I'm writing a spy game. I've got most everything hammered out. But I'm curious of peoples opinions on my damage system. The vast majority of weapons have the same damage. (With certain exceptions of course) That being 1d10. A damage of 1 is really bad scratch, but a 10 depending on the hit location is limb mangling/dismemberment, or to a vital like the head or chest equals death. My reasoning about this is I've seen reports, and had experiences related to me where people have died from being stabbed by a small knife, or .22. But at the same time, people surviving being shot by an AK or 12 gauge 00 buck to the stomach (the 12 gauge incident happened to a friends little brother).
So what do you people think about this? Opinions, thoughts, or ideas?

Quote from: Ronin;688317I'm writing a spy game. I've got most everything hammered out. But I'm curious of peoples opinions on my damage system. The vast majority of weapons have the same damage. (With certain exceptions of course) That being 1d10. A damage of 1 is really bad scratch, but a 10 depending on the hit location is limb mangling/dismemberment, or to a vital like the head or chest equals death. My reasoning about this is I've seen reports, and had experiences related to me where people have died from being stabbed by a small knife, or .22. But at the same time, people surviving being shot by an AK or 12 gauge 00 buck to the stomach (the 12 gauge incident happened to a friends little brother).
So what do you people think about this? Opinions, thoughts, or ideas?

I like it. Damage in a proper fight isn't precise, it's basically random chance, there's so many factors to it that a blind die roll will basically do just as well as trying anything more complex, but with much less effort on the part of the players.

It will also force players to think hard about getting in fights, if every damage roll is potentially debilitating.

Yeah, the idea that no matter how much of an expert you are you can be killed by one bullet is very rooted in reality, however, you might consider adding some sort of mechanic that allowed players to get out of a shave with death? You spend some kind of fate or divine favour point and the shot flies past your head?

This would probably violate the theme the way I've described it.

Maybe I'm too generous to players.

Ladybird is right about it deterring getting into fights. If you want a stealth and skill based game (as I assume a spy game would be) this is probably the right way to go.

Yeah, I've toyed with the idea of some sort of luck point system. But I'm looking for more of a gritty John le Carré, Len Deighton, Olen Steinhauer, or The Sandbaggers style game. So I don't think as you said it would fit with my theme. Although, perhaps I should present it as an option. For those wanting to run a more James Bond type of game. Should I even bother? I mean I kind of am writing it for myself.

Well, that's up to you of course. I like to picture lots of people playing the games I make when I make them, even if it is just for myself. xD If it was me I'd put the optional system in, but it doesn't seem worth the effort to you, then you're probably right.

There is a downside.

So your assassin that carried a .223 pistol with a silencer is going to be killing people in a very different way that the Sniper with a .50 cal.

Basically a gun like a .223 will kill if you put a bullet it the targets head from close range specifically because the low power of the round will mean it enters the skull and ricochets round the insider destroying brain tissue. The same bullet is very unlikely to take off an arm. A .50 will take off an arm or a leg.

Also actual play there is a pay off between ammo versus weight/weapon size.

If you make all damage the same then all PCs will carry small guns with high capacity magazines.

Now having said all that if 'kit' isn't important in your game it works fine. If you want 'kit' to matter, which is fairly common in spy games, then you may want to introduce a damage modifier for some weapons still based on that d10 premise. Say a .223 gets -2 damage at medium range and -4 at long range minimum 1, for example.

It's not about whether or not a pocket knife can kill you with one blow. It's about what's really more likely to do so - a bullet from Kalashnikov or a stab with a paper cutter?

It's always kind of like  that anecdote about the guy who survived a fall when his parachute didn't open. For every one that did, ten other parachute jumpers (well, mostly paratroopers) died from some parachute related accident. Does that mean we shouldn't use parachutes, as more people survived a fall when one did not open than died due to an accident with them?

Quote from: jibbajibba;688339There is a downside.

So your assassin that carried a .223 pistol with a silencer is going to be killing people in a very different way that the Sniper with a .50 cal.

Basically a gun like a .223 will kill if you put a bullet it the targets head from close range specifically because the low power of the round will mean it enters the skull and ricochets round the insider destroying brain tissue. The same bullet is very unlikely to take off an arm. A .50 will take off an arm or a leg.

Just a nitpick but your referencing .22 Long Rifle, Not .233 (aka 5.56x45mm) which is used by assault rifles like the M-16. That little gun nerdery aside. I agree. But while your correct a .22lr will not take an arm off. But it can do damage that can render the arm useless. Severing tendons nerves what have you. So yeah the arm isn't blown off. But its just a hunk of useless meat hanging on your side. Coincidentally .50 BMG has a damage bonus to the standard 1d10. As it is a devastating round on personnel.

Quote from: jibbajibba;688339Also actual play there is a pay off between ammo versus weight/weapon size.

If you make all damage the same then all PCs will carry small guns with high capacity magazines.

Now having said all that if 'kit' isn't important in your game it works fine. If you want 'kit' to matter, which is fairly common in spy games, then you may want to introduce a damage modifier for some weapons still based on that d10 premise. Say a .223 gets -2 damage at medium range and -4 at long range minimum 1, for example.

That is a concern. The balancing point being range. Like you talked about. A small .32ACP pistol like a Kel-Tec P32 has a very short range, while a full size autoloader like a Beretta 92, or a Colt 1911 have a much better range. Ranged weapons have four range categories. Point Blank, Short, Medium, Long. Each category has its own penalties. So in a firefight at 30 meters, the Kel-Tec would be at long range, while the Beretta would be at medium range.

Hello

Well, one thing i don't like in most systems is the fact that you can get a very good to-hit roll, and then roll a very bad damage roll.

From the player point of view, it's disappointing to strike a clean hit but in fact wasn't as clean as you first thought and, on the contrary, when a character barely hits its target, it can become a barely-hit-right-through-the-head strike.

So here is my proposal:
- all weapons have a fixed damage (or very small range of damage)
- actual damage to the target is dependant on the to-hit roll plus the weapon damage.

This way, there are less dice rolls (which i think is a good thing) and the actual damage of a weapon is more tied to the skill of the character.

Quote from: Raoul;688421So here is my proposal:
- all weapons have a fixed damage (or very small range of damage)
- actual damage to the target is dependant on the to-hit roll plus the weapon damage.

Bingo, and welcome to the RPG site!

This is exactly how I work damage in my games. One caveat, you need to have a quarter and half damage for low success rolls otherwise there's no such thing as a grazing shot. Exampli gratia:
Roll 1-2 over target: quarter damage
Roll 3-4 over targer: half damage
Roll 5-6 over target: full damage
Roll 7-8 over target: +1 damage
Roll 9-10 over target: +2 damage
Roll 11 over target: +3 damage
Roll 12 over target: +4 damage and so on

So someone with a shotgun, damage 6, who rolls 4 over the target does 3 damage. If they had rolled 10 over the target, they would do 8 damage. If they had rolled 1 over the target, that would be 1 damage etc. Adjust to taste. Without the quarter and half every shot would do a minimum of 6 damage.

My old Cyperpunk game ran on a similar model.

It was a bit cumbersome but ..

% roll over to hit
Damage was determined by % + damage of weapon + ammount exceeded to hit by,.

So you needed to roll a 50 to hit
You rolled 67 add 20 = 87%  (damage bonus +37%)

Damage from an AKM +40%

Damage is %d + 37 + 40 .

Because aiming gave a bonus to hit it also gave a bonus to damage. You aimed for a round and you have the Hunter/sniper skill to double the bonus for aiming so you got +20% on your roll... etc...

Quote from: The Traveller;688427This is exactly how I work damage in my games. One caveat, you need to have a quarter and half damage for low success rolls otherwise there's no such thing as a grazing shot.

In most games we have the roll to make the hit, the roll for damage, and possibly the roll for location.

Damage seems clearly a function of the weapon and it does not make intuitive sense that a pocket knife is going to create a wound that compares with that of a scythe. So I have to say that a narrow range of damage does not make intuitive sense to me. If you're coming at me with that scythe, I want Dirty Harry's .44 Magnum in my hand and not a .22 target pistol.

I agree that hit location has a great deal to do with lethality (not altogether the same thing as damage) which is why the assassin is using the low caliber pistol at close range: Easy to conceal, not very loud, and for that precise kill shot, probably much more lethal than a shotgun -- ask Dick Chaney's buddies.

Many games do have a roll for hit location, but generally for flavor rather than any practical effect. And as such, I would contend that the damage range roll is an ersatz hit location roll.

I shot at you with my 2d6 + 2 S&W .44 magnum and I scored a hit. Now I roll for damage: 1 + 1 + 2 = 4 points of damage --a grazing hit with a high powered weapon. Shot you again. This time I roll 5 + 4 + 2 = 11 points of damage. Man I just knocked your spleen out and you are down on the floor bleeding out. Turn around and shoot the guy with the scythe. BOOM! I'm making to-hit rolls like it's going out of style. This time I roll 6 + 6 + 2 = 14 points of damage . I took his frickin' head off, just like Harry said I would.

To allow for the skilled assassin's shot or the single stab wound to the heart, I would suggest that there is a penalty to the to hit roll (up for grabs on the quantification of it) that allows the user to inflict maximum damage for the weapon. On top of this, another skill-based option for particularly lethal hit locations that minimize the victims hit points (she stabbed him with a hat-pin through the eye that pierced his brain and dropped him like a felled ox). How could a 1d4-1 weapon do that. Even maxing out at 3 points of damage should not kill someone, but there are occasions when it does.

BTW: Most lethal knife wounds that I've ever heard of do not do much in the way of piercing damage, but they end up by nicking an artery and the victim bleeds out with only a small hole in their gut. Most games pay absolutely zero attention to residual damage and its continuing effects.

For a spy game I'd think you would actively want to encourage use of small-calibre guns, knives, etc, so this seems an excellent genre rule.
IRL you can die from a .22 or a .44 magnum, but the .44M has much more 'stopping power' - it will more reliably take an opponent out of the fight. But you probably don't want your spies all going Dirty Harry.

Quote from: teagan;696655Damage seems clearly a function of the weapon and it does not make intuitive sense that a pocket knife is going to create a wound that compares with that of a scythe.

And yet I'd much rather be attacked by Timmy the bookworm with a scythe than Lei Li the master ninja with a pocket knife.

Quote from: teagan;696655So I have to say that a narrow range of damage does not make intuitive sense to me. If you're coming at me with that scythe, I want Dirty Harry's .44 Magnum in my hand and not a .22 target pistol.

Bare weapon damage is a factor, no doubt, but the balance between that and skill must be carefully struck. At low to mid skill levels, the weapon should predominate, at high skill levels the skill should predominate. This isn't difficult to emulate through simple rules.

Quote from: teagan;696655And as such, I would contend that the damage range roll is an ersatz hit location roll.

That's certainly how I deal with it, albeit without rolling for damage. The higher to hit rolls mean you came closer to a vital area, which is pretty intuitve.

Quote from: teagan;696655To allow for the skilled assassin's shot or the single stab wound to the heart, I would suggest that there is a penalty to the to hit roll (up for grabs on the quantification of it) that allows the user to inflict maximum damage for the weapon.

No need, and see what you're doing, you're introducing unneccessary complications to satisfy your preferred combat system. The skilled shot is just the killer rolling much higher than the target, which they will probably do since their skills are that much higher. It scales beautifully as well.

Quote from: teagan;696655On top of this, another skill-based option for particularly lethal hit locations that minimize the victims hit points (she stabbed him with a hat-pin through the eye that pierced his brain and dropped him like a felled ox). How could a 1d4-1 weapon do that. Even maxing out at 3 points of damage should not kill someone, but there are occasions when it does.

Yes, this is where hit roll based damage shines. Even a pencil is a lethal weapon in the hands of someone who's trained for the last twenty years in a monastery atop a windblow mountain, misguidedly dedicated to the maxim that the pen is mightier than the sword, just to ram it through the slits in a visor. At higher skill (or luck)levels, the skill(or luck) becomes the defining factor.

Quote from: teagan;696655BTW: Most lethal knife wounds that I've ever heard of do not do much in the way of piercing damage, but they end up by nicking an artery and the victim bleeds out with only a small hole in their gut. Most games pay absolutely zero attention to residual damage and its continuing effects.

This is usually for accounting reasons. Trying to, as a GM, track the residual damage taken by a massed variety of different monsters in a grand melee against the group quickly becomes an exponential exercise in pain. Why not just have the PCs track their own death spiral and ignore the monsters then? Because you're now putting them at a disadvantage versus the rest of the world, and I don't think that's useful.

It's one of those unfortunate realities that pen and paper bring with it.

teagan

Quote from: teaganBTW: Most lethal knife wounds that I've ever heard of do not do much in the way of piercing damage, but they end up by nicking an artery and the victim bleeds out with only a small hole in their gut. Most games pay absolutely zero attention to residual damage and its continuing effects.

Quote from: TravellerThis is usually for accounting reasons. Trying to, as a GM, track the residual damage taken by a massed variety of different monsters in a grand melee against the group quickly becomes an exponential exercise in pain. Why not just have the PCs track their own death spiral and ignore the monsters then? Because you're now putting them at a disadvantage versus the rest of the world, and I don't think that's useful.

It's one of those unfortunate realities that pen and paper bring with it.

Really that all encapsulates my thoughts on a standard damage. Yeah a .44 magnum should do more damage than a .22. But my system reflects the idea that a small pocket knife could nick and artery in the leg and do life threatening damage. Certain weapons do, do more damage. .44 mag does have a damage bonus versus 9mm. But yes a lot of weapons do have the same damage potential. I think it makes players characters a lot more weary of engaging in a confrontation. Instead of the "I wade out into machine gun fire and start spittin rounds from my desert eagle." Makes you think about seeking cover, defensive maneuvers, or can I beat this guy to the punch and drop him, or vastly reduce his ability to counter-attack.