation. 'Chill' lets characters with multiple attacks have to declare their first action only, with later attacks decided upon 'after the results of the prior attack is determined'. A system might also consider a whole 'family' of actions to be an allowable declaration, or can be very specific e.g. called shots might need to be declared ahead of time (Chill, AD&D - in this case perhaps because it carries a +1 initiative penalty) or just be a form of attack.
Games where actions are ordered primarily by action type essentially have to have a declaration phase in advance, whether or not there's an initiative roll - e.g. T&T a character has to choose [Magic, Ranged, Melee] so the latter two can happen first, then moves into simultaneous combat for melee. The solo 'Arena of Khazan' plays with this a little by asking first if the player wants magic, then asking if they want to do ranged, then moving into melee, via paragraph but essentially a series of Yes/No declaration choices where either side [player or NPC] can one-up the other and 'jump in' by choosing an appropriate faster option, instead of the declaration being handled in e.g. initiative order like Storyteller.


Initiative and Actions
Initiative and # action systems in RPGs are also closely intertwined. Normally the number of actions depends on the initiative system, but systems which go the other way do exist. The simplest would be the 'advantage system' above, but AD&D 1E (not 2E) is interesting in that it works out numbers of actions very precisely and then uses a potentially complex priority system to work out who goes when.
(summarized in the ADDICT file found here - http://www.dragonsfoot.org/fe/ )
 
Other Elaborations: an odd initiative idea where initiative is spent as 'fatigue' to absorb damage can be found here:
http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?676703-New-(possibly)-Initiative-Idea
 
Factors that have been used to modify Initiative include: Dexterity and/or Speed attribute, weapon size (bonus for reach or penalty for size), creature size, number of actions, armour (penalty), action type, environmental penalties (underwater, etc), spells (haste/slow), character level or weapon skill modifier, surprise or weapon draw penalty, fatigue and/or injury penalty. Mental actions may substitute Int or other modifier for Dex/Spd in some games. DC Heroes uses total of all 'action' attributes (Dexterity, Intelligence, Influence) plus d10 for initiative, instead of its usual 2d10 on a table roll of stat vs. stat.
Hackmaster apparently has a rule where a player who hesitates or screws around can suffer initiative penalties for 'indecision' for their character.

An old article for FUDGE here deals with attempting to adjust Fudge simultaneous initiative to an action-based system where characters can take/lose initiative. Though I like its goals/criticism of normal systems more than the execution: "[for most initiative systems]..their effects appear random and unrelated to the events of the conflict."

Systems may drop the usual initiative system for a sub-system in unusual cases e.g. 3E D&D Oriental Adventures has samurai roll Iajutsu Focus skill in duels to determine who strikes first, with the winner gaining several bonus dice damage [to duplicate lethal samurai duels despite D&D's large HP pools]. The skill does not help in normal combats, however. Star Wars - Edge of the Empire reportedly has two separate skills for initiative, one used if a character initiates combat (Cool) and another if they are drawn into combat (Vigilance).
(It would be easy to imagine special cases where unusual rolls are made for initiative as well, e.g. if everyone is being psionically attacked, initiative might be slowed for those who failed their saves - the most basic way to do that being to have the save be the initiative roll).

Recent edits: rolling initiative and surprise (*), Monologuer (*)
« Last Edit: March 13, 2019, 10:44:37 PM by Bloody Stupid Johnson »

Bloody Stupid Johnson

  • Senior Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3366
Actions per round
« Reply #32 on: December 23, 2011, 07:30:47 PM »
How much a character can do in a round is another question, though one often tied to the Initiative system. This is something that requires particular caution for a designer, as it is very easy to design a system that is either too slow due to too many actions and action types, or where variation in the Speed attribute/number of attacks per round is very unbalanced.

(D&D Note - note that letting # attacks escalate with level (e.g. in D&D) to balance more powerful spells is more feasible with some setups - e.g. not with action points, games where everyone gets just one action, or most attribute-based # actions (apart maybe from Warhammer)).

 
Types of setups known include:
 
*one main action per round on a characters initiative. Movement may be an action, or limited movement may be allowed in addition, or movement can delay a character’s initiative. The simplest and most balanced system.
Here extra actions is a rare (and powerful) ability, sometimes needing extra checks and balances; a common one is that extra attacks don't also grant extra movement. Systems sometimes give out 'partial' attacks - AD&D weapon specialization gives 3/2 attacks per round (a second attack every second round), or multiple attacks can be made at a penalty (3rd edition D&D), while Dragon Warriors 'Master Bowman' gives a 50% chance of a character getting a second attack. 'Elven Grace' in 13th Age gives the elf an extra attack that round if they roll under the 'escalation die' with a d6, but the die size increases each time a roll is successful. Leonard Lakofka (Leomund) notes in Gygax Magazine #1 that he used to house-rule the 3/2 attacks per round into a % chance of an extra attack each round based on level, which would remove the level-based breakpoint and the metagaminess of every second round getting an extra attack (on the subject of extra attack systems, he also randomly rolled manticores # attacks randomly; d6+2 tail spikes/round instead of a fixed 6).
The roll for extra attacks could also be part of another roll; i.e. 2nd Ed. D&D has an optional critical system where a critical (natural 20) gives a second free attack, instead of double damage.

Another way of handing out a 'partial' action that was interesting was in D&D 5E (19 Sept playtest); rogues at 2nd level gained a 'cunning action' ability that gave them an extra action which could only be used for disengage, hide or hustle; one build option could expand on this with 'Fast Hands' letting the action be used for Sleight of Hand, disable a trap, or open a lock. (The extra action gives results essentially the same as making one of these actions a 'free action' for a rogue).
 
4E/5E boss monsters (4E D&D solos or 5E D&D legendary monsters) got extra actions in those systems (this sort of thing is more a feature of 'one action per round' games - in a game with lots of attacks per round the DM can just build boss creatures with higher SPD/more actions, and too many starts to get problematic for the GM to handle).

Tunnels and Trolls, because of its heavily abstracted combat system, has things generally equivalent to extra actions (or natural weapons) just add bonus dice to the combat dice pool (e.g. special abilities in M&M supplement).
 
oWoD Vampire would be nominally a 'single action' system, but with the super-speed "Celerity" power sufficiently common that quite a few to most characters would have it.

D&D 4E gave an extra 'minor action' on top of the main action, somewhat similar to the 'bonus action' idea of 5E; for example, healer characters usually only spent minor actions to heal, fixing a problem that healing is often suboptimal in combat due to this not contributing to taking down the opponent and so resulting in taking more damage.

*a number of multiple actions based off combat skill (default 1). 3E for instance starts at one attack, with more accruing based on Base Attack Bonus. Lower attack bonuses for secondary attacks make these a way of handing out 'partial' attacks, with the problem that they against a worthy opponent they may just be 'fishing' for 20s (they're useful against multiple weaker opponents but that may be better implemented by giving a character the option of multiple attacks at a significant penalty).
Palladium gives extra attacks for Martial Arts and Boxing (which also apply when shooting guns or firing energy blasts). Savage Worlds gives out increases in attacks largely via specific Edges (Frenzy/Improved Frenzy, Double arrow shot, Two Weapon Fighting etc.), some of which have rank minimums IIRC, so more skilled characters still get more attacks but in a roundabout way. While still powerful, level minimums can keep extra attacks at 'level appropriate' point.
[in discussion offline, a friend discussed a system where a higher TN task inherently takes more actions to perform - this probably works best offset by a system like this, where more skill also gives more actions]
Extra actions based off combat skill usually can't be used for movement - fighters aren't meant to just run at the speed of light - e.g. Savage Rifts has a 'Split the Seconds' edge which can't be used for movement, while 3E D&D has separate 'move actions' regardless of number of attacks.
5E D&D is interesting just since it has extra attacks that vary between classes, seeming (I think) relatively balanced despite quite different structures. A fighter may have several attacks; a ranger might trades Extra Attack for a beast companion with its own set of actions; a rogue has extra damage while wizards generally cast one spell/round  that levels up in power.
SenZar had a system where # attacks per round is based off combat skill (1, +1 at 5th, 10th, 15th and 20th). Spellcasters instead gained actions at only 10th and 20th. Spells cost only 1 action, so multiclassed fighter/wizards could cast more per round, although spells also took one 'phase' per level to cast with only 10 phases in a round, so extra actions were likely to be limited to lower-level spells.
NOTE that systems where you gain extra attacks with level, tend to be more balanced in games where there's a lot of hit point inflation. If a game has basically fixed hit points despite level, everyone getting an extra attack = fights now last half as long (and possibly come down to who wins initiative). Single-action only (Dragon Warriors), or the 'you can take two actions, but at a penalty' (Talislanta 3E etc.) tends to work better if HPs are more static.

*One action by default, but with a high Initiative roll granting bonus attacks - as seen in 1st edition Shadowrun (where result - 10 gave timing of the next attack i.e. a 27 gives attacks on 27, 17, 7). Fairly elegant, but not necessarily balanced. How swingy the results are obviously depends on the dice used for initiative -and hence core mechanic, unless initiative uses a different die roll (not uncommon). This is usually combined with an initiative rolls each turn, instead of a single roll each combat, although it would be possible to only grant extra attacks on the first round (e.g. due to surprising the victim).
(Possibly there'd be some way to handle this non-linearly, such that a higher roll gives 'diminishing returns' in number of bonus actions - e.g. extra actions might be timed to occur only on specific counts set by a table, such as at # of attack-squared initiative numbers...1 for 1st attack,4 for second, 9 for 3rd, 16, 25, 36...).
Another variant is Legends of the Wulin using match-counting (ORE style) mechanics - extra 'sets' on initiative allow minor actions only. (attack rolls also generate extra sets, but these instead add extra effects).
If used with ‘side-based’ initiative, a single high roll can grant several monsters bonus attacks and so smoke the PCs. Might be used to treat Two Weapon Fighting as a bonus to Initiative (considered but not used as an option in Midian Dark Fantasy). Or, a character might be able to take a penalty to attack to get an initiative bonus, with an ambidexterity feat offsetting this penalty for two-weapon users. This would certainly require an initiative roll each round though, or a fixed order where characters could roll to attempt to 'push initiative' each round.

Another variant, in Alternity, is for a low initiative to lose bonus attacks - Alternity has 4 phases (Amazing, Good, Ordinary, Marginal) depending on whether a character rolls under 1/4, 1/2, or full action check result, or fails the roll completely. Each action requires one phase, so a character with 2 actions who rolls poorly and acts in the Marginal phase only is reduced to one. Most variations of this delay bonus attacks to later in the round.
(as an aside I have seen the exact opposite of this system used in boardgames, though it doesn't make a lot of sense - in 'Conquest of Planet Earth: the space alien game' players roll their number of action points (1d6, 1 rolls again at +1), and the player with the lowest number of action points goes first.

 
*One action; a character can opt to take multiple actions, but if so both actions take a penalty (e.g. Talislanta, Storyteller, Savage Worlds, Star Wars D6).
In Marvel Super Heroes (FASERIP) similarly the character can make a Fighting FEAT check to make multiple actions, but can make only one attack (at a penalty) if they fail the roll. Usually multiple actions in this variant are simultaneous, though Star Wars delays extra actions i.e. all primary actions are resolved first, then secondary, etc. much like high-level fighter attacks in AD&D. RuneQuest variant ElfQuest lets characters with skills over 100% make two attacks at half skill with the second attack delayed 3 strike ranks.
In some games, this option applies with some actions only e.g. D&D allows multiple actions at a penalty for Two Weapon Fighting.
One elaboration is to adjust the multi-action penalty based on what weapon a character is using i.e. a short sword (speed 3) might allow two attacks both at -3, while a two-handed sword (speed 7) might take a -7 penalty if used to make two attacks. Talislanta usually has a -5 penalty, but certain skills such as Zandir Swordsmanship or Arimite Knife Fighting drop extra attacks to -3. Another variant may be the Superbabes system for "Do It Twice" - here a character can make twice as many actions if they successfully make a Dex ("moves") roll with d20 under the stat. Failing the roll does not cost the character an action, but attempting the roll costs 3 fatigue points (power points), in addition to the costs of the other actions.
Balancing the math of this option is trickier as it may be possible for players to calculate they can increase their odds of hitting by acting twice at a penalty. In games like this there is (indirectly) synergy between Luck points and multitasking; a character is more likely to pull off two actions when they use luck. (Compare with games such as 4E D&D, where 'action points' are a daily resource granting extra actions directly). HERO 6E has a 'multiple attacks' option which adds a defense penalty instead (1/2 DCV) -  likely to discourage its use by strong characters against lots of minions who otherwise couldn't hit.
Magic under this might treat a spell as just a normal action (a multitasking character may be able to cast e.g. 2 spells as separate actions), limited to one spell regardless of other actions, or can use multi-task rules for multiple targets, extra Energy Bolts from one spell, etc.
(See also 'Combat Moves', pg 5 - section for multiple-actions)
An article for FUDGE here discusses adding a 'Speed' skill (specific for each other skill) which discounts penalties and at higher level can offset penalties for more than 2 actions.
Multiple action penalties are sometimes assigned equally to both actions, or for sequential actions there can be an increasing penalty - e.g. defenses might be at -0,-1,-2, etc. [e.g. TriStat dX -this also has an 'extra defenses' power each level of which cancels penalties on that attack, with attacks after that taking penalties normally]

*set number of multiple actions. Fantasy Dice for instance gives characters a simultaneous primary action + secondary action. Secondary actions cannot include movement (unless the first action is a dodge); if the first is a defense it has to succeed for the second action to be an attack (counterattack). Actions apart from counterattack can't use the same arm. Some actions e.g. sprinting forfeit the secondary action. Supers RPG 'Infinite Power' gives characters 2 actions each round that can be used to move, attack, use a skill, or use a power, but the same action (e.g. attacking) can't be repeated.

*a number of multiple actions based off an attribute e.g. Agility (Synnibarr) or in Alternity off average of Con+Will (? - a bizarre attempt at balancing the usefulness of stats - this is also partly dependent on initiative roll in Alternity, see above). Where based off a stat, a designer has to be careful as this introduces a massive breakpoint between “1 action per round” and “2 actions per round”, and a slightly less serious one between 2 actions and 3. Multiple actions are sometimes based off a separately bought up stat (e.g. SPEED in Hero) instead.
Synnibarr is also interesting in that the character who wins initiative gains a bonus attack on segment 1 (slightly odd in that the same roll gives varying numbers of attacks based on what everyone else rolled).
Multiple actions sometimes occur all at once, or can be handled with phases (HERO) or initiative passes (Palladium) where everyone cycles through attack #1 in initiative order, then attack #2, etc.
The Fantasy Trip gives missile combatants with high DEX more attacks - the larger the bow, the more DEX is required for a second shot. It uses not raw DEX but 'adjusted' DEX (adjDex) including assorted circumstance modifiers e.g. armour. Crossbows get +1 Dex used prone - so its possible a x-bow man could reload faster that way.
Arduin Grimoire has a system based on comparative DEX: if your DEX is double an opponent's you get 2 actions, etc. It uses DEX-countdown to resolve when, with the second attack occurring at 1/2 Dex. Monsters with multiple physical attacks like claw/claw/bite always get that number of attacks regardless of their DEX, but delays them the same way i.e. a monster with just 2 claws would get claw #1 at DEX and claw #2 at 1/2 Dex; differently to how AD&D would do it with a 'routine' all done at the same time and only high-level fighter attacks staggered.

Fireborn has an interesting, if cumbersome, system where a character gets physical actions equal to their "Fire" (as the element; equivalent to Str) attribute. A series of actions is scripted, and a dice pool (Fire + bonus dice moved from other stats if desired) is rolled vs. the defenders' pool with each net success carrying out one of the scripted actions in order. (The main issue being that individual actions don't have separately calculable chances of success, e.g. modifier for skill rating). For example a character with 'Fire 3' might do a Dash+Jump+Strike.  Characters can choose to script 'Power' before a Strike (+5 damage, but the attack is more likely to fail), or 'Press' afterward (+2 damage), and can make multiple attacks with a 'Ready' (2 Ready for a medium weapon, 3x for heavy - the extra action cost helping put a brake on extra attacks despite a largeish number of raw actions). Effects like 'knockouts' also count as added-on actions, rather than being a hit penalty etc. Because opponents can't counter movement outside their reach, successes for Dash or similar are subtracted before attacker and defender rolls are compared.
(Heroic Golden Turbulence is also similar, but less developed, and with fewer actions due to a smaller dice pool to start with, as well as including both attack and defense).
(after some thought, I think the system here is probably too complex for the payoffs it gives - combat results being not tremendously different to other systems. Much of the system could be duplicated in e.g. a Savage Worlds type game without the dice pool, with a rule that a character can add a move or similar either declared before the roll at -2, or at a cost of each [4 pt] raise generated after)
Note this system tends to give extra movement for higher-rated characters (most systems with multiple actions try to  inflate movement per turn less). Because each turn a character can make several actions, whole bonus actions can be given out more readily (e.g. "If you have shuang dao and Weapon Use (elite) edge, you may Feint or Defensive Feint once each turn without using a mental action to do so").

*Strike ranks - see above. Strike rank systems can run into problems with low-speed weapons getting too many attacks if not balanced carefully (a drop of speed from 4 to 3 in a 12-segment round moves a character from 3 attacks to 4 attacks, while going from 3 to 2 moves a character from 4 attacks/rd to 6 attacks/rd.
One patch is to have modifiers apply to base number of attacks rather than speed and use [segments in round/number of attacks] to work out a characters speed, instead of modifying the strike rank of weapons directly.
 
*Actions bought with initiative e.g. Feng Shui - actions cost a number of initiative points to complete – characters count down from their initiative e.g. an attack taking 3 initiative might start on 10 and actually complete on 7 (or be executed immediately, but with the next attack not allowed until 7). This is similar to Strike ranks, except counting down instead of up. Feng Shui type games tend to give fast characters higher initiative points and so more actions, whereas strike rank systems tend to reduce the time required to make actions and have a round with a fixed number of segments. Feng shui also lets characters take 'snapshot' actions - the normal 'shot cost' of 3 initiative for an attack can be reduced to "2" at -2 to hit (fairly severe in its d6-d6 system) or "1" with a -5. 3-cost actions can be performed at count 2 or 1 without extra penalty, though longer actions carry into next round.
 
*Action Points – various of Leading Edge Games’ RPGs use this; An interesting version of this is also seen in the freerpg JAGS. In JAGS number of action points are determined by “Reaction” ( DEX). The length of an action determines how many action points a task is (i.e. Full Round = 10, Medium = 7, Short =3). Unless an attacker wins initiative by a significant margin, they can be interrupted with a shorter action i.e. a “Charge” is a Long action (8 points) and so can be interrupted with a normal Attack (Medium action, 5 points). This folds something similar to 3E/4E D&Ds “attacks of opportunity” into the normal action system. A downside is that a player needs to know action costs of various actions on their turn and weigh up the relative costs; it also makes Dex/Reaction very valuable. Action points are good for handling detailed movement allowances (i.e. "crawling = 2 APs per 10ft" and so on).
Rolemaster (RMSS) gives characters an activity % (a character gets "100% activity" each round), with various actions using up variable %s of activity. (actions are separately defined as snap, normal or deliberate for initiative purposes).
 
*Dice actions + automatic actions. DC Heroes allows characters one of each. This is fairly good since action types are defined by the system (if you roll dice for it, its a dice action). Lifting an object would be an automatic actions (weight = STR), as would running (distance = DEX) unless the character wants to lift something super-heavy or run particular fast which requires the character to make a Pushing attempt.
This approach also combines interestingly with the ability to take multiple actions at a penalty (Masterbook). Running + Shooting is possible, but automatically gives a multi-tasking penalty to shooting rolls.; lifting a too-heavy weapon automatically penalizes attack rolls.
(DC Heroes is interesting in that while characters all get one action/round, some PCs can do dramatically more with it. Thanks to multi-actions and logarithmic movement rates, Superman can fly halfway around the world and smack a bunch of guys with one action. It also has interesting 'superspeed' rules, where any noncombat action has a base time measured in APs; Superspeed APs deduct from these and so and with enough points in it, someone can build a house as a combat action.).
 
*MERP % Activity- MERP 'moving manuevers' use a dice roll on a chart to determine % activity that a roll uses. A low roll may mean the manuever is successful, with moderate rolls meaning an action takes a full round (100% activity) and high rolls meaning the manuever consumes less time, with remaining % activity being spendable to perform other actions. (Another note - Rolemaster in one of the companions had a skill for multiple attacks, while may be a precursor of 'iterative attacks' in 3.x D&D)
 
*rolled number of actions e.g. Cthulhu eating d3 investigators per round.

Number of permitted actions may change under some circumstances. D&D treats "surprise" as special; 3.x allows only a standard action (i.e. no movement except by replacing the normal action) in a surprise round; 1E AD&D is the opposite and allows a character to make a set of melee attacks each segment on a surprised foe.
AD&D also allows extra actions against certain opponents i.e. a fighter can make attacks equal to their level against 1-1 HD creatures or 0-level humans (a legacy of the Chainmail combat system?). This is something other games handle more deftly; DC Heroes for example lets a character make a "Multiattack" by taking a hit/damage penalty, applying the attack result against mobs of foes simultaneously (larger the mob, the greater the penalty).
Palladium reduces number of actions for characters who are spellcasting, compared to normal melee actions - which synergises in an interesting (if unclear) way with their Dodge system to make it harder for a wizard to dodge or parry midspell - they are less likely to have extra actions to spend to do this, assuming the action has to come out of a lower number of actions per round. (Rifts also has different ROF for weapons like bows compared to melee attacks, which is mostly just confusing since using a bow presumably shouldn't alter how many Dodges a character can make a round).(Edit note: I have now seen an online Rifts game where it was houseruled wizards could just cast spells at the same rate as melee attacks, 8 attacks = 8 spells! wheeeeee).
Special abilities can also grant extra actions in specific circumstances (e.g. Cleave) or characters can sometimes spend points for additional actions (4E Action Points). Extra limbs/weapons can also grant extra attacks (see 'Two Weapon Fighting' in the combat moves section, next page for a list of variants).
Games sometimes include abilities which allow open-ended repeat attacks- e.g. Blade Cascade in 4E D&D (Unerrata'd) or Flying Windmill Kick in Feng Shui - either let a character make attacks until they miss. This sort of ability can be dangerous to design since there could be combos with abilities that increase to-hit bonus (Elven Accuracy in 4E, generally speaking luck points..) dealing up to unlimited damage.

The allowed number of actions per round plays a part in determining what combat actions are defined in the system. A game which allows only a single action per round may have to define additional basic action types to cover what would be combinations of multiple actions in other systems - perhaps compare "Two Weapon Fighting" as normal multitasking of two attacks, vs. 4E D&D "Twin Strike" as a defined power, or Charge as a defined action in say 3E D&D, vs combinations of Run+Wild Attack in Savage Worlds.
 
A game can also have fairly abstract 'actions' - where something that might be a separate action in another system is merely a result of extra success. For example, a very high attack roll might kill multiple opponents (Anglerre 'overflow' w/ cleave ability), or perhaps weirder uses of bonus combat successes in Heroic Golden Turbulence.
Conversely, something that might be resolved as a separate action may also just turn into a bonus, rather than being resolved with another roll. 4E TWF just gives a +1 to damage for having an offhand weapon, and Tunnels and Trolls just turns an extra weapon into bonus dice (see Damage post specific system notes for details). The Lone Wolf gamebook series has a Mind Blast type character ability, that just gives a bonus to Combat Skill instead of being resolved as a series of extra rolls of psychic attack vs. psychic defense or anything like that.
 
Splits between attack/defense are sometimes modelled at the level of actions (a character can either spend an action to attack, or on Dodging; Palladium), sometimes through selection of combat manuevers (a Wild Attack gives a bonus to attack and penalty to defense; Savage Worlds), or through point allocation (a LegendQuest character can apply Skill Levels toward attacking or toward Parrying [a particular opponent], once per round - part of a general idea that a skill level can be used 1/round that also shows up in spell Control Levels and the horsemanship rules)

A game may give out separate 'attacks' and 'reactions' - notably in 5E D&D a character might have 4-5 melee attacks but still only one 'reaction', so their attack power increases independently of defensive power (compare to Palladium where being faster always increases both, though special abilities like extra plusses to Dodge or 'automatic Dodge' allow one-sided increases).

Games may also distinguish between 'actions' and 'attacks' e.g. 3E and 5E D&D where one 'action' can give several attacks; AD&D refers to 'attack routines', where a bonus routine might be multiple weapons or limbs. 'Bonus' actions may be given out as full rounds/normal actions, or be limited to single attacks. Inconsistencies here potentially generate problems (5E D&D: normally a 'bonus action' gives only a single attack to fighter-type characters e.g. two weapon fighting, scimitar of speed; whereas, 'quicken spell' etc. can let a whole spell be done as a single bonus action, giving the equivalent damage of 4 attacks from an 'eldritch blast' or similar spell).

Its not uncommon for games to distinguish between 'physical' and 'mental' actions - characters may exist who can perform bonus mental actions but not physical actions, due to limitations of physical form. GURPS has a 'compartmentalized mind' advantage (from the Lensman supplement, which had it from the original books), at least one 3E D&D race with multiple minds can do it (the synad, though limited in x/day). 2nd Ed. AD&D deities are noted as being able to perform 2 (demigod), 5 (lesser), 100 (intermediate), or unlimited (greater god) tasks simultaneously by divine rank, and subject to limitations of physical form, presumably to allow them to handle assorted plots, prayers and communications in their portfolios.

Special: 'Number of attacks' is only very rarely directly tested as a game mechanic. Cadillacs & Dinosaurs [Twilight 2000] has an 'initiative' (1-6) that represents combat experience, and so has rolls to avoid 'panic' made with D6 under initiative rating if severely injured etc. (the normal game system is d10 roll under stats 1-10); a failure meaning the character freezes for a Phase for each point failed (they can drop prone after one Phase has passed).

Generally, if everyone gets several attacks a round (Palladium), it would probably be better to just switch this for shorter rounds with fewer actions per round ('When everyone is special, no one will be').

Action systems where a character gets to do X several times, or just do Y once normally, is going to give characters a strong incentive to do X. For instance, this would include 5E fighters with say 4 attacks a round (mitigated slightly by having at least a few options that can be performed with an 'attack'), or worse FUDGE characters who have purchased a SPEED skill specific to another skill e.g. who can 'Knifethrow' 3x/round without penalty or do anything else once. This could be particularly a disincentive against 'improvised actions' - doing anything interesting in combat that's not directly on the character sheet but instead use of terrain/situation - for powerful/high-level characters , since power of normal attacks or spells is 'scaling up' along with number of them.  
Action-point systems where characters get discounts on particular actions can increase potential # physical attacks but still allow a character to 'mix and match' - less incentive to just do the same thing over and over. Avoiding this problem might contribute to bloat in special abilities, again as in 5E where Eldritch Knight characters have to get a 'cast spell+attack' separate action to keep spellcasting competitive with their 4 attacks.

Dice Rolling Note: Systems vary in how many dice rolls are required per combat round (or just per combat - a game could have one-roll resolution without rounds, e.g. Full Light, Full Steam).  
This depends basically on:
 a) the number of stages involved in resolution (e.g. some subset of: initiative, attack, defense, hit location, armour bypass, damage, soak)
b) the number of actions (sometimes not the full set of stages is required per action, e.g. one initiative applies to all, or one 'attack roll' in a dice pool system might be split across multiple attacks, or a damage roll is made with a flat bonus for extra attacks that hit), and;
c) how many dice are actually in a 'roll' e.g. d20 vs. dice pool.
« Last Edit: November 14, 2018, 06:30:09 AM by Bloody Stupid Johnson »

Bloody Stupid Johnson

  • Senior Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3366
Combat - Hit Points
« Reply #33 on: December 24, 2011, 04:24:06 AM »
Finally, and brace yourself, everything and everyone has 20 hit points. Yes, a Confederation of Worlds light infantry commando who has spent the last twelve years choking down steroid pills the size of softballs who could walk naked across the Satan’s Armpit dessert [sic] (still in shape for cocktails later) has as many hit points as Don Knotts in “The Incredible Mr Limpet”. But to make you feet (or perhaps even feel) better, we’ll call them something else...hmm...how about Damage Levels? Yeah! Now that sounds important!” – HOL.
 
PCs, typically being mortal, tend to get physically injured and occasionally die. Games may have parallel systems for handling mental and/or spiritual damage as well – including fatigue, psychic damage and spell use; possibly even results of “social combat”.
 
The most common basic approach for handling damage is that characters have a resource, “hit points” which when depleted means they are killed.
 
Depending on the system Hit Points may be a pure resource (lost when a character takes damage) or it may be designed to also function as a score (aka a “gauge”) for the purpose of other game effects for example, in Tunnels and Trolls, normal physical damage is subtracted directly from a character’s Constitution and the current value is used for Constitution checks – such as the character trying to hold their breath, resist poison or make a saving throw against a death spell (as a side effect of this large monsters, which have a CON multiplier, are particularly good at holding their breath). Mutant Epoch works similarly, with current Endurance being looked up on a table to perform a 'Hazard check' such as resisting poison. (Note after playing Mutant Epoch - the table lookup for attributes looks unwieldy at first, but actually stat checks don't seem to be made that often, e.g. combat uses a different subsystem and doesn't need use of the table).
Comparatively, D&D sometimes attempts to use “hit point checks” (e.g. the “Death Touch” granted power in 3E perhaps, or the Power Word spells) but this typically works badly because hit points are not scaled in a fashion that works with any particular dice roll. T&Ts approach is also nice in that dealing damage to CON is balanced against damage to any other attribute – DEX damage from slowly being petrified, STR damage from fatigue, Intelligence damage from mind blasts or Luck damage from a curse – eliminating the need for a condition system as seen in other games.
 
Games with Multiple types of Hit Points
A couple of games including Palladium, Star Wars Saga, Marvel Super Heroes, Amazing Engine and Alternity use multiple varieties of Hit Points –“hit points + SDC” or “wounds + vitality” or “mortal wounds + lethal wounds”. Most of these multiple-type-of-HPs systems are aimed at making characters “brittle” since often a good attack will bypass the larger pool of lower-grade hit points and zap a PC in their Wounds stat - though for Palladium few attacks can bypass SDC and the distinction between HP types is fairly minor (SDC having been added primarily to bloat up PCs’ HPs in modern games, so they could withstand gun damage). Marvel Super Heroes had a Health score based off several stats combined, plus a Kill result or being dropped below 0 could result in a character losing Endurance ranks. Alternity build off its multiple HP subsystems to have a couple of interesting mutations representing redundant internal organs and the like. On the downside it required tables to determine what damage type an attack did - an ordinary attack would have 3 separate damage ratings listed, effects that dealt damage on a miss (i.e. dodges vs. explosions) needed 5, and even inanimate objects had multiple HPs - e.g. "the canister can be broken by 4 points of wounds or 2 points of mortal damage".
(EDIT NOTE: this sort of system does have a psychological advantage in that a GM can deal minor attrition damage - not possible if wound levels are quite granular, as well as major damage where necessary.)

(Note that systems which just have large pools of HPs, particularly where these just inflate with level, can run into realism problems where situations that should be automatic death (stabbed in your sleep; falling from a great height; smothering a grenade with your body in Palladium) only cause a flesh wound. This can require the GM to overrule the HP results to give a death result, which can have rules (like 'coup de grace' in 3E). Multiple HPs can fix this (if Mortal Wound health boxes increase more slowly), as can tight control over HP inflation/fixed # HP systems).

Note that here I've been talking about games where the two different HP tracks are equivalent in scale - so that a character might take 10 points off HP-A or 10 points off HP-B. A slightly different case is if the system has say an arbitrarily large hit points score and also gives a character a few 'wound boxes' or similar, perhaps with a critical filling in a box or perhaps with a number of hit points damage filling in a box also. 'Dragonborn' IIRC does this (as does the vanished ROAR game where characters had a fixed 5 'Life' levels in addition to normal damage hurting their CON). This can be a reasonable way to calculate wound penalties or the like in a normal ad hoc HP system.

Hit Points are also sometimes divided up across various hit locations, as in Twilight 2000 or Runequest. This system may or may not be used for NPCs, since it requires more detailed tracking, even though the resulting maimings may be fun. This setup can cause complications for tracking 'systemic' damage - Roma Imperious (IIRC) has no core HP system and so even blood loss is resolved as being damage to a specific location, with some rules charting how this spreads through the body. HarnMaster uses specific injuries but also has a separate 'blood loss' statistic which is tracked.
 
Fixed HPs (i.e. all characters have the same # hit points)
Some systems use fixed hit points + soak rolls – as lampooned above in HOL; here everyone has the same number of Hit Points i.e. 7 health levels IIRC for Storyteller or 3 “Wounds” for PCs in Savage Worlds (though SW characters must first be “Shaken” to take a Wound). To represent character’s different ability to withstand injury, damage itself is reduced for tough characters (via a soak roll or a "Toughness" threshold); though soak rolls are sometimes found in other designs as well (Warhammer, whose 1st edition was famous for the ‘Naked Dwarf’ effect ). The Buck Rogers: High Adventure Cliffhangers game –not to be confused with the Buck Rogers XXVc game which is an AD&D variant - apparently has a system where characters have only one hit point; PCs must pass a Stamina check any time they are injured, or die.

Wound Penalties
Fixed HPs i.e. where all characters have the same # hit points frequently form a condition track (referred to as the “Trauma Gauge” pattern in Kirk’s RPG design patterns) – individual health levels may be named (Bruised, Maimed, etc) and have increasing wound penalties on all checks. This is realistic but can lead to a “death spiral” effect since the penalty usually affects all checks (not just Constitution-based checks like in Tunnels and Trolls). FUDGE has a slight variable on this where a character gets a limited number of named injury levels: there may be multiple boxes at the same level (e.g. "Scratch" levels) and taking one too many hits of that severity causes the wound to overflow and be recorded against the next level. Old gamebook Cretan Chronicles  had an interesting death spiral kludge in that being seriously wounded reduced a character from rolling 2 dice to 1 die, but this cancelled out if both sides were crippled (preventing lengthy stalemates).
Penalties may sometimes be reduced by an advantage or feat (usually a fixed amount), or a skill (e.g. Aberrant has a endurance skill letting a character roll [Stamina+Endurance] and reduce the penalty by the # successes).


Soak rolls
These are rolls by the defender to reduce the amount of damage, sometimes representing toughness in an alternate way to having different HP totals. A soak might be only sometimes successful (Savage Worlds), or the roll may nearly always succeed but have to be rolled to determine how much is stopped (Storyteller).
Soak rolls are particularly common in dice pool systems since soak is a form of ‘effect’ which these handle well.
Savage Worlds also has a "soak roll" where a character expends a luck point, aka a "benny", to try to roll their Vigour, absorbing one wound per 4 points of the roll.

Personally, I used to hate soak rolls since for WW a quite lengthy set of dice rolling for hit/dodge/damage/etc could end up with no damage due to soak, and since it didn’t make sense to me that being stabbed could result in no damage. Nowadays I don’t mind the Savage Worlds approach however, and have come to terms with the idea of a fully soaked hit just being a “flesh wound”.
 
Another note on soaking: HP-based systems are generally fairly predictable; a large number of hit points will take several rounds to plough through. Sometimes critical hits are added on to neutralize this invulnerability, although...this is an example of a subsystem working at cross-purposes with the main system (why not just have hit points that inflate less dramatically in the first place).
A soak-based system is more capricious; it is sometimes possible for a very poor 'soak' roll and/or high incoming damage roll to drop a fairly tough target in one very lucky hit. In many die-pool games these sort of events are quite rare though (e.g. a result of 0 successes on 8d10, target number 6 will only come up on 1 in 256 rolls).
A couple of minor perks of soak systems are that they're also good for representing cases where a character's ability to take damage will change rapidly (such as from shapechanging) without current wounds being affected; similarly some games have abilities that let a character sometimes exchange their 'soak' stat for a different stat (such as 1/round using Dex to 'roll with punch' instead of using a Con-based toughness value). A HP system does the exchange less deftly (e.g. by having HP based off an unusual stat all the time).

Occasionally a system that doesn't use soaking normally will find a situation that requires it and improvise something. A couple of Tunnels and Trolls solos allow CON saves, with the amount failed by becoming damage (in Captif D'Yvoire, for instance), though this is more or less just a general mechanic for saves which happens to be using CON in this instance. 5th ed. T&T Gunnes allow a Luck save with amount made by/missed modifying damage, since the damage of a bullet 'varies tremendously depending on where it hits the victim' - other weapons don't get this.
Palladium in 'Dead Reign' notes that zombies are resistant to damage, and gets a "natural Armour Rating (A.R.) of 14 reflecting its ability to soak up or shrug off most kinds of damage" although this has the problem that it runs off the to-hit roll rather than the damage roll, and a zombie is as likely to shrug off an SMG burst as a punch.
 
Finite soaking: very rarely a system has soaking while runs out after use. Dying Earth is one example of this - a character makes a "Health" roll to negate an injury, reducing their health pool by one; otherwise they are injured (-2 to all actions, on d6). The soak dice themselves function much like "hit points", although they are rolled instead of fixed in value.
(Savage Worlds soak costs a 'bennie' and so also work like this).

True20/ Mutants & Masterminds instead of having HPs has a soak roll called a "Toughness save" (d20+modifiers) made vs. a variable DC based on the damage of the attack and with how much the roll is failed by determining effects (usually an accumulating penalty but eventually collapse or death). Because of the d20s variability, this may make combat more "swingy" than a normal HP system, or a dice pool soak.

Toughness Thresholds
A 'Toughness threshold' is sometimes included in a damage calculation as a way to consider opponent's level of vulnerability. It can be used to replace a variable # of hit points, just as soaking does (Savage Worlds), or HP may vary as well (Warhammer). It is similar to 'soak' but as I mean it here suggests using a fixed subtraction, rather than a roll.
Savage Worlds for example calculates a 'Toughness' at 2 + 1/2 Vigour die; armour also adds to this.
 For Savage Worlds the system reduces HP tracking for minions nicely and so is good for mass combat, but with the trade-off that it requires lucky rolls to bring down big monsters, making that more hit and miss (though a party can operate tactically to help bring down a big monster). (as noted by CRKruger) The variation between characters due to Vigor [4 points between d4 and d12] is more than the bonus provided by Heavy Armour (+3) - the 'Naked Dwarf' effect.


Specific Injuries
Yet another way to handle wounds is by “specific injuries”: e.g. in Amber, Rolemaster. Most of these (Amber excepted) also have a HPs system for blood loss and the like, but most damage is via descriptive effects like “grazed knee”, “left leg disabled” or “skull crushed”. The HP system normally just causes characters who fail to die from serious injuries to eventually collapse from minor damage, though Warhammer combines a HP system with specific injuries in an unusual way; a character only loses Hit Points (“Wounds”) initially, but after this buffer is exhausted starts to roll on the critical damage tables.
More commonly, specific injuries are tacked onto a HP system via critical hits, or for attacks which do over a certain amount of damage (Earthdawn injuries over a certain threshold have varying effects based on their hit location though HPs are not normally tracked locationally; 2nd Ed. AD&D’s Fighters Handbook had “numbed” and “useless” results for called shots to a location from attacks dealing over ¼ the victim’s total HPs). CHILL (but not other Pacesetter Games' RPGs) has a semi-specific system where most attacks will generate abstract Wounds of varying degrees based on success level of the attack roll, in addition to targets taking HP ("Stamina") damage.
Adding specific injuries onto a HP system is sometimes considered problematic at a conceptual level - an uneven level of abstraction since some wounds involve broken bones, bleeding effects etc. and other "wounds" -those just causing the HP number to go down -don't, as well as having large HP numbers fail in their role of providing protection to characters.

 
Specific injuries can also be fairly abstracted, as “conditions”. (e.g. see scenario mini-game “Lady Blackbird” http://www.onesevendesign.com/ladyblackbird/ ?)
FATE has a system of 'consequences' whereby stress (damage) can be voluntarily converted into fairly narrative complications like 'dangling off a cliff' or whatnot, instead of being subtracted from the stress track. (a strange hybrid of specific injury and soaking?).
Hackmaster (the revision) subtracts damage from HPs normally, but also records each wound separately (which affects wound healing).

Additional Notes
 
*Hit Points & other hit-point-like resources: Exalted has a wound level system, plus gives characters a separate pool of power points ("Essence") which fuels various Perfect Defenses. Characters usually need to use perfect defenses to block various (massive-damage-pool) effects, making the power points pool in some ways analogous to "hit points".
 
*Multiple systems: D6 Space actually has two alternate damage systems, giving the GM the choice between a hit point system and using soak rolls (perhaps for compatibility with Star Wars). 3E D&D's Unearthed Arcana has an optional 'Toughness' system (like Mutants & Masterminds' system) which can be used to replace hit points.
 
*Luck: As well as physical toughness, "Luck" frequently factors into how well a character can absorb damage. Different systems handle this intangible in very different ways: D&D assumes that 'luck' is part of a characters' Hit Points (a luckier character would have more). The Tunnels and Trolls characters CON represents physical durability only but the T&T character has a separate Luck score that will usually reduce incoming damage indirectly, via additional Combat Adds and better saving throws. The Savage Worlds character's "Wounds" are also wholly physical, although the scale for them is fuzzier (a damage roll under Toughness may 'injure' a target descriptively, but has no mechanical effect); the Luck factor applies via Bennies powering Soak Rolls.
 
Secondary 'wound boxes' on top of HPs: As an interesting case of (probably bad) game design accidentally creating a secondary 'wound box' system, there are 3.0 D&D vorpal weapons, which could cut off someone's head on a critical hit, often on a 15-20 result (keen scimitar) or even 12-20 (with keen + the improved critical feat stacking in 3.0). Epic-level characters could get 4 to 8 attacks a round (with two weapon fighting), resulting in many epic level monsters having evolved multiple heads to survive; effectively a being has a special 'wound track' where each head is one 'wound', with the regular HPs (bloated to crazytown) being irrelevant. A couple of monsters also had extra vorpal resistances (sirrush); or weapon immunity in 3.0 could also stop such weapons working (if a monster needed a +6 weapon to hit the +5 vorpal weapon wouldn't work -  though barring the GM having handed out a +6 weapon that's non-vorpal as well, this shuts down the warrior completely).

Death's Door
Many HP systems consider a character to be only incapacitated at 0 hit points, and die at some negative number. A few systems instead treat a score of 0 as death, but have character's collapse at a small positive number. Systems vary considerably in how wide they set the margin, depending on how lethal the system is; Dragon Warriors has [d6+5] health points and a death result of -2, meaning quite often a hit [about 2-5 damage] will just kill a seriously injured character outright. 3.5 uses -10 (and Pathfinder -CON); 4E uses negative [half normal HPs]. 5E does not track negatives (minimum is 0) but characters start making "Death saves", actually fairly good for keeping suspense in dying though this also necessitates more rules to provide automatic death in extreme cases, and it makes magical healing very effective as it will bring someone around automatically despite 1-2 failed death saves, starting at 0 instead of a negative number.); Marvel Super Heroes likewise does not track negatives, but a character losing all "Health points" begins to lose Endurance ranks instead. Mutant Epoch has several categories (Incapacitated but conscious i.e. can still use mental mutations, incapacitated but stable, incapacitated and dying - with the exact thresholds depending on a characters [Endurance+Willpower]. Palladium and AD&D 1E/2E (optionally, for -6 or worse) have permanent impairments for characters reduced to negative HPs; Palladium has a table for this).
Shadowrun 4 lets characters buy extra "Damage Overflow Boxes" as an advantage, while DC Heroes has an 'Invulnerability' power which kicks in to recover damage automatically if a character with it (e.g. Superman) would be killed.

The main technical issue associated with having negative HP thresholds is PC/monster consistency. It is usually more fun for combat to include a monster being taken out as a decapitation or the like; that a monster technically isn't dead until -10 HP is something alot of 3.5 DMs are going to overlook when describing a final blow (I had one DM describe an NPC as losing an arm when we were fighting her - and then we decided to just take her prisoner). One of the more interesting logical workarounds within rules is Advanced Fighting Fantasy's Death Door system; a Hero reduced to 0 Stamina begins losing LUCK points at 1/round, finally perishing at 0 Luck; monsters do not have LUCK scores (though they may substitute Skill instead for involuntary checks such as resisting spells) and so can be described as being slain immediately at 0 Stamina. Another good compromise is the systems that require some sort of check to continue functioning at 0 - luck rerolls and the like can help PCs stay functioning (or just be incapacitated), while a monster may be more likely to fail and be dispatched without having to linger in the twilight before death. Spawn of Fashan has 'cling to life' rolls, but notes that is 'a product of a strong will developing from intelligence', so doesn't apply to most (non-sentient) creatures.
A system may sometimes skip 'death's door' for specific effects e.g. 5E disintegrate destroys a target reduced to 0 HP, rather than have it become dying; or a mind flayer extracts a targets brain if it can reduce their HP to 0. This makes these attacks particularly lethal; in the sense they bypass a portion of the hit points (the 'underground' half of a 5E characters HPs) they slightly resemble 'aggravated' damage or damage that 'goes straight to wound points'.
Death at '0' may be mathematically easier to calculate any 'overkill' with, e.g. if a cleave-type power lets a character apply excess damage to a different target (lower numbers of HPs, e.g. just a few wound boxes, would also help).

Objects
Objects may have HPs, as creatures do. Systems where high STR is supposed to be modelled, such as supers game, may want to instead have "break DCs" or similar to separate object and creature destruction subsystems, as realistic damage generation from super-strength may result in target creatures getting reduced to a thin paste unless object HPs are set extremely low, and so lead to an arms race with regard to defensive powers, or balanced super-strength will give little ability to punch through tanks (GURPS Supers).
Damage to objects may reduce checks relating to the object (e.g. Repair rolls, Drive rolls, etc).
 
Partial List of HP Calculations
Some of the numbers given below are here because they show interesting design in and of themselves, others are listed to give context to the list of damage calculations by game (next post).

Arbitrary HP Score (the most common design)
D&D: Usually 1 dice per level (d4 to d12 by class), plus Con modifiers. 1st level maximized in some editions. AD&D replaced dice with fixed points (no Con modifier) after "Name" level (usually 9th or 10th). A house rule I'd seen was to have an extra Hit Die for "0-level" (e.g. race-based hit die) - this is also used in David Johansen's Dark Passages D&D variant, and in Dungeon Crawl Classics/Mutant Crawl Classics (where characters start at 0-level).
Monsters have mostly arbitrary (or CR-based) numbers of Hit Dice, with d6s in 0D&D, d8s in AD&D; Maybe partly because dice size is standardized, small monsters may have 1/2 or 1/4 of a HD.  They use type-based dice in 3E, and size-based dice in 5E (something similar to this idea first having been floated by Gygax for his never-written 2nd Edition; its interesting in that # size categories is thus influenced by # dice steps possible, perhaps interesting as a two-way interaction since the rule both sets # categories and couldn't exist if # of categories wasn't in the ballpark of what would work for it).  
4E has fixed HPs based on monster level (much higher than base PC HPs, possibly with a x2 elite or x4 solo multiplier).
Low HPs in 0D&D/AD&D are arguably buffered by lots of NPC hirelings, making CHA almost a source of extra HPs :)
D&D almost never uses wound penalties: late 2E 'combat and tactics' has specific injury criticals, and 3E in rare cases (GM option, when stepping on caltrops) may have specific injuries. 4E often had conditions occur as a side effect of 'powers'. One place exact HP mattered in 1E, was magic sword use; a character worked out average HP/level and each level worth of HP reduced their 'personality' by -1, possibly letting a magic sword take them over if heavily injured.
Carcosa: as 0D&D, but hit points are re-rolled between encounters to increase unpredictability (i.e. replicating some of the automatic features of using soak rolls more awkwardly).
Arduin: started out as a series of fan or '3rd party' 0D&D supplements, but went to a revised HP system - base by race (largely size-based), +Con score, + 5 for fighting classes,  +1 for 2nd/3rd/4th level, +1 per level for warriors (1 per 2 levels or 1 per 3 for others). "People now have a chance to run any character or characters on any expedition they choose without regard to difference in levels of experience. They can have their 1st level warrior stand shoulder to shoulder with a 10th level lord and hold the gate together! Just as in real life young and inexperienced Warriors accompanied older, more experienced fighters."  
As a fairly haphazard early (modular) game its sort of unclear whether monsters are intended to also convert to this - it could be argued that one reason for the revised system was to prevent 'high level fighters having three times as many HPs as the dragon they were fighting' in which case the monster should be staying the same, and new monsters appearing in the same book as the new HP system have Hit Dice normally. 'The Arduin Adventure', intended to replace the core 0D&D rules to use with the supplements, does give more HPs to some monsters (e.g. orcs go from 1 hit dice to 34 hit points); it has a slightly different HP system again of [CON score +20+level].
Some of Hargrave's problems with HP inflation may actually be due to level inflation - the class tables in the original Arduin go up to level 100.
Gamma World: CON in six-sided dice is traditional from 1E to 4E (weapons do AD&D damage but powered weapons doing large amounts also exist). 4E adds 1d6 per level advanced, and has classes...Enforcers get +Con HP initially, and add CON modifier each level advanced. GW characters convert to AD&D keeping all their hit points (!) i.e. 35-60 average at 1st level. (as stated in the AD&D DMG for 1st ed. GW, and the same rule applies for 4th Edition according to Dragon #183 conversion rules).
Monsters have lots of (usually) six-sided hit dice, set by race rather than CON (2E listed ability scores for creatures). (though if it hadn't, its HD per CON idea would've made it easy to represent things like the 3E 'tauric' template that adds component races HD together).  
Palladium (in general): generally Hit points = Physical Endurance (3d6) + d6 per level (including 1st).
-Original Palladium Fantasy characters Original or revised Palladium Fantasy did not have SDC. Race affects PE and hence HP heavily e.g. at 1st level normal elf 2d6 PE->3d6 HP, human 3d6 PE->4d6 HP, dwarf 4d6 PE->5d6 HP. Multi-classed characters could scam extra HPs by going up level in multiple classes, getting them more levels more cheaply.
-TMNT characters had SDC based off Size Level, plus any physical skills (choice of somewhat restricted due to skills being allocated on background table).
-Heroes Unlimited characters had SDC based off power category, + super power bonuses, etc, plus more physical skills.
-Rifts/Robotech include 'MDC'. Base SDC is by class (from 3d6 to d4x10). Even a roll on the background table can give 'scaly skin' (+3d6 SDC).
Monsters e.g. in Rifts may instead have up to several hundred MDC, or more (with deities having HPs that look like modest lotto jackpots).  Inflation of numbers over time largely erodes the value of PE (Physical Endurance) as an attribute (on the flip side, damage output, Strength went up due to inclusion of physical skills and then 'supernatural strength' - but PS does not affect MD damage). The MDC system can optionally be dropped to have an SDC-based game (Conversion Book guidelines), such as for characters travelling to 'SDC worlds', though this generates weirdness since the straight MDC/SDC conversion it suggests drops some characters to 1/100th their normal hit points pretty arbitrarily, leaving some characters still overpumped (e.g. Juicers get a huge SDC bonus - normally insignificant in effect - that doesn't divide).
Palladium's inflation sometimes is 'uneven' in what's increased. As HP increases damage also increased, and the margin of error between unconsciousness/death [-PE] narrows from quite wide to almost nonexistent.
13th Age: Base value 6-8 by class, + Con modifier, x3 multiplier at 1st level. The multiplier increases by x1 up to 4th level, by x2 up to 7th level, then by x4 up to 10th level (game max.).
Synnibarr: d6*100 life points per level, plus CON (rolled on d20, minimum 8)*10 at 1st level only. +bionics bonuses (potentially into the thousands of points, to a cap of 50,000). Bionics add to general LP pool, despite limbs having locational HP, i.e. a bionic arm helps against being shot in the head. Optional system replaces with life points = weight.
BRP: average of SZ (2d6+6) and CON (3d6). Divided by location in Runequest.
Marvel Super Heroes: Health = STR+AGI+END+Fighting. (usually damage = opponent STR). At 0, unconscious and begin losing Endurance ranks.
Fuzion: Base Stun hits = body (1-10)*5. Base Hits (killing) = (body*5). Characters can reallocate up to 1/2 between these at chargen.
Toon: 1d6+6 hit points
SenZar: = character CON (5-15) x experience level. Death at -CON.
Monsters use the same formula but get +/- d10 or d20 to the total (GM choice)?- presumably for variety [fixed CON given for each].
Dragon Warriors: d6+class modifier (+9 barbarian, +7 knight, +4 sorcerer). Unconscious at 0, death at -3. The random roll replaces having a random-roll 'Constitution' - it doesn't have CON, instead instead using Strength for e.g. rolls against poison - a houserule I've seen is to roll a 3d6 'Endurance' score and use [End/3] instead of the d6 roll for HPs.
HERO (6E): body base 10 (+1 per character point), stun base 20 (+2 per character point). -Body equals death.
Hero characters will usually have a 'Physical Defense' (or Energy Defense) that reduces damage slightly; in 4E PD was derived as (Str/5) and ED (Con/5), while they're fixed base in 6E.
Amazing Engine: varies by setting. Faerie, Queen & County, Stamina = (Willpower+Reflexes)/5, Body = (Fitness/5). Attributes are up to 7d10, +20. Bughunters get an additional +10 to physical stats and a /3 divisor.
Talislanta(circa 3E)- About 10-16 base HP depending on template (12 is standard), +Con (average 0), +2/level. Extreme template HPs range from 4 (ferran) to 22 (monad).
Unisystem: (Str+Con)x4, +10 life points. Stats are rated around 1-6. "Hard to Kill" can add extra life points (1-5 pt merit, +3 per pt, also adds to checks to survive at negative LPs).
Superbabes: HTK (hits to kill) =(d6 per level)+ Muscles bonus (up to +220 at 1000 Muscle) + Health bonus (+600 at a max. 1000 Health) + Moves bonus (+60 at max. 500 Moves) + Int bonus (+10 for mindless, +0 average, +5 for a deific 300) + Will bonus (+55 for a 500) minus Personality and Looks penalty (up to -30 from a max 300 in each; up to +10 for scores of 0).
Icons: Stamina = [Strength+Willpower] (note: No Endurance stat. Determination can also be spent to stop damage.).
Cortex- Life Points equal Vitality stat +Willpower stat (scores are rolls from d2 to d12 so using maximum i.e. d8+d8=8+8 = 16 LPs.) When total damage exceeds LPs, the character must make an average Vitality+Willpower roll to stay conscious; difficulty increases each round. Wound (as opposed to stun) damage can also apply a penalty to this.
Over The Edge: roll double normal dice pool of most combat oriented trait, or take [7x pool] as hit points. If multiple traits, some or all can be rolled (specify in advance and take highest).
Demonspawn gamebooks: Life Points = sum of all attributes (there are seven rolled on 2d6x8;  Strength, Speed, Stamina, Courage, Luck, Charm, Attraction + Skill which starts at 0 and gains one per combat) = average LPs of 392. Being sexy helps noticeably - since there are two charisma scores (Charm vs. males and Attraction vs. females) which each add 1:1 to LPs. There is also a "Power" score for using magic, which doesn't add to PC LPs, but does for some monsters (e.g. Demonspawn). Monster difficulty is usually reduced by low Charm/attraction; very tough monsters can have very high Courage or Stamina for more LPs with little other combat effect (one 900-LP giant skunk monster has 200 Courage, 400 Stamina) - a way for the GM (well, the book) to fudge monster hit points where desired.
Starcluster 3E: "Constitution" = Str + Coordination + Agility + Endurance (stats averaging 7-8), multiplied x10 if using d100 or d10+bonus, x4 if diceless, x2 if multidice additive. (damage varies depending on which game resolution system is chosen). Penalties accumulate for each 25% of Con lost.
Hong Kong Action Theatre: reportedly has two sorts of damage - 'Form' (Toughness attribute)(physical injury) and Focus (Chi attribute)(fighting spirit). Player allocates damage between these as desired - Form reduces Speed/Skill, Focus reduces Cool and use of special abilities.
FantasyCraft: (damage similar to D&D). Characters have Wounds = CON (x size multiplier; 1 med, x1.5 large which is available for some PC races at 1st level e.g. drakes, giants), plus Vitality of up to [12+Con mod]/level. Minor NPCs instead make 'damage saves'; this is a slightly wonky mechanic as its a 'damage based DC' - see discussion of these in next post - although the problem doesn't affect PCs/special NPCs. Tougher non-special NPCs may still make 'damage saves' require multiple failed saves to kill (...basically invalidating the point of not tracking hit points, although it does allow 'kill minor NPC' feats/powers to work against them at reduced effect). Critical hits allow characters to spend an action die per failed save applied. Weapon feats often cause autofails based on different stats being higher than the target (Con - hammer, Int-knife, Wis-staff, etc.).
Hollow Earth Expedition: HP = Body (1-5) + Willpower (1-5) + Size (avg. 0). Characters are unconscious at 0 and die at -5 (-7 w/ Diehard). Total HP for creatures can be negative if Sz is low in which case the effect is ignored until affect they take damage i.e. a -4 HP creature dies immediately if it takes damage.

Stress Track
Fate Core: a character has physical and mental stress boxes for 1 damage /2 damage, with Physique and Will skills giving extra slots (for 3-damage at +1, 4-damage at +3, and an extra mild consequence slot for +5. They also can take a mild, moderate or severe consequence from damage, reducing it by 2, 4, or 6 respectively and each time adding a (negative) Aspect. Characters recover all stress (but not consequences) between action scenes and probably will 'concede' conflicts without dying. NPCs have fewer stress boxes, depending on plot importance. [side note: see thread here debating if characters should all have the same stress track for 'spotlight time' fairness).
Shadowrun 1E: 10 wound boxes (Body stat roll used to soak damage). NPCs may have less - being taken out by a Light, Medium or Heavy wound only ("Professional rating" 1-3).
Storyteller e.g. Vampire: a number of named wound levels (Bruised, Crippled, Incapacitated, etc). The only way to get an extra wound level basically is the "Large" merit.
Limited number of levels makes this handy for running wound penalties (which inflate seriously at Crippled). 1 damage = 1 wound level vs. soak so damage often varies between complete bounce and 'chunk salsa' effects, as opposed to other games' death spirals. Each level gives a particular wound penalty; some rolls are exempt from wound penalties e.g. Arete rolls in Mage are initially only about 1-3 dice, so wound penalties don't affect it. The unrealisticness of damage 'bouncing' for high soak is somewhat mitigated by PCs normally being supernaturals; physically human creatures (including Mages) can only soak 'bashing' damage, not lethal.
Aberrant -a Storyteller-derived superhero game, this was similar but had serious problems with damage and soak scaling; a PC could be built with soak similar to a regular human ('baseline'), while energy blasts could go up to 20 or 30 dice. Health Levels were the same as Storyteller, although aberrants could make a skill check to negate wound penalties and could buy extra health levels (redundant internal organs).
Apocalypse World: 12 segments, normally shown as a 'clock'. Derivatives may modify this, e.g. Dungeon World is more D&D-esque, with the main notable difference perhaps that characters can often get free 'kill' results vs. lower-level opponents (+1 to your level if you have the Vorpal Sword).
(AW doesn't use its HP as a track very much - e.g. to determine whether injury worsens on its own. It does show soaking, a common feature of fixed # HP [stress track] systems, in that characters can take an attribute penalty to absorb damage, albeit rarely).
Savage Worlds: PCs have 3 wounds with a "fourth" wound meaning a roll for incapacitation, -1 to rolls per wound; 3 bennies which can be spent to roll a Vigour check to resist wounds. Most NPCs have only one wound.
Forgotten Futures: named wound levels of "Bruised", "Flesh Wound", "Injured", "Injured" (there are two 'injured' levels), "Critical". Unlike most stress track systems, wounds just use descriptive labels i.e. a weapon might deal an 'Injured' result. An extra result at the same level is moved down to the next stage i.e. a second Bruise gives a Flesh Wound instead. See also damage calculations, next post.
Fireborn: characters have 'minor wounds' equal to their 'Earth' score, and then wounds at -1, -2, -3, etc. up to -8(dead). Thresholds of [Water x 1,2,3 etc.] determine if a wound is equal to -1, -2 etc. Minor wounds give no penalty (-0), once all wounds of a given level are filled a wound moves up to the next stage.

Attribute Loss
Tunnels and Trolls: = character CON score (base 3d6; x 2/3 if elf, x2 if dwarf or hobb, +level or magic boosts). Death at 0.
The Fantasy Trip (pre-GURPS): HP = STR . Generally 8 to about 16; in Melee STR and DEX add to 24, TFT clone at darkcitygames has 3 stats and uses base 8 for each, with 8 discretionary points. Monsters may have STR of up to 50 or so (giants).
GURPS: HP =Health (3-18, bought with points). -HLT means roll HLT or die. Automatic at [-5*HLT]. 4E uses STR instead of HLT.
DC Heroes: damage is subtracted from BODY attribute; body also reduces damage taken (calculated with a table). The damage reduction can also be provided by armour or martial arts powers; characters are sometimes made harder to kill with the Invulnerability power, giving an immediate check to 'heal' damage taken.
Maelstrom: characters have an Endurance score (base 30 + discretionary points, rolled against as a percentage). Characters are unconscious at 0 and dead after 100 damage total.

Roll Penalty
Cortex+ e.g. Marvel Heroic/Smallville: 'stress' is rated at up to d12. It equals one of the dice in the attacker's dice pool when damage is generated, and can then be used as an extra die by the victim's opponents. More damage later either supercedes (if higher) or adds one dice step; the system is interesting in that it can give a probability adjustment based on damage for either the total damage taken, or a single individual wound. There are mental and emotional stress tracks as well as physical, making powers like 'invulnerability' less overpowering.
A minor peculiarity of the system is that since attack roll and damage are separate numbers chosen from the same dice pool, a high attack correlates with less damage and vice versa (instead of a high attack getting more damage).
Marvel SAGA: cards are also used as HPs. (NPCs don't have cards and so just have HPs, I believe).

Specific Injury/ Locational HP
One Roll Engine: 4 wound boxes to the head, 10 to the torso, 5 for each limb: potentially +1 box to each for a high Body stat.
Age of Heroes: 'location points' (LPs) determined by cube root of mass in each hit location (listed on a table). 'Cumulative hit points' are calculated with LP x a multiplier based off CON (4.0 for an average score) + flat Willpower bonus (=half willpower).
Rolemaster: hit points based off 'body development' skill rank, capped by race however. Early RM had a die roll for each rank bought, later RM had a fixed amount (based on race) per rank. As a skill it is indirectly affected by class (development cost) and the stats determining available Development Points. Raw HPs are less important in RM than in many games due to commonness of crits.
Cadillacs & Dinosaurs: NPCs 20 points. PCs have stats rated 1-10 and a 'hit capacity' of chest (STR+CON)*3, other locations (STR+CON)*2, and head (CON*2). (Presumably a character with high STR and low CON would have a head that looks like an apple). Locations are disabled at 0, and blown off at negative of normal.
Amber: GM defined damage (wounds are described and all effects are up to the GM)
Puppetland: character sheet has a 'jigsaw' picture of the puppet. Each time it is damaged, a piece is coloured in. (thanks to TristramEvans).
PDQ: damage reduces a characters 'qualities' and are down when all qualities are zero. The first quality lost has a story effect related to it ('Punching Spiderman in the Mary Jane').


General patterns here: 1-10 stat range (e.g. d10 mechanic) tends to use either HP generated by a multiplier, or a subtraction operation on all incoming damage, or locational points. D20 most often follows a D&D model (rolled HP + Con mod per level). Die pool systems often use rolled soaks, sometimes with fixed # health levels.

Working around the HP system: a HP system should provide a 'workable' HP total for any character that can play, more even if everyone should be involved in combat. In e.g. boardgames, characters with small HPs may have some other workaround (abilities that let them burn off items or cards instead of taking damage and so extra 'virtual' HPs, and RPGs can likewise have spells that do that - i.e. Phantom Armour for the 1E illusionist).
« Last Edit: April 30, 2018, 12:00:54 AM by Bloody Stupid Johnson »

Bloody Stupid Johnson

  • Senior Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3366
Combat - damage!
« Reply #34 on: December 25, 2011, 07:50:03 PM »
He rolled the percentile dice again. The numbers blazed up at him. Eighty One. High damage, even for an immortal.
-Bimbos of the Death Sun
 
 
The other side of the HP system is the damage system. Damage in most systems is an example of an effect system; it is usually the most involved effect system in an RPG because precision is required – the stakes are by default character life or death, leading to inclusion of detailed modifiers for things such as weapon modifiers (1), attacker Strength (2), and sometimes hit location (3). Damage usually includes a random variable (4) and may include a skill/to-hit bonus.(5).
 
(1) Weapons: In HP-based systems weapons are often assigned different amounts of damage (exceptions including OD&D and Fighting Fantasy; potentially HERO which is more complex but where, IIRC, a weapon’s specifics can be designed by the player able to pony up enough points). Some systems give weapons multiple possible damage ranges e.g. Harnmaster separately defines Edge, Point and so on values for weapons (a detail most games are happy to ignore or abstract into the damage roll – like maybe a 1 on your longsword damage means you hilt-punched the orc in the snout); Palladium’s Ninjas & Superspies includes various unarmed damage ranges for one-finger-strike, punch, kick and so on, though fails to offer much incentive to use lower-rated attacks.
All weapons being equal does give a player more freedom to customize to fit their concept, without ending up using something that’s sucky because the game designer failed to properly understand how a khopesh is meant to be used (the stupid shape is to go around an enemies shield, not so you can make free trip attacks; thanks, whoever wrote Sandstorm...), but this removes a layer of the crunchy/tactical elements of character design; it is generally better to design weapons to be equal rather than identical; a task often approached by adding different armour penetrations, special abilities, special drawbacks or attribute requirements to weapons, something designers manage with varying degrees of success. Of course, it can also be argued that some weapons (e.g. whips or lucerne hammers) should be uncommon choices because they aren't that good. (Some systems like 3E include special abilities like feats etc. that can power-up weaker options.

 
(2) Hit Location: some systems will modify damage for vital locations struck (e.g. head = double damage), while others assume this sort of thing to be part of the damage roll; for others damage points aren’t changed by location but the effects of X amount of damage might be different i.e. different limbs may be disabled, or a character may have less HPs in some areas (such as the head e.g. in Twilight 2000, Runequest).
One example of what not to do with hit location would be the mind-boggling Swords’ Path: Glory (discussed here: http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=21194 ); it uses hit location tables that cross-reference a rolled Impact and armour type to determine exact flesh depth penetrated and hence whether bones are broken, arteries slashed or so on. Unlike Rolemaster this was almost wholly a raw HP system – the hit location was randomly determined and final output of the table is simple a number of damage points and a shock roll % rather than a specific injury, making the outcome not much different to just rolling a damage die (compare the principle of Black Box design http://www.enworld.org/forum/general-rpg-discussion/226856-simulationists-black-boxes-d-d-4th-edition.html ). Also, SPG was meant to be plugged into a system where HPs inflated rapidly with level, despite its HPs being completely physical rather than representing “luck” or “rolling with blows” , and didn’t allow for any way to select hit locations or otherwise improve damage from character skills/higher attack rolls, making it in many respects then, less realistic than say Storyteller (?...though the idea of a layer of 'impact' calculation before damage calculation, something shared with HarnMaster, could have potential uses...?).
 
Hitting a specific hit location may only be available as a result of a "called shot" in some games (2nd Ed. AD&D, Unisystem, Savage Worlds), or may be a result of a good hit roll (an idea that works better if attack rolls are DEX-modified, rather than STR-modified), or might be generated with a separate random roll (Runequest, Deadlands).
A "separate" roll can sometimes be generated as part of another roll i.e.
*Warhammer 1E/2E reverses the tens and ones places of the d100 to determine location. The future 40K games e.g. Deathwatch run into complications with autofire weapons such as bolters where a single hit roll can generate multiple hits (a success is one hit, +1 hit per 10% of attack margin, up to the full ROF); in this case the hit location roll is used for the first shot and a table lists where 2nd, 3rd, etc. shots land - following a sort of arc across the body e.g. Head is always Head/Body/Legs (or something like that).
As noted by Rob Muad'Dib later:
Quote
Top Secret/SI(Designed by Douglas Niles and published by TSR way back in 87, it used all kinds of cool/innovative bits in its design--ads/disads, stun/wound dmg marked as /X, luck points, etc) pulled two result from attacks for close combat/melee. You'd roll under your Attribute (plus small skill bonus), if you succeed, your damage was based on the tens die (a Price is right/blackjack mechanic) and the ones die determined hit location.

*One Roll Engine counts matches in a dice pool as successes for that number i.e. if you rolled 7,6,6,6,5,4,4,1 you got either three successes (damage) against location 6, or two successes (damage) against location 4. Potentially this method could be used with a damage roll in some games, if damage is generated additively from a set of dice, without having to use OREs core mechanic for all actions.
If randomly generated with a separate roll, hit location may be generated for just some results (e.g. hits that are criticals, or that do more than a certain amount of damage) or for all results. A rolled outcome might be modified in some circumstances e.g. it may be possible to 'block' a hit to the head in melee by taking a hit to the arm instead. HarnMaster arranges locations on a table lowest-to highest (with odds/evens determining left/right) so that a bonus or penalty can be added to the location roll for 'aiming high' or 'aiming low', without fully specifying where a blow is aimed.
Synnibarr has a rule where hit locations for shots are rolled but dealt to a % of hit points, which would work except that cybernetics add huge hit point bonuses to the general hit point pool (i.e. a character can be shot in the leg, and not disintegrate solely due to having an incredibly tough robotic arm).
 
How the hit location system works has a major effect on combat description by the GM/players. The GM is freer to improvise description without locations, whereas with more detailed rules the player might get to describe results more (based off the dice rolls/mechanics).

A couple of other determination methods use a silhoutte or body map: Aces & Eights' "Shot Clock" uses a d12 to generate scatter around a prechosen location (which is hit without scatter if the attack roll is sufficiently high), while Millennium's End uses an “overlay” (showing how much roll is made/missed by) over a “body map”.
Hit locations mostly provide a more realistic game, at a cost of more mucking around, but do tend to generate issues with certain damage types such as electrocution, shock, or poison – even falling – which are hard to allocate to single locations. Some systems may use different location tables for melee and ranged weapons.
I’ve occasionally thought that in cyberpunk type games where “organlegging” is popular, hit location tables might be useful for the GM to help determine what “treasure” is salvageable out of defeated opponents...


(3) Strength modifier: the other common modifier applied to damage is for Strength; exceptions include 0D&D pre-Greyhawk, HarnMaster - with slight variation appearing in the most complex version, HarnMaster Gold, Rolemaster, and Legends of Anglerre; Amazing engine which claims Fitness adjusts it but doesn't say how much; 4th ed. D&D where various modifiers might apply; as well as the simpler Fighting Fantasy or Maelstrom which don't have an equivalent score. Tunnels and Trolls just gives more 'adds' for STR, so it improves to-hit and then indirectly damage based off difference between attacker and defender. Rolemaster adds Strength modifier to offensive bonus (to-hit chance) which indirectly ups damage and criticals (STR modifying result here is possibly weird as it gives specific, highly accurate and deadly strikes on high results). Shadowrun 1st Ed uses Str to modify target number of defender's soak roll.
This tends to make Strength a fairly important statistic for damage in most games. Modifier is normally just an addition to damage, though Synnibarr gives characters a damage multiplier and Savage Worlds increases the step die rolled (the Strength die). A couple of games (Magic Quest, Legend Quest) have STR bonus based off # Str points above STR-minimum to use a weapon, instead of an absolute modifier (notably affecting dual weapon use since using two weapons has cumulative Str-required, so using them reduces Str damage bonus). D&D 3E applies 1.5x Str mod to two handed weapons and 0.5 for offhand weapons, so that TWF can't apply 2x Str mod easily; optional rules (Savage Species) extends the progression to x2, x2.5 etc. for monster weapons used three- or four-handed. (This sort of proportionality can be less messy with die pool/variable TN systems).
In a system, occasionally a weapon might get an extra bonus beyond the normal plus from Str, e.g. City of Terrors for T&T has an item, the 'war gauntlet' that 1/day power punches for 1d6 damage per Str point (whereas a normal fist is 1d and gets +1 'add' for each Str point above 12; the Gauntlet presumably gets that as an extra bonus as well).
GURPS calculates a character’s # d6s rolled for damage depending on Strength and whether the weapon is “Thrust” or “Swung”. The Forgotten Futures RPG was interesting in that Str only increased the probability of more damage rather than adding more damage automatically since it increased odds of a higher result (different damage descriptions are given for a 2d6 roll under ½ the Str (Body) value, a roll under full Str value, and rolling over).

Systems may “mirror” the role of Con in determining hit points and role of Strength in determining damage; one might add and the other subtract damage equally (Warhammer). Or to try to build a system where a character can normally take 3 hits before dying, a character might add [1xStr mod] to damage and [3xCon mod] to HPs.
Breaking this parallel leads to a noticeable balance issue in 3.x D&D, where a low Con cripples even a high level character (20th level = 20x Con modifier to HP). This sort of one-sidedness also occurs in “Aggravated Damage” (Storyteller), where the attacker still gets Str but the defender doesn’t get a soak roll using Stamina.
Crossbows in D&D tend to be weaker than other weapons due to not adding Str modifier; later D&D versions added +Dex for parity, while Palladium (in their medieval weapons & castles book) gave crossbows a built-in equivalent STR. Another game where this really shows is Scion, where melee weapons can get Epic Strength bonuses (see here).
See page 7 (post 69) for more on weapon Str minimums.
Large creatures don't always get enough raw bonus from Str to represent how nasty they are, so may get some sort of size bonus to damage (maybe equivalent to weapon type e.g. in 3E where size steps up damage dice). BRP e.g. Call of Cthulhu bases 'damage bonus' off a combined total of [STR attribute + SZ attribute] rather than STR alone.
 
*(4) the random variable; most systems use random roll of some kind for damage; exceptions include games where to-hit roll modifies damage instead e.g. Talislanta (see below), Dragon Warriors (damage set by weapon, no modifiers), and Tunnels and Trolls (damage = difference between attackers and defenders’ rolls; an odd system in that extra weapon damage dice also add to a character’s chance to hit).
Rolemaster uses the attack roll on a table to determine hits of damage (no separate damage roll). High rolls generate criticals off a different table; the attack roll (modifier by attack and defense skills) determines what sort of critical is generated (A to E or so), with a new roll then being made on the critical table.
DC Heroes has attack success adding to damage, but also often generates a 'variable' nonrandomly, through attackers or defenders expending Hero Points to raise their effect or resistance values, or use of Hero Points to eliminate damage directly with 'Last Ditch Defense'. (cf. post on 'safety valves').
Games with fixed/fairly fixed damage ranges can have larger variables in cases where some of the normal damage modifiers/rules don't apply that well. Aberrant for instance has Teleport error (landing inside an object) deal 1d10 health levels of damage (rolled directly) when most rolls instead use a dice pool. A 3.x pit trap begins with a roll of d4 to see how many spikes the character lands on, then gives each spike an attack roll/damage roll as a dagger (which could perhaps mostly be abstracted to a single larger die if desired, although that would cause DR issues).
Highly polar rolls can work better for generating interesting results. For instance, a GM might use a damage roll for a missed attack to see how badly damaged a computer console is, which gives fairly fixed (uninteresting) results if the damage is also along a fairly narrow range.

*(5) the to-hit or skill bonus; Shadowrun 1E has fixed damage, modified by attack successes; in it weapons have varying "Staging" which is how many successes move a weapon up a damage code -light to medium, medium to serious, etc. Weapons with low Staging are more beneficial for highly skilled characters, however Staging is also the # of soak (Body) or Dodge successes by the defender that will drop the attack back a code so these weapons are less effective on high-Body targets, or high Quickness ones. A later edition of Talislanta has fixed damage by weapon, with 1/2 damage (partial success), x1 (normal) or x2 (critical). Storyteller (oWoD) adds successes to-hit to the damage dice pool.
The to-hit add to damage can be thought of as one way to represent character skill. D&D doesn't add a bonus from the to-hit roll (except via criticals) but skills may apply a bonus to damage directly i.e. extra 'sneak attack' dice, BECMI weapon mastery, weapon specialization, or monk +1/2 level to damage in 1E.
Note: post #28, above, has more about 'effect' in general- flow of data from margin of success to result and so on.
Note that if a high dice roll increases damage, that can offset combat options or builds designed to roll lots of attacks at a penalty to 'critfish' for 20s or the like - a penalty to the main attack lowers damage, while an attack with a penalty deals less damage.

Damage-based rolls
A very few systems have worked out how to take a damage value, and use that to determine a success chance/probability of related events. For example, in Marvel Super Heroes an energy blast doing 30 points of damage would be a Remarkable amount of damage, and that value could determine the likelihood of the blast setting a building on fire (i.e. using the Action table, 30 damage would give a normal success on a 36+ on d100..). Other systems have attempted to set damage-based DCs (consider 3E D&Ds “concentration checks” for spellcasters taking damage, Coup de Grace saving throws, or a high level rogues’ Defensive Roll ability) but this generally works poorly since damage is not scaled appropriately to give a d20-based DC.
Essentially systems run from a Success Roll (die roll for success/failure)-àEffect; taking an Effect output and converting it back to a success chance is working backwards, and so is difficult. MSH works for it since attacks deal fixed damage; Mutants and Masterminds should allow damage-based checks as well, since its damage rolls are just DCs for checks. Savage Worlds almost but not quite manages it, since its damage roll is on a slightly different scale to other checks - the sum of 2 dice, instead of best of 2 dice (the original 1st printing SW had damage as simply a trait roll, and in some respects would function better for this than the modern system). A dice pool system could in theory handle a conversion back from Damage to Success roll, if the damage dice pool and normal task die pools had similar numbers of dice.
Comparing say SW-1st printing and MSH, these work differently in that MSH has damage equal to 'attribute' (from which a check probability can be worked out), while in SW-1st printing damage is simply a check itself - game mechanically there's no difference between rolling unarmed damage and making a Strength check to twist someone's head off. The SW system has most of the advantages of MSH i.e. capability to use damage as a DC for an opposed roll, but also allows damage randomization. Similar systems could (theoretically) work with damage that directly reduces attributes (like in T&T), whereas MSH's system isn't particularly compatible.
In a game like SW where damage is a 'check' there isn't much difference between a sword stroke and a save-or-die effect. In some ways its damage checks are better for that in that a SoD often doesn't consider all of the toughness bonuses a creature should have, such as size bonuses and the like.
One Roll Engine is perhaps scaled well to use damage as an opposed roll too (as damage simply equals to-hit successes, plus some weapon bonuses) though I don't know if any particular mechanics are built off this. Earthdawn is another system where damage is a normal task die roll (Strength + weapon specific modifier is used to work out the step die), though the final result is normally subtracted from hit points rather than being used for opposed rolls, normally; Air Blast uses damage vs. Strength for knockdown (in ED 2E), most other knockdowns etc. are complicated by considering Wound Threshold however.
 
Further thoughts on damage-based rolls
Actually, considering further there are probably 3 potential mechanisms providing usefully scaled damage amounts (from the damage roll of individual damaging attacks):
1) damage from one hit is on the same scale as attribute (fixed/proportional to attribute, say 3-18 if the system has stats that are rolled with 3d6), and can be assigned a check modifier accordingly, using the normal attribute bonus chart or attribute check rules. If not attribute, it could work if scaled as a skill check or other check.
2) damage is rolled as a check, identical to other checks (if it equals to-hit successes, or is a separate Strength check with limited weapon modifiers, as in original Savage Worlds, etc). The damage can be variable and is used as the target number for opposed rolls.
Or 3) damage is generated by a 'damage check' which is identical to other checks as above, but then a final amount is generated from this, not necessarily equal to check result e.g. actual quantities of damage can be assigned via a table. Make the damage check function consistently as an opposed value may limit some of the operations that would normally be possible with a table, like using an alternate table for smaller weapons; it also suggests that e.g. damage reduction/armour should apply to the check result rather than output damage number.
Setup 3) of course adds a table - and in the middle of combat - but generates fewer constraints to the designer with regard to how Hit Points must be scaled, and how the damage check must be scaled (the two things that have to dovetail with each other in the case of the other options).
A few systems use ad-hoc translations of damage to success chance, usually badly: the 2nd Ed. Complete Fighter lets the 'sap' manuever have a 5% chance of KO per point of damage (regardless of defender HP), while Superbabes has damage forcing the target to roll d% under its current HPs to not be knocked out. Modern Savage Worlds sometimes uses [roll penalty = number of wounds] e.g. cremefillian ingested poison in Low Life; maybe gearing down the damage too much?
(Hypothetically, you could imagine a system which has damage set up to work as a check value, and damage that isn't - call these fixed and unfixed damage maybe. In this case extra bonuses could give more damage, but at a cost of having the damage become 'unfixed' and no longer be useable for dealing stun, knockback etc. etc. That could be associated with e.g. weapons vs. spell damage.)

Elaborations
If rolled separately, critical successes/failures on damage rolls could have other effects, like weapon breakage (e.g. a '1' for damage = a weapon breakage).

As an idea, a range of different special results could be generated for 'criticals' without a table, based on damage rolls, e.g. 'doubles' might 'roll up', each maximum die causes pushback and multiple maximum dice makes a target drop prone.


Legends of Anglerre (FATE) has a mechanism for damage where the overkill on creatures ("overflow") is directly applied to other creatures (if there's a stunt like Cleave) or converted into additional effects (movement, etc.). LoA is perhaps especially good at handling this since it lacks a second roll for damage or other damage modifiers i.e. for weapon type (explaining how using a greatsword increases movement would be difficult!); amount by which an attack roll succeeds becomes damage directly. In other games, T&T has no term for "overflow" but likewise lacks a separate damage roll and so readily e.g. lets damage be split between multiple targets.

Older systems in particularly may sometimes model blood loss as ongoing damage from injury, which accumulates until a wound is properly treated (e.g. LegendQuest). Because of extra book keeping this is rarely seen nowadays. In more recent games the Roma Imperious system had interesting blood loss rules, further complicated in its case by HP being divided up by hit location, meaning blood loss was also from particular locations, rather than being systemic. D&D 3E retains bleeding for dying characters only, who lose 1 HP per round until they stabilize, apart from a couple of specific weapons/monsters. A game may also abstract progressive weakening with occasional rolls to see if a character collapses, instead of continuing damage.

Other Effects of Damage
In addition to HP damage, attacks might also cause 'knockdown' or 'knockback'. Systems here include DC Heroes, MSH (special colour result), High Colonies (based on damage before armour subtraction, if greater than Str - so lots of bullets can knock a character down), Runequest (I think replacing impales on special successes with some weapons?), and Rifts occasionally more or less by GM fiat (or whatever cases of GM fiat Kevin wrote down).
 
A damage 'threshold' can have other effects as well. D&D and some D20 variants have 'Death by massive damage' [for 50+ points, or a size-based amount] adding a save or die to large damage amounts. Some special attacks might also trigger based on N+ damage e.g. in Rifts the 'Xiticix killer' has a tentacle that enters and reams a target for extra damage if the original damage roll is 12+; in some games crits or Str bonuses etc. may modify this, or a 'base' amount only may be considered.

Critical hits - see page 14 (post #136) for more details on critical hit systems.
 
Multiple dice for damage are reasonably common, which can scale up problematically at times. One comment in regard to scaling for systems e.g. 4E D&D here
Quote from: Yakk
There are people who think that if 1d8+4 is an appropriate amount of damage to take when you have 20 HP, then 10d8+40 is an appropriate amount of damage to take when you have 200 HP. In reality, the first has a huge random component (anything from 25% to 60% of your HP can be taken off in a blow), while the second is highly predictable (40% to 55% is the equivalent range) and takes 5+ times as long to evaluate. An example of this is the 4e damage per level charts, which presume "half dice, half fixed" has the same meaning at level 1 as at level 30, significantly making level 30 combat less exciting.

Some sample damage calculations, grouped into categories (roughly parallelling the 'effect' categories in post #28 on pg 3):

Fixed damage
Fixed damage (per shot that hits) would potentially work well with a system where a roll determines how many attacks hit, which could then be applied as a multiplier. Fireborn is something like this (but is somewhat more complex and listed under 'dice pool systems' below)
Fighting Fantasy: 2 damage regardless of weapon. (Test for Luck for 4, or 1 if this fails). cf. Advanced Fighting Fantasy below (Table-based). In rare cases damage may be rolled - e.g. Space Assassin has blasters which do 1d6. Weapon type usually doesn't modify; an inferior weapon may penalize "Skill" (the rules in the books sometimes just treat losing a weapon as generic 'damage' to Skill, rather than an ongoing modifier; in which case picking up weird alien nunchucks/a sharp piece of fruit/a walrus as a weapon and then drinking a Potion of Skill to restore lost Skill, might be interpreted as meaning you are now proficient in weird alien nunchucks/fruit/a walrus).

Marvel Super Heroes: damage = STR or weapon material strength, whichever is lower, or power rating for powers. While damage is fixed, special success on the attack roll may add a Slam, Stun or Kill result. Being fixed, the damage has no problem with scaling up to cosmic level without choking on too many dice - a class 3000 energy blast just does 3000 damage, instead of having to roll 30d6 (or whatever).
Dragon Warriors: fixed base damage by weapon (1-6); Str also adds a bonus to damage.
BESM 3E : mostly fixed damage, although damage is doubled on a margin of 12+ and tripled for 18+. Characters add 'attack combat value' (to-hit bonus).

Varying Die Type [i.e. an independently rolled die]
0D&D: 1d6 damage, regardless of weapon. The Greyhawk supplement adds alternate weapon damage and Strength modifiers/exceptional Strength for fighting men, as well as 'large-size' damage for weapons (e.g. a longsword is d8 vs. an orc or d12 vs. an ogre - maybe it does more damage cutting through more flesh, or this may be a game balance thing); 1st ed AD&D is basically the same as that. Swords & Wizardry White Box (a clone) has d6+1 for 2-handed except staves, d6-1 for small, with +1 damage on a critical.
(flat random damage IMHO is perhaps not optimal since its not much more effort or complexity to instead use a weapon die, or have a calculation off something instead of an arbitrary expression).
A few spells/effects use alternate systems e.g. fixed damage (a hellhound's breath doing damage equal to its HD in AD&D) or damage modified by AC [moving through the very pointy Plane of Minerals doing damage equal to d4+AC (not including Dex adjustments).
D&D 2E/3E: 1d4 to d12 +Strength modifier e.g. d8+Str mod for longsword. Potential critical for double damage on 19-20 (3E) or on 20 (2E). Strength modifiers start at 12+ in 3E and 16+ in 2E. Spells typically deal d6 to d8 per caster level. 50+ damage in one hit optionally forces a saving throw vs. death ('death by massive damage').
D&D 4E: variable # of weapon dice (by power) + key ability modifier + any additional special effects. Max damage on critical, +d6 per weapon plus. Some powers do damage on a 'miss' [=ability mod]; some feats likewise give that with weapons such as warhammer or scimitar, to balance their lower (+2, vs. normal +3) proficiency bonus.
Overall inflation in ability mods over D&D editions has tended to make the actual weapon die roll less and less meaningful (vs. 0D&D where a low roll might just scratch the orc, a high roll kill it); this changes the whole dynamic of combat from a series of life-or-death die rolls to a slow 'grinding' process (in part prompting need for more complex manuever systems to spice it up, although these are also good for involving player choice).
Black Streams: this is an interesting (free on drivethru) rules supplement for AD&D intended to let single PCs take on a dungeon solo. It takes the normal damage roll and vs. PCs steps it down [1= none, 2-5 = 1 damage, 6-9 =2, 10+=4]; PCs use the same table but deal damage in 'hit dice' e.g. a roll of '2' would deal 1 HD of damage and so kill a 1 HD orc. They also get a bonus class-based 'fray die' that works similarly.
Runequest/BRP: base by weapon e.g. d6 or d8 +damage bonus from [total STR+SZ] on table, with normal ratings giving +0 extra damage.
Savage Worlds: Explorer edition/Deluxe - Str dice + weapon damage dice (i.e. Str +d8 for sword). +d6 if hit roll succeeds by 4+; maximum rolls reroll and add. Shaken if roll exceeds toughness, +1 wound per 4 over. Str also heavily limits what weapons a character can wield, and so affects damage substantially (although a higher Str die can still roll a 1 - in unarmed combat particularly, Steve Erkel can 'roll up' and outdamage Arnie. Compare this to Forgotten Futures below, which has a slightly similar effect from a table).
SW 1st printing/2nd printing -Str trait roll (including wild die) + fixed weapon bonus. 1st printing gives +2 from per each 'raise' to hit (4 over Parry) (this was reduced in 2nd printing to encourage called shots). PCs had a big advantage on damage since they get both a wild die to it, and are more likely to get a 'raise' on the hit roll as well.
(see nDervish argues here that damage scaling in SW tends to not work at higher levels due to the fixed 4/wound being a narrowing gap as number of dice increases).
SW damage does tend to generate occasional blowouts since there are several dice which can 'roll up' separately. A houserule might be to limit one die to rolling up; potentially you could even limit rolling up to the bonus die added from a 'raise', so that open-ended results become quite rare.
(I also was recently working on a SW-derived system which was one-roll-only; in this a weapon did damage equal to either the Fighting die result (including rolling up as normal), or a separate damage die (usually larger, and including step increases for Str). 'Light' weapons dealt damage equal to the fighting-die only, with no extra damage roll; this has an effect of reduced 'critfishing' for TWF as this had two chances to roll up the Fighting die, off both attack rolls, but no damage die explosions.)
Ample Polyhedra: One friend's homebrew rpg "Ample Polyhedra" system, had a damage system reminiscent of Savage Worlds: characters had 1-4 'wounds' (1=Extra" to 4="PC") but instead of wound divisor being a set /4, each character had a 'toughness number' which was the divisor. A complication with that was that to keep criticals valid, critical dice were then also increased for high Toughness to cancel this out, making large creatures vulnerable to being stabbed in vital places e.g. Toughness 4 = +d8 damage on a critical (raise on attack roll), while Toughness 6 would give +d12 on a critical - even more damage so as to maintain a 50% chance of an additional 'wound'. A houserule proposed was to have normal damage wounds calculated using the Toughness as divisor, then add a separate critical roll not adjusted for Toughness i.e. d8 vs. TN 5 to get +1 wound added on to the final wound count.
The game treated armour as a toughness bonus, but this only helped against the first wound (a character with base Tf 6/+ armour 9 would take wounds on 15, 21, 27, etc.).
Cortex: damage = attack roll - difficulty, + probably a damage die (d0 unarmed). Strength modifies weapon damage only indirectly, by boosting the attack roll (for Str-based weapons). Str also does not limit what weapons a character can use.
Toon: almost all attacks do 1d6 damage, no Str [Muscle] modifier. The 'incredible strength' schtick, which has a fixed base instead of being Muscle-based, lets a character do +3 damage on a successful skill roll but gives combat penalties if the skill roll fails and opponent Fight roll succeeds. A few weapons do extra damage e.g. rayguns 2d6,  bazooka d6+2.
Warhammer 2E: d10+Strength modifier +(fixed) weapon modifier, 10s explode (if a separate Weapon Skill roll is made, IIRC); subtract target Toughness.
Later SF Warhammer games this inflates with multiple damage dice sometimes e.g. base 2d10+5 for a bolter, with +1 dice & drop the lowest for its 'tearing' quality (greatly increasing chance of a 10 occurring and rolling up), increase # Wounds, and some creatures with Unnatural Strength or Toughness (e.g. Space Marines) double those modifiers.
Dungeon World: like 13th Age below, weapons deal a hit die based on character's class.
Talislanta: combines step-die with a basic table (d20+modifiers, 6-10 partial success, 11-19 normal, 20+ critical). In e.g. 3E most swords would do d10+STR score; with a 'partial success' damage is reduced by half and with a critical the damage is doubled. 4E just has fixed base damage, adjusted for the table in the same fashion. Spells deal around d4 per spell level (potentially outpacing HPs), again with a damage multiplier from the table.
Ork!-the RPG: this uses a d4 to d12 for stat rolls (skills checks roll a number of these dice equal to skill rating 1-5, and add them). Combat is a raw attribute roll ( i.e. one die) of attacker Str ('Meat') vs. defender Con ('Bones'), with armour/weapon each adding up to +5 bonus; this same modifier range is normal for opposed rolls, though the modifier is fairly harsh for stat rolls as these use only 1 die. Damage = one level per 3 points of difference, round up (characters have six wound levels, including the uninjured health level).
Amazing Engine: step die with a 'margin rating' (roll under this on ones dice of the attack d100 means "Body" damage rather than "Stamina"). e.g. knife d4/3 margin, club d6/2. Fitness (basically Strength) theoretically adjusts this, but how much is not listed! Margin rating can be adjusted by called shots or armour.
Maelstrom: varies by weapon e.g. staff d6, spear 2d6, sword from 2d6 to 5d6 by cost. There is no STR attribute.
Mercenaries get a special proportional damage bonus - d6 per 10 damage or fraction, counting rolls of 1-3 and ignoring 4-6 (a blackjack die pool!). This is then a two-step process where initial damage has to be rolled before the number of dice to roll is known (e.g. 10 damage would roll 1 bonus die, 11 damage = roll 2 bonus dice). Ignoring the effect of rounding up, this gives about a 10% average increase in damage (+1 per bonus die).
Metagene: uses a variable dice based on strength. What's interesting here is they slowed down the progression by going d4,d4+1,d6,d6+1,d8, d8+1,d10..etc..not necessarily a great choice, every 2nd increase has exactly the same average but different distribution (i.e. d8+1 and d10 are both 5.5).

Die Pool (additive)
GURPS: variable number of D6s based on STR and whether weapon is swung or thrust.
The Fantasy Trip: variable number of D6s, by weapon; weapons useable are limited by character STR (roughly similar results to GURPS); only unarmed damage is adjusted by Str directly. Crits deal double or triple damage (4 or 3 on 3d6).
Cadillacs & Dinosaurs: firearms deal a number of d6s; monsters typically have a number of d6s (basically arbitrary; most are not rated with Strength). Melee/thrown weapons d6+Str score or half Str score.
13th Age: variable die type/additive. Damage is one die/level, with damage die based off class rather than weapon to allow free weapon selection, + [ability mod*tier]. Monsters deal a fixed amount of damage instead.
Star Wars D6: damage of multiple D6, for melee weapons this is a Strength check (+possible weapon bonus dice). Notable because this uses the same mechanic as normal task rolls. Targets roll Str to resist (+ armour?), with difference (on a table) determining if a character is stunned, wounded, incapacitated, mortally wounded or killed (3 wounds generate an incapacitated, incapacitated + a wound = mortally wounded).
Tunnels and Trolls:. available as free download on drivethru; extract of the core rules from the solo adventures here http://www.freedungeons.com/rules/. Roll weapon dice (d6s) + combat adds (+1 per point above 12 in ST, DEX, or Luck) - [same total for opponent] = damage (before reducing for armour). Damage is finely defined by weapon 'adds' allowing for huge weapon lists (e.g dirk 2d+1, broadsword 3+4, scimitar 4d, warhammer 5d+1, greatsword 6d); where D&D has 'dagger: d4', T&T has a whole table of dagger types ranging from 'Dirk: 2+1' to 'Scramasax: 2+5', and same for other types.
In 7E and later, 6s deal automatic 'spite' damage. [T&T combats can be very one-sided, so PC resource attrition through the adventure may occur mainly through 'spite' or through loss of spell points [ST/POW]).
Missiles do much more damage (opponent total isn't subtracted from combat total) but require a Dex roll to hit, and come with the problem defense that a miss means defense is 0 and melee damage against the archer becomes probably fatal (though in a group situation, this is mitigated by friends contributing to attack or taking a share of damage). A DEX roll can also be required to hit very agile opponents (Blood Bats in the 5E rulebook adventure) or dodge the attack of larger monsters - GM discretion- so that opponent roll again isn't subtracted.  Monsters that don't fight normally and have to take the full attack of PCs are usually given a very high CON by fiat (e.g. the Con 90 giant mosquito in solo adventure Amulet of the Salkti).
Poison in T&T is very common and can multiply the final damage e.g. x2 curare, x4 dragon's venom. Early versions of T&T added the multiplier to initial die roll; I think later versions applied multiplier to final 'hits' instead, so that poison didn't increase chance of hitting, though this generates adjudication problems as characters would often be using two weapons - with only one actually poisoned - or adding their totals together in mass combat.
A couple of magic weapons -i.e. the Hero and Hopeless Swords, from the Naked Doom solo dungeon- generate a fixed attack each round, instead of rolling dice. This is also the case for one common attack spells (Take That, You Fiend). TTYF deals [IQ attribute*spell level] damage, a horrendous amount; this is especially bad in 7E where a character's level itself is often [IQ/10], making a TTYF deal damage approximately equal to [IQ-squared/10]
As the 'attack roll' is made up of weapon damage dice, it limits a lot of possible manipulations of the dice pool - it doesn't make much sense to 'split' the pool or spend dice on combat moves since most fancy manuevers shouldn't be easier with a greatsword than a dagger, unlike if the pool represented fighting skill.
Superbabes: base damage d6 (punch) to 20d20 (clobbered with aircraft carrier) + Strength bonus measured in dice with an irregular progression (at higher levels, generally +d6 per 50 for a maximum of +22d6 at 1000 STR). The "Hit 'em Harder" power adds a further +d6 per level with a specific weapon (in example characters up to +6d6).
SenZar: weapon type generates a 'Damage Class' (base DC is set by weapon, can be modified by magic weapons), plus Str adds bonus dice; these are added together to get up to several D10s of damage. Some weapon enchantments can deal x2 or x3 damage; the system gives separate damage bonuses for a Natural 20 to hit (x2) and rolling 10 over the TN (maximized damage) - quite often both happen at once. 1st level characters are very squishy but gain HPs rapidly -  a strange feature of the advancement being that while there's no balanced mathematical progression, characters dealing level-inappropriate piles of damage will level faster (by killing oversize threats) until they die or catch up in HPs. Spells instead deal fixed damage (= power points spent, max. cost capped by spell level), and monsters have what sort of dice they roll for damage fiat-assigned directly, rather than going via 'damage class'.
Infinite Power: damage is (like other rolls) a set of d8s added together, 8s add and roll over. A total over opponent 'damage limit' inflicts one 'hit' and 4 hits takes out a character. (This is based off the quick start rules but it seems there's no benefit to increasing damage beyond enough to hurt the target).
HERO: d6 Stun per point of damage class (e.g. per 5 STR). Body damage = 1 per die (except that 1s rolled on the stun dice are worth 0 damage, and 6s worth 2 damage). Typical combat is fairly nonlethal because chargen is complex, and due to genre conventions. Killing attacks do more Body but less Stun - in 6E, Body damage equals the full roll and multiply by d3 to determine Stun dealt.
Fuzion: multiple d6 additive. Dragonball Z for Fuzion apparently runs into hundreds of bonus dice, apparently with defensive dice subtracting (?) and average normally used unless a result is likely to be significant. # dice (or fractions like -1 per 10d) can be used directly in some calculations like penalty for combat manuevers or energy costs, rather than damage itself. The scaling issue shows the problem fitting DBZ to Fuzion rather than using a custom system (e.g. Marvel or DC Heroes for instance are better adapted to this sort of scaling problem, but their setup is intrinsic to their damage systems rather than something that can be just added on in a sourcebook.).
Other: Someone's DIY system on rpg.net here has a table cross-referencing Str and weapon type, with the peculiarity that rounding off means optimal weapons shift around as Str goes up/down.  

Die Pool (Count successes)
(Dice pool games as above tend to have fixed wound tracks; partly 'soak' is easier with these, but also arbitrarily-large HP pools would require correspondingly large damage dice rolls - its more OK to go from roll d8 at 1st level to 4d8 at higher level, than to go from 5d10 to 20d10...)
Storyteller: [Str+weapon bonus] dice, counted at difficulty 6. Bonus damage dice from success on attack roll [Dex+Melee]; subtract target soak successes[Stamina].
Storyteller-descended Aberrant usually is similar (though soak reduces the damage pool without being rolled). IIRC one interesting case was that a teleport error would deal 1d10 damage (very unpredictable compared to the usual range).
One Roll Engine: damage = number of matches on attack roll (to location determined by the actual number) + weapon bonus damage.
Shadowrun 1E: damage set as Light (1), Moderate (3), Serious (6) or Deadly (all 10) damage levels, by weapon. Weapon skill roll extra successes equal to weapon 'staging' rating increase damage to the next step; weapons also define the target number to reduce damage for soaking with body dice ('power level'). Dodge dice are spent and add as bonus dice to the Soak roll (using the same target number!) but also cancel the attack completely if more successes are rolled than attack successes. Dodge dice have to be rolled separately (or colour-coded) due to their ability to cancel hits completely, so there isn't really any simplification from having dodge/soak be intertwined.
Surgery rules tie into the damage rules e.g. an organ transplant leaves a character with a Deadly wound. This works generally better than it would in a overly-variable-HP system, where X damage will kill some PCs and be a scratch to others, like high-level D&D fighters.
Blue Planet: a set three damage dice (d10s) are rolled against a TN of [base damage + Strength - target Toughness] giving a wound severity of 0 (glancing blow), 1 (minor), 2(serious), or 3 (critical). Each wound forces a stun roll (Will check) with a penalty equal to the severity; critical wounds also force a Fitness roll to avoid dying.
Arkham Horror is really a particularly complex boardgame, but system-wise is interesting since its virtually the 'count successes' version of Tunnels and Trolls. A character rolls their 'fight' score as a number of dice (5s or 6s are successes, with a blessing lowering TN to 4 or curse to TN 6. Weapons add bonus dice and the successes equal damage - if the monster isn't killed it deals damage. Therefore like T&T hit/damage is a single roll, though only one side rolls. Two weapons simply stacks the damage bonuses; one weapon (the axe) has a +3 bonus instead of +2 used two-handed. The 'marksman' skill lets a character reroll a fight roll once per game turn. Monsters can be 'physical immune' or 'magical immune' in which case a weapon of that kind adds no bonus, but the base Fight dice still always apply.
Fireborn: weapon base + an attack 'sequence' will include manuevers that add pluses to damage (e.g. Press +5), or that can instead give an extra attack. A peculiarity is that the detailed damage amount is then compared to a 'threshold' which will convert it back to a 'minor wound', or -1d penalty, -2d penalty, etc. The effect is that damage amounts are fine-grained and look important (this weapon does 8, that does 9) but will frequently end up having no game effect (a kick for 4 or mace for 7 damage might both be a -1d wound for a Water 4 opponent). Or a -1 wound might become -2 instead because -1 wound level is already used up). An issue might be that attack 'sequence' might be metagamed to choose either multiple attacks or a 'press' depending on exact damage thresholds, if known?

Base + Margin of Success (or Table)
Rolemaster: damage by attack roll on chart; possible critical rolls on high attack.
Army of Darkness (Unisystem variant): STR x weapon multiplier i.e. [Str+1] x3 for sword. Add attack success level (determined by table, generally +1 damage per 2-3 over minimum success value of 9+). Core unisystem uses varying dice types. The Buffy unisystem variant also notes that life point damage for shots/stabs is doubled vs. humans (after armour, though largely just extra addition in low-armour genres; halving armour vs. bludgeoning and revising damage calcs might've been better).
Unisystem tries to speed up combat by streamlining dice rolls, despite the hit roll adding to damage. NPCs or monsters use their average attack roll to work out the normal 'success level' of attacks and add that to the base damage, resulting in the same damage every time, while PCs refer to the table.
DC Heroes: fixed base found by comparing STR/target BODY on a table (0 if evenly matched, up to full attribute if resistance is zero), plus bonus damage from a high attack roll.
Over The Edge: attack roll (multiple d6) minus defense roll, difference is multiplied by a weapon damage factor (no Str score exists/ is factored in, unless its defined as an ad-hoc trait and used as the attack roll). Armour works as rolled absorption.
Fate Core: damage ('shifts' directly equals the difference between attacker Fight and defender Fight roll, or Provoke vs. Will for social combat. Weapon and strength provides no direct modifier - relevant Aspects are potentially createable but would typically affect damage via increasing attack roll rather than modifying damage directly. One example stunt, My Blade Strikes True, forces a target to take a consequence rather than simple stress, 1/combat.
Forgotten Futures: (freerpg, link here) damage roll uses the normal resolution system (2d6 under stat). A roll is compared to Body (i.e. Str) or weapon "effect" for weapons such as guns, and each weapon has a table listing a result for if the roll is under 1/2 Body, under full Body, or over, with damage being one of four levels (Bruise, Flesh Wound, Injury, or Critical). For instance a rifle deals a Flesh Wound on a failed roll, an Injury on a success, with a critical of Critical/Kill (target rolls Body to avoid being killed). Armour modifies the "effect" number. Note that since the 2d6 roll is non-linear, the 'critical' result is less common, and that (as noted above) high 'STR' (Body in FF-speak) only increases likelihood of more damage, rather than giving a direct bonus.
Feng Shui (2E): Str+x by weapon or power base damage [usually +1 to +4], - opponent Toughness = wound points. Wound points may be used as a modifier e.g. 'Vengeance of the Tiger' lets character riposte after taking damage with plus to hit equal to wounds taken (probably unbalanced, but followed by a Con check with the same number as a penalty to avoid exhaustion).
HOL: . Weapons have a base Wounds, then weapon "Anguish Factor" (minus target Armour) is cross-referenced with a d6 'intensity' roll on a table to get a damage multiplier (which however only varies by x1 from the roll though e.g. a 4 adjusted anguish gives 1-2:x1,3-6:x2). A high attack roll adds +d6 to anguish factor. As noted above, characters all get 20 Health Levels.
Advanced Fighting Fantasy uses a simple 1d6 roll on a weapon-specific table e.g. a sword by roll in order is 2|3|3|3|3|4|5 (the last number, for 7+, is available only with special bonuses). This gives slight variation while keeping range of damage mostly compatible with original FF (where damage for a successful hit is always 2). See notes on "game hybridization/how to" - overcomplicated by back-compatibility with a very simple system. AFFs two editions handle 'Strength' differently; in 1E this gave +1 damage while in 2E it became a feat (equivalent) rather than a skill, and also IIRC just gives a +1 to the roll on the table i.e. much less of a bonus - the table downsizing the effect similarly to say Fantastic Futures' tables.
Chill: chill has named result levels like 'scratch' or 'critical', generated by attack result on a table, which fill up boxes on a health track that's generally similar to e.g. Fudge or Storyteller. Each result also generates an amount of 'stamina damage' which is set by the result level e.g. 2d10 or 4d10. System has some redundancies therefore, also, Str or weapon type don't modify damage.

Other Attack-Roll Based
Unknown Armies (d% roll-under), firearms do damage equal to the attack roll if you roll under your skill, up to a maximum for the specific gun. A roll of doubles (11, 44, etc.) gives automatic maximum damage).
(T&T above could potentially be grouped with this inasmuch as it too has wholly attack-roll-based damage, albeit that the attack roll is multiple dice additive).
The miniatures game 'Silent Death' apparently uses a 3-die roll to hit (sometimes different dice types). Weapons are rated as 'low', 'medium' or 'high' damage, indicating which of the 3 attack dice is used as the damage roll also e.g. on a 3+4+5 attack that hit with a 'low' weapon, damage would be 3. Doubles indicated these added together, building in 'criticals'. (If you rolled 4,4,5, you could do more damage with the low weapon than the high one, 8 vs. 5.


General Note: Damage being a different subsystem to other mechanics can affect the value of stats modifying damage and/or hit points. Multiple damage sources can make e.g. Str bonus irrelevant, but more often a different subsystem scales up the importance of STR. In an extreme case, a Marvel Super Heroes character for instance uses attribute score for damage and table lookup to-hit, so a one-rank shift in Fighting stat might give +5% to hit (increasing damage per round by 10%), while the same increase to Strength might increase damage by 50%, 100% or more.

Thoughts in closing: many people consider it logical that the attack roll influences the damage - which can also in many games factor in character skill. Some core mechanics do not easily support this, and/or the additional calculations involved can be annoying or slow. Attack and damage being somewhat disconnected is sometimes desired e.g. Savage Worlds does this to encourage 'called shot' attacks. Its also argued that, for example, having damage only slightly influenced by margin of success makes random gunfire dangerous despite e.g. darkness or movement penalties, supporting an illusion of realism.


See also: damage for miscellaneous situations (falling, immersion, etc.) is dealt with in post #55.

Describing damage: most GMs are generally in favour of giving colourful descriptions of what damage looks like to players. Note that games with hit locations and etc like limit the GMs ability to extemporize here. Games where there are a lot of small damage quantities coming off an arbitrarily large HP pool are a dampener on description since it tends to be irrelevant and happen all the time; a player is more likely to notice/care if they have only a few 'large' hit points.
« Last Edit: August 06, 2019, 02:06:45 AM by Bloody Stupid Johnson »

Bloody Stupid Johnson

  • Senior Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3366
Combat - Armour
« Reply #35 on: December 26, 2011, 05:30:09 PM »

 
The usefulness of armour in a system is partly determined by genre concerns (desire to make limited armour feasible for barbarians or swashbucklers, for instance), and partly by 'realism' (weapons may be made quite deadly, but with armour offsetting this by being especially good at stopping damage).

Systems for handling armour:
 
1) Armour as Target Number (to-hit number) – D&D, Palladium Fantasy – here an attack roll to hit must be over an armour-based target rating to hit. Palladium also lets characters roll a “Parry” and use the highest of that and the armour rating, while D&D stacks any “parry bonuses” onto the base to-hit required. The Palladium approach makes armour less useful at higher levels but also removes a synergy between DEX and armour in D&D, that actually makes high DEX + high armour more powerful if you can manage to get both together (through mithril or Graceful armour etc). Palladium armour is also limited in how much damage it can absorb before being destroyed. However...perhaps the main benefit of armour as a target number is that it removes the extra 'subtraction' step of armour as DR, making it easier to roll a large number of attacks for an orc skirmish etc. In the case of Palladium, having to roll damage on the armour however slows down the system enough this benefit is lost.
D&D as it evolved became more realistic, with AC getting more increase from dodging. Having a single AC represent a mix of both led to twice as many factors at play on the same number, with a tendency for AC to vary dramatically.
AD&D AC, while usually used as a target number, rarely might instead apply as a modifier to raw damage ("Characters who fall into the pit are hit by a number of spikes equal to their AC. Each hit deals 3 damage and requires a save vs. poison.." - Egg of the Phoenix).
More on DEX mod: note that 5E D&D balances 'Dex mod' by having heavy armours not apply it, while medium armours are capped at +2; generally AC is very constrained. One 0D&D variant, Arduin, didn't apply Dex modifier to AC; this is somewhat justifiable perhaps in that defensive benefits are modelled in other ways, with high DEX granting the initiative and always giving the option to parry (otherwise not possible), and giving more actions (could help to parry).

Armour as target number tends to scale badly for SF games as it makes guys in super-armour incredibly hard to hit – often even with futuristic weapons since these do tons of damage but don’t often get hit bonuses, but doesn’t offset damage if they do get zapped...so combat becomes miss, miss, miss, miss, miss, vapourize). Note that if a system gives a character bonus damage for a good attack roll, a raised armour TN will reduce bonus damage, also.
Armour in D&D adding to AC also led to Strength rather than Dex adding to hit rolls. This occasionally generates additional messing around n the games system i.e. being “entangled” separately penalizes to-hit (Str based) and Dexterity), and maladapts it for supers games (Strength becomes very powerful, but enormous Strength is a superhero genre convention; also two super-speedsters would be unable to hit each other, while a super-strong brick easily hits a speedster).
A houserule for Palladium here (adapted from Heroes Unlimited) takes out MDC but adds categories of half/full/no damage based on strength level/damage type (potentially streamlineable to a linear roll a la Savage Worlds but more improvised).

(Possibly the origin of armour being treated as it is in D&D, decreasing chance of hitting rather than absorbing damage, might be a legacy aspect due to armour more or less predating hit points - in the wargame figures might have a roll to be taken off the board in an armour-based fashion???)


2) Armour as damage absorption – probably the most common system in RPGs, here armour gives a penalty to damage; either a straight subtraction, or rolled (e.g. extra “soak dice”, counting successes in some Storyteller games). (In theory armour in a dice pool game could also modify the number on a die needed for it to count as a “success”, reducing damage by a proportion, but I don’t think I’ve ever seen this). The main drawback of this method is that small weapons may have trouble getting through armour. Variants include:
*absorption can be rolled in other fashions e.g. armour may subtract e.g. 1d6 from damage (or a related step die [Alternity]); Lord Vreegs' Celtricia game gives armour a base protection, divided by [average of 2d6], meaning armour is on rare occasions seriously perforated. Rolled absorption mitigates the problem of smaller weapons having trouble penetrating, at least slightly, at a cost of more rolling.
Rolled absorption may also allow multiple layers of armour to be accounted for separately - each layer gets a roll and the best is taken - without this excessively increasing armour defense value. (a similar effect could also be achieved by having armour affect the damage roll, e.g. roll damage twice and take the worst).
*GURPS (IIRC) gives armour both a to-hit and an absorption, a combination of this and the above method.
*Synnibarr gives armour a damage divisor (from one to four “tenths” i.e. from /10 to /10,000, and then up to four more for armour) but is also destroyed if it takes too much damage (an ablative system, see below). Creatures such as dragons sometimes got scales that worked as extra 'armour' on top of their normal armour, to balance them with PCs who could have up to 8 'tenths'.

Note if a game is 'PC only rolls' (e.g. Dungeon World), then armour will probably work by absorbing damage since most other options don't work e.g. there's no 'hit roll' by monsters to affect; armour as extra HPs may still work.


*Table-based. Rolemaster (and Sword's Path Glory) cross-reference armour on the damage tables when calculating damage. This is basically a form of absorption, although the table allows greater control of the final results - i.e. less likelihood of all damage being negated. In Rolemaster, critical hit severity [A to E] is also reduced.
Absorptive armour synergizes badly with fixed weapon damage (e.g. in Marvel Super Heroes, its frequently possible to be unable to injure a highly armoured opponent; this isn't helped by a good attack roll).

3) Armour as extra HPs (ablative); Palladium’s high technology games - Rifts and Robotech –do this since attacks can’t get through armour until its been reduced to slag. For Palladium this was a fairly good expansion of the base system since it built off an aspect of the armour rules in its earlier games (the armour’s damage capacity) and also avoided the usual trap of Armour as Target Number systems where armour classes go off the scale. For a normal Fantasy RPG system, this approach would perhaps be unrealistic.
This approach is also an interesting "game balance control" tool for the GM in Rifts; upgrading a puny character's armour effectively jacks up their hit points.
Most of the time this approach has damage taken by armour lost permanently (eventually you buy a new set), though "The Black Hack" (D&Desque) has armour points that recover after resting, with the (thin) rationalization that a tired or wounded character can't use armour as effectively. Most versions of this rule, obviously, your armour is destroyed and needs to be replaced every 5 minutes.


4) Separate Armour Bypass roll – rarely seen (since it adds an extra die roll). Dragon Warriors has this; a successful hit roll is followed by a roll of another die vs. an Armour Factor. For example plate = AR 5; a sword would roll d6 and have to beat the AF i.e a 6 equals damage. This can be used to give weapons varying armour penetration. In DW, it does tend to add “whiff factor” (excessive miss rate), and unlike D&D type systems, higher level/combat skill gives no direct bonus at getting through armour.
This sort of mechanic is good for representing e.g. multiheaded weapons (triple-flails or African throwing knives); each blade or head can roll a separate die. Max rolls/1s could also be used to represent e.g. weapon breakage or impalement.
Villains & Vigilantes uses a d100 bypass roll; if the roll fails the damage is absorbed by the armour, reducing its %.
JAGS gives armour an ‘armour save’ on 4 Jags dice (d6s with 6s counting as 0s) to convert Penetration (PEN) damage into Impact damage, though not to stop damage entirely. PEN damage >4 is doubled as it reaches a character’s vitals.
CHILL integrates 'armour bypass' into the damage roll directly - damage is rolled, with a roll less than armour on a location bouncing off, while higher rolls instead deal full damage. This systems limits the full benefits of a bypass system i.e. weapons can't be low-damage but high-penetration, but is relatively simple. Perhaps some weapons could potentially be kludged to have a separate 'effective damage' for bypass purposes.
Free rpg Zenobia has an armour save where a dice pool of 1-6 d6s (depending on armour type) is rolled, and any 6s negate the hit. It has a 'Hard to Kill' skill which operates as Armour 1 and thus, gives a 1-in-6 chance of negating damage completely) - probably showing how treating toughness as armour is especially bad when armour is bypassable instead of damage-absorbing.

An Armour save/bypass roll could also be used that just gives a reduction of damage, rather than negating it; this may be a good way to represent "partial armour" without hit location (credit to David Johanson for this).
 
5) Armour as Parry
Supers! (Hazard Studios) has armour which is basically rolled as a defense i.e. it functions as a "Parry" when a characters opts to use Armour instead of a different defensive power (if defending with something else, the armour rating is ignored). Supers! Armour can be used multiple times, unlike other powers used in defense, but at -1d each time. Relative multiple of the attack over the armour defense sets the damage inflicted.

Other Elaborations: HarnMaster attempts to model characters wearing multiple layers of different armours, but with this tending to generate, IIRC, excessive defences – such as system probably requires diminishing-returns to be built into the benefit from the total armour points.
A few systems have also attempted to use “piecemeal” armour – per location (for post apocalyptic games in particular it may be fun to get that road warrior feel by strapping some old tires onto your body for extra defense). The 2nd edition AD&D Fighters Handbook again did this, but with a cumbersome system of adding fractional AC bonuses for mixing and matching armour types; it works better in systems with hit location rolls.
Most armour systems give characters penalties for wearing armour; if different armour by location is used penalties should perhaps be calculated off different locations i.e. head (helm)- perception checks, body – swim/climb (most suit weight being there), arms – manual dexterity, legs – speed.
 
Aberrant has armour piercing attacks (reduces Soak by 2/attack success) as well as aggravated damage (ignores soak entirely, but had reduced damage base); conversely armour can have the Impervious advantage, making it more expensive (=probably lower armour value overall) but letting it ignore these effects.
 
Early AD&D is somewhat infamous for the "weapon vs. AC modifiers" table, which cross-referenced armour type with weapon to generate a to-hit modifier. This is generally criticized as being unnecessarily slow (some character sheets try to solve that by adding a few lines for weapon type on character sheet) and it also suffers slightly in that monsters usually don't have an equivalent armour or weapon type listed. It does however add a degree of tactical calculation and verisimilitude into combat, as well as being a part of the balance of the game - some weapons, notably crossbows, have benefits if using the table that made them seriously inferior when the table was ditched in 2E, and in addition multiple weapon proficiencies become more useful as it gives a character the option to switch between weapons (the table is cut down in 2E, but a later rule where characters get more weapon slots for Int could lets high-Int characters indirectly earn to-hit bonuses if both rules are in use, encouraging less stereotypical fighters). The table itself primarily reflects weapon type (bludgeon, slash, pierce) though it also adjusts for 'encumberance' of armour i.e. unarmoured types can get larger bonuses against slow weapons like two-handed sword (i.e. can dodge better).

CORPS has armour with an x/y rating, where 'x' is stopped and 'y' is converted to nonlethal.

General Considerations:

Scaling: How armour ratings are scaled is an interesting question that varies, typically depending on the damage scale (if absorptive) or the to-hit scale (for AC systems like D&D's). Most games have relatively fixed damage which also sets the scale for armour (set to not make it too powerful); open-ended damage systems struggle with armour scaling to an extent i.e. in Tunnels and Trolls armour can stop excessively large amounts of damage since damage is based off the difference between both sides' combat totals and could be any number.
 
Access to Armour: typically either all characters can use it (sometimes with it inflicting penalties), or proficiency in it may be based on class or skill selection. A few systems also have Str-based armour use: Tunnels and Trolls gives armour an explicit Str-required (wizards can wear it, albeit that in 5E and earlier, spellcasting fatigue might mean they suddenly can't move after casting a spell).  In theory a game with Str-requirements only for armour with add a plus to Strength from class.
Savage Worlds makes armour extremely heavy, meaning that characters wearing it are likely to suffer encumbrance penalties unless they're strong or have an Edge that increases cargo capacity [Brawny]; while tightly integrated this does make encumbrance a bit less optional than in other games. It incidentally, also deters strong characters from going around mostly naked (the fantasy barbarian archetype)...the last thing your barbarian character wants is the Brawny edge.
Another compromise system is Atlantis (based on Talislanta's "Omega System")- the quick start includes an 'advanced militia training' which doubles STR (min +2) for determining armour penalties.
Dungeon World has a derived 'load' (encumbrance) rating which is modified by class and affects armour worn, as well as there being specific class features that can reduce armour weight.
Armour may interact positively or negatively with character skill. Palladium's Parry rules mean that a high Parry makes armour redundant, while Tunnels and Trolls has a skill that doubles armour protection, and 2E Dark Sun had an 'armour optimization' skill which let a character slightly boost AC to compensate for limited armour available.

Balancing unarmoured characters: while the benefits of armour are in part determined by how good the designer makes armour in the first place, some characters may also get extra niche-protected benefits while not wearing armour due to their concept e.g.
*The swashbuckler kit in 2nd Ed. AD&D (the kit) got a +2 to AC while not wearing armour; later Skills and Powers had this a selectable fighter ability (plus human characters could purchase a tough skin for AC 8, nonstackable with normal armour).
*The 1E AD&D monk likewise got an improved AC due to 'defensive ability', which only worked when unarmoured.
*barbarians in 5E D&D add [Con mod] to AC i.e. 10+Dex mod + Con mod.
*The Dragon Warriors barbarian class is balanced on the assumption they wear less armour than the knight, but have more HPs. (They always have the higher HP base, but take penalties when wearing heavier armours).

Armour and effect on other probabilities: armour that reduces damage can affect probability of other special effects via use of damage-based rolls (see above). Ad hoc adjustments can be used in other cases e.g. 3.0 had a monk "Flensing Strike" feat which let a target save vs. having strips of skin torn off/pain effects with a special save bonus equal to natural armour bonus, or whips have a rule where they just can't damage opponents with armour or natural armour.

Armour spikes get rules in some systems - 3E notably uses the grappling rules. Savage Worlds' Fantasy Companion notes that charging doors, or falling over, may result in getting stuck.

Armour & Agility/Dexterity Penalties
Armour's weight may inflict a flat penalty on Dex-related tasks. This can include Dodge rolls, initiative, any Dex-based roll. Savage Worlds as noted above just makes armour heavy and applies encumberance penalties (good as small dice sizes make any penalty substantial, such that rolling multiple minor penalties into one is a good idea), while Tunnels and Trolls 5E applied an (optional) DEX multiplier. D&D generally just caps max. Dex bonus to AC (3E and later) in heavier armour; early D&D may give specific penalties (Wrestling, thief skills) as well as probable penalties by GM fiat.
The Fantasy Trip is notable for especially harsh DEX penalties for armour, which also seriously affects to-hit chance (at worst plate = -6 Dex). The penalties are so serious, and combined with a hit roll that's normally on 3d6 and hence nonlinearly increasing, that there's an incentive to have heavy armour worn by lithe agile high-Dex characters so they can still hit, while the beefcake dudes should be as naked as possible.

Hit Locations: armour may be varied by location in games which have either location rolls or 'called shots'. Another approach is to reduce total armour value e.g. a character who takes off their helmet might have a reduced armour rating and reduced perception penalties.

SHIELDS
Shields typically operate as a bonus to parry or as armour, depending on system. Conan D20 divides AC into Parry AC and Dodge AC, with the bonus for a shield being +4 Parry/+1 Dodge (helping vs. ranged attacks). Savage Worlds gives shields a Parry bonus, but they instead act as armour vs. ranged attacks (as these ignore the character's Parry rating). Tunnels & Trolls simply treats shields as armour (a problem with its system is that characters take damage based off difference in attack totals, so usually a shield does less than using an offhand weapon). Arrowflight (1E) reportedly treats a shield as armour if a character gets any successes on a defense roll, or if the hit happens to strike the shield arm hit location).
Dragon Warriors gives a shield an extra roll (a 1-in-d6 roll to negate a successful blow); this gets kludgy for magic shields as it does not scale up for those, which instead add a Defense bonus. [a penalty to the attacker's roll]. An elaboration for this might be to adjust the roll for certain classes or whatever (knights might get a 1-on-d4 roll, say) -  although, this sort of roll which gives a fixed chance - completely unmodified by attacker ability, be they Joe the Peasant or the god Thor - has the potential to break if modifiers are allowed, since bonuses can never be offset or countered.
3E lets tower shields (but not other shields) plug into the 'cover' rules if the character sits wholly behind the shield.  
 
A couple of systems limit how often a character can use a shield (each round). In GURPS Man-to-Man, shield 'passive defense' is the readying time of the shield. Likewise for Sword's Path Glory: it varied readying times for shields, with a reduced parry based on how many initiative impulses have passed since the shield was last used (calculated as a multiplier to the base parry %). (SPG also has multiple 'tracks' for weapon and shield initiative, so a character might get to choose between doing a shield-parry at a penalty, or making a weapon parry and delaying their next attack).
More abstractly, 2E D&D limits how often a shield bonus can be applied for small shields (all shields add +1, but a buckler can only be used once/round). Systems with specific weapon skills usually rate shields with a skill percentage for defense, rather than a flat bonus. This sort of rule could support multiple use of shield bonus each round in line with weapon multiple attacks, where those are skill based.
Systems which represent facing typically limit shield bonuses to front/side attacks; 2E D&D has an option to strap a shield on a character's back, but this applies a penalty on to-hit rolls.
 
Some systems may model shield degradation e.g. giving shields their own limited 'hit points' (Runequest IIRC). In this case a shield may be useful to prevent a weapon taking damage from parrying.
One houserule on the internet for earlier D&Ds, 'shields shall be splintered', lets a player opt to let a shield absorb an enemy blow that should have hit, breaking it..
 
Legendary Lives has an odd system for determining shield-defense where a characters [DEX+shield size] determines its parry bonus in each hit location separately. This staggers increases across multiple categories (a point of DEX always adds to defense somewhere, without giving a huge bonus) and perhaps realistically gives a lower shield bonus to the weapon arm and legs.

Some systems may model the effects of weapons (such as flails) that are particularly good at getting around shields by reducing the shield bonus.
Like armour, shields can sometimes get spikes (e.g. spiked bucklers; Tunnels & Trolls includes the 'madu', or horned shield). Generally these are handled with two-weapon fighting rules.

Special Abilities
Some special abilities may mimic the effects of armour. e.g. the Angel in Apocalypse World gets 'Battlefield Grace: while you are caring for people, not fighting, you get +1 armour' or 3E monk: add +Wis mod to AC. In systems where armour is a TN (D&D, Palladium) Dodging and Armour are basically the same and these are perhaps more common.
An early (081712) 5E D&D playtest included fighter manuevers which let a character roll their 'expertise die' and reduce damage by that, only when wearing armour or using a shield (despite these things normally raising AC instead of soaking damage).

Tunnels and Trolls gives warriors the ability to absorb double value for armour (i.e. leather would absorb 12 hits instead of 6). Deluxe backtracks from this slightly (sometimes seen as a problem due to lengthy ties in battle), with the doubling kept but considered to be armour 'abuse' and requiring saving rolls by the warrior to prevent the armour degrading. 'spite damage' also bypasses armour, and warriors get extra dice in combat per level. Overall the problem is mostly one of warriors being a bit broken initially (or as soon as they can buy full plate) while wizards dominate the endgame more.

Monster special abilities: As a weird variety of DR, AD&D 2E had a monster called a 'chronovoid' which took 1/2 damage per magic weapon +1, or 1-3 spell levels. Hence a nonmagical weapon did nothing, a +1 1/2 damage, a +2 full damage, a +3 1.5x damage, and a +4 double damage. (I know D&D normally handles armour as an AC raise, but I otherwise don't know where else to put this). Pondering, maybe this monster would be easier with double HPs (say, roll d12s and allow it a Con modifier) and then use x2, x3, x4 rather than x1.5, etc.  Something more fine-grained might've been better for spells, e.g. 25% per spell level, although that would be hard to implement.

recent edits: The Black Hack; DW 'load'(*); Rifts armour and game balance (*), chronovoids (*)
« Last Edit: April 29, 2019, 11:47:41 PM by Bloody Stupid Johnson »

Bloody Stupid Johnson

  • Senior Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3366
Combat - Miniatures & Movement
« Reply #36 on: December 26, 2011, 07:12:20 PM »

Image: Island of the Sirens map for the D&D Minis wargame; triangles represent hampered terrain.
 
Systems vary considerably in how detailed movement considerations are; discussion of existing systems in this section needs to be considered with the caveat that different groups played games with different emphasis on it –for instance most versions of D&D can be played with or without miniatures/counters, at least if the GM is willing to handwave the occasional fireball area and decide randomly which PC a monster attacks.
Where miniatures are used, distances may be measured, or a grid may be used – in hexes as in GURPS or in squares as in D&D. (In theory, a surface could also be marked with equilateral triangles). Squares are less precise for diagonal movement but may allow placement of larger figures better (a Large figure fits weirdly on 3 adjacent hexes). Larger figures such as horses cause issues since where they take up irregular areas (3.0 D&Ds 2-square-long horses) detailed rules for facing/turning are also needed. GURPS has some very intriguingly weird Large creatures e.g. GURPS Lensmen has player character races including “1 hex humanoids”, “3-hex” Rigellians, 10-hex-long Velentians (arms in hexes 2,4,6; 1 hex reach; 40 hex wingspan), 7-hex-long Delgonians (arms in hex 2, legs in hexes 3 and 5), and elephantine “4-hex” Dhilians.
Using miniatures, sometimes a figure just affects/threatens all sides of it equally (is assumed to just turn where necessary) as in 3E D&D, while other games have characters select a 'facing' which will specify flank and rear squares which might not be shield protected, can't be attacked into or take a to-hit penalty, etc.
3E has an abstract 'flanking' where multiple opponents on opposite sides get a hit bonus, whereas Savage Worlds just gives extra opponents a 'gang up' bonus.  

Movement in some miniatures systems grants the defender an additional attack (HarnMaster, D&D), while in others (DragonQuest, Warhammer Quest) the defender instead must pass a roll to disengage. In the case of 3E/4E D&D, movement out of individual 'threatened squares' generates a bonus attack, while for 5E (or AD&D) movement out of an opponent's entire threatened area - i.e. leaving their reach, not just moving around inside it - gives the bonus attack.
 
Miniatures show statically a melee situation that is actually dynamic and constantly shifting; combats in systems using them to excess tend to be very stationary and punish movement harshly . Attempting to add swashbuckling movement back in to a minis system results in a more complex sets of “interrupts” and special powers or skills, with (in my opinion) a final result that combat is still less fluid than if miniatures were not used at all. They also consume setup time and effort. On the plus side miniatures do help adjudicate ranges or inclusion of PCs within areas more fairly, can add a tactical dimension, and can reduce GM book keeping if used right e.g. in a mass combat they can be useful for tracking better how many opponents are left and which are wounded, and act as visual props that add interest to a game.
 
Miniatures are less required in games which are abstracted (such as Tunnels and Trolls). They are also more problematic when dealing with chases, vehicles or big monsters (3.x/4E rules for “move action” rules do pursuit poorly – e.g. with turn-based movement and pursuer’s attacks reducing their movement ). Marvel Super Heroes got around this sort of thing by using hexes, but having “areas” which were a massive 40ft across. Somewhat related to this, The Gaming Den (tgdmb.com) has in its archives some discussion around the idea of abstract-sized areas that upsize with party level. Warhammer 3E uses abstract 'zones' to handle distances; 13th Age apparently does likewise and includes rules meant to mimic positioning effects abstracting, such as having multiple-target spells either affect d3 targets or d4+1 with collateral damage to allies (at player option).

Movement rules may include penalties for 'hampered terrain' (e.g. these cost double movement to go through). Some houserules I've seen cover how dead monsters can act as hampered terrain (and how large monsters may crush things when collapsing).

Exact positioning is also perhaps more useful in a game where there are a lot of area-type explosions or blasts. (As a side note, blasts sometimes just extend out through the area, or sometimes have diminishing damage from the epicentre).


 
EDIT: 3-D movement: 3D movement (space, air or underwater combat) makes miniatures slightly trickier. Theoretically 3 objects in a space define a plane, and can be represented on a 2-D surface e.g. for space combat where a defined "falling direction" isn't necessary. More than 3 objects may need representation of height up when placing the miniatures (and actual distance between objects will be affected, technically - square root of [height diff squared+horizontal distance squared).
Flying objects can work vs. each other (with appropriate scale) but probably requires a separate map to the ground-based battle.
 
Movement rates in systems may be racially based (i.e. dwarves get move 9" in AD&D), or based off an attribute i.e. Speed in Tunnels and Trolls, or DEX in many systems. Marvel Super Heroes has movement based off Endurance, somewhat mysteriously.
Games with "action points" may have movement rates which vary indirectly as a result of characters having different # action points (IIRC, JAGS).
 
In a number of systems, characters have randomized movement each turn. Examples include:
*Savage Worlds, where Running lets a character move [Pace+d6] tabletop inches (Normal non-running movement does not require a roll).
*Masters of the Universe, where characters can move d6.
*DC Heroes has fixed base movement based (=DEX), although movement can be Pushed with expenditure of hero points and a roll.
*The HeroQuest boardgame (d6 squares).
*2E AD&D, where characters could make a series of Str checks to attempt x5, x4, or x3 normal speed (x2 is automatic).
*Rolemaster, where moving required an agility check on a table.
 
Rolemaster/MERP movement was fairly time consuming, with standard movement requiring a [d100+modifiers] roll on the Moving Manuevers table to determine how much of the turn is consumed by movement. (Also, God help you if horses, stairs, or jumping is involved - any attempt to go up stairs during an adventure can theoretically end in a broken neck).
Original RM (1st/2nd ed) had a flaw in movement rates, where moving at x3 or more base speed increased manuever difficulties. This increased the likihood of rolling a result that reduced movement to 80% or less, so that trying to move faster would slow down a character. The tables were further tinkered with in (I think) Companion V.
 
Proponents of rolled movement tend to like it because of possible variation introduced to combat - by making movement less predictable, precalculation of options by players is made less clear. It also makes the combat movement work for basic chases without too much extra effort. On the downside, its an extra roll; and many of the systems above generate amounts of movement that are extremely variable.
 
According to this, Spanish game 'Far West' "had the Speed (Velocidad) skill; you rolled d100 under it if you had to run. No degrees of success or actual speed, though; either you ran faster than the opposition, or you didn't." Shockingly abstract / hard to convert into anything useful.

(Far West here, and Rolemaster, and maybe AD&D, illustrate the problem of trying to apply normal resolution system to movement/chases - its usually a bad idea since characters should be able to try to run faster without it failing entirely. Replacing the normal core mechanic with a simple die roll of dX+Y feet/squares moved is probably better, though a different mechanic does make interpreting any sort of skills boosting movement more complicated).

In some systems depending on how initiative factors into movement, some of the same effect as random movement might be introduced by the initiative roll (e.g. with per-segment movement and the like).
 
Fireborn (see combat manuevers) is somewhat interesting in that it has a 'roll' for movement as part of the total attack sequence roll, requiring attack successes be spent.

3E is interesting in that it doesn't have either rolled movement or variable movement rates between characters - all humans for instance have a movement of 30ft/turn. Consequently chases don't work well. This also interferes with combat tactics like running away from a mob and fighting them one at a time as they catch up.

Reach
Reach is easy to handle in square/hex mapped games as being able to hit targets further than the adjacent square - at least, the huge 'reach' of very big creatures or polearms can be handled, although differences at human level are going to be handled less well.
Some games may have more detailed reach e.g. Age of Heroes has weapon length rules with shorter weapons must make an attack to successfully close in.
On the other extreme, 13th Age ignores reach more or less, but has a "Reach Tricks" feat applying ad hoc benefit - 'once per battle, tell the GM how you are using your weapon's reach to perform an unexpected stunt such as an opportunity attack against an enemy that disengaged then moved, strike a nearby enemy not engaged with..' or perhaps parry attack on an ally or the like.

Cover
While perhaps this could be considered a form of armour, cover is something that typically is a concern in games which take tactical positioning (and hence movement) seriously so I'm sticking this here. Cover may absorb damage, provide a to-hit penalty, be rolled against a separate check. It sometimes is considered to block particular hit locations, in which case a location roll might determine whether the cover works. Some 'indirect-fire' weapons, such as grenades, may be able to go around some forms of cover. Cover rules may also intersect with vehicle rules i.e. a character may have cover inside some sorts of vehicles. Effectiveness of cover may depend somewhat on 'readied action' rules or whether move/shoot/move to duck down again is allowed, as well as degree of attack penalties for 'snap fire' vs. aimed shots and what weapons occur in a given game (e.g. it may be a bad idea to hide behind SDC cars in Rifts).

Doorways
Doorways can be a 'choke points' (in military terms) - limiting how many opponents can engage. This is more of a concern in games where multiple opponent rules are very harsh - e.g. while T&T combat is very abstract, it directly adds the attack of extra opponents so 2 skeletons might be an automatic win for the PCs, 3 a fair fight and 5 an automatic loss (depending on relative stats). The last time I played this, it led to lots of attempting to get skeletons through doors one at a time and therefore necessitated lots of GM judgment calls (that started turning into ad hoc rules), in what was theoretically a very simple system and indeed as a result of its combat being simple.

Chases
Unisystem has a slightly interesting chase system (e.g. from Buffy):
Quote
Chases: Movement concerns may also arise during a chase scene. First, you must decide how much of a lead the chasee has on the chaser. We suggest granting +1 per Turn of head start. Then have the two racers perform a Dexterity (doubled), or Dexterity and Sports Resisted Action. The winner gains +1 per Turn. So if the lead sprinter started with a three Turn head start (+3) and the chaser won the first Resisted Action, the lead would be down to +2. Once the lead is eliminated (brought down to 0), the chasee is caught; if it grows to +5, the chasee gets away.
(This roll is in spite of normal per-turn movement being fixed at [Dex+Con] per turn).

Movement system fails
You'd think it would be fairly straightforward, but movement systems tend to generate a few possible issues e.g.:
3E elusive target: when an opponent attempts to hit you and misses, they instead strike someone 'flanking' you. The problem is, unless they have reach, a flanking opponent is 10' away and so can't be hit.
3.5 Trample: 3.0 worked (horses were 5x10, not 10x10cubes) whereas in 3.5 two adjacent opponents make this malfunction.
5E D&D lightning bolt -by RAW this hits grid intersections, not squares, so doesn't hit anything if fired directly ahead. http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?747894-5e-So-it-s-been-out-for-a-bit-what-issues-are-people-having/page8
D&D 4E reportedly has issues with diagonal movement of rectangular shaped vehicles/objects - cf. here https://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?776802-4e-Diagonal-Movement-of-Vehicles (although I'm not sure I understand the problem).

Especially ignoble mention also goes to D&D Basic (BECMI) Immortals rules; this made Immortals theoretically 4-dimensional creatures (as in, having four spatial dimensions), making the goings-on very difficult to conceptualize.

Less seriously, Champions apparently rounds up movement on 'half moves' (really a math issue) so characters often buy an extra inch of movement to add an inch to half-moves. (reference)

See here for further discussion on movement/facing/tactical combat e.g. The Fantasy Trip as an example (Skarg).
« Last Edit: July 14, 2018, 08:26:37 AM by Bloody Stupid Johnson »

LordVreeg

  • S.O.C. Disaster
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3933
    • http://celtricia.pbworks.com/
Design Alternatives Analysis Archive
« Reply #37 on: December 27, 2011, 09:40:59 AM »
I've done a lot of game design, and so I have leafed through your posts a few times.  Wanted to say I enjoy them.  Makes me understand the reasons I have done certain things, seeing them in context.
Currently running 1 live groups and two online group in my 30+ year old campaign setting.  
http://celtricia.pbworks.com/
Setting of the Year, 08 Campaign Builders Guild awards.
'Orbis non sufficit'

My current Collegium Arcana online game, a test for any ruleset.

Bloody Stupid Johnson

  • Senior Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3366
Design Alternatives Analysis Archive
« Reply #38 on: December 27, 2011, 06:42:28 PM »
Thanks, Lord Vreeg :)
 
Edit note - adding link to Feel of Combat notes here to keep the topic together.
 
Quote from: RobMuadib;512932
FEEL OF COMBAT
Oh yeah another thing that bears mentioning with the more abstract systems with increasing hit points is how normal threats (i.e. falling) become trivial (the old saw about high level fighters being able to jump off a cliff and get up and fight with no ill effects.) So you have to add kludges like the massive damage rules etc.
 
Another thing is the overall speed and feel of combat. Does it resolve quickly, or does it end up like D&D combat with everyone hacking on each other for several rounds, etc. You should design it for the effect you want out of combat. Do you end up with lots of corpses in a gritty system, do people cut and run after getting wounded. Does everyone just get knocked out and roughed up like in Super Heroic systems. Each type of system works better for some things than others.
 
The more heroic the game system, the less lasting effects of damage there should be, and the more of a beating character's can take. While gritty systems can end up with lots of dead character's, often to the extent that combat is effectively MORE deadly than real life, lots of people die every time there is combat, instead of people getting wounded, fleeing combat and dying without medical attention. Indeed, because most game systems don't include any morale systems, lots of fight are to the death, while in real life, people cut and run if possible.
 
Another thing is on Impairment, in real life, people can be wounded and not really notice any significant effects of the wound due to adrenaline, unless a bone is broken, the body part is mangled outright. In some famous cases of suspects on PCP, they can take over a dozen gunshots to the torso and not even be slowed down. (In reality people only drop immediately if they take major damage to the CNS (Brain, spine, neck), or the heart is directly damaged) People can be shot without realizing it. While at the same time they can drop for purely psychological reasons, or die of shock from a shot to the foot.
 
Most often impairment is used in RPG's so people can be beat down and rendered ineffective, the death spiral, instead of just eventually dying. Incapacitation is used to make for an effective end to combat, without necessarily people dying, especially in Heroic/Super Heroic realities. Needless to say there is HUGE amount of variation in combat systems.

As a general note on combat, as well as level of lethality, combat systems vary in abstraction - systems can be abstract so that 'fiction' is generated built around interpreting die rolls and changes in numbers, or detailed which maximizes the amount of player tactics that can be brought into play. (see post # 197, problems of abstraction level).

In terms of 'tactical' design, I saw this here which I found interesting:
"I suggest that there are a large class of players who don't want to be tactically challenged, but do like engaging a system and generating a result that's in some way their own. It's okay if the decisions that they want to make are largely obvious, so long as they aren't endlessly repeated. If they have to react to a changing situation, even if the best choice is pretty clear, they feel good about it. There's something satisfying about making the right decision, even if it's not terribly hard to make the right decision. As long as you're actually making a decision, and not just repeating a script."
4E D&D for instance I've seen condemned by hardcore wargamers as "tactical illusionism", since the choices generally aren't arduous, but it would support the need of this sort of player - they don't want anything hard, but want a medium between complex strategy and being a meatbot whose function is to roll hit and damage dice for the fighter.
« Last Edit: December 23, 2015, 05:22:32 PM by Bloody Stupid Johnson »

LordVreeg

  • S.O.C. Disaster
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3933
    • http://celtricia.pbworks.com/
Design Alternatives Analysis Archive
« Reply #39 on: December 27, 2011, 07:10:28 PM »
btW, LOOKING AT DAMAGE, AND ARMOR...

Have you looked at said catagories with non-normal bell curve distributions?

Or with armor as damage absorption combined with target number...or with the damage absorption also a range?

also do not see continuous init systems under initiative...not to complain, just enjoying this thread, and that is what I have used for 20+ years.  Hackmaster and  i think exalted also have used it.
« Last Edit: December 27, 2011, 07:14:32 PM by LordVreeg »
Currently running 1 live groups and two online group in my 30+ year old campaign setting.  
http://celtricia.pbworks.com/
Setting of the Year, 08 Campaign Builders Guild awards.
'Orbis non sufficit'

My current Collegium Arcana online game, a test for any ruleset.

Bloody Stupid Johnson

  • Senior Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3366
Design Alternatives Analysis Archive
« Reply #40 on: December 27, 2011, 07:25:50 PM »
No problem, appreciate any input.
I'll go back and add 'continuous' to initiative systems when I have time (Sword's Path Glory does that as well...with three separate tracks, for weapon arm, shield arm and movement...).
 
Not sure what you mean by 'non-normal bell-curve distributions' w/ regard to damage sorry? I will go back and add note of rolled armour absorbtion though- hopefully I the same thing you're thinking of e.g. rolling d6 for how much damage your armour takes (like Alternity or Agon).

LordVreeg

  • S.O.C. Disaster
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3933
    • http://celtricia.pbworks.com/
Design Alternatives Analysis Archive
« Reply #41 on: December 27, 2011, 07:31:51 PM »
Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;497779
No problem, appreciate any input.
I'll go back and add 'continuous' to initiative systems when I have time (Sword's Path Glory does that as well...with three separate tracks, for weapon arm, shield arm and movement...).
 
Not sure what you mean by 'non-normal bell-curve distributions' w/ regard to damage sorry? I will go back and add note of rolled armour absorbtion though- hopefully I the same thing you're thinking of e.g. rolling d6 for how much damage your armour takes (like Alternity or Agon).


You have it.

I also use (along with critical hits) a dividig dice with protection and damage to change the normal distribution to more of a long-tailed distribution.  

So tiny dagger like a dirk might do 2d6+1/d10 damage, a broadsword might do 1d10+16/d6, and a really slow doublebladed broadaxe may do 3d6+19/d4.

All protections are divided by the average of 2d6 ( I know it sounds obscure, but it works really well to give me the distribution I want)
Currently running 1 live groups and two online group in my 30+ year old campaign setting.  
http://celtricia.pbworks.com/
Setting of the Year, 08 Campaign Builders Guild awards.
'Orbis non sufficit'

My current Collegium Arcana online game, a test for any ruleset.

Bloody Stupid Johnson

  • Senior Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3366
Combat manuevers and core mechanic
« Reply #42 on: December 27, 2011, 07:59:43 PM »
Hmm, hadn't considered how to give long-tailed distributions with dividing dice before, though it makes sense I guess multiplying (as with the d10xd10 distribution) and dividing give the same sorts of results, but with rounding down smoothing it out a bit...? I do wonder if you graphed it out if there'd be a simpler way to get that effect ? Anyway, thanks again.

***EDITED TO ADD THIS IN, IN SEQUENCE


Core mechanic & Combat manuevers

Currently I've been musing over how core mechanic affects choice of what is a combat manuever in the system - potentially working through this may let us work back to pick a core mechanic that better suits what you want. (questions that are usually quite far apart and so not usually a consideration at the outset (Unless a designer is rebuilding an existing system perhaps, since then the total existing structure is visible).  

General Notes
*Active defense (i.e. separate roll to dodge or parry) is generally possible for any mechanic since you could at worst can use the RQ approach where both roll (parry success = attack is blocked). If 'players only roll'  then opponents can't have active combat manuevers, obviously, but 'players only roll' could be an add-on for basically any mechanic.
*Often there's a choice between having a manuever declared before a roll is made, and having an extra effect result from a good attack roll. Manuevers that are better than a standard attack can be either:
-declared a priori before the roll, with a difficulty adjustment.
-occur as an extra effect or option after the roll, as a result of a good 'effect' (hitting by X, spending successes, etc).
A given core mechanic may be slightly better at either applying a difficulty adjustment (i.e. favouring pre-declared actions), getting a measureable effect out (i.e. favouring choices after the roll, good at both - so either is fine - or generally bad at both. In this last case (where neither is good), that perhaps suggest a more abstract system, or options to be balanced so that doing something all the time isn't an issue. Abilities can also be resource-based (you have a 'shoot them in leg' power useable N times/day), or might require mechanical investment in feats/skills to perform. At worst an extra roll may be involved (e.g. for hit locations).
The sort of tasks requiring difficulty adjustment includes in particular 'called shots' or the like, as well as what I'd called 'going for broke' in general (Power Attack type mechanics*"Automatic Action" - skips whatever the dice mechanism is, so can appear in any system. (Main system distinction - are automatic actions determined by 'take 10' or similar, or are these a fixed category?). As noted under cutting down excess rolling, very variable results can require a diceless resolution to break bizarre results. Movement, grabbing or lifting might be forced to be automatic instead of being too random. So movement is probably more likely to be an automatic fixed amount given a high-variability roll (d20, changing die types). SW has a fixed base but a variable 'running die', reducing divergence by the large base value.
*Pushing: existing cases - DC Heroes, Masterbook- known examples are generally universal-table games. Its a roll to increase what's basically a fixed effect to start with. Relies on having effect-output (and translating that back as a boost to a raw value) so  most feasible with universal-table type games; possibly also count-success systems (though its a. tricky as dice-pools are fairly small/granular and b. usually these are rolled rather than fixed, and 'spending willpower' or a safety valve mechanism fills the niche instead).

Additive
Additive systems usually don't use the core mechanic for damage rolls - and damage rolls could be more relevant to some sorts of combat manuever design (? - e.g. where damage is used to work out check difficulty)
*handle better attack>more damage translation badly, so, "armour bypass" or "power attack" type manuevers are more likely.  'Backstab' or 'Coup de grace' need specific combat options, instead of occuring  automatically as a function of attack successes giving more damage.
*More likely to have manuever declared 'a priori' (before rolling).  Games where you pick assorted manuevers after rolling usually work with more granular "effect" numbers for math convenience - compare the complex manuever systems (Heroic Golden Turbulence, Fireborn ) are often found in success-count systems; additive systems are more likely to require choice of a manuever before rolling, though there are exceptions (Dungeon World's multiple options for Moves; Dragon Age which gives stunt points after the roll equal to the [d6] 'dragon die' if doubles are rolled).
Grapple, disarm - abilities that take out an opponent bypassing its HP - tend to be more problematic with heavily inflating HP pools, occurring in many additive systems.

Multidie Additive
Wide variation in character's  likely average roll - the 2D character won't beat the 6D character in a fair fight- which could perhaps encourage building tactical 'you lose' situations into the manuever system to compensate and let powerful characters be taken down if they fail to defend or otherwise make a huge tactical blunder. (Tunnels and Trolls, for instance, has a number of situations where the defender doesn't get to roll and consequently takes a ton of dice to the face). System supports rolled movement fairly well, if you're into that.
This same concern can apply in other games where there's a heavy bell-curve/determinacy in results: Amber (diceless) may be an example although it relies on player/GM ingenuity rather than a codified mechanical system.


Roll-Under
Opposed rolls generally speaking more difficult. Properly speaking, its just where both sides roll that's a problem - RQ has a "resistance table" that handles conflicts with a single roll - but active defense (both rolling) isn't as easy. [see opposed roll notes for specific problems in e.g. Cadillacs & Dinosaurs]. Speaking of RQ specifically, the resistance table also handles [attribute vs. attribute] not [skill vs. skill] which has large numbers of possible numbers, though roll-under systems that aren't d100 could work. Overall, Grabs and the like (i.e. opposed Str) are possible but slightly more complex than in additive games.
Other Notes:
*Roll-under doesn't let a difficulty modifier be applied as easily for defender skill, so usually it has an active roll for the defender [Active Dodge or Parry], defaulting to unmodified % otherwise. (an exception being Dragon Warriors, where 'defense' points can be penalize to reduce Attack score - still a nuisance, but where calculations that'd be annoying anyway are merged with some tactical decision making than in any other case would just be pure extra complexity). Generally in roll-under 'called shot' type effects may be more acceptable (aiming for something at -10%, for instance), that being slightly easier to apply.
Arguably, 'Active dodge/parry' is slightly more difficult as well,  except that any success being a total block (a la Runequest) may be OK. 'Blackjack' resolution is also possible.
Like additive, has limited flow from attack into damage so likely to have backstab, coup de grace as defined manuevers.

Dice pool:  success counting
Makes "burst fire" type mechanics more awkward, due to number of dice.
TWF - works, can be implemented multiple different ways (e.g. TN increase vs. split dice pool).
Changing controlling-attribute for tasks in combat problematic just since since weighting of attribute on checks is very high (being able to switch up stat+skill is a feature of this, but done at-will breaks combat - the high Int characters are not going to stop Feinting or whatnot).
Difficulty in these games can be applied by shifting TN, penalizing dice pool, or requiring more successes: the first two options would require advance declaration of combat manuevers that would cause a penalty.
(You could also potentially have a choice, where a penalty is dice before rolling and successes instead if announced late).

Success-counting systems especially struggle with tying automatic actions to the randomizer (if they aren't just a fixed category) since no # of dice gives a final 100% chance- requiring ad hoc rules like oWoD Storytellers' "you can succeed automatically if your dice pool is equal to or greater than the difficulty". If multitasking 'splits' dice pools or raises TN to perform an action, an automatic action may need a fixed 'cost' in dice assigned to perform, or a stat to roll/default difficulty assigned.  Games with varying TN could have automatic actions be 'TN 0' in which case successes = dice pool, unless there's also a 'reroll 10s' or similar open-ending rule.

Dice pool: match counting (e.g. ORE)

Hard to apply difficulty modifiers before the roll (modifiers are major, maybe too major), hence 'going for broke' (power attack) not as workable as an option. (ORE specifically might add a minimum 'height' to a roll to get a move to work, however, IDK that its easy to work out what sort of bonus damage would work as a trade-off, and/or such a mechanic might reduce the final # successes and so be counterproductive). Conversely, manuevers where there's a bonus to hit but lower damage would also be difficult.

Dice pool: take highest
*Multiple actions: can't have a 'split dice pool' attack action, since highest roll will be in either subset (i.e. there's no effective penalty).

Dice pool: resource dice pool (e.g. DiTV)
Works more for 'extended' actions. Lends itself to lots of opposed manuevers (spending a die to 'reverse the blow', etc.). If this is the universal resolution mechanic for a system, combat moves tend to be designed somewhat abstractly so that they also work for other events - social combat, "skill challenge" type stuff, etc.

Changing-Dice-Type
With single-die, is handy for resolving multiple attacks/ opponents. Single die gives very unpredictable results on opposed ability checks e.g. grabs (grapple), though resolution could be more complex (e.g. just having a die type comparison to see who is stronger, perhaps with a shift up of die type for a "raise"/crit on the attack roll). Generally a 'crit' type result happens if a roll is X points over the target difficulty (crits can't happen on dice maximum since chances of this go down as dice get larger) so there needn't necessarily be a 'backstab' option.
Other variations (take-highest or changing die/die pools that count successes) operate more like those options.
If difficulty in the system is normally applied by shifting die type up/down, then that forces declaration of combat manuevers in advance.
(One game of this type I'd designed which used a cortex-type [stat die + skill die] for skills, kept combat to single-die by splitting a die each to attack and defense, letting the player customize how aggressive their stance was and also allowing 'full attack' and 'full defense' type options by spending both dice on one thing. It also ended up with a clunky method of exchanging 'steps' between the dice.)


Universal-Table
These are more likely to have certain manuevers appear as 'special effects' of good result levels, rather than declared upfront - e.g. knockback (DC), or the "slam", "stun" or "kill" results of MSH (FASERIP). That, combined with the ability to tables to calculate odds for very large base numbers, add to the appeal of this mechanic for the superhero genre.
MSH's subvariety of UT again doesn't consider opponent stat at all. [i.e. doesn't support a "simultaneous attack" type combat option].
Active dodge is more difficult (asymmetric results due to ad hoc penalties from a roll) - kludgy.


Summary
Summarizing the meanderings above and overgeneralizing a bit we get final results for the common options of:
Roll-under: requires 'active dodge', backstab and/or coup de grace rules.
Additive: usually before-the-roll combat moves. Requires backstab/coup de grace rules.
Count successes: leans toward after-the-roll (success spending) manuever options, multiple attacks slightly painful.
Match-counting: more heavily favours after-the-roll (success spending) manuever options.
Universal table: leans toward after-the-roll 'special success' manuever options.
« Last Edit: October 11, 2018, 11:48:27 PM by Bloody Stupid Johnson »

Bloody Stupid Johnson

  • Senior Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3366
Combat - combat moves Pt 1
« Reply #43 on: December 27, 2011, 08:01:43 PM »
"My Limit Break involves a moose, the demon Baphomet, and a Kuiper Belt object. It takes four hours and you can't skip any of the cutscenes."
-Pintsize

Below is an list of combat special attacks/actions from various systems.
In most games, a character can freely choose a special attack, at least from those abilities they know. A couple of systems have other limiters; 4E D&D gives characters a limited list of powers which are generally 1/encounter, while Dragon Age has characters roll an attack roll first, with a high roll giving more “points” to spend on stunts. 13th Age has "flexible attacks" where a character gets a set of moves with fairly metagame triggers (e.g.: odd natural dice roll to hit, even natural dice roll, natural 16+, X on the escalation die) which tends to mean fighters will have one or two combat options available depending on their roll, which ones available varying from round to round. The "Escalation Die" is particular interesting - this is a d6 used as a counter for rounds passed, which can also be spent as a to-hit bonus and so favours characters using powerful attacks until later rounds.
TORG favoured certain actions depending on a pick of cards from the Drama Deck. 5E D&D limits some (4E styled) manuevers to the "battlemaster fighter"; these use a supply of manuever points recharged by short rests. The Street Fighter Storytelling Game had special manuevers which had prerequisites to learn (like Punch **/Kick ***) and then cost 'power points' to use (similar to using magic in many games; PP cost also varied depending on combat style).
It is also possible to encourage mixing-up of manuevers by making sure terrain effect/circumstances modify them heavily (or different monsters). A move may also add a bonus to a different move that follows immediately.

Some systems make various moves more difficult based on realism concerns, while others may use a more 'cinematic' setup. Options also sometimes need to be balanced considering other rules e.g. grappling is traditionally an issue in D&D given that it can largely bypass the HP system, the primary defense of higher-level characters.

Simple, single-action-per-round combats can potentially be described very complexly if desired (there's less chance that narration will accidentally trip a mechanical 'lever') but often there's not much player incentive to do so. [Mechanics: *roll* success! Description: "Fighter takes a swing at the orc, the orc deflects the swing with a buckler, the orc stabs at the fighter, the fighter dodges and counterattacks BAM! the orc is hit."] Sometimes "stunting" (a rule where any cool description gives a bonus to an action) is used to replace a detailed combat move system to interact with. GM improvisation is also a possibility.

Specific weapons may add bonuses to specific moves (swordbreakers, "Da Dao" swords with rings in the non-cutting back edge for disarming) or be useful for specific moves only (nets).


Various combat actions might be designed so that various options are relatively balanced against each other. Equally, it may be acceptable to have the vanilla 'I attack' option be the best - this is OK if other options will sometimes become better for various tactical or other reasons - some or many options being 'edge cases' for specific situations. Games sometimes balance subsets of actions against each other with different action types e.g. x,y and z are 'minor actions' or 'bonus actions' which are intended to be less good than a normal attack action. This does give slightly more design complexity - potential for creating fairly randomly distributed 'trap' options where some character abilities arbitrarily synergize (different action types) and some don't (as they use the same resources). The same problem applies even with just one action type (e.g. the fighter/wizard who has to chooses between casting a spell and swinging a sword) but tradeoffs are more straightforward/apparent  to the designer.
Games with lots of character options can run into problems where resources are dumped into winning by optimizing particular weird options (3.x D&D for instance having highly specialized spiked chain/improved trip, 'ubercharger' or grappler builds) - resulting in player interest in character building but relatively uninteresting gameplay.
 
 
Basic Attacks
 
*Attack: the character makes a normal (melee?) attack. In some systems the character may need to split a bonus between “attack” and “defense” initially, while others assume normal attack/defense unless a specific action is taken.
Some weapons may use different sub-actions for attack e.g. “Automatic fire”, or “Continuing Beam” fire may be a different action.
4E D&D has a no-frills 'basic attack' which is used for opportunity attacks or bonus attacks, but is less powerful than a character's normal turn (where they may use a 'power'). Classes without Str/Dex as workable scores sometimes were 'taxed' by needing an at-will power that would fill the role of a basic attack. Characters which were dazed, charmed or otherwise handicapped might be limited to only making basic attacks temporarily.
Attack rolls can be based on a skill, an attribute (Marvel Super Heroes), or a level-derived number (D&D). Rolls may be directly opposed (e.g. in initiativeless games like Tunnels and Trolls),  against an armour-based number (D&D), against a fixed number barring rolled dodging (e.g. Storyteller; Palladium is a crossbreed of this and armour-based), with a penalty based on allocated defense points (Dragon Warriors), or against an automatically scaling parry value. Monsters may not get to roll in some games e.g. Dungeon World (the players roll Defy Danger instead, or may take automatic damage in some cases). Ranged attacks sometimes use a different system (cf. "Shoot", later in this post).
A couple of games lack a true 'attack roll' e.g. T&T (see Damage for description), 3:16 (roll is just made for how many enemies are killed). (and Fireborn calculates a # of attacks that hit, without individual 'hit rolls' - see 'TWF' later this post). In cases where T&T needs attack-roll based resolution e.g. to see if a monster can pull off a special move, it may add an extra fixed-odds roll (e.g. the snakebeast entangles on 1 on d6), an extra Saving Roll, or 7E had extra effects based on 'spite' (# 6s rolled in monster dice pool). Monsters also sometimes just automatically did something (e.g. there are monsters in Amulet of the Salkti which had sparking armour that automatically blinds a character for 5 DEX damage if they're hit; something that could perhaps have worked off 'spite' if that had been invented at the time). tl;dr - the single-roll resolution generates a lot of edge cases where trying to figure out a result becomes a bit tortuous.
Call of Cthulhu for a couple of outer gods has a peculiar roll for attack, where a die is rolled on a table to find a god's (e.g. Azathoth's) skill score is, for that attack. This is sometimes 100% but overall could be replaced by just a single, average, percentage.
Extra Difficulty on an attack roll is sometimes represented with an extra roll, for instance 3E D&D has a 'miss chance' % due to darkness or invisibility - kept separate to the main hit roll to prevent high skill levels offsetting it i.e. so these circumstances are always a problem.

 
*Skill Attack:: cf. 'Skill Defense' below. An attack roll using skill is not usually a distinct action type, really, but I'm leaving this here for the sake of inclusion. Some games which ordinarily do *not* use skill rolls for attacks do allow a skill to be used under specific circumstances. For instance, FantasyCraft (to quote Pedantic on rpg.net here:
Quote
Compare that to something like the Spear Mastery from FC, which lets you substitute your Athletics check for an attack roll, which leads you to look for ways to boost your athletics check, which leads you to using the englightened skill ability from the Explorer class, and then you notice you can use Sword Mastery to perform spear tricks with swords and so forth.
Here as skills have a higher maximum value than the (fixed-level-based) attack bonus by class, using skill increases the attack result (particularly useful to classes with a poorer base attack). It would also be possible as a mechanic to substitute a skill roll for an attack roll under specific circumstances (Ride when attempting a trample, etc.), given a mostly-unified system for skills and attack rolls.

"Glancing Blow"- 4E and early 5E had attacks which could be pulled off as a side-effect of an attack, but dealing lower damage. 4E contained a number of attacks which dealt [ability modifier] damage even on a miss; 5E early playtests (081712) included similar fighter moves 'Glancing blow' and 'Jab' which deals damage equal to the 'expertise dice' spent to power the maneuver, instead of the normal [weapon+Str mod] result. An attack roll was required in early 5E. A similar power doesn't appear in the final 5E fighter's list of manuevers, with the equivalent option possibly turned into a simpler 'half damage on miss' great weapon fighting power and then dropped due to controversy.
As well as these there was a similar missile attack, "Snap Shot" which did [expertise die] in damage but rather than being a bonus attack following an attack action, could be taken on a turn used for something else, e.g. moving.
5E later on in the "Unearthed Arcana" column added a "fell handed" feat which gives partial successes on damage rolls - if a character misses due to disadvantage but the higher roll would've hit, then they deal reduced damage equal just to [Str mod]. (This has a mathematical flaw in that a character's chance of doing at least some damage actually increases with disadvantage, due to rolling two dice - the same chance as if they had 'advantage').

Most systems of course would just use the description of a 'glancing blow' for a normal attack with a low damage result - a poor roll for damage, low attack roll not giving much of a damage bonus, failed Test For Luck [Fighting Fantasy], or good opponent Soak.


*Shoot - generally uses the same mechanic as melee combat, but not always, e.g. as a consequence of the roll not being resisted by defender skill; Fighting Fantasy uses opposed rolls for normal melee (both sides roll 2d6+Skill), while ranged attacks roll under skill on 2d6. Metamorphosis Alpha uses a different mechanic for missiles to remove AC as a factor (2d6 with TN set by range, instead of d20 vs. AC), as does Tunnels and Trolls which uses a Dex roll to hit, whereas normally for melee attack/damage is one opposed roll with the difference giving hits (see "Damage" post, multidie additive system examples, for how this works). For attacks on PCs e.g. in 5E T&T, a PC may be allowed a Luck roll to dodge an incoming missile (consistent with how traps are handled, and since monsters by default lack “Dexterity” ratings - sort of an early version of the 'player's only roll' rule). In Deluxe T&T, wizards are normally limited to 2 die weapons, but can use larger weapons if they lose their 'combat adds' - with larger ranged weapons they hit as often as warriors (uses unadjusted DEX roll), but do much less damage.
"Supergame" (1980) apparently used a d6-vs.-d6 roll to determine to-hit instead of a formula or table of [attacker skill/[attacker skill+defender skill] as a percentage; it also rolls a hit location for 'fire combat' only to determine damage multiplier, instead of rolling a multiplier directly.
Thrown attacks may use the same rules as bows, etc; Savage Worlds has separate Throwing and Shooting, while Atomic Highway puts thrown attacks under Athletics.
Savage Worlds uses skill rolls for both melee and ranged attacks, but with target numbers being calculated differently for ranged attacks (usually making it easier to shoot, barring cover). Shield bonuses, as noted under shields, apply a Toughness bonus against ranged fire in SW, instead of a Parry bonus which is irrelevant.
Ranges frequently vary by weapon.
Systems can use exact measurements or (as in Warhammer 3rd, HOL) a highly abstract range/range bands  (HOLs ranges are “Really Not Far”, “Not Far, Really”, “Closer than Really Far”, “Really Far”, and “Really Really Far”).
Some systems adjust penalty (as well as maximum range) by weapon e.g. 3.x D&Ds “range increments” - which is probably easier with less abstract range.
Others systems may adjust throwing distance by Strength (Palladium).
DC Heroes has a particularly neat exponential equation which determines maximum heft/throwing distance for supers characters;
Weight (in APs) + distance (in APs) = STR score
e.g. Silver Age (2E or 3E) Superman (STR 25) could hit a baseball (Weight 0) 25 APs of distance (32000 miles/orbit), throw a battle tank (weight of 11 APs i.e. 40 tons) 14 APs of distance (16 miles), throw a 20 AP weight (a 25,000 tonne submarine) 5 APs of distance (100 yards), or just lift a 25 AP (750,000 ton) object.
Shooting is also not infrequently modified by attacker movement (e.g. Palladium, 'shooting wild' penalty if attacker is moving) or defender movement - some games penalize ranged attacks vs. moving characters and some the reverse (e.g. 3E characters without the 'Run' feat lose their Dex bonus when running, the reverse of most games where movement makes a target harder to hit).
IIRC, RQ uses different hit location tables for ranged vs. melee combat.
Range may affect damage or armour penetration; in systems where the to-hit roll bonus affects damage, a range penalty to shoot often reduces damage indirectly (mainly modelling decreased accuracy; it could be argued that reduced velocity should have a separate effect). T2000/Cadillacs & Dinosaurs also has different armour penetration ratings for different ranges.
Something else I'll drop here is a reference to Phoenix Commands' to-hit table for firearms - see this thread which gives details of the highly complex equation used to generate the to-hit table.

"Imperial Assault", an FFG boardgame, apparently has custom dice with range as well as damage (with custom dice being better at various results) - bringing up the interesting idea of a roll generating [hit at range X] maybe separate to [dodge difficulty](attack roll) and [damage].
Weapons may have separate damage ratings for melee and thrown (e.g. TFT).
As with attack, extra rolls (beside the hit roll) might be required e.g. 'miss chance' (see Attack). T&T Deluxe requires a Luck check as well as DEX when using a sling with stones, noting they fly 'erratically'.
Dishonourable mentions: Fireborn has a shooting action for mechanical weapons which is confusingly called "Fire". ("Fire is also the name of a character attribute equivalent to Str, along with Water/Earth/Air.)

*Press the Attack: (DC Heroes) attacker beats up defender relentlessly. Gives +1 to hit; requires the attacker win initiative. (effectively just a combat modifier; it doesn't itself consume an action).
 
*Aim: at cost of an action gain to-hit bonus; more rarely aiming may delay initiative without costing an action. Using it may prevent movement, even where that is a free action normally. Aim may also give a damage bonus (or could give a bonus indirectly, if combined with a called shot or damage bonus from high hit roll). Bracing may be related to aiming, characters may be able to brace some weapons for extra bonuses (at cost of not moving). It may be terrain-dependent rather than an action i.e. you may need a low wall to set a weapon on. 5E D&D in the second or so playtest was interesting for having a 'precise shot' feat which reduced cover by a rolled amount [d6]- the bonus was capped at +2 maximum for partial cover or +5 for three quarters so that it sometimes negated cover bonus to AC but couldn't provide more bonus than that.
 
*Counterstrike/Simultaneous attack: counter-attacking at same time as attacker; usually both forfeit defense.
In Palladium "Simultaneous attack" lets a character hold initiative and attack as someone attacks them, so that neither can Parry. This is very useful for tough characters trying to hit very agile targets. The move synergizes with its two weapon fighting rules (paired weapon characters are the main characters that can defend vs. simultaneous attacks, by parrying with one weapon while striking with the other; a couple of weird Ninjas and Superspies martial arts may also have combined attack/parry special combat moves).  
HarnMaster has a 'counterstrike' option which can be chosen by the defender even if they're already attacked, but which favours the attacker. A hit deals more damage than if the target had tried to parry.
Some combat systems that don't use initiative treat all attacks as simultaneous by default e.g. Fighting Fantasy/Advanced Fighting Fantasy / Tunnels and Trolls (& Pendragon?), where both sides roll and winner inflicts hits.
T&T gives hits = difference in side totals, giving a few quirks; missile attacks aren't compared to melee totals so both sides instead deal incredible damage (with the missile resolved first).
Multiple attackers usually can roll to inflict damage, while the outnumbered character can only do damage once, if they win (Two Weapon fighters or monsters with multiple attacks may be an exception). Alternatively, multiple characters may just add their attacks together [e.g. Tunnels and Trolls]. Fighting Fantasy is more built around one-on-one combat, being a solo gamebook system.

 
*Free shot: make a special extra attack against a foe who can't fully defend themselves. For instance, 3E's "Attack of Opportunity" is triggered by an opponent exposing themself via movement, dismounting, casting a spell, reloading, etc. HarnMaster gives extra attacks for "tactical advantage" results when comparing attack/defense rolls.
Free shots are normally less powerful than a normal turn - in 3E D&D, a normal turn for a character abstracts a whole round of action ('full attack') and so usually includes several attacks, while an attack of opportunity is a single attack, making it less significant; in 4E a character gets only one attack per turn, but can't use special powers on opportunity attacks. ROAR normally made an opposed attack roll to represent abstractly a whole round of attacks; a 'free shot' could occur under special circumstances but did 1/5th normal damage since it represented a single blow. JAGS' interesting opposed action system let a character substitute any action with a shorter time in response to an opponent's action, if they paid its action point cost.
5E reactions are also sort of related - in 5E this is an action type which can be done once/rd (if triggered) and includes opportunity attacks, certain spells (e.g. Shield), or Hellish Rebuke) or other specific (mostly defensive) abilities. Streamlining to once/round gives a unified 'currency' to what would be individual limitations in 3E if any (letting someone do an AoO and a quickened spell, perhaps). This can require additional specifications - the Hydra in 5E gets multiple reactions equal to the number of extra heads 'which can only be used for opportunity attacks' for example; the 3E hydra gets bonus 'Combat Reflexes' (but number of attacks is special); anything in 4E can make one opportunity attack per turn.

*Unarmed attack: unarmed strike may just be a 'weapon', typically with poor damage, but there can be other elaborations including defense penalties (Palladium), free attacks to unarmed attackers going vs. armed foes (3E), automatic loss of initiative (2E). 2E AD&D gave unarmed strikes a descriptive table based on the raw d20 roll - with lower numbers unlocking repeats of stronger effects to reward higher skill bonuses - and also giving a % KO for each (a bit anomalous given that lethal bludgeoning attacks only stun on a deliberate Sap attempt). FATAL has different unarmed combat tables for different races specifying e.g. 'elbow vs. face' and a damage roll.
Unarmed damage is often partly or wholly nonlethal damage; a few systems also give characters increased 'soak' vs. unarmed damage (e.g. Storyteller) or extra rolls to resist damage (Palladium roll with punch for 1/2 damage).
Palladium has various specific kicks -in Ninjas & Superspies giving a problem in that there was little reason to not use the most damaging repeatedly (Systems Failure later added some elaborations to these, like the Roundhouse Kick or Axe Kick prohibit other kicks being used, while the Wheel Kick cannot come "right before or right after another kick".
Unarmed attack penalties sometimes inherit onto other related moves, such as unarmed trip or disarm attempts.
A fairly simple or abstract system (0D&D, FATE) an attack that deals not much damage (1 on d6, etc) might be described as an unarmed attack - a punch as the foes' lock swords - but complex unarmed systems tend to introduce extra rules like nonlethal damage or 'attacks of opportunity' etc. which prevent that sort of thing. (The more complex the combat option system, the more a description of a character action is likely to accidentally hit some sort of mechanical switch unintentionally, perhaps detrimentally).
The Way of the Tiger series of gamebooks included a number of specific punch, kick and throw moves the main character, a ninja, could use: specific moves sometimes had different special effects (such as a throw being foiled by an oiled-up foe). The battle at the climax of book 1 has a heavily scripted battle where virtually every move has specific effects (and ideally requires a specially learned "Kwon's Flail", unfamiliar to the BBEG, to beat him).


Attack+ Movement Actions
 
*Charge: may be only descriptive or may penalize defense for extra attack/damage. In 3.x charging commonly allows multiple attacks (for characters with the ‘Pounce’ special quality). A Flyby Attack/Hyperslam may be present in some games.
Dragon Warriors had no built in Charge action, although the game has rules for Minotaurs which treat their charge like a ray attack (match minotaur SPEED vs. EVASION, instead of the normal ATTACK vs. DEFENCE roll - i.e. it cannot be parried).
 
*Bull Rush (Pull/Push/Trip): manuever used to push foe backwards or move their location. Effect of roll may determine distance moved. Shield Rush may be a variant of this.
Pushback: in The Fantasy Trip a large (multi-hex) figure may move by 'pushing back' a number of one-hex figures, as long as its STR is greater than their combined STR; TFT damage is subtracted from STR so this uses current STR)..  (Mechanically, this works directly because of how abilities scale - e.g. the maths for this would work badly for Talislanta, where average abilities are based around 0, since a character with +1 Strength could push back an infinite number of 0-Str mooks). Other systems might do multi-pushback as a 'multiple actions' type affair with some more fuss


Knockback: There may be a separate knockback option for punching someone backward (without the attacker moving), or this may be a natural byproduct of punching someone in a supers game. HERO (5E) has a Breakfall skill to resist this.
 
*Pressing Forward (LegendQuest, Age of Heroes): in LegendQuest the attacker pushes foe back with repeated attacks, causing them a hit penalty if their resulting movement exceeds the allowed “free walk” allowance. Age of Heroes has 'Pressing Attacks' which force the target to move backward a hex or take a penalty to the parry roll.
 
*Trample/Overrun: running over things. 3.x D&D has this as a special attack with a Str-based save DC (trample), or giving free hoof attacks (Overrun); dragons get a 'crush' attack with a similar system to trample (but maintainable as a grapple). Simpler games like Tunnels and Trolls may just assume 'trample' is part of how a monster deals damage without needing specific natural weapon or combat manuever effects. Savage Worlds gives Gargantuan creatures a special squash damage of [Str + their Size - opponent size) vs. Toughness, a massive amount.
 
Multiple Actions:
 
*Multi Attack / Multiple Actions: the character takes a penalty to hit to attempt two actions. Found in various systems. Sometimes requires a roll to attempt, instead of needing a penalty (e.g. in Superbabes it requires a d20 roll under Dex and also costs fatigue points, as do all combat actions).
Another option is for several actions (swing on chandelier/attempt to stab) to require just a roll on the lowest-chance statistic - the logic being that if the dice favour you enough to succeed on the hardest part, then you also succeed on the rest.
Or, successes on the first roll may become bonus dice on a follow-up roll, as long as they're connected.
Shatterzone is interesting in that it handles gang-up bonuses as the inverse of multiple action penalties - multiple characters attempting an action together are spending multiple actions to get 1 action at a bonus, instead of 1 action to get multiple actions at a penalty. It does (wonkily) use this for group attacks as well i.e. several characters shooting at once, requiring extra rules to calculate number of hits and bonus damage.
Alternity 'multiattack' is a rank benefit of higher weapon skill; the character rolls a single 'control' d20 and then for each attack subtracts varying situation dice with extra attacks increasing step e.g. one might be -d4 and another -d8 [so a base 13 might get a -2 and -4 for rolls of 11,15). This gives slightly less dice rolling but more predictability.
Savage Worlds has a peculiar distinction in that when multiattacking some actions let PCs/wild cards roll their 'wild die' (e.g. using two weapons), and some don't (e.g. full auto fire, including Bolt spells with multiple bolts in Deluxe, Frenzy attacks).
T2000 2E/Cadillacs & Dinosaurs (the GDW 'House System') for guns includes penalties on successive bullets in a burst, based on recoil [the penalty is assessed based off # shots and character Str].
A specific 'multiple attacks' combat action isn't required if attacking is so abstract that one roll can hurt multiple targets. Tunnels and Trolls is one example of this (it uses multiple dice, but even trying to group individual dice rolls isn't meaningful since # dice is based off weapon size); a version closer to D&D is the 'Black Streams' solo AD&D adventure patch (mentioned in the 'damage' post) which lets a character destroy multiple opponents with one attack roll, provided all have that AC or worse.

*Last Ditch Effort:: another form of special 'multiple action' from Shatterzone, this is actually used for extended skill contests, which are normally divided into 4 steps (A,B,C and D) and have a time limit applied. A character hitting the time limit can hurry and use the multiple actions rules to complete all remaining steps with one action, but with an extra difficulty penalty. A character can attempt this at other times as well, but either way all steps of the extended skill check automatically fail if the last ditch effort fails.
 
*Full Attack: full round action found in 3E and Warhammer 2nd Ed; the character must give up their movement to attempt multiple attacks.
 
*Two Weapon Fighting (TWF):
A skill rating in 'offhand' or two-weapon fighting might determine chance to hit with offhand (Recon), # of actions with the offhand ("HDL" system), or size of offhand weapon (LegendQuest).
Two Weapon Fighting is sometimes designed to be balanced with other styles (i.e. using a shield, or great weapon), or occasionally is a 'higher level' combat ability e.g. in the Blood Sword gamebook series, its a legendary warrior ability (the only way to get 2 attacks), or in the related Dragon Warriors is a special ability of high rank Knights.

TWF is not always a form of multiple attacks - some systems use other options i.e. in 4E the basic 'Two Weapon Fighting' feat just adds +1 to damage, or in Tunnels and Trolls each character's combat roll represent a whole round of combat abstractly - TWF just adds extra dice (a 3-die shortsword in each hand lets a character roll 6 combat dice, same as a greatsword; ST and DEX requirements for both weapons are cumulative - an 'ambidexterity' special ability in TrollZine #3 lets a character use full DEX with each hand). Swords and Wizardry adds +1 to hit for using two weapons, dealing average damage. 'World of Dungeons' lets a character using a secondary weapon re-roll their damage roll with the offhand weapon's damage die, the 'Holmes companion' lets a TWF character roll twice for damage and take the best.
Another option (with no examples I can think of) would be for a particularly good attack roll (multiple successes, 5 over AC, whatever) let the offhand weapon hit also (presumably doing more damage than the usual 'extra success' result, if any) without a second attack roll. (maybe Fireborn)
However, TWF is usually represented by an additional attack with the offhand weapon, which is the best way to make damage/description of the offhand weapon relevant - whether you’re using a lit torch or a magic artifact sword in your offhand is irrelevant if an extra weapon just gives a flat +1 to damage (4E D&D). A system can also just let a character with multiple attacks already hold two weapons and divide their normal attacks between them, but in most cases this is at best a 'flavour' effect which likely just penalizes the character for using small weapons instead of a two-handed sword. [White Dwarf #19 Berserker class; similarly someone early in 4Es run once suggested re-skinning the Cleave power for fighters to represent dual wielding, before 'Tempest' options were added in its Martial Power accessory.] This rule probably implies that any character with 2+ attacks/round is ambidextrous. Similarly, a character with one attack might switch which attack they use from round to round - which could potentially be useful for a 4E character where different powers are more effective for different weapon 'keywords'. An example might be the 4E monster type 'bandit' which could switch between a more accurate dagger attack and a mace attack (offhand?) that missed more often, but also allows them to shift a square.
 
In the normal cases where TWF gives multiple actions - a game may treat TWF as just a normal use of a 'multiple actions at a penalty' rules (Savage Worlds, ORE perhaps?), or TWF may have specific rules which make it possible. This first option is more integrated with other subsystems, but note that TWF has intrinsic penalties (i.e. one-handed weapon / no shield) which make it inferior to attacking twice with one weapon, if that is also allowed. TWF itself may also count as a specific combat option e.g. the 4E 'Twin Strike' power (which actually does get two attack rolls unlike normal 4E TWF) or Feng Shui's "Double Tap" manuever) - this means that a TWF attack can only be used to deal damage, not extra parries or disarms or called shots or whatever. Alternatively TWF may just provide a bonus combat action which might be used for other actions - in this case a 'shield punch' may actually use the TWF rules, for instance, or an offhand action might be useable for a trip, disarm, or to pin an opponent's weapon (leaving them exposed to a hit from the main weapon).
 
Games with multiple attacks often limit TWF to a single extra attack - for instance 3.x limits TWF to a single extra attack unless multiple feats are taken, while SenZar allows an extra attack on only one Action Phase (characters start at one, but can get up to 5 or so phases per combat round at higher levels). AD&D 2E likewise limits characters to a single extra attack per round (a change from 1st edition, where higher fighter levels granted extra "attack routines" i.e. two weapons doubled attacks). "13th Age" lets a character using two weapons reroll a natural 2 on d20 (an extra attack is only 5% likely, slightly more if a character can modify die roll e.g. half-elves can subtract 1 once per combat) (as this only affects 5% of rolls, a +1 to hit would probably be better).
TWF often incurs some sort of to-hit penalty (like -2/-4 on d20 in D&D, or having to split a dice pool), with penalty sometimes reduced by an Ambidexterity ability, though depending on system this ability may be required to fight with two weapons at all.

TWF is often Dexterity intensive e.g AD&D reduces the to-hit penalty by Dexterity adjustment, while 3.x requires a high Dexterity to qualify for the appropriate Feat. It is also sometimes Strength intensive in systems that use Strength requirements for weapons are cumulative (e.g. Tunnels & Trolls - halflings here are bad at dual-wielding). In LegendQuest this also happens, and in LQ this also reduces the weapon's damage bonus from Str, calculated from the difference between total Str and Str-required.
In other games, TWF multiple attacks can often allow a character to leverage multiple uses of their STR bonus to damage, making it more appealing to stronger characters - this is sometimes balanced by reducing the damage bonus for offhand weapons (3E), reducing the damage bonus for light weapons, or prohibiting Str bonuses on TWF actions entirely (4E did this on most lower level TWF powers; 5E limits both weapons to being light barring a feat, and doesn't add a Str bonus to the offhand weapon unless the character has the "two weapon fighting" fighting style). If ability scores other than Str can apply to damage (4E, 5E) this still makes TWF very powerful, but incentivises TWF characters to at least not be especially musclebound.

Miscellaneous:
-Palladium has the interesting drawback for TWF that a character forfeits their normal Automatic Parry when using paired weapons. A significant balancing factor, it has the odd effect of making TWF particularly attractive to heavily armoured characters who can rely on armour in place of parrying (Ninja Turtles :) ). TWF in Palladium is inconsistent with its rules for multiple limbs - usually extra limbs adds +1 attack per round instead of extra attacks like that gained from paired weapons, as does 'ambidexterity' (from Heroes Unlimited mutation abnormality/Aliens Unlimited racial trait). Palladium usually treats 'paired weapons' as a martial arts power, though it can also be sold as a specific Weapon Proficiency e.g. TMNT. TMNT notes that you roll once and use the roll to hit for both weapons, which seems to be unique to it, rather than rolling twice.
Palladium (Heroes Unlimited) 2E also has an 'energy expulsion' power which can have its damage split with 2 separate attack rolls but as one attack, instead of the normal 'forfeit parry' rule which isn't particularly detrimental in ranged-vs.-ranged combat. Mystic China has a Triad Assassin gun-fu martial art which gives more attacks and specifies how many shots are with each hand; possibly redundant if the GM lets you use WP Paired with guns.
-An old D&D houserule was sometimes to roll a chance of for 'ambidexterity', before a character could use two weapons: one variant (White Dwarf #18) being to roll a dice for each hand (d6 for left, d12 for right for instance) with the higher roll determining handedness and equal rolls meaning ambidexterity. A sub-variant of that is to separate partial ambidexterity (can use either hand) from full dual wielding (can use both at once) i.e. full ambidexterity might only occur on a roll of 6/6 on d6/d12, with lower ties meaning the partial version. ROAR used various advantages, with 'coordinative' ambidexterity giving no hit penalty but making the off-hand not as strong.
Early Gamma World had a "Duality" mutation which made a character ambidextrous, in among various other mutations; it also let a character do a mental attack or other action (like pick a lock) at the same time. Other characters could only TWF if they had multiple limbs (arms).
-D&D (whatever edition) usually gives monsters with TWF the ability to do this basically for free. This was a drow ability in 1E which maybe via Drizzt became a ranger ability in 2E. 3E mariliths also got it for free (not needing any of the feats they got from all their HD). Phaerimm in 2E are an annoying instance in that they can use 4 scimitars to attack, despite having radial symmetry (i.e. half of these are at the back, unless it floats sideways); they probably should use multiple human-size weapons as the arms are relatively small (somewhat like Pathfinder centaurs), and actually probably do in 2E since the rules for L-size creatures are vague and probably don't let them use larger weapons. Mariliths are another race that typically used M weapons in 2E but got auto-sized up due to creature size in 3E (or 5E).
-Gangbusters (1E) Boxing skill is used to attack with both fists; the skill check if successful means a double hit with both fists, if it misses normal skill is rolled separately for a single hit. (This gives the same number of attack rolls as rolling twice for each weapon, but the second roll doesn't specify which weapon hits; it does let chance of a double hit be adjusted directly, instead of being determined by multiplying the individual probabilities together [rule of intersection]).
-deadEarth has a Moves score rolled on 2d6 which is basically action points a character has; 'paired weapon' skill reduces the action point cost of one-handed weapons by 1/2. (interacts oddly with the defend rules where a defender needs to spend the same # moves to defend, unless the GM houserules that).
-13th Age has a ranger at-will 'double melee attack' power where damage dice drops one size (d8 to d6), and a second attack can be made as a free action only if the first attack roll on d20 is a natural 'even' roll.
-TWF attacks may be staggered instead of all at once: LegendQuest deliberately rolls separate initiatives for each separately (a largely unfair advantage), while 2E D&D adds a weapon size adjustment that can make weapons land at slightly different times.
-Available off-hand weapons can be limited to smaller weapons based on size (e.g. 3E D&D 'light weapons'), specifically defined 'offhand' weapons (4E D&D)(benefits Small characters e.g. apparently gnome tempest with shortsword), or by weapons adding their Strength-required (Tunnels and Trolls). TFT has TWF limited to a 'main gauche' only, which has worse damage than a dagger (1d-1, rather than 1d+2).
-3E D&D has 'double weapons' which are two-handed but let a character make an attack with each end e.g. in core the quarterstaff, two-bladed sword, orc double-axe, dwarven urgrosh, gnome hooked hammer, and dire flail.
-5E D&D limits TWF to 1/round by costing a bonus action to use it (equivalent to a 'swift action' in 3E); meaning using two weapons can prevent use of some other abilities like fighter's 'healing surge' type power, or rogue free Disengage. It doesn't require giving up movement a la 3E/Pathfinder however. (An earlier version of TWF in the 5E playtest instead let a character attack twice, but with both dealing 1/2 damage - making the ability most useful against 'minion' type creatures).
-BESM 3E has a normal -3/-3 penalty to TWF (on a die roll to hit of 2d6), which increases to -6 if aimed at different targets. TWF ability [cheap at 2 points] reduces this one 'grade' to -1 or -3. On its own, this is a reasonable. HOWEVER, the game also has the option to strike two opponents with the same attack, at -3, meaning a TWF can attack two opponents with different swords at -6 to each, or stab two people with the same sword at only -3. (???)
-FGU games e.g. Aftermath often penalized offhand tasks by having an "offhand dexterity" attribute, generally lower than normal Dex but trainable. Original Recon as noted in Weapon Proficiencies had characters learn left-handed and right-handed weapon skills separately.
An 'ambidexterity' type ability obviously may affect non-combat use (writing a letter) as well as combat use. Potentially other sorts of multiple actions could be affected as well, e.g. casting a spell with one hand while attacking with the other.
-Fireborn with its attack 'sequences' system, lets a character do one move per success rolled; using a single weapon repeatedly requires one or more 'Ready' actions, while a character can use a second weapon without this i.e. a character would need 5 successes to use a Greatsword twice [Greatsword Strike+Ready+Ready+Ready+Greatsword Strike) but only two successes to [L. Weapon Strike + R. Weapon Strike].
-more simply, reportedly Shadowrun 5E lets characters with 2 weapons just split their attack dice pool between the two.
-Dragon Age lets characters 'stunt' if they roll any doubles on 3d6, getting stunt points equal to one of the dice (coloured differently). An extra attack is one option, which has discounted cost if a character has a TWF talent, but there's only an extra attack if character's get a stunt.  TWF characters may be indirectly more mobile since 'skirmish' (extra move) is a common low-cost stunt (if a character rolls well enough to TWF without the talent, they might however get to move too).
-'Atomic Highway' notes that TWF does basically nothing (is cosmetic) - the character can choose which weapon they can attack with and has a spare if disarmed. It also notes that with, say, two guns, ammo before reloading is effectively doubled (maybe an argument to balance that with an off-hand shot penalty).
-Gamma World has to deal with characters with extra arms fairly often; 4th edition ('92 Nesmith edition) gives an extra attack; the 7E (4E-D&D compatible) has a mutation card that lets a character with another arm make an extra basic attack as a minor action.
-WHFR 4E has a 'dual wielder' talent where one (percentile) attack roll is made, then the tens/units reversed to see if the second attack hits (so 34 for the first attack is a 43 for the second). The character also needs a separate Ambidexterity talent or suffers a -20 to their second weapon skill.
Notes:
See also Initiative for notes on combining TWF with high initiative rolls granting multiple attacks.
See also the post on Monsters for discussion of multiple natural weapons.
In games where # attacks is based off DEX, TWF could be treated as a bonus to DEX - though there could be problems with breakpoints where some characters get an extra attack dual-wielding and others with a higher score don't.
Defense action rules also interact with TWF - e.g. if each attack requires an action to block it can 'overwhelm' defense (cf. DeadEarth). T&T sort of models this as well.
In the common 'extra attack but both weapons have less damage' version, TWF characters will consider extra attacks or rerolls less valuable that 'great weapon characters', and suffer or benefit more from per-attack damage adjustments (damage reduction or vulnerability, if non-proportional, including armour if that works as damage reduction, as well as ability modifiers to damage and damage bonuses for a particular good attack roll).
External lists:
List of 3.5 D&D feats based off the 'Two Weapon Fighting' feat: http://alcyius.com/dndtools/feats/players-handbook-v35--6/two-weapon-fighting--2998/index.html
List of FATE stunts associated with two weapon fighting: http://evilhat.wikidot.com/two-weapon-fighting
(Note that original FUDGE has no rules for TWF as such; the iconic character 'Groo the Wanderer' uses two swords, but this is just represented as a 'Superb' Sword skill).

*Multiple Opponents/Area attack: a single attack targets multiple opponents (e.g. with same roll). Sometimes found in supers games – using powers or with “Sweep Attacks” e.g rolling logs under several opponents. Legends of Anglerre has an "Unthinkable Attack" useable by certain epic creatures, which requires a turn to power up, burns a Fate point, and inflicts consequences on targets in a large area.
 
*Cleave/sweep: -e.g. fighters in AD&D could make a number of attacks equal to level vs. monsters of less than [1-1] HD (its been suggested how many are killed could be resolved quickly by rolling a 'dX' where X is the fighter's level. Replaced by the 'Cleave' feat in 3.x (bonus attack when an opponent is dropped) and then in 4E a cleave power which dealt [ability modifier] damage to an adjacent foe, slightly useful to kill "minions".
The ability actually dates all the way back to Chainmail, where a 'Hero' [=4th level fighter equivalent] was equivalent to 4 men and a 'Superhero' [=8th level fighter equivalent] was equal to 8. 0D&D apparently gave out this ability to monsters too (1 attack per HD, and bonuses to the HD applied to a single attack, e.g. a 6+3 HD troll would make six attacks, one of them getting +3...to damage?)


*Combination Move: ability to join two moves together as one action (Ninjas & Superspies) i.e. combination Parry/Entangle where parry also ties up opponent’s weapon.
 
*Full Auto:-gun option emptying clip to shoot more bullets, generally with less accuracy.
In Palladium, one attack with x10 damage IIRC; takes a full-round action in d20 modern.
nWoD reportedly has bonus dice for autofire but extra attacks from some powers for e.g. martial arts- ramping up damage for the latter potentially far faster... Some 'multiple attacks' in the earlier Aberrant had rules similar to a burst bonus: the 'Rapid Strike' mega-Dexterity enhancement added +Mega-Dex rating to punch/kick damage pool (a flurry of super-speed punches).
This may have accuracy penalties e.g.(As noted in dice pools - supplemental) the GDW House System (i.e. Cadillacs & Dinosaurs/Dark Conspiracy/Twilight 2000 2E), uses a d6 Dice Pool for autofire instead of its usual mechanic (d10 roll under) to handle lots of shots quickly. (check how TN adjustments for range?)
(For any 'spray' weapon - shotgun, railgun, or automatic weapon - the damage roll can represent how many of the projectiles hit the target, so less than Max Damage may mean describing more damage to the scenery. Credit to Novastar for this).
Warhammer 40K RPG rules e.g. Deathwatch represent 'full auto' by having a single attack (with a to-hit bonus of +20%) and degree of success giving multiple successful hits - one, plus one per 10% success margin. This is an elaboration on the normal system where attack rolls don't affect damage. As all the shots are from one "attack", a single successful Dodge negates all of them, unlike if they were rolled separately. Each has a separate damage roll - 'Righteous Fury' crits occur based on 10s on the damage roll + successful weapon skill check, so happen individually for each hit.
Dungeon World has a 'Volley' action which lets a player choose to burn extra abstract ammo units as a trade-off against extra damage, or choose to move into more danger as a trade-off. In DM, 'unlimited ammo' is largely a disadvantage, since ammo-loss tradeoffs can't be selected (though other GM tomfoolery including arrows would be thwarted as well).
Irregulars here [edit: dead link] has an interesting auto-fire rule; the normal game mechanic is dice pool (making multiple attacks messy), with autofire resolved by rolling an attack as normal and cross-referencing range to get a target number; a number of dice equal to number of shots is then rolled, giving two 'dice pool' checks instead of a roll of the 'dice pool' per shot. Its maybe slightly spoiled by having extra shots add a minor bonus to damage, so that the exact number of hits is sort of irrelevant. The minor damage add also makes it relatively more beneficial to spread fire against multiple targets.
Hero 5E potentially uses both options for autofire - it normally rolls damage separately for each hit but (in The Ultimate Skill) has an optional autofire skill [Deadly Sprayfire]which instead gives an Irregulars-type damage bonus [+1 damage class per extra attack that hits]; arguing this is more effective due to how HERO handles damage (subtractions from each damage roll/armour, chance of stun).
Autofire might or might not be allowed when using two weapons.
Palladium (Rifts) has rules for micromissile volleys as well as autofire: notably, a character cannot dodge volleys of 4+ missiles. Targets can shoot a missile, in which case there's a chance of nearby missiles being taken out when that missile explodes.
Fragged Empire normally uses 3d6+modifiers for virtually every game roll, except high Rate of Fire weapons which add ROF to the number of dice rolled. I believe that it doesn't affect damage directly, just gets extra damage via the attack roll (a 'strong hit' per 6 rolled). Cover specifically reduces damage for high ROF weapons.
Amazing Engine's Bughunters uses a Fitness (i.e. Str) check for autofire instead of Reflexes (recoil), with a -30% to hit per 45 degrees of arc. A character can make attacks in the area equal to 1/2 the ammo expended, as well as a free attack on anyone entering the zone; it lasts for a round starting on the characters' turn.
High Colonies rolls more dice if shooting multiple shots; 2 or more 1s give a 'jam' (3 is serious, 4+ weapon destroyed), guns can't jam in single-shot mode.

Ranged Burst: D&D 4E, and D&D 3E at least once (Epic feat "Storm of Throws") have an odd mechanic where a character using archaic melee weapons - e.g. axes or bows - make ranged attacks across an area, somewhat like if they were using autofire, instead of having a set number of attacks. Particularly egregious is the 4E rogue power 'Cloud of Steel' (7th level rogue, PHB I) - a close 'blast 5' power which lets a character shoot everyone in a 25' wide area as one action with a crossbow of all things, ignoring the normal reloading time. The mechanic is IMHO really a misapplication of one that makes more sense with explosions e.g. grenades or fireballs.

*Manyshot: 3.5 has a 'Manyshot' feat which lets a character with it shoot two arrows with a single attack roll, increasing to three or four as number attacks increase - this actually didn't increase how many arrows a character can fire normally, but is a 'standard action' so that characters could also move. Pathfinder instead gives two arrows on the first attack so that the feat synergizes with its prerequisite, Rapid Shot. Savage Worlds [Fantasy Companion/free fantasy web supplement] also has manyshot (as 'Double Arrow shot', IIRC) and keeps the basic mechanic (a single roll for two arrows at -2), but makes the edge elf-only.



*Multitasking: 3.0 D&D Savage Species has a 'Multitasking' feat letting characters with multiple arms perform a standard action per pair of arms as a full-round action.

*Vital Strike (Pathfinder) - including this w/ multiple actions mostly for reference. Vital Strike lets a character trade in multiple attacks to do a single attack with multiplied weapon base damage (as well as moving, normally prohibited with multiple attacks in pathfinder).
« Last Edit: April 07, 2020, 06:47:25 AM by Bloody Stupid Johnson »

Bloody Stupid Johnson

  • Senior Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3366
Combat - combat moves - Part II
« Reply #44 on: December 27, 2011, 08:03:09 PM »
Movement

*Move: action type varies from system to system – anywhere between ‘counts as full turn’ and ‘free action up to x distance’. A character might be able to expend variable action points to get more or less movement, or different movement actions may be defined (e.g. Normal, Double Move, Run, 5’ step/Shift, Withdraw, Circling [JAGS], Intercept (Shadowrun)). In games where a character can opt to act twice with penalties, running may give penalties from this (e.g. Savage Worlds). Changing facing or standing up may also count as movement. 'Opening a door' counts as 10ft of movement in 3.0 D&D IIRC, while other systems may make this a separate (possibly free) action
(One game at least, MSF High has characters spend 'movement points' to do kick attacks).
A game posted in the design forum, Irregulars, had multiple movement rates x various action lengths so a character could e.g. have a 'complex action' (full move), 'normal action' (2/3 move), simple action (1/3 move) or free action (1m) version of walk, jog, run or sprint. Moving didn't actually actually require an action but is assumed to be simultaneous with other actions up to that length, with faster movement meaning more penalties - e.g. you could walk+shoot, then break into a run with remaining movement).  
Movement can give various penalties to attack: e.g. in 3.x any movement (beyond a 5ft step) prevents a 'full attack'. In Savage Worlds movement is normally free up to allowance, although "Snapfire" weapons take a -2 penalty to attack if any movement is taken (before or after the shot i.e. this assumes the initial shot is done in less time if subsequent movement is taken).
5E D&D base a base move built in, then a character can "Dash" as an action (bonus action for level 2+ rogues). A houserule I'd seen on the internet to increase running movement was "Running: when you Dash you can Dash again as a bonus action".
Chill has movement penalties for firing, standing up, placing obstacle (moving a chair into a pursuer's path while running away), or watching behind.

*Giving Ground: parry combined with retreating backwards to give an extra bonus (LegendQuest, JAGS).
 
*Jump: specific movement type. Distance may require a roll on skill/attribute (e.g. 3.5 Jump/ Pathfinder Athletics) or be fixed i.e. 1ft per Str point (Synnibarr); or 1/4 normal movement rate (Attack of the Humans). A fixed distance might be "pushable" as an action (cf. DC Heroes). In combat there may be a “Leap Attack” that uses Jumping.
5E has a Str-based long-jump distance which is theoretically based on Str but practically more capped by movement rate (1ft of jump costs 1ft of move) unless a character uses a Dash action as well - see here
(3E has a proviso that Jump uses movement as well, with excess movement potentially forcing an action to be spent on movement next round).

*Climb/Swim/etc – typically uses a skill roll (Str based). One game (RECON) uses a Perception check for Climbing.
 
Duck for cover
 
Change Facing - only for games which use facing (Superbabes, IIRC Gurps).

*Open Door- (movement). IIRC, 3.0 D&D counted this as equivalent to 10ft of movement if we care (though that is unusual). Perhaps less likely to occur in combat.

*Combat Driving: can include rules for vehicles, mounts, chariots, etc. Often controlling a vehicle consumes some sort of action (Palladium is noteworthy in that characters in robots add extra 'robot combat' actions to their normal hand-to-hand actions, getting more attacks). A number of standard actions (like bull rush) may apply to vehicles. Missile fire generally suffers movement penalties.

Defense
Note that games vary considerably as to whether defensive actions exist and must be declared, or are 'built in' to a default defense value.

*Parry: block opponent attack. Some systems assume certain amount of parrying, giving a “passive defense” rating or high defense value, while others assume an active parry must be made to factor in defensive skill; decisions like this determine how dangerous multiple (lower-level?) attackers are in a system. GURPS has a passive defense rating; Supernatural (Cortex) lets characters roll their attribute die on passive defense, or [attribute+skill] if using an action.
AD&D 2E has multiple types of parries (single attack or all opponent’s attacks). Parrying is normally adjusted by Dexterity or Agility, though in a couple of games Strength is used instead, including Conan D20 (Parry Defense is calculated with Strength, but with the proviso that penalties for low Dex are still added, and dextrous characters have low Parry but can just opt to Dodge instead), and AD&D where a character with a Strength to-hit bonus can spend their action parrying to subtract it from opponent attack (1E PHB, pg 104). Arduin Grimoire allows a Parry only if a character's DEX is higher than their opponent, possibly since it uses DEX-countdown initiative so that higher DEX is needed to go first/react faster.

In some cases parry may cost only a penalty to attack, rather than being an action (MSH). Some systems may allow a character to parry attacks vs. an ally (e.g. with a polearm; AD&D2E Complete Fighter); this may have separate rules as a ‘Guard’ action. Parries may apply a fixed or rolled penalty to an attacker, or be rolled as an opposed check; for example Palladium. Rolled parry systems of course have more dice rolls in combat, but also may handle situations where a character can't readily defend (i.e. when surprised or casting a spell) more intuitively. The choice of whether the defender gets an active roll can also be affected by luck point mechanics e.g. rerolls, which otherwise typically favour the attacker.
Hackmaster gives fumbled parries a 'free attack' to the attacker; also, for long combats/later combats in the day, a character rolling less than their Fatigue Number is fatigued.

 
Elaborations: The Stormbringer RPG has rolled parries, with the additional effect that a critical parry can break the attacker's weapon. HarnMaster, a critical Parry gives a DTA [Defender Tactical Advantage], i.e. a bonus attack to 'riposte' (IIRC this can be with their regular weapon, if parrying with shield). Honor + Intrigue (Barbarians of lemuria variant) reportedly does this as well - at least for some combat styles a buckler critical could be followed with a free sword attack.
Fireborn (see "actions") lets defenders script a sequence of moves in response to a similar attack sequence - a dice pool is rolled to see how many moves a character can pull off, with a 'defend' being needed to cancel each attack move, and potentially attacks included following a 'ready'. (As a house rule, heavy weapons could be made harder to riposte with due to requiring multiple 'ready' successes in defense, which is normally the case when making second attacks in Fireborn).
(Fireborn also has a proviso on the specific parry-equivalent manuever, "block", that a weapon has to be within a weight-category for a block to be possible. Larger targets can also "sweep" multiple foes who are unable to block).

Some systems give PCs a total of “defense points” to distribute as desired between opponents (making flanking rules largely unnecessary) e.g. Dragon Warriors, or the 'dodge pool' in 1E shadowrun.
5E D&D has a 'Parry' fighter manuever which burns a resource [manuever points] to reduce damage directly by manuever die (e.g. d8) + Dex mod, but doesn't alter hit difficulty. Atomic Highway lets characters do active defense rolls against a number of targets equal to Notice skill.
Games sometimes allow ranged attack (e.g. arrow) deflection as a separate special ability (e.g. D&D monk 'Deflect Arrows'). 5E D&D 'Deflect Arrows' works somewhat like fighter Parry, with damage reduced by [d10+Dex+monk level], and the monk can also catch the weapon if damage is reduced to 0.
I've seen a suggested house rule for 5E Parry (Opa Opa on this site) that lets a character do a 'parry' at the cost of a 'hit die', which is weird - doing super parry at cost of fatigue I think is the idea.
Tunnels & Trolls since it works by comparing attack totals and dealing the difference as damage, essentially builds a 'parry' into attacking (instead of having an AC). In it, doing anything else in combat, such as spellcasting or shooting an arrow, can be fatal since no defense total is generated.

Riposte: a parry followed by a quick counterattack. Sometimes a 'Riposte' may occur as a result of a good 'parry' e.g. HarnMaster gives a bonus attack for a critical parry, if opponent rolls poorly. Similarly Marvel Heroic lets a character spend a 'plot point' to gain an effect die from a reaction (defensive roll) - including dealing damage though this rule has probably wider applications.
Dragon #165 has a 'riposte' manuever for fighters, on top of a parry manuever (giving a penalty 1/round to an opponent's roll). The fighter delays their action, and if the parry works the delayed attack gets a +2 to hit. (the parry could actually work due to either the extra bonus or inherent AC, I think, and the riposte would still work.)
Palladium e.g. Ninjas & Superspies has a few similar combination manuevers e.g. 'Automatic Body Flip/Throw' where a character substitutes the manuever bonus for the normal Parry bonus (i.e. lower) and then flips the target on a win (the also lose the option of a 'roll with punch/fall').

*Spell Parry - [Age of Heroes] - Parry attempt but using a spell.

*Power Defense - - hazard studios' Supers! RPG lets nearly any power be used defensively (superstrength to punch a thrown car out the way, etc). The main limitation is that a power used for defense can't be used also to attack on the characters' turn. Specifically defensive powers (Armour, Mental Shield) can be used multiple times/round but with a -1d cumulative penalty.

*Block: by this I mean using a body location e.g. an arm to parry, taking damage to that location instead of the original location struck. This result may appear from a ‘partially successful’ Parry, rather than being defined as a separate manuever.

*Skill Defense: basically as Parry, except a couple of games e.g. Hollow Earth Expedition (HEX) gives characters a defense bonus from a skill in use, rather than just combat skill (i.e. you can defend with Photography while trying to photograph something, or Magic while casting a spell).
4E D&D has a "Reflexive Dodge" skill power, which uses a skill roll to calculate a damage reduction, rather than a defense number; "make an Acrobatics check and reduce the damage you take from the triggering attack by half the check result" (fairly high, but also limited to 1/encounter and level 16+); a similar power exists for Arcana skill vs. energy damage. (this sort of mechanic seems logical and thematic, though the 'function call' of the skill rules makes it potentially possible to stack on other modifiers from powers affecting skills; also, its slightly weird conceptually, since damage isn't modified by a check -making it asymmetric).

 
*Fend: similar to parry, but assumes defender is making attacks to hold the opponent at bay (like a lion tamer with a chair).
 
*Dodge/Tumble: used to avoid an attack or do something acrobatic, perhaps disengage from a dangerous area.
Dodge typically uses an opposed roll of some kind to activate (i.e. roll the same or better than the opponent); or there may be a flat chance of success. Some systems (SenZar, Talislanta) may add penalties to defense for an unsuccessful dodge attempt; which might result in a more likely hit (if the dodge had to be declared before the attack roll; otherwise this is moot unless degree of success adds to damage) or additional damage.
Dodge is sometimes not allowed vs. fast-moving attacks e.g. bullets. Dragon Warriors has an 'Evasion' which is matched against the Speed of the attack, instead of the attacker's skill.
Dodging may be automatic, count as one action (Palladium), impose a penalty to attack rolls if used (Marvel Super Heroes), or be free up to a certain limit. Some games demand dodge-type actions be declared in advance (3.x D&D Total Defense & Fighting Defensively) while others permit them as interrupts (often burning future actions).
Games where Dodge is normally rolled vs. an attack roll may sometimes also be rolled against a fixed target number - Palladium 'fireball' for instance has a fixed target number of 18, or a roll to avoid walking into a carnivorous plant in Rifts Dinosaur Swamp uses a 'passive dodge' of 16.
Star Wars D6 (2E, anyway) has a default fixed defense, but a character who Dodges replaces this with their roll even if its lower ("sometimes people accidentally leap into the line of fire or move right into someone's attack!").
Most editions of D&D are notable for having 'dodge' function with two alternate mechanics - attacker roll to-hit or defender roll to save - 5E 'Dodge' gives a character disadvantage to be hit on the attacker's roll, or advantage on a Dexterity save; 3E assumes a free Dodge against fireballs etc. and has no action giving a bonus to this.
Ninjas and Superspies (Palladium) distinguishes between regular Dodge and Multiple Dodge (lower bonuses but works against rear attacks). Automatic Dodge in N&SS costs one attack (and requires the character win initiative) unlike the later version for Juicers in Rifts; there are rules for characters dropping an Automatic Dodge to perform Multiple Dodge if targeted by rear attacks.
World of Synnibar has separate ratings for dodge vs. normal and 'wide beam' (20ft wide or more) blasts - should you fail other characters may be able to help with a 'heroic attempt' to pull you out the road, or you may get a God Roll as a final fallback should the blast be fatal.
Tunnels & Trolls has 'Dodge' as an option available only against (unfairly) large monsters like giants. A DEX save allows a character to deal their entire dice roll as damage, instead of having to compare it to their opponent's roll and probably be squashed by the difference [cf. Damage for a quick explanation of T&T combat]. One solo, Captif d'Yvoire, has a monster where you can do this but take damage to DEX and CON by the amount you fail the save, and also bases the SR level off its [current MR starting at 150/30]).

Exalted 'Full Dodge' gives a number of dodges equal to [Dex+Dodge+specialties] dice pool, but with a cumulative -1 to each roll.
Whether Dodge/Parry requires active declaration in advance, or can use a future action, is relatively important tactically . Notably in the case of multiple opponents: if 4 goblins engage a fighter and the one attacked can choose to dodge with a future action, they can raise defense substantially with only a 25% drop in offense, while all four need to defend otherwise (assuming the attacker can freely switch targets). The same principle applies the other way to PC 'boss fights'.
Mutazoids has a 'normal' and 'full' dodge; normal indicating a character is 'within the opponents' reach but dodging individual attacks' while full is 'staying out of reach and cannot attack'. This sort of parallels e.g. 3E D&Ds 'fighting defensively'/'full defense' split; these are interesting in that there are multiple manuevers which are separated by degree of split between attack and defense, instead of being defined by whether its a 'dodge' or a 'parry'.
High Colonies (which assumes most combat is gun combat) has a dice roll for defense based on what the target did on their initiative (stood still d6, walked/crawled 2d6, doubled 3d6, ran/charged 4d6, dodged 5d6).

*Make Saving Throw: usually this is a reactive event that doesn't take an action. Cf. Dodge (e.g. for the Palladium fireball). Some 3E or later stunlock spells (Hold Person) allow a reroll as a full-round action, basically so people feel like their turn may be doing something. In 3.5 this did have the problem of creating a perverse incentive for enemies to coup de grace Held PCs before they could re-enter the combat.

*Shield Wall: locking adjacent shields for extra bonus.
 
*Roll with punch/fall (e.g. Palladium): spend action where dodge etc. has already failed, to reduce damage by half. In game this I suppose reflects e.g. tensing up muscles against a punch.
The action does tend to have more bonuses than Dodge - presumably deliberately since unlike regular Parry the roll is made vs. a roll that is already successful (so has to be higher) and less abuseable in any case since it only halves damage rather than negating it fully. Roll with punch is slightly reminiscent of a "soak roll", though its more common for those to be an automatically occurring thing rather than an action.
Mutazoids has a 'rolling with an attack' action which reduces damage 1/2 and does not cost an action, but causes character to lose initiative next turn.
Sometimes treated as not an action but an automatic defense; for instance Mercenaries, Spies and Private Eyes has a 'Pugilism' skill which lets a character absorb 1 damage/skill level each combat round from unarmed attacks

 
*Maintain balance (Palladium - Systems Failure): negate successful knockdown attack with a skill roll (40%, or Acrobatics/Gymnastics %, instead of the usual d20 roll) at cost of one attack and instead of using a "roll with punch/fall".

*Tough it out (Hypothetical) - aka Con-based Intimidate, where a character takes an attack to show how tough they are.
(I've sort of done this myself in AD&D, but more with "player skill" than by any mechanical means).

*Heroic Attempt: mostly unique to Synnibarr; if one hero is about to be hit with an attack, another hero may attempt a ‘heroic attempt’ to interrupt it and interpose themselves, or pull the victim out of the way. Requires an unusual bonus initiative check to pull off. JAGS more or less allows this indirectly as well (it allows interrupts on any action, with a shorter action). Low Fantasy Gaming has a "Rescue" action, which requires a Dex check and also costs a Luck Point (regained after a long rest).
 
*Interpose: the character takes damage meant for someone else. e.g. Risus has rules for this which let characters take double damage (instead of rolling among team members to see who takes normal damage, since the system is quite abstract); the other characters also get extra dice nexd round to 'avenge' them, regardless of whether they were taken out entirely.

*Use Perfect Defense (Exalted)
- really a form of magical power use, but bears mentioning. A 'perfect defense' in Exalted is a charm (power) that automatically blocks an opponent attack, e.g. by automatically giving [attacker's roll +1] defense successes. A character can only use one charm per round, which combined with the ability of character's to deal huge amounts of damage can leads to "paranoia combo" combat, where all characters use basic attacks only to leave them capable of putting up an emergency perfect defenses, very slowly depleting opponent's motes (power points) until an attack can get through.

*Act Under Fire /Defy Danger (Apocalypse World /Dungeon World): a very catch all 'move' for avoiding trouble but typically representing a dodge. DW balances the ubiquity of the move somewhat by allowing multiple possible stats to be used to modify it, depending on nature of the danger and how the character attempts to respond.

*Blank Mind: - e.g. the Invulnerable RPG includes this as a mental defense type action.

*Single Weapon Style: while not exactly a combat move, this is included by way of comparison with Two Weapons use. This is not infrequently just inferior to either two weapons or use of a two-handed weapon (which generally means more damage) or a shield.
Use of a single weapon might be encouraged by making it a classes' only option, or a default option in case of low Str/Dex (see 'weapon proficiencies and Str requirements'), or if other skills aren't also purchased. Games more rarely may provide a bonus to single-weapon users e.g. Complete Fighter for AD&D gave them an AC bonus - this sort of thing may be justified with the idea of a single-weapon fencing stance being more side-on and so presenting less frontage to an attacker. Being able to punch or grab an opponent may also be advantageous, and/or warrior-spellcasters may need a hand free if they want to cast spells occasionally. Low Fantasy Gaming encourages single weapon style by letting single weapon users switch weapons without an action, although this is slightly undermined by also letting characters switch melee/ranged for free also (e.g. someone with a greatsword can also switch to longbow for free and back).

Cooperative Actions
*Team Attack: two attackers attack simultaneously. May add damage for purposes of stunning (HERO), or add damage before armour subtraction to get more oomph vs. invulnerable foes (Superbabes).
 
*Aid Another: spend turn assisting an ally, adding bonus to their action. This might require a roll, or not (e.g. a character might fail to assist an ally, although this may make this quite bad as an action combat option - at the very least its possible the main character's action will still either fail, or would've succeeded regardless). The secondary character's bonus is usually 'scaled down' in some fashion rather than adding directly. Count-success systems handle 'critical fails' here fairly straightforwardly, in that -tve successes (a botch) may subtract successes from an ally.
In Savage Worlds, I have houseruled that a wild card helping an 'extra' NPC, could loan them their 'wild die' if they successfully make an appropriate check.

*Assist Spellcasting: [LegendQuest] allowing targets to assist a spell's working on them (e.g. some healing spells). In LQ, unconscious characters cannot assist.


*Create Advantage: (Fate, e.g. Fate Accelerated [FAE]): this creates an 'Aspect' and allows 1-2 free (without spending a fate point) uses of it; basically the same as 'aid another' but described in terms of Aspects. It has very broad use i.e. outside combat it can be used to represent various things, and most skills (not just Fighting) can be used to Create Advantage whether by noticing a useful detail or crafting a quality into an object.


*Beast Attack: ordering an animal companion to do something. 4E D&D has a range of animal powers, most of which replace the user's own attack however. 3E D&D has skills for 'pushing' or performing tricks with animals.

Using Cover: not exactly an action but a game may have rules for using cover (possibly including other characters!). Typically if an attack misses due to cover it will hit the cover (e.g. 3E D&D, Star Wars D6). Some systems may have rules for cover being broken - Star Wars use a 'Str roll' based on cover durability vs. damage to see how heavily damaged the cover is, while other games may just track HP of objects.
« Last Edit: April 18, 2018, 08:41:10 AM by Bloody Stupid Johnson »