Arnesonian-style Hit Points for D&D-type games

[keolander]

Even though I have owned a copy of First Fantasy Campaign for well over a decade now, I either missed (or it failed to penetrate my thick skull) the little tidbit on page 3 "as the players first rolled for characteristics, the number of Hits a body could take ran from 0 - 100. As the player progressed, he did not receive additional Hit Points, but rather he became harder to Hit." That mechanic, I believe, makes a ginormous difference in the style of play between it and Gygaxian D&D (which relies upon a radically expanding power curve). As I've gotten older, I find a more shallow power curve fits my needs more than "starting off with a rusty stick and killing rats outside Freeport before being able to kill a god by the end EverQuest-style play".

In my own Castles & Crusades game, I decided on PCs (and named Bad Guys) get Constitution Score x Size Hit Points: 3 for small (like Halflings & Pixies), 4 for Man-sized and 5 for Large (Half-Giants, Half-Ogres, Centaurs, etc). Armor (other than helmets and shields) are Damage Reduction while Shields/Helms are Armor Class. Alternately, I cranked the weapon damages (like a Longsword now doing 1d6+6) With these combinations, an unarmored Man-sized PC can take about 3-5 average damage hits before dropping.

[kesher]

Are you also rolling with the "getting harder to hit" as levels increase? I suppose you could just do an inverse of the combat bonus, or whatever it is, levied against foes. That might work nicely...

[Deleted]

In Dave's Adventures in Fantasy, humans had around 10 hit points depending on stats and, more importantly, size. This was combined with a d6 weapon damage and a save-for-nothing armor system. I know he says that at one point characters had from 0-100 hit points but that range seems a bit excessive.

Personally, I keep escalating hit points but also have characters getting harder to hit as they level. I don't see those things as mutually exclusive. Another important consideration is whether or not 0 hit points means death.

[xerxez]

Agree with you- Been tinkering with my own set of rules for a new rpg just for me and my friends and I decided to go with no increase in h.p. unless constitution increases-which is rare. Went with armor absorbing damage and needing repaired.

[Malcadon]

If one is to use a save vs taking weapon damage, I recommend using the Breath Weapon array, with a successful save negating all damage instead of the standard half-damage one gets from a dragon's overly spicy belch. It is high enough at low-level to keep characters form from shrugging-off most hits, and by the OD&D rules, it is the one save that Fighting-Men have an advantage with. Basically, a low-level Fighting-Man has a 30% of avoiding a hit, with Dwarves and Hobbits at 40%, while everyone else gets 25%.

If one is using Dexterity-based AC adjustments, then the adjustment could apply to this save, instead of AC, which can now be focused entirely on armor protection (great, if you're also a Weapon Class/Armor Class purist).

[Deleted]

Dave's Adventures in Fantay uses an armor save. The save doesn't block 100% of the damage but only a portion of the damage based on the type of armor (1/3 for leather 1/2 for chain and 2/3s for plate). That table is as follows:

Leather: 55% chance to reduce damage by 1/3
Chainmail: 60% chance to reduce damage by 1/2
Plate: 90% chance to reduce damage by 2/3s

Since this is roll+math and I prefer either rolls or math, I converted the AiF numbers to a straight save percentage. For example, in AiF plate armor blocks 2/3s of the damage 90% of the time which works out to blocking all damage 60% of the time (keeping the same average per round).

Leather: 18.3%
Chainmail: 30%
Full Plate: 60%

In another thread about armor effectiveness, I calculated these percentages from OD&D's alternate combat system by looking at the hits deflected by a higher AC. Those numbers were:

Leather (AC7): 18%
Chainmail: 35%
Plate: 55%

These numbers are pretty close to one another. You could convert them to a d20 roll high value (ala Saving Throws) thusly:

Helmet only: 19
Leather: 17
Chainmail: 14
Plate: 9

Notice that there is significantly more room between these values than between the normal AC values which allows you to fix a wider array of armor types in the game if you so desire.

[Fearghus]

Aug 1, 2016 11:24:06 GMT -6 @hedgehobbit said:

Dave's Adventures in Fantay uses an armor save. The save doesn't block 100% of the damage but only a portion of the damage based on the type of armor (1/3 for leather 1/2 for chain and 2/3s for plate). That table is as follows:

Leather: 55% chance to reduce damage by 1/3
Chainmail: 60% chance to reduce damage by 1/2
Plate: 90% chance to reduce damage by 2/3s

Since this is roll+math and I prefer either rolls or math, I converted the AiF numbers to a straight save percentage. For example, in AiF plate armor blocks 2/3s of the damage 90% of the time which works out to blocking all damage 60% of the time (keeping the same average per round).

Leather: 18.3%
Chainmail: 30%
Full Plate: 60%

In another thread about armor effectiveness, I calculated these percentages from OD&D's alternate combat system by looking at the hits deflected by a higher AC. Those numbers were:

Leather (AC7): 18%
Chainmail: 35%
Plate: 55%

These numbers are pretty close to one another. You could convert them to a d20 roll high value (ala Saving Throws) thusly:

Helmet only: 19
Leather: 17
Chainmail: 14
Plate: 9

Notice that there is significantly more room between these values than between the normal AC values which allows you to fix a wider array of armor types in the game if you so desire.

How does the roll to hit work in this scenario where there is an armor save? 10+ on a d20 or something like that?

[Deleted]

Aug 9, 2016 7:08:24 GMT -6 Fearghus said:

How does the roll to hit work in this scenario where there is an armor save? 10+ on a d20 or something like that?

Basically, d20 + Attacker's # Hit Dice vs. 11 + Defender's # Hit Dice (modified for shield bonus, Dex bonus, etc)

So, a third level fighter hits a first level fighter on a 9 (d20+3>11+1), whereas a first level fighter hits a third level fighter on a 13 (d20+1>11+3). A sixth level magic user, for example, has 3+1 hit dice so fights as a third level fighter with +3. [Note that I ignore any bonus hit points for determining combat power as it appears Arneson did it this way. Plus it makes the math easier]

When I use this system, most normal monster (goblins, orcs, ogres, giant rats, etc) won't be wearing armor. I reserve monster armor saves for monsters that are particularly hard to damage such as giant bugs, dragons, and elite soldiers types wearing heavy armor.

The primary reason I use this system is that it makes armor less important as the characters level up.

[keolander]

Gave a little more noodle power to thinking about the Hit Points revamp for D&D. I suppose the best may be something along the lines of Constitution x Size:
- 3 for Small PCs like Halflings, Gnomes, Pixie-Fairies, etc
- 4 for Human-scale PCs like Dwarves, Men, Elves, Half-Orks, etc
- 5 for Large-scale PCs like Half-Ogres, Centaurs, etc

Of course, the damage done by weapons would probably need to be scaled up a bit for most weapons. Something more along the lines of what Steven Long did for the Lord of the Rings RPG. A Longsword would do, say, 2d6+2+STR Bonus (and Strength would need to be redone to start doing extra damage at 13 with +1 up to 18 with +6).

The thing is adding the Arneson To Hit Locations/Saving Throw seems like it would make for far too lethal of a game (1 good smack with a sword and "Off with his head!"). I suppose the "saving throw" aspect would be "save vs. limb chop", with Fighters improving the best. You still get hit, but you take the damage somewhere you're not going to get gutted like a fish (midsection of the armor, instead of an extremity). 

[Malcadon]

Without having to pull-out Runequest or Tunnels & Trolls rulebooks, I'll rather have a system in D&D where:
• to-hit roll is based on attack's fighting capacity* vs defender's fighting capacity to represent how people clash in a sword fight;
• damage dice rolled is equal to the attack's fighting capacity (to hit a bunch of human targets, or one big target);
• body armor as a reduction score to damage taken by normal weapons (with a minimum of 0 damage, when armored);
• and a Save vs (Physical) Attack** to take half damage, to represent a character's innate reflexes and luck.

But that is just me.

*as in, 1st level Fighting-Man is "1 man +1", 2nd level is "2 men", and so on.
**with shields and high DEX improving your odds; encumbrance and low DEX lowing it.