Posting mode: Reply
Password(Password used for file deletion)
  • Supported file types are: GIF, JPG, PNG
  • Maximum file size allowed is 3072 KB.
  • Images greater than 250x250 pixels will be thumbnailed.
  • Read the rules and FAQ before posting.
  • ????????? - ??

  • File : 1305839597.jpg-(14 KB, 330x241, m1911.jpg)
    14 KB Making a combat system. Anonymous 05/19/11(Thu)17:13 No.14982910  
    Heyah /tg/, I had an idea for a combat system, was wondering if you could provide some input.

    Damage (for organic targets and complex machinery) would be based on the severity of the actual individual injury, in 6 separate grades: superficial (scrapes, cuts, stitch worthy at worst), debilitating (damage to muscular tissues), potentially lethal (damage to non-vital organs such as the digestive system), lethal (damage to semi-vital organs such as the lungs), immediately lethal (damage to the heart or CNS), and instantly lethal (destruction of the heart or CNS). All characters would also have a structural health, but this wouldn't really matter much as it would represent the capabilities of the human superstructure, and you're going to be dead long before that completely craps out in most cases. There would also be rules for bleeding and pain, both based on similar grades, though I haven't though much about their mechanics.

    Multiple injuries of a specific type would increase the severity of bleeding and deal additional structural damage, but wouldn't have much effect beyond that (three rounds in the gut aint really that much worse as far as combat is concerned, functionally). Though you'd need to treat each injury individually, potentially making someone's day very miserable once medical attention is needed.
    >> Anonymous 05/19/11(Thu)17:14 No.14982924
         File1305839691.jpg-(22 KB, 360x266, glock22.jpg)
    22 KB
    Weapons would have 4 primary stats (aside from weight, ammo capacity, size, etc.): accuracy, penetration, lethality, and damage. Accuracy would serve as a cap to the potential modifier you could apply to an attack roll, since a weapon is only as good as its wielder and a wielder is only as good as its weapon. Penetration represents the raw penetrative capabilities of the weapon. Lethality represents how nasty an injury the weapon leaves, be it through deformation, fragmentation, yawing, or just leaving a really wide cut. Finally, damage represents how much raw physical damage a weapon can do the superstructure of a creature or object. I'll explain what those last three do in the next paragraph.

    When you attack a target, you'd compare the degree of success on the attack roll to basic table, to determine the maximum grade of injury possible. You'd then compare penetration minus any cover or armor modifiers to the target's size, with each interval of the target's size being another grade of injury higher (so a size six target compared to a 20 penetration weapon would potentially receive a Lethal injury, assuming you rolled a high enough attack). You'd add lethality to this value, which could potentially increase the grade of the injury past the maximum you rolled. Damage really wouldn't be worth bothering with unless you were trying to destroy an object for the most part and would just deplete structural health.
    >> Anonymous 05/19/11(Thu)17:15 No.14982931
         File1305839729.jpg-(79 KB, 640x472, HK_USP_9mm_Pragl.jpg)
    79 KB
    The primary goal of this system however, would be for the players to not have to worry about it all that often (since getting shot really, really sucks). To this end, some variety of fate/action point system would be included that would allow players to downgrade the particular injury or negate entirely. These would differ from most such systems in that they're plentiful and easily replenished.

    My ultimate aim with this is to have a system where getting shot sucks almost as much as it does in real life, but being the big damn hero is still quite possible.
    >> Anonymous 05/19/11(Thu)17:18 No.14982956
         File1305839898.jpg-(388 KB, 800x600, 3580478b42f1e5f02.jpg)
    388 KB
    To explain attacking a bit more plainly:

    1. Roll attack, compare with table to determine maximum injury possible.
    2. Compare penetration to target's size, cap off at maximum injury.
    3. Apply lethality to capped off penetration without being affected by cap.
    4. Apply injury to target.
    >> Anonymous 05/19/11(Thu)17:27 No.14983060
         File1305840457.jpg-(13 KB, 540x201, beretta-93r-3.jpg)
    13 KB
    sounds good

    how do you handle bursts, full-auto or aiming?
    >> Anonymous 05/19/11(Thu)17:31 No.14983098
    Semi-automatic fire, bursts, and full auto would all be handled as a single attack. The subsequent rounds would just have the weapon's recoil applied as an increasing penalty (so with a 3 round burst on a recoil 2 weapon, the second round would have a -2 penalty, and the third would have a -4) to determine their placement. Aiming would be used mostly to minimize penalties for things like range or the target being on the move.
    >> Anonymous 05/19/11(Thu)17:36 No.14983159
    but what about weapons with more than one firing mode?
    and what about supressing fire?

    your ideas sound like you want to make combat somewhat tactical
    so manouvers like hitting many targets in one burst, shooting out ir into cover and special rules for shotguns or grenade launchers would be necessary
    >> Anonymous 05/19/11(Thu)17:38 No.14983172
    oh and what about different ammunition types?
    wouldn't it make sense that damage is determined by ammo?
    >> Anonymous 05/19/11(Thu)17:38 No.14983184
    Those are all in mind, but right now I'm concerned about polishing up the damage system. The system hasn't really left the conceptual stage.

    Multiple fire modes could easily be handled by allowing you to choose how many rounds you fire in a round.

    Supressing fire could be handled by including some variety of fear mechanic.
    >> Anonymous 05/19/11(Thu)17:41 No.14983210
    Ammunition would have a set of base stats (accuracy, penetration, lethality, and damage as with weapons) and individual weapons would modify it from there. The default assumption would be lead core, copper jacket ammunition (at least with modern firearms), and specialty ammunition would alter those base stats (semi-jacket hollowpoint would for instance increase the weapon's lethalty and reduce its penetration, as is the standard method of handling HP rounds).
    >> Anonymous 05/19/11(Thu)17:45 No.14983260
    It's worth noting that while I intend this game largely for modern combat, that I plan to do it up as a semi-generic RPG. Not quite as varied as GURPS in its capabilities, but still capable of handling things such as fantasy or the supernatural. Just designed with the same basis of being injured really sucks in mind. My original goal for this was designing a zombie apocalypse system with zombies being an utter bitch to kill.
    >> Anonymous 05/19/11(Thu)17:47 No.14983284
    >>Fast replenishing pool of "fate" points
    >>When they run out, you start taking massive, suckful injury

    OP, I strongly recommend you check out Spycraft's damage system (HP and Vitality). It's very close to what you're looking for in raw terms, and might be easier to play with.
    >> Anonymous 05/19/11(Thu)17:49 No.14983313
    Taking massive, suckful injury when you run out suits me just fine. Complaining about it is like complaining that you die when you run out of hit points. The fate/whatever points are the standard character resource. Useful for keeping them alive, aiding their attacks, skills, etc.
    >> Anonymous 05/19/11(Thu)17:52 No.14983348
    maybe add some kind of bars for:
    pain/exhaustion and bleeding/trauma

    they're parallel
    one starts from the right the other from the left
    if they meet somewhere in the middle you fall unconscious
    >> Wasteland Warrior !EcRjYWX0sY 05/19/11(Thu)17:52 No.14983350

    Whenever I wanna run something modern, or modern esque, I use dark heresy with all the weapons replaced by real world firearms. Damage is based on the cartridge you use, rather then the gun, which determines range, rof and the like.

    Its way more lethal then dh though, a single shot of anything bigger then 5.56 has a good chance of killing a pc in one hit.
    >> Anonymous 05/19/11(Thu)17:54 No.14983366
    I use AFMBE.
    >> Anonymous 05/19/11(Thu)17:55 No.14983374
    I was thinking pain and bleeding would both follow similar tracks to the injury levels. Pain levels would determine the degree of penalty suffered, or if you can even remain an actual threat in combat. Bleeding levels would simply determine how long it takes for you to wind up at the next level and eventually unconsciousness/death.
    >> Anonymous 05/19/11(Thu)17:57 No.14983394
    do you have some kind of wound monitor in mind?

    how do those different injuries types work out?
    >> Anonymous 05/19/11(Thu)17:58 No.14983405
    Physical trauma would be represented by your character's structural health. As you take damage to your structural health, injuries can potentially increase in severity. So, for example, if you were kicking some poor sap to death, in most cases, you wouldn't do worse than a superficial injury, but as broken bones and pulped muscle added up, the injury would increase in severity and internal bleeding would begin to set in. This is an instance where structural health would be important for PCs, though with most forms of combat, it wouldn't be all that important.
    >> Anonymous 05/19/11(Thu)17:59 No.14983416
    Not so certain on that one. I haven't given too much thought on the actual mechanics behind it. I'm still at the conceptual stage. I mostly just wanted to see /tg/'s opinion of the concept itself.
    >> Anonymous 05/19/11(Thu)18:04 No.14983456
         File1305842642.jpg-(29 KB, 289x283, Stovolboy_sts451.jpg)
    29 KB
    I like your ideas so far BUT
    it could get very complicated

    I think combat mechanics should be fast
    combat can take forever if the system is too complex
    >> Anonymous 05/19/11(Thu)18:07 No.14983477
    Well, the other reason I started this idea was because I wanted to see a "realistic" system that's still fairly quick to play. So assuming I don't go full retard, I'll be doing my best to keep it somewhat simple while still allowing semi-realistic combat. When it comes down to crunch time, I'll probably be back on /tg/ to do playtests and get advice for areas of mechanics I don't know too much about (I'm pretty certain I could model a decent gun fight, but I don't know squat about swordfights, for instance).
    >> Anonymous 05/19/11(Thu)18:21 No.14983589
    there is one important element in melee combat that many rpgs don't or just partly feature


    if both opponents are equally skilled the rate of hits getting blocked should be fairly high

    dodging should also be possible, but in actual combat it is fairly rare (instead in martial arts/hand-to-hand)

    maybe they could be linked to your fate points

    an actual hit should be equally fatal as a gunshot

    blunt weapons crush bones and blades cut off entire limbs
    at a medieval exhibition I've seen a very old curator hit a hung up pig in half with a longsword in one blow
    >> Anonymous 05/19/11(Thu)18:27 No.14983642
         File1305844024.jpg-(89 KB, 600x370, 212.jpg)
    89 KB
    I was considering using the opponent's agility (or whatever comparable stat I include) as a penalty to the attacker's roll. In melee combat, I'd imagine that applying their skill with their particular weapon (plus any modifiers for the weapon) could cover their skill at blocking/parrying.

    As to melee weapons, I was thinking they'd have fairly low penetration and high lethality (bladed weapons anyway) and do enough structural damage for it to be significant. The injuries tend not to affect the vitals as readily (as a gunshot anyway), but do tend to do a lot of damage to a person's superstructure.
    >> Anonymous 05/19/11(Thu)18:37 No.14983723
    I'd actually use the opponents weapon skill

    das schwarze auge let's you decide if you want to pay more attention on attack or parade or keep them balanced

    if you skill swords to 4 you can distribute 4 points on attack and parade
    >> Anonymous 05/19/11(Thu)18:40 No.14983765
    Lyotard uses the term ‘the predialectic paradigm of discourse’ to denote the bridge between culture and society. It could be said that the subject is contextualised into a subcultural discourse that includes narrativity as a whole.

    In V, Pynchon reiterates realism; in Mason & Dixon he deconstructs subcultural discourse. However, the subject is interpolated into a capitalist appropriation that includes sexuality as a totality.
    >> Anonymous 05/19/11(Thu)18:42 No.14983774
    The characteristic theme of the works of Pynchon is the role of the poet as observer. But an abundance of discourses concerning semiotic subcapitalist theory may be discovered.

    Realism suggests that consciousness is fundamentally impossible, given that the premise of capitalist appropriation is invalid. In a sense, Reicher[1] states that we have to choose between realism and postdialectic conceptualist theory.
    >> Anonymous 05/19/11(Thu)18:42 No.14983779
    “Sexual identity is unattainable,” says Foucault. Many theories concerning the common ground between truth and class exist. However, Baudrillard uses the term ‘realism’ to denote the economy of cultural language.

    “Society is intrinsically meaningless,” says Lyotard; however, according to Geoffrey[2] , it is not so much society that is intrinsically meaningless, but rather the economy, and some would say the paradigm, of society. The predeconstructive paradigm of reality holds that discourse is created by the collective unconscious. Thus, the meaninglessness of capitalist appropriation intrinsic to Pynchon’s Vineland emerges again in V.

    If one examines the predeconstructive paradigm of reality, one is faced with a choice: either reject realism or conclude that consciousness is used to disempower the underprivileged, but only if truth is interchangeable with art; otherwise, Bataille’s model of capitalist appropriation is one of “structural nihilism”, and hence part of the rubicon of sexuality. The primary theme of Hubbard’s[3] model of cultural socialism is the role of the reader as observer. In a sense, Bataille uses the term ‘the predeconstructive paradigm of reality’ to denote a mythopoetical whole.
    >> Anonymous 05/19/11(Thu)18:43 No.14983786
    The characteristic theme of the works of Pynchon is the difference between sexual identity and culture. But if realism holds, we have to choose between predialectic cultural theory and submodernist nihilism.

    The premise of capitalist appropriation suggests that context is a product of the masses. It could be said that in Vineland, Pynchon analyses the predeconstructive paradigm of reality; in V, however, he denies realism.

    The subject is contextualised into a capitalist appropriation that includes narrativity as a paradox. In a sense, the primary theme of Cameron’s[4] analysis of realism is the role of the writer as participant.

    Lacan suggests the use of capitalist appropriation to analyse sexual identity. Therefore, the example of realism depicted in Pynchon’s The Crying of Lot 49 is also evident in Gravity’s Rainbow, although in a more self-sufficient sense.
    >> Anonymous 05/19/11(Thu)18:44 No.14983797
    That's what I meant. I should have wrote that out a bit more clearly, since my wording was chosen rather poorly.

    lol wat
    >> Anonymous 05/19/11(Thu)18:49 No.14983826
    Also, interesting idea. Perhaps just using the opponent's agility as a penalty and then allowing the opponent to decide how much of their weapon skill they want to apply as a penalty to the opponent's attack roll (at the cost of their own) could work.
    >> Anonymous 05/19/11(Thu)18:50 No.14983835
    >to the attacker's attack roll

    >> Anonymous 05/19/11(Thu)18:54 No.14983874
    By the way, does anyone have a suggestion for a name?
    >> Anonymous 05/19/11(Thu)18:57 No.14983899
    it might be a bit early for that since it's still just a bunch of ideas
    >> Anonymous 05/19/11(Thu)19:00 No.14983933
    I archived your thread btw
    >> Anonymous 05/19/11(Thu)19:00 No.14983935
    Ah you're probably right.
    >> Anonymous 05/19/11(Thu)19:01 No.14983942
    Oh thank you, I'm kind of flattered.
    >> Anonymous 05/19/11(Thu)19:09 No.14984021
         File1305846555.jpg-(25 KB, 500x389, terminator1.jpg)
    25 KB
    some suggestions before I go to bed

    if you make a list of weapons and accessoires/upgrades you could include some kind of category for availability according to periods

    for example today a laser pointer is common and small
    back in the 80s they were very rare, big and too power hungry to be used without a huge external battery pack
    >> Anonymous 05/19/11(Thu)19:14 No.14984068
    but that doesn't mean your list has to be a weapons alamanc

    keep it abstract
    like deviding it into fantasy, modern, cyberpunk, sci-fi and so on

    maybe you won't even need to make a huge list with hundreds of firearms (except you want to)

    templates for kinds of weapons would be perfectly sufficient
    >> Anonymous 05/19/11(Thu)19:18 No.14984113
    Might be sueful for helping brainstorm Op, the damage system I used in my Stalker game was based on a 'HP pool' shots that did <= 1/4 of health - just a scratch
    <=1/2 of health - minor wound
    <= 3/4 of health - serious wound
    <= health - potentially fatal wound
    > health - rare, usually a killshot or something similar

    each 'level' of wounding gave you CON + 1dX seconds/minutes/days until you died of the wound, without treatment. lower the wound on the chart, the more survivable it was. fatal wounds would usually kill you in under a few minutes.
    >> Anonymous 05/19/11(Thu)19:29 No.14984212
    I was thinking of going with the fairly standard "light pistol, medium pistol, heavy pistol, intermediate carbine, intermediate rifle, full power carbine, full power rifle" sort of set up and just having individual weapons as fluff/modifications to cost, availability, and ammunition capacity, and potentially reliability. Certain weapon features would receive some statistical adjustments (single action vs. double action, polygonal rifling, etc.), but they would just get separate entries and explanations of what they do rather than weapons with those features being statted up individually.

    If I were to expand on the system and include specific settings, I might go into a greater level of detail, such as statting up the m4 and the AK series individually, but for most games it wouldn't be massively significant.

    Delete Post [File Only]
    Style [Yotsuba | Yotsuba B | Futaba | Burichan]