I agree with MKV.

The idea is nice, in most recent RPG however, the life point/hit point system work with a reduce stat/proficiencies system.

That is the most your HP are going down, the worst you are.

Using your suggested system alone give some problems, for example, how to do located damage ?
How to make a character moving slow because he/she was hit at the knee ?

Those are situations that are nice, I mean when you face such a problem and get ride of it, you''ll remember it as a fun/interesting part of your character''s life.

-* So many things to do, so little time to spend. *-

But you must count, when you HP is critical, you have extra force (desesperate??). For example, a mouse trapped and injuried is more dangerous that a free mouse.



-eng3d.softhome.net-

I believe that little bit extra is known to all as adrenaline. Very fun to add into games I think

As for MKV - I do totally agree with your nasty Abstraction Monster from time to time. This be one of them . It then comes to the fore that if you want location based damage that you end up with some problems. Not so I think. What you need to do is have an armour/protection rating for each location, a weight assocciated with that and the strength that the particular location has. This means that if you get hit then your armour goes down in your leg, the weight is the same. You can reduce the strength with significant blows that end up slowing the character down.

This isn''t the be all and end all of this discussion, but I would like to think about what kinds of combinations you could have for each area. I am thinking that HP was not really a health issue but rather an armour issue. How much armour your body exerts to force

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
-Chris Bennett of Dwarfsoft
"The Philosophers' Stone of Programming Alchemy"
IOL (The list formerly known as NPCAI) - A GDNet production
Our Doc - The future of RPGs
Thanks to all the goblins over in our little Game Design Corner niche

I wouldn''t consider HP armour at all, I''d consider them "the increments of damage that you can take". This also gives way to actually having HP in the game anyway, though they are more tied up with the mechanism.

Here''s an example (very simple): You have a creature with 10 strength and 10 intelligence. You give it 100hp. That would mean it requires 100 hits of 1hp to reduce it to zero, which you''ve defined as dead. However, you won''t work directly with hp, but on the stats - so each hit of 1hp reduces a stat by 1/10 ( in the case of NOT having localised damage ).

That means, after 100 hits of 1hp, you''ll be at 0 strength and 0 intelligence, i.e. the equivalent of a stone ( you''ll be stone-dead in a moment! )


Okay, fine and dandy, but now you want to have localised damage!
So you say this creature has a head and a leg. ( it''s a very poorly designed creature, perhaps John Romero had something to do with it. )
You design it so that the intelligence is in the head ( GASP! ) and the strength is in the leg. The leg also happens to be 80% of the body size. ( What the hey, lets call this creature a SNAKE! ).

Now you have: 100 hp, 20 in the head, 80 in the leg. 10 strength in the leg, 10 intelligence in the head. A strike of 1hp to the leg does 1/8point of strength damage, and a strike of 1hp to the head does 1/2point of intelligence damage. Strikes to the head will kill it quicker than strikes to the leg, PLUS have effects that are very interesting. To balance, it should also be either less likely to hit the head, or more difficult.
( or both ).

How does that sound?



People might not remember what you said, or what you did, but they will always remember how you made them feel.
~ (V)^|) |<é!t|-| ~

Sounds superb there MKV (for Vampyre )... It should definitely be harder to hit the head and more difficult. Because that is where the intelligence is, you could claim that it saw your attack coming and dodged out of the way. Also, because it is, say, 30% of the surface area or volume of the leg then you can just randomise the attack which then would be less likely to land on the head.

The order of the attack is:

1. Choose the location of the attack
   
2. Deal with the victims movement/dodge etc
   
3. Figure the damage to the stats

Different attacks are more likely to hit different things, ie - a lunge is more likely to land on the body and a sweeping attack is more likely to hit on the legs. This way you can have some fun with John Romero''s (LOL! ) snake by beating it senseless.

Just had another thought (I know, I better be careful ) It would be funny if you could have different effects for different kinds of deaths. ie. If we consider that we have a chicken (also created by John Romero ) then if we whack its head off then it would run around (because it still had strength of body). If we whacked the <Monty Python''s> Black Knights arms and legs off then it could sit there and hurl abuse at you

-Chris Bennett of Dwarfsoft - Site:"The Philosophers' Stone of Programming Alchemy" - IOL
The future of RPGs - Thanks to all the goblins over in our little Game Design Corner niche
          

quote: Original post by dwarfsoft

Sounds superb there MKV (for Vampyre )... It should definitely be harder to hit the head and more difficult. Because that is where the intelligence is, you could claim that it saw your attack coming and dodged out of the way. Also, because it is, say, 30% of the surface area or volume of the leg then you can just randomise the attack which then would be less likely to land on the head.

You can''t just base the hit chance on the surface area of the part in question, because it''s eg. much easier to move your hand or head out of the way than it is to move your entire body (=torso). So, torso should be much easier to hit than legs.

-Jussi

"Raise your head up in the sky"
- Ayreon

Which is what I said further down

-Chris Bennett of Dwarfsoft - Site:"The Philosophers' Stone of Programming Alchemy" - IOL
The future of RPGs - Thanks to all the goblins over in our little Game Design Corner niche
          

Very interesting

I''ll try to modify my home made rules to add some more interactivity in my system.
Sofar I only use steps (hit point>75% and <100% : -2 to all proficiencies...)

But your system sounds best.
(In fact it was one of the almost not designed part of my system, cause my players were old AD&D ones )

I could let you know what I did if you want.

-* So many things to do, so little time to spend. *-

This was touched on in Vagrant story but your point is well taken.
I had a few other brain storms that were of interest at least when i thought of them. they deal more with proficiencies than simple stats.
Of coarse we need a stat base so the simple math works but whatever.

Hp deffence armor and armor class.
/\\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\\\/\/
As i mentioned before,Hp should not really be a stat at all. AS you take damage, you become less effective in certain areas and thus you are dieing in effect. Lets work with MK''s theory.
by combining armor types, armor class skills and evade stats, there would be no need for hp or even a deffece stat persay. Im sort of sick of the equip and it works junk. no matter what hapens in most games, you still get stuff, equip it and it does its work automatically. this in my mind need tweeking as the user should be required to learn the strengths and weaknessess of a particuar armor type in much the same way that they would a weapon. in a simpleton meathod, we could use armor class as this stat. You buy, make or receive a peice of equipment and equip it. that peice has a base armor deffence attribute which reduces damage by a degree. It also has a chance pf breaking. by equiping that armor, you are a little stronger but its no over for you yet. your stats are still the same and you could still take mortal damage id targeted properly.
The next thing is armor class. this would be a little hard to impliment as it would require a lot of player interaction. You have to learn (through a lv system or a skill point base) to use that armor effectivly to reduce damage or it is no better than your bare body.

this would mean that as you level up, you hit points are determined by what your stats are at as well as what armor class (not so much armor) you have equiped. on top of that we could set it up so that your stats heal themselves at a constant rate.
Now, incorperating MK''s idea.
targeting certain body parts reduces certain stats. stats like strength and intelligence would be localized to certain parts but if they fall below a certain level, you lose that body part. If your intelligence is too low, you will be too stupid to move and the armor class will be null. essentially, you become less effective the moreyou are hit but if the enemy leaves you alone for a bit, you will be charged for battle again.

is there anything i missed?

Allow the flaming to begin
Conshape Electronic Arts

I think that you summed it up nicely (isn''t it strange that I am agreeing with you? ). The only thing that nearly knocked me out of my seat was when you were just about to not say ''skill based''. Use the simple XP method of skill based and it works rather well. You learn it as you wear it, but you then need to train at a designated area to gain a level.

More thoughts? I need to get a typing

-Chris Bennett of Dwarfsoft - Site:"The Philosophers' Stone of Programming Alchemy" - IOL
The future of RPGs - Thanks to all the goblins over in our little Game Design Corner niche