I've never had a problem with them in any of the games I've enjoyed that used them (Runequest, Warhammer FRP, Dark Heresy, Flashing Blades, Boot Hill, etc.).

I've also never seen a good* Amber Diceless Roleplaying GM handle combat in a way that didn't involve describing where weapons hit, how much of a wound was inflicted, how pain it was, etc. and take that into account later in the battle. In fact, whenever I've run Amber combats, players are always aiming for specific hit locations and achieving very specific results.



* Note that I said good... in my experience, the shitty Amber GMs are generally the vaguest when it comes to this sort of stuff.

Quote from: RPGPundit;337194Why 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?

You need to be more specific. There are different type of system. Some use a unitary hit points and add a difficulty and various effects (beyond damage) when a hit location is hit. Others divide hit points. Of two the former seems to be more common as a design choice.

as always,what jeff said.  

however, the first time a PC's tripping over their entrails and having to roll up a new character after their second fight, they usually get discarded.

Quote from: RPGPundit;337277The problems that occur in many "hit location" games are the following:

1. The fiddly nature of what each type of hit in each type of location will do; because if you're going a little "realistic" then logic kind of demands you go further. Thus, you slow down the game considerably.

2.  That this allows for the game to become much more potentially imbalanced, there's far more areas where you could figure out a "cheat", and crafty players, once they figure out that a called shot to the right-eye is the best possible location to attack, will ALWAYS be attacking nothing but the right eye.
Unless you rule that hit locations always must be totally random, or give ridiculous levels of penalties so that there's effectively no chance of hitting that area (which is the same as just saying "fuck it" and not using locations in the first place), both of which are stupid from the pov of emulation.

So both these things create "shocks" to the game that actually harm the opportunity for good immersion, it would seem.

RPGPundit

The problem with hit locations, in my opinion, is that the idea of attacking a specific area on an enemy is only half of the real issue.

In real fighting, people usually attack the best target that they can identify, according to not just their tastes, but their abilities.

For example, a fencer might try to stab his opponent in the hand. It would be a calculated decision because touching the hand wins just as much as the body, but touching the body might seem more dangerous. He didn't attack the hand just to do it... he did it because it was the right move.

In an RPG, there is no relationship between what your opponent did on his last turn and what you do on yours, mechanically anyway. If a guy kicks you and wiffs, there isn't any reason to say you are going to hit him in the face while his hands are down, or kick him in his support leg, because you don't get a bonus to do it.

Worse still, is the idea game designers have that the limbs can take less damage than the body or head. For some reason, game designers imagine that they can take a better hit to the ribs than the arms, which can't to anything but break, despite the fact that the arms either can be pushed away by the attack (distal) or are made of larger, heavier material than some of the ribs (proximal the elbow).

This idea makes attacking limbs always a better idea in terms of its affects on crippling the enemy instead of going through all of his hit points, which isn't just unrealistic, in my opinion, but facilitates the problem of successful called shots being game breaking.

When you make a regular attack against hit points, you are saying that you are taking the best, generally safest, and most correct attack to break your opponents will, beat him down, and end the fight (at least in systems where characters have hit points enough to survive several deadly blows). In these systems, hit points are abstract because being shot by a gun or hit by an arrow doesn't actually mean blood was drawn... it is just a near miss.

When you make a called shot in one of those systems, you are basically asking permission to bypass the normal system of abstract damage and simply win the fight immediately.

In such a case, the only way to make it fair is to make the called shot so difficult, it only succeeds, on average, often enough to make it just as viable as basic attacks.

The reason why people don't fly into combat head first and try to kill their opponents immediately in a real fight is because not only is it hard, but if you fail it is possible that you will be countered heavily. For example, a boxer that dives at his opponent and fails could get knocked out.

Since the real reason for making a called shot is to end the fight quicker, by ignoring the normal hit point system, I think I have a solution for D&D style systems.

Called Shots aka Vicious Attack
The attacks attempts to kill his enemy right away instead of conforming to the natural flow of combat. The attacker gets to make a normal attack roll with a -X (something fair) penalty. If he hits, he deals double damage. If his opponent survives this attack, either because he endures the damage or the attack misses, he gets to make an attack of opportunity that deals triple damage on a successful hit.

In this kind of system, you would only want to make a Called Shot if you were sure you could hit, or if you suspected your opponent couldn't take an attack of opportunity.

You could even have Feat Trees that catered to it like:

Counter Fighter
If an opponents attack misses by 10 or more, you get an AoO against them.

Counter Striker
If you make a Called Shot on an AoO, your opponent doesn't get to counter attack because he survived.

On a side note, I believe that rogues in Dungeons and Dragons deal so called sneak attack damage, and have low hit points, to reflect the idea that they are always trying to end the fight quickly without as much concern for their safety.

I think that low hit points, high damage reflects a different natural attitude than that of the fighter. Such a person is always in your face, trying to kill you. A fighter, with his lower damage and higher hit points, is trying to pace himself through a combat, taking the best and safest means of attack, without letting emotions or haste guide him.

So in that way, my called shot system is already in dungeons and dragons. It is just that you have to be a very cut throat person to utilize it. Such a cut throat person has no choice but to always be utilizing it.

I liked the German RPG called Endland. It's mostly post-apocalyptic.

How does it work? Every attack is a "called shot". There is a specific difficulty to hit every body part and specific effects for getting hit there.

There are not hit points either. A light wound on the leg has a certain effect. That's it. Then, some effects will keep you from fighting.


So, hit location is not a problem. Adding hit location to hit points is.

Quote from: 1of3;337493There are not hit points either. A light wound on the leg has a certain effect. That's it. Then, some effects will keep you from fighting.

This can work well if one's opponents are generally humans. In fantasy or science-fiction games with a large number of monsters/aliens with different body sizes and shapes (not to mention skin types, bone types and structures, etc.), you end up having to design each monster/alien's entire physiology to be about to create hit charts for them as "accurate" as the ones for the humans.

Statistically, its very hard for it to make sense in GAME TERMS to allow both overall hit points AND "called shots". Because if you use the latter, and you make it statistically more likely that someone trying to do a bunch of called shots will hit ONCE and take out his opponent before the other guy can take him down doing regular attacks, it will simply mean that players will ALWAYS make called shots.
On the other hand, if it is statistically more likely that the guy just attacking hit points will wipe you out before your "called shot" takes him out, then players will NEVER make called shots.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;337560Statistically, its very hard for it to make sense in GAME TERMS to allow both overall hit points AND "called shots".

In GURPS you are capped to the amount of damage you can do an extermity Health/3 for hands and feet, Health/2 for Arms and Legs. For the head,and the various torso areas (vitals, groin, etc) damage is unlimited but you take a steep penalty for trying to hit there. It does work out as representation of high skill in a weapon. Plus not all weapons types (piercing, slashing, blunt) have the same effect in the most devasating locations.

Harnmaster in contrast you don't get to hit for a specific location but rather for a general area. High, Low, and Normal. The actual location is a result of a random roll. Damage effects in two ways. The first is a general injury level that degrades your attributes and skills by causing minuses to the roll. The second and more serious are the saving throws you have to make anytime you are hit and get a new injury. These are also modified by the general injury level. These saving throws are specific to the hit locations. The harder the hit the worse the possible result.

Harnmaster is more elegent of the two but by inches in my opinion. Both system feel "realistic" in that you make decision based on realistic considerations not because it represents the best game choice. SJ Games and their playtesters go to great length to ensure this.

Quote from: RPGPundit;337560Statistically, its very hard for it to make sense in GAME TERMS to allow both overall hit points AND "called shots".

Not really.

Flashing Blades uses overall hit points plus every wound lands somewhere. An average character has ten hit points. If wounded in the arm or the leg for six or more points of damage, the arm or leg is impaired. If wounded in the chest or flank for 6+, the character may become unconscious. If the character is wounded in the head for 6+, the character is dead.

Works fine in my experience.

Quote from: RPGPunditBecause if you use the latter, and you make it statistically more likely that someone trying to do a bunch of called shots will hit ONCE and take out his opponent before the other guy can take him down doing regular attacks, it will simply mean that players will ALWAYS make called shots. On the other hand, if it is statistically more likely that the guy just attacking hit points will wipe you out before your "called shot" takes him out, then players will NEVER make called shots.

I think there are too many variables in a given system and too many variables that arise in the course of play to make such a sweeping judgement.

In my expericence of actual combat, martial arts, fencing, paintball, and that dodad with the movie you shoot a light gun at. All shots ARE called shots.

Basically I shoot at a target. If the target moves or I an not a very good shot I might miss. In a fight I try to hit a specific spot I don't randomly take a punt. Now most injuries in fights are defensive where you stick an arm, or a leg in the way of my hook kick or whatever.

The best way this runs is in Amber or the online Gorean combat games. Hard to do this with a more structured rule set.

[cut out previous post]


Apologies! What you are talking about is not Hit Location but Called Shots or Aiming. My previous post was thus a non-sequitur. I am sorry to have wasted your time.

-clash

As with most elements in gaming, hit locations are a matter of preference. In my games, they work just fine. Mostly through a front loading of information and an understanding that people will try to hit vital areas, vital areas are vital for a reason, and that there is a level of abstraction in any sort of RPG combat system. Pooled non-location HP systems can be just as "fucked up" with the most obvious power creep. At some point, you can say "Hey, my character can march into this certain combat against X opponents that do Y damage and never fear dying". This is not really "fucked up" but more a preference. You will over look it or house rule it or use a system that does not have or minimizes this issue or be happy with it. The same for hit locations.

My preference is now entirely for hit locations as they help with immersion for me. Some folks, it takes them right out but for me, it is a way to visualize where that 2 hp of damage went. It is the means I use as a GM to say "Dude! You just took twice you HP to your right arm, it is out of commission."

That said, hit locations are not for everyone. Some folks do not want the added book keeping or feel it does not model combat correctly or just do not like way it is handled. That is cool.

The games I've seen where hit locations more or less worked were Aces & Eights, and WFRP.

In the latter, you cannot make called shots, and hit location only starts to matter after the person is at zero wounds.
In the former, you are basically ALWAYS taking called shots, and statistically your best shot of hitting is always going to be to the torso.

RPGPundit