Quote from: Eric Diaz on August 24, 2022, 05:51:30 PM
I like SOME realism; I do not want most swords to weight 10 pounds.

While not every system has this as a defense, many systems have unified bulk and weight into one stat for encumbrance purposes, and they use weight as that metric.  So a small brick of steel wrapped in a small amount of cloth and similar might weigh 3 pounds and be listed as 3 pounds, but that same exact material in the shape of a katana might be listed as 10 pounds to represent how much harder it is to carry something that is extremely long instead of compact, even though it is literally just 3 pounds.

I get that this is a cope, but that way you can make sense of the table and not have everyone walking around with world of warcraft swords or whatever.  It also does legitimately seem to be the intention in some cases.

There are two combat systems that I've found to be easy, and more interesting. 

West End Games D6 Star Wars has a set of rules for 1vs1 dueling. It's called Dueling Blades.

http://griffonpubstudio.blogspot.com/p/schweigs-d6-resources.html?m=1

Essentially it is an opposed roll, with the margin of success determining one of four results.  A simple movement with no damage in the direction the winner wants.  Maybe towards a cliff or airlock, or towards a corner of the room.  Next is a stun, then a wound, and last is a GM determined critical hit. 

Oddly, it is a rare combat system that doesn't use initiative.  You both just roll your skill dice, and the higher roll minus the lower roll is all you need. 

The movement aspect makes it a lot of fun.  It is much more interesting than two guys just swinging until one goes down or gives up.

The other is Palladium Books opposed roll system of strike vs a parry or a dodge.  It works better than armor class.

Double post

I'll get on my soapbox.

For *modern* combat, Twilight:2013. Accent no substitutes. Quick resolution and it *feels* right because it includes things like shock and blood loss and not just a death spiral or magically-100% effective all the way down until you cross the 0 hit point threshold.

For fantasy combat, I'd go with GURPS.

don't like exalted 3e's combat system none

I'm a terminal fanboy of The Riddle of Steel, so for me the thing a combat system now needs to be interesting is some way for the player to juggle his commitment between manoeuvring, attacking and defending, so that in principle it's possible for a player who knows the system better to beat (with a little luck) a less-skilled opponent who has better raw scores or gear.

Dragon Warriors has a combat system that I really love. Melee attacks are made against a defense stat, which improves with character growth (kind of like the "parry" stat in savage worlds, though the math is done differently). Ranged attacks are made against a difficulty determined by circumstance (range, lighting, cover, target movment speed, etc.). Armor presents another difficulty level which a separate roll has to be made to bypass. It's a very elegant system, which I find represents the reality of combat quite well.

The real stroke of genius though is that if attacked by multiple opponents, a character has to split their defense score between them, which ends up being a simple way of accounting for the advantage given by numbers and flanking, without having to mess with facings or exact character position. That system also has a knock-on benefit, which is that since you need to know how many enemies are attacking each player, you almost have to let everyone move into position, and then roll attacks all together. That might sound weird, but I find it does a much better job of replicating the instantaneous nature of combat than a standard turn order does. 

My only real beef with the system is that shields give you an extra saving throw to make against an incoming attack, instead of being incorporated into the character's defense. That, I find, is a very inelegant solution.

Pretty simple.  I like fast combats with lethal criticals that don't take forever to find on some chart (looking at you, DCC).  So for us, it's essentially B/X or Castles & Crusades with the following critical table. 

On a natural 20 (or lower for some classes at certain levels) you do a critical strike.  Then roll another d20 (martial), d16 (semi-martial) or d14 (non-martial). 

1-15: x2 damage
16-17: x3 damage
18-19: x4 damage
20: x5 damage

Roll your hit location die & describe your critical.  For damage causing spells with a saving throw, the victim takes a crit if they roll a 1.  Super fast & easy and dangerous, as even low level foes can pack a punch. 

We also have a fumble table, based on rolling a natural 1.

Quote from: Svenhelgrim on August 25, 2022, 09:03:18 AM
I used to think I wanted realism, until I played a very complex system where one combatant attacked, the defender parried, then if the attacker hit, you rolled for hit location, then compared your weapon damahe to the armor on that location, then looked up a chart to see what the wound actually did to the injured party.  Oh wait...did you take i to account the amount of fatigue each combata t had?  Because it lowers your chance to hit and parry, basically making the fight take even longer.  Oh! And there's equipment damage to take into account as well. 

After an hour of all that I scrapped it and went back to D&D. I have been sticking with D&D like combat systems ever since.  It works for me so long as we can keep things moving.

Are we talking ,,Kryształy Czasu" (crystals of time) Rpg per chance?
Upon second look - sounds more like Song of swords

Quote from: TommyK on August 26, 2022, 02:56:42 AM

Quote from: Svenhelgrim on August 25, 2022, 09:03:18 AM
I used to think I wanted realism, until I played a very complex system where one combatant attacked, the defender parried, then if the attacker hit, you rolled for hit location, then compared your weapon damahe to the armor on that location, then looked up a chart to see what the wound actually did to the injured party.  Oh wait...did you take i to account the amount of fatigue each combata t had?  Because it lowers your chance to hit and parry, basically making the fight take even longer.  Oh! And there's equipment damage to take into account as well. 

After an hour of all that I scrapped it and went back to D&D. I have been sticking with D&D like combat systems ever since.  It works for me so long as we can keep things moving.

Are we talking ,,Kryształy Czasu" (crystals of time) Rpg per chance?
Upon second look - sounds more like Song of swords

Sounds more like Krystały Gówno (Crystals of Shit).

Quote from: Effete on August 26, 2022, 04:28:28 AM
Sounds more like Krystały Gówno (Crystals of Shit).

Eh, more like Crystals od Tedious and Unnecessary Mathematical Procedures that Cosplay as "Realism" While Not Really Being Coherent. Something like that for sure 

Quote from: TommyK on August 26, 2022, 07:43:08 AM

Quote from: Effete on August 26, 2022, 04:28:28 AM
Sounds more like Krystały Gówno (Crystals of Shit).

Eh, more like Crystals od Tedious and Unnecessary Mathematical Procedures that Cosplay as "Realism" While Not Really Being Coherent. Something like that for sure 

That's why "feel" is more important than how fiddly you make the mechanics when trying to convey "realism."

Twilight:2013 is crunchy but simple.  Roll d20 dice pool vs a target number based upon your applicable skill with modifiers (range, your movement, target movement, visibility, etc). More dice increase your margin of success, which increases damage dealt. Compare that damage to a hit point value to determine effects.  Apply those effects as penalties to skills, determine if you go into shock, determine if you are bleeding out, determine if "bicep go poof," or if "you'll blow out a lung, Jack."

All of the modifiers can either easily be applied on the dice roll or you can bake them in on your character sheet.

When you fire a gun at an NPC or slice them with a sword, and it's a slight wound to the off hand, the results are different than a critical torso wound.  As it should be - one is a minor inconvenience (-1 skill level penalty which may or may not reduce your dice pool), and the other is a lifeflight away from death (enters into shock, possibility of bleeding out, which gives you an additional wound level to all your hit locations at the end of every round until one location goes past critical and you die or someone stabilizes you before that happens). This feels right.  There is even the option to add a 5th wound level for the head and torso that is an insta-kill, reflecting a sniper or playing out the Highlander decapitation scene

The best part of the rules is you can dial the crunchiness up or down a bit with optional Stage I or Stage III rules rather then the desire Stage II rules.

Quote from: 3catcircus on August 26, 2022, 02:11:19 PM
The best part of the rules is you can dial the crunchiness up or down a bit with optional Stage I or Stage III rules rather then the desire Stage II rules.

And that is, in my estimation, a very useful mechanic – sometimes you want to do away with combat as quickly as possible, sometimes there is fun in dragging it out, depleting PCs resources, just to mount tension a bit more.

Anyways, a few thoughts on the original topic.

1. Who gets to roll dice – no matter the system I prefer players to do the rolling (myself being ,,forever GM"). It gives them an illusion of having fate of their characters in their hands, even if their odds would be greater should the GM roll. If they die they want it to be ,,their" doing (failed save for example) than someone's else (NPC striking them down, wiyhout any paary, save or dodge)

2. Active defense vs static defense – usually active is better, for the same reasons as stated above. This may drag combat a bit (you have to have a successful strike and unsuccessful defensive manouver), but again – the players (at least mine) want to have the ,,final" say in combat. On the other hand, when it comes to ranged combat everyone accept that when they are hit (an NPC rolls to hit) – they are hit, and that's that.

3. Hit locations and wounds – I prefer easier methods of dealing with hits and wounds. If someone declares they want to hit a particular body part (head, hand, whatever) then it's a to-hit-roll with penalties, albeit with some bonus if successful. As for wounds – an abstract representation of those has been forever and isn't going anywhere for a reason. I can see some ,,charm" in systems that do away with wounds, HP, or whatever you want to call it for another system, for example a roll on a to-wound-chart, where even one lucky roll can one shot a PC, but the same can be achieved with normal HP rules just by incorporating critical hits. The HP system gives players (and GM) a way of assessing how a certain combatant is doing in combat – should he continue, or should he rather flee, because he might not be able in a round or two. It gives that information and it's valuable; completely abstract wound charts with no HP don't.

4. Maneuvers – some system have basically one (I swing my sword / shoot an arrow) some have quite a lot. The thing is that players soon learn which actions will yield the best results and they spam them. A certain iteration of DnD tried to limit that but it came across as not-so-believeable; I haven't played it myself so cannot say anything else. So I usually stick with systems with simple actions, and if a player wants to do something out of the ordinary, along the lines of: ,,i parry his sword, then feint an attack, and than thrust my rapier into his chest, right in the heart" - I'd call for some rolls that seem reasonable for me and players and be done with it. The funny thing is that usually the probability of that ,,uber" move to be successful and it's consequences to be greater are more or less the same as going for ,,normal" actions. But for some reason it still makes everyone happy.

Quote from: TommyK on August 27, 2022, 08:59:59 AM

Quote from: 3catcircus on August 26, 2022, 02:11:19 PM
The best part of the rules is you can dial the crunchiness up or down a bit with optional Stage I or Stage III rules rather then the desire Stage II rules.

And that is, in my estimation, a very useful mechanic – sometimes you want to do away with combat as quickly as possible, sometimes there is fun in dragging it out, depleting PCs resources, just to mount tension a bit more.

Anyways, a few thoughts on the original topic.

1. Who gets to roll dice – no matter the system I prefer players to do the rolling (myself being ,,forever GM"). It gives them an illusion of having fate of their characters in their hands, even if their odds would be greater should the GM roll. If they die they want it to be ,,their" doing (failed save for example) than someone's else (NPC striking them down, wiyhout any paary, save or dodge)

2. Active defense vs static defense – usually active is better, for the same reasons as stated above. This may drag combat a bit (you have to have a successful strike and unsuccessful defensive manouver), but again – the players (at least mine) want to have the ,,final" say in combat. On the other hand, when it comes to ranged combat everyone accept that when they are hit (an NPC rolls to hit) – they are hit, and that's that.

3. Hit locations and wounds – I prefer easier methods of dealing with hits and wounds. If someone declares they want to hit a particular body part (head, hand, whatever) then it's a to-hit-roll with penalties, albeit with some bonus if successful. As for wounds – an abstract representation of those has been forever and isn't going anywhere for a reason. I can see some ,,charm" in systems that do away with wounds, HP, or whatever you want to call it for another system, for example a roll on a to-wound-chart, where even one lucky roll can one shot a PC, but the same can be achieved with normal HP rules just by incorporating critical hits. The HP system gives players (and GM) a way of assessing how a certain combatant is doing in combat – should he continue, or should he rather flee, because he might not be able in a round or two. It gives that information and it's valuable; completely abstract wound charts with no HP don't.

4. Maneuvers – some system have basically one (I swing my sword / shoot an arrow) some have quite a lot. The thing is that players soon learn which actions will yield the best results and they spam them. A certain iteration of DnD tried to limit that but it came across as not-so-believeable; I haven't played it myself so cannot say anything else. So I usually stick with systems with simple actions, and if a player wants to do something out of the ordinary, along the lines of: ,,i parry his sword, then feint an attack, and than thrust my rapier into his chest, right in the heart" - I'd call for some rolls that seem reasonable for me and players and be done with it. The funny thing is that usually the probability of that ,,uber" move to be successful and it's consequences to be greater are more or less the same as going for ,,normal" actions. But for some reason it still makes everyone happy.

Everyone should always roll their own dice - it's one of the very few "player agency" things that actually is agency and not just whining about not getting your way.

Active defence is always a good thing - whether a static opposed roll or penalties to the attack roll or a change in difficulty of success on the attack roll.

I disagree on hit points.  I'll get on my soap box about Twilight:2013 once more.  You have a base hit point for each location (head, torso, each arm and each leg). You have slight/moderate/severe/critical values that are a certain multiple for each location. When damage is done, you don't subtract hit points. You compare the damage to the thresholds (i.e. if you do 10 points of damage to the head, and your moderate threshold is 11, you only suffer a slight wound; 15 points causes a moderate wound, etc.) That level of wound causes various effects. Take another wound of the same level to the same location and it increases the wound level.

So what you get is less than 109% combat effectiveness from any wounds, but nothing beyond "I'm hurt" until the wound levels start to stack up. Even with severe wounds you can still be somewhat of a threat.  This is very realistic without being onerous to manage during game play.  Take a look at several videos that have made their way into Twitter (usually in defense of 2A and armed citizens) - head shots usually cause unconsciousness and immediate subdual, but a guy shot or stabbed elsewhere is still a threat for anywhere from 20 seconds to a minute before they bleed out and collapse - more than enough time to get off a shot or swing a sword for one last attack.

Quote from: 3catcircus on August 27, 2022, 09:28:13 AM
I disagree on hit points.

I don't think we are in disagreement, at least not yet 

As far as hit locations  / HP ,,pools" go we could differentiate:

1. One hit location (body) / one HP pool – the most popular version, DnD and most OSR games use it. If someone rolls high on damage it can be interpreted as striking head, if low – just grazing arm for example. Usually if a player wants to strike a precise hit location it's motivated by game circumstances – for example as in trying to cut off Saurons finger with The Ring on it. And that's when GM has to come up with some ad hoc ruling whether how that could happen, what should be rolled.

2. Many hit locations (body parts) / one HP pool – as in WFRP and FFG 40k RPGs. You have many hit locations, because that creates problem with armor; you don't have one set of armor, you have to have all pieces of armor to be equally protected everywhere. That makes for a problem in two areas – a player has to spend more money on protective gear and that gear might pose encumbrance problems. Sure the same could happen in one location / one pool instance, but I find that in many locations systems armor tends to be a bit more in-game expensive and cumbersome for a PC.

3. Many hit locations (body parts) / corresponding HP pools – and I think that's the system You prefer; I'd say it's seen also in Cyberpunk 2020 and some later editions of Elric or Stormbringer RPG, don't remember exactly.
There is certain elegance to this system, because usually a hit (with a weapon) to the head means almost certain death or at least unconsciousness, and it corresponds with what we more or less expect to happen in real life. I think that CP 2020 even had a rule that not only did head has it's own HP pool, but also all damage to the head was doubled. And I have no problem with that system because the reasoning behind it is sound. I tend to prefer ,,one pool" systems for 2 reasons: for the sake of simplicity and a bit higher chances of survival of PCs.

4. One hit location / many HP pools – and I'm not sure I know any RPG that would use this combination.

But the system I was alluding to in my previous post, that I don't, like is a tricky one:

5. One hit location (declared) / no HP pool – there aren't many RPG systems that utilize this one; I can think of one Polish – Dzikie Pola (Wild Lands) 2ed. TLDR version of this system is: you declare which location you want to hit, which might impose some penalties, and if you hit you roll on damage chart (modified by your strength, used weapon, used maneuver) which goes something like (more or less): 1-4, tis' but a scratch, 5-7 nothing to worry about, 8-10 light wound, 11-15 moderate wound, 15-19 serious wound, 20 death. One could argue that this system is just a hidden HP pool system (a couple of light wounds amount to one moderate, a couple moderate to serious and so on), but it's the same for everyone, at least for all PCs and ,,human" NPCs; and the possibility of death from one hit is higher. If you roll a nat 20 on damage chart, that's it, no matter other circumstances lowering that roll (i.e. armor). So 5% of all successful hits result in someone's death, no matter who's striking. The other thing is that it's quite difficult both for GM and players to assess what the damage output might be in particular fight; the outcome was too ,,swingy", from barely any damage to game over in one hit.

And now for something different:

Cont.
5. Debilitating effect of wounds – in some systems taking damage imposes penalties, in some you effectivly take damage with no repercussions, until you die, or at least fall unconscious. I prefer the second system – again for the sake of simplicity and moving combat quickly. The first one also creates ,,death spiral" - wounded combatants are worse at fighting so it's easier to finish them off. One instance when I would impose penalties for damage would be for some monsters that have large HP pools – combat will inevitably drag for some time, so these penalties will speed things up.