Hit points, locations, damage, etc.

[Atgxtg]

Originally Posted by the Bromgrev

Ever since I can remember, we've used an added column for firearms tables, called 'Penetration'. It's a fixed value so for example a 7.62mm FMJ might do 2d8 (5)*, with 5 being the number of armour points it ignores. That way guns can go through light armour without having a hideous damage roll, which would be unrealistic.

*That's a made-up dam. (pen.) stat, by the way, I don't have my tables to hand.

That's what Palladium did, sort of. They gave each weapon a PEN score and rated body armor that way.

If BRP is drawing from WoW, then I suspect armor will be rated in K (Kinetic) and B (Ballistic). Basically the same thing. Maybe there will be a default of 1/4 AP from one to the other? A ballistic vest will have some effect on a knife. So a 12 AP kevlar vest providing 3 AP vs Kinetic would seem about right.

[frogspawner]

FWIW, a Penetration rating for ballistic-type weapons seems sensible, IMO. I don't know anything about the subject, but the admin would be easy.

Hi-jacking the thread back to where it was a few pages ago...
Leaving aside the precise threshholds for minor/major/mortal wounds, I was just thinking that rolling location only when the blow was significant should keep most people happy. Like my own version where you roll a location, then look up the relevant effect. If the Major Wound table always gave a hit location, wouldn't that be good enough for those who want such detail?

[drohem]

Yeah, if you are using the Major Wound rules, then ignoring locations for minor wounds should be no issue. Minor Wounds would be descriptive only and for flavor and dramatic narration.

[Atgxtg]

I agree. Depending on where you drew the major/minor line, you could just do like they did in Strombirnger and put the hit locations in the major wound chart.

The only real drawback to this approach has to do with armor. Hit locations allow for mixed armor. No hit locations either mean using a generic armor value, or using an average armor value for most hits, and tracking location specific armor for major wounds. Or variable armor.

[Kloster]

Originally Posted by Atgxtg

I agree. Depending on where you drew the major/minor line, you could just do like they did in Strombirnger and put the hit locations in the major wound chart.

The only real drawback to this approach has to do with armor. Hit locations allow for mixed armor. No hit locations either mean using a generic armor value, or using an average armor value for most hits, and tracking location specific armor for major wounds. Or variable armor.

For me, it's not the only real one, but this is truly a big problem.
Hit location permits a different protection value on the different locations (as a flak jacket that don't protect arms).

Another one is that it forbids certain tactics (aiming to strike a certain location to disarm, or to hit more vital area).

The biggest problems I have with the major wound table (I'm speaking of the one of SB1, because this is the only one I have used) is that it is completely random. It may be desirable in SB, where the chaos is the driving force, but I don't think it can be desirable in other settings. Besides that, the wounds caused by a broadsword and a firearm are completely different, and require a different table (I don't see how you can cut the nose of your opponent with a colt peacemaker). If we have several table depending on the weapon, it becomes more complicated than managing the hit locations, and if we don't, the wounds can be aberrant.

And I'm not even speaking of the lethality of the combination of Major wound table / Variable armor. I don't care loosing a character because I'm beaten by a superior foe or because I'm doing mistakes, but I don't like to see the death or the unusability of a character just because of sheer bad luck on 2 consecutive dice rolls.

Runequestement votre,

Kloster

[Enpeze]

Originally Posted by Kloster

For me, it's not the only real one, but this is truly a big problem.
Hit location permits a different protection value on the different locations (as a flak jacket that don't protect arms).

Another one is that it forbids certain tactics (aiming to strike a certain location to disarm, or to hit more vital area).

You are right. It prevents certain tactics in order to be simpler.

Originally Posted by Kloster

The biggest problems I have with the major wound table (I'm speaking of the one of SB1, because this is the only one I have used) is that it is completely random. It may be desirable in SB, where the chaos is the driving force, but I don't think it can be desirable in other settings.

Why? Dont you think that combat is rather chaotic in real life too? Only in cinema and books its usual that the hero controls the situation and wins every time.

Originally Posted by Kloster

Besides that, the wounds caused by a broadsword and a firearm are completely different, and require a different table (I don't see how you can cut the nose of your opponent with a colt peacemaker). If we have several table depending on the weapon, it becomes more complicated than managing the hit locations, and if we don't, the wounds can be aberrant.

Only if you take the table literally. I understand the wound table as guide and not as law. The effects should be similar and if a certain wound rolled dont correspond with the weapon you have, just modify the effect. Eg. in your example the bullet goes in the enemies face and removes his nose.

Originally Posted by Kloster

And I'm not even speaking of the lethality of the combination of Major wound table / Variable armor. I don't care loosing a character because I'm beaten by a superior foe or because I'm doing mistakes, but I don't like to see the death or the unusability of a character just because of sheer bad luck on 2 consecutive dice rolls.

But its realistic to loose your life due to bad luck. If you are unsatisfied because your PC died, then you should overthink your risk management before you begin to combat. Run away, hide in the shadows or hire specialist who are able to win this combat.

[Kloster]

Originally Posted by Enpeze

But its realistic to loose your life due to bad luck. If you are unsatisfied because your PC died, then you should overthink your risk management before you begin to combat. Run away, hide in the shadows or hire specialist who are able to win this combat.

I know it is realistic, and I agree with your comments. This is tactics I employ even without the Major wound table. But RPG are GAMES and should be enjoyable. That does not mean I don't want PC to be immortal, but I think BRP is deadly enough, and the extra lethality brought in by the MWT and Variable armor unnecessary. It is in line with setting with SB, so should be used, but I would not use it for the other BRP incarnations.
RQ and CoC are deadly enough.

Runequestement votre,

Kloster

[Enpeze]

Originally Posted by Kloster

I know it is realistic, and I agree with your comments. This is tactics I employ even without the Major wound table. But RPG are GAMES and should be enjoyable.

Of course they should. And everybody has a different view what he enjoys. For me the joy comes fromt the immersion and plausiblity of the setting. BRP is the operating system which provides the link between this setting and us. In short if we cut the lethality and random madness and horror from combat, its not fun for us anymore, because it lowers the setting realism and plausibility. The result is that we dont have that much respect and fear for combat anymore and maybe we do silly fights in situations where in reality it would be plausible to look for a different solution.

Originally Posted by Kloster

That does not mean I don't want PC to be immortal, but I think BRP is deadly enough, and the extra lethality brought in by the MWT and Variable armor unnecessary. It is in line with setting with SB, so should be used, but I would not use it for the other BRP incarnations.
RQ and CoC are deadly enough.

Enough? Maybe in comparision with other rule systems you are right. But in absolute factors, I would not say. I would rather say BRP is reasonable deadly to portray the reality to some extent while staying flexible and simple. I would not want play and dont enjoy anymore a rule system which is not as deadly as BRP.

I can understand your position. You are more into the classical literatic "hero" and cinematic thing than me I assume.

[Atgxtg]

Originally Posted by Kloster

I know it is realistic, and I agree with your comments. This is tactics I employ even without the Major wound table. But RPG are GAMES and should be enjoyable. That does not mean I don't want PC to be immortal, but I think BRP is deadly enough, and the extra lethality brought in by the MWT and Variable armor unnecessary. It is in line with setting with SB, so should be used, but I would not use it for the other BRP incarnations.
RQ and CoC are deadly enough.

Runequestement votre,

Kloster

BRP really isn't that deadly. The ability to kill with one hit is fairly low, and in most cases restricted to impaling weapons that critical. BRP is more lethal than, say, D&D, but there are deadlier games.

One thing about hit locations and Major Wound charts is that they tend to make the game less deadly, as they increase the chances of a character being taken out of a fight while still alive.

BTW, While you can't cut someone's nose off with a peacemaker, you can certianly shoot it off.

[Kloster]

Originally Posted by Enpeze

...
For me the joy comes fromt the immersion and plausiblity of the setting. BRP is the operating system which provides the link between this setting and us. In short if we cut the lethality and random madness and horror from combat, its not fun for us anymore, because it lowers the setting realism and plausibility. The result is that we dont have that much respect and fear for combat anymore and maybe we do silly fights in situations where in reality it would be plausible to look for a different solution.
...

Agreed.

Originally Posted by Enpeze

...
Enough? Maybe in comparision with other rule systems you are right. But in absolute factors, I would not say. I would rather say BRP is reasonable deadly to portray the reality to some extent while staying flexible and simple. I would not want play and dont enjoy anymore a rule system which is not as deadly as BRP.
...

Also agreed.

QUOTE=Enpeze;4590]
...
You are more into the classical literatic "hero" and cinematic thing than me I assume.[/quote]

It seems so.

Runequestement votre,

Kloster