Random crazy ideas... hacking damage & hit points

[Jimb]

There is another way this stuff comes into play in mmos that I've never seen apply in a normal rpg which is agro management. I really know how most DMs/GMs handle the decision of who monsters attack (as I don't DM/GM) but in mmos there is this hidden agro number and the person with the highest agro is the one being attacked. So a good part of big battles is making sure the tank (guy with best armor/DR/etc and most hitpoints) is the one taking all the damage and using various affects end up allowing you to also control that agro score. A tank may taunt and do no damage but it will up his agro. Direct damage will generally total more agro than a damage over time, same goes for healing. Buffs and Debuffs depending on the skill/spell will have positive or negative effects on agro. I guess this agro stuff probably doesn't really apply to normal rpgs though.

There are explicit rules for this in D&D 4E. Certain classes have the ability to "mark" their enemies. A marked enemy takes penalties (and often more severe effects) if they don't attack the person who marked them. So if a fighter marks some kobolds, those kobolds are more likely to attack the fighter, so it's like the fighter has the highest agro.

[Questionor]

There is another way this stuff comes into play in mmos that I've never seen apply in a normal rpg which is agro management. I really know how most DMs/GMs handle the decision of who monsters attack (as I don't DM/GM) but in mmos there is this hidden agro number and the person with the highest agro is the one being attacked. So a good part of big battles is making sure the tank (guy with best armor/DR/etc and most hitpoints) is the one taking all the damage and using various affects end up allowing you to also control that agro score. A tank may taunt and do no damage but it will up his agro. Direct damage will generally total more agro than a damage over time, same goes for healing. Buffs and Debuffs depending on the skill/spell will have positive or negative effects on agro. I guess this agro stuff probably doesn't really apply to normal rpgs though.

There are explicit rules for this in D&D 4E. Certain classes have the ability to "mark" their enemies. A marked enemy takes penalties (and often more severe effects) if they don't attack the person who marked them. So if a fighter marks some kobolds, those kobolds are more likely to attack the fighter, so it's like the fighter has the highest agro.

Which sounds like a taunt but if no one uses specific marking abilities how does it work? Generally when i've played d&d it "feels" like (I don't actually know what the dm is doing) that dms will have a group of an enemy sort of try to spread out attack as many people in the party as possible or simply attack which ever person is closest or whoever attacked it last. More rarely some will have an enemy change target if one player does a really massive amount of damage. And some will end up "playing" a war game where they try to strategically play the enemies simply as he would choose best which would generally amount to them all ganging up on the key weaklings in the group (redmage, healer, etc)

Also you said "more likely" to attack. What is controlling the more likely? Does the enemy simply roll a die to choose target and the fighter who marked have a higher probability?

[Deliverator]

Our 4E game used a +1 token if you missed by 1 (which is the most frustrating of all misses!)...you could then spend this token later in the game for anything you might need +1 for...or you can save them up to rock multiple pluses on a future roll.

Best part? The DM took advantage of the rule as well! Nothing is more hilarious than me laughing at the DM for missing by 1 and then him going "oh looky here! +1 for cheating!" and turning a miss into a hit. Ouch!

Ahem! And whose idea was that?

[cawshis]

Ahem! And whose idea was that?

Mine, of course! +1 for cheating has been Cawshisco original since 1991! I take credit for all +1 and their +1 derivatives.

[jenskot]

This is great!!

With all these options/hacks, I feel that it comes down to what you type of game you are gunning for.

For a grinding/dungeon crawl game, I would use a simple hack or no hack at all. For the most part, these types of games will have players performing at top level and they should be able to succeed half of the time.

I'm a big fan of the momentum mechanic and have used it for a couple of game hacks that have combat scenes that I want to have shifts in momentum between the opposing forces. If I wanted the battle to skew torwards the PCs, I would use what you listed (giving a token for a player failing). If I wanted a even battle, I would have a attacker give his opposition momentum if the attacker failed/rolled under a certain number.

Or perhaps as a player loses hit points, they gain tokens to stage a comeback...

Giving conditions instead of damage sounds interesting! I actually want to try that now instead of using hit points. It really gives a player a feeling of control.

Yes!!!

Something that I've been toying with (that is not HP related, but combat related) is when both sides succeed. I've been using this specifically for a wrestling game to create a instance where both wrestlers are successsful when attacking and both reverse eachothers moves to create a stalemate.

Yes! I love it when ties in opposed rolls mean something. It shouldn't just be... roll again or ignore... it's an opportunity for an epic moment like rolling a natural 20 or a 1!

Unrelated, I really like how in Apocalypse World, the GM doesn't roll. The player's roll determines everything. And the game is weighted so that a mixed success is the most common result where the player gets what they want but at a cost. It also feels different than other games. You never feel bad when the GM describes something awful happening because almost always it is a result of something you rolled. It's hard to describe but it feels VERY different than when a GM rolls behind a screen, you have no idea what's going on, and then they describe bad stuff happening to you and you are not sure how or why it happened.

[jenskot]

Sometimes games feels like... I roll to reduce your numbers, you roll to reduce mine. Who can reduce numbers the fastest!

And the results seem very fixed. I get the bad guys to 0, I win (winning usually means killing your enemy which is weird that is the default). And in many games, the GM, the system, or the module weighs everything in the player's favor. You can lose but often you don't because the stakes are too high! Losing means a Total Party Kill! Which is also a weird assumption for failure. I'm surprised how little I've seen dropping to 0 hit points meaning you are captured. And often how many numbers (hit points) you lose before making someone else's numbers (hit points) drop to 0 doesn't immediately matter. It matters in terms of how long it takes you to recover and how healthy you are for the next fight but it doesn't affect the outcome of the fight you just played.

I've been playing a lot of Mouse Guard and even though I'm still trying to reduce your numbers, it doesn't feel that way. First, Life and Death aren't assumed to be the default stakes. When you drop someone to 0, it doesn't mean they die. It means you get something. And even if you win, how much your numbers are reduced by matters. If you lose a little, you owe the other side a minor compromise, half a normal compromise, more than half... a major compromise!

Every fight ends differently. And you don't mind losing because you don't always die if you lose, and you can still win something with compromises. These simple features completely change RPG combat for me. I don't feel like the end is a forgone conclusion. And the emerging story drastically changes based on the decisions we make. It's super fun.

[jenskot]

More than just hacking damage & hit points, John Wick wants more...

Santa Vaca - Ditching d20


Santa Vaca - Fixing Your Alignment


Santa Vaca - Answering Questions


Santa Vaca - Feats Don't Fail Me Now!

[chrisg]

Our 4E game used a +1 token if you missed by 1 (which is the most frustrating of all misses!)...you could then spend this token later in the game for anything you might need +1 for...or you can save them up to rock multiple pluses on a future roll.

Best part? The DM took advantage of the rule as well! Nothing is more hilarious than me laughing at the DM for missing by 1 and then him going "oh looky here! +1 for cheating!" and turning a miss into a hit. Ouch!

The student has surpassed the master... ::sniff::

Also, check out the Injury rules in the d20 SRD. The executive summary: when you hit, your enemy has to make a Fort save vs DC 15 + (your damage/5). Failure < 9 == a cumulative +1 on your next Fort save. Failure >= 10 == disabled.

You could easily substitute various (and more interesting) conditions for disabled, and you could also make them situational. Get slammed by a big monster and make the condition: prone. Get stabbed in the leg: slowed. Zapped by lightning: stunned. Etc. You could also make a hierarchy of conditions. Very Eeeeeeeenteresting!

[Saif]

I wish I was good enough on my feet to do stuff like this!

But I'm still really clumsy around D&D and get confused a lot. I suck at running D&D.

Also, I haven't gamed in over a month.

[chrisg]

I just listened to John Wick's "Ditching d20" and "Answering Questions" videos. I have to say they probably achieve a lot of what you're talking about. They require conflict resolution, they basically work out of the box except for needing to modify DCs, and they support a low-power style of gaming, where characters are vulnerable to being hurt, etc.

Having said that, they're a huge departure from d20 out of the box, and they also probably require a lot of GM Fiat (unless I missed something). Consider the 6 hit point PC fighting a dragon. The dragon breathes fire on him, he fails his saving throw. The GM has to decide: do I deduct hit points and murder him, or do I impose failure conditions. What failure condition is comparable to being burned to a crisp? Is a broken weapon enough? Should I make the PC horribly burned and near death? Is he merely on fire? Blown off his feet and dazed?

You'd be much better off hacking a game like Mouse Guard to get better results. Speaking of which, wasn't someone working on a D&D hack for MG?