I finally pinned down what I think is the key to how Deadlands' combat system is awesome (aside from the absurdly cool card-based action system):  A hit location system.

The cool thing about it is that it allows you to get extremely precise information out of the combat system with a minimum of fuss.

Why don't more games use these anymore?  The more I look at other games that don't have this as a lynch pin of their combat system, the more I grow dissatisfied with 'em.  About the only way I find it acceptable is if the entire combat system is of sufficiently large grain that it doesn't really matter (such as the very loosey-goosey systems like BESM).

It seems to me like other games (particularly Storyteller and its ilk) create all sorts of confabulations and system contortions to get around having a hit location system when its introduction would help consolidate the otherwise crunchy mechanics quite nicely.

In D&D hit points are an abstract.  The difference between a mace swung at a 4hp Magic User for 6 points of damage and a 40hp Magic User for the same damage is not that the second Mage has a thicker skull.  The second Mage dodges out of the way at the last moment -- using up some of their stamina and luck in the process.  The mace doesn't hit.

So having a hit location table for a system with abstract hit points and "damage" doesn't make all that much sense.  To me, anyway.

Hit location has some disadvantages, too. Most implementations require another role, it doesn't play nicely with system where you have lots of hit points and it often gets weird with strange creatures and odd positions.

(I'd like to add that "Strange Creatures and Odd Positions" would be a great name for a band. Change "and" to "in" and it would be even better)

Quote from: StuartIn D&D hit points are an abstract.  The difference between a mace swung at a 4hp Magic User for 6 points of damage and a 40hp Magic User for the same damage is not that the second Mage has a thicker skull.  The second Mage dodges out of the way at the last moment -- using up some of their stamina and luck in the process.  The mace doesn't hit.

So having a hit location table for a system with abstract hit points and "damage" doesn't make all that much sense.  To me, anyway.

I didn't bring D&D into this.  I wasn't even thinking of it, honestly.

D20 honestly has a different tactical PoV than the games I'm thinking of.  Something not really replicated elsewhere anymore.  It's an ablative system where characters who have any HP at all are fully up and functional and those who aren't are going down.  Everything's very tactical and movement-based, and resembles a kind of miniatures war game meshed with some sort of board game (ala Chess).

I'm speaking more of things like Unisystem, Storyteller, the system AEG uses for games like L5R, etc.  In other words, the non-D&D "mainstream" games that have come out since the mid-90's and have been more or less my bread'n'butter.

just got it the other day, but i'm happy to report that Warhammer Fantasy has a simple hit location system that looks like it'll be fun in-play.

i'm a fan of hit location and critical charts, myself...and i place the blame solely on the Arduin Grimoire for the latter.

I like hit location folded into crit charts.  A regular hit result of "you lose X number of abstract points" is just fine by me, but once in a while someone needs to lose an eye.

Hence, I use the Arduin crit charts in my 3.5 games.

Quote from: jrientsHence, I use the Arduin crit charts in my 3.5 games.

I'm intrigued, how exactly?

Quote from: SosthenesI'm intrigued, how exactly?

A natural 20 to-hit followed by a natural 20 to confirm the crit results in a % roll on the Arduin charts in addition to the normal crit rules.  I interpret any results that don't intersect the modern rules well.  I think the '2 twenties' rule is actually how Hargrave ran it for his games.  Similarly, a natural '1' calls for a reroll to confirm fumble.  A second '1' sends you to Hargrave's fumble chart.

Quote from: jrientsI like hit location folded into crit charts.

Ahhh, the jones to run Rolemaster.

MERP achieves almost the same level of crit awesome as RM.  And chargen doesn't make my brain ooze out of my ears.

Lesseee here...I got a +48 OB with my longsword, and the orcs's got a 10 DB and armor class 9...I hit for 8 BS, and -- slash foe's upper leg, +2 hits, and -25% to all rolls!

I just made that up but DAMN it felt good.

"...long time passing.."

RPGPundit

Quote from: RedFoxI finally pinned down what I think is the key to how Deadlands' combat system is awesome (aside from the absurdly cool card-based action system):  A hit location system.

The cool thing about it is that it allows you to get extremely precise information out of the combat system with a minimum of fuss.

Why don't more games use these anymore?  The more I look at other games that don't have this as a lynch pin of their combat system, the more I grow dissatisfied with 'em.  About the only way I find it acceptable is if the entire combat system is of sufficiently large grain that it doesn't really matter (such as the very loosey-goosey systems like BESM).

It seems to me like other games (particularly Storyteller and its ilk) create all sorts of confabulations and system contortions to get around having a hit location system when its introduction would help consolidate the otherwise crunchy mechanics quite nicely.

And some of us are considered to have dated systems because we use hit locations.

My Iridium System and Iridium Lite both use hit locations. Ten locations with varying Fortitude depending on location (head and chest with the least and extremities with the most). You roll to hit, then a targeting skill to direct the hit. Opponents can parry. It the attack makes it through you deal damage. If you miss targeting then you roll a d10 for a random location.

Cool points I have been told
1. mix and match armor to locations allowing for that steel helm on the head, leather on the arms look.
2. more tactical play involving the use of shields, parrying and weapons.
3. ability to tell where the damage went. I have a broken arm so now those pick pocket rolls will be more difficult.

Not cool points I have been told
1. More book keeping than one roll systems.
2. More math than one roll systems
3. Generally more complex than one roll systems

You can download the Iridium System Core Reference for free from RPGNow or Our site.
ISCR from HinterWelt
ISCR from RPGNow
Character Sheet

I must admit, it seems like something that is usually added as an after thought. I have always liked knowing where the hit went.

Bill

Quote from: Dr Rotwang!Ahhh, the jones to run Rolemaster.

I used to use that in AD&d 2e.

Eventually, it got too tedious.

It was cool for its day. But for 3e, I opted for someting a bit simpler (but still, less abstract.)

We've had this discussion before. My thinking on why they were largely abandoned as more trouble than they were worth:

1. All the freaky-ass monsters that you encounter in RPGs. It just doesn't make sense to use a human hit location chart for hydras, beholders, centaurs, dragons, etc. So do you have a million different charts or do you only use the chart for hits on humanoid opponents, which tends to fuck-over the (usually humanoid) PCs a lot more than their (often non-humanoid) enemies?

2. Critical hits usually act to increase lethality. Who suffers from this more in the long run, the PCs (who are in every fight) or their enemies (most of which only feature in one fight)?

3. They add more rolls to combat.

4. Most importantly, they're redundant. Roll a crit and do a shitload of damage, I'll call it a sweet head shot. Deal a single point? That's more of a shoulder knick. Damage and degree of attack roll success neatly encompass hit locations, expecially if the two are linked.