Why does it seem like its so hard to make them work, something that you'd think would be a pretty significant quality of immersion, in fact more often than not ends up acting against immersion by ruining the play experience, or slowing it down considerably.

Why is it so hard to get it right? Why is just "lump hit points" not just easier (that's obvious) but essentially BETTER in terms of gameplay? Is there any happy medium? Are there systems that have done things right?

RPGPundit

In melee combat, my view is that over 50% of hits in a hit location system should be to the arms - but that'd make for a rather farcical spectacle. Not for heroic games, certainly.

The only reason Hit Points work is that we so used we don't stop and think about them any more. They have become invisible as, like the dice and the character sheet.

Hit locations make us think about hit points. Suddenly we are reminded that there is a character who bothered in the least by the 15 arrows sticking out of him.

Basically hit locations make an abstract system not so abstract and that high-lights its flaws.

If you want a injury system that takes in hit locations and still is somewhat 'crunchy' then check out HarnMaster.

I never had any problem with the hit location systems in either RuneQuest or WFRP:idunno:

Which game system?

 Who is assuming that its fucked?


In my GURPS game sessions discovering the hit location never interfered with immersion. Had a player that after discovering where her rifle shot had hit an opponent just said "Damn, I must have slipped when I fired" then said "Okay, I adjust for that and steady myself for my next shot quickly."

I gave her a fair modifier and we went on with the combat.

That stuff happens in real life.


- Ed C.



Not a perfect recollection - but that was the gist of it.

Quote from: T. Foster;337199I never had any problem with the hit location systems in either RuneQuest or WFRP:idunno:

I didn't have any problem either in the games with hit locations that I've played. :confused: :idunno:

Pundit, could you give an example of a system in which hit locations don't work properly, or are unfun, or whatever?

Hit locations are difficult to reconcile with a random determination system because the relative exposure of different locations is so variable. Is the target standing, crouching, lying prone? Square on or side on? In the open or behind cover? Peeking around a corner or peeking over a bush? Does the target have a shield? Any fixed location table is going to produce more strange than reasonable results.

Hit locations are difficult to reconcile with hit points systems, because, as Soylent Green wrote, it involves mixing two levels of abstraction. As soon as we start distributing hit points around the body we start to think about what hit points are. This never ends well. Systems that use injuries rather than hit points as the basic method of assessing damage tend to have an easier time with hit locations.

The system i'm working on does not have hit points and does not have random hit locations. All hit locations are assigned costs (which vary with circumstance). The degree of success determines how many points an attacker has to purchase a hit location. In melee combat the attacker simply spends his advantage on hitting wherever he wants, assuming he has enough points. In ranged combat, the shooter can either take a general shot and take whatever is the best hit with the available points, or take a called shot and risk missing if he doesn't get a high enough degree of success to afford that location.

Does it work? It's not finished, but it shows promise.

I always liked Top Secret S.I, where yes it is HP in a given location, but your hit roll determined where and how much with melee weapons. (Sadly they made firearms a bit more random.) High skill could also shift the hit roll location to near parts--the higher the skill the better the shift.


I've seen systems which try and go beyond HP with that, but therein lies madness. The old Tri Tac house system with its Penetration value/bone break value, additional splinter damage from shattered bones. You get something that takes more time to resolve and thus puts the immersion into dangerous  time sensitive detraction areas.I.e "roll this roll that keep rolling" territory, when a simpler system is "you are wounded for X...and limp move on.." would help maintain immersion better because the rules take less. It is a delicate balance of time to resolve "mechanics" vs. suspension of disbelief. When something takes seconds to happen and ten or more minutes to mechanically resolve you've probably done more harm than good for the "feels more real" aspect of play.

Quote from: RPGPundit;337194Why does it seem like its so hard to make them work, something that you'd think would be a pretty significant quality of immersion, in fact more often than not ends up acting against immersion by ruining the play experience, or slowing it down considerably.

Why is it so hard to get it right? Why is just "lump hit points" not just easier (that's obvious) but essentially BETTER in terms of gameplay? Is there any happy medium? Are there systems that have done things right?

The question answers itself, see bolded part.

To elaborate:

A) If combat is rapid and quick-flowing, then even a single extra roll to determine hit location will slow it down, relatively speaking. Consider early D&D but with THAC0 instead of the combat matrix: one roll to see if you hit, no time lost perusing tables, and a second roll to see damage, again, no time lost perusing tables. Two rolls and nothing else; add a third one to determine location, and you've immediately increased the length of combat by one-half.

B) If combat is already slow and detailed, well... I'm not really fond of such systems. But I imagine that people who do like torturously slow combat resolution would be the people who don't think that combat location rules slow down the game. As for others, they're already anxious to get done with those calculations, anyway, so they'll just perceive it one more thing to slow down an already slow game.

Quote from: Silverlion;337207I always liked Top Secret S.I, where yes it is HP in a given location, but your hit roll determined where and how much with melee weapons. (Sadly they made firearms a bit more random.) High skill could also shift the hit roll location to near parts--the higher the skill the better the shift

IMO that was still not a great system, at least at low skill level -- statistically you ended up shooting people in the hand most of the time. It became a running joke around our table. The fourth time you shoot a guy in the hand with a .45 ACP, I don't think a bandage and a first aid check is gonna cut it.

I've never had a problem with hit locations in WFRP, you generally lose overall hit points until you are so battered to really defend yourself anymore then future critical hits based on body part do have various effects.  I've seen many players start doing called shots to try and target specific hit locations once they start criting someone.

Reign's (and ore in general) does a pretty good job managing specific hit points by location as well.  Not to mention Riddle of Steel, which isn't a favorite of mine does do a good job of managing hit locations, probably one of the better ones in terms of where you hit logically flows from how you attack.

Quote from: Premier;337208T

A) If combat is rapid and quick-flowing, then even a single extra roll to determine hit location will slow it down, relatively speaking. Consider early D&D but with THAC0 instead of the combat matrix: one roll to see if you hit, no time lost perusing tables, and a second roll to see damage, again, no time lost perusing tables. Two rolls and nothing else; add a third one to determine location, and you've immediately increased the length of combat by one-half.

But if you roll the hit location die at the same time that you roll the damage die, you don't waste any time, don't you?

In every case, what you said and what I said is a fallacy, because rolling dice doesn't waste much time (unless your system involves some arcane way of interpreting the dice), what wastes time is applying those results.

I had no problem whatsoever with the hit locations in Dark Heresy.  I found them quick to resolve, fun, and produced nasty and dangerous results.

Deadlands classic used a wound level system combined with hit locations. Your initial hit was random, but the better your attack, the more you could shift your hit location toward the head or vitals. So, a hit roll followed by a location roll (which was a d20 IIRC, so it's not too complex).

Damage was rolled, but rather than deduct hit points, it was divided by the opponent's size & armor for the number of wound levels. A slightly more complex operation (division instead of subtraction), but still only one mathematical operation to determine the level of pain.

IIRC, the DL:Reloaded system completely does away with this notion in favor of complete abstractness.