Quote from: smiorgan;618635Yeah. Goes to show how important context is. Those big gloves allow you to do that, but bare knuckle techniques are completely different. Some systems (like Renaud's Defense Dans La Rue) protect the gut and mark because a shot there will end the fight (because you're in a street, and you'll get kicked by your opponent's mates when you go down). The chin is tucked in so most blows will strike the top of the head.

Boxers protect the gut too. But you tend to do it with your elbows. I would be wary of any technique claiming to end a fight in one hit though. MMA gloves are really light compared to boxing gloves, but a shot to the gut still wont end most fights in that sport. After years of muay thai, i have been kicked solidly in gut by shins and knees...those hits wear your down, but it is really, really hard to end it with one shot to the gut.  And an important part of training is stengthening those stomach muscles so it doesn't feel like much when you get hit there.

Gloves do make a difference though. It definitely creates less space for a fist to pass through.

Boxers and MMA fighters usually tuck the chin as well (especially when they cage).

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;618637Boxers protect the gut too. But you tend to do it with your elbows. I would be wary of any technique claiming to end a fight in one hit though. MMA gloves are really light compared to boxing gloves, but a shot to the gut still wont end most fights in that sport. After years of muay thai, i have been kicked solidly in gut by shins and knees...those hits wear your down, but it is really, really hard to end it with one shot to the gut.  And an important part of training is stengthening those stomach muscles so it doesn't feel like much when you get hit there.

Gloves do make a difference though. It definitely creates less space for a fist to pass through.

Boxers and MMA fighters usually tuck the chin as well (especially when they cage).

FWIW my background is coaching and practicing English MA, from 18c. It's recreational rather than competition standard.

The thing is, the target audience for 18 and 19c boxing manuals is probably not a hardcore boxer. More likely they're reasonably fit and take a few classes for self-defence. So when we talk about protecting the gut it's not because the other areas aren't important, it's because the trainer is time-poor and has to prioritise on what to teach. It just happened that Renaud favours a particular guard, for the reasons I mentioned (which I don't entirely agree with).

These manuals aren't gospel, either. The WMA community holds some texts up with such reverence because they're historical documents, when the content is actually no damn good (like some RPGs).

Quote from: Dan Davenport;618602What game systems do you think do the best job of simulating pain, as well as the fear of pain?

........

Mind you, I'm not sure that I'd want to run a game with this level of detail... unless, perhaps, if there's a particularly slick way of handling it.

I can think of several systems, Rolemaster, The Riddle of Steel, but in my opinion, the system that does pain and fear of pain best are Ironclaw 2nd edition and Usagi Yojimbo (Sanguine), with the added advantage of simplicity.

Now I have no time, I'll explain how it works later.

Sometimes I wish we had a martial arts subforum here:)

I think I contributed to getting this discussion away from the OPs initial subject of pain and RPG mechanics. My guess is he isn't terribly concerned about being 100% realistic and more concerned about something that feels right for most people at the table.

So to backpeddle a bit, I would say if you want something to reflect stuff like being stunned by pain I think the following might work: depending on your wound system, you could have each character possess a Pain threshold which is triggered when they take a certain amount of damage. For example, maybe characters all have a wound threshold of between 1-4. If you have a 1 and take one wound, you don't have to worry, but if you take two wounds in a single blow, that exceeds your wound threshold and you suffer penalties. This could just be for the one round (to avoid the whole death spiral issue) or conditional on failing some kind of endurance check like I mentioned before. I think the key is getting around problem where seemingly reasonable wound penalties have too pronounced an effect for what they are intended to represent.

The reason I think a pain threshold might work, is it makes things a bit more relative. So Newton the 90 pound professor might have a pain threshold of 1, but Biff the Beefcake might have a 3 or 4.

Quote from: Claudius;618667I can think of several systems, Rolemaster, The Riddle of Steel, but in my opinion, the system that does pain and fear of pain best are Ironclaw 2nd edition and Usagi Yojimbo (Sanguine), with the added advantage of simplicity.

Now I have no time, I'll explain how it works later.

I am trying to remember how rolemaster handled fear of pain. It has been a while since I played.

You could also just use normal existing fear mechanics and apply it to situations where the character suffers or might suffer pain. For example, I could see taking the Ravenloft fear check and anytime the character faces the possibliity of encountering something painful when they attack, they need to make a save. Using DoD, I would have them roll a d4 on a failure when they are just trying to attack, but roll a d6 when they damage (and a d10 when they take a bunch). The d4 gives you a range of possibilities from fumbling, freezing to staggering. The d6 raises it to things like running away. And the d10 elevates it to possibly needing a system shock roll. I am going by memory though so my exact numbers might be off. It is quite a bit rough for a solution though.

Off the top of my head, HarnMaster has the most detailed injury system that I've seen, and it has an effective combat and injury system.  Obviously, it might more detailed than most people are looking for but it just might scratch that itch for some who want more detail for combat and injury in their gaming.

A game system can mechanize the effects of pain on physical performance but the fear of feeling pain is up to the player or the rules risk dictating how PCs react to situations.

After all, if a PC wants to stop a mugging in progress, then gets told to roll a d6 and the outcome is " sorry but you rolled a 1. That guy has a knife, so your fear of getting cut overrides your desire to help that young woman."

At that point, why the fuck are you playing?

Quote from: Exploderwizard;618688A game system can mechanize the effects of pain on physical performance but the fear of feeling pain is up to the player or the rules risk dictating how PCs react to situations.

After all, if a PC wants to stop a mugging in progress, then gets told to roll a d6 and the outcome is " sorry but you rolled a 1. That guy has a knife, so your fear of getting cut overrides your desire to help that young woman."

At that point, why the fuck are you playing?

This stuff doesn't bother me so much. It depends on what you are trying to do. It works well in horror games, in my opinion. It can work in other games where you want to emphasize the fear of being hurt. Some players don't take well to these kinds of mechanics though.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;618690This stuff doesn't bother me so much. It depends on what you are trying to do. It works well in horror games, in my opinion. It can work in other games where you want to emphasize the fear of being hurt. Some players don't take well to these kinds of mechanics though.

Personally, it depends on what I signed up to play. For example if I chose cowardice and combat paralysis as disads for my character then I would fully expect to freeze in combat situations and avoid the possibility of harm at all costs.

I don't know if I would play a game where my decisions in game are decided by the author because its more realistic or captures a certain feel that the author believes the game needs. I have actual fiction to read for that.

At the table, I want to play ,not get told how I react.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;618706Personally, it depends on what I signed up to play. For example if I chose cowardice and combat paralysis as disads for my character then I would fully expect to freeze in combat situations and avoid the possibility of harm at all costs.

I don't know if I would play a game where my decisions in game are decided by the author because its more realistic or captures a certain feel that the author believes the game needs. I have actual fiction to read for that.

At the table, I want to play ,not get told how I react.

I understand and it is totally fair to play the game you want to play. For me i could get into this kind of mechanic of the rulebook was clear they wanted to simulate the effect of fear on characters.

I dont see this as simulating fiction, it is more of a reality simulation. We all know how we would like to react in a violent situation, but we rarely react the way we envision ourselves acting. I think a game that had a bravery stat for example, which you either have to overcome to take actions in a dangerous situation, or take penalties to act, could be kind of fun. You could shift that decision to the player if you prefer, and in most games doing so works best, but I dont think it is inherntly bad to have this sort of mechanism when it is intended to reflect something real like how fear is something that can actually stiffle your actions or cause you to run when away (even if you want to be doing something else).

Now some players just don't like stuff like that taking control of their character, and that is totally cool. But I will happily use fear and sanity mechanics in games where it feels appropriate and the players are all onboard. It isn't something that works very well for epic fantasy, but it can work great in a modern realistic setting or a horror setting.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;618668I think I contributed to getting this discussion away from the OPs initial subject of pain and RPG mechanics.

Whoops, guilty also.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;618706Personally, it depends on what I signed up to play.

Right on. And a game that forces you to have a skill of don't be afraid has a limited scope. If you wanted to make some statement about the horror of being unable to act and scared, that's OK, but it's not the kind of game we're used to.

If you plan to use fear as a limiting mechanism, then there are a few ways to do it:

- make it a disadvantage that's triggered under some circumstances and specific to a character build
- make it fear of escalating the fight to the next level. So it's OK to wade in with fists and get bruised, but once someone draws a knife your attitude changes. I think that's reasonable.

Dogs in the Vineyard has (I think) four tiers of conflict with ways to escalate. But from what I remember of the mechanics it does this in a strange, broken way so I wouldn't use that as a model (and it would probably get me into trouble, eh?)

I do think it's reasonable to have people with different comfort zones regarding fighting. Brawling OK, a knife fight not OK. Friendly schlaegar match with cuts to the scalp and cheeks, OK, but a pistol duel to the death, not OK.

Or twist it up a bit--effete nobles who are fine with duelling to the death with rapiers, but cave in as soon as someone bloodies their nose. It's all about social background, and mechanically workable. Call it "social partitioning" or something.

Hmm. There's an idea. I'll write that down.

I'm fine with fear and sanity rules in games as well as 'wound thresholds' that mess with my ability to fight/defend. I think it's generally up to the players to decide whether or not to enter a fight and when it's time to retreat/run away... but very few people I've played with ever run away once the knives/guns/fists come out and mostly I blame that on rules that assure them they won't face any permanent damage. If I know a bullet/knife/sword can put me in the hospital for weeks, or cause the loss of use of an arm... or death... I'm gonna picture that pain in my mind and think a lot harder about avoiding the situations where that might happen.

Quote from: Simlasa;618731I'm fine with fear and sanity rules in games as well as 'wound thresholds' that mess with my ability to fight/defend. I think it's up to the roleplaying to decide whether or not to enter a fight and when it's time to retreat/run away... but very few people I've played with ever run away once the knives/guns/fists come out and mostly I blame that on rules that assure them they won't face any permanent damage.

I have found the simplest solution to this problem is to have a sufficiently lethal system. If characters die easily enough, people will role play fear just fine.

In my system, pain decreases Stamina temporarily, so it doesn't make it penalize a character's ability to hit, but it means they have a harder time shrugging off subsequent wounds and are more susceptible to getting knocked out. Fear of pain is something I leave up to roleplaying. The system is deadly enough that my players are generally loathe to get into fights that aren't very much one-sided in their favour.

As far as pain goes, a lot of games such as Hackmaster, Harnmaster, RQ6, Yggdrasill, etc... have a mechanism where if you take a wound, some form of save must be made against Pain, Shock, Trauma, etc, or it can reduce initiative, stun you, make you fall down, etc...

The fear of pain, along with abillity to handle adrenaline, situational awareness (Jeff Cooper's Conditions) I would chalk up to some kind of skill or ability (Combat Sense, Grit, Toughness, whatever) that represents your general increase in the intangibles that go along with becoming a veteran combatant.  In a Class system, this would just be handled by Class/Level.